HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500060 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2016-03-18COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
March 18, 2016
Ms. Ellie Carter Ray
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP -2015-00060 Riverside Village Block 5 Final Site Plan
Dear Ms. Ray:
We have reviewed the Final Site Plan for Riverside Village Block 5, dated February 19, 2016, as
submitted by Shimp Engineering, and we offer the following comment:
1. As previously mentioned the sidewalk should not extend to the back of curb on Trailside
Drive as shown. It appears to direct pedestrians to cross at the corner.
If additional information is needed concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(540) 829-7553.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Hydraulics Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Ellie Ray
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT) <Joel.DeNunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:27 PM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: RE: Riverside Village Block 5
Ellie,
Comments have been adequately addressed and I have no objections.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Residency Administrator
VDOT Charlottesville Residency
434-422-9373
ioel.den unzioCcbvdot.vir4inia.00v
From: Ellie Ray [mailto:eray@albemarle.org]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 2:37 PM
To: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT)
Subject: RE: Riverside Village Block 5
Joel,
Is this a 'no objection' from VDOT?
Thanks,
E//ie Carter Ray, PLA, LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432
From: Justin Shimp [mailto:Justin@shimp-engineering.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 1:35 PM
To: Joel DeNunzio, P.E.<ioel.denunzio@vdot.virginia.gov>
Cc: Ellie Ray <eray@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Riverside Village Block 5
Joel/Ellie,
See below from Shelly, is this sufficient for Vdot to issue a no objection?
Thanks!
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
1
From: "Plaster, Shelly (VDOT)" <Shelly.Plaster@vdot.virginia.gov>
Date: April 14, 2016 at 1:21:12 PM EDT
To: 'Lauren Gilroy' <lauren @shimp-engineering.com>
Cc: Justin Shimp <justin@shimp-engineering.com>
Subject: RE: Riverside Village Block 5
Hello! Culpeper is great.
I'm not sure who the reviewer will be when you resubmit (I think I'm out of it completely now?) but you
have addressed my comment.
Have a great day,
Shelly
From: Lauren Gilroy [mailto:lauren@shimp-engineering.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2016 1:00 PM
To: Plaster, Shelly (VDOT)
Cc: Justin Shimp
Subject: Riverside Village Block 5
Hi Shelly,
Hope you're doing well up in Culpeper. We have most of the approvals for Riverside Village Block 5; 1
believe that the only issue is that sidewalk at the intersection oif Trailside Court and Trailside Drive.
Could you take a look at the attached pdf and let me know if we have that the way you want it?
Thanks,
Lauren Gilroy
(434) 227-5140 x4
Ellie Ray
From: Alexander Morrison <amorrison@serviceauthority.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 20, 2016 7:53 AM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: RE: Riverside Village Block 5 SDP201500060
Ellie,
Yes. Now that the construction plans have been approved I hereby recommend approval of SDP201500060.
Alexander J. Morrison, P.E.
Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
(0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116
(C) 434-981-5577
(F) 434-979-0698
From: Ellie Ray [mailto:eray@albemarle.org]
Sent: Tuesday, April 19, 2016 1:59 PM
To: Alex Morrison
Subject: FW: Riverside Village Block 5 SDP201500060
Alex,
Does this mean the ACSA has issued a 'no objection' on the site plan? The applicant wants me to put plans out for
signature, but I thought I should check with you first.
Thanks,
Ellie Carter Ray, PLA, LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432
From: Justin Shimp [mailto:justin@shimp-engineering.com]
Sent: Monday, April 18, 2016 1:41 PM
To: Ellie Ray <eray@albemarle.org>
Subject: Fwd: Riverside Village Block 5
FYI
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Michael Vieira" <mvieira@serviceauthority.org>
Date: April 18, 2016 at 1:37:10 PM EDT
1
ALg��
� �'IRGINZP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434-296-5832
Fax 434-972-4126
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp (iustin@shimp-engineering.com)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: January 6, 2015
Rev1: February 4, 2016
Rev2: March 4, 2016
Subject: SDP 201500060 Riverside Village Block 5 - 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 Preliminary Approval (from approval letter dated 10/6/15):
1 [32.5.2(a)] The Tax Map and Parcel number has changed for this parcel; provide the updated number in all
locations in the plan set.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The TMP is still incorrect under `Zoning' in the notes.
