HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201300009 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2013-04-23County of Albemarle
Department of Communitv Development
Memorandum
To: Johnathan Newberry, Planner
From: Amelia McCulley, Zoning Administrator
Date: April 23, 2013
Subject: SP 2013 -09 All Things Pawssible — initial submittal
I have reviewed the initial submittal and have the following comments:
1. Please ask the applicant to address the criteria within Section 26.3 for consideration with
special use permits. If the proposal will not meet any of the criteria, such as not using the first
floor of the building, please ask the applicant to explain and justify their proposal. Specifically,
the applicant should address how this proposed use will be compatible with and will not detract
from surrounding industrial uses.
2. Please ask the applicant to address how the proposed fencing provides soundproofing.
Specifically, how does this fencing material provide soundproofing to the extent of concrete,
block or brick as noted in Section 5. 1.11 (a)?
3. It would be helpful to have information, such as actual sound meter testing, to confirm that this
use as proposed, will comply with the maximum sound levels outlined in Section 4.18.04.
Engineering may have further suggestions for how best to address this. We want to assure
that noise associated with this use will not negatively impact surrounding industrial uses.
4. Please ask the applicant to breakdown the proposed use of the building in terms of area and
time of day usage. For example, will the groomer, acupuncturist and massage therapist be
there at the same time? Parking for this use is an issue that will need to be addressed at least
in more general terms, with the special use permit. This concern about addressing parking at
this time is due to these several factors:
a. the adjoining office building is using part of this property as parking area. This parking
need will need to be addressed in some manner;
b. this site is somewhat constrained in terms of available parking and possible expansion
for parking;
c. this proposes removal of existing parking; and
d. there is inadequate parking onsite based only on the Zoning Ordinance parking
requirements for commercial kennels and not considering the additional uses proposed.
The applicant will need to submit a parking study that explains a) why their use is distinct from
a commercial kennel (so that parking standard should not apply); b) what parking they currently
use and what services are currently provided? This second question is get to at a comparison
from which we could extrapolate the needs for their current proposal. It would be helpful to
have parking counts at various times of the day, in regular intervals such as each hour.