HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400010 Review Comments 2014-02-04Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Friday, June 06, 2014
Reviewer: Ellie Ray
Department /Division /Agency: Planning
Reviews
Review Status: Approved
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Wednesday, May 28, 2014
Reviewer: Ellie Ray
Department /Division /Agency: Planning
Reviews
Review Status: No Objection
Ellie Ray
From: Margaret Maliszewski
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2014 2:39 PM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: Rolkin Road
I've approved the Rolkin Road project for the ARB.
Margaret M.Maliszewski,Principal Planner
Albemarle County Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,Charlottesville,VA 22902
434-296-5832 x3276
1
AL$z
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4012
May 19, 2014
Ashley Cooper
Cooper Planning
304 7th Street SW
Charlottesville VA 22903
RE: ARB- 2014 -05: Rolkin Road Retail Shops — Site and Architectural Design
Dear Ashley,
We have reviewed the recent re- submittals for the above - mentioned project. The revisions made in these drawings resolve
the outstanding conditions of ARB approval. You may consider this letter your Certificate of Appropriateness.
This approval is predicated on the fact that the design and materials, as proposed and exhibited for review, will be used.
The acceptance of approval implies that the applicant has agreed to execute the design as indicated on the site plan,
attachments, materials, samples, and other submittal items presented. Any change in the approved design or materials will
require an amendment to the plan and must be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board.
Please note the following:
1. This application is approved with the condition that mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance
Corridor.
2. Certificates of Appropriateness are valid for the same period that the corresponding site plan is valid. If there is no site
plan required for the proposed work, the Certificate of Appropriateness is valid for 3 years. Applicants requesting an
extension of the period of validity must do so in writing. The letter must be received by the Director of Planning prior
to the expiration date.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
cc: ARB- 2014 -05
p A
Lils
J tft(;1L'�tQ'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4012
May 19, 2014
Ashley Cooper
Cooper Planning
304 7th Street SW
Charlottesville VA 22903
RE: ARB- 2014 -05: Rolkin Road Retail Shops — Comprehensive Sign Plan
Dear Ashley,
We have reviewed the recent re- submittals for the Comprehensive Sign Plan for the above - mentioned project. The
revisions made in these drawings resolve the outstanding conditions of ARB approval. You may consider this letter your
Certificate of Appropriateness. The approved design criteria for signs for the Rolkin Road Retail Shops building are
outlined below:
SIGN FEATURE
SIGN CRITERIA
Sign type
Channel letter
Colors
Letters
Face: White translucent acrylic; Trim cap /return: Matthews 313 Dark Bronze
Raceway
To match the color of the wall to which it is attached
Graphics
No limit to overall graphic colors as long as individual tenant graphics total number is limited
to three and all colors have a coordinated appearance.
Locations
• See accompanying building elevations for the location of sign bands and placements.
• Signs shall be centered vertically in the designated sign band and centered horizontally
with a single, pair, or group of first story windows or doors in the designated sign band.
• Graphics may be used independent of channel letters within the sign band on the tower.
Size
Letters
• Standard guidelines regarding size and proportion apply.
Graphics
Maximum height not to exceed the tallest letter in the sign. When used, graphics shall be sized
and located to appear as an integral part of the overall sign.
Illumination
Letters
. Signs may be internally illuminated.
• If LED: The level of illumination provided will not exceed the illumination produced by a
single stroke of 30 milliamp (ma) neon. (Note on every application.)
Graphics
Opaque background required. (Note on every application.)
Letter type /font
Unlimited
This approval is predicated on the fact that the design and materials, as proposed and exhibited for review, will be used.
The acceptance of approval implies that the applicant has agreed to execute the design as indicated on the site plan,
attachments, materials, samples, and other submittal items presented. Any change in the approved design or materials will
require an amendment to the plan and must be reviewed and approved by the Architectural Review Board.