Revi : Comment addressed.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide boundary dimensions for the subject parcel.
Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a) & COD Section X] It appears that the proposed building does not meet the maximum front build -
to line listed in Section X of the Code of Development; verify and revise, or submit a variation request.
Final: Comment addressed, assuming the revised road plans are approved.
Revl: Awaiting road plan approval.
Rev2: Road plan has been approved.
4. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the owners, zoning, TMP and present use of abutting parcels.
Final: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(b) & Section X] Provide the number of stories in the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.2(b)] The layout sheet indicates there are 14 parking spaces in the row closest to the building, but
there are only 13 spaces shown; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed. However, see additional parking comments below.
Revi : Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation.
Final: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(e)] Show the existing landscape features (as described in 32.7.9.4) on the existing conditions sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(h)] The revised floodplain line must be approved prior to site plan approval.
Final: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(i)] Label the existing streets.
Final: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(i)] The design of Trailside Court appears to have changed from what was previously approved; an
amended road plan must be submitted and approved. The changes include a cul-de-sac (of sorts) versus a
courtyard, and a paver walk instead of a standard sidewalk.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; revised road plan currently under review.
Rev1: Awaiting road plan approval.
Rev2: Road plan has been approved.
12. [32.5.2(1)] Dimension the revised street turn -around area.
Final: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(j, k)] Verify that all lines and all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage
facilities have been shown on the plan. Provide the deed book and page number for all existing utility
easements.
Final: Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements including
telephone, cable, electric and gas.
Final: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify the location of the proposed walk that provides access to the building; the hatch pattern
is outside of the `walk' lines in some places and no lines exist in others.
Final: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the sitting walls and provide a detail.
Final: Comment addressed; sitting walls have been removed from the plan.
17. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the dumpster pad.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; the dumpster pad must extend at least 8' beyond the front of
the dumpster (sec. 4.12.19).
Revi : Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2(n)] Label all proposed lighting on the layout sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
19. [32.5.2(n)] The lighting locations shown on the layout and utility sheets appear to be slightly different than
what is shown on the lighting plan; verify that all locations are accurately shown on all sheets to
demonstrate that no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. One light pole is proposed on top of a storm manhole.
Additionally, since reduced length parking spaces are proposed, the light poles in the island will
need to remain centered as to not intrude in the required unobstructed overhang.
Revi : Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Provide a landscape legend listing the number, species and planting size of all
proposed plantings to demonstrate landscape plan and Code of Development requirements have been met.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2(p) & 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, subject to the agent's approval. If you
intend to use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following:
1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall 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.
2
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to
ensure that the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly
approved by the agent in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393 through III -413, and as hereafter
amended.
Final: Comment addressed. Existing trees are no longer being used to meet current site plan
requirements. However, since trees surrounding this site are used to meet the overall project
(Riverside Village as a whole) tree canopy requirement, the tree protection shown on the previous
site plan should remain in place during construction.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.5 & COD Section IX] Clarify if previously approved street trees along Trailside Court will
remain.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
23. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Provide landscaping in the Plaza area that meets the requirements of
Section IX.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
24. [32.5.2(p) & COD Sections VII & IX] Provide information regarding the ground treatment in the plaza area.
Section VII requires a concrete or brick patio and Section IX requires planting around that patio.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please note that the area outside of the patio will be turf lawn
(or whatever it is intended to be).
Rev2: Comment addressed.
25. [COD Section III] In order to comply with the Block description listed in the Code of Development, please
provide two benches in the green space at the southern end of the parking lot in addition to the amenities
provided in the plaza north of the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
26. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.6 & COD Section IX] The table in Section IX requires large shade trees, ornamental
trees and screening shrubs for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping that meets this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
27. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] The landscape notes indicate 5% of 17,098 SF has been provided in landscape
area. What is the 17,098 number referencing?
Final: Comment addressed.
28. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] One of the `landscaped areas' noted on the landscape plan does not have any
landscaping proposed; provide trees and shrubs in any area that counts toward this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
29. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(b)] The landscape plan notes indicate that there are 49 proposed parking spaces
while the plan shows 48; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
30. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.7 & COD Section IX] As noted above, the table in Section IX requires screening shrubs
for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping to meet this requirement and 32.7.9.7.
3
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment addressed.
31. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.7] Provide information demonstrating how the dumpster will be screened.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Provide a detail that includes height and gate treatment.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide the height of the proposed enclosure on the detail.
Also, provide a label indicating the entire enclosure is brick.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
32. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.8] It appears the majority of the tree canopy requirement is being met with existing
trees; see above for direction on how to verify and document preservation of existing trees.
Final: Comment addressed.
33. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.8, and COD] The percentage of tree canopy required is determined by the gross
residential density of the overall project. The maximum gross residential density for Blocks 1-5 is listed in
the Code of Development as 8.1 dwelling units/acre, which would require 20% tree canopy. Revise the
landscape notes to use 20% as the basis for the tree canopy requirement.
Final: Comment addressed. The overall canopy for the entire Riverside project must be 20%, but
10% for this block is adequate.
34. [32.5.2(p)] Show all utility lines and easements on the landscape plan to demonstrate no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. As noted below, the roof drain easement is not shown.
Additionally, since most of the landscape isn't shown, conflicts cannot be verified.
Revi : Comment addressed.
35. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Section IX states that all plant species must conform to the Native Plants for
Virginia Landscapes list. When species are provided, please select plants from this list.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Colorado blue spruce, Alleghany viburnum and Blue Wave
hydrangea are not Virginia native plants; the viburnum and hydrangea aren't even native to the US.
There are Virginia native viburnum and hydrangea species, but those proposed are not. Please
select Virginia natives for all plants as required by the COD.
Revi : Comment addressed.
36. [32.5.2(t)] Show the limits of the Dam Break Inundation Zone. DCR has been contacted regarding review of
this development; their reply will be forwarded once received.
Final: Comment addressed.
37. [4.17] Lighting fixture B does not appear to be full cutoff; either select a different fixture or specify a different
bulb that emits less than 3000 lumen.
Final: Comment addressed. Fixture B has been changed.
38. [4.17] The catalog number provided for fixture B in the luminaire schedule does not match that provided on
the cut -sheet; verify and revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
39. [4.17] List the tilt for Fixture A in the luminaire schedule.
Final: Comment addressed.
40. [4.17] 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-half foot-candle.
Final: Comment addressed.
41. [Comment] ARB approval is required. ARB comments will be provided after the September 8th meeting.
Final: Comment still valid; ARB approval is required.
4
Rev1: Comment addressed. ARB approval has been granted.
42. [Comment] If any off-site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site Plan
approval. Among possible others, it appears an easement will be required for proposed grading in several
areas of the County owned park parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. There is still a small area of grading proposed on TMP78G-3B-
9 and the open space parcel.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
43. [Comment] Clarify if an easement is being created for the new roof drain line coming on to the parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The comment response letter indicates an easement is shown,
but it does not appear to be on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed. The roof drain is no longer proposed.
Final Plan:
44. [32.6.2(i), 4.12.4(a) and COD] The number of parking spaces shown exceeds the requirement listed by
more than 20%, which is not permitted. However, Sheet 4 of the COD states that 2 parking spaces are
required for each residential unit. Revise the parking note to indicate 48 spaces are required. As a result,
the 56 spaces proposed falls within the permitted range.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
45. [32.6.2(i) & 4.12.16(c)6] All perpendicular parking is now proposed to be 16' in length instead of the
standard 18'. Show the required 2' unobstructed overhang and make sure no improvements, including
landscaping, interfere with this overhang area.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
46. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The photometric plan does not show lighting levels at the southern property boundary;
extend the photometric information all the way to the property line or show readings less than 0.5 fc prior to
the line.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
47. [Comment] The existing landscape and sidewalk easement at the turn -around area will need to be revised
once the amended road plans are approved.
Rev1: A plat to amend the sidewalk easement should be submitted upon approval of the road plans.
Rev2: Comment still valid.
48. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until all reviewers complete their reviews and grant their
approval. Engineering, Inspections, Fire Rescue and ARB comments have been provided. ACSA and
VDOT comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Engineering, Inspections, Fire Rescue and VDOT comments
have been provided. ACSA comments will be forwarded upon receipt. ARB has completed their
review and has no objection.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. Engineering, Fire Rescue, ACSA and VDOT reviews are
pending. Inspections has completed their review and has no objection.
49. [Comment] The parking requirement note on the Cover sheet was never updated to reflect the 2 spaces
per residential unit requirement (still says 1.5); please revise the note.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray0albemarle.orp or 434-296-5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
5
ALg��
� �'IRGINZP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp (iustin@shimp- engineering.com)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: January 6, 2015
Rev1: February 4, 2016
Subject: SDP 201500060 Riverside Village Block 5 - Final
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
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 Preliminary Approval (from approval letter dated 10/6/15):
1. [32.5.2(a)] The Tax Map and Parcel number has changed for this parcel; provide the updated number in all
locations in the plan set.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The TMP is still incorrect under `Zoning' in the notes.
Revl : Comment addressed.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide boundary dimensions for the subject parcel.
Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a) & COD Section X] It appears that the proposed building does not meet the maximum front build -
to line listed in Section X of the Code of Development; verify and revise, or submit a variation request.
Final: Comment addressed, assuming the revised road plans are approved.
Rev1: Awaiting road plan approval.
4. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the owners, zoning, TMP and present use of abutting parcels.
Final: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(b) & Section X] Provide the number of stories in the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.2(b)] The layout sheet indicates there are 14 parking spaces in the row closest to the building, but
there are only 13 spaces shown; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed. However, see additional parking comments below.
Revl : Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation.
Final: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(e)] Show the existing landscape features (as described in 32.7.9.4) on the existing conditions sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(h)] The revised floodplain line must be approved prior to site plan approval.
Final: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(i)] Label the existing streets.
Final: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(1)] The design of Trailside Court appears to have changed from what was previously approved; an
amended road plan must be submitted and approved. The changes include a cul -de -sac (of sorts) versus a
courtyard, and a paver walk instead of a standard sidewalk.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; revised road plan currently under review.
Rev1: Awaiting road plan approval.
12. [32.5.2(1)] Dimension the revised street turn - around area.
Final: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(j, k)] Verify that all lines and all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage
facilities have been shown on the plan. Provide the deed book and page number for all existing utility
easements.
Final: Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements including
telephone, cable, electric and gas.
Final: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify the location of the proposed walk that provides access to the building; the hatch pattern
is outside of the `walk' lines in some places and no lines exist in others.
Final: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the sitting walls and provide a detail.
Final: Comment addressed; sitting walls have been removed from the plan.
17. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the dumpster pad.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; the dumpster pad must extend at least 8' beyond the front of
the dumpster (sec. 4.12.19).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
18. [32.5.2(n)] Label all proposed lighting on the layout sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
19. [32.5.2(n)] The lighting locations shown on the layout and utility sheets appear to be slightly different than
what is shown on the lighting plan; verify that all locations are accurately shown on all sheets to
demonstrate that no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. One light pole is proposed on top of a storm manhole.
Additionally, since reduced length parking spaces are proposed, the light poles in the island will
need to remain centered as to not intrude in the required unobstructed overhang.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
20. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Provide a landscape legend listing the number, species and planting size of all
proposed plantings to demonstrate landscape plan and Code of Development requirements have been met.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment addressed.
21. [32.5.2(p) & 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, subject to the agent's approval. If you
intend to use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following:
1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall 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.
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to
ensure that the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly
2
approved by the agent in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393 through III -413, and as hereafter
amended.
Final: Comment addressed. Existing trees are no longer being used to meet current site plan
requirements. However, since trees surrounding this site are used to meet the overall project
(Riverside Village as a whole) tree canopy requirement, the tree protection shown on the previous
site plan should remain in place during construction.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.5 & COD Section IX] Clarify if previously approved street trees along Trailside Court will
remain.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
23. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Provide landscaping in the Plaza area that meets the requirements of
Section IX.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
24. [32.5.2(p) & COD Sections VII & IX] Provide information regarding the ground treatment in the plaza area.
