HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202000033 Action Letter Initial Site Plan 2020-05-12�~ of AI,B
LjRGIN",
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
May 12, 2020
Craig Kotarski
Timmons Group
608 Preston Ave, Suite 200
Charlottesville, VA 22903
Dan Rosensweig
Habitat for Humanity
919 West Main Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP202000033 — Southwood Village 1 — Initial Site Plan
Mr. Kotarski and Mr. Rosensweig:
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby grants administrative conditional approval to the
above referenced site plan.
The 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 19 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. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist with areas for tree preservation identified.
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. A fee of $1,613 for the final site plan application.
Please submit 10 copies of the final plans to the Community Development Department. The
assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies (for ACSA,
please submit 3 copies of construction plans directly to them, as stated in their comments).
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:
1. Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)- 2 copies [Matt Wentland;
mwentland(a)albemarle.org]
2. Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)- 3 copies [Tori Kanellopoulos;
vkanellopoulos(a)albemarle.org]
3. Albemarle County Inspections Services (Inspections)- 1 copy [Michael Dellinger;
mdellingerCa-)-albemarle.org]
4. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue- 1 copy [Shawn Maddox;
smaddox(a)albemarle.org]
5. Albemarle County Service Authority- See comments for number of copies to ACSA
[Richard Nelson; rnelson(a)serviceauthority.org]
6. Virginia Department of Transportation- 1 copy [Adam Moore;
adam.moore(a)vdot.virginia.gov]
7. RWSA — 1 copy [Dyon Vega; dvega(a)rivanna.org]
8. CDD E911 — 1 copy [Brian Becker; bbecker(a)albemarle.org]
If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements, please feel free
to contact me at 434-296-5832 ext. 3270 or vkanellopoulos(@albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
V—/Zlzl-�
Tori Kanellopoulos
Senior Planner
�~ of A1.g
LjRG['.31�'
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Craig Kotarski — Timmons
From: Tori Kanellopoulos — Senior Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: May 1, 2020
Updated May 5, 2020 with Engineering Comments
Subject: SDP202000033 - Southwood Village 1 - Initial Site Plan
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department
Community Development will recommend approval of the plan referred above when the
following items have been satisfactorily addressed. (The following comments are those
that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added
or eliminated based on further review.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable
reference to the Albemarle County Code.]
Required Prior to Final Site Plan Approval:
Planning (Tori Kanellopoulos)
1. Code of Development and Setbacks/Building Standards:
a. Lots 10, 11, and 12 have setbacks greater than the 25' maximum front
setback in Block 5. Setbacks are not measured from an
additional/secondary sidewalk. Additionally, the front area is really more of
a public space, not front yards. Recommend create a special lot in the
front for a public space, so that lots front on special lot and setback
requirement is met.
b. Lots 10-12: Note that if this `public access' travelway behind the lots is
intended to become a street, these lots may be considered `double
frontage' and may need to meet the requirements in 14-401 and 14-419.
c. Include Notes A-G from Table 5 of the COD and general notes applicable
to all Blocks (do not need visuals, just notes) on Sheet 2 with other
setback/building standard requirements.
d. Lot 34 appears to have less than the 5' minimum rear setback.
e. On Sheet 2, the Neighborhood Center maximum building height is listed
incorrectly as 55', instead of 50' per the COD.
2. Code of Development and Flex Uses:
a. Create a table to track the flex units. Show how each is meeting the flex
unit requirements (e.g. GFA, height, setbacks) in the COD.
b. Include the flex unit requirements from the COD in the site plan as a
sheet. One sheet should be dedicated to flex unit tracking/requirements
for clarity.
c. Flex Units on the site plan should not be labeled `optional'. Anything
shown on the site plan must be built. If these flex units are not yet
included, they should be labeled as garages only.
d. Future flex units will require a Letter of Revision or Minor Amendment.
Consider parking and other requirements for future Flex Units and plan
accordingly.
e. Flex Units on the site plan should not be labeled `typical' as each unit is
different.
3. Code of Development and Affordable Housing: Each affordable unit needs to
be labeled on the layout plan (e.g. ADU for affordable dwelling unit). Future plans
will include market rate units, and each plan needs to have the affordable units
labeled (not just in a table).
4. 18-4.2 and 18-30.7 Steep slopes:
a. Remove any references to `critical' slopes, instead refer to as `steep'
slopes.
b. There appears to be some grading in preserved slopes near Lots 35-39,
based on the demolition plan. This grading is only permissible if it is
necessary for required public facilities and there is not adequate area
outside of slopes for these uses.
