Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP200900018 Review Comments 2009-03-300 ti xt' County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Elizabeth Marotta, Current Development Project Planner From:Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review Date:30 March 2009 Subject: Major Amendment and Buffer Waiver for Blue Ridge Shopping Center SDP-2009-00018) The major amendment for the Blue Ridge Shipping Center has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to this site plan amendment once the following comments have been addressed. 1. This plan set must clearly designate what areas of the site are being modified. Please bubble the northwest corner of the property where the retaining wall was eliminated. This amendment will serve as an addendum to the previously approved plans. 2. Please include the sheet SP1. This sheet contains critical information required for site plans. No other sheets appear to be required in this set. The index of sheets and the sheet labeling system (1 of 6, 2 of 6, etc.) should be updated considering that the lighting sheets will be removed from the set. 3. Please show the additional trees mentioned in your application as proposed in the sheet set and modify the landscape schedule. 4. All slopes steeper than 3:1 must be planted with a low maintenance, non - grassed groundcover. If this disturbed area will be left at a 2:1 slope, please also specify a groundcover beneath the trees. If the slope is 3:1 or flatter, please label it as such. 5. A waiver must be granted by the Planning Commission for construction within the 20ft undisturbed buffer. The engineering analysis of this waiver request is provided below. Engineering Analysis of the Waiver Request for Construction within the 20ft Undisturbed Buffer Project Description The applicant is requesting permission for the disturbance of the 20ft buffer which exists along all boundary lines of commercial properties that are shared with residential or rural zoned parcels. During construction this buffer was disturbed and the zoning division is currently processing a violation. The applicant states that the area was graded when the contractor was given a drawing that did not clearly state that this area was to be left undisturbed. It should be noted that all previously approved plans for this parcel had proposed plantings within the buffer area, but had not shown any grading. This latest site plan application shows proposed topography within the buffer that approximately matches the graded contours as they currently exist on site. Current Development Engineering Review Comments y',-,^ Page2of3 f L''i 4 b T , t k, i fI r,,'-,,r1 r t pw r pi its y F 74 fix' •Ar t 6,11 ,,.' 4 t, " ./,',''''' 1 , f .. I4_-w S 'W3 Mkt U. 1 Photo A: Look sou along the w cur line. The photo above is the best available for providing context for the waiver request. In the center of the picture • the white retaining wall at the Southwest corner of the p holding up the parkin lot to Building C. This retaining wall is located at the 20ft buffer line. The previously appro ved site plans had a second wall shown on the same alignment, extending to the north, in order mainta the 20ft undisturbed buffer when the site when from a fill operation to a cut. The 20ft buffer line runs down the center of this photograph at the seam between the flat slope to the left and the steeper slope to the right. The height of the slope is between 4 and 6ft. Waiver Analysis and Recommendation 21. MINI YARD REQUIREMENTS The minimum yard requirements in the commercial districts are as follows: c. Buffer zone a to r and rural areas districts N construction activity including gradi or clearing of vegetation shall occu closer tha twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district. Screenin shall be provided as required in section 32.7.9. (Amended 9 -9 -92) 1. Waiver by the commission. The commission may waive the prohibition of construction activity, grad or the clearing o vegetatio in the buffer in a particular case where the Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 developer or subdivider demonstrates that grading or clearing is necessary or would result in an improved site design, provided that: (i) minimum screening requirements are met and (ii) existing landscaping in excess of minimum requirements is substantially restored. (Added 7- 10 -85) Current Development cannot offer any information regarding the condition of the buffer area prior to construction or whether the proposed alternative constitutes an improved site design. The buffer had been disturbed before the request was made. This waiver must be granted or else the site will be in perpetual violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Engineering review recommends approval of the waiver if the double staggered row of evergreen trees described in section 32 -7.9.8 is provided in the plan. 1C tcj A IC J III ufkk., Ct Or- COUNTY fltc:INP OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 April 10, 2009 Steve Hopkins PO Box 5526 Charlottesville 'VA 22905 RE: SDP - 2009 -18 Blue Ridge Shopping Center Major Amendment Dear Sir: The Site Review Committee has reviewed the development proposal referenced above. Preliminary comments for the following divisions of the Department of Community Development and other agencies, as applicable, are attached: Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Engineer) Albemarle County Division of Zoning & Current Development (Planner) lbemarle County Division of Planning (E911)- no objection Albemarle County Division of Planning (Architectural Review Board) Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue 1--Albemarle County Service Authority- pending Comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was reviewed, and should not be considered final. However, the Site Review Committee has attempted to identify all issues that could affect approval of the proposed project. Please make the revisions that have been identified as necessary for preliminary approval by the Site Review Committee. If you choose not to make the requested revisions, please submit in writing justification for not incorporating such revisions. Submit eight (8) full size copies and one (1) 11" x 17" copy to the Department of Community Development including responses to each of the attached comments of the Site Review Committee by April 27, 2009. Failure to submit this infoi niation by this date will result in suspension of the review schedule. Review will resume when revisions are submitted along with a reinstatement fee of $65. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely,1 Elizabeth M. Maro a Senior Planner Zoning & Current Development Application #:SDP20090001 Short Review Comments Project Name:LBlue Ridge Shopping Center - Major Major Amendment Date Completed:04/08/2009 Reviewer:Andrew Slack E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: NO OBJECTION. Date Completed:04/06/2009 Reviewer:James Barber Fire Rescue Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Indicate the location of fire hydrants. Hydrants must be located within 400 feet of buildings by way of a! prepared travel way. Date Completed:03/30/2009 Reviewer:Philip Custer Engineer Z &CD Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Buffer disturbance waiver is required. Pane: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Friday, April 10, 2009 A & ALiik„ Uu® Fr; IkGIN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434)9724025 Date:April 3, 2009 To:Steve Hopkins Cc Owner: Preston Stallings From:Elizabeth M. Marotta, Senior Planner Re:Blue Ridge Shopping Center Major Amendment SDP20090018 The Planner for the Zoning & Current Development Division of the Albemarle County Department Community Development will recommend approval of the plan referred to above when the following items 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.) 1. Please clearly identify (revision cloud) the areas of this plan that are included in this amendment request (i.e. the limits of disturbance and landscaping changes), and make sure all changes to any sheet are clearly identified. 2. Please add the site identification information that is required by Sec. 32.5.6 (a) and (b). 3. Please make sure the cover sheet accurately reflects which sheets are included in the submittal. 4. Please graphically provide the trees described in the narrative of your application. Also, please make sure that the buffer meets or exceeds the standards set forth in Sec. 32.7.9.8a Screening. 5. As the narrative describes the disturbance was the result of the buffer not being clearly labeled on the plans, please re -label 20' setback as "20' undisturbed buffer" on the plans. 6. Please make sure the revised submittal includes an updated landscape schedule. 7. The Planning Commission must grant a waiver for the disturbance (grading and landscaping) of the 20' undisturbed buffer. This is scheduled to go to the Planning Commission on May 19 2009. If you have any questions or need additional information, please feel free to email me at emarotta @albemarle.org or by phone at 296 -5832 x3432. C ALk*,t kU1N« COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 MEMORANDUM TO:Elizabeth M. Marotta, Senior Planner FROM:Brent Nelson, Landscape Planner RE: Design Planning comments on: SDP 2009 -18: Blue Ridge Shopping Center, Major Site Plan Amendment DATE:April 7, 2009 I have reviewed the Major Site Plan Amendment for the above referenced proposal including Sheet AO Cover Sheet and Sheet SP2 Amended Site Plan, received March 31, 2009, and I have the following comments: Issue: Amendment Proposal /Description/Delineation Comments: The drawings, included in this submission, did not provide any indication as to the purpose and extent of the requested amendment. A written description of the proposal was not provided on the drawings, and the location of amendments to the plan was not delineated by means of "clouding ". Recommendations: Revise the drawings to include a written description of the amendment proposal. Delineate the areas involved with the use of "clouding ". Issue: Cover Sheet/Index of Sheets Comments: Sheet AO Cover Sheet contains an Index of Sheets with 6 sheets listed. Only 2 of the sheets listed are included in this submission. Recommendations: Include all the drawings currently listed in the Index of Sheets or revise the index to correctly identify the sheets included in the submission. Aov AL , o" ®Z.1i County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Elizabeth Marotta, Current Development Project Planner Front: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review Date:30 March 2009 Subject: Major Amendment and Buffer Waiver for Blue Ridge Shopping Center SDP - 2009 - 00018) The major amendment for the Blue Ridge Shipping Center has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development can recommend approval to this site plan amendment once the following comments have been addressed. 1. This plan set must clearly designate what areas of the site are being modified. Please bubble the northwest corner of the property where the retaining wall was eliminated. This amendment will serve as an addendum to the previously approved plans. 2. Please include the sheet SP1. This sheet contains critical information required for site plans. No other sheets appear to be required in this set. The index of sheets and the sheet labeling system (1 of 6, 2 of 6, etc.) should be updated considering that the lighting sheets will be removed from the set. 3. Please show the additional trees mentioned in your application as proposed in the sheet set and modify the landscape schedule. 4. All slopes steeper than 3:1 must be planted with a low maintenance, non - grassed groundcover. If this disturbed area will be left at a 2:1 slope, please also specify a groundcover beneath the trees. If the slope is 3:1 or flatter, please label it as such. 5. A waiver must be granted by the Planning Commission for construction within the 20ft undisturbed buffer. The engineering analysis of this waiver request is provided below. Engineering Analysis of the Waiver Request for Construction within the 20ft Undisturbed Buffer Project Description The applicant is requesting permission for the disturbance of the 20ft buffer which exists along all boundary lines of commercial properties that are shared with residential or rural zoned parcels. During construction this buffer was disturbed and the zoning division is currently processing a violation. The applicant states that the area was graded when the contractor was given a drawing that did not clearly state that this area was to be left undisturbed. It should be noted that all previously approved plans for this parcel had proposed plantings within the buffer area, but had not shown any grading. This latest site plan application shows proposed topography within the buffer that approximately matches the graded contours as they currently exist on site. Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 1105.001. h REF y itto i aC,i' 4 I ,r4 f'F hex, f Photo A: Looking south along the western curb line. The photo above is the best available for providing context for the waiver request. In the center of the picture is the white retaining wall at the Southwest corner of the property holding up the parking lot to Building C. This retaining wall is located at the 20ft buffer line. The previously approved site plans had a second wall shown on the same alignment, extending to the north, in order maintain the 20ft undisturbed buffer when the site when from a fill operation to a cut. The 20ft buffer line runs down the center of this photograph at the seam between the flat slope to the left and the steeper slope to the right. The height of the slope is between 4 and 6ft. Waiver Analysis and Recommendation 21.7 MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS The minimum yard requirements in the commercial districts are as follows: c. Buffer zone adjacent to residential and rural areas districts. No construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation shall occur closer than twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district. Screening shall be provided as required in section 32.7.9. (Amended 9 -9 -92) 1. Waiver by the commission. The commission may waive the prohibition of construction activity, grading or the clearing of vegetation in the buffer in a particular case where the Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 developer or subdivider demonstrates that grading or clearing is necessary or would result in an improved site design, provided that: (i) minimum screening requirements are met and (ii) existing landscaping in excess of minimum requirements is substantially restored. (Added 7- 10 -85) Current Development cannot offer any information regarding the condition of the buffer area prior to construction or whether the proposed alternative constitutes an improved site design. The buffer had been disturbed before the request was made. This waiver must be granted or else the site will be in perpetual violation of the Zoning Ordinance. Engineering review recommends approval of the waiver if the double staggered row of evergreen trees described in section 32 -7.9.8 is provided in the plan. Page 1 of 1 Elizabeth Marotta From: Gary Whelan [gwhelan @serviceauthority.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 1:52 PM To:Elizabeth Marotta Subject: RE: blue ridge update please Elizabeth, The Service Authority has no comment on activity in the buffer. It does not impact our pipes or easements. It sounds like you didn't receive my last reply. Anyway, we are ok with it. Gary From: Elizabeth Marotta [mailto:emarotta ©albemarle.org] Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 11:49 AM To: Gary Whelan Subject: blue ridge update please Hi Gary, I just want to get an update from you on what your comments are for Blue Ridge Shopping Center... Based on previous emails between you, Megan, and myself there seemed to be some confusion as to what exactly the scope of this application is. To clarify, SDP200900018 is simply a site plan amendment to extend the area of disturbance shown on the plan to include the area of the "20' buffer" along the western property line where they already inadvertently disturbed land. The disturbance has already occurred. My assumption is that you are asked to comment on it in case there are ACSA lines /easements in that vicinity and you want something on the record about that, OR, you have opposition to the proposed planting /screening scheme they are proposing to mitigate the disturbance. Whatever is going on in the rear of the site (as your last email to me mentioned) is not part of this amendment request. If you need any information, or have questions, please feel free to call me and we can talk about it. Thanks Gary, Elizabeth 296 -5832 x3432 4/14/2009 SDP200900018 Blue Ridgy° Shopping Center Page 1 of 1 Elizabeth Marotta From: Gary Whelan [gwhelan @serviceauthority.org] Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 10:25 AM To:Elizabeth Marotta Subject: RE: SDP200900018 Blue Ridge Shopping Center Thanks. The comment still stands. From: Elizabeth Marotta [mailto:emarotta ©albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 9:47 AM To: Gary Whelan Subject: RE: SDP200900018 Blue Ridge Shopping Center No, this amendment is for the disturbance of the buffer along the western( ?) property line... the line that runs perpendicular to 250/ opposite the side of the property as the harris teeter building. The disturbance is right up near the road, between where the retaining wall ends and the street is. From: Gary Whelan [mailto :gwhelan ©serviceauthority.org] Sent: Friday, April 10, 2009 9:43 AM To: Elizabeth Marotta Subject: SDP200900018 Blue Ridge Shopping Center Elizabeth, Are we talking about the area in the rear of the site? If so, the Service Authority takes no exception to grading and landscaping activities within a required buffer. This memo is not to be interpreted as approval for any pending or future Blue Ridge Shopping Center Site Plans. Any activity within existing orpture ACSA easements requires our review and approval. fir y, Gary 0+ \I It`\ A 4/14/2009 L- k b‘x (Jed ft C L1130/(fl 00C_Cl P1 Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District April 24, 2009 706 Forest St, Ste G Charlottesville, VA 22903 975-0224 TO:Elizabeth Marotta Planning Department RE:Soils Report and Comments for: Blue Ridge Shopping Center T t.,..\ ti t r 0 C ” W m 0 Q tom 00 n m l 5UJ eff ihip . ,..,0.,co W /3 ^`may 9 g,:111111a j y M w m f i or L. o Oi m c.)\;), U 3 h t o p . :r - m a c y W C':!,','''-:: 'CO V I ' , 90 to O U j Eigliili.a 4 cr. m m ; C M ir „rf--,_)-41111.tIlipato r, 0,f.7 . r..\:.7. ,:.--/''' ' \ C,)t-- m =I ate m CD m co7Jp., M ._......._ 1 II ` b FB q m m ol c,,„.., . m o J ., r. R l B111a '' 4* \ I co 03 r NI 11N S.' . (-) :1-0 ::>‘----:(\*N- 1114'17 _ m i M m m r Y J i m U U 7• m O t d 0 „!