Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400030 Approval - County 2014-03-25�,lfl� IIII� s' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 May 13, 2014 Tim Miller Meridian Planning Group 1413 Sachem Place, Ste 1 Charlottesville VA. 22901 RE: SDP-2014-30 Inglewood Apartments _ Site Plan- Initial Dear Sir: 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. An Erosion and Sediment Control Permit may be issued after the following approvals are received: 1. Approval an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. 2. Approval of a Stormwater Management Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code. 3. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control. 4. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist. 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 $1,500. 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. Once you receive the first set of comments on the final site plan, please work with each reviewer individually to satisfy their requirements. Provide proof of each reviewer's tentative approval once received. The Lead Review will notify you when it is time to submit copies for signature. The final site plan will not be approved until the following conditions are met: The Department of Community�evelopment shall not accept su mittal of the final site plan for signature until tentative approvals for the following conditions have been obtained: Planning Division Approval of (4 Copies are required to be submitted for review) 1. [32.6] A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code. 2. [32.5.3(a)] This application was reviewed against Site Development Plan requirements only. It appears that the project intends to perform a boundary line vacation between Parcel 2 and Parcel 1, but no subdivision application has been submitted. Any subdivision related comments are provided for reference only unless necessary for final site plan approval. Prior to final site plan approval the Boundary Line Vacation plat shall be submitted, reviewed, approved by the County, and recorded in the Clerk's Office. The deed book page information of the recorded plat shall be provided on the final site plan. 3. [32.5.2(a)] With the proposal, modifications to parking, access, and stormwater facilities for the sites are taking place on Parcel 3. As such this parcel shall also be part of the site plan. Throughout the site plan revise to include Parcel 3 as part of the plan, such as legal reference, parcel address, title of plan, and existing conditions on the lot. Staff does not intend for the density of this lot to be included on the plan. If you have any questions about this please give me a call. 4. [4.12.8(e)] Instrument assuring continuation of off-site parking. The required parking for the two (2) existing apartment buildings located on TMP 061KO -05 -OA -00300 is partially located on TMP 061KO- 05 -OA- 00200. As such an instrument for shared parking shall provided to the County in a form that is suitable for recording. It shall be subject to review and approval as to form and substance by the County Attorney, and shall be recorded in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the County before the final site plan is approved. It is advisable that this document be recorded with the Boundary Line Vacation plat discussed above. 5. [32.5.2(a),18.6, 4.11.31 Building Separation. In any case in which there is more than one main structure on any parcel, there shall be a minimum of thirty (30) feet between such structures except as otherwise provided in section 4.11.3. This provision shall not apply to structures built to a common wall. On the plan provide the building setbacks between the existing structure closest to the proposed structure. Assure this meets the required building separation. Currently it does not appear to meet the minimum 30' building separation distance. A reduction provided for in Section 4.11.3 may be appropriate for the proposal, if the site qualifies based on fire flows. If you are seeking this reduction assure that this is listed on the cover sheet under setbacks and assure you reference 4.11.3. The Fire Official will be required to sign off on the reduction prior to final site plan approval. Revise appropriately. [32.5.2(a),18.31 Setbacks. On sheet 1, under site data, provide setbacks for R -15 zoning. They are: Front 25', Side 15', Rear 20'. Also provide building separation information discussed above in comment #5. 7. [32.5.2(n)] Existing conditions. On the site plan it is not clear what is happening to the existing entrance on North Berkshire Road. Is it remaining open? Is it proposed to be closed? Please clarify. 8. [32.5.2(n)] Existing conditions. Add existing fire hydrants to the site plan. Specifically there is a hydrant located along Inglewood Drive near the proposed entrance to the proposed 17 parking spaces. Revise. 9. [32:5.2(n)] Existing conditions. There are existing sidewalks along North Berkshire Road. Revise the site plan to show. the sidewalks. connected to the sidewalk on Inglewood Drive. On the final site plan provide this connection. 2 11. [32.5.2(n)] Existing conditions. At the rear of the property there is an existing dumpster. Depict this on the existing conditions sheet of the site plan. Is the dumpster to remain? Is it to be relocated? If so, where is it to be relocated? Screening of the dumpster will be required per Section 32.7.9.7. 12. [32.5.2(n)] Existing conditions. At the rear of the property there is an existing shed. Depict this on the existing conditions sheet of the site plan. Is the shed to remain? Is it to be relocated? If so, where is it to be relocated? 13. [32.5.2(n)] Existing conditions. On TNT 061KO -05 -OA -00300 it appears the bio- filter is proposed over the existing sidewalk leading to the laundry facility. Is the sidewalk being demolitioned or was it not depicted? Please clarify. Revise appropriately. 