The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP000000396 Review Comments Site Plan Approval 1986-07-28 �y OF ALBS °°, 0, .,;,,,, ; i”. 2 '' t.11itant '', 1, 6 pF ar,R I ,'7'''' t° G Zy�� 9 � e JUL ,i,6 1986 \� Gi PLAN"4,il'INc 9 le-sICZ' DEPARTMENT OF ZONING i�`�' 401 MCINTIRE ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE. VA. 22901.4596 (804) 296-5875 MEMORANDUM TO: David Benish, Planner 605 FROM: Kathy J. Brittain, Agency Coordinator - RE: Western Sizzlin Steak House Addition DATE: July 28 , 1986 Please be advised that I have reviewed the above referenced amended plan and submit the following comments : (1) The handicap space is shown as 6 ' wide. As you are aware the ordinance required a minimum of 8 ' with an adjacent 5 ' aisle. The plan should be changed accordingly. (2) The parking indicated on the plan is adequate for the proposed addition. However, the parking space just south of proposed addition "A" should be deleted as this space will not have adequate sight distance when backing out. If you should have any questions , please let me know. ' . ,A4P./.1141 k j b '� �@:�►"` KA)/ r ,_.,Ilcf-c6 feHp, ) t.; r 90 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE icoTTEIri. PR lit ' .,` U City Hall • P. 0. Box 911 J filli cii Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 *PGINIA'ln March 9, 1981 11 b.ik RfCOV...f 41{ i trIZT(ti i N r. Guy E. Clark, Myer Western Sizzlin Steak House ` OF 1250 Seminole Trail �`�. ALSE,3iARLE � Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 �� Dear Mr. Clark: The City of Charlottesville, Gas Division, hereby grants your re- quest to place a temporary, portable storage building an our utility easement adjacent to the Western Sizzlin Steak Muse an 29 North. Your written agreement to remove this portable structure within 24 '' hours' notice will be placed in our files in case future construction and/or maintenance e so dictate. Sincerely, Wi . Wiech, SuperintendentDivision i\.117 Wt7W/r :ge cc: Albemarle County Planning Commission JOHN E HARWOOC COMM!SSIONER 07'', --- W.S.G BRITTOP! ~ DEPUTY COMMISSIONER&CHIEF ENGINEER LEONA RP R HALL,BRISTOL,BRISTOL DISTRICT - HO RACE G FRALIN,ROANOKE.SALEM DISTRICT If{, . LEO E.BUSSER III I �r�„ E,I DIRECTOR OF ADMINISTRATION THOMAS R GLASS,LYNCHBURG,LYNCHBURG DISTRICT 1'7i �, .I , 1,6 J.M.WRAP,JR. MORRILL M CROWE,RICHMOND,RICHMOND DISTRICT ^fis" DIRECTOR OF OPERATIONS WILLIAM T.ROOS,YORKTOWN,SUFFOLK DISTRICT 0i J.P.ROYER,JR. .''"'- DIRECTOR OF PLANNING DOUGLAS 6 JANNEY,FREDERICKSBURG FREDERICKSBURG DISTRICT P.B.COLDIRON RALPH A BEETON,FALLS CHURCH,CULPEPER DISTRICT ��/Q��/��(� ��/T��mi VIRGINIA OF ENGINEERING R ORERI S LANDFS,STAUNTON,STAUNTON DISTRICT COMMONWEALTH VV Le ALTH of VIRGINIA H.R.PERKINSON,JR. T RAY HASSELL III CHESAPEAKE,AT LARGE-URBAN DIRECTOR OF PROGRAM MANAGEMENT CHARLES S HOOPER.JR CREWE,ATLARGE-RURAL DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS & TRANSPORTATION myG;mxximu IN REPLY PLEASE REFER TO MataMLUOMMX �\. P. 0. Box 910 � \ .' Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 P }�f J ";«} ein1 January 11 , 1977 \..%! Route 29 \-',' ' " 1' ` I Albemarle County Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Director of Planning County of Albemarle 414 East Market Street Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Dear Mr. Tucker: I am in receipt of a letter dated December 2, 1976, from Mary Joy Scala of your staff, concerning Route 29 in the vicinity of Westfield Road. More specifically her letter involved the Western Sizzlin Site Plan. In the body of her letter, Mrs. Scala conveys the Planning Commission's concern for traffic safety in the vicinity of Westfield Road. I am somewhat dismayed by what T believe is a belated concern for traffic safety. Although the Westfield Road inter- section has existed for a number of years, Westfield Road was only added to the State Secondary System in 1974. The sight distance problem which is now being brought to our attention has always existed at this location. although the Department must shoulder some of the responsibility for the addition of this road to the System, I believe the County must also recognize their responsibility in this matter. The County after all is responsible for the control of the development within the County. In the case of Westfield Road, the County may have no legal obligation concerning the improvement of this situation. There is in my opinion, however, some moral obliga- tion. It may be further that the County can not require the Western Sizzlin Steak House to bear the cost improvements along Route 29. It is a fact, however, that only these improvements will improve the situation which now exist at the Westfield Road/Route 29 intersection. Continued A HIGHWAY IS AS SAFE AS THE USER MAKES IT Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Route 29 January 11 , 1977 Page 2. In the recent past, the Department and the County have had a fine working relationship. I believe our interest and desires concerning traffic safety have been the same. This is specifically true along the Route 29 corridor north of the City of Charlottesville. I have detected in recent weeks however, a general weakening in the resolve of the Commission concerning such safety features as sight distance and turn lanes. I would request that you remind the Commission of the problems which result when these traffic safety requirements are waived. Concerning Mrs. Scala's letter and the Western Sizzlin Site Plan, I recognize the limitations in the County Site Plan Ordinance. The Department is reviewing the intersection of Westfield Road at 29 and will make improvements at such time as funding will permit. Yours truly, arlC � D. S. .00sevelt Resident Engineer DSR/mam cc: Mrs. Mary Joy Scala Mr. Guy B. Agnor Mr. D. B. Hope �.r.Y OF AL9 �LO� of /r ALQ� • : 4` O y _r U ST r` to NCIN0' Planning Department 804/296-5823 414 EAST MARKET STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 ROBERT W. TUCKER, JR. RONALD S. KEELER DIRECTOR OF PLANNING December 2, 1976 ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF PLANNING MARY JOY SCALA SENIOR PLANNER Mr. Dan Roosevelt Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation , P.O. Box 910 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Re: Western Sizzlin' Site Plan Third Lane - Route 29 North Dear Mr. Roosevelt: The Albemarle County Planning Commission at their meeting on November 30, 1976, reaffirmed their approval of this site plan subject to Virginia Department of Highways approval of the entrance. They felt that since this approval had already been obtained, the third lane would not be required. Some of their reasons for not requiring the lane were: 1. Western Sizzlin' did not have an entrance on Route 29; furthermore, they were previously denied that entrance by the Commission; 2. The existing decel lane for Greenbrier Drive does not extend to the Western Sizzlin' property line; therefore, the third lane could create a confusing and hazardous situation; 3. The Commission did not have the benefit of Mr. Perry's recommendation, when this site plan was originally discussed, and such a requirement at this time would be after the fact. The Commission requested that we convey to you their concern for traffic safety in this area. Since the development of Westfield Road with Western Sizzlin' and Divi- sion of Motor Vehicles will cause an increase in traffic using the road, they felt attention should be called to the vertical alignment of Route 29 which prevents motorists from anticipating the Westfield Road intersection. If you have any questions please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely, Mary,J6j Scala Senior Planner • cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. • Ronald S. Keeler Carlos M. Montenegro Hartwell Clarke Benjamin Dick • MJS/jt •