5. 18-4.7 and COD Open Space:
a. Total greenspace in Block 2 is 1.4 acres, not 1.3 acres (Sheet 2).
b. How much of this greenspace will end up being developed? Only count
greenspace that will not be developed in future phases of Village 1.
c. Total amenity space provided should be 22,440 (Sheet 2).
d. Maintenance and ownership documents, to be reviewed and approved by
Planning and the County Attorneys Office, are required prior to final plan
approval (may also be completed with final plat): Open space in private
ownership shall be subject to a legal instrument ensuring the
maintenance and preservation of the open space that is approved by the
agent and the county attorney in conjunction with the approval of the
subdivision plat or site plan.
6. 18-4.11 Structures and easements:
a. All utilities need to be shown on the landscape plan. Utilities need to be
shown more clearly as well — the storm sewer pipe is difficult to see.
b. Several trees appear to conflict with utilities, including AS in front of Lot
11.
7. 18-4.12.6 Parking space requirements:
a. Remove reference to affordable units with parking on Sheet 2, as parking
table will track both affordable and market rate.
b. Label all garages, including those that are flex use structures. For interior
garages, they can be shown with a dotted outline.
c. The parking table states there are four (4) spaces to be provided for Lots
9, 10, and 11 on Road 1, and one (1) space for Lot 12, however only four
(4) total street spaces are labeled on the layout plan, instead of five (5).
d. Include the number of condo (MFH) units on the parking table. Include the
number of bedrooms or ensure at least 2 spaces are provided per unit.
e. The two (2) street spaces for Lots 25-32 do not appear to be labeled on
Road 3.
8. 18-4.12.9 Street parking: Show street parking space (that is, show the front and
end lines for each space). Staff needs to ensure each space meets the 9X20'
design standard and is within 300' (per COD) of the use it is serving.
9. 18-4.12.10 Shared parking: A shared parking agreement will be required for the
condo units.
10.18-4.12.16 Design standards and parking:
a. The accessway for Lots 14-23 may be challenging for vehicles to turn
around.
b. 18' for each on -site (driveway) parking space is needed. Extend driveways
so that 18' on -site (and off the sidewalk) is provided for each space.
c. Bumper blocks are required for the parking spaces adjacent to sidewalks
in the Condo parking lots, as the sidewalk is 5' (not 6').
11.18-4.12.19 Dumpster pads: While dumpsters are not required with only
residential uses, dumpsters appear necessary for the condo units. Consider
location of dumpster, and dumpster pad design standards and 18-32.7.9
screening requirements. Indicate how trash service is provided for these units.
12.18-4.17 Lighting:
a. Include the required note (typed out) on the lighting plan: Each luminaire
that emits 3, 000 or more maximum lumens must be full cutoff.
b. The Light Loss Factor must be 1.
c. There is spillover of greater than 0.5 footcandles onto Lots 10, 11, and 12,
and onto the accessway (currently labeled as public).
13.18-32.5.2 Contents of an initial site plan and 18-32.6.2 Contents of a final site
plan:
a. The full boundary of TMP 90A1-D1 needs to be shown on the existing
conditions sheet.
b. The existing accessory structures (near the parking lot for Condos #1 and
#3) should be labeled (e.g. is it a shed?) on the demolition plan. The
demolition plan should also indicate that these structures are being
removed. They should not be shown greyed out on the layout and other
site plan sheets, as they are being removed.
c. The owner/Zoning District for TMP 76-51 is not included.
d. Include the following requirement: All water and sewer facilities to be
dedicated to public use and the easements for those facilities and shall
be identified bV a statement that the facilities are to be dedicated to the
Albemarle County Service Authority.
e. Show/label adjacent Old Lynchburg Road and its ROW on applicable
sheets (where visible).
f. Clarify `market rate assumed'. Units that are not included with this
submittal should not be referenced.
g. If there are any existing easements on or adjacent to the parcel (where
utility connections would be made), show those easements and include
their DB/PG.
h. Water and sewer utilities are shown, however no ACSA easements
appear to be shown. Include any easements that ACSA requires on the
site plan (if any).
i. Include the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing intersection
from Road 1.
j. Show and label the limits of the Dam Break Inundation Zone on applicable
sheets.
k. Include a sheet with the proffers for this ZMA.
