HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201400067 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2014-11-03COUNTY 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: David Jensen
From: Christopher P. Perez, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: November 3, 2014
Subject: SDP - 2014 -67 The Lofts at Meadow Creek — Final Site Plan
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 August 20, 2014:
1. [32.61 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. [COD Seetian to 8-55-5.31 SP-eel landscaping. VDOT eonnncnt 44 dated 8 -5 -14 requires the street tree
landscaping alonr- Rio Rd to be relocated out Ofthe landscahin' strip in the right- of-wav due to Clear
Zone requirements. "pile street tree landscaping is depicted in the application plan for ZNIA2013-
00001 and is required; hoNvever, the required plantings can be relocated outside of Ifie landscape strip
to wliere VDOT requires it. In order to t'acilitate the relocation'ofthe street tree landscaping a
Variation request will need to be requested and processed to niodik/ the typical street design
requirement and the application plan from tale rezoning. 'phis item can be handled at the final site plan
stae. !'he ar iatior aill be e�iece thr ou ch he spec i(/ exception pr ncess. f scfg d 1'is t-econnnending
c plrt ov(rl of the var iatinrr it tivi // o to the I3CJ.S` on consent nt agenda. /f'slcrf f is reconlinending dIcnjal it
,.rill he rr(tnir,ed to go to the PC.' I'" then to the 1305.
9 +mall: Cdrnmicunt addressed. din aonnsa hationn 5V ffi the Director of PhInnnihm) tine reqanireei Street
trees are diete-rn fined to be in dlhe Same t?enneraff chaura ca er as depicted On the aLDL) cafl onn
�Iihnun /Ctodffe doff'Deve ➢o unaennt.
3. [COD Section 1, 8.5.5.31 jai7llSCL'lpino strip. VD0 ' Comment 115 dated 8 -5 -14 regtnres the
landscaping strip along Rio Rd to be six (6) foot wide, rather than the live (5) foot ,vide as provided.
The landscape strip is depicted in the application plan for ZIVlA2013-0000 1 as five (5) foot. wide and
is required; however, it can be modified i:o meet VDOT requirements if needed. In order to fiacilitate
file change a. Variation request: will need to be requested and processed to modify the typical street
design requirement: and the application plan from the rezoning. This item can be handled at the final
site plan stage. The 1,uriation n4/l be r°enieived through the special exception process, ifataff is
Peeorr'nnendrrlg oplwoiwl of the var "1('ltron it ivill go to the BO on 'consent c g(,,c rda. if sIgf f is
iveonunending denial it YPrl/ be r'equit -ed to go to the PC 1", then the BO S.
Fionai: Comment addressed. J n eonsu hationn wit ➢n the Director of Planning the reclanh-ed
Ilanndffseal)e strip is detell- RuNedt to be in the same gyennerai character as depieted on the atnulication
L ➢a¢n /CodVe of DevellopRnent. .
4. 10fN), SeeQ;ion L, .`i. i 3, 3y.,,; !(n), .4ngled Aw- khigSpetces. VD0T conullent,N dai.ecl
-5 iii requires I.he ttivo spaccs <11011'i ihe clltr�ince. I'i'otii Rio R(I to oc rcloc "'Acd to Il ea
Inininlunl throat ICI11 (h. 1 thr_ l.wo parking sp<iaa ,u-c to he reloc",acd I'raln is clepicf_cd on f ic,
apl_)1icatloll plain I�'ron3 the re,,oning ihell a V11-iation shall hike Iliac ttivo sl),lucis Call hc- pushed
b ic.. -k slightly to meet the thro It lelloill but arc in the same �oencral location and design a Variation hill
Ilot be Ilecdc(l. File di. la, u,)e -H d. set f,. A ''Cali, Lion, s i csi ] gn 1Il1 f' ���. �t ap
5. [ Also , for the �hy� o spaces III, cniSolica(1 Ilbove proviCIO
II) angle ol'Ihese spaccs on tale I)lan so staff coil vcriiv ihcy meet file rec!uirc(I dim('nsions l,)cr sectiotl
4.12.16(( „)3. )i'p9 si!: CoIi"P61:r(`3: —1,��D 'l . to be
s:�har alilQ� S11it1�itd.ti_.i�)1_r_. :1 4p tidt i' �8 iDlf ➢L
',`P-VU. -
e , -, l -
6. 1.�'2 ,i..��l])e �t'�.��%;,�G3��'��� G i !1f/'17111'lC'Cl/' %�CI1'lC1A,3; t)�)LI(;('S'. y01'thC i CI.II-VYhnG_it- 5P�1Ct; ) %O L! ClliUl'
the site I))ovid(-' a one- hun(irc(i X100) loot: sioht distance line: on ttic nn,t _�
11 P an Path. " lie I_)edcsti'ian pat i is depictc(l oil the attp Ic.ai.ICnl 1) ,ai Tor
1,P,JA201 ) -00001 is going arotiti(l the real of%hc) h[Iij(li:ng and I11c eiino ill-) in the oC;lc ;I area (;I' the
dulrlpster pilCl <lt the I'milt. ("i',hc I-nli!clilli . Tllk' original 1)atll (Icsihn prov i(lc(I i"'. ;ass <)pen sp<lc('
on the s0utlltve;tel1 I)OI- ioli of the propei-ty. inStc I(I, oii Ills site !)fail the ptial) iias illmliI-icc! (.i)
d011b1C back and le i(1 to ithc passirc. II:(.reaiioi)Ll! "In "'I scar the pon(I alai Icar of -the Inli1diil('.
