HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202000001 Action Letter 2020-04-06COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832
April 6, 2020
Kelsey Schlein
Shimp Engineering
912 E High St
Charlottesville VA 22902
kelsey@shimp-engineering.com
RE: Conditional Approval of SDP202000001 Our Neighborhood Child Development Center —
Initial Site Plan
Dear Ms. Schlein:
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative approval to the above referenced site
plan.
This approval shall be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, provided that the
developer submits a final site plan for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after the date of this
letter as provided in section 32.4.3.1 of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, and thereafter
diligently pursues approval of the final site plan.
In accordance with Chapter 18 Section 32.4.2.8 Early or Mass Grading may be permitted after the
following approvals are received:
1. Engineering approval of a VSMP plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the
County of Albemarle.
2. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control.
3. Tree protection fencing locations shown on the Grading and Utility Plan.
The final site plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until the following items are
received:
1. A final site plan that satisfies all of the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
2. Applicable fee. See Sec. 35.1.
Please submit DIGITAL copies of the final plans as well as 3 paper copies to the Community
Development Department. The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing
agencies. Once you receive the first set of comments on the final site plan, please work with each
reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements.
The Department of Community Development shall not accept submittal of the final site plan for signature
until tentative approvals for the attached conditions from the following agencies/reviewers have been
obtained:
SRC Members:
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)
Albemarle County Information Services (E911)
Albemarle County Building Inspections
Albemarle County Fire & Rescue
Albemarle County Service Authority
Virginia Department of Transportation
Albemarle County Planning Services (Architectural Review Board)
Please contact Mariah Gleason at the Department of Community Development at maleasongalbmarle.org or
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3097 for further information.
Sincerely,
k"*
Mariah Gleason
Department of Community Development, Planning Division
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)
Mariah Gleason, mgleason cgalbemarle.org — Requests changes
1. [32.5.2(a)] Zoning notes.
a. The proposed zoning and use are not approved by this site plan. The rezoning associated with this project —
ZMA2019000015 Child Development Center — will have to be approved by the Board of Supervisors prior to
approval of the final site plan.
b. Any proffers and special exceptions, and conditions thereof, will need to be noted and demonstrated in the site
plan materials.
2. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(a), 4.20] Setbacks.
a. On the Cover Sheet, make it clear that the setback notes are referencing the C-1 Commercial zoning district
regulations.
b. Revise the Side & Rear Minimum setback notes to distinguish between required setbacks for structures and
off-street parking, since they are different (see Sec. 4.20(a)).
c. Show the parking setback on the Sheet C3.
3. [32.5.2(a), 21.7(c)] Undisturbed use buffer. Per Sec. 21.7, when abutting a residential zoning district, commercial properties
are required to provide a 20ft use buffer. In these areas, no construction activity is allowed and screening must be provided.
Site improvements shown within this 20ft buffer area will require approval of a special exception. Please submit an
application and fee for this exception. Note: The Special Exception Application, if not signed by the property owner, will
need to include the additional page titled "Certification That Notice Of The Application Has Been Provided To The
Landowner" to be considered a complete application by the County.
4. [32.5.2(d, n), 4.12.151 Parking area. Requests for waivers to parking area grade and curb & gutter requirements were
received in the last submission. The waivers will need to be approved prior to the approval of the final site plan.
5. [32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(q)] Parking schedule. Align the Parking Schedule and ITE Trip Generation chart so both use the same
enrollment capacity for the child day center use.
6. [32.5.2(n), 4.12] Dumpster. Provide a detail for the dumpster pad. See Sec. 4.12.19 for more information regarding
minimum design requirements for dumpster pads.
7. [32.5.2(h)] Floodplain. Note that activities, including development and storage, in the Flood Hazard Overlay District are
highly regulated by Sec. 30.3.
8. [32.5.2(n)] Recreation areas. Will there be playground equipment, or something similar, associated with the recreation
areas? If so, those improvements should be shown on the site plan. If equipment will be added later, a Letter of Revision,
LOR, to the site plan may be needed.