14.18-32.7.4.2 and 18-32.7.5.3 Easements:
a. A public access easement is shown for the emergency access behind Lots
8-12. Who will maintain this accessway? Is it intended for VDOT to
eventually take over maintenance? Or it will be privately maintained but
provided public access?
b. Label that the accessway for Lots 14-23 will be private. Consider how this
will be owned and maintained. It could be a separate instrument (meeting
the 14-317 requirements) just for these lots or included in the main HOA
documents. However, if it is not a separate instrument, all HOA members
would be contributing to its maintenance.
c. There appears to be a structure on Lot 33, which will need an easement
for maintenance.
d. Comparing the demo plan and layout plan, it appears the full area needed
for the offsite grading easements on TMP 90A1-1 D is not included.
i. Additionally, there appears to be grading on or directly adjacent to
existing dwelling units. Are these units being relocated?
e. In Block 5 at East Park, it is not clear where the private drainage
easement and public SWM/drainage easement begin and end.
f. Landscape easements must be shown and labeled on the site plan. These
easements are required for required landscaping on individual residential
lots.
g. An access easement and maintenance easement is required for the
pedestrian path/sidewalk shown on Lots 18 and 19.
h. Any new and revised easements must be shown on an easement plat or
subdivision plat, which must be approved prior to final site plan approval.
Engineering, ACSA, and VDOT may require easements. Maintenance
documentation must be provided for non-ACSA easements. Ensure that
the final site plan and final subdivision plat exactly match.
i. Public easements require deeds, which must be reviewed by the County
Attorney (and Engineering for SWM). Private easements require
maintenance and ownership documents meeting the standards in 14-317.
These are usually covered through a HOA. This requirement must be
completed with a plat.
15.18-32.7.2.3 Sidewalks and other pedestrian ways: Show the material of the
sidewalk on Lot 32.
16.18-32.7.9 Landscape plan:
a. 18-32.7.9.4 Landscape plan/preservation of existing trees. Include the
signed Conservation Checklist.
b. 18-32.7.9.4 Contents of a landscape plan.
i. Provide information on the shrubs shown, not just the trees.
ii. I count 6 AS along Central Park, not 7.
iii. I count 6 QB along Road 3 by park, not 5.
iv. I count 10 CF by lawns/condos, not 12.
v. Update total tree counts accordingly. I have different total counts for
AC, AR, AS, CF, GB, and QB.
c. 18-32.7.9.5 Street trees.
i. Show street trees along Hickory St and Road 1 (at least the
northern portion). These must be consistent with the street trees
shown on the Road Plan.
ii. Provide two additional street trees along Road 3 near the stub out
across Lots 25-28, if feasible, to meet the street tree spacing
requirement.
iii. Provide additional trees adjacent to the Plaza along Road 2, if
feasible, to meet the street tree spacing requirement.
iv. Provide additional trees near Lot 34, if feasible while maintaining
site distance requirement, to meet the street tree spacing
requirement.
d. 18-32.7.9.6 Landscaping parking areas. Parking area landscaping
requirements are met, however each parking lot/area should be calculated
separately, instead of added together. Each parking lot needs to meet the
requirement on its own.
e. 18-32.7.9.7 Screening. The following requirement must be met: Parking
areas consisting of four spaces or more shall be screened from adjacent
residential and rural areas districts. The condo parking areas not
screened from TMP 90A1-1 D. A 6' fence and/or landscaping is needed
to meet this requirement.
f. 18-32.7.9.8 Tree canopy. Use the maximum gross density for Phase 1 to
calculate the tree canopy requirement. This appears to be 14 units/acre.
17. Code of Development and Open/Green/Recreation Space:
a. Trail buffer: Show the required mixture of deciduous and evergreen trees
and shrubs in the trail buffer per the COD.
b. Pedestrian connections:
i. Every 100 feet of pedestrian connections must have four (4)
flowering trees and four (4) medium shrubs. This requirement is not
being met for the two pedestrian connections shown: NS is not a
flowering tree and neither connection has shrubs.
ii. Asphalt and stone dust appear to be shown as the same with the
material key.
c. Recreation/Amenities:
i. Include both playgrounds in the recreation calculation table on
Sheet 2. Appears to be more SF of parks provided and less SF of
gardens than shown. Note that any special lots created need to be
included in total counts.
ii. More clearly label the trail LF requirement on the layout or
landscaping plans.
iii. Sidewalks do not count as amenities/required trails.
iv. Provide more detail on East Park and the SWM Facility. Is this
intended to be dry or wet?
v. Will West Park be a special lot, to ensure it is publicly accessible?
Otherwise confirm how it will be publicly accessible.
vi. Remove the Recreation/Park space note. Anything shown on the
site plan must be built/constructed/planted prior to inspection
approval. The final design must be shown on the final site plan. A
significant change will require a Letter of Revision. Optional
landscaping does not need to be included.
