Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP202100022 Correspondence 2021-07-06 (4)SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C. Design Focused Engineering July 6, 2021 Andy Reitelbach County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 RE: Response Letter #3 for SDP2021-00022 Albemarle Business Campus: Block 5 Dear Andy, Thank you for your review of the final site plan for Albemarle Business Campus: Block 5. This letter contains responses to County comments dated June 30, 2021. Our responses are as follows: 1. [32.5.2(b)] Information regarding the proposed use. a. New Comment: Clarify the additional proposed uses on the site. The cover sheet identifies the proposed uses as self -storage and restaurant. However, the site and utility plan identifies the additional tenant spaces as general retail, not specifying the restaurant. RESPONSE: Comment received. The site/utility plan, parking schedule, and ITE trip generation have been clarified to be consistent throughout the plan. b. Provide the square footage of non-residential space in each of blocks 2-5 so that staff can ensure the ranges identified in the Code of Development are met. Provide the total square footage of the structure on Block 5. It appears the building footprint square footage is provided but not the building's overall square footage, which must be between 45,000 and 125,000 square feet. Clarify the square footage: the cover sheet states that the "restaurant" portion of the development is 3,800 square feet. However, the two retail tenant spaces on sheet C6 total 4,337 square feet. RESPONSE: Comment received. The cover sheet has been clarified to match the site plan. c. Provide more information on the amount of proposed greenspace and amenities. Also identify all the amenities that are being provided. 20% of the site must be greenspace, and 20% of the site must be amenities; however, these two elements can overlap in many, though not all, circumstances. It is not clear what is being counted as greenspace, what is being counted as amenity, and what is counted toward both calculations. Provide more detail calculations of these elements. Recreational facilities in accordance with 18-4.16 of the Zoning Ordinance are not provided in block 1, as required by note 1 on sheet 5 of the COD. Provide these required amenities and recreational facilities in block 1. If substitution of these facilities is desired, provide a substitution request with justification to Planning staff for review. In addition, the dog park on block 5 is not shown as part of the site plan at all. 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com Who will be maintaining the private greenspace and amenity areas? Some sort of agreement will be required. A Private Improvement Maintenance Declaration (PIMD) or another type of legal agreement must be provided for review and recorded, to assign ownership and maintenance responsibilities for the green space and amenities, such as the stone dust path. As a separation parcel, TMP 76-46AB will need a legal document to ensure continued access and maintenance of the shared elements and amenities with the overall development, in the event that the parcel to a separate owner in the future. This document has to be completed with the site planning stage since there would likely be no further subdivision of 76-46B. As there is already a proposed plat and deed of easement for other shared features of the development, it is recommended the stone dust path be added to the plat (SUB2021-00100) and to the deed of easement associated with that plat. It appears there is already language referencing maintenance in the draft deed of easement. Please be aware that the deed will require review by the County Attorney's Office prior to final approval, so additional information may be needed depending on the outcome of that review. RESPONSE: Comment received. A revised plat and deed of easement has also been submitted for review. d. The parking schedule needs to be revised. Sufficient parking must be provided for the development. There is not currently enough parking, and the Zoning division has not approved the requested reduction in parking. i. As the parking spaces are proposed to be shared among blocks 2-5, a shared parking agreement will be required prior to site plan approval. A parking agreement may be required with this site plan depending on the location of the revised property lines. Shared parking agreement has been received and is under review along with the easement plat and deed. RESPONSE: Comment received. ii. The parking schedule must be revised. There are more than 45 spaces depicted on the site plan. In addition, there is greater than 20% permitted increase over the required amount of parking. Remove some of the parking spaces so that the number of spaces is not above the 20% permitted. See comments Li and I.ii above for more clarification on the proposed uses of the non -self -storage areas of the development. RESPONSE: The cover sheet (parking schedule and trip generation) and site plan have been updated for clarity. Please note that excess parking has been removed from the site plan to be within the permitted requirements. iii. New Comment: Why is the handicapped parking space blocking the ramp onto the sidewalk to the southwest of Retail Tenant Space 1? The ramp could not be used if a vehicle were parked in the space. RESPONSE: Although unconventional, ADA access is provided in this location as there is adequate clearance of 3.2' between the 18' length of the parking space and the curb. To ensure that access to the ramp will be provided, the area beyond 18' of parking length has been striped. 2. [32.5.2(i)] Streets, easements, and travelways. 