9. [32.5.2(e), 32.7.9.4(c)] Existing landscape features. On Sheet C2, provide a note that refers to Sheet C6 for information
regarding the identification/common name and approximate caliper of existing trees onsite.
10. [32.5.2(a)] Departing lot lines. Please show departing lot lines from the southeast corner of the property.
11. [32.5.2(a)] Abutting parcel information. Provide the tax map and parcel numbers, names of the owners, zoning district, and
present uses for TMP 78-813.
12. [Comment] Process. Prior to final site plan approval:
a. ZMA201900015 must be approved by the Board of Supervisors.
b. The special exception and waivers must be approved.
c. Any applicable proffers and special exceptions, and conditions thereof, will need to be satisfied.
13. [32.6.20), 32.7.9] Landscape plan. For the final site plan:
a. Sign the conservation checklist provided on Sheet C6, per 32.7.9.4(b)(2).
b. An area of at least 5% of the paved parking and vehicular circulation area shall be landscaped with trees. These
planting must be evenly dispersed within the parking area. See Sec. 32.7.9.6 for more information.
c. Provide screening along property boundaries that are adjacent to residential districts, in accordance with Sec.
32.7.9.7.
i. The tree line abutting TMP78-813 appears to be comprised of plantings that are located on TMP 78-
8B. If that is the case, and the plantings are located on a neighboring parcel, they cannot be used to
satisfy the requirements to develop this parcel.
ii. Will the tree line between the proposed large parking area and TMP 78-8B have protective fencing
during the construction of the parking area?
d. The landscape plan will be required to meet the standards and guidelines of the ARB, as this property is
location in an Entrance Corridor.
OTHER SRC REVIEWERS
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)
John Anderson, janderson2galbemarle.org — Requests Changes; see comment letter attached.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911)
Brian Becker, bbecker(c-r�,albemarle.org — No Objection
Albemarle County Building Inspections
Michael Dellinger, mdellinger(a)albemarle.org — No Objection
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue
Shawn Maddox, smaddox(a)albemarle.org — No Objections
1. After speaking with the applicant, a hydrant will be added so Fire Rescue has no other objections.
Albemarle County Service Authority
Richard Nelson, rnelsongserviceauthori, .org — Requests Changes; see comments below
1. Submit a PDF copy of the site plan for review.
2. Show water connection to existing water main.
3. Water and sewer connection fees will be applied for the larger meter size.
Virginia Department of Transportation
Max Greene, max. rg eene(a vdot.vir ig'nia.gov — No Objection; see comment letter attached.
Albemarle County Architectural Review Board
Patricia Satemye, psaternye(a)albemarle.org — Requests Changes; see below and comment letter attached.
1. The 3/13/2020 resubmission of ISP was reviewed by ARB staff. Original ARB comments all stand unchanged. See
ARB action letter for ARB2020-1 dated 2/4/2020 for ARB comments to be addressed on the final site plan
submission.
Albemarle County Zoning Division (Zoning)
Rebecca Ragsdale, rra sg dalegalbemarle.org — Requests Changes; see comments below
Previous comments do not appear to be addressed but they may be a condition of final site plan approval. The final site
plan approval must list any proffers or special exceptions with conditions approved as part of the rezoning process.
1. Parking -All parking areas must comply with the minimum design requirements of Section 4.12. The Requirements of
Section 4.12.15 must be met for all parking areas as well, including surface materials, curb, gutter, etc, including
existing gravel areas that may be used for parking.
2. Parking Lot landscaping- The existing gravel areas if allowed to remain for parking must also meet parking lot
landscaping requirements.
3. Where will child recreation areas be located on the site? They are improvements that must be shown on the site plan. If
added later, an update (LOR) to the site plan must be reviewed and approved in the future to allow the playground
equipment.