Please note the following:
1. Certificates of Appropriateness are valid for the same period that the corresponding site plan is valid. If there is no site
plan required for the proposed work, the Certificate of Appropriateness is valid for 3 years. Applicants requesting an
extension of the period of validity must do so in writing. The letter must be received by the Director of Planning prior
to the expiration date.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
cc: ARB- 2014 -05
Tanya Rutherford, Gropen, 1144 E. Market Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902
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 19, 2014
Applicant Name /Address: Ashley Cooper, Cooper Planning, 304 7t' Street, SW, Charlottesville, VA 22903
Tanya Rutherford, Gropen, 1144 E. Market Street, Charlottesville, VA 22902
Property Owner Name: Pantops Office Building LLC
Property Owner Address: PO Box 8147, Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB# and Project Name: ARB2014 -05 Rolkin Road Retail Shops
Tax Map /Parcel #: 078000000075AO
We have reviewed your request for a freestanding sign for the above -noted development and have approved the following
design for the ARB.
SIGN FEATURE
APPROVED CRITERIA
Sin type
Monument
Location
In the north/northwest corner of the site
Sign size
Overall: 14' tall x 9'8" wide by 3'8" deep
Brick monument: 10' tall x 8' wide
Individual tenant signs require individual sin permits.
Tenant Panels: 4'10" long x 1'9" tall
Base: 2'8" tall x 8' wide
Pin -mount letters: to be determined
Cap: 1'4" tall x 9'8" long
Materials
Monument: Brick and block to match approved building materials
Tenant panels: Acrylic, vinyl, paint
Pin -mount letters: aluminum, paint
Colors
Tenant panels: Background: Matthews Dark Bronze 313 (opaque)
Letters and graphics: White translucent
Pin -mount letters: Black
Graphics
May be illuminated in tenant panel
Illumination
Tenant panels: Internal LED, letters and graphics may illuminated, background is opaque
Pin - mount: External, less than 3,000 lumens
Landscaping
Four Magic Carpet Spirea, 12 -15" at planting, located to screen ground- mounted light fixtures
from view, as viewed from the EC, Rolkin Road and Abbey Road
You may consider this letter your Certificate of Appropriateness. This approval is predicated on the fact that the design
and materials, as proposed and listed above, will be used. The acceptance of approval implies that the applicant has agreed
to execute the design as indicated on the submittal items presented, and as listed above. Any changes in the approved sign
or materials will require a new application and additional review.
PLEASE NOTE: A CHECKED BOX MEANS THESE CONDITIONS APPLY TO YOUR SIGN APPROVAL
®
"Opaque" means that light will not pass through the material. Consequently, the color of the background portion
of the face of the sign will not be visible when the sign is internally illuminated at night. If you have any
question about this requirement for an opaque background, do not proceed with the construction or installation
of the sign until you have spoken with County staff.
®
Individual tenant signs require individual sin permits.
If you have any questions concerning this action, call Margaret Maliszewski at 434 - 296 -5832 x 3276.
�Y OF ALg�'Lr
�IRGIN�P
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
Memorandum
To: Daniel Hines, P.E. (dhinesCa)bohlereng.com)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: February 19, 2014
Revl: May 12, 2014
Subject: SDP 201400010 Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments 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, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
Conditions of Initial Plan Approval (from approval letter dated 12/20/13):
1. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
Final: See Final Plan comments below.
Revl: Comment still valid.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the name of the property owner.
Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Reference the Zoning Map Amendment approved for this property with the associated
application plan (ZMA199800020), as well as any proffers and applicable approved waivers.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. List the proffers associated with the approved ZMA and any
approved waivers granted for the property /project.
Revl: Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.2(b)] Provide /clarify the maximum amount of impervious cover and the maximum amount of paved
parking and vehicular circulation area; the numbers provided are presented in a different manner and the
`interior parking' number doesn't match the number provided on the landscape plan.
Final: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(d)] Show the areas of the site where existing slopes are critical slopes. Additionally, it appears a
critical slopes waiver will be required to develop the site as presented.
Final: Comment addressed. A Special Exception for disturbance of critical slopes was approved by
the Board of Supervisors on February 5, 2014.
6. [32.5.2(1), 4.12.13(e), & 4.12.18(c)] The design of the loading space and dumpster pads creates awkward
and potentially dangerous vehicular access through the site; the full length of both the loading space and the
dumpster pads must be out of the travelway. Please revise or clarify the layout to demonstrate that safe
circulation is provided.
Final: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(k)] Verify that all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage facilities have been
shown on the plan.
