Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400050 Review Comments No Submittal Type Selected 2014-09-05�• �I''lll��• COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 Memorandum To: Scott Collins From: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: September 5, 2014 Subject: SDP - 2014 -50 Acme Stove and Fireplace Center—Site Plan- Final The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] Conditions of Initial Plan Approval (from approval letter dated May 5, 2014: 1. [32.6] A site plan meeting all the requirements of section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code. Final: See Final Plan comments below. Comment still valid. 2. [32.5.2.1(c)] Boundary Lines. Notably, a boundary line adjustment plat, SUB2007 -215, was approved by the County on 7 -23 -2007. This Boundary Line Adjustment plat appears to modify the frontage of the lot and vacates the 18' easement at the front of the property and dedicated a portion of right of way to public use. Was this plat recorded? If so, assure the existing conditions sheet and the rest of the plan is modified appropriately. Notably depending on where the true front boundary line is located, this may affect the building setbacks as depicted on the plan. Revise if appropriate. Final: Rev. 1 The applicant has submitted SUB2014 -102 Iwe,llc /Acme Stove, which attempts to vacate the 18' strip and dedicate 742.74SF to public use for right -of -way purposes. Once approved revise sheet 2 of the site plan to provide the DB Page reference information of the recorded plat and accurately depict what was recorded. 3. [32.5.2.1(c), 32.5.2(i), 32.5.2(o)] Per County Records Seminole Lane is proposed to be a Public Road; however, at this time it is not accepted into the State's Secondary System. The road portion of Seminole Lane which is on this lot will need to be dedicated for public right of way prior to final site plan approval. This shall be accomplished via a subdivision plat. Final: Rev. 1 Comment still relevant. The applicant has submitted SUB2014 -102 Iwe,llc /Acme Stove which attempts to dedicate 742.74SF (Parcel C) for public right of way. Sheet 2 of the site plan was revised to omit that portion from the site plan. Revise to assure the 742.74SF is depicted on the site plan. 4. [32.5.2 (m) & (n), 4.12.17(b)] Entrances. "Entrances to parking areas from public streets or private roads shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation standards... " With Seminole Lane being a Public Road, VDOT's approval of the entrance is required. Final: Rev 1. Comment still relevant, pending VDOT review /approval. 5. 132.5.2.1(c), 32.5.2.2(a), 21.7(c)] Buffer zone adjacent to residential and rural areas districts. "No construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation shall occur closer than twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district... " On the plan assure the 20' buffer is depicted and labeled. Final: Comment addressed. 6. 132.5.2(n), 4.12.17(c)1] Two way access. The entrance to the site is 20' wide, based on this; staff assumes the site proposes to utilize two way accesses. Regardless, on the plan provide traffic directional arrows for traffic movement. Final: Comment addressed. 7. 132.5.2(n), 4.12.18(a)] Loading Space Size. Loading spaces shall be a minimum of twelve (12) feet in width, fourteen and one -half (14 1/2) feet in clearance height and a length sufficient to accommodate the largest delivery trucks serving the establishment, but in no case will such length be less than twenty -five (25) feet. On the site plan assure the loading space is correctly dimensioned to meet the above requirements, as currently it appears the length of the loading space is 20' and 10' wide. Revise appropriately. Final: Comment addressed. 8. 132.5.2(n), 4.12.18(d)] Delineation of loading spaces. Loading spaces shall be delineated in a manner that identifies and preserves the required dimensions with paint striping, signage, or by other means approved by the zoning administrator. The zoning administrator may authorize that bumper blocks or posts be used to delineate loading spaces on surfaces that are not conducive to paint striping. On the site plan assure the loading space is appropriately delineated as required by the ordinance. Revise appropriately. Final: Comment addressed. 9. 132.5.2(n), 4.12.16(c)(1)] Perpendicular Parking Size. Spaces along a 20' aisle shall be 10' wide by 18' long. Currently there are between 4 and 6 spaces on the plan which are along a 20' aisle, which are depicted as 9' wide. Revise these spaces to meet the required 10' width. Final: Comment addressed. 10. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.19(c)] Screening. Dumpsters shall be screened as required by section 32.7.9 and, where applicable, section 30.6. Assure the dumpster is appropriately screened. On the final site plan provide the material used in the enclosure and the height of the enclosure. Final: Comment addressed. 11. [32.5.2(a)] Being this site is located in the Entrance Corridor (EC), approval from the Architectural Review Board (ARB) is required prior to final site plan approval. Final: Rev 1. Comment still relevant. 12. [32.5.2(n) & (p)] The following will be required for final site plan approval: - Outdoor lighting information including a photometric plan and location, description, and photograph or diagram of each type of outdoor luminaire [Sec. 32.7.8 & Sec. 4.171 Final: Rev 1. Comment not addressed. On sheet 1, under general notes `Lighting' makes claim that wall pack locations are depicted on the plan, also the sheet list provides for sheet 7; however, there is no light information provided with the final site plan, sheet 7 is not provided in the plan set. Revise appropriately. - A landscape plan meeting the requirements of section 32.7.9 of Chapter 18 of the Code, including a tree conservation checklist. Final: Comment addressed. 