HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201300050 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2013-10-08Lrf2C;l1�ZA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832
October 8, 2013
Ms. Cheryl Lynn Taylor
4164 Innslake Dr. Ste. B
Glen Allen, VA 23060
RE: SDP 2013 -00050 Verulam Farm Property — Tier II PWSF
Dear Ms. Taylor:
Fax (434) 972 -4126
Pursuant to Albemarle County Code § 5.1.40(h)(3)(b) the above referenced application has
been found to be incomplete and is therefore rejected. The specific reasons for rejection are
provided with references to specific duly adopted ordinances, regulations or policies. Required
modifications or corrections that will permit acceptance of the application are included as well.
A. Reasons for resection:
1. [Section 5.1.40(a)(1)] Application form and signatures. A completed application form,
signed by the parcel owner, the parcel owner's agent or the contract purchaser, and the
proposed facility's owner. If the owner's agent signs the application, he shall also submit
written evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. If the contract purchaser
signs the application, he shall also submit the owner's written consent to the application.
The property owner has not signed the application form. If the applicant is acting as
agent for the property owner, such written documentation must be submitted.
2. [Section 5.1.40(a)(4b)] The plans and supporting drawings, calculations and
documentation shall show: Elevation. The benchmarks and datum used for elevations.
The datum shall coincide with the Virginia State Plane Coordinate System, South Zone,
North American Datum of 1983 (NAD83), United States Survey Feet North American
Vertical Datum of 1988 (NAVD88), and the benchmarks shall be acceptable to the county
engineer.
The benchmark used is not indicated on the drawings.
3. (Section 5.1.40(a)(4f)] Trees. The height, caliper and species of all trees where the
dripline is located within fifty (50) feet of the facility that are relied upon to establish the
1
proposed height or screening, or both, of the monopole or tower. All trees that will be
adversely impacted or removed during installation or maintenance of the facility shall be
noted, regardless of their distances to the facility.
Sheet A -1 Compound Plan contains a tree inventory and the location of those trees.
With the exception of the reference tree & an adjacent off -site poplar tree, the location
of tree drip lines was not shown on the drawing; therefore, the impact of the proposed
construction on these trees could not be determined. Revise Sheet A -1 Compound Plan
to show the drip lines of the trees located within the 50' radius of the tower.
B. For information only; issues to be addressed prior to approval
The following are provided for information only and are not the reason for rejection of
the application. The Planner for the Planning Division of the Albemarle County
Department of Community Development will approve for the application referred to
above when the following items have been satisfactorily addressed. Additional
comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.
Comments are preceded by the applicable reference to the Albemarle County Code.
1. [Section 5.1.40(b)(2)] Setbacks. Notwithstanding section 4.10.3.1(b), the agent may
authorize a facility to be located closer in distance than the height of the tower or other
mounting structure to any lot line if the applicant obtains an easement or other
recordable document showing agreement between the lot owners, acceptable to the
county attorney addressing development on the part of the abutting parcel sharing the
common lot line that is within the facility's fall zone (e.g., the setback of an eighty (80)
foot -tall facility could be reduced to thirty (30) feet if an easement is established
prohibiting development on the abutting lot within a fifty (50)footfall zone). If the right -
of -way for a public street is within the fall zone, the Virginia Department of
Transportation shall be included in the staff review, in lieu of recording an easement or
other document.
Sheet A -0 Site Plan shows the fall zone for the proposed 91.8' tall monopole extending
across Interstate 64 eastbound right -of -way. Written permission from VDOT, allowing
the fall zone in the right -of -way, is required. Sheet A -0 Site Plan shows the fall zone
91.8' setback originating at the monopole. With the recent review of another AT &T
PWSF proposal, it has been determined that the 91.8' setback (fall zone) would be from
the closest ground equipment to the right -of -way, which in this case is the monopole
2. Miscellaneous:
a. Sheet T -1, Project Information, Sheet SP -1, Site Information both list the
Magisterial District as Ivy. This is incorrect. Please amend to Samuel Miller.
b. Sheet T -1, Project Information and on each page of the plan at the bottom
mention the site location as "Dick Farms" Rd. Staff is not aware of a road of this
name — is it meant to be Dick Woods Road?
c. Sheet SP -1, in the Project Information map (1" = 600'), notes a lease area of 60' x
60'. On the map above it (scale 1 " =60 ") the lease area is described as 50' x 50' in
area. I believe the lease area is meant to be 50' x 50'. Please correct.
2
d. Sheet A -1, Monopole and Equipment Notes list incorrect tower elevations. For #1
the proposed top of tower elevation should be 692.8'. For the Tower base the
latitude and longitude are incorrect. Please correct to 38° 2'5.294 latitude and
78° 36' 49.997" longitude. The elevation note is also incorrect. Please amend to
601.0'.
e. On Sheet A -1, in the tower elevation drawing, it is noted that the 2' lightening
rod is existing. I believe this should be noted as "proposed."
f. On Sheet A -2, the engineer's seal is not signed. Please include the signed seal in
the revision.
g. On Sheet E &S -4 the tower height is noted as 99.3' feet. This should be 91.9' —
please correct.
h. The application plan appears to show over 10,000 square feet of proposed land
disturbance and requires a WPO (Water Protection Ordinance) plan, Application
and fee. The WPO plan must be approved prior to final site plan approval per
chapter 17 of the County of Albemarle Code.
i. VDOT notes that the existing site entrance as shown on the application plan is
adequate as a Low Volume Commercial Entrance.
j. This property and therefore the tower location are within a County designated
Entrance Corridor which requires review by the County Architectural Review
Board (ARB). This application has tentatively been scheduled for a review by the
ARB on Monday, October 21, 2013. The ARB meetings typically begin at 1 pm in
room 241 of the Albemarle County Office Building on McIntire Road in
Charlottesville.
Once items in Section A above are submitted, the application can be deemed complete and
review of the application can continue. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you
have any questions or require additional information.
Sincerely,
aoz,� �/J �-
Andy Sorrell, Senior Planner
Planning Services
File: SDP 2013 -00050
3