Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900072 Correspondence 2020-07-31 (2). �0000 T I M M O N S GROUP suit00 Preston Avenue F 434.295.8317 YOUR VISION ACHIEVED THROUGH OURS. Charlottesville, VA22903 www.timmons.com July 30, 2020 Mariah Gleason County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Rd, North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 RE: Beaver Creek Medical Office Building— Final Site Plan Review (digital submittal) — SDP201900072 — Rev. 2: Comment Response Letter Dear Ms. Gleason: We have reviewed your comments dated June 17, 2020 and made the necessary revisions. Please find our responses to the comments below in bold lettering. Albemarle Countv Plannine Services— Planner— Mariah Gleason: 1. [32.5.2(s)] Coordination of plans. See attached comments from Jack Kelsey regarding the alignment of County -planned improvements into the site design and plan. The final site plan for this development will need to align/coordinate with the planned road improvements. We have reviewed Mr. Kelsey's comments and incorporated them into the submitted plans. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Comparing the revised plan against previous comments, it appears that changes to the site design have made some comments irrelevant. However, show construction/reconstruction of an ADA ramp on the western site entrance between this property and TMP 60-39 from Ivy Rd/Rt 250. The proposed curb will tie into the County sidewalk project at the ADA ramp, so construction/reconstruction will not be necessary. Additional notes have been added to Sheets C4.0 and CS.O to clarify. Rev. 2: Original comment still applies. If additional revisions are identified by Jack Kelsey, their incorporation may be required for final site plan approval. Acknowledged. We have been in contact with Jack Kelsey and will continue to coordinate on any additional comments he may have. 2. [32.5.2(i)] Easement area. It was difficult to identify on the plans maps where current easements are located on the property. This was particularly true for the access easement between this property and TMP 60-39. In reviewing the planned improvements associated with this development, it appears that instead of vacating and realigning the current access easement and having an additional easement to allow the off -site parking, the necessary easement area — for access, construction, maintenance, and use — between this parcel and the owner of TMP 60- 39 should actually be drawn to the extent of the paving improvements shown on that property. Also, please clarify what the Dominion Energy easement on Sheet C2.1 is being adjusted from and to. Easements have been clarified on Sheet C8.0. The off -site easement with TMP 60-39 has been revised to include all areas required for access, construction, maintenance, and use. No changes to the Dominion Energy easement are proposed; see Sheet C8.0. CIVIL ENGINEERING I ENVIRONMENTAL I SURVEYING I GIs I LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE I CONSTRUCTION SERVICES Rev. 1: Follow up comment. Thank you for providing clarity in the plan maps and in the comment response letter. Please submit an easement plat, and related maintenance agreements, to the County for review/approval. See Comment 12(a) below, regarding process. An easement plat and maintenance agreements have been submitted to the County. Rev. 2: Comment satisfied. 3. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(a)) Setbacks. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. a. In the Setback notes on Sheet C0.0, reference both special exceptions that are currently in review by the County that need to be approved to allow this development: i. Rear parking setback, pursuant to 4.20(a) ii. Use buffer, pursuant to 21.7(c) Both Special Exceptions have been referenced on Sheet C0.0. b. The setback shown along the western property boundary is incorrect. As the zoning ordinance states, the 10ft front minimum setback is only from public street ROWS. Review and revise as necessary. The western setback has been revised based on Twin Sycamores Lane being a private street. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 4. [32.6.3] Parking structure. Please submit materials pursuant to Sec. 32.6.3. In the comment response letter from the applicant, it was indicated that architectural drawings would accompany the submission of the final site plan, but our office has not received this information digitally or physically. Architectural drawings have been included in this submission. See Sheet L3.0. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 5. [32.5.2(b), 4.12] Parking schedule. Rev. 1: Comments addressed. a. The parking requirement for this use, based on the proposed square footage of the development, is 107 parking spaces [(26,600sf x 0.8) x (1/200) = 106.4, which rounds up to 107]. It is a standard practice of the County to round up to the nearest whole number if the minimum number of required parking spaces is found to be more than [x] whole number. The parking requirement has been revised on Sheet C0.0. b. In the underground garage, provide auto -turn analysis to demonstrate that a reverse maneuver, from a parking space furthest from the entrance, can be performed without a 3-point turn. If this maneuver cannot be demonstrated, the parking spaces in the underground garage will need to be reconfigured. Auto -turn analysis has been provided on Sheet CS.2. Rev. 1: Comments addressed. 