4. Section 21.7(c) applies: Use buffer adjacent to residential and rural areas districts. For the purpose of this subsection, a
use buffer shall not be required when a commercial zone is across a street from a residential or rural area district. No
construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation shall occur closer than 20 feet to any residential or
rural areas district. Screening shall be provided as required in section 32.7.9. The board of supervisors may waive by
special exception the prohibition of construction activity, grading or the clearing of vegetation in the use buffer in a
particular case upon consideration of whether: (i) the developer or subdivider demonstrates that grading or clearing is
necessary or would result in an improved site design; (ii) minimum screening requirements will be satisfied; and (iii)
existing landscaping in excess of minimum requirements is substantially restored.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
Site Plan Review
Project title:
Our Neighborhood Child Development Center — Initial Site Plan
Project file number:
SDP2020-00001
Plan preparer:
Shimp Engineering, 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902
Kelsey Schlein, kelsey(abshimp-en ing eerieg com
Owner or rep.:
James A. or Peggy W. Dettor, 1395 Stony Point Road
Charlottesville, VA 22911-3501
Plan received date:
6 Jan 2020
(Rev. 1)
16 Mar 2020
Date of comments:
5 Feb 2020
(Rev. 1)
2 Apr 2020
Plan Coordinator:
Mariah Gleason
Reviewer:
John Anderson
SDP2020-00001
For Initial Site Plan Approval
Engineering recommends Approval with condition to revise Site Plan design per comments below: For Final
Site Plan Approval.
For Final Site Plan Approval
2/5/20 ISP Engineering review comments; Items 1-11:
1. Recent discussion between County Engineer and site plan surveyor indicates possible error; please consider
effect of calculations that may not adequately adjust for survey methods /equipment, especially when
responding to county engineer request for a certified field survey showing the limits of the floodplain
relative to the large metal garage and the small addition. Please rely on published FEMA floodplain data
when preparing site plan design, or representing floodplain limits ( link to VFRIS:
https://consappsrpt.dcr.vrginia.gov/vafloodrisk/vfris2.html ). (Rev. 1) Addressed.
2. Provide conceptual storm water management, using narrative text and schematic. Provide location of any
on -site stormwater quality or quantity control measures. Recommend SWM Note/s, Sheet C1. An ISP
must provide conceptual SWM design. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
3. With existing entrance to be closed, provide and label Rt. 20 CG-6 (required across the closed entrance),
sheet C3. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
4. With existing entrance closed, label linework for continuous sidewalk along Rt. 20. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
5. With final site plan, provide curb /gutter, walk, drainage, pavement, and other relevant civil (typical)
details. (Rev. 1) Comment persists. Applicant response (3/13/20): `Noted, these details will be provided
with the final site plan.'
6. Show and label existing or proposed private utility easements, or public (ACSA) utility easements. Provide
deed book -page ref. to existing recorded easements. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
7. Show and label proposed water and sanitary sewer connections to building/s (garage and residence). (Rev.
1) Addressed.
8. Sheets C2 and C3 show change to parking. C2 shows gravel to be removed. C3 shows 27 delineated
parking spaces (assume asphalt, since lined). Clarify if these 27 spaces are to be paved, then: (Rev. 1)
Partially addressed. Applicant response: `Requests to waive curb and gutter (for both parking areas) and
maximum grade (for back portion of parking lot) have been included with this resubmission. Please see
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 5
revised grading plans, which have been updated with the corrected survey information.' As follow-up:
Waiver requests will be evaluated prior to final site plan approval. Also, item 12, below.
a. Provide label/s (paved parking; gravel parking).
b. Tie proposed grade to existing grade.
c. Provide storm runoff collection; curb and gutter in parking areas is required (18-4.12.15.g).
d. Revise to ensure max. grade in any direction does not exceed 5% (18-4.12.15.c.).
e. It appears grade of several of 10 curvilinear parking spaces may exceed 5%, if compared with
existing grade. If proposed grade > 5%, please revise design.
Note: Grading within FEMA-mapped floodplain to establish /improve parking does not appear to be a
permissible use (ref. 18-30.3.11 /Table). (Rev. 1) Partially addressed. Applicant response: `Fine grading
is proposed within the floodway fringe and will have no impact on the base floodplain elevation. A section
has been included on C4 per Frank Pohl, County Engineer's request.' As follow-up: C4, Exhibit: Fine
Grading on Floodway Fringe (approximate cut of 39.58 SF; approximate fill of 39.47 SF) must convert SF
to CY cut /fill to support no net increase in earth volume within FEMA-mapped floodplain. CY values and
`No Rise' (PE -seal) Certificate are required with initial Floodplain Development Permit Application. Also,
since monitoring grading to the hundredth of a CY is impractical or impossible, final site plan must include
one or more notes or labels to ensure fine grading does not violate floodplain hazard overlay district
requirements. Specifically, site plan (C3, C4) should provide text, notes, narrative, etc. to ensure:
a. No increase in `net' earth volume below contour 342' which is the base flood elevation at this site.
b. Prohibition on earth import (unless select material; see d., below). In other words, cut in one
location may be used as fill in another, provided locations do not decrease existing cross -sectional
floodway fringe (area), or increase net volume of post -development fill below elevation 342'.
c. Construction Sequence Note should prohibit earth import. Item 9.c., above, item 9.e., below.
d. Alternatively, note/s may require haul truck scale receipts as evidence that earth export exceeds
earth import. Asphalt pavement is not earth. Scale receipts must be submitted to Engineering
Division as condition of WPO plan bond release, and to receive a Certificate of Occupancy.
e. Ref. text at 18-30.3.11 —Permitted and prohibited uses and structures /Table, Stream Crossings
and Grading Activities: `For purposes of this provision, fine grading is defined as a balanced site
(cut/fill) with no changes to the base floodplain elevation or horizontal limits to the floodplain.'
10. Engineering review comments on ZMA201900015 are relevant to SDP2020-00001, ISP; specifically:
a. `- Provide a certified field survey showing the limits of floodplain in reference to the location of
the large metal garage and the small addition. The small addition and the corner of the large metal
building appear to be in the floodplain limits. Provide documentation that the small addition was
approved to be in the floodplain. If it wasn't, the addition will need to be removed.
b. - if a) improvements to the metal garage building exceed 50% of the building value and b) if any
part of the building is within the Flood Hazard Overlay District, then the entire building will need
to be removed from the MOD or the value of improvements will need to remain below 50% of
the building value.' (Rev. 1) Addressed. As follow-up: C2 — Show concrete slab where the
(building) addition in the floodplain has been removed.
11. Engineering requests: (Rev. 1) Not addressed. Applicant response: `We proposed fine grading activities
within the floodway fringe, which will not require a floodplain development permit. A VSMP application
will be submitted at a later time.' Asefollow-up: see items 1 l.d.,e., below.
a. A Floodplain Development Permit (FDP) Application; please note requirements listed at 18-
30.3.12 and 18-30.3.13. (Rev. 1) Comment persists.
b. A VSMP Permit Application: Requirements at 17-401 thm 17-405 apply, including stormwater
quality and quantity limits, and requirements. (Rev. 1) Comment persists.
c. Applicant response to item La./b., above. (Rev. 1) Addressed.
d. Applicant response is incorrect. Definition at 18-3 /Development. `For purposes of floodplain
management, "development" means any man-made change to improved or unimproved real
estate, including, but not limited to, buildings or other structures, mining, dredging, filling,
grading, paving, excavation or drilling operations or storage of equipment or materials.' A FDP
Engineering Review Comments
Page 3 of 5
Application, `No Rise' (PE -seal) certificate, and Approved VSMP /WPO plan are pre -requisites to
FSP Approval.
i. See 18-30.3.12.A. —Prerequisite to development; required permits and certifications. `In
addition to the requirements for any other permits under this chapter, no use, structure, or
any other development (collectively, the "development") within the flood hazard overlay
district shall commence without the owner first obtaining or providing the following: A.
Floodplain development permit. Note: A FDP is required for fine grading within the
floodplain fringe.
ii. See 18-30.3.13.A.1 —'Encroachment prohibited unless owner demonstrates no increase
in water surface elevation of the base flood.' (i.e., `No rise')
e. On -site SWM facilities (if any) require deed of easement, with recordation of easement plat a pre-
requisite to FSP Approval.
New (Rev. 1
12. CI: General Construction Note 6; meaning unclear at `Paved, rip -rap or stabilization amt lined
ditch...' Please check /revise.