Section VII requires a concrete or brick patio and Section IX requires planting around that patio.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment not fully addressed. Please note that the area outside of the patio will be turf lawn
(or whatever it is intended to be).
25. [COD Section III] In order to comply with the Block description listed in the Code of Development, please
provide two benches in the green space at the southern end of the parking lot in addition to the amenities
provided in the plaza north of the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
26. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.6 & COD Section IX] The table in Section IX requires large shade trees, ornamental
trees and screening shrubs for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping that meets this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment addressed.
27. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] The landscape notes indicate 5% of 17,098 SF has been provided in landscape
area. What is the 17,098 number referencing?
Final: Comment addressed.
28. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] One of the `landscaped areas' noted on the landscape plan does not have any
landscaping proposed; provide trees and shrubs in any area that counts toward this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment addressed.
29. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(b)] The landscape plan notes indicate that there are 49 proposed parking spaces
while the plan shows 48; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
30. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.7 & COD Section IX] As noted above, the table in Section IX requires screening shrubs
for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping to meet this requirement and 32.7.9.7.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
Revi : Comment addressed.
3
31. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.7] Provide information demonstrating how the dumpster will be screened.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Provide a detail that includes height and gate treatment.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide the height of the proposed enclosure on the detail.
Also, provide a label indicating the entire enclosure is brick.
32. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.8] It appears the majority of the tree canopy requirement is being met with existing
trees; see above for direction on how to verify and document preservation of existing trees.
Final: Comment addressed.
33. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.8, and COD] The percentage of tree canopy required is determined by the gross
residential density of the overall project. The maximum gross residential density for Blocks 1 -5 is listed in
the Code of Development as 8.1 dwelling units /acre, which would require 20% tree canopy. Revise the
landscape notes to use 20% as the basis for the tree canopy requirement.
Final: Comment addressed. The overall canopy for the entire Riverside project must be 20 %, but
10% for this block is adequate.
34. [32.5.2(p)] Show all utility lines and easements on the landscape plan to demonstrate no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. As noted below, the roof drain easement is not shown.
Additionally, since most of the landscape isn't shown, conflicts cannot be verified.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
35. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Section IX states that all plant species must conform to the Native Plants for
Virginia Landscapes list. When species are provided, please select plants from this list.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Colorado blue spruce, Alleghany viburnum and Blue Wave
hydrangea are not Virginia native plants; the viburnum and hydrangea aren't even native to the US.
There are Virginia native viburnum and hydrangea species, but those proposed are not. Please
select Virginia natives for all plants as required by the COD.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
36. [32.5.2(t)] Show the limits of the Dam Break Inundation Zone. DCR has been contacted regarding review of
this development; their reply will be forwarded once received.
Final: Comment addressed.
37. [4.17] Lighting fixture B does not appear to be full cutoff; either select a different fixture or specify a different
bulb that emits less than 3000 lumen.
Final: Comment addressed. Fixture B has been changed.
38. [4.17] The catalog number provided for fixture B in the luminaire schedule does not match that provided on
the cut - sheet; verify and revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
39. [4.17] List the tilt for Fixture A in the luminaire schedule.
Final: Comment addressed.
40. [4.17] 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 -half foot - candle.
Final: Comment addressed.
41. [Comment] ARB approval is required. ARB comments will be provided after the September 8t" meeting.
Final: Comment still valid; ARB approval is required.
Rev1: Comment addressed. ARB approval has been granted.
4
42. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site Plan
approval. Among possible others, it appears an easement will be required for proposed grading in several
areas of the County owned park parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. There is still a small area of grading proposed on TMP78G -3B-
9 and the open space parcel.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
43. [Comment] Clarify if an easement is being created for the new roof drain line coming on to the parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The comment response letter indicates an easement is shown,
but it does not appear to be on the plan.
Rev1: Comment addressed. The roof drain is no longer proposed.
Final Plan:
44. [32.6.2(i), 4.12.4(a) and COD] The number of parking spaces shown exceeds the requirement listed by
more than 20 %, which is not permitted. However, Sheet 4 of the COD states that 2 parking spaces are
required for each residential unit. Revise the parking note to indicate 48 spaces are required. As a result,
the 56 spaces proposed falls within the permitted range.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
45. [32.6.2(i) & 4.12.16(c)6] All perpendicular parking is now proposed to be 16' in length instead of the
standard 18'. Show the required 2' unobstructed overhang and make sure no improvements, including
landscaping, interfere with this overhang area.
Revi : Comment addressed.
46. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The photometric plan does not show lighting levels at the southern property boundary;
extend the photometric information all the way to the property line or show readings less than 0.5 fc prior to
the line.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
47. [Comment] The existing landscape and sidewalk easement at the turn - around area will need to be revised
once the amended road plans are approved.
Rev1: A plat to amend the sidewalk easement should be submitted upon approval of the road plans.
48. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until all reviewers complete their reviews and grant their
approval. Engineering, Inspections, Fire Rescue and ARB comments have been provided. ACSA and
VDOT comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Revi : Comment not fully addressed. Engineering, Inspections, Fire Rescue and MOT comments
have been provided. ACSA comments will be forwarded upon receipt. ARB has completed their
review and has no objection.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray0albemarle.orp or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
5
"JL
R
r'r
}ra
�t; ;t
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
February 4, 2016
Ms. Ellie Carter Ray
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP -20I5 -00060 Riverside Village Block 5 Final Site Plan
Dear Ms. Ray:
We have reviewed the Final Site Plan for Riverside Village Block 5, dated December 14, 2015,
as submitted by Shimp Engineering, and we offer the following comment:
1. As previously mentioned the sidewalk should not extend to the back of curb on Trailside
Drive as shown. As shown it appears to direct pedestrians to cross at the corner.
If additional information is needed concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(434) 422 -9782.
Sincerely,
Troy ustin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
ALg��
� �'IRGINZP
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp (iustin@shimp- engineering.com)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: January 6, 2015
Subject: SDP 201500060 Riverside Village Block 5 - Final
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
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 Preliminary Approval (from approval letter dated 10/6/15):
1. [32.5.2(a)] The Tax Map and Parcel number has changed for this parcel; provide the updated number in all
locations in the plan set.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The TMP is still incorrect under `Zoning' in the notes.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Provide boundary dimensions for the subject parcel.
Final: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a) & COD Section X] It appears that the proposed building does not meet the maximum front build -
to line listed in Section X of the Code of Development; verify and revise, or submit a variation request.
Final: Comment addressed, assuming the revised road plans are approved.
4. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the owners, zoning, TMP and present use of abutting parcels.
Final: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.2(b) & Section X] Provide the number of stories in the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.2(b)] The layout sheet indicates there are 14 parking spaces in the row closest to the building, but
there are only 13 spaces shown; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed. However, see additional parking comments below.
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation.
Final: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.2(e)] Show the existing landscape features (as described in 32.7.9.4) on the existing conditions sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.2(h)] The revised floodplain line must be approved prior to site plan approval.
Final: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.2(i)] Label the existing streets.
Final: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.2(1)] The design of Trailside Court appears to have changed from what was previously approved; an
amended road plan must be submitted and approved. The changes include a cul -de -sac (of sorts) versus a
courtyard, and a paver walk instead of a standard sidewalk.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; revised road plan currently under review.
12. [32.5.2(1)] Dimension the revised street turn - around area.
Final: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.2(j, k)] Verify that all lines and all necessary easements for proposed water, sewer and drainage
facilities have been shown on the plan. Provide the deed book and page number for all existing utility
easements.
Final: Comment addressed.
14. [32.5.2(1)] Provide the location of any other existing or proposed utilities and utility easements including
telephone, cable, electric and gas.
Final: Comment addressed.
15. [32.5.2(n)] Clarify the location of the proposed walk that provides access to the building; the hatch pattern
is outside of the `walk' lines in some places and no lines exist in others.
Final: Comment addressed.
16. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the sitting walls and provide a detail.
Final: Comment addressed; sitting walls have been removed from the plan.
17. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the dumpster pad.
Final: Comment not fully addressed; the dumpster pad must extend at least 8' beyond the front of
the dumpster (sec. 4.12.19).
18. [32.5.2(n)] Label all proposed lighting on the layout sheet.
Final: Comment addressed.
19. [32.5.2(n)] The lighting locations shown on the layout and utility sheets appear to be slightly different than
what is shown on the lighting plan; verify that all locations are accurately shown on all sheets to
demonstrate that no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. One light pole is proposed on top of a storm manhole.
Additionally, since reduced length parking spaces are proposed, the light poles in the island will
need to remain centered as to not intrude in the required unobstructed overhang.
20. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.4(a)] Provide a landscape legend listing the number, species and planting size of all
proposed plantings to demonstrate landscape plan and Code of Development requirements have been met.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
21. [32.5.2(p) & 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, subject to the agent's approval. If you
intend to use existing trees to satisfy any of the landscape plan requirements, please include the following:
1. Areas and other features shown on landscape plan. The landscape plan shall 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.
2. Conservation checklist. The applicant shall sign a conservation checklist approved by the agent to
ensure that the specified trees will be protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly
approved by the agent in a particular case, the checklist shall conform to the specifications in the
Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393 through III -413, and as hereafter
amended.
Final: Comment addressed. Existing trees are no longer being used to meet current site plan
requirements. However, since trees surrounding this site are used to meet the overall project
(Riverside Village as a whole) tree canopy requirement, the tree protection shown on the previous
site plan should remain in place during construction.
2
22. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.5 & COD Section IX] Clarify if previously approved street trees along Trailside Court will
remain.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
23. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Provide landscaping in the Plaza area that meets the requirements of
Section IX.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
24. [32.5.2(p) & COD Sections VII & IX] Provide information regarding the ground treatment in the plaza area.
Section VII requires a concrete or brick patio and Section IX requires planting around that patio.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
25. [COD Section III] In order to comply with the Block description listed in the Code of Development, please
provide two benches in the green space at the southern end of the parking lot in addition to the amenities
provided in the plaza north of the proposed building.
Final: Comment addressed.
26. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.6 & COD Section IX] The table in Section IX requires large shade trees, ornamental
trees and screening shrubs for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping that meets this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
27. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] The landscape notes indicate 5% of 17,098 SF has been provided in landscape
area. What is the 17,098 number referencing?
Final: Comment addressed.
28. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(a)] One of the `landscaped areas' noted on the landscape plan does not have any
landscaping proposed; provide trees and shrubs in any area that counts toward this requirement.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
29. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.6(b)] The landscape plan notes indicate that there are 49 proposed parking spaces
while the plan shows 48; please revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
30. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.7 & COD Section IX] As noted above, the table in Section IX requires screening shrubs
for the parking lot in Block 5; provide landscaping to meet this requirement and 32.7.9.7.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there was a layer error; very little landscape is
shown on the plan.
31. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.7] Provide information demonstrating how the dumpster will be screened.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Provide a detail that includes height and gate treatment.
32. [32.5.2(p) & 32.7.9.8] It appears the majority of the tree canopy requirement is being met with existing
trees; see above for direction on how to verify and document preservation of existing trees.
Final: Comment addressed.
33. [32.5.2(p), 32.7.9.8, and COD] The percentage of tree canopy required is determined by the gross
residential density of the overall project. The maximum gross residential density for Blocks 1 -5 is listed in
the Code of Development as 8.1 dwelling units /acre, which would require 20% tree canopy. Revise the
landscape notes to use 20% as the basis for the tree canopy requirement.
Final: Comment addressed. The overall canopy for the entire Riverside project must be 20 %, but
10% for this block is adequate.
3
34. [32.5.2(p)] Show all utility lines and easements on the landscape plan to demonstrate no site conflicts exist.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. As noted below, the roof drain easement is not shown.
Additionally, since most of the landscape isn't shown, conflicts cannot be verified.
35. [32.5.2(p) & COD Section IX] Section IX states that all plant species must conform to the Native Plants for
Virginia Landscapes list. When species are provided, please select plants from this list.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. Colorado blue spruce, Alleghany viburnum and Blue Wave
hydrangea are not Virginia native plants; the viburnum and hydrangea aren't even native to the US.
There are Virginia native viburnum and hydrangea species, but those proposed are not. Please
select Virginia natives for all plants as required by the COD.
36. [32.5.2(t)] Show the limits of the Dam Break Inundation Zone. DCR has been contacted regarding review of
this development; their reply will be forwarded once received.
Final: Comment addressed.
37. [4.17] Lighting fixture B does not appear to be full cutoff; either select a different fixture or specify a different
bulb that emits less than 3000 lumen.
Final: Comment addressed. Fixture B has been changed.
38. [4.17] The catalog number provided for fixture B in the luminaire schedule does not match that provided on
the cut - sheet; verify and revise.
Final: Comment addressed.
39. [4.17] List the tilt for Fixture A in the luminaire schedule.
Final: Comment addressed.
40. [4.17] 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 -half foot - candle.
Final: Comment addressed.
41. [Comment] ARB approval is required. ARB comments will be provided after the September 8th meeting.
Final: Comment still valid; ARB approval is required.
42. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site Plan
approval. Among possible others, it appears an easement will be required for proposed grading in several
areas of the County owned park parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. There is still a small area of grading proposed on TMP78G -3B-
9 and the open space parcel.
43. [Comment] Clarify if an easement is being created for the new roof drain line coming on to the parcel.
Final: Comment not fully addressed. The comment response letter indicates an easement is shown,
but it does not appear to be on the plan.
Final Plan:
44. [32.6.2(i), 4.12.4(a) and COD] The number of parking spaces shown exceeds the requirement listed by
more than 20 %, which is not permitted. However, Sheet 4 of the COD states that 2 parking spaces are
required for each residential unit. Revise the parking note to indicate 48 spaces are required. As a result,
the 56 spaces proposed falls within the permitted range.
45. [32.6.2(i) & 4.12.16(c)6] All perpendicular parking is now proposed to be 16' in length instead of the
standard 18'. Show the required 2' unobstructed overhang and make sure no improvements, including
landscaping, interfere with this overhang area.
4
46. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The photometric plan does not show lighting levels at the southern property boundary;
extend the photometric information all the way to the property line or show readings less than 0.5 fc prior to
the line.
47. [Comment] The existing landscape and sidewalk easement at the turn - around area will need to be revised
once the amended road plans are approved.
48. [Comment] This site plan cannot be approved until all reviewers complete their reviews and grant their
approval. Engineering, Inspections, Fire Rescue and ARB comments have been provided. ACSA and
VDOT comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eraygalbemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
5
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT of TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper. Virginia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
January 6, 2016
Ms. Ellie Carter Ray
Mr. Max Greene
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP - 2015 -00060 Riverside Village Block 5 Final Site Plan
SUB - 2015 -00223 Riverside Village Block 5 Road Plan
Dear Ms. Ray and Mr. Greene:
We have reviewed the Final Site Plan and Road Plan for Riverside Village Block 5, dated
December 14, 2015, as submitted by Shimp Engineering, and we offer the following comment:
1. The proposed pavers should stop at the Iimits of the public right -of -way and then match
the sidewalk typical section that has been previously approved along Trailside Drive. The
sidewalk should not extend to the back of curb on Trailside Drive as shown.
If you need further information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(434) 422 -9894.
Sincerely,
Shelly A. Plaster
Land Development Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
�OF Aign.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
Project: Riverside Village Block 5
Project Number SDP201500060, SUB201500223
Plan preparer: Shimp Engineering Uustin @shimp - engineering.com]
Owner or rep.: Riverside Village Properties, Inc.
Plan received date: 15 December 2015
Date of comments: 31 December 2015
Reviewer: Max Greene
The Riverside Village Block 5 plan # SDP201500060 submitted 15 December 2015 have received
Engineering Review and does not appear to meet Albemarle County minimum checklist items for
approval. The following items will need to be adequately addressed prior to final site plan approval.
1. VSMP amendment plans for County View File #WP0201400074 will need to be submitted and
approved. The amendment plan will receive a new CV number upon submission of VSMP plan
and fee.
2. One -way access loop should be a minimum 12' wide per 18- 4.12.17.c.2, County Code.
Engineering staff is available on Thursdays from 2 -4 PM to discuss these review comments. Please
contact Max Greene, at mgreene@albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832, Ext. 3283, to schedule a time to meet.
File: CDD1_fsp_Review Riverside Village Block 5_3lDec20l5.doc