stl' -Csls (lie orioilti"tl d gnila.vo!It ofdic patl) (also lie ;ilcoi'por ik,( (l ild(o ill", tiit(2 JAIII_ M tili)Itlon to
Vi hai Iti dt'piCir:(l OCi 111 {_ �ilw illdil, l�C.lTal'dliss of fhe &,' igll'111 ordCl' to fa��iiltate a chill c I�rol -n 01C
2Ipplication plaid rezoning ti 1✓ �viatioil r-,qt!(,st `,111l ilue(l to 'he regtiestC(I LIi1C1 Ixocossc(1 to lllo(Jll`y the
pith loc'Itlon. I'l)i -s itelll cal) I)e handled al thu finzll site plan stage. 7/1e 0x:
Z111Y)n' 11 / /1C',C?PC1('!l i.'_A'CL'f7 / /tN1 (�i'O ('.Y�, if .ti' /tiff ?`� /'('CDnP.1nBi1('liil( an”" ol,W!, { %� /l7P 1'C ?i''1Ltji {)f'? it' 1'r �) 1l)
1i1E' %'OS on C(iPL)'<.'ni Uq(:'F1Clc:f. jf i(,U %f is rect)in1,,,vno1: it duifial (/ bill he ro,q /fired !) /l!(: P, , 1��
filt'n lhi" �iilS. l,iil >>! >If„
8. [ZMA2013 -1, Proffer #21 Transit Reservation Area On the site plan label and depict the small
transit shelter associated with the bus stop. Final: Per proffer #2 the design of the bus pull -off and
shelter shall be reviewed and approved by Charlottesville Transit Authority (CAT), VDOT, and
the Director of Planning. Currently CAT is the only reviewer left to review the design. Planning
staff has sent the plans to CAT for review /approval. Pending comments.
9. u, Rio Road 11111)1'orellielP(S. Can t.Ile JAI] -, (:iCa1 -k (Il,illl(.rac 1Vifll Sl.i.l(hng
t1CCi) pi'O })O; >Cd to be CP(;(ilC %4tCCl foI' ti1C t0 ]til(i In(. A .s!), 1;t'Ov %I.E,. c,- tote S,il ^.I
tll(� hil(I Is to i.)(: (e(.IlctliGd 10!- I)llbl1C nsc 11i i ., `'C
10. [ZMA2013 -1, Proffer #11 Rio Road Improvements. Prior to final site plan approval the Rio Rd
widening/dedication to public use will need to take place on a subdivision plat to be reviewed by the
County, approved, and then recorded in the Clerk's Office prior to final site plan approval. The DB
page information of this action shall be provided on the final site plan.
Final: Comment still relevant. Pending submittal of plat _under separate cover.
11. [ZMA2013 -1, Proffer #31 Affordable Housing. "Each site plan for land within the property shall note
the aggregate number of units designated for Affordable Units" Provide the affordable unit
information on the site plan for staff to verify the requirement is met.
Final: Comment not adequately addressed. Sheet 2, Affordable Units, provides a note which
states: "see proffer 3 above for required number of affordable units." however, proffer 3 states
that "each site plan...shall note the awrezate number of units designated for Affordable Units."
Thus on this site plan please provide the aggregate number of units designated as Affordable
Units. Based on the proffer, the required amount of affordable housing for this use is twenty
percent of 65 units, thus 13 affordable units shall be provided. Clearly label this on the plan.
12. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.16(c)(1)] Perpendicular Parking Size. Throughout the plan label the aisle widths,
including in the parking areas. Spaces along a 24' aisle shall be 9' wide by 18' long.
Final: Comment still relevant. Only a single 24' width label was provided on the plan. Please
add a measurement to the parking structure aisles and the parking structure entrance. This will
aid the Zoning Inspectors in the field.
13.
15.
18. [32.5.2(d), 30.7.51 Managed and Preserved Slopes. This parcel no longer contains "critical slopes"; it
has a combination of both "managed slopes" and "preserved slopes" based on the approved overlay
map. Show both the managed and preserved slopes as represented on the approved map and label
them accordingly. b-, showil oil the site plasl as yvell as the cxisiitl' ::oslcliliorls
Slit Ct i0 "IV C. it 1) tl,C tll "ld('1'StE ?Ii(1i11 o1 (Il`.' iil,1)3� is oil Ica cil tvp(' Cif dope i 1)'In;i _1' 4 �`. Vii.. The
proposed disturbance of the preserved slopes is allowed based on the exhibit and special exception
approved with ZNIA201300001 which requires construction in this area. Additionally, disturbance of
managed slopes is now permitted without a waiver as long as certain performance standards are met.
Coordinate with engineering to make sure the construction proposed on the managed slopes meets
these requirements. Final: Comment still relevant, work with Engineering to remedy this.
19. y= a4 .l(? j ,)E.'Irklt'7ti`3'. Oil sliyet. I of tllt s!tc pllil asstllv,, tilat tllt, 10' `Cti`>acl�s a1'e lloteci.
20 . Hii-otig,i1ow tllc p! lil jvovi(1c clii-cciioolal air. v, s for Lilc cdrivc,ai�;Ies.
21. �3 :.>>.1(11)j 13n slicct I, revise site_ data 11- 101,1liatioil to bri,:al� dow!i lio,.r 70,696`>F ol'Opt,il `pace is
bciilg provided ow itc. Notable, slicet 10 dons not depict enoi.igh open, to leave 70,696SI, oI' Opeii
sj)aee. Please address this. l V1SE. T17i lid filatl 'f �� �G:Il z>
22. lCoRuu.ni -mg] It i.lppears as though only otle (1) dunlpstel- is being p - ovided onsite. Bell , there ai-c to
be 65 utlits in this inulliPanli]_V developn-d-t, it seems appl-opritltc r,uue citunpsiers Will be i-cy1,1i1-ed to
}handle all the waste produced. Asstin: that 1.1ic atruit.nit of dunlpstus is provided Which Will adequatel',
3
Service the Cleve lol:Jllle111. Erik, volliIlrnelli111l,
23. [4.17] Lighting. '01l sheet 1„ under Notes, the note shall he revise( is li"lhtin" shall Hilt
exceed orlc half (0.5) foot camilc fl "l1,rT1o�r N1 Revise to 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 - halffoot- candle. Final: Comment not adequately addressed. The above required note
shall be provided on all site plans that have lighting associated with them. Please include the
above note on the site plan.
24. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site
Plan approval. Final: Comment appears to be relevant for water connections to the site.
25. [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. 4.17]
Final: Comment not adequately addressed.
- Sheet C -26 provides the required lighting cutsheets for each light type; however, the cutsheets
are not clearly labeled as to which fixture corresponds with the table: XA, XB, XC, and kW.
- Sheet C -6 depicts the locations of the various types of lights (XA -XW); however sheet C -26
does not provide matching quantities of each light found on sheet C -6.
- Also, the details of each light type provided in the cutsheet is not legible.
- Also, the table does not provide labels for each column.
- Also, clearly provide the lumen levels of each lamp within the table (if the light is over 3,000
lumens, it shall be a full cutoff fixture).
- Within the table assure the tilt of the fixture is provided (full cutoff provides for zero tilt).
- Also, the lighting plan shall include a photometric plan which measures the light spillover to
the residential property lines and the public street (spillover shall not to be over 0.5 halffoot
candles).
- All maintenance factors for the lights shall be 1.0
NEW CON=NTS
26. [4.12.6] Parking. On sheet C -2, under Parking Required, there appears to be a mathematical error in
the amount of required parking spaces. As currently the plan lists 53 + 60 spaces as 93; however, I
believe it should be 113. Revise if appropriate.
27. [4.12.6] Parking. The Building Official has commented on the size of the handicapped barrier free
parking space associated with the van - accessible. Currently the plan has a 5' width; I believe he's
looking to have this expanded to 8' wide. Please work with him on this item.
28. [Comment] Prior to final site plan approval the vacation of the property line between TMP 61A -17
and TMP 61A -15 shall take place on a subdivision plat to be reviewed by the County, approved, and
then recorded in the Clerk's Office prior to final site plan approval. The DB page information of this
action shall be provided on the final site plan. It may be appropriate to combine all platting items on
a single plat.
29. [COD Section VIII] The two required benches are depicted in various locations throughout the plan
(see sheet C -18 and sheet C -22). Assure that the plan is consistent on the location of the benches.
Revise.
30. [COD Section X, 32.7.9.5(d)] The plan attempts to utilize Lagerstroemia Indica "Crape Myrtle" as
street trees along Rio Road; however, this is not permitted as these trees are classified as small
ornamental trees and do not qualify for use as public street trees, which shall be large deciduous
4
trees (Section 32.7.9.5(d)).
The applicant should revise the plan to provide some type of large deciduous tree in this area to act as
street trees in order to meet the required street tree landscaping. The Acer Rubrum "Flame Red
Maple " is an appropriate tree, as such replace the five Crape Myrtles fronting Rio with an
appropriate tree type.
Please note, that the Code of Development provides guidelines for plantings on the entrance road, that
requirement is met with this same mix; however, to meet the requirements for landscaping on the
public street frontage please refer to the comment above. If you have questions please give me a call.
31. [Comment] The plan depicts an indention, which looks like parallel parking spaces adjacent to -the
two parking spaces at the entrance. Please clarify what this space is for through labels. If they are for
parking spaces please provide measurements and labels. Etc
32. [Comment] To avoid confusion on sheet A2.01, please provide labels to each elevation view. For
example it appears the West Elevation is the view from Rio Road. If so, please label it as such. Also,
it appears the East Elevation is the rear of the building. If so, please label it as such.
33. [4.12.6] Parking. At the rear of the building (East Elevation) is the base of the wall openings tall
enough to block vehicle headlamps from shinning through? If not, please modifying the openings to
prevent headlamps from shinning through onto residential lots.
34. [Comment] To avoid confusion on the cover sheet please omit SDP201400048 from the title, and
replace it with SDP201400067 — Final Site Plan.
35. [Comment] On sheet C -1, in the approvals box, please omit the Health Department and ARB
signature lines, and please include `8911" signature line.
Engineering Comments — Justin Deel
Comments attached dated 10 -31 -14
ACSA —Alex Morrison
Comments Pending (Revised plan set recently received by ACSA)
R WSA - Victoria Fort
No comments. Please work with ACSA to address the water connection issues.
E911— Andrew Slack
Approved
Building Inspections — Jay Schlothauer
1) Rearrange the barrier -free parking space, that is not within the garage, so that it is van - accessible.
Fire and Rescue —Robbie Gilmer
1. Fire flow test needs to be conducted on the RWSA 16 in main on RIo Road not the 12 inch ACSA line
on Pen Park Road
VDOT— Shelly Plaster
Comments attached dated 11 -3 -14
Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) — Juwhan Lee
Review of bus pull off and shelter in process, comments pending.
Please contact Christopher P. Perez in the Planning Division by using cperez e,albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext.
3443 for further information.
OF ALg�,,
`�77'
��RGINLP
County of Albemarle
Department of Communitv Develoument
Memorandum
To: Chris Perez, Planning
From: Justin Deel, Engineering
Date: 31 Oct 2014
Subject: The Lofts at Meadow Creek (SDP- 2014- 00067)
The final site plan for The Lofts at Meadowcreek has been reviewed. The following concerns should be
addressed prior to approval;
1. The VSMP/WPO application will need to be approved before recommending approval of the final
site plan to Planning. Please separate the VSMP package (SWM, ESC, storm drainage) from the
site plan. This should be a stand -alone submittal for the VSMP program.
