Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201300031 Review Comments 2013-05-13 Ellie Ray From: Ellie Ray Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 4:45 PM To: 'Justin Shimp' Subject: RE: Fedex Phase IV Justin, I have finished reviewing the plan and it is approvable. However, it looks like you forgot to sign your seal...and I can't sign the plans until the seal is signed. I can go ahead and add my signature (dated tomorrow) if you'll set up a time to come in and sign your seal tomorrow. I can give you your copy when you come in. Let me know if tomorrow works and we can set up a time. Thanks, Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 From: Justin Shimp [mailto:justinc shimp- engineering.com] Sent: Thursday, August 01, 2013 9:04 AM To: Ellie Ray Subject: Fedex Phase IV Ellie, Just checking to see if those revisions had made it across your desk yet? My clients are just waiting on the site plan to file the building permit. Anything that could be done to expedite would be much appreciated! - Justin Justin M. Shimp, P.E. President Shimp Engineering, P.C. 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville VA 22902 E: JustinPshimp- engineering.com P: 434 -953 -6116 (Direct) P: 434 - 207 -8086 (Office) F: 804 - 302 -7997 1 ova /RGINv°' County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 . Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126 Memorandum To: Justin Shimp ( lustin engineerinq.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: May 22, 2012 Rev1: July 22, 2013 Subject: SDP 201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 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.] [32.5.2(b)] Clarify the maximum square footage of the subject building. It appears that a small building addition is proposed; list the square footage of the existing structure and what is proposed as an addition. Also, please list the building addition in the narrative. Rev1: Comment addressed. However, I can't find reference to the building addition in the narrative. 2<[32.5.2(b)] Verify that the building addition and new canopy will not exceed 35' as any structure height beyond that requires additional setback area. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please list 35' as the maximum building height instead of 65'. 3. [32.5.2(b)] It seems that several parking spaces will be lost in order to add the proposed drop off area, but the parking information on the Cover Sheet does not reflect this change. Please note how many spaces are being removed and the number of spaces that will remain. Rev1: Comment addressed. 4. [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated with the waiver. a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to determine what is required. Rev1: Comment addressed. 5. [32.5.2(1)] Please verify that all existing and proposed utility easements are shown on the plan. Rev1: Comment addressed. 6. [32.5.2(n)] Please dimension all proposed improvements including walkways, building addition, the new canopy, the new dumpster screening doors, new pavement area and new curb radii. Rev1: Comment addressed. 7. [32.6.2(i)] Note the size of the re- striped parking spaces. Rev1: Comment addressed. 8 [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved; limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed 1 conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The conservation plan checklist must be signed prior to final approval. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] It appears that new site lighting is proposed; please add this to the narrative. Also, the ARB review of the proposed changes may generate additional lighting comments. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please revise the note under "Lighting" on the cover sheet; it currently states that no additional outdoor lighting is proposed. 32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Please show the light pole locations on the layout sheet to verify there are no site conflicts. Rev1: Comment addressed. However, it appears that the Tight pole in the southeastern portion of the parking lot is proposed within a power easement; please be aware that VA Power can force the removal of this pole should it interfere with their easement. 11. [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 footcandle. Rev1: Comment addressed. 12. [Comment] Please include the area where the Bradford Pear is being removed and replaced within a "Limits of SPA" area. Rev1: Comment addressed. ,711[Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until Engineering, Fire /rescue, ACSA and VDOT complete their reviews and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Inspections has reviewed the plan and has no objections. A separate ARB application is under review; this site plan amendment cannot be approved until the ARB application has received approval. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. This site plan cannot be approved until Apicompletes their review and grants their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Fire /rescue, Engineering, ARB, VDOT and Inspections have reviewed the plan and each has no objection. . [Comment] The planting schedule only lists 4 arborvitae but there appear to be 7 proposed on the plan. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eravanalbemarle.orq or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. 