HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400019 Review Comments Major Amendment, Preliminary Plan 2014-05-27�'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
April 4, 2014
Rev1: May 27, 2014
William M. Eschenfelder
Delta Airport Consultants, Inc.
9711 Farrar Court, Suite 100
Richmond, Va 23236
RE: SDP201400019 CHO Airport Surface Parking Expansion — Major Amendment
Dear Sir:
Your Major 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)] Clarify why TMP 32 -49 is included in "Project Information" as no work appears to be
proposed on this parcel. If TMP 32 -49 is indeed part of the project, owner information should be
provided or easements may be necessary.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
2. [32.5.2(a)] It looks as if both grading work and the very edge of the new parking lot are proposed
outside of the parcel limits; please clarify.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Remove LI from the zoning note as the Airport parcel is zoned RA. Add EC (Entrance
Corridor).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.2(a)] Add a north point to the Landscape Plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(a)] Display the Landscape Plan at a standard scale.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.2(b)] One of the upper rows of parking in the new employee parking lot is labeled as 19 spaces
when there are just 18 shown on the plan; please revise.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(b)] List the total number of existing and proposed parking spaces in addition to the overall
tota 1.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. It is still unclear exactly how many existing spaces are
being removed to add accessways to the existing parking lot, and how many new spaces are
proposed. For example, the chart provided lists 146 proposed employee spaces, when the
plan indicates that 31 additional spaces are being added to the existing lot as well.
Additionally, the overview map shows 201 spaces in the existing lot and 146 spaces in the
new lot, but the plan indicates 200 spaces in the existing lot (including the 31 new spaces) and
147 in the new lot. The chart also refers to 21 `future' spaces, but isn't clear about where they
are; all reference to future spaces should be removed. Provide all relevant information about
existing spaces being removed as well as all new spaces proposed, and correct the counts in
the chart and overview map (on sheet 3) to match what is shown on the plan.
8. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation in the project
area for use in landscape plan calculations.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(d)] The critical slopes ordinance was recently amended to create a Steep Slopes Overlay
map for the development areas. The slopes shown on this plan are now considered "managed steep
slopes "; revise all `critical slopes' references to `managed steep slopes'.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(e)] Show all existing landscape features and clearly label what is being removed and what is
intended to remain.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. Demolition Layout, Sheet 6 is not included in the plan set.
11. [32.5.2(f)] Revise the water supply protection note to indicate that this parcel is within a water supply
protection area.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
12. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the right -of -way and pavement width of Dickerson Road.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the pavement width for the proposed entrance off of Dickerson Road.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the pavement width for the modified entrance off of Bowen Loop along with the
associated travelway width. One -way access aisles must have a minimum 12' width.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.26,k,l)] Verify that the location(s) and dimensions of all existing or proposed utilities and utility
easements including water, sewer, drainage, telephone, cable, electric and gas are shown on the
plan. Label any existing easements with the Deed Book and Page Number or the easement number
reference from the Airport Property Map.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
16. [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.
17. [32.5.2(n)] Label and dimension any existing walkways.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2(n)] Show the proposed lighting on the layout, grading, and utility sheets to verify that no site
conflicts exist.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. While the lighting locations have been shown on the
Grading & Drainage and Utility Layout sheets, no Lighting Plan has been included in the
submittal. Once a lighting plan is provided, locations can be verified to make sure no
conflicts exist.
19. [32.5.2(n)] Sign location and design are not reviewed or approved on a Site Plan application; a
separate sign application is required. Please remove all sign design information. Sign locations
should also be removed or labeled as `future sign location to be reviewed and approved with a sign
application'.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. As noted above, please remove all sign design information.
Sign locations should also be removed or labeled as `future sign location to be reviewed and
approved with a sign application'.
20. [32.5.2(n)] Label blank areas around the proposed parking lot with the intended ground
cover /surface treatment.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
21. [32.6.1(a)] The site development plan must be sealed, signed and dated by an authorized preparer
(licensed architect, engineer, land surveyor or landscape architect).
Rev1: Comment still valid.
22. [32.6.2(f)] Clarify the transition between the existing travelway and the existing parking lot at the
modified entrance off of Bowen Loop; is there curbing along the edge of the parking lot?
Rev1: Comment addressed.
23. [32.6.2(h)] Remove one of the `inspections' signature lines from the signature panel.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
24. [32.6.20)] Verify that all utilities and utility easements are shown and labeled on the landscape plan;
it appears that some utilities shown on other sheets aren't present.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
25. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Several of the proposed plantings have utility conflicts; move all landscaping
away from existing and proposed utilities and outside of any utility easements. Documentation of
authorization from the easement holder to plant within their easement must be provided for any plants
remaining within easements.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
26. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(a)] The plant schedule lists 20 Amelanchier grandiflora but only 18 are shown
on the plan. Similarly, the plant schedule lists 12 Acer rubrum while 14 are shown on the plan.
Clarify and revise if necessary.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
27. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in
order to satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9 or to meet conditions of
approval, subject to the agent's approval. It seems that some of the Landscape Plan requirements
may be proposed to be met with existing vegetation. If this is the case, the landscape plan should
show the trees to be preserved, the limits of clearing, the 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, the applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to insure
that the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved
by the agent in a particular case, such checklist shall conform to specifications contained in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pp III -284 through III -297, and as hereafter
amended. This checklist must be signed, dated and included on the plans.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. The Conservation Checklist should be signed and dated
by the owner or applicant.
28. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(d)] The landscape plan shall verify that it satisfies the minimum landscaping
and screening requirements of Section 32. See comments below.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
29. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5] Provide a note indicating the number of street trees required and the number
provided.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
30. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.6] Provide a note to demonstrate that an area a minimum of 5% of the paved
parking and vehicular circular area is landscaped in shrubs and trees. See section 32.7.9.6(a) for
additional information.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
31. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.6] Provide a note listing the number of parking lot trees required and the number
provided. See section 32.7.9.6(b) for additional information.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
32. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.8] The tree canopy requirement for this site is 10 %; provide information to verify
that this requirement is being met.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
33. [32.6.20)] ARB approval of the landscape plan is required.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. ARB will review this application at their June 16t" meeting.
34. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Light poles are shown on the landscape plan, but no photometric plan is included
in the plan set. A complete lighting plan including photometric information, a luminaire schedule, and
legible cutsheet(s) must be submitted for review. The lighting plan must also be reviewed and
approved by the ARB.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. No photometric plan has been submitted for review.
35. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be recorded prior to site plan approval.
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, if any revisions require off -site work the above still
applies.
36. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the Site Review
Committee (SRC) have been addressed. Any comments not available at the time of the SRC
meeting will be forwarded once received.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Engineering, RWSA, Fire /rescue, ARB, ACSA and VDOT
must complete their reviews and grant their approval before this amendment can be
approved; comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
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,
&LL
Ellie Carter Ray, CLA
Senior Planner
Planning Division