HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP202000005 Mand Preapp Letter 2020-03-03�py AI�
r
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Memorandum
To: Mr. Robby Noll (Robby@tbmcom.com)
From: Tim Padalino, AICP — Senior Planner
Date: November 8, 2019
Subject: Pre -Application Meeting — "Ivy Proper" (PREAPP-2019-111)
This letter contains a summary of the pre -application meeting (PREAPP-2019-00111) conducted on
October 28, 2019, as well as preliminary comments and informational guidance from County staff
and Site Review Committee (SRC) member agencies. This proposal (as discussed in the pre -
application meeting) has generated planning, zoning, and other issues that need to be addressed in
your application materials, as identified below.
• Attendees —Applicants:
o Robby Knoll — The Building Management Co.
o Clint Shifflett — Timmons Group
Attendees — Agencies:
o
Frank Pohl — CDD-Engineering
o
Francis MacCall — CDD-Zoning
o
Khris Taggart — CDD-ARB
o
Tim Padalino — CDD-Planning
o
Adam Moore — VDOT
o
Richard Nelson — ACSA
• Subject Property(s):
o TMP 458A2-14 and #58A2-20
o Zoning is C 1 Commercial
o Zoning Overlays include EC Entrance Corridor
Proposed use(s):
o The applicant proposes multiple uses in one structure.
o The primary (potential) vendor/lessee would be a veterinarian's office, which is use
that requires a special use permit (SP) in the Cl zoning district per Zoning Ordinance
(Z.O.) Section 22.2.2.5, and which is subject to supplemental regulations contained in
Z.O. Section 5.1.11. An additional SP would not be required pursuant to Z.O. Section
22.2.2.11 (relating to water consumption for uses not served by public water) in
conjunction with the proposed veterinarian's office use.
o However, some other (potential) proposed uses that would otherwise be permissible by
right would require an approved SP per 22.2.2.11 (relating to water consumption for
uses not served by public water), unless it can be positively demonstrated that the
Page 1 of 4
(potential) proposed use(s) would involve an amount of water consumption less than
400 gallons per site acre per day.
• Proposed shared entrance:
o The applicant proposes closure of existing entrance on adjoining parcel #20A and
construction of new shared entrance near the side property boundary shared by parcels
#20A and 20.
o However, this location would not meet VDOT's access management standards — it
does not have adequate distance/spacing between Scott's Exxon entrance, and does not
align with Dick Woods Road intersection.
o A waiver would be required from VDOT for this proposed shared entrance; the
applicant can prepare and submit such a request as soon as they have decided on a
final layout they are committed to (but that layout does not have to be an approved site
plan).
Proposed shared parking:
o The owner of adjoining parcel 20A has previously constructed multiple parking spaces
and other improvements on parcel 20.
o The applicant proposes a shared parking agreement, by which 7 spaces for parcel 20A
would be physically provided (with "easement" for use by parcel 20A) on parcel 20,
and an interparcel vehicular connection would be provided from parcel 20 to parcel
20A.
• Stormwater management:
o An approved WPO/VSMP Plan would be required.
o The proposed on -site SWM practices include an underground detention tank with
slow/extended release.
o The proposed drainage would partially convey as sheet flow to the east, to an existing
drop inlet (on adjoining parcel #20A).
■ This might require maintenance or replacement of the existing drainage pipe, if
the post -development flow exceeds pre -development flow (any increase would
require upgrade/replacement of pipe).
■ If applicable, VDOT would have to review and approve any proposed
modifications to the storm drainage infrastructure, and the County would have
to review and approve any proposed changes to the hydrological function of
the project/site.
o The applicant will work with owner of adjoining parcel 20A to determine location of
existing septic system and drainfield, and will carefully coordinate the design of the
proposed stormwater management and drainage infrastructure so as to avoid conflicts
and ensure safety and environmental health.
■ Frank Pohl indicated it would be necessary to maintain a minimum clearance
of ten (10) feet between any existing drainfield/septic system infrastructure and
proposed new stormwater/drainage infrastructure.