1 sHimp PROJECT MANAGEMENT CIVIL ENGINEERING LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING.); July 29th, 2013 Ms. Ellie Ray Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Regarding: Minor Site Plan Amendment — Federal Express Phase 4 (2331 Seminole Lane), SDP 2013 -00031 Comment Response Letter Dear Ms. Ray, Thank you for your review of the 2331 Seminole Lane Minor Site Plan Amendment. We have reviewed and revised the plan per your most recent comments dated 07/22/13. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments. Also attached are 5 sets of the revised plan for County signatures. Minor Site Plan Amendment: 1. Building areas are now defined under proposed use on sheet 01. The proposed building addition has also been added to the amendment narrative on sheet 01 as note # 23. 2. The max building height has been revised to 35' under "Building Height" on sheet 01. 8. A signed conservation checklist is now shown as detail #4 on sheet C3. 9. The note under "Lighting" on sheet 01 has been revised to reflect the proposed outdoor lighting as shown on sheet C4. 10. Comment noted. The light pole within the easement shall be relocated if VA power ever has an issue with its location. 13. All other agencies /departments have no objection with the current plan. 14. The planting schedule has been revised to reflect the 7 arborvitae proposed with this plan. If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at (434) 207 -8086 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. Review Comments Project Name: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Minor Amendment Date Completed: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 Reviewer: Ellie Ray Department/Division /Agency: Planning Reviews Comments: Revisions submitted prior to applicant receiving all comments; they will address additional comments, get ACSA comments and then resubmit. Review Status: See Recommendations •■• J^ r ilk yP _ �IRGIN�P County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126 Memorandum To: Justin Shimp (iustin(cishimp— engineering.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: May 22, 2012 Rev1: July 22, 2013 Subject: SDP 201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 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.] 1. [32.5.2(b)] Clarify the maximum square footage of the subject building. It appears that a small building addition is proposed; list the square footage of the existing structure and what is proposed as an addition. Also, please list the building addition in the narrative. Rev1: Comment addressed. However, I can't find reference to the building addition in the narrative. 2. [32.5.2(b)] Verify that the building addition and new canopy will not exceed 35' as any structure height beyond that requires additional setback area. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please list 35' as the maximum building height instead of 65'. 3. [32.5.2(b)] It seems that several parking spaces will be lost in order to add the proposed drop off area, but the parking information on the Cover Sheet does not reflect this change. Please note how many spaces are being removed and the number of spaces that will remain. Rev1: Comment addressed. 4. [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated with the waiver, a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to determine what is required. Rev1: Comment addressed. 5. [32.5.2(1)] Please verify that all existing and proposed utility easements are shown on the plan. Rev1: Comment addressed. 6. [32.5.2(n)] Please dimension all proposed improvements including walkways, building addition, the new canopy, the new dumpster screening doors, new pavement area and new curb radii. Revl: Comment addressed. 7. [32.6.2(1)] Note the size of the re- striped parking spaces. Rev1: Comment addressed. 8. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved; limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed 1 conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The conservation plan checklist must be signed prior to final approval. 9. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] It appears that new site lighting is proposed; please add this to the narrative. Also, the ARB review of the proposed changes may generate additional lighting comments. Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please revise the note under "Lighting" on the cover sheet; it currently states that no additional outdoor lighting is proposed. 10. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Please show the light pole locations on the layout sheet to verify there are no site conflicts. Rev1: Comment addressed. However, it appears that the light pole in the southeastern portion of the parking lot is proposed within a power easement; please be aware that VA Power can force the removal of this pole should it interfere with their easement. 11. [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 footcandle. Rev1: Comment addressed. 12. [Comment] Please include the area where the Bradford Pear is being removed and replaced within a "Limits of SPA' area. Rev1: Comment addressed. 13. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until Engineering, Fire /rescue, ACSA and VDOT complete their reviews and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Inspections has reviewed the plan and has no objections. A separate ARB application is under review; this site plan amendment cannot be approved until the ARB application has received approval. 