HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100012 Review Comments Appeal to BOS 2021-04-27a
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To:
Tim Slagle (trslagle&embargmail.com)
From:
Kevin McCollum - Planner
Division:
Planning Services
Date:
April 27, 2021
Subject:
SDP202100012 SDP1996-64 - MINOR - DIGITAL
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department of Community
Development will recommend approval of the plan referred to 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.]
Planning (Kevin McCollum)
Please contact Kevin McCollum at the Department of Community Development at kmccollurn"bemarle.org or
296-5832 ext. 3141 for further information.
1. [32.5.1 and 32.6.11 Please scale sheet Al to the same scale as the other sheets. Please package all
applicable sheets into one Minor Site Plan Amendment document. Include the Site Plan number and title
on the cover sheet.
a. Update the cover sheet to include "Minor Site Plan Amendment SDP202100012 — A Minor
Amendment to SDP199600094. This comment has been addressed.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Please include all applicable general information.
a. The name of the development; names of the owner, developer and individual who prepared the
plan; tax map and parcel number; boundary dimensions; zoning district; descriptions of all
proffers, special use permits and conditions thereof, special exceptions and conditions thereof,
variances and conditions thereof, application plans, codes of development and bonus factors
applicable to the site; magisterial district; county and state; north point; scale; one datum
reference for elevation (if section 30.3, flood hazard overlay district, applies to any portion of
the site, United States Geological Survey vertical datum shall be shown and/or correlated to plan
topography and show existing and proposed ground elevations); the source of the topography;
departing lot lines; minimum setback lines, yard and building separation requirements; the
source of the survey; sheet number and total number of sheets; and the names of the owners,
zoning district, tax map and parcel numbers and present uses of abutting parcels.
b. Please update the Zonin¢ District to read "Licht Industry."
t
c. Add the following Zoning information. "The Property is subject to the Airport Impact
Area, Entrance Corridor, and Steep Slopes — Managed Overlay Districts."
d. Prior to approval, please be sure to add the seal/stamp of the Architect who prepared these
drawings.
e. Please include a reference that states the property is in the Jack Jouett Magisterial District.
f. Please include a source of topography/elevation data.
3. [32.5.2(e) and 32.7.91 Please include a landscaping schedule that includes the type and quantity of the
proposed landscaping. Comment not addressed. A landscaping schedule that provides detailed
information of the proposed landscaping areas is required on Sheet C3. For example, state the
species name of the proposed bushes, the quantity proposed. etc. Below are links to Albemarle's
recommended plants list and a resource for canopy calculations.
a. https://www.albemarle.orp/Home/ShowDocument?id=1022
b. https://www.albemarle.orp/Home/ShowDocument?id=1020
4. [32.5.2(i)(m) and 32.7.21 Please provide more context information to show that the proposed
improvements are not impacting any existing travelways, ingress or egress, or parking requirements.
Please show the proposed improvements within the context of the existing conditions. Provide dimensions
and context to how they relate to the overall site. Please see Fire -Rescue's comments below.
[32.5.2 (n)] There are eleven (11) existing striped parking spaces along the travel way adjacent to the
primary structure that appear to be proposed to be removed as a result of this amendment. These spaces
are not shown on the existing conditions drawing. Please show these spaces and identify them as "to be
removed." This comment has been addressed.
6. [32.6.2(h)] Please include a signature panel on the cover sheet. Comment partially addressed. Signature
panel is not correct, please include the attached template on the first sheet.
Albemarle County Building Inspections — Betty Slough, bslough(a),albemarle.org— Comments forwarded to
Applicant by email on 3/15/2021(copied below). Current Review Pending (4/27/2021). Additional Inspections
comments will be forwarded to the Applicant upon receipt.
I see where they added the notes, but the other issues have not been addressed. Specifically, the following:
The Use group shown on the Architectural drawings indicate the building being changed to an M Use. The
drawings show seating areas which makes part of the building an Assembly use.
The exterior area between the two buildings also becomes an Assembly use(potential occupant load of 2500) that
is regulated by the USBC. This impacts everything in the design.
Because of the proposed use of the exterior area between the buildings and the existing vehicle travel lanes,
something will need to be provided to prevent vehicles from entering the pavilion area. (The current drawings
show some potted plants. An engineer's report that these would suffice to stop a vehicle and their placement
would be necessary.)
Let me know how you want to proceed from here. I think these things are critical to their expected uses and
design. With the exterior assembly area, they would potentially need 60 toilets. I would guess that they aren't
thinking the exterior area counts for part of the building requirements, but it does. Also, the fire services may
have issue with the assembly area blocking the travel path.
Albemarle County Engineering Services — John Anderson, janderson2&albemarle.org — No Objection
(4/7/2021).
Albemarle County Fire Rescue — Howard Lagomarsino — hlagomarsino&albemarle.org — Requested changes
(4/22/2021).
1. I see the added notes, but this submission and a site visit on my own does not clarify the questions of
emergency vehicle access, potential to obscure hydrants and PIV valves from immediate view. At a
minimum:
a. It is unclear on the plans if there is to be any reduction in the travel way. It is important to note,
ACFR is opposed to any reduction of the travelway. Plan should show travelway width on the
existing and new conditions pages to ensure no reduction of travelway width is to occur. with the
new additions.
b. On the plans, new landscape areas appear they will obscure fire hydrants and PIV's, please provide
indication on plan there will be a minimum of three foot clearance around the hydrants and PIV's.
t1