Public water utility / private well:
o The property is within the ACSA jurisdictional area for water only; the nearest ACSA
water line is relatively far away, and is separated from the property by the railroad.
o If the applicant does not intend to connect to ACSA water due to cost or logistical
complexity or any other reason(s), then a request must be made to ACSA for
permission to not connect.
Page 2 oi'a
o Additionally, because this area has been mapped as having a leaking underground
storage tank and/or other groundwater issue (within a 2,000' buffer of one or more
"Leaking Tank Sites"), the applicant would need to prepare and submit a `BTEX" test
for review by ACSA, DEQ, and/or County Engineer as part of the process of
requesting permission from ACSA to not connect to public water; the BTEX test must
demonstrate that there are no contaminants and otherwise demonstrate the adequacy of
the available groundwater for safe use as a private well supply.
• Private sanitary sewer:
o The applicant provided Health Department (VDH) approval letter (dated 12/5/2018)
for a private on -site septic system that could handle up to 875 gallons per day of
sanitary wastewater.
o This proposed system and drainfield would be located in the rear of parcel 20 and
would require disturbance of critical slopes.
• Critical slopes:
o The proposed site layout would require disturbance of existing critical slopes.
o Frank, Francis, Tim, and applicants discussed the details of the critical slopes waiver
(special exception) request process.
Entrance Corridor / ARB:
o The applicant discussed the location and conceptual design of the proposed structure —
specifically, the importance of locating the structure close to the road frontage, with
relegated parking in the rear and sides, as shown on the conceptual pre -application
materials.
o Khris explained the importance of screening the parking and screening the HVAC
(and other) equipment from the EC.
o Khris provided initial information about landscaping requirements; discussion
involved:
■ the timing of the landscape plan (should not be the first priority; should come
after some other initial site plan / site design decisions are made); and
• the opportunity to (potentially) utilize some of the existing VDOT ROW for
private landscaping (would require coordination with and approval of VDOT;
including a landscaping easement and corresponding deed/maintenance
agreement)
o The applicant indicated an intent to provide a monument sign in the front, with smaller
signs in the rear portions of the proposed structure near the entrances that would be
accessed from the parking lot. Khris indicated that small signs in the rear portion of
the building (not visible from EC) would not be subject to EC standards or ARB
review/approval — but confirmed that the proposed monument sign in the front would
be subject to EC standards and ARB review/approval, including landscaping around
the monument sign.
o Applicant inquired about possible permissibility of a sign painted onto one of the brick
sides of the proposed structure. This issue requires additional research/guidance.
Additionally, please note that a community meeting would need to be conducted for any SP
application, per Z.O. Section 33.37 and in accordance with the Community Meeting Guidelines
(attached). Regarding the Community Meeting Guidelines, please note the following major
highlights:
Paige 3 of 4
This required community meeting should be conducted within the first month after the SP
application is determined to be complete. (Guideline 3)
You will need to communicate directly with staff to coordinate community meeting
logistics. (Guidelines 4,5)
You will need to send community meeting invitations by mail to all members of the public
who are included on the list that County staff will provide to you after the SP application
is submitted. These invitations will need to be mailed a minimum of two weeks prior to
the required community meeting. After mailing the invitations, you must provide a letter
of verification that the invitations were mailed to every member of the public on the list
provided by County staff. (Guideline 6)
The following list summarizes the information that must be submitted with the SP application in
order to be considered a complete application; please reference the corresponding SP Checklist for
additional details:
■ Completed and Signed Special Use Permit Checklist (attached)
■ A copy of this Pre-App Comment Letter
■ Project Narrative
■ Concept Plan
■ Trip Generation Estimates
If you have any questions about the information provided in this letter, or if you wish to discuss
the proposed project further, please contact me using the information provided below.
Thank you very much; sincerely,
-1�O W,
Tim Padalino, AICP
Senior Planner
(434)-296-5832 x 3088
tpadalino@albemarle.org
Attached:
■ Special Use Permit Application Checklist
■ Community Meeting Guidelines
Page 4 oi-4