14. [32.5.2(b) &(n)] Assure that the proposed units listed for the site are consistent throughout the site plan. Specifically sheets C -201, 202, and 301 depict 4 proposed units; however, sheet 1 proposes 8 new units. Assure these pages are corrected to depict the correct number of proposed units for the new building (8 proposed units). 15. 132.5.2(i)] Streets. Provide the Rte number for Inglewood Drive. Staff believes it is Rte 1411. Revise appropriately. 16. [32.5.2 (m) & (n), 4.12.17(b)] Entrances. "Entrances to parking areas from public streets or private roads shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation standards... " VDOT approval shall be required. 17. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.17(c)1] Two way access. On the plan provide traffic directional arrows for traffic movement. 18. [32.5.2(a)] Add Entrance Corridor (EC) to the Zoning note on the cover sheet. 19. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the full width of the retaining walls required for construction. 20. [32.5.2 (n)] What kind of walls are the retaining walls? Are they block/redi -rock walls, geogrid? Provide this information on the plan. Also, on the plan provide the limits of disturbance for the proposal, to include the area to construct these walls. 21. [30.7.5, 32.6.1(e6), 32.5.2(n) 32.5.2(d)] Managed Slopes. Throughout the plan indicate with shading those areas of the site where existing "managed slopes" are located. Currently only Sheet C -301 contains this information. Also, please discontinue the use of the term "critical slope" throughout the plan, as these slopes are now defined as "managed slopes" as defined by the March 5, 2014 BOS changes to the critical slopes portion of the ordinance (Section 30.7.5 adopted on 3- 5 -14). Disturbance to these slopes are now permitted by right provided that design standards listed in 30.7.5 are satisfied to mitigate the impacts caused by the disturbance of the slopes. Please consult with Engineering staff to assure design standards are being met with the proposal. Their approval of this item shall be required prior to final site plan approval. 22. [32.5.2(k)] Verify that all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage facilities have been shown on the plan. 23. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any existing utilities and utility easements including telephone, cable, electric and gas. 24. [32.5.2(p)] Assure that the proposed plantings are outside of existing and proposed easements or provide proof of authorization from the easement holder. 25. [32.5.2(e), 32.7.9.4(c)] Existing landscape features. The site has a substantial amount of existing mature trees onsite; however, none of these trees are depicted on the landscape plan or the existing conditions page. Depict these trees and provide their size and common name on existing conditions sheet of the plan. If they are to be removed, on the plan depict.this. Revise. 26. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in order to satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9, subject to the agent's approval. If you intend to use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following: 1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall show the trees to be preserved, the limits of clearing, the location and type of protective fencing, grade changes, requiring tree wells or walls, and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. .2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to ensure that the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393 through III -413, and as hereafter amended. 27. [32.7.9] On sheet C -202, in the landscape schedule, T -1 provides 2.5" caliper at time of planting for 340 SF; however, this does not match the approved plant canopy calculations. Rather for a 2.5" caliper White Oak the canopy calculation is 289 SF. If you revise the minim size at planting to be 3.5" caliper then the 340 SF calculations is applicable. Revise appropriately. 28. [32 .7.9] On sheet C -202, in the landscape schedule, T -2 provides 2" caliper at time of planting for 124 SF; however, the minimum size provided does not match the approved plant canopy calculations. For this plant type the county utilizes height at the time of planting to calculate canopy. Specifically 6 -7' height at the time of planting is required for the 124 SF of plant canopy. Revise appropriately. 29. [32.7.9] On sheet C -202, in the landscape schedule, T -2 provides 2.5" caliper at time of planting for 124 SF; however, the minimum size provided does not match the approved plant canopy calculations. For this plant type the county utilizes height at the time of planting to calculate canopy. Specifically 6 -7' height at the time of planting is required for the 124 SF of plant canopy. Revise appropriately. 30. [32.7.9] On sheet C -202, in the landscape schedule, T -3 lists 744 SF of canopy calculations for 3 plantings; however, upon review of the plan there are truly 6 found. Three (3) plantings of Eastern Redbud only account for 372 SF of canopy, six (6) Eastern Redbuds would account for 744 SF. Revise appropriately. 31. [32.7.9.6] Landscaping within a parking area. The minimum parking lot landscaping requirements do not appear to be met. Namely, the type of plantings required by the ordinance are shade trees; however, the plan provides T -3 Eastern Redbuds, which are ornamental trees. Revise to assure shade trees selected from the current list of recommended large shade trees are provided within the parking lot areas. For the proposed amount of parking spaces, six (6) of shade tree plantings are required to be located within 495 SF of landscape islands or abutting areas. Neither the areas of street trees and shrubs required by sections 32.7.9.5(d) and (e) nor shrubs planted between a parking area and a building on the site shall be counted towards the minimum area of landscaping for the parking area. Revise appropriately. 32. [32.7.9.7(a)(2)] Screening. Parking areas consisting of 4 or more spaces shall be screened from residential areas. On sheet C -202, screening meeting requirements described in 32.7.9.7 shall be provided onsite to screen the 27 spaces from TNT 61K -9 -2. Revise. 33. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.7(a)3] Screening. The proposed bio- filter shall be screened from the public street. Screening meeting requirements described in 32.7.9.7 shall be provided onsite to screen the facility. Revise. 4 34. [32.7.9.8] Tree Canopy. On the plan provide the calculations for the tree canopy, to include required and provided. Upon my initial review of the site, the canopy provided on the plan does not appear to meet the minimum required. My calculations are: 58,370 SF site * 15% canopy requirement = 8,755 SF required. Revise appropriately. 35. [32.5.2.n] Existing and proposed improvements. Please show all existing outdoor lighting and provide a lighting plan. 36. [32.5.2(n) & (p)] The following will be required for final site plan approval: - Outdoor lighting information including a photometric plan and location, description, and photograph or diagram of each type of outdoor luminaire [Sec. 32.7.8 & Sec. 4.17] - A landscape plan in accordance with [Sec. 32.7.9]. 37. [Recommendation] While the parking space length reduction is permitted for the 27 spaces based on the proposal, it may be appropriate to rework this to avoid the overhang as large vehicles trying to park may continuously bump against the retaining wall. Retaining walls which sustain many hits overtime may become unstable and collapse. 38. [Recommendation] On sheet 1, under site data, the site plan number is listed as not available. Revise to contain the true site plan number. It is suggested that when the final site plan comes in, that the title provide the SDP# for the final site plan. Engineering Division Approval of. Cop, isrequired to be submitted for review) 1. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the County of Albemarle 2. A Stormwater Management Plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code. 3. All easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control. 4. ADD Note: Existing Entrance To Be Removed (North Berkshire Road, NW corner of site), sheet 2 of 5, Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan. 5. AC Code, Ch. 18, Zoning, Sec. 30, Overlay Districts, 30.7 STEEP SLOPES OVERLAY DISTRICT, 30.7.5 DESIGN STANDARDS, applies to proposed grade changes to existing managed slopes just north of 17-space parking area (Ref. Sheet 4 (C -202), Initial Site Plan; 30.7.5.b.4, steepness; and 30.7.5.d, surface water diversions - § 30.7.5; Ord. 14- 18(2), 3 -5 -14. Albemarle County Service Authority Approval 1 Copies are required to be submitted for review) 1) 1 copy of the final site plan is required for review and approval by the ACSA. 2) Provide fixture counts for the proposed building. 3) Revise sewer connection so the lateral angle with the flow is greater than 90 degrees. 4) Add applicable ACSA details (www.serviceauthority.org). 5) Add ACSA Water and Sewer General Conditions. 6) Show water main along entire alignment of Inglewood Drive on the plans. 7) Call out all fittings, bends, gate valves, taps, etc. Virginia Department of Transportation Approval 1 Copy is required to be submitted for review) - Comments attached Albemarle County Fire & Rescue Approval (1 Cop, is to be submitted for review) 1. Dead end roads greater than 150' require an approved turn around for emergency vehicles. per 2009 VSFPC 503.2.5 2. Turning radii entering the parking lot shall not be less than 25'. per 2009 VSFPC 503.2.4 3. Fire Flow test required prior to final approval. E911 Approval 1 Cony is required to be submitted for review) 1) For the three (3) existing structures that will be accessed by a separate parking area we will need to create a private road name for the access and address those structures off of the new road name. The developer should contact this office with a list of three (3) proposed road names for approval. Building Inspections Approval. (l Copy is required to be submitted for review) 1) The proposed apartment building requires a fire sprinkler system; indicate the fire water line on Sheet C -202. If you have any questions about these conditions or the submittal requirements please feel free to contact me at ext 3443, cperez @albemarle.org. Sincerel Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner "�•� �� ��l 'fog DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Oranga Road Gulpepe , VirglNa 22701 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P..E„ Commissioner April 30, 2014 Mr. Christopher Perez Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: SDP - 2014 -00030 Inglewood Apartments Initial Site Plan Dear Mr. Perez: We have reviewed the initial site plan for the Inglewood Apartments dated 3/21/14 as submitted by Meridian Planning Group, LLC and offer the following comments: 1. The sight lines and profiles for each entrance needs to be added to the site plan to ensure that adequate sight distance is available. 2. The entrances may be designed to Moderate Volume Commercial Entrance standards as described in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual. 3. The minimum throat width of each two way entrance should be 24'. 4. The new sidewalk shown should be extended to the corner of North Berkshire Road and Inglewood Drive and connected to the existing sidewalk along North Berkshire Road. 5. It is difficult to tell from the grading plan provided, but it appears that a significant portion of the parking area and entrance runoff will bypass the proposed storm sewer system and drain towards Inglewood Drive. Additional grading information including additional spot elevations should be added to the plan to confirm the drainage area of the site runoff. In addition, the impact to drainage along Inglewood Drive needs to be considered by the design engineer. If you need additional information concerning this project, please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, 7 11UY PlUbIL 11, r.L'. Area Land Use Engineer Culpeper District WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING