HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201400003 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2014-03-28- � 9
�'IRGII�ZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4176
28 Mar 2014
Justin Shimp, P.E.
Shimp Engineering
201 E. Main St. Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22902
THACH, COLLETT M
TRS OF COLLETT M THACH TR &
TRS OF EDITH C THACH TR
C/O HANTZMON WIEBEL
P O BOX 1408
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for placement of a levee in the floodplain at the proposed
Woolen Mills development (SP201400003). We have a few comments which are listed below:
Engineering
1. New flood hazard overlay district regulations were passed on 3/5/14. These regulations
require a Floodplain Development Permit. The application is attached.
2. Please provide more detail on the structural components of the levee. The section with a free
standing wall above the existing retaining wall (of unknown internal structure) does not
appear structurally sound. Draw all sections to scale, and detail enough materials and
structural components so that the plan is feasible as conceptualized.
3. Underneath the proposed levee are various underground structures of unknown extent.
These may have a significant affect on the levee'e effectivenss and stability. There are some
active stormwater pipes and waterlines in places. There are the original mill buildings which
were buried under the paved areas. This appears to make up much of the existing wall or cliff
on the creek. It appears some investigation is needed to know more about these elements.
4. Provide more detail on the levee drainage. Indicate the planned provisions for long term
maintenance and the necessary operations for flood control during each storm.
5. Include details of the subfloor area in the cross - sections. It is not clear on the plan whether
the intent is to fill in these areas. This comprises fill in the floodplain, which must included and
shown.
Page 1 of 2 Revised 4 -8 -11 eke
6. Provide an updated FEMA HEC -RAS model of the Rivanna River floodplain, with and without
the proposed fill. Demonstrate that there are no impacts to other areas of floodplain,
elevations or limts, on other properties. See Design Manual section 4A, and provide all
information requested. (I understand your position that this is a backwater area, and I don't
disagree. But, both backwater, and the "just flood storage" areas appear to be the most
commonly filled areas in the county. I will need to treat this like any fill in the floodplain of a
detailed study area, by demonstrating no impacts, and I will need your seal to this effect.)
7. Provide scaled cross sections through each building showing the lowest floor, the levee, and
the floodplain. Clarify where the lowest floor will be below the flood levels. It should be clear
how much habitable space is proposed to be at risk should the levee fail. It is recommended
that the habitable space (lowest floor level in FEMA terms) not be below the flood level.
Ideally, there should be a freeboard, in case the levee fails.
8. The county has two other levees in existence; the Luck Stone Quary and the Town of
Scottsville. You should compare these, the sizes, the flood area, and the amount of property
or residences at risk behind them.
9. Stream buffer, and stream buffer impacts need to be detailed on the plan. How much tree
cover or stream bank will be effected, and what the proposed differences and mitigation might
be are important factors in this project.
Planning
Woolen Mills, a historically designated neighborhood adjoining the City of Charlottesville includes
an existing mixture of industrial, residential, greenspace, and community recreational uses. This is a
special use permit request for placement of a levee in the floodplain and other than the current
existing use for light industrial, a proposed use for the site has not been described. Proposed uses
should be similar in type and scale to the designated land uses described in the Comprehensive Plan
and to other such established uses in the immediate area.
Comments on conformity with the Comprehensive Plan are provided to the Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report. Initial comments on how your proposal
generally relates to the Comprehensive Plan are provided here:
The land use designations for this property are Industrial Service, Parks and Greenways and
Institutional in Neighborhood 4. The Industrial Service designation includes warehousing, light
industry, research, heavy industrial uses, as well as uses allowed under office service. Commercial
uses are allowed in this designation as a secondary use. Residential uses may be appropriate in
areas with this designation if such uses are compatible with the nearby and adjacent Industrial
Service uses. It is important that impacts of the Industrial Service uses, such as traffic, noise, odors,
and vibrations do not affect residential uses. Parks and Greenways are designated for parks,
greenways, playgrounds, pedestrian and bicycle paths and Institutional uses include public and
private schools, universities and colleges, and public facilities and utilities.
The proposed Comprehensive Plan update recommends portions of this property for
Office/R &D/Flex/Light Industrial use. It is not recommended that new buildings be located in the
floodplain; however use of the portions of buildings outside of the floodplain may be intensified.
This category supports residential use as a secondary use only. The proposed Comprehensive Plan
update supports redevelopment of this historic site; however, as previously mentioned above, new
buildings are not recommended in the floodplain.
0
Although the scope of placing a levee in the floodplain request is somewhat limited for full
consideration of Neighborhood Model principles the proposal does provide opportunities for the
following Neighborhood Model principles: redevelopment and site planning that respects terrain.
There are many important environmental features, such as floodplain, wooded areas, and critical
slopes located on this site, therefore it will be important that any site planning on the property
respect terrain. Portions of the buildings are located in the floodplain. This special use permit
request could result in the buildings no longer being located in the floodplain. Furthermore, the
buildings located on this property are contributing structures in a historic district. Rather than
eliminate the buildings, this special use permit request could provide an opportunity for reuse of the
building, redevelopment of the site, and preservation of historic buildings. Broadway Street, an
important economic corridor for the City and County, will provide access to this property.
Providing a mixed use component on this property could enhance and provide additional
employment, economic, and residential opportunities in this portion of the County.
The following comments and issues have been provided and should be addressed with this special
use permit:
1. Enhancing the usability of the historic resource is a positive aspect of the proposal;
however, there is insufficient information to determine how the fill, walls and levee will
impact the historic structures. Provide additional detail explaining how the existing
structures will be modified to accommodate the proposed work. Elevations of the
buildings /site with the proposed fill in place would be helpful.
2. Correct "new tree lines" to coordinate with all proposed work. For example, the new access
road is located in a wooded area that the application plan shows as unchanged. Some areas,
such as that near the shed, are shown with continuous tree lines where there are individual
trees with open areas between.
3. Explain how the new access road will function. What does it lead to?
4. Will the narrow section of "hardscape area" by the four -story building be used for
pedestrian access?
5. Confirm that there are existing trees that would remain along the creek after tree cutting,
filling, construction, etc. If there are areas where no trees will remain, correct the tree line
on the drawing. Is any replanting proposed?
6. Clarify the location of the rocks and rock wall on the plan. Show existing retaining walls on
the plan.
7. There is a pipe entering the creek in line with the alley between one -story warehouse
buildings. What is the source of this pipe? Also, there is an old valve near the fire hydrant in
the same area. Is the valve related to the pipe? Please identify the purpose of the valve and
state whether or not it is still functional. How will this valve and pipe be dealt with during
the proposed work?
8. Please show the fire hydrant on the plan. Is the hydrant still functional? If so, how and
where will it be relocated? We will need to consult with Fire/Rescue on this.
9. In the corner between the 1 -story warehouse and the 4 -story warehouse, there is a mound
with what appear to be tank caps, as well as a valve. Are there tanks or pipes in this
location? If so, what do they (or did they) contain? How would they be affected by the
earthwork needed for the proposed fill (removal, burial, etc.)? What is the function of the
valve?
3
10. What are the expected uses of the 1 -story buildings and the first floor of the four -story
building after the proposed work (residential, commercial, etc.)? The safety of occupants of
those floors will be part of our review.
11. Will the area under the four -story building be filled? If so, what will be the impacts on the
building remains in that area? There appears to be a basement level below the main floor of
that building. Is that area accessible from the rest of the building, and if so, would it remain
accessible? Or would it be filled?
12. Cross - section B -B' is labeled both as a vegetated slope and as having rip -rap reinforcement.
Please provide the square footage of (and show the location of) the areas that will be
vegetated vs. covered in rip -rap.
13. It is important to ensure that there will be opportunities to include the following elements on
the site, should further development or redevelopment occur: Will there be opportunities to
connect and enhance bike and trail access with the already existing transportation networks
in the area? And will interconnection opportunities remain on the site? As it appears
vehicular access to Market Street will be eliminated. Please clarify the intended plans for the
existing Market Street access.
Zoning
JMandy Burbage, Senior Planner)
1. The County recently amended the Zoning Ordinance to establish a Steep Slopes Overlay
District. Please revise the application plan to show any steep slopes (managed or
preserved) on the property. This information is expected to be available on GIS -Web
beginning on March 23. If you have any problems accessing the information, contact
Damon Pettitt at ddpettitt@albemarle.org.
Permitted uses within the Steep Slopes Overlay District are outlined in Section 30.7.4 of the
Zoning Ordinance. Stormwater management facilities, such as a levee, located on
preserved slopes are permitted by special use permit. Should field run topography
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the County Engineer that any slopes within the Steep
Slopes Overlay District are less than 25 %, any use permitted by right or by special use
permit within the underlying Light Industrial zoning district would apply. If this is the case, a
levee would be a by right use. Any fill or retaining walls that occur within the Steep Slopes
Overlay District will be subject to design standards outlined in Section 30.7.5 of the Zoning
Ordinance.
2. Intensifying land use or increasing the amount of habitable space within the floodplain area
is typically not recommended. However, in this particular instance, a levee would be
established to protect and encourage the adaptive reuse of a historic structure. Should the
levee be approved, the County may choose to limit the expansion of the building beyond its
current form in order to limit the amount of life and property at risk should the levee system
fail. For the same reason, the County may choose to restrict the permitted uses within any
portion of the building located below the base flood elevation level.
3. Factors which can prevent the failure of a structure such as a levee, are appropriate design
and construction, followed by continuing maintenance. Because this will be privately
owned and maintained, rather than maintained by a public entity, we advise having
measures in place to assure ongoing maintenance. If this cannot be achieved through the
stormwater agreements, we suggest that the applicant propose alternative measures to
achieve this goal.
4. Given the significance of the levee to the uses behind it, we recommend the imposition of a
E
condition that the construction of the levee be certified by an engineer, at various
milestones and once complete.
5. The proposed levee plan modifies access to site and will necessitate the relocation of
existing parking. Please show or explain how parking will be relocated.
Building Code review
Jay Schlothaur had not comments regarding this application
Action after Receipt of Comments
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on the pages attached to
this letter.
It is recommended that you have a work session with the Planning Commission prior to a public
hearing. It might be beneficial to have some knowledge of their willingness to approve a levee,
and of their potential concerns.
Fees — MAKE CHECKS OUT TO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE; PAY AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
FRONT DESK
Recently, the Board of Supervisors amended the zoning ordinance to require that applicants pay
for the notification costs for public hearings. Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the Planning
Commission, payment of the following fees is needed:
$349.20 Cost for newspaper advertisement
$205.17 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage /$1 per owner
after 50 adjoining owners)
$554.37 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing
Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for the
Board hearing needed.
$554.37 Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing
$1108.74 Total amount for all notifications
Notification of adjoining owners and an associated fee are not needed unless a deferral takes
place and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date. Fees may be paid in advance and a
payment for both the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid
at the same time.
Resubmittal
5
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal.
The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience.
Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is
gbrooks @albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
Glenn E. Brooks, P.E.
County Engineer
Co