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. Fire /rescue, Engineering, ARB, VDOT and Inspections have reviewed the plan and each has no objection. 14. [Comment] The planting schedule only lists 4 arborvitae but there appear to be 7 proposed on the plan. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray(c.albemarle.orq or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. ' pF A l ✓ j. p 1 County of Albemarle a 1 J ` Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126 Memorandum p�✓``�'� I To: Justin Shimp ( iustin enaineering.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: May 22, 2012 Subject: SDP 201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 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 cherwise specified.] 1_____/ 1 [32.5.2(b)] Clarify the maximum square footage of the subject building. It appears that a small building addition is proposed; list the square footage of the existing structure and what is proposed as an addition. Also, please list the building addition in the narrative. L_____ &A L iT t ►__l v 1 L1 1_.l -A a4 I U [32.5.2(b)] Verify that the building addition and new canopy will not exceed 35' as any structure height b yond that requires additional setback area. 1 -Acid LA at. c - - (_,A -\ 1,,LI t OF' l t - [32.5.2(b)] It seems that several parking spaces will be lost in order to add the proposed drop off area, but the parking information on the Cover Sheet does not reflect this change. Please note how many spaces are being removed and the number of spaces that will remain. - -4- - [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated with the waiver, a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to det rmine what is required. (V_ 3 P t=om.. �U41 Li _ I l--t i C_ %---Lt C61 cl IC, � [32.5.2(1)] Please verify that all existing and proposed utility easements are shown on the plan. 32.5.2(n)] Please dimension all proposed improvements including walkways, building addition, the new canopy, the new dumpster screening doors, new pavement area and new curb radii. 7. [ Note the size of the re- striped parking spaces. -b 1 otr.A. t U u © tL L/ L 01-�o.e_ 1 CV- 8. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in 4 7 t _A order to satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved; limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. 9. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] It appears that new site lighting is proposed; please add this to the narrative. Also, the ARB review of the proposed changes may generate additional lighting comments. Ft X U 41-1- 1 i-1 Ll t�-it o t._1 Caste,t - 1 - 4{ A '.�S r-(v c,ceains &P. y 10. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Please show the light pole locations on the layout sheet to verify there are no site conflicts. CEP Vv) 2 £"T)i-�'LO — �24 VA 'Qov,s+Gl e.Q.J1 t- -u-OAA O f, — OU, ( o 1.9-10 t , 4' ' r-2 _c_ c A (� c-i-d- i' t 1r�J1 /1L G' d . -- • 1 c . 0 /w 1 Z i.t.t. -- — _ d ��.4. A rt,idtAe� , [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 Tight 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 footcandle. *2' [C omment] Please include the area where the Bradford Pear is being removed and replaced within a "Limits of SPA" area. 1 13. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until Engin ring, Fir cue, ACSA and V complete their reviews and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Inspdions has reviewed the plan and has no objections. A separate ARB application is under review; this site plan amendment cannot be approved until the A application has received approval. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray(a.albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. L\ ° . vA, ti's ,._,, ko_sk_ • v,,-,--- • -F7,...... . ,L_I 2 SHIMP [AND 'I.A .j i•. July 3 2013 Ms. Ellie Ray Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Regarding: Minor Site Plan Amendment — Federal Express Phase 4 (2331 Seminole Lane), SDP 2013 - 80044- x003\ Comment Response Letter Dear Ms. Ray, Thank you for your review of the 2331 Seminole Lane Minor Site Plan Amendment. We have reviewed and revised the plan per your most recent comments dated 05/22/13. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments. Minor Site Plan Amendment: 1. Building areas are now defined under proposed use on sheet 01. The proposed building addition has also been added to the amendment narrative on sheet 01. 2. Building elevations have been verified with the architect to not exceed 35' at any point. 3. The parking schedule on sheet 01 has been revised to show 9 spaces that will be removed with this SPA. 4. The WPO application process is no longer required due to the addition of a gravel infiltration area thus reducing the total proposed impervious area. 5. All known existing easements are now shown on the plan with appropriate recorded deed book /page numbers. 6. Dimensions have been added to the plan where requested. See sheet C2. 7. The size of the proposed restriped parking spaces have been dimensioned on sheet C2. 8. A completed tree conservation checklist has been added to sheet C3 as detail #4. The owner shall sign the checklist once all comments have been addressed. 9. New parking lot lighting has been added as an item on the site plan amendment narrative. ARB comments on lighting have also been addressed. 