Final: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements including
telephone, cable, electric and gas.
Final: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(m)] Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from the proposed
ingress and egress locations.
Final: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension all walkways, fences (guardrail), walls, trash containers (pads), paved areas,
travelways, entrances and loading areas.
Final: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(n) & 4.12.16(e)] All parking spaces that are next to a sidewalk that is less than 6' wide must have
bumper blocks.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. All 16' reduced length parking spaces must have a minimum
2' unobstructed overhang; show this line on the plan to verify that no obstructions are proposed
within the required 2'. Please also show the overhang line on the landscape and lighting plans to
ensure no light poles, shrubs or trees will encroach into this space.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
12. [32.5.2(n)] Provide the proposed paving material for all walks, parking lots and other paved areas.
Final: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify if any outdoor lighting is proposed; lighting locations appear to be shown but no
photometric plan or fixture information is provided. No lighting locations are approved until this information
is provided.
Final: See Lighting Plan comments below.
Rev1: Comment still valid.
14. [32.5.2(p) & ZMA Proffer] The landscape plan must be submitted to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation to
make sure that the plan provides, to their satisfaction, screening of all buildings and parking areas visible
from Monticello.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. As discussed through email, changes per the Thomas
Jefferson Foundation will be reviewed on the next submittal.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4] The landscape notes provided appear to reference old Site Plan ordinance sections;
please update with current references.
Final: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(p) & ZMA Proffer] The proffers for ZMA 1998 -00020 included a provision that street trees would be
provide along both sides of Rolkin Road; all proffers must be satisfied, see next comment for additional
information regarding street trees.
Final: Comment addressed. It should be noted that any required tree that may be removed in the
future due to utility maintenance must be replaced.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
17. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.5.2(d) & 32.7.9.5(d)] Street trees are required along both Rolkin and Abbey Roads. The
existence of utilities or utility easements does not preclude this requirement; see section 32.7.9.5(d) for
location and spacing requirements.
Final: Comment addressed. It should be noted that any required tree that may be removed in the
future due to utility maintenance must be replaced.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] As noted above, the 'Area of Parking Lot' on the landscape plan does not match
the `Interior Parking' number provided on Sheet 3; please clarify and verify that the required 5% interior
landscaped area is provided.
Final: Comment addressed.
2
19. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.7(a)3 & 32.7.9.7(a)5] Clarify if dumpster screening is provided; though perhaps not
specifically required by the ordinance due to the adjacent private streets, this area should be screened from
view of any public street and from Monticello.
Final: Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2(p)] Several of the proposed plantings appear to be within existing or proposed easements; please
either move all landscaping outside of easements or provide proof of authorization from the easement
holder.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that some of the proposed plantings along Abbey
Road are either directly on top of, or very close to, the underground electric line. The email from
Dominion authorizing planting within their easement states that no trees may be planted on top of
lines; revise proposed planting locations. Please also add a note to the landscape plan that states
that any planting removed in the future due to utility line or easement maintenance must be
replaced.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
21. [Comment] The Special Permit for the proposed drive -thru must be approved prior to Site Plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet addressed.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [Comment] ARB approval is required.
Final: Comment not yet addressed. ARB comments on the landscape and lighting plans may
supersede comments provided in this letter.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed; ARB approval has not yet been granted.
23. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be submitted for review and recorded prior to
Site Plan approval.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that work is proposed off -site in three different
areas. Two of these areas seem to be within existing easements for water and sewer; however,
clarify why the third area near the proposed entrance onto Rolkin Road (on TMP78 -75A3) does not
require an off -site easement.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
Final Plan Comments:
24. [32.5.2(a)] Sheet 4 is numbered 1/1; please revise to Sheet 4 of 22.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Sheet 4 is now numbered properly, but an additional sheet
has been added to the plan set, please revise to say sheet 4 of 25 instead of sheet 4 of 24.
25. [32.6.2(h)] Revise the signature block so that each reviewer will have space to sign and date to the right of
their title. Add ARB and Fire Rescue to the signature panel; Zoning may be removed.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
26. [32.6.2(i)] Dimension the angled parking spaces and the associated travelway. Label the angle of the
parking spaces.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
27. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.6(b)] The landscape compliance chart indicates that 6 parking lot trees are provided and
are noted with a "^" symbol, however there only appear to be 5 trees with that symbol in the call -out; please
clarify.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
28. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.8] Revise the required tree canopy note in the compliance chart to say, "7283 SF of tree
canopy required" instead of, " 7283 SF of interior landscaping area required ".
Rev1: Comment addressed.
3
29. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.8] The total tree canopy number provided in the compliance chart does not match the
sum of the numbers provided in the landscape schedule; please verify and revise. Additionally, any tree
proposed to be planted at 2.5" caliper can use the canopy number for that planting size (see pages 10 & 11
of the Albemarle County approved plant canopy calculations).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
30. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The luminaire schedule shows five proposed light fixtures, but the fixtures on the lighting
plan aren't labeled; clarify which fixtures are proposed in which locations.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
31. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Provide the manufacturer's cutsheet for proposed fixture "E ".
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The association between the luminaire schedule and the
cutsheets still isn't clear; there is no cutsheet with the description (model number) R290 70GLCL
(fixture D), and it also isn't apparent to which fixture the cutsheet on Sheet 15 corresponds. Make
sure the model number or description provided on the schedule is the same as that listed on the
cutsheet. It might also be helpful to label the cutsheets with the "label" provided in the schedule.
32. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Proposed fixture "D" does not appear to be full cut -off as defined by Albemarle County.
Our definition prohibits any fixture with parts which may reflect light above the horizontal plane. See ARB
comments for additional information.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. All cutsheets are required to determine if all fixtures are full
cut -off.
33. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The photometric plan indicates that the lighting level along the Hickman Road right -of-
way exceeds 0.5 foot - candle; revise the plan to provide levels of 0.5 foot - candle or less along this public
right -of -way.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
34. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Provide the following standard lighting note on the lighting plan: Each outdoor luminaire
equipped with a lamp that emits 3, 000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be
arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads.
The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning
districts shall not exceed one -half foot - candle.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
35. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until ARB, Engineering and VDOT completed their reviews
and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. ACSA comments have been provided.
Inspections and fire /rescue have completed their reviews and have no objection.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. This site plan cannot be approved until ACSA completes their
review and grants their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. ARB comments have
been provided. VDOT and Engineering have completed their reviews and have no objection.
Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. The Code is
kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may found on the County Attorney's website which
may be found under "Departments and Services" at Albemarle.org.
In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18 of the Code if the developer fails to submit a
revised final site plan to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after the date of this letter the
application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the developer.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using era y albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: IThursday, May 01, 2014
Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski
Department /Division /Agency: ARB
Reviews
Regarding the site plan and architectural design:
1.What is the proposed lamp type for the Radial Wave Dome fixture — high pressure sodium or metal halide?
2.The L2 wall fixture locations on the architectural drawings and the lighting plan still don't match. Which version is
accurate?
3.A1.1 shows a recessed can light fixture that wasn't previously identified. Can you confirm that this fixture is flush
with the canopy? It looks like the can lights (and the other wall fixtures, as well ?) were not included in the
photometrics, but should be. The intensity of lighting around the building is an ARB issue.
Regarding the Comprehensive Sign plan:
1.Adjust the dashed sign area boxes to reflect "unoccupied space" at the tops and bottoms of the sign areas.
2.If your client is amenable, it is recommended that the sign area boxes extend the full length of the brick sign band
between pilasters on the NW elevation, and from pilaster to tower on the SE elevation, while still accounting for #1,
above.
3.Correct the second detail labeled #3 on Sheet 2 to read #4.
4.Correct Sheet 2 to make the notes of Detail 4 completely visible.
5.Revise the raceway color notes in Details 4 and 5 on Sheet 2 to indicate that the "raceway color will match the
color of the surface to which it is attached ".
6.Eliminate the words "no raceway" from the title of the Channel Letter Section detail.
7.Reverse the titles of Details 4 and 5 on Sheet 2.
8.In the wall sign criteria table under Illumination Details, revise "opaque background required" to "opaque
background required for graphics ".
Regarding the monument sign proposal:
1.No further comments. An approval letter is being drafted.
Review Status: Requested Changes
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Wednesday, April 30, 2014
Reviewer: Max Greene
Department /Division /Agency: Engineering
Reviews
Review Status: No Objection
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Friday, April 25, 2014
Reviewer: Troy Austin
Department /Division /Agency: VDOT
Reviews
The comments in my letter dated 2 -24 -14 are still applicable. Since Abbey and Rolkin Roads are private, we have
no objections to the site plan. They will need to get a permit for the tie in to the storm sewer on Hickman Road.
Review Status: No Objection
OF ALg
vlttcmi�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: Final Site Plan for Rolkin Road Retail Center - SDP201400010
Plan preparer: Bohler Engineering [dhines @ bohlereng.coml
Owner or rep.: PANTOPS OFFICE BUILDING LLC
Plan received date: 05 February 2014
Date of comments: 26 February 2014
Reviewer: Max Greene
The Final Site Plan (SDP201400010) submitted 05 February 2014 has received
Engineering Review and do not appear to meet Albemarle County minimum checklist
items for approval. The following list of deficiencies will be adequately addressed prior
to final approval of the site plan:
A) Road and drainage plans (SDP201400010)
1) Retaining wall design will be site specific. Generic wall designs are no longer accepted.
a) Geo -grid may extend 20' or more into site and may be under the load bearing
portion of the buildings soil foundation.
b) Wall construction inspections will be required and as -built records may be
requested prior to final Certificate of Occupancy.
C) Retaining wall appears to be only about 18" wide from face of footing to back on
top of wall as scaled on plan view. Is this the actual dimension once the wall is
installed? Please be sure retaining wall and guard rail will not cause the pavement
width to narrow during construction.
2) Please show pavement stripping with dimensions for access isles on the site plan.
Angled parking requires 16' minimum travel isle and drive thru lane will be 12'
minimum width. Both do not appear adequately addressed at this time.
3) Please add a note to the planting plan "Sight easements will be maintained at all times.
Limbing of trees and shrubs may be required for vehicular safety."
4) Albemarle County has a 3' minimum width for parking islands. One parking island is
labeled 2.8' and needs to be widened to the minimum 3' width. The 3' width is the
minimum for car door swing and safe entry into vehicle.
5) Please show safety slabs for manhole structures over 12' in depth.
6) Please show inlet shaping for the bottoms of manhole structures to prevent erosive forces
from corroding structure and to prevent the pounding of waters that may harbor
mosquitoes.
7) Please show benchmark location, elevation and datum for topography. An existing utility
or other known position will suffice.
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
B) Stormwater Management and Mitigation Plan
1) Stormwater Management appears to have been adequately addressed with the
DMV Final Site plan #1999 -127 and is currently being converted to SWM
facility.
C) Erosion Control Plan
1) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan with application and fee will be submitted for
review and approval. Existing early grading permit for stock pile area will be
replaced with new WPO plan for Final Site Plan.
http: / /www.albemarle.ora/upload /images /forms center /departments /Community _Developme
nt/forms/En ine�ering __and_WPO_Forms/Plan_Review-
Application Stormwater Management -BMP Plan.pdf
Once these comments have been addressed, please submit 2 copies of the revised plans,
calculations, and narratives to Current Development Engineering along with the required review
fee and transmittal form.
Current Development Engineering is available from 2:30 -4 PM on Thursdays to discuss these
review comments. Please contact Max Greene at 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3283 or email
mgreene @albemarle.org to schedule an appointment.
Eilr CDDEI_sdp_MRG_Rolkin Road Retail Center.doc
OL
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
February 24, 2014
Ms. Ellie Carter Ray
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP - 2014 -00010 Rolkin Road Retail Center — Final Site Plan
Dear Ms. Ray:
We have reviewed the final site plan for Rolkin Road Retail Center dated 1'31114 as submitted
by Bohler Engineering and offer the following comments:
1. Inter parcel access would allow the elimination of an entrance on Abbey Road and is
good access management practice. As Abbey Road is not in the State Highway System,
VDOT cannot require the shared access between the two parcels.
2. Per VDOT standards, the minimum throat length for one lane of egress is 35' not 18'.
Please note that the entrances shown on the site plan are not entrances that will be
constructed under VDOT permit and are not subject to VDOT standards unless directed
to be by the County.
3. The storm sewer located under the retaining wall will likely not be able to be excavated
should the need arise. I would suggest that the design engineer explore an alternative
design of the storm sewer that would not require it to be located under the retaining wall.
4. A permit will be required from this office to make the storm sewer connection shown on
the site plan.
As this site will not directly access a roadway that is in the State Highway System, comments 1
through 3 are advisory only. If you need additional information concerning this project, please
feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
IA� Aat
Troy Austin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832
February 21, 2014
Ashley Cooper
Cooper Planning
3047 1h Street SW
Charlottesville VA 22903
RE: ARB- 2014 -05: Rolkin Road Shops Countywide CofA
Dear Ms. Cooper,
Fax(434)972 -4126
I have reviewed the above -noted application. The following revisions are requested to make the proposal consistent with the design
criteria that apply to the County -wide Certificate.
1. Identify on the drawings the material of the element directly above the brick of the pick -up window.
2. Identify on the drawings the material of the "canopy" at the top of the tower.
3. The WLS fixture is not a full cutoff fixture according to the County's definition. Either specify a lamp for the fixture that emits
less than 3000 lumens or choose an alternate fixture that has no part of the fixture below the glass lens.
4. Provide a cut sheet for the WME fixture on the plan and for review. Be sure to specify a full cutoff fixture according to the
County's definition, or specify a lamp that emits less than 3000 lumens.
5. Identify on the lighting plan the colors of the fixtures and poles.
6. Clarify on the lighting plan whether bases are proposed for the light poles. If they are, indicate on the plan that the 20' height
includes the bases.
7. The L1 wall fixture shown on A4.1 is not shown on the site lighting plan. The architectural finish schedule references an L2 wall
pack that is not included in the site lighting plan. The wall light locations are not consistent among all site and architectural
drawings. Coordinate wall light types and locations among all architectural drawings and site plan drawings.
8. Add the mechanical equipment note to the architectural drawings: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance
Corridor shall be eliminated."
9. The Century Link "planting in the easements" letter references maintaining 7.5' of clearance. It is assumed this does not apply in
this case because there are no overhead lines. If your understanding is otherwise, provide clarification.
Within 15 days of the date of this letter, please send correspondence (email is acceptable) indicating whether you will or will not
proceed with these revisions. If you choose not to proceed with these revisions, staff will be unable to approve your application. If you
choose to proceed with the revisions, please forward me one set of revised drawings together with a memo summarizing the revisions
you've made and the attached resubmittal form. Also, please note that the comprehensive sign plan for this building is currently under
review. If you have questions, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
cc: ARB- 2014 -05
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
REVISED APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. County staff has indicated
below what they think will be required as a resubmission of revisions. If you need to submit additional information please
explain on this form for the benefit of the intake staff. All plans must be collated and folded to fit into legal size files,
in order to be accepted for submittal.
TO: DATE:
PROJECT NAME: ARB- 2014 -05 Rolkin Road Shops
Submittal Type Requiring Revisions () indicates submittal Code
County Project Number
# Copies
Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (E &S
# Copies
Distribute To:
Mitigation Plan (MP)
1
M. Maliszewski
Waiver Request (WR)
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
Road Plan (RP)
Private Road Request, with private /public comparison
(PRR)
Private Road Request — Development Area (PRR -DA)
Preliminary Site Plan PSP
Final Site Plan or amendment FSP
Final Plat (FP)
Preliminary Plat (PP)
Easement Plat (EP)
Boundary Adjustment Plat BAP
Rezoning Plan (REZ)
Special Use Permit Concept Plan (SP -CP)
Reduced Concept Plan (R -CP)
Proffers (P)
Bond Estimate Request (BER)
Draft Groundwater Management Plan (D -GWMP)
Final Groundwater Management Plan (F -GWMP)
Aquifer Testing Work Plan (ATWP)
Groundwater Assessment Report (GWAR)
Architectural Review Board (ARB)
ARB- 2014 -05
1
Other: Please explain
(For staff use only)
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
ARB
1
M. Maliszewski
Ellie Ray
From: Alex Morrison [amorrison @serviceauthority.org]
Sent: Wednesday, February 19, 2014 12:01 PM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: SDP201400010: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Ellie,
Please have the applicant submit the following documents to the ACSA (Attn: Jeremy Lynn) for construction review:
• 3 Sets of Plans
• Water Data Sheet
Thank you.
Alexander J. Morrison, EIT
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(0) 434 - 977 -4511 Ext. 116
(F) 434 - 979 -0698
�Y OF ALg�'Lr
�IRGIN�P
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
Memorandum
To: Daniel Hines, P.E. (dhinesCa)bohlereng.com)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: February 19, 2014
Subject: SDP 201400010 Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments 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, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
Conditions of Initial Plan Approval (from approval letter dated 12/20/13):
1. A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
Final: See Final Plan comments below.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the name of the property owner.
Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Reference the Zoning Map Amendment approved for this property with the associated
application plan (ZMA199800020), as well as any proffers and applicable approved waivers.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. List the proffers associated with the approved ZMA and any
approved waivers granted for the property /project.
4. [32.5.2(b)] Provide /clarify the maximum amount of impervious cover and the maximum amount of paved
parking and vehicular circulation area; the numbers provided are presented in a different manner and the
`interior parking' number doesn't match the number provided on the landscape plan.
Final: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(d)] Show the areas of the site where existing slopes are critical slopes. Additionally, it appears a
critical slopes waiver will be required to develop the site as presented.
Final: Comment addressed. A Special Exception for disturbance of critical slopes was approved by
the Board of Supervisors on February 5, 2014.
6. [32.5.2(1), 4.12.13(e), & 4.12.18(c)] The design of the loading space and dumpster pads creates awkward
and potentially dangerous vehicular access through the site; the full length of both the loading space and the
dumpster pads must be out of the travelway. Please revise or clarify the layout to demonstrate that safe
circulation is provided.
Final: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(k)] Verify that all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage facilities have been
shown on the plan.
Final: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements including
telephone, cable, electric and gas.
Final: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(m)] Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from the proposed
ingress and egress locations.
Final: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension all walkways, fences (guardrail), walls, trash containers (pads), paved areas,
travelways, entrances and loading areas.
Final: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(n) & 4.12.16(e)] All parking spaces that are next to a sidewalk that is less than 6' wide must have
bumper blocks.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. All 16' reduced length parking spaces must have a minimum
2' unobstructed overhang; show this line on the plan to verify that no obstructions are proposed
within the required 2'. Please also show the overhang line on the landscape and lighting plans to
ensure no light poles, shrubs or trees will encroach into this space.
12. [32.5.2(n)] Provide the proposed paving material for all walks, parking lots and other paved areas.
Final: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify if any outdoor lighting is proposed; lighting locations appear to be shown but no
photometric plan or fixture information is provided. No lighting locations are approved until this information
is provided.
Final: See Lighting Plan comments below.
14. [32.5.2(p) & ZMA Proffer] The landscape plan must be submitted to the Thomas Jefferson Foundation to
make sure that the plan provides, to their satisfaction, screening of all buildings and parking areas visible
from Monticello.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. As discussed through email, changes per the Thomas
Jefferson Foundation will be reviewed on the next submittal.
15. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4] The landscape notes provided appear to reference old Site Plan ordinance sections;
please update with current references.
Final: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(p) & ZMA Proffer] The proffers for ZMA 1998 -00020 included a provision that street trees would be
provide along both sides of Rolkin Road; all proffers must be satisfied, see next comment for additional
information regarding street trees.
Final: Comment addressed. It should be noted that any required tree that may be removed in the
future due to utility maintenance must be replaced.
17. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.5.2(d) & 32.7.9.5(d)] Street trees are required along both Rolkin and Abbey Roads. The
existence of utilities or utility easements does not preclude this requirement; see section 32.7.9.5(d) for
location and spacing requirements.
Final: Comment addressed. It should be noted that any required tree that may be removed in the
future due to utility maintenance must be replaced.
18. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] As noted above, the `Area of Parking Lot' on the landscape plan does not match
the `Interior Parking' number provided on Sheet 3; please clarify and verify that the required 5% interior
landscaped area is provided.
Final: Comment addressed.
19. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.7(a)3 & 32.7.9.7(a)5] Clarify if dumpster screening is provided; though perhaps not
specifically required by the ordinance due to the adjacent private streets, this area should be screened from
view of any public street and from Monticello.
Final: Comment addressed.
2
20. [32.5.2(p)] Several of the proposed plantings appear to be within existing or proposed easements; please
either move all landscaping outside of easements or provide proof of authorization from the easement
holder.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that some of the proposed plantings along Abbey
Road are either directly on top of, or very close to, the underground electric line. The email from
Dominion authorizing planting within their easement states that no trees may be planted on top of
lines; revise proposed planting locations. Please also add a note to the landscape plan that states
that any planting removed in the future due to utility line or easement maintenance must be
replaced.
21. [Comment] The Special Permit for the proposed drive -thru must be approved prior to Site Plan approval.
Final: Comment not yet addressed.
22. [Comment] ARB approval is required.
Final: Comment not yet addressed. ARB comments on the landscape and lighting plans may
supersede comments provided in this letter.
23. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be submitted for review and recorded prior to
Site Plan approval.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that work is proposed off -site in three different
areas. Two of these areas seem to be within existing easements for water and sewer; however,
clarify why the third area near the proposed entrance onto Rolkin Road (on TMP78 -75A3) does not
require an off -site easement.
Final Plan Comments:
24. [32.5.2(a)] Sheet 4 is numbered 1/1; please revise to Sheet 4 of 22.
25. [32.6.2(h)] Revise the signature block so that each reviewer will have space to sign and date to the right of
their title. Add ARB and Fire Rescue to the signature panel; Zoning may be removed.
26. [32.6.2(i)] Dimension the angled parking spaces and the associated travelway. Label the angle of the
parking spaces.
27. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.6(b)] The landscape compliance chart indicates that 6 parking lot trees are provided and
are noted with a "I" symbol, however there only appear to be 5 trees with that symbol in the call -out; please
clarify.
28. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.8] Revise the required tree canopy note in the compliance chart to say, 7283 SF of tree
canopy required" instead of, " 7283 SF of interior landscaping area required ".
29. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.8] The total tree canopy number provided in the compliance chart does not match the
sum of the numbers provided in the landscape schedule; please verify and revise. Additionally, any tree
proposed to be planted at 2.5" caliper can use the canopy number for that planting size (see pages 10 & 11
of the Albemarle County approved plant canopy calculations).
30. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The luminaire schedule shows five proposed light fixtures, but the fixtures on the lighting
plan aren't labeled; clarify which fixtures are proposed in which locations.
31. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Provide the manufacturer's cutsheet for proposed fixture "E ".
32. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Proposed fixture "D" does not appear to be full cut -off as defined by Albemarle County.
Our definition prohibits any fixture with parts which may reflect light above the horizontal plane. See ARB
comments for additional information.
33. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The photometric plan indicates that the lighting level along the Hickman Road right -of-
way exceeds 0.5 foot - candle; revise the plan to provide levels of 0.5 foot - candle or less along this public
right -of -way.
34. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Provide the following standard lighting note on the lighting plan: Each outdoor luminaire
equipped with a lamp that emits 3, 000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be
arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads.
The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning
districts shall not exceed one -half foot - candle.
35. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until ARB, Engineering and VDOT completed their reviews
and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. ACSA comments have been provided.
Inspections and fire /rescue have completed their reviews and have no objection.
Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle. The Code is
kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may found on the County Attorney's website which
may be found under "Departments and Services" at Albemarle.org.
In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18 of the Code if the developer fails to submit a
revised final site plan to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after the date of this letter the
application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the developer.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eras albemarle.orp or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Friday, February 14, 2014
Reviewer: Robbie Gilmer
Department /Division /Agency: Fire Rescue
Reviews
Based on plans dated 1/31/14
No Comments or Objections
Review Status: No Objection
Review Comments
Project Name: Rolkin Road Retail Center - Final
Date Completed: Friday, February 07, 2014
Reviewer: Jay Schlothauer
Department /Division /Agency: Inspections
Reviews
Based on plans dated January 31, 2014.
No comments or conditions.
Review Status: No Objection