6. [4.12.18] Loading areas. Loading spaces must be delineated in a manner that identifies and preserves the required dimensions with paint striping, signage, or by other means approved by the zoning administrator. Indicate on the plans, if not already done, how the loading space will be delineated. Signage has been added to denote the loading space on Sheet C4.0. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Please provide a detail for the associated signage. A detail for the sign (MUTCD 117-6) has been provided on Sheet CIA. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 7. [32.5.2(e)] Existing landscaping. a. Provide a label for the tree along the rear property boundary. A label has been added on Sheet C2.0. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Show all of the trees that exist on the site currently. In looking at the County's aerial imagery, there appear to be more trees located on the site than what is currently shown on the Existing Conditions sheet. Additional shrubs have been shown on Sheet C2.0. Rev. 1: Please provide at least one label for the vegetation surrounding the 2-story block and stucco building. Two labels have been provided on Sheet C2.0. Rev 2: Comment addressed. 8. [32.6.2(k), 4.17] Outdoor lighting: a. The plan needs to demonstrate anticipated footcandle measurements up to the boundaries of the property. Please revise to extend the analysis beyond the confines of the parking area. Calculation areas have been revised to show measurements up to and beyond the property lines. See Sheet SE1.0. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Provide the manufacturer cut sheets for each of the fixtures proposed on the lighting plan. It is preferred that the cut sheets be inset onto the appropriate plan sheet. The cut sheets need to include the total lumens emitted by the fixture and, if the total lumens is 3,000 or more, that the fixture is a full cutoff luminaire. Manufacturer cut sheets have been added to Sheets SE5.0 and SE5.1. All fixtures are full cutoff. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Thank you for providing these cut sheets. The luminaire identified as S3 appears to exceed 3,000 lumens. As such, this fixture will need to be a full cutoff. Review and revise accordingly. Fixtures have been revised to a fixture that emits less than 3,000 lumens. See Sheets SE1.0, SE5.0 — SE5.1. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. c. Albemarle County assesses photometric plans based on a maintenance factor, or "LLF", of 1.0. Please revise the table of Sheet SE1.0 to include this information. (Note: Before the C/O is issued, site inspectors will use the lighting plan and this information to evaluate whether the as -built lighting aligns with the site plan.) Sheet SE1.0 now includes the maintenance/light loss factor used to calculate the photometrics. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d. [New — Rev. 1] Spillover of lighting from fixtures cannot exceed 0.5 footcandles at the property line. Review and revise accordingly. Spillover has been mitigated through re -selecting the fixtures facing Ivy Road. See Sheets SE1.0, SE5.0 — SE5.1. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. 9. [Albemarle County Engineering Policy] Sight distance. Indicate the sight distance lines for entrances and left turn lanes. This information did not appear to be included, or at the very least, labeled on Sheet C5.1, as noted in the applicant's comment response letter. Sight distance has been labeled on Sheet C5.2. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 10. [Albemarle County Engineering Policy] Benchmarks. It was difficult to locate benchmark locations on the plan maps. Provide a label to clearly identify these elements. Benchmarks have been identified on Sheet C2.0. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 11. [32.5.2(a)] Neighboring lots. a. Update the use on TMP 60-37 to reflect "funeral home" uses as this is the use defined by the ordinance. The use for TMP 60-37 has been revised on all sheets. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b. Update the zoning on 60-36 to reflect "C-1 Commercial" in accordance with the County zoning map. Per e-mail with Mariah Gleason on 1/29/2020, this comment has been redacted. TMP 60-36 is zoned Commercial Office. Rev. 1: Comment withdrawn. 12. [Comment] Process. a. If easements are proposed/needed, they will need to be submitted to the County for review/approval, recorded, and noted on the final site plan prior to the plan's approval. Acknowledged. Rev. 1: Comment remains. Please submit any easement plats and related agreements to the County for review/approval. The easement plat will require an application and fee. Once approved, the easement will need to be noted on the appropriate plan maps with a deed book and page reference. An easement plat has been submitted to the County for review/approval. Rev. 2: Comment remains. An easement plat has been submitted to the County for review/approval. When/if approved, the recording deed book and page will need to be noted on the site plan. Deed book and page number have been listed on Sheet C8.0. b. The special exceptions associated with this development are in review and will need to be approved by the Board of Supervisors prior to approval of the final site plan. Acknowledged. Rev. 1: Comment remains. The two special exceptions associated with this site plan will be considered by the Board of Supervisors on April 15, 2020. If the special exceptions are approved, the notes in the Setback and Zoning section will need to be updated to reference the approved resolution action. Apologies that more accurate direction regarding the aforementioned notation was not provided previously. Setback notes and labels have been revised on Sheets C0.0 and C4.0 per Special Exception. Rev. 2: The two special exceptions associated with this development were approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 15, 2020 (see the attached Resolution for your records). On the Cover Sheet, revise the asterisk language in the Setback notes to the following: *Special Exceptions to the rear parking setback, pursuant to 4.20(a), and the use buffer, pursuant to 21.7(c), for this development were approved by the Board of Supervisors on April 15, 2020 with the following conditions: 1. The buffer disturbance within 20 feet, as measured from the rear property line, is allowed only for screening, landscaping, and parking. No dumpster or dumpster pad may be located closer than 20 feet from the rear property line. 2. All screening, parking lot landscaping, and landscaping islands shall meet Architectural Review Board requirements. 3. Surface parking shall be no closer than 5 feet from the rear property line, as shown on the exhibit titled "Beaver Creek— Medical Office Building— Special Exception: Site Layout with Special Exception Request" and dated December 19, 2019. The asterisk language has been revised as requested on Sheet C0.0. 13. [Comment] Proposed sign location. In accordance with recent County guidance, please remove proposed sign location depictions and labels from all plan sheets. The proposed sign has been removed from all plan sheets. Rev. 2: Comment addressed. Additional comments based on plan dated 04-21-2020: 14. [32.5.2(a)] Owner. Update the owner information on the Cover Sheet to reflect the current parcel owner, 2246-2248 Ivy Road LLC. The owner information has been revised as requested on Sheet C0.0. 15. [32.5.2(i,1)] Easement plan. On Sheet C8.0: a. Provide the deed book and page for all easements noted on the sheet, with the exception of the 20' ACSA waterline easement. Deed book and page number have been listed on Sheet C8.0. b. Revise both labels for the "Variable Width Access Easement (TMP60-39)" to "Private Variable Width Shared Access Easement" to mirror the easement plat for this development. Easement labels have been revised as requested on Sheet C8.0. c. Revise the label for the "Easement to be Abandoned" to instead state "Hereby Abandoned". Label has been revised as requested on Sheet C8.0. 16. [32.7.9] Landscape Plan. In the Landscaping of Parking Areas table on Sheet L2.0, update the parking lots spaces to reflect 78 parking spaces and revise subsequent calculations. The parking space tabulations have been revised to reflect 78 parking spaces. See Sheet L2.0. 17. [Comment] Title Block. Update the Revision Description section of the title block on all sheets to be consistent with that shown on the Cover Sheet. Title blocks have been updated for consistency. Albemarle County Engineering Services Rev. 2 —Engineer — Matthew Wentland: 1. The submitted easement plat will need to be approved prior to Site Plan approval. Acknowledged. The easement plat has been approved and recorded with the County. 2. The VSMP plans will need to be approved before Final Site Plan approval. Acknowledged. 3. Off -site easements and SWM easements will need to be recorded prior to FSP approval. A Deed of Dedication will need to be signed and recorded for the SWIM facility easements. This will be filled out by the County and forwarded to the applicant when the plat is nearing approval. An easement plat has been submitted to the County for review. 4. Provide additional spot elevations/detail in the area of the dumpster pad and inlets 202 and 602. There appears to be a high point in the gutter between inlet 202 and the dumpster pad and it needs to be shown where the stormwater from the dumpster pad and the parking close to inlet 102 will enter the stormwater system. Additional spot grades have been shown on Sheet C5.1 to clarify grading scheme. Albemarle County Information Services — E911— Andrew Slack: No objection. Albemarle County Building Inspections— Michael Dellinger: No objection. Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue —Shawn Maddox: 1. No objections, thank you for addressing previous comments. Albemarle County Service Authority— Richard Nelson: 1. Requests Changes: comments were provided directly to the applicant. Comments have been addressed and sent directly to Richard Nelson at ACSA. Virginia Department of Transportation Rev. 2—Adam Moore: Land Use: 1. The proposed CG-12 ramp needs to be perpendicular to Twin Sycamore lane to direct pedestrian traffic safely across street for the future sidewalk project. The proposed CG-12 ramp has been revised to be perpendicular to Twin Sycamores Lane. See Sheet C4.0. Albemarle County Architectural Review Board — Patricia Saternye: 1. Requests Changes: comment letter attached. Comments have been addressed and sent directly to Paty Saternye. Albemarle County Facilities Planning & Construction —Jack Kelsey: 1. Comments will be forwarded upon receipt. No additional comments have been received. We have included PDF copies of the plans and calculations for your review. If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to give me a call at 434.29S.S624. Sincerely, Kim Mellon Project Engineer