10. The proposed light pole locations are now shown on sheet C2. 11. The required standard lighting note has been added to sheet C4 as note #3. 12. A limits of SPA line and text has been added to sheet C2 around the proposed Bradford Pear removal and replacement. 13. Comment noted. Recent ARB comments have been addressed and resubmitted. If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at (434) 207 -8086 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail. Best Regards, Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering, P.C. Ellie Ray From: Margaret Maliszewski Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 2:50 PM To: Ellie Ray Subject: Planning Application Review for SDP201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor. The Review for the following application has been completed: Application Number = SDP201300031 Reviewer = Margaret Maliszewski Review Status = Requested Changes Completed Date = 06/12/2013 1 Z: ry e "Vrilly COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4176 June 11, 2013 Dave Sands Baskervill PO Box 400 Richmond, VA 23218 RE: ARB 2013 - 57: Monticello Community Surgery Center Dear Dave, I have reviewed the above - referenced application for a county -wide Certificate of Appropriateness. The following revisions are requested to make the proposal consistent with the design criteria that apply to the county -wide Certificate. 1. Regarding the light fixtures for the proposed canopy: a) Include the canopy fixture locations, details (including lamp type and wattage) and cut sheets on the lighting plan. b) Revise the photometric calculations to include the canopy fixtures. County ordinance requires that fixtures with lamps that emit 3000 lumens or more must be full cutoff fixtures. Eliminating the up -lamp option would meet the full cutoff requirement. 2. Indicate on the lighting plan the light pole height, including bases if used. 3. Indicate on the lighting plan the light pole and light fixture colors /finishes. 4. Show the light pole locations on the site plan for coordination purposes. 5. Include the standard lighting note on the 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-halffootcandle. 6. Include the new Bradford Pear tree in the plant schedule. Revise the minimum size at planting to 2'/2" caliper. 7. Include the following note on the site plan and architectural elevations: Mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance Corridor. 8. Please note that the wall sign illustrated in the perspective views requires a separate permit and is not approved with this application. Within 15 days of the date of this letter, please send me a letter (by 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 the attached Resubmittal form and a memo summarizing the revisions you've made. Your decision to make the revisions will suspend the 60 -day review period associated with your original submittal. However, I expect to complete the review of your revised proposal within 2 weeks of your re- submittal. Sincerely, Margaret Maliszewski Principal Planner cc: ARB- 2013 -57 EIIie Ray From: Michelle Roberge Sent: Monday, June 10, 2013 11:45 AM To: Justin Shimp Cc: EIIie Ray Subject: E2_sdp_Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Attachments: E2_sdp_Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane.pdf Hello Justin, Please see the attached letter for application SDP2013 -31. Thanks! Michelle Roberge Department of Community Development County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3458 1 `l k. : f ..w 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: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SDP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Plan preparer: SHIMP Engineering, PC [434- 207 -8086] Owner or rep.: Riverside Group, LLC Plan received date: 13 May 2013 Date of comments: 7 Jun 2013 Reviewer: Michelle Roberge Engineering has completed the review for the minor site plan amendment to SDP95 -089 for 2331 Seminole Lane. I have no additional comments for the site plan, but the site plan cannot be approved until a WPO application is submitted and approved. The remaining comment can be addressed with the WPO application. A. Site Development Plan (SDP201300031, previously under SDP201300014) [Comment 10] Please provide more information on the 8" PVC pipe that drains from a nearby pond and connects to your proposed drainage system. It appears the 1995 approved site plan did not show the 8" pipe connecting to the existing DI -7. Please provide drainage calcs in the WPO plan to show the system is adequately sized for the 10 year storm. [Revision 1] Comment not addressed. This was intended for WPO phase. Please submit a WPO application and address the following: a) Please show net impervious area on a table to verify if stormwater management needs to be addressed. If there is no increase in impervious area, water quality requirements are considered addressed. b) Please provide a channel adequacy report. The analysis should incorporate the extent of flooded area and additional runoff captured on site if pond south of site spills over. c) Provide all stormdrain calcs. d) Please provide a manhole instead of 2- 8" PVC 45° bends to DI -7. e) Please provide all drainage easements for off -site drainage through the property. Sincerely, •r► Michelle Roberge Ellie Ray From: Ellie Ray Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 11:42 AM To: 'Justin Shimp' Subject: RE: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Not yet Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 From: Justin Shimp [mailto:justin@shimp- engineering.