13. Design should be revised to provide 5 - 6% maximum grade at any point in proposed 27-space asphalt
parking area (C3). Although this comment is not recommendation to approve waiver request to maximum
grade for parking areas found at 18-4.12.15(c), design should be revised to more nearly approach 5%
maximum grade. Please consider images below. Existing grade is proposed for the 27-sapce parking area,
without altering grade at either the upper or lower ends of the existing gravel parking area, which slopes
from building toward a stream and is proposed to be paved. Please note:
a. Waiver request states `this back parking lot will be reserved for employee parking.'
i. Please confirm approximately 27 employees are anticipated to work at Our
Neighborhood Child Development Center, else recommend language that reflects likely
staffing levels (5, 10?).
ii. Whether parking at this or any site (where max. parking area grade applies) is reserved
for employees is irrelevant. Employees are entitled to safety -based design listed at 18-
4.12.15(c), as is owner, patrons, or any individual with access to a parking lot. The
standard does not discriminate, while waiver petitions for a relatively less safe, steeper
maximum grade.
b. Waiver request states `the proposed grade of the back parking area (27 space) is approximately
7%, while C4 indicates 7.8 and 9.6% proposed grade:
i. Waiver request appears inaccurate.
ii. 9.6% is nearly double the 5% max. grade allowed under 18-4.12.15.c.
iii. Initial site plan and waiver request are inconsistent, and waiver would likely be denied on
basis of inconsistency. Comment takes no action on waiver request to standard listed at
18-4.12.15.c.; rather, comment notes that waiver of 5% grade is problematic.
c. There are design solutions that require no fill in the floodplain, no alteration to building, no
degradation to stream. Re£ images, below, and propose grade with final site plan to meet (or
nearly meet) 5% max grade for the 27-space parking area. If, for example, the 28.5' wide drive
aisle between the last, southernmost space in the 10-space area and first, northernmost parking
space in the 13-space side of the 27-space parking area is graded 10% (existing grade z3.3%), then
5% max grade in the 27 space area appears possible. This require cutting the drive aisle by
approx. 4'. Were the aisle cut 3', resulting 27-space lot max. grade would be Z5.8%; were it cut
2', resulting 27-space grade would approach 6.7%. Waiver request is problematic since design
alternatives exist to meet, or nearly meet, max. grade listed at 18-4.12.15.c. Design is encouraged
to examine alternatives that flatten grade in the 27-space area without requiring fill in mapped
floodplain, or affecting building, or altering sheet flow from pavement (recommend angle to east),
or diminishing stream water quality. In fact, runoff from flatter grade (less energy) is less erosive
than runoff from steeper impervious areas; steeper is proposed with waiver request. 5% grade
Engineering Review Comments
Page 4 of 5
provides environmental and safety benefits; it is favored over paving existing 27-space parking
area at existing grade.
ISP, sheet C3
S�Gs�oa � �e ca
\ yEE. �•
0 O
\ \ FEI
\` it
C3
1
- 1
\ 25550 Sr RESERVE'
\ FOR PLAMG FlE1➢
FOR CH1W 0
\ CENTR USE f
ASPHkT PARKING AREA
Engineering Review Comments
Page 5 of 5
14. Waiver from curb and gutter requirement at 18-4.12.15.g. appears reasonable if design of 27-space parking
area slopes east. This comment anticipates supporting waiver (no curb) at edge of 27-space parking area,
but does not anticipate outcome of curb /gutter waiver review for other areas. This comment takes no
action on waiver of curb /gutter std. listed at 18-4.12.15.g. Waiver request will be evaluated prior to final
site plan approval.
15. C4: Distance between proposed asphalt surface east of building and property line is less than 1'. Confirm
with Planning that paved surface within 1' of adjacent property is consistent with side setback requirement.
16. C4: Provide note requiring paving operation in this location be staked by a surveyor prior to asphalt paving
in this location (TMP # 78-58K), or acquire off -site temporary access /construction easements.
