Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201500002 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2015-03-091_" ill COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4176 March 9, 2014 Ms. Sue Albrecht 255 Ipswich Place Charlottesville VA 22901 RE: SP201500002 Little Lambs Farm Child Development Center Dear Ms. Albrecht -- Thank you for the recent application for this special use permit. Please find review comments included in this letter. Please see the attached re- submittal schedule for a list of dates on which you can submit your revisions and responses to review comments (below and attached), as well as for possible Planning Commission dates. (Please note that the listed dates are the earliest possible, but actual dates need to be selected to suit the revision schedule for each project.) Review Comments Planniniz — Rural Areas (Scott Clark) • Please note that, as with any special use permit, this request will be evaluated based on its appropriateness under the County's land -use goals in the Comprehensive Plan and on its impacts (safety, traffic, noise, etc.) for the surrounding area. As noted in the pre - application meetings, we expect noise and traffic to be significant issues during this review. Water - quality impacts will also be important, especially given this proposal's proximity to the South Fork Rivanna reservoir and the use of structures in the stream buffer. • Application Narrative: • More detail on the size and general design of the school building is needed. • While the application states that only '/ acre of the site would need to be cleared for the school building, it appears that much more than that would be cleared once the other structures and facilities are considered. See below under "Conceptual Plan" for more detailed comments. Conceptual Plan: o The conceptual plan is marked "not to scale." The conceptual plan must be drawn to scale. o Elevation contours should be included on the plan. o The plan should include existing and proposed tree lines, so that we can evaluate the changes in landcover generated by the proposed use. o Please clarify the label "Preservation Area Throughout." There does not appear to be any specific boundary to this area, and no standards for what is permitted or prohibited in that area are included in the plan. o Although the plan is not clear, it appears that nearly all the wooded vegetation on the site would be removed for buildings, parking, travelways, and school and equestrian facilities. As mentioned in the pre - application meeting, maintaining forest cover on the site is important for water quality protection. The current proposed layout appears to remove a large proportion of the tree cover. A more compact design would be more appropriate. o Stream buffers — although the plan is not to scale, it appears that the proposed school building, dwelling, septic field, and stormwater detention area are either in or very close to the Water Protection Ordinance stream buffer. The buffer must be shown on the plan, and these facilities should not be in the buffer or on steep slopes adjacent to the buffer. At a minimum, the 100 -foot buffer should remain wooded and be undeveloped, except for trail use. Moving proposed facilities farther from the buffer would strengthen the application. o Stormwater detention — please see the Engineering comment below. More detail as to the scale and location of the facilities will be needed. The current plan gives no detail and only a general location, which appears to be within the stream buffer. In general, given the proximity of the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir and the location of the stream buffer, this plan appears to maintain little or no effective water - quality buffer for the increased level of use on the site. o Septic field — please see the Health Department comment below. Again, the location and size of the field should be verified, and a field of the necessary size should be specifically located on the plan. o The size of the school building and residence should be shown on the plan. o Uses that are not part of the day care proposal (i.e., the commercial stable facilities) need not be shown on this plan unless they are facilities that are also essential to the operation of the day care (entrances, etc.). Also, please note the very important issues regarding uses on the site raised by the Zoning comments (see below). Zoning (Francis MacCall) Please see attached memo. Planpin <( — Current Development (Megan Yaniglos) A site plan will be required for this use. If parking can be seen from either Lambs Road or adjacent residences, landscape screening in accordance with 32.7.9 will be required during the site plan. It is unclear what the carriage houses will be used for. Please clarify in the narrative, and state whether these will use additional development rights. Engineering (Justin Deel) Site will be subjected to new VSMP requirements, which does not appear to have been considered based on submitted documents. [Planning note: We would recommend that you and/or your plan preparer work directly with our engineers to make sure that stormwater requirements are properly anticipated on this plan. While the stormwater review would be part of the site -plan review of the project if the special use permit were approved, the conceptual plan should at least confirm that the guidelines of the state program can be met with the proposed use.] Virginia Department of Transportation (Shelly Plaster) • Please see attached memo Virginia Department of Health (Josh Kirtley) • VDH staff has requested that you meet in person with them to discuss the proposed use and the related water and septic- system issues. We would recommend that you have that meeting and revise the application accordingly before resubmitting. If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for requesting the deferral. If none of these actions is taken, staff will schedule your application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal. Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the Planning Commission meeting. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. I would be happy to meet with you to discuss the issues raised by this application. Sc'(tt Cl€ft Senior Planner, Planni Division County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Scott Clark, Senior Planner From: Francis MacCall, Principal Planner Division: Zoning Date: February 27, 2015 Subject: SP 2015 -002 Little Lambs - Daycare — initial zoning comments Please consider the following comments: 1. The use of the property for a commercial stable, a dwelling unit and a bed and breakfast are permitted by -right uses and may potentially exist alongside a special use permit use. This is the case even after the exercise of eminent domain by a public entity which reduced the size of the parcel from 24+ acres to 18+ acres. If determined through the special use permit process that the proposed daycare use would be appropriate for this property even with the by -right uses then the property may wind up with multiple uses both residential and commercial. 2. The concept plan contains details on a portion of a separate parcel that is not part of this application. Parcel 1 B1 is currently owned by the Commonwealth of Virginia and cannot be included in this application for the daycare since the owner does not have permission from that property owner to develop as shown, let alone utilize the property for a special use permit. This parcel 1 B1 should be shown on the concept plan and those improvements removed from that portion of the concept plan. 3. The concept plan should be revised to clearly define what will be relevant to the daycare use. Knowing what the other by -right uses are, either exiting or proposed, and their relation to the special use permit is certainly relevant to reviewing the impact of the daycare on the property itself and the community. That said the plan needs to clearly differentiate the different uses either with additional notes (Residence — by -right use, Forest barn /agriculture — by -right use, Covered riding ring /Commercial stable — by -right use) or some other way (color coding, with a table of uses ?) This is going to be pertinent to defining the major elements of the concept plan for the site to be developed in general accord with the plan. 4. Clearly delineate the daycare parking spaces and the spaces for the other by -right uses. The number of parking spaces for the daycare appears to be adequate. Please clarify what spaces will be for the daycare noting that there can be no more than 36 spaces permitted for the daycare per the numbers of children and staff proposed. See comet #3 about delineation of the uses. 5. The concept plan should be revised to show the building setbacks and the stream buffer (Front — 25', Side - 25', Rear - 35', Stream Buffer - 100') 6. A site plan will be required for the daycare use. ky.a CCIMMQNWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Wpgfer. Mrg;nia 22701 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner February 26, 2015 Mr. Scott Clark County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: SP- 2015 -00002 Little Lambs Farm Child Development Center Dear Mr. Clark: We have reviewed the Special Use Permit for the Little Lambs Farm Child Development Center, submitted by Sue Albrecht on January 16, 2015 and offer the following comments: 1. Adequate sight distance should be demonstrated for all access points onto Lambs Road. 2. All of the entrances /exits should meet the commercial entrance standards, which can be found in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual. 3. Roadside drainage should be taken into account when the commercial entrances are designed. If you need further information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 422 -9894. Sincerely, 7A Shelly A. Plaster Land Development Engineer Culpeper District WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING 2015 Submittal and Review Schedule Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments Resubmittal Schedule Written Comments and Earliest Planning Commission Public Hearing* Resubmittal Dates Comments to applicant for decision on whether to proceed to Public Hearing * Request for PC Public Hearing, Legal Ad Payment Due ** Planning Commission Public Hearing No sooner than* COB Auditorium Monday Wednesday Monday Tuesday Nov 03 Dec 03 Dec 22 Jan 13 Nov 17 Dec 17 Jan 05 Jan 27 Dec 01 Tue Dec 30 Jan 05 Jan 27 Dec 15 Jan 14 Feb 02 Feb 24 Jan 05 Feb 04 Feb 09 Mal-03 Tue Jan 20 Feb 18 Feb 23 Mar 17 Feb 02 Mar 04 Mar 16 Apr 07 Tue Feb 17 Mar 18 Mar 30 Apr 21 Mar 02 Apr 01 Apr 13 May 05 Mar 16 Apr 15 Apr 27 May 19 Apr 06 May 06 May 11 Jun 02 Apr 20 May 20 May 25 Jun 16 May 04 Jun 03 Jun 22 Jul 14 May 18 Jun 17 Jun 22 Jul 14 Jun 01 Jul 01 Jul 06 Jul 28 Jun 15 Jul 15 Jul 27 Aug 18 Jul 06 Aug 05 Aug 10 Sep 01 Jul 20 Aug 19 Tue Sep 01 Sep 22 Aug 03 Sep 02 Sep 14 Oct 06 Aug 17 Sep 16 Sep 28 Oct 20 Tue Sep 01 Sep 30 Oct 19 Nov 10 Sep 14 Oct 14 Oct 26 Nov 17 Oct 05 Nov 04 Nov 16 Dec 08 Oct 19 Nov 18 Nov 23 Dec 15 Nov 02 Dec 02 Dec 21 Jan 12 2016 Nov 16 Dec 16 Dec 21 Jan 12 2016 Dec 07 Jan 06 L Jan 11 2016 Feb 02 2016 Dec 21 Jan 20 2016 Feb 01 2016 Feb 23 2016 Jan 04 2016 Feb 03 2016 Feb 08 2016 Mar 01 2016 Bold italics = submittal/meeting day is different due to a holiday. Dates with shaded background are not 2015. 2016 dates are tentative. * The reviewing planner will contact applicant to discuss comments of reviewers and advise that changes that are needed are significant enough to warrant an additional submittal or advise that the the project is ready for a public hearing. If changes needed are minor, the planner will advise that the project go to public hearing. " The legal ad deadline is the last date at which an applicant can decide whether to resubmit or go to public hearing. If an applicant decides to go to public hearing against the advice of the reviewing planner, a recommendation for denial will likely result. Generally, the applicant will will have only one opportunity to defer the PC public hearing for the project once it has been advertised for public hearing. Additional deferrals will not be allowed except in extraordinary circumstances such as a major change in the project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought to the applicant's attention.