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 11:41 AM To: Ellie Ray Subject: RE: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Anything from Engineering? Thanks, - Justin From: Ellie Ray [mailto:eray(aalbemarle.orq] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 11:29 AM To: Justin Shimp Subject: RE: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Fire /rescue has also completed their review and has no objection. Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 From: Ellie Ray Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 11:27 AM To: 'Justin Shimp' Subject: FW: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor ACSA comments below. Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 From: Alex Morrison [mailto:amorrison@ serviceauthority.orq] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 8:30 AM To: Ellie Ray Subject: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 1 Review Comments Project Name: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Minor Amendment Date Completed: Monday, June 03, 2013 Reviewer: Howard Lagomarsino Department/Division /Agency: Fire Rescue Reviews Comments: Review Status: No Objection VOW Ellie Ray From: Alex Morrison [amorrison @serviceauthority.org] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 8:30 AM To: Ellie Ray Subject: SDP201300031: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Ellie, I have reviewed the above described plans. I have the following comments: • Add to the abandoned water meter note that the service line will be abandoned at the main. • Show new water meter connection -n to the main. • Provide fixture counts so the 1.5" water size can be verified and connection fees can be calculated. Thank you. Alexander J. Morrison, EIT Civil Engineer Ctmv Service Autivirity 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 Office: (434) 977 - 4511 EXT: 116 This email may contain confidential information that should not be shared with anyone other than its intended recipient(s). 1 EIIie Ray From: EIIie Ray Sent: Wednesday, May 22, 2013 3:54 PM To: 'Justin Shimp' Subject: SDP201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Attachments: CDP1_sdp_ECR_Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor.pdf Justin, Please find attached my comments for the above referenced application. Feel free to contact me if you have any questions, concerns, or need further clarification. Thank you, Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development Planning Division 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 fax: 434.972.4126 1 pfA1 ®! �IXGINIP County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126 Memorandum To: Justin Shimp ( iustin(a�shimp— engineering.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: May 22, 2012 Subject: SDP 201300031 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 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.] 1. [32.5.2(b)] Clarify the maximum square footage of the subject building. It appears that a small building addition is proposed; list the square footage of the existing structure and what is proposed as an addition. Also, please list the building addition in the narrative. 2. [32.5.2(b)] Verify that the building addition and new canopy will not exceed 35' as any structure height beyond that requires additional setback area. 3. [32.5.2(b)] It seems that several parking spaces will be lost in order to add the proposed drop off area, but the parking information on the Cover Sheet does not reflect this change. Please note how many spaces are being removed and the number of spaces that will remain. 4. [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated with the waiver, a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to determine what is required. 5. [32.5.2(1)] Please verify that all existing and proposed utility easements are shown on the plan. 6. [32.5.2(n)] Please dimension all proposed improvements including walkways, building addition, the new canopy, the new dumpster screening doors, new pavement area and new curb radii. 7. [32.6.2(i)] Note the size of the re- striped parking spaces. 8. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved; limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. 9. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] It appears that new site lighting is proposed; please add this to the narrative. Also, the ARB review of the proposed changes may generate additional lighting comments. 10. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Please show the Tight pole locations on the layout sheet to verify there are no site conflicts. 1 11. [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 footcandle. 12. [Comment] Please include the area where the Bradford Pear is being removed and replaced within a "Limits of SPA" area. 13. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until Engineering, Fire /rescue, ACSA and VDOT complete their reviews and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Inspections has reviewed the plan and has no objections. A separate ARB application is under review; this site plan amendment cannot be approved until the ARB application has received approval. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray(aalbemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. Review Comments Project Name: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Minor Amendment Date Completed: Monday, May 20, 2013 Reviewer: Jay Schlothauer Department/Division /Agency: Inspections Reviews Comments: Based on plans dated May 10, 2013. No comments or conditions. Review Status: No Objection Review Comments Project Name: Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor Minor Amendment Date Completed: Thursday, May 16, 2013 Reviewer: Margaret Maliszewski Department/Division /Agency: ARB Reviews Comments: This proposal is under review as ARB- 2013 -57, which is being reviewed administratively. Comments will be forwarded as soon as the review is complete. Review Status: See Recommendations 1110 � < � 1All 1) - gLpn C (- -- --- County of Albemarle ') (- b p ior Department of Community Development LO ? e,w 401 McIntire Road, ; i ` ` 60 Charlottesville, VA, 22902 -1 .ci "4G' O � Phone 434 - 296 -5832 ,5 at1� Memorandum "" To: Justin Shimp (iustin enqineerinq.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: April 3, 2012 Subject: SDP 201300014 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor t -- pfaNrata!: ou.b►- ti-4k. --- I- 60)+ -to S S C.LU A 6 e&(a 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.] v [32.5.2(a)] Please dimension the boundary lines that are shown on the plan. Z"[32.5.2(a)] Provide a note on the cover sheet regarding the critical slope waiver that was approved with the preliminary site plan. It was associated with SDP1995 -00053 and was approved on July 11, 1995. [32.5.2(a)] Add the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel number, and present use of the abutting residential parcel. � [32.5.2(a) & 21.7] Add a reference in the 'Setbacks' information to the required 20' undisturbed buffer d6 between commercial and residential districts. Show this line on the site plan and note whether or not 0 disturbance of this buffer is proposed. If disturbance is proposed, a waiver will be required. If disturbance is N- not not pr� please move the 'limits of disturbance' line outside of the required buffer. J I a. [32.5.2(b)1 Provide the maximum square footage of the subject buildin . _ . � 4 - — Ci icy xc . t9-id. pa.e� A 61, Liz), ct 1� - � - KD LJ Q [32.5.2(b)] Note the maximum amount of impervious cover on the site. Ce "°pd - L [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver (jjtiALi granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated Q ��// with the waiver, a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to determine 2 L____ what is required. 4 ‘j olc cr l-t Loo4L (....1- cL kiNien - $lp LTCt p.u i az &- [32.5.2(f)] Provide the name and location of the adjacent watercourse. Q 9. [32.5.2(h)] The flood plain line shown does not match County GIS; please verify and show the correct L location of the flood plain limits. The stream buffer should also be shown if it extends beyond the flood CJ 14411 plain. 1-- i..i.C_ -[Lt - k Ki(1LtA clL -{in � bc C.,LO 0 L t , ,,44 � , �EM4 Lt Lie & o� S*Y S FT • - ) (10. [32.5 . Please dimension all proposed walkway*, walls, and concrete pads. - sawi (ti -f1 V acc-511 j ✓ b Lei c- - i-u -O L� / i )6ir 1 3,0,4 1 3,0,4 / /VLL/4 v't'' r evuiJ c-[M. b 24,416 t .L �I 1. [32.6.2(g)] Show any existing public utility and drainage eas ents; if new easements are proposed, they I should be noted as dedicated to public use 4 _.p - ( / 65,4 o� e'O I --- Q�� T A p f 2" -cc (r) 7 t-1` 1 . he rery pla nw t iri � satisfy landscaping [32.7.9.4(b)] Wen and screening existing trees /plants requirements ar to be the p land ed in plan lieu of shall indicate nting e the ma trees erials to be saved; order to limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. 13. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until ACSA and VDOT complete their reviews and grant their approval. Engineering comments have been provided. Inspections, fire /rescue, and ARB have reviewed the plan and have no objections. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using erav@albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. 2 Michelle Roberge From: Glenn Brooks Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 4:22 PM To: Justin Shimp; Max Greene; Michelle Roberge Cc: Ben Ochs; Nat Perkins Subject: RE: Fedex Phase IV, Engineeing Comments Thanks, I recall I was willing to compromise and not require WPO plans for the minor impervious addition of the gravel pads and machinery. Nor was it necessary then to analyze and possibly upgrade the drainage system for off -site flows which do not seem to be considered from past plans. The drainage easements should be provided as long as there is off-site water draining through this property. From: Justin Shimp [mailto justin(ashimp- engineering.com] Sent: Monday, June 24, 2013 10:14 AM To: Glenn Brooks; Max Greene; Michelle Roberge Cc: Ben Ochs; Nat Perkins Subject: Fedex Phase IV, Engineeing Comments Glenn, Following up on our meeting of last Thursday, we have determined that we can make changes to the plan to remove the concrete pad (impervious area) and replace it with a pervious surface, such as pea gravel. This will eliminate any increase in runoff or water quality concerns from added impervious surfaces. With this modification, we understand that a WPO application would not be required. Concerning the easements, we have reviewed the title report and inspected the plats of record. It appears that drainage easements have not been recorded or the storm sewer in front of the building that we will be leasing and renovating. Given the fact that our improvements are not changing the drainage patterns, nor adding impervious area that would trigger a WPO review, it is our opinion that new easements would not be required for this minor site plan amendment. Considering the above items, we request approval for this minor site plan amendment be granted as soon as possible. If our understanding of the approval requirements are incorrect, please provide documentation as soon as possible. Thanks, Justin M. Shimp, P.E. President Shimp Engineering, P.C. 