—J
\� FEMA BFE
F
17. C5: Confirm with VDOT whether portion of private water service lateral may be located within Rt. 20 RW.
18. C9: Label RW /property lines.
19. C9: Provide vertical sight distance profile.
Please feel free to call if any questions. Thank you
I Anderson 434.296-5832 -x3069
SDP2020-00001 Our Neighborhood Child Development Center ISP 040220revl
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 East Broad Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
April 6, 2020
Mariah Gleason
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP-2020-00001- Our Neighborhood CDC - ISP
Dear Ms. Gleason:
(804) 786-2701
Fax: (804) 786-2940
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced Our Neighborhood CDC - ISP, as submitted by Shimp
Engineering, dated March 03, 2020 and find it to be generally acceptable.
A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right of way. The
owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency land Use Section at (434) 422-9399
for information pertaining to this process.
If you have further questions please contact Max Greene at (434) 422-9894.
Sincerely,
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
February 4, 2020
Kelsey Schlein
Shimp Engineering
912 E High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ARB-2020-01: Our Neighborhood Child Care Center (TMP: 07800-00-00-058K0)
Dear Ms. Schlein,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on Monday, February 3, 2020
completed an advisory review of the above -noted request to review Final Site Plan.
The Board by a vote of 5:0, forwarded the following recommendation to the Planning Commission:
The ARB expresses no objection to the special use permit/rezoning, subject to the following
conditions:
• Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4c(2), (3) and (5)
recommended conditions of initial plan approval: The ARB recommends approval of the
Initial Plan without conditions.
• Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit:
1. Provide the conservation checklist in the site plan.
2. Provide a tree protection fencing detail in the site plan and show the tree protection
fencing in the Grading and Draining Plan sheet.
• Regarding the Final Site Plan:
A Certificate of Appropriateness is required prior to final site plan approval. The following
items must be addressed, in addition to all items on the Final Site Plan Checklist.
1. Confirm that no changes are proposed to the exteriors of the buildings. If buildings are
to be modified, submit architectural designs, elevations, and material colors and
samples for review with the next submittal.
2. Confirm that a dumpster is not proposed. If a dumpster is to be proposed, and will be
visible from the EC, include details for the dumpster enclosure in the site plan and
identify screen type, material, manufacturer and color.
3. Show all existing and proposed mechanical equipment on the site plan. Show how
visibility of all proposed mechanical equipment will be eliminated from the EC.
4. Show all proposed fences. Chain link fence cannot be approved for new fencing
visible from the EC.
5. Revise the plan to provide large shade trees along the EC, 35' on center, 3Y2" caliper
at planting. Revise the spacing and quantity of ornamental trees accordingly.
6. Provide a landscape schedule that identifies all proposed plant species, quantities and
size at time of planting.
7. Revise the plan to show that there are no conflicts between the utilities, the existing
drainage easement, and the proposed landscaping.
8. Provide large shade trees, 2Y2" caliper at planting, spaced 40 feet on center, along the
improved accessway.
9. Provide medium shade trees, at least 2Y2" caliper planting, spaced 25 feet on center,
along the proposed pedestrian ways.
10. Provide the standard perimeter parking lot landscaping (trees 40' on center, 2'/"
caliper at planting) in all parking areas where improvements (other than paint striping)
are proposed.
11. Provide shrubs, 24" at planting, in the perimeter planting areas on the north side of the
improved parking lot.
12. Revise the plan provide the species of the existing landscaping.
13. Add the standard plant health note to the landscape plan.
14. Ensure all existing landscaping is shown on the site plan.
15. Show tree protection fencing for preserved trees in both the grading and landscape
plans.
16. Provide a conservation checklist in the site plan.
17. Ensure that no grading is proposed within the dripline of any tree designated as
preserved.
18. Sign applications are required for all proposed signs.
You may submit your application for preliminary ARB review at your earliest convenience.
Application forms, checklists and schedules are available on-line at www.albemarle.or /q ARB.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely, ;
L� 4:::�_
Paty at
Senior Planner
cc: James A. Dettor Jr.
Peggy W. Dettor
1395 Stoney Point Road
Charlottesville, VA 22911-3501
File