2 l 3. [Recommendation] Screening. The current proposal preserves the required 20' undisturbed buffer between the commercial lot and the residential district, as is required by the ordinance. The proposal goes even further to preserve existing vegetative screening by preserving upwards of 50' of existing vegetation on the managed slope. Thus the screening requirement at the rear of the property appears to be met. Regardless, the abutting property owner (TMP 045B 1- 05 -OA- 00800) has contacted staff about the proposal and has requested the applicant install a 6 -8 foot tall wooden fence along the property line at the top of the ridge along the property line for screening purposes due to the anticipated loss of screening proposed with the development. It should also be noted that the Wilco Hess development and the Floors Are Us development, each provided a 6 — 8 foot tall wooden fence atop the ridge on the property line to mitigate the loss of existing vegetative screening at the bottom of the slope as part of their Critical Slopes waivers. While the current proposal does not propose to disturb the slopes onsite, nor are these slopes defined as critical slopes any longer, rather they are now defined as managed slopes, thus no waiver is required to disturb these slopes. The current proposal cuts trees from the existing tree line at the rear of the property at the bottom of the managed slopes. Upon a recent site visit it appears that the trees which are proposed to be cut currently provide the majority of the vegetative screening at level with the homes on the bluff. With the loss of these trees the existing screening for these homes may be significantly reduced due to the steep upwards slope from the site to the residential lots at the rear of the property. Per discussions with the abutting owner they would grant this development an easement on their property, which would allow for the relocation of the screening measures. If such an easement or letter of intent for such an easement was granted by the abutting owner the fencing provision of the ordinance for screening could be relocated to a distance at the top of the slope that would not disturb the 20' undisturbed buffer, the existing slope and would enable the preservation of trees that provide screening and/or provide stabilization. In order to achieve the desired effect, the area of the fence would have to be determined in the field at the time of the development or installation of fencing on the parcel from the residential lot. If the applicant chooses to provide a fence the easement and the fence should be depicted and labeled on the final site plan. Final: It does not appear the applicant is interested in working with adjacent neighbor as noted above. 14. [NEW COMMENT] On sheet 1 under Lencral notes. the calculations for ` Impervious Areas'. and t. adjacent to the Trip Generation data for those exact items. Revise to assure only one set of information is provided. During my landscaping review planning staff assumed the most recent numbers adjacent to the Trip Generation Data are the most accurate: Impervious Area = 19, 76� and Parkip,- 4-- n o 12 13—, , 15. [COMMENT] On sheet 3, the end handicapped parking space adjacent to the main entrance should be redesigned or omitted, as currently if a car or van pulled into the space they would not be able to back out without backing out to the entrance to the site or hitting the building. Revise. Rev 1. Comment not addressed. Revise 19. [NEW COMMENT] The proposed tower /decorative chimney appears on the site plan with the same line width as the building walls, thus it reads that the feature has walls which block entrance into the 3 building. Revise. 20. [NEW COMMENT] Three (3) Willow Oak Trees, one (1) Dogwood tree, and eight (8) Henry Garnet Sweetspire shrubs are located in the VDOT right -of -way. VDOT will be required to approve the location of these plantings prior to approval, also maintenance of these plantings shall be adequately addressed prior to their approval. If the trees are to remain, a three party maintenance agreement will need to be developed between the developer, VDOT, and the County. This document shall be developed by the applicant and reviewed/approved by the County Attorney and set to record prior to approval of the plat. On the plan the DB Page number and the title of the landscape maintenance agreement shall be provided (preferably on sheet 5). If the above is not amenable to all parties, it may be appropriate to relocate these required plantings outside the right of way. 21. [NEW COMMENT - 32.7.9.6(a)] Landscaping ... 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 a building on the site shall be counted toward the minimum area landscaped area for a parking area. On sheet 5, under Calculations, `Paved Circulation Area' has been revised to be 5,855 SF; however, this number only accounts for vehicle circulation area but it should also account paved parking area. Based on the calcs provided on sheet 1, it appears the true number should be 10,130 SF. Please revise the 5% calcs to account for both paved parking area and vehicle circulation area. E911— Andrew Slack Approved Building Inspections — Jay Schlothauer - No objections Fire and Rescue —Robbie Gilmer - No objections Engineering Comments — Max Greene Comments pending. ACSA —Alex Morrison Comments pending. ARB — Margaret Maliszewski Comments pending. VDOT— Troy Austin Comments pending. Please contact Christopher P. Perez in the Planning Division by using oerezkalbemarle.org or 434- 296 -5832 ext. 3443 for further information. 4