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville, VA 22902 E: Justin @shimp- engineering.com P: 434 - 953 -6116 (Direct) P: 434 - 207 -8086 (Office) F: 804 - 302 -7997 1 ti 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: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SDP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Plan preparer: SHIMP Engineering, PC [434- 207 -8086] Owner or rep.: Riverside Group, LLC Plan received date: 13 May 2013 Date of comments: 7 Jun 2013 Reviewer: Michelle Roberge Engineering has completed the review for the minor site plan amendment to SDP95 -089 for 2331 Seminole Lane. I have no additional comments for the site plan, but the site plan cannot be approved until a WPO application is submitted and approved. The remaining comment can be addressed with the WPO application. A. Site Development Plan (SDP201300031, previously under SDP201300014) [Comment 10] Please provide more information on the 8" PVC pipe that drains from a nearby pond and connects to your proposed drainage system. It appears the 1995 approved site plan did not show the 8" pipe connecting to the existing DI -7. Please provide drainage calcs in the WPO plan to show the system is adequately sized for the 10 year storm. [Revision 1] Comment not addressed. This was intended for WPO phase. Please submit a WPO application and address the following: a) Please show net impervious area on a table to verify if stormwater management needs to be addressed. If there is no increase in impervious area, water quality requirements are considered addressed. b) Please provide a channel adequacy report. The analysis should incorporate the extent of flooded area and additional runoff captured on site if pond south of site spills over. c) Provide all stormdrain calcs. d) Please provide a manhole instead of 2- 8" PVC 45° bends to DI -7. e) Please provide all drainage easements for off -site drainage through the property. Sincerely, :f► IP 1 Michelle Roberge p' A ® 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: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Plan preparer: SHIMP Engineering, PC [434- 207 -8086] Owner or rep.: Riverside Group, LLC Plan received date: 7 Mar 2013 Date of comments: 29 Mar 2013 Reviewer: Michelle Roberge A. Site Development Plan (SDP201300014) 1. Please apply for a critical slope waiver. CV '`� / Wes^ n'l tic" ,,,,' 2. Please provide the spot elevations at the NE and NW comers of the concrete pad. All runoff from the contrete pad shall be captured in DI -7. ✓3. In the inner most corner of the retaining walls for the concrete pad, please show a spot elevation to be slightly higher than 391 to ensure no ponding. V4 proposed contours 391 and 392 around DI -7 shall be fixed to show no overlapping contours. Please provide an inset for the demo plan within sheet C2 to separate what is removed/relocated to what is proposed on the site plan. '✓6. A building permit is required for the retaining walls. Please show a detail of the retaining walls on / sheet 3. s !. Please provide a note for the extension of the 15" concrete storm pipe to DI -7. V>3. Please provide the spot elevation for the new sidewalk at the southern most end to show positive / drainage. 9. It appears a portion of the site is within the floodplain according to FEMA maps, which are no longer accurate. We recoTmend or the applicant to upd4e the FEIAA maps. Please apply to r update FEMA maps. or lv 2o . iite s t app�avC b /1v f 4 , 10. Please provide more information on the 8'q-PVC pipe that drains from a nearby pond and connects aftetzto ouw to your proposed drainage system. It appears the 1995 approved site plan did not show the 8" pipe connecting to the existing DI -7. Please provide drainage calcs in the WPO plan to show the system is adequately sized for the 10 year storm. Sincerely, ,1 r 1 Michelle Roberge AL �4S1' pF gt, rAZ I: Q w County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126 Memorandum To: Justin Shimp (justin (@shimp— engineerinq.com) From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: April 3, 2012 Subject: SDP 201300014 Federal Express Phase 4 - Minor 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.] 1. [32.5.2(a)] Please dimension the boundary lines that are shown on the plan. 2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide a note on the cover sheet regarding the critical slope waiver that was approved with the preliminary site plan. It was associated with SDP1995 -00053 and was approved on July 11, 1995. 3. [32.5.2(a)] Add the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel number, and present use of the abutting residential parcel. 