„ c ,--- r .r ,ham illt: M m`0,M . oU r 7 J .".co CJ. k r0 m o717'. W CO U M1 CL Lc, USDA United States Natural Prepared by: Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Department of Resources Conservation District Agriculture Conservation 434- 975 -0224 Service Soils Report SOILS REPORT FOR: Blue Ridge Shopping Center Soil Survey Area: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Unit: 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Chester is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a moderate available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is D. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 3703 Hayesville clay loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes, severely eroded Description Category: Virginia FOTG Hayesville is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is clay loam about 7 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a low shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The seasonal high water table is at a depth of more than 6 feet. The land capability classification is 4e. The Virginia soil management group is X. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 56B Meadowville loam, 2 to 7 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Meadowville is a gently sloping to moderately sloping, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 14 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 48 inches. The land capability classification is 2e. The Virginia soil management group is G. This soil is not hydric. Map Unit: 56C Meadowville loam, 7 to 15 percent slopes Description Category: Virginia FOTG Meadowville is a strongly sloping to moderately steep, very deep, well drained soil. Typically the surface layer is loam about 14 inches thick. The surface layer has a moderate content of organic matter. The slowest permeability is moderate. It has a high available water capacity and a moderate shrink swell potential. This soil is not flooded and is not ponded. The top of the seasonal high water table is at 48 inches. The land capability classification is 3e. The Virginia soil management group is G. This soil is not hydric. Thomas Jefferson SWCD 1 4/27/09 Map Unit: 88 Udorthents, loamy Description Category: Virginia FOTG No description available for Udorthents, loamy. Mapunit Hydric Rating Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Not hydric percent slopes 37C3 Hayesville clay loam, 7 to Not hydric 15 percent slopes, severely eroded 56B Meadowville loam, 2 to 7 Partially hydric percent slopes 56C Meadowville loam, 7 to 15 Not hydric percent slopes 88 Udorthents, loamy Partially hydric Soil Shrink -Swell - Dominant Soil Top Depth : 0 Bottom Depth : 0 Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 37C3 Hayesville clay loam, 7 to 1.5 15 percent slopes, severely eroded 56B Meadowville loam, 2 to 7 1.5 percent slopes 56C Meadowville loam, 7 to 15 1.5 percent slopes 88 Udorthents, loamy 0 Corrosion Concrete - Dominant Condition Soil Survey: Albemarle County, Virginia Thomas Jetterson SWCD 2 4/27/09 Survey Status: Published Correlation Date: 12/01/1981 Distribution Date: 10/21/2002 Map Symbol Soil Name Rating 14C Chester loam, 7 to 15 High percent slopes 36B Hayesville loam, 2 to 7 Moderate percent slopes 37C3 Hayesville clay loam, 7 to Moderate 15 percent slopes, severely eroded 56B Meadowville loam, 2 to 7 High percent slopes 56C Meadowville loam, 7 to 15 High percent slopes Thomas Jetterson SWCD 3 4/27/09 oy 11P County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To:Elizabeth Marotta, Current Development Project Planner From: Phil Custer, Current Development engineering review Date:27 April 2009 Subject: Major Amendment and Buffer Waiver for Blue Ridge Shopping Center SDP -2009- 00018) The major amendment for the Blue Ridge Shipping Center has been reviewed. The engineering review for current development recommends approval to the site plan on the condition that the buffer disturbance is approved by the Planning Commission. 5. A waiver must be granted by the Planning Commission for construction within the 20ft undisturbed buffer. The engineering analysis of this waiver request is provided below. Rev. I) Comment remains unchanged. The engineering analysis below has been amended based on the latest revision. Engineering Analysis of the Waiver Request for Construction within the 20ft Undisturbed Buffer Project Description The applicant is requesting permission for the disturbance of the 20ft buffer which exists along all boundary lines of commercial properties that are shared with residential or rural zoned parcels. During construction, approximately 110ft of this buffer was disturbed. The zoning division is currently processing a violation for this disturbance. The applicant states that the area was graded when the contractor was given a drawing that did not clearly state that this area was to be left undisturbed. It should be noted that all previously approved plans for this parcel had proposed landscaping within the buffer area but had not shown any grading. This latest site plan application shows proposed topography within the buffer that closely matches the graded contours as they currently exist on site. Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 2 of 3 n riZIT `" fN mod Y T+ y.0 y Photo A: Looking south along the western curb line. The photo above is the best available for providing context for the waiver request. In the center of the picture is the white retaining wall at the Southwest corner of the property holding up the parking lot to Building C. This retaining wall is located at the 20ft buffer line. The previously approved site plans had a second wall shown on the same alignment in order to maintain the 20ft undisturbed buffer when the site transitioned from fill to cut. The 20ft buffer line runs down the center of this photograph at the seam between the flat slope to the left and the steeper slope to the right. The height of the slope is between 4 and 6ft. Waiver Analysis and Recommendation 21.7 MINIMUM YARD REQUIREMENTS The minimum yard requirements in the commercial districts are as follows: c. Buffer zone adjacent to residential and rural areas districts. No construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation s occur closer than twenty (20) feet to any residential or rural areas district. Screening shall be provided as required in section 32.7.9. (Amended 9 -9 -92) 1. Waiver by the commission. The commission may waive the prohibition of construction activity, grading or the clearing of vegetation in the buffer in a particular case where the Current Development Engineering Review Comments Page 3 of 3 developer or subdivider demonstrates that grading or clearing is necessary or would result in an improved site design, provided that: (i) minimum screening requirements are met and (ii) existing landscaping in excess of minimum requirements is substantially restored. (Added 7- 10 -85) Current Development cannot offer any information regarding the condition of the buffer area prior to construction or whether the proposed alternative constitutes an improved site design. The buffer had been disturbed before the request was made. The minimum screening requirements mentioned in 18 -21.7 are found in 32- 7.9.8. Section 32 -7.9.8 specifies that screening areas must consist of evergreen trees located in a double- staggered row at 15ft on center. For a 110ft long screening area, this would yield two rows of 7 or 8 trees for a total between 14 and 16 trees. Though the latest set shows 16 trees within the disturbed buffer area, four of the trees are not evergreens and the landscaping is not provided in a double - staggered row. Engineering review recommends approval of the waiver if the double staggered row of evergreen trees described in section 32- 7.9.8, or equivalent, is provided in the plan. A waiver must be granted or else the site will be in perpetual violation of the Zoning Ordinance. oF AI,g4 c ti; t IRCiNl COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 - 4126 MEMORANDUM TO:Elizabeth M. Marotta, Senior Planner FROM:Brent Nelson, Landscape Planner RE: Design Planning comments on: SDP 2009 -18: Blue Ridge Shopping Center, Major Site Plan Amendment DATE: April 30, 2009 I have reviewed the Major Site Plan Amendment for the above referenced proposal including the following: Sheet A0: Cover Sheet, latest revision date March 20, 2009 Sheet SP1: Site Plan, latest revision date April 23, 2009 Sheet SP2: Site Plan, latest revision date April 14, 2008 Sheet LI: Illumination Plan, latest revision date March 5, 2009 Sheet L2: Light Fixtures, latest revision date March 5, 2009 Sheet L1A: Bank Lighting Plan, date March 4, 2008 Outstanding issues that need to be addressed are as follows: Issue: Lighting Plan Comments: This latest submission included Sheets Ll: Illumination Plan, L2: Light Fixtures, and LIA: Bank Lighting Plan. Sheet L1A: Bank Lighting Plan is not the lighting plan approved by the ARB. Lighting is not a part of this amendment; therefore, these drawings should not be included in this submission. Recommendations: Revise this application by removing lighting drawings L1: Illumination Plan, L2: Light Fixtures, and L1A Bank Lighting Plan. Revise the Index of Sheets on Sheet AO accordingly. Issue: BB &T Frontage Landscaping Comments: Sheet SP2 Amended Site Plan does not reflect all of the Entrance Corridor frontage landscaping approved for the BB &T bank proposed in the northwest comer of the shopping center. Recommendations: Revise Sheet SP2 Amended Site Plan to inclu(ee all of the planting required by the ARB for the BB &T Bank in the northwest corner of the shoppingcenter.