18. Code of Development and Vehicular Trip Count: The maximum trip count
permitted for Phase 1 is 5,000 trips per day. The COD also requires each site
plan to show the trip count generated with each site plan. Include this
requirement.
19. Code of Development and Retaining Walls:
a. Label any retaining walls shown on the site plan. Note that the COD limits
retaining wall height to a maximum of 6'.
b. Any retaining walls on individual lots require a maintenance easement.
20. Housing Mixture Plan: Include an expanded table of the Housing Mixture Plan
approved with the rezoning on each plan/plat submittal, so that Planning can
track this Housing Mixture Plan as it is filled out over time.
21. Comment: It appears part of Bitternut Lane (as it turns into Pliny Road) is being
removed with this site plan. How will residents access their homes in this area?
The application plan with ZMA201800003 shows this road being re-routed.
22.ZMA201800003 Proffers: Note that the trail amenity proffers will need to be
completed prior to build -out of Phase 1, with the trail network completed prior to
the issuance of the 100t" building permit in Blocks 3-8 and the pedestrian
connection to the existing Southwood neighborhood constructed prior to the
issuance of the 300t" certificate of occupancy in Phase 1.
23.Additional applications: The following applications and approvals are required
prior to final site plan approval:
a. 18-32.7.4.2 and 18-32.7.5.3: Easement Plats: All new and adjusted
easements must be shown on an easement plat or on a final subdivision
plat, which must be approved prior to final site plan approval, and must
match the final site plan.
b. 18-32.7.4.1: Approval of a VSMP Plan is required prior to final site plan
approval. See Engineering comments.
c. 18-32.7.2.2 and 14: Road Plan approval is required prior to final site plan
approval.
Engineering (Matt Wentland)
1. The VSMP plan will need to be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval.
2. The Road Plans will need to be approved prior to Final Site Plan approval.
3. Show all drainage easements on the plans. There appears to be missing
easements, such as on the pipes passing under Hickory Street.
4. Remove CG-6 labels from in front of CG-9 entrances.
5. Provide bumper blocks where parking is adjacent to sidewalk less than 6' wide.
[18.4.12.16e]
6. Provide a turnaround on the alley behind Lots 14-23, as it is over 300' in length.
[Design Standards Manual]
7. It is not recommended for the pedestrian sidewalk to be located at the same level
as the alley. A curb or heavier -duty sidewalk section should be used.
8. Pipe velocities should be under 20 ft/sec. [DSM]
9. Remove trees from next to or over storm structures and pipes (such as in front of
Lot 11) and make the location of the storm system clearer on the landscape
sheets.
10. [VSMP] The proposed pad to the northeast of the entrance should be re -graded
to better direct the runoff to the drainage system. As it is shown now, it is more
directed onto the roadway.
VDOT (Adam Moore)
1. See attached letter dated April 28, 2020.
Fire/Rescue (Shawn Maddox)
1. Add a hydrant to the vicinity of the intersection of Road 1 and Road 2. This will
allow you to shift the hydrants towards the Old Lynchburg Road entrance as the
spacing exceeds 500' in some areas.
2. Provide an ISO needed fire flow for a representative sample of each type of
building.
3. Provide an available fire flow based on a recent test in the area.
ACSA (Richard Nelson)
1. Comments/correspondence will be sent directly to applicant. Water/sewer
construction plan is under ACSA review.
Inspections (Michael Dellinger)
1. Add the following note to the general notes page:
a. Retaining walls greater than 3 feet in height require a separate building
permit. Walls exceeding 4 feet in height require a stamped engineered
design also. Walls require inspections as outlined in the USBC.
2. Add the following to the general notes page:
a. All roof drains shall discharge in a manner not to cause a public nuisance
and not over sidewalks.
3. Add the following note to the general notes page:
a. Buildings or structures built before January 1, 1985 must have an
asbestos survey performed in order to apply for a demolition permit.
Asbestos removal permits are required if positive for such from Albemarle
County and VDOLI. Contact VDOLI for their additional requirements and
permits for demolition projects at 540-562-3580 x131.
4. No parking data shown or accessible parking detail with signage. Please
provide.
Virginia Department of Health (Alan Mazurowski)
1. No objection. See attached letter dated April 27, 2020.
Architectural Review Board (Margaret Maliszewski)
1. Currently, the county is not applying Entrance Corridor regulations to the portion
of Old Lynchburg Road on which the subject property is situated.
E911 (Brian Becker)
1. Roads 1, 2, and 3 require road names, per the Albemarle County Road Naming
and Property Numbering Ordinance, Sec. 7-200, Part B (page 2 of the PDF):
a. "It is intended by this article that all roads within the county which serve or
are designed to serve three (3) or more dwelling units or business
structures shall be named..."