4. [32.5.2(a) & 21.7] Add a reference in the 'Setbacks' information to the required 20' undisturbed buffer between commercial and residential districts. Show this line on the site plan and note whether or not disturbance of this buffer is proposed. If disturbance is proposed, a waiver will be required. If disturbance is not proposed, please move the 'limits of disturbance' line outside of the required buffer. 5. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum square footage of the subject building. 6. [32.5.2(b)] Note the maximum amount of impervious cover on the site. 7. [32.5.2(d)] It appears that the proposed critical slope disturbance is in an area covered by the waiver granted with the preliminary site plan. Due to the critical slope disturbance, and the conditions associated with the waiver, a WPO application must be submitted; please coordinate with Engineering to determine what is required. 8. [32.5.2(f)] Provide the name and location of the adjacent watercourse. 9. [32.5.2(h)] The flood plain line shown does not match County GIS; please verify and show the correct location of the flood plain limits. The stream buffer should also be shown if it extends beyond the flood plain. 10. [32.5.2(n)] Please dimension all proposed walkways, walls, and concrete pads. 11. [32.6.2(g)] Show any existing public utility and drainage easements; if new easements are proposed, they should be noted as dedicated to public use. 12. [32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved; 1 limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, a completed and signed conservation checklist must also be included on the plan. This is required to show that the 20' undisturbed buffer will be maintained. 13. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until ACSA and VDOT complete their reviews and grant their approval. Engineering comments have been provided. Inspections, fire /rescue, and ARB have reviewed the plan and have no objections. Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray(c�albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for further information. Michelle Roberge From: Ellie Ray Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 4:33 PM To: Michelle Roberge Subject: RE: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Sounds good. I'll let you know as soon as I have a chance to talk to David. Sony I replied to Justin's email to you, but I didn't want him rushing around and submitting the waiver request and fee if there is a possibility it isn't required. The refund process is a bear! From: Michelle Roberge Sent: Tue 4/2/2013 4:26 PM To: Ellie Ray Subject: RE: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Hi Ellie, After discussing with Glenn, a critical slopes waiver would be required if this new plan is disturbing more than the approved plan from 1995, but you mentioned this may be difficult to check since the plan didn't show specific areas of disturbance. I'll wait until you chat with David tomorrow to see what you guys discuss. - Michelle From: Ellie Ray Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2013 12:34 PM To: Michelle Roberge Subject: RE: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Hey Michelle, I'm working on my review of this project today and in my research discovered that they did get a critical slope waiver with the preliminary plan for this site. It's possible this plan proposes additional disturbance, but it looks like their waiver request was not nearly as detailed as what we require now. It didn't give a specific area of disturbance, it just simply asked for a waiver to disturb critical slopes. Additionally, the plan didn't show the specific areas of disturbance...it was a 1995 plan, so the plan requirements were a little different. Anyway, I'm going to check with David tomorrow when I get back to the office, but it's possible this one won't require an additional waiver. If you want, you could ask Glenn as well to get his take. Thanks - Ellie From: Michelle Roberge Sent: Mon 4/1/2013 10:05 AM To: justinc shimp- engineering.com Cc: Ellie Ray Subject: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Hello Justin, I have completed the engineering review of SDP2013 -14 Federal Express Phase- 4 Minor. Please see the attached comment letter. 1 ® n 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: Federal Express Phase 4 Minor -Minor SP Amendment to SDP 95 -89 for 2331 Seminole Lane Plan preparer: SHIMP Engineering, PC [434- 207 -8086] Owner or rep.: Riverside Group, LLC Plan received date: 7 Mar 2013 Date of comments: 29 Mar 2013 Reviewer: Michelle Roberge A. Site Development Plan (SDP201300014) 1. Please apply for a critical slope waiver. 2. Please provide the spot elevations at the NE and NW comers of the concrete pad. All runoff from the contrete pad shall be captured in DI -7. 3. In the inner most corner of the retaining walls for the concrete pad, please show a spot elevation to be slightly higher than 391 to ensure no ponding. 4. The proposed contours 391 and 392 around DI -7 shall be fixed to show 110 overlapping contours. 5. Please provide an inset for the demo plan within sheet C2 to separate what is removed/relocated to what is proposed on the site plan. 6. A building permit is required for the retaining walls. Please show a detail of the retaining walls on sheet 3. 7. Please provide a note for the extension of the 15" concrete storm pipe to DI -7. 8. Please provide the spot elevation for the new sidewalk at the southern most end to show positive drainage. Sincerely, aI Michelle Roberge