2. Critical slopes must be per Albemarle County Code (ACC) 18 -30.7. Please make your drawings
match the overlay district maps.. The walls proposed to fill in the slopes that are marked as
managed slopes must follow the design guidelines of ACC 30.7.5, with 6 foot wall maximum.
3. Slopes steeper than 3:1 must have a low maintenance ground cover (not grass). [ACC 18 -30.7]
4. Provide sealed retaining wall plans.
5. VDOT approval will be required for improvements along Rio Road.
6. Ensure that bus stop lane is marked off so as to differentiate from the turn lane.
7. The travelway into the site does not meet the grade requirements for parking [ACC 18- 4.12].
8. Parallel parking needs to be striped.
9. Handicapped parking spaces in garage should be located on the east side of the parking facility to
eliminate the need to cross vehicle access isle [ACC 18- 4.12.15.i].
10. Restore east elevation profile view of retaining wall.
11. Inlet calculations do not appear to be correct. Please accurately reflect curbs and grades, and
ensure 10 year storm gets to the SWM facilities. We can check details with VSMP plans.
The following issues with biofilter design will affect the layout of the site plan;
1. You cannot have a sanitary sewer /manhole in the biofilter dam.
2. The biofilter does not appear to meet minimum setback for bioretetion BMP [VA DEQ
Stormwater Design Specification No. 9, Table 9.3].
3. Provide a 4 to 6 foot maintenance access strip to west side of bioretention facility.
4. The biofilter treatment cannot be part of the sediment forebay.
�1
r A
a
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
160t Orange.Rjad
Curpeper.Yrgnu 22701
Charles & Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
November 3, 2014
Mr. Christopher Perez
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902.
Re: SDP- 2014 -00067
Dear Mr. Perez:
We have reviewed the Final.Site plan for The Lofts at Meadow Creek, as submitted by W &W
Associates on 10/9/14, and offer the following comments:
1. Please correct the curb and gutter label at STA 11 +50 on Rio Road.
2. The minimum entrance radius is 25', please see appendix F of the Road Design
Manual.
3. Please add a note to nose down the curb at STA 07 +75 on Rio Road.
4. Please add a note stating that the relocated utility poles shall be set outside of the
clear -zone.
5. As mentioned in the Initial Site plan comments, additional detail, including spot
elevations, need to be provided at the SWM facility entrance. Please clarify the
transition from C&G to shoulder /roadside ditch. How will the additional runoff be
controlled now that there is concentrated flow coming down the gutter -pan?
6. The cross -slope at the main entrance is approx. 6.3 %. This should be within a 2- 3°:do'
range.
7. Please provide additional spot elevations, along the C&G at the main entrance, to
ensure positive flow. Also, please consider a reversed curb on the south -side of the
entrance.
8. Why is STM STR #8 called out as a sump on the inlet computations? It does not
appear to be a sump condition on the profile.
9. Please provide the Asphalt Pavement Widening detail, WP -2.
10. The crosswalk located within the ROW should be shifted closer to Rio Road. The
stop bar should be a minimum of 4' behind the crosswalk.
11. The Crosswalk spacing between lines should be not less than 6 feat wide and the CG-
12's should be located within the crosswalk markings.
12. Stop Ears and arrows should be Type, E Class I Thermoplastic. Vae r ining
pavement markings should be Type A (Latex) paint..
q
i
13. Please remove the proposed stop bar located in the left turn lane on Rio Road, approx.
STA 10 +50.
14. Please extend the left turn lane striping, approx. 10', to the entrance PC. However,
ensure that the striping does not interfere with the left turn movements exiting the
site.
15. The allowable lane closures along Rio Road are restricted to work hours from 8:00
pm thru 6:00 am.
16. Thank you for providing the MOT Notes, Narrative and Communications Plan. We
also request that you schematically show the placement of all traffic control devices
rather than referencing a typical traffic control standard.
17. Further discussion is required for the ROW dedication to accommodate the bus stop.
18. The dashed lines in front of the bus shop should be solid rather than dashed.
Hopefully this will help guide a driver away from entering the bus stop. Also in the
bus lane please include the word marking BUS ONLY.
If you need further information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me
at (434) 422 -9373.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
ICE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING