HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201300057 Review Comments Minor Amendment 2014-03-21�'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 -4126
November 11, 2013
Revl: February 10, 2014
Rev2: March 21, 2014
Scott Chapman
VHB, Inc.
115S.15 th Street, Suite 200
Chester, VA 23836
RE: SDP2013 -00057 Northside Library — Minor Amendment
Dear Sir:
Your Minor Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be
approved the following revisions are required:
1. [32.5.2(a)] The owner of this parcel is County of Albemarle; please revise the Cover Sheet.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Add EC (Entrance Corridor) to the Zoning note.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a)] The written and graphic scales provided on Sheet C7.01 do not match; please revise.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.2(a)] Add the landscape, lighting, and lighting detail sheets to the Sheet Index.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the names of the owners, zoning district, tax map and parcel number, and
present uses of all abutting parcels.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The information provided on the parcel to the southwest
is incorrect; it appears to be a combination of information for the parcel being reviewed and
the adjacent parcel to the east. The SW parcel contains office condominiums and can be
labeled as `Village Office Condos, various owners'.
Rev2: Comment not addressed. The information provided on the parcel to the southwest is
cut off and illegible. Additionally, all of the other adjacent parcel information is no longer on
the plan. Please provide the correct information on all adjacent parcels.
6. [32.5.2(b) & 4.12.4(a)] Zoning will determine the number of required parking spaces for this use; this
information will be forwarded upon receipt. The number of spaces required and the number of
spaces provided should be included on the cover sheet once their determination is made.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The parking chart and other notes indicate that 84
spaces are provided, but only 83 are present on the layout (one row labeled 8 spaces in the
back parking lot only has 7 spaces). Please revise all notes to indicate the correct number of
spaces and remove the old `parking requirements' information provided under `Site Data'.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of impervious cover on the Cover Sheet.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(b) & 4.12.16] All 16' reduced length parking spaces must have a 2' unobstructed overhang.
It appears the light pole may encroach into this 2' overhang; please verify and revise if necessary.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. 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.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the name and route number of the existing adjacent street, as well as the
pavement and right -of -way width.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(1)] It appears there are off -site lanes proposed for egress from the site; clarify if an access
easement exists. If it does, please show it on the plan with the associated Deed Book and Page
Number. If it does not, an easement and maintenance agreement must be established.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(k)] The proposed storm drain system appears to connect to portions of the existing system
that are labeled for removal on the demolition plan; please clarify.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
12. [32.5.2(1)] Verify that the location(s) of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements
including telephone, cable, electric and gas are shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(m)] Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from the
proposed ingress and egress location.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify the current square footage of the building as well as the square footage of the
proposed addition(s).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension all walkways, the dumpster pad, all curb radii, the larger travelway behind the
building and the outer travel lane next to the book -drop.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(r)] Clarify the large dark circle symbols (one in loading area, one near loop in upper parking
lot) that are on the layout plan.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Since no other storm drain information is provided on
the layout plan, the manholes should be labeled for clarification.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
17. [32.6.2(e)5] Provide a detail for "VDOT Mod CG -6R ".
Rev1: Comment addressed.
18. [32.6.2(g)] Label the angle of the parking spaces in the upper lot.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
19. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4] Currently the landscape plan is very difficult to read; the call -outs have no
quantity included, different symbols are used for the same plant, and the same symbols are used for
different plants. Please provide the quantity of the proposed species in the call -out and /or use
consistent symbols for each type of plant proposed.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. One section of planting area in the back parking lot has
not been labeled. It appears to contain 5 additional Thuja.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
20. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Several of the proposed plantings appear to have utility conflicts; move all
landscaping away from proposed utilities and outside of any utility easements.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The Cornus along the front of the parcel are all within
the Dominion Power easement; please provide documentation of authorization to plant within
their easement. Additionally, three Platanus are proposed directly on top of existing storm
drain pipe and will need to be moved. Please also verify that all existing and proposed utilities
are shown on the landscape plan; it appears that at a minimum the proposed storm drain
information isn't provided.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. Provide documentation of Dominion's authorization to
plant within their easement for the project file.
21. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Provide the planting size of each species in the plant schedule, and verify
that the minimum standards have been met.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5(b)] Street trees are required along all existing public street frontage; these trees
should be selected from a current list of recommended large shade trees approved by the agent,
provided that medium shade trees may planted instead when the agent determines that site
conditions warrant smaller trees. The trees proposed are listed under "ornamental trees" and do not
meet this requirement. Please select a large shade tree from the County's approved plant list unless
the ARB approves the use of this species.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting final ARB approval.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting final ARB approval.
23. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5(b)] Clarify which existing trees along the existing public street frontage are to
remain; the demolition sheet indicates several are to be saved, but the landscape plan seems to
indicate otherwise.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
24. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5(e)] When a parking area is located so that the parked cars will be visible from
an off -site street, the agent may require additional planting of low street shrubs between the street
and the parking area. It appears that this requirement is proposed to be met with rows of shrubs
planted perpendicular to the parking lot. It is unclear if this layout will provide the desired screening of
the parking lot; the ARB will determine whether or not this is an approvable layout.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting final ARB approval.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting final ARB approval.
25. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.6(a)] An area of at least five (5) percent of the paved parking and vehicular
circulation area shall be landscaped with trees or shrubs. Neither the areas of street trees and shrubs
required by sections 32.7.9.5(d) and (e) nor shrubs planted between a parking area and the building
shall be counted toward the minimum landscaped area for a parking lot. Please verify that the number
provided for "parking areas" includes all paved parking and vehicular circulation.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
26. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.7] The dumpster enclosure note refers to a separate set of plans; dimension the
height of the fence and provide an enclosure detail to show that the screening requirements are being
satisfied.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please provide the requested information on this plan
set (one note still says `refer to arch plan'). Additionally, please demonstrate how the
dumpster pad provides the minimum 8' of pad area in front of the dumpster (4.12.19(b)) as it
appears that the pad ends just a foot or two in front of the enclosure on one side.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
27. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.8(b)] Tree canopy is calculated using plants that will exceed 5' in height at 10
years maturity. Buxus 'Green Velvet' does not meet this requirement; subtract its canopy number
from the calculation.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The Buxus canopy was successfully removed, but there
are a couple of other canopy miscalculations. Acer rubrum planted at 2.5" caliper can use the
canopy number for that planting size of 452 sf (see page 10 of the Albemarle County approved
plant canopy calculations). Please also make revisions necessitated by correcting the plant
counts for the Itea and Thuja requested below.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
28. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.8(b)] The plant schedule lists 13 Acer rubrum but it appears there are 14 shown
on the plan; please clarify and revise if necessary.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. While the Acer rubrum count is now correct, there are a
few remaining inconsistencies between call -outs, plant counts and the plant schedule. One
area of Carpinus is labeled as 9 trees, but there only appear to be 8 (the schedule seems to
count just 8); please revise the call -out. One area of Itea is labeled as 25, but only 23 plants
are shown; please revise the call -out as well as the schedule. Please include the unlabeled
area of plants referenced above ( #19 ... Thuja ?) in the plant schedule.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
29. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] All lighting, including building mounted fixtures, must be shown on the lighting
plan. Any areas labeled "TBD" must be included on this plan or the approval will not extend to those
fixtures. An additional site plan amendment will be required when those fixtures are to be installed.
Revl: Comment addressed. No building mounted lighting is reviewed or approved with this
site plan.
30. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Sheet E1.2 includes a spec sheet for a fixture not listed in the luminaire schedule;
please clarify.
Revl: Comment not addressed. This sheet contains the spec sheet for a "GL 13" fixture
while this fixture is not listed in the luminaire schedule; please clarify.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
31. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The luminaire (fixture) schedule must include the quantity, lumen level,
maintenance factor, and tilt of each proposed fixture.
Revl: Comment addressed.
32. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Albemarle County requires that the LLF (maintenance factor) be 1.0; verify that the
photometric plan uses proper LLF.
Revl: Comment addressed.
33. [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.
Revl: Comment not fully addressed. The note has been added, but the spillover exceeds 0.5
footcandle along the Rio Road right -of -way; please revise the lighting to reduce the spillover
to 0.5 footcandle or less (4.17.4(b)1).
Rev2: Comment addressed.
34. [Comment] Reference the benchmarks used for surveys.
Revl: Comment addressed.
35. [Comment] It appears that there are "removal' areas outside of the limits or work; please clarify.
Revl: Comment addressed.
36. [Comment] The limits of work extend beyond the parcel lines in several areas. Provide
documentation of all off -site easements including temporary and permanent easements. If no
easements exist, they will need to be established prior to approval of this site plan.
Revl: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting word on easements for all proposed off -site
work. Off -site work is shown on both TMP 61 -120L and TMP 61 -120.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed; awaiting word on easements for all proposed off -site
work. Additionally, all easements must be shown and labeled on the site plan. As previously
discussed, verification of authorization to construct permanent improvements within the
existing access easement on the library parcel is also required.
37. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until ACSA, ARB and Fire /Rescue complete their
reviews and grant their approval; comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Engineering and VDOT
comments have been provided. Inspections and E911 have completed their reviews and have no
objection.
Revl: Comment not fully addressed. The revised plan has been distributed to ACSA, ARB,
Fire /Rescue, Engineering and VDOT; this amendment cannot be approved until they complete
their reviews and grant their approval. Comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. This amendment cannot be approved until ACSA and
ARB complete their reviews and grant their approval. VDOT, Fire /Rescue and Engineering
have completed their reviews and have no objection. All other comments will be forwarded
upon receipt.
38. [Comment] There is at least one area where labels on the plan are covered with white -out; when the
plans are submitted for signature, no white -out may be present.
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.
If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
2
Ellie Carter Ray, CLA
Senior Planner
Planning Division