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com a. At the time of subdivision, a request, with justification, for a private street will be required for the proposed new street through blocks 2-5. Requests for private streets in non-residential areas are reviewed administratively. If the request for a private street is granted, a private improvement maintenance agreement will also be required. A request for a private street must be submitted for this block if right-of-way is proposed for the travelway located between Wahoo Way and Old Lynchburg Road. Otherwise, the frontage and setback requirements cannot be met with the currently proposed layout. If a private street is not proposed (and approved dependent on staff review) for this travelway, then the building on this block must be pushed back 5 feet in order to meet the requirements of the COD for a setback of five feet from the sidewalk if the sidewalk is not in right-of-way. See footnote 3 on page 8 of the COD. It is acknowledged that a private street request is not currently required for the interior travelway, as the subject parcel has frontage on Old Lynchburg Road. However, please be aware that the self -storage building must meet the setback requirements established in the COD when a private street authorization is requested. These requirements include the building being setback five feet minimum from the right-of-way line, or sidewalk if it outside of the right-of-way. The sidewalk along the northwest corner of the building, adjacent to the storage office, would not meet this requirement, as it is directly adjacent to the building. The comment response letter referenced a waiver that would be emailed. To my knowledge, this waiver request has not been received by CDD at this time. Although setback requirements along this internal travelway are met at this time, they may not be met with future site plan proposals and private street requests. Please be aware that ensuring setback requirements are met with those future submissions will be an important part of the review and could delay approval of such applications, depending on the design(s) and any waivers or modifications that are requested. It is recommended that these issues be addressed at this time. RESPONSE: Thank you for underlining this issue. The developer understands that a waiver will need to be pursued to ensure that this building will remain within the allowable setback per the COD at the time of private street authorization. If this waiver is denied, the developer understands that other alternatives, such as road re -alignment or a rezoning, will need to be pursued to address this issue. b. A separate submission of road plans will be required for the proposed new street through blocks 2-5. Road plans will be required if the travelway between Wahoo Way and Old Lynchburg Road is proposed to become a private or public street. RESPONSE: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. A road plan will be submitted at a future time, when the travelway becomes authorized as a private street. c. Identify on the site plan the proffered right-of-way dedication depicted in the "Single - Lane Roundabout Exhibit." With the vehicle trips per day generated by the proposed uses, as provided on the cover sheet of the site plan, proffer number 1 will need to be fulfilled with this block. In addition to the cash contribution, a plat will need to be prepared to dedicate the right-of-way at the intersection of 51h Street and Old Lynchburg Road. Show this round -about construction and dedication on this site plan as well. As mentioned in previous comments, clarify the proposed use of the other tenant spaces in this building, whether they are for restaurant or general retail or both. RESPONSE: Please see the revised cover sheet, which includes an updated ITE trip generation table. 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com d. Identify all proposed access easements. Access easements will require an approved plat. An access easement plat is required to be submitted and reviewed prior to final site plan approval. A PIMD will be required with the easement plat. Receipt of easement plat is acknowledged. Plat is under review. RESPONSE: Comment received. 3. [32.5.2(j); 32.5.2(k)] Label all existing and proposed water, sewer, and storm drainage easements by type and include a size/width measurement. For existing easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. For proposed easements, an easement plat will need to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded at the courthouse prior to approval of the final site plan being granted. Submit easement plats for review and approval prior to approval of the site plan. Receipt of easement plat is acknowledged. Plat is under review. RESPONSE: Comment received. 4. [32.5.2(1)] Label all existing and proposed utility easements by type and include a size/width measurement. For existing easements, state the deed book and page of the recorded instrument. For proposed easements, an easement plat will need to be submitted, reviewed, approved, and recorded at the courthouse prior to approval of the final site plan being granted. Submit easement plats for review and approval prior to approval of the site plan. Receipt of easement plat is acknowledged. Plat is under review. RESPONSE: Comment received. 5. [32.5.2(p); 32.7.9] A landscape plan that complies with section 32.7.9 of the Zoning Ordinance must be submitted with the final site plan. When submitting final site plans, keep in mind that the landscaping requirements need to be met individually for each phase of the development, as the phases must be able to stand independently. See comments below: a. Street trees need to be planted along the entirety of the proposed internal road since that improvement is being proposed with this site plan. Although not needed at this time, since it is not a street, please be aware that street trees meeting the requirements of the ZMA and Zoning Ordinance will need to be provided along this travelway at this time it is approved as a private street. RESPONSE: Comment received. We have accounted for this future requirement in our landscape plan. b. Identify where the new property lines are so that staff can accurately determine whether the proposed landscaping is actually on the subject property. The landscaping, such ash the tree canopy, required by this development must be located on the subject parcel. The revised property lines for TMP 76-46AB do not appear to be depicted on the landscape plan. RESPONSE: Thank you for bringing this our attention. The property boundary is now notated on the landscape plan. c. New Comment: Provide additional information on the proposed tree wells for those trees along the interior travelway. Identify the square footage of the tree wells, as they must be at least 50 square feet. RESPONSE: The tree wells are approximately 70 SF. For further clarification, dimensions of the tree wells have been added to the site plan. If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions, please feel free to contact me at Keane@shimp-en ine eerine com or by phone at 434-227-5140. 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com Regards, Keane Rucker Shimp Engineering, P.C. 912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com