2. Please provide this office at least three alternative road names for review, in case
your first choices are not acceptable.
3. The Albemarle County Master Road Names Directory can be accessed at:
http://www.albemarle.org/albemarle/upload/images/webapps/roads/.
Please contact Tori Kanellopoulos in the Planning Division at
vkanellopoulos(aD-albemarle.orc or 434-296-5832 ext. 3270 for further information.
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701
April 28, 2020
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Matt Wentland & Tori Kanellopoulos
Re: SUB-2019-00174 - Southwood Redevelopment — Village 1 — Road Plans
SDP-2020-00033 — Southwood Redevelopment — Village 1— Site Plan
Review #2 & 3
Dear Mr. Wentland & Ms. Kanellopoulos:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Timmons Group, dated 07 April
2020, and offer the following comments:
Please add note to the plan stating: Landscaping plants and trees adjacent to the sight
distance triangle will need to be maintained in area between 2 and 7 feet above ground as a
clear zone to preserve sight lines and accommodate pedestrians.
2. Please show how CD-1's will drain to structures on the plan view of the road profiles. Cross
drains must connect to a structure, mid -pipe connects are not allowed due to video camera
inspection and maintenance access requirements.
3. Some manholes/structures are located in close proximity to driveway entrances and CG-12
ramps. This may make it difficult to construct these entrances and meet the required slopes
and dimensions.
4. Pedestrian crosswalk warrant is required for mid -block crossings. Mid -block crossings are
crossings not associated with stop locations. These crossings must be evaluated in
accordance with the guidelines of IIM-TE-384.
5. Marked crosswalks do not appear to be warranted and should be removed.
6. Align CG-12's perpendicular on corners. CG-12 locations need to be relocated on the
intersection corners for pedestrian visibility and safety. Pedestrian crossings shall be on the
intersection side of the stOD bar location. See sections 204 and 1330.5 for clarifications.
7. Entrance curb radii shall be 25' minimum on moderate volume commercial entrances from
road #2 and road #3. See RDM F-89
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
December 20, 2019
Matt Wentland
Page 2
8. The alley that serves lots #14 to #23 needs designation as a commercial entrance and must
include appropriate geometry.
9. Please show sight distance and access management for proposed commercial entrances.
10. Parking lane bump -outs should be in accord with AASHTO 4.20. See AASHTO figure 4-26
for parking lane transition at intersection.
11. Please show degree of angle for commercial entrance into parking lot for condominium #2.
Angled entrances should not be less than 60 degree from road. Angled entrances may require
larger entrance radii to accommodate the anticipated average vehicle without crossing the
curb when entering/exiting site.
12. Please show Stop sign locations. Only one Stop sign is shown at the intersection of road #1
and road #2
13. Type III (Road closed) barricades should be shown on road stubs.
14. Road stub drainage should be directed into inlets or other measures to prevent erosion.
15. Please show offset spacing for Commercial Entrance Channelization Island per RDM F-98.
Island appears to be in travel way for road #3.
16. Due to the level of items noted in this review, these comments may not be exhaustive.
17. Note that the final site and subdivision (road) plan must show conformance with the VDOT
Road Design Manual Appendices B(1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards,
regulations or other requirements.
If further information is desired, please contact Max Greene at 434-422-9894.
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 Transportation and Land Use
Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process.
Sincerely,
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
COMMONWEALTH of 'VIRGINIA
In Cooperation With the Thomas Jefferson Health District
State Department of Health
1138 Rose Hill Drive
Phone (434) 972-6219 P. 0. Box 7546
Fax (434)972-4310
Charlottesville, Virginia 22906
April 27, 2020
Tori Kanellopoulos, Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: Southwood Redevelopment
Final Site Plan
SUB202000033
Ms. Kanellopoulos:
ALB9EMARLE • CHARLOTTESVILLE
FLUVANNA COUNTY IPALMYRA)
GREENE COUNTY ISTANARDSVILLE)
LOUISA COUNTYILOUISA)
NELSON COUNTY (LOVINGSTON)
As requested, I've reviewed the Final Site Plan (4/6/20) for the proposed redevelopment.
It appears all newly created lots will have access to public water and sewer systems, and there
are no existing septic systems or wells that will be impacted by the development. Therefore, I
have no objection to the site plan.
If there are any questions, please give me a call, 434-972-4306.
Sincerely,
Alan Mazurowski
Environmental Health Supervisor
Thomas Jefferson Health District
alan.mazurowski(�i),vdh.vir ig'nia.gov