HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600019 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2016-10-14COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
October 14, 2016
Craig Kotarski
Timmons Group
111 W High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SDP201600019 Parham Construction — Major Amendment
Dear Sir:
Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to
be approved the following revisions are required:
1. [Comment] The application stated that this plan amends SDP198700002, but that site plan
is for a difference Tax Map and Parcel. The correct application that this proposal amends is
SDP00000411; please add a reference to this site plan number on the Cover Sheet. Rev. 1:
Comment Addressed.
2. [Comment] Please remove all WPO related sheets from the Site Plan; WPO plans have a
different period of validity and should not be included. If desired, you may include them in
your sheet index but cross them out for this submittal. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
3. [32.5.2(a)] Add Managed Steep Slopes to the Zoning note. Rev. 1: Update the managed
stems slope Zoning note to say "managed". Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
4. [32.5.2(a)] The setback information provided on the Cover Sheet is not entirely correct.
Please provide parking setback information in addition to the required building setbacks.
Additionally, there is not a 10' side/rear setback for districts other than residential, rural
areas and Monticello historic district; building separation requirements are enforced. Rev.
1: Comment Addressed.
5. [32.5.2(a) & 26.5(c)] A 30' undisturbed buffer is required to be maintained adjacent to any
district other than commercial or industrial; add a note reflecting this requirement and show
the buffer line on layout, grading and landscape plans. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
6. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the zoning district and present use of abutting parcels. Rev. 1:
Comment Addressed.
Page 1 of 10
7. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the maximum amount of paved parking and vehicular circulation. Rev.
1: Comment Addressed.
8. [32.5.2(b) & 5.1.51 & 5.1.52] Be aware of the requirements of 5.1.51 (Outdoor Activities in
Industrial Districts) and 5.1.52 (Outdoor Storage in Industrial Districts) as they relate to
industrial activities and the storage of materials and equipment. If any outdoor storage area
is proposed, show it on the site plan. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
9. [32.5.2(d)] Show all areas of Managed Steep Slopes on the layout and grading plans. Rev.
1: Comment not fully addressed. Add the managed steep slopes to the "Layout" and
"Grading" sheets. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
10. [32.5.2(e)] Show all existing landscape features on the existing conditions sheet; GIS
shows some that aren't included in the plans. Make sure all landscaping to be removed is
noted as such. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Include all existinq trees shown on
the conservation plan in the existing conditions sheet. Label the existing trees with species
and size on the existing conditions sheet. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. Provide
labels with species and size for the existing holly trees along the southern boundary with
TMP 90-28 on the existing conditions sheet. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed.
11. [32.5.26,11k,l)] Verify that the location(s) and dimensions of all existing or proposed utilities
and utility easements including water, sewer, drainage, telephone, cable, electric and gas
are shown on the plan. Label any existing easements with the Deed Book and Page
Number. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide the location of the existing water
and wastewater lines, as well as the location of the existing sanitary drainfield(s) and well(s),
in the plan. There also seems to be oil and gas storage within the property. Show any gas
and/or oil lines within the property. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. The contact for
the applicant has stated that there are not oil or gas lines on the property. That the only
infrastructure for oil and gas on the site are storage tanks, which have been shown on the
plan. VDH approval of the existing well and septic is required and the site plan will not be
approved until VDH approval has been received. I have been informed by VDH that the
"Completion Statement" document that was sent by the applicant's contact is not the VDH
approval that is required for utilizing the existing well and sewer systems. See the VDH
comments, once they become available, for more information. Also, provide the location of
a reserve drainfield on the site plan. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed. See VDH
comments. VDH approval for both the existing well and existing septic system will be
required before the site plan will be able to be approved.
Rev. 4: Comment not fully addressed. See VDH comments. VDH approval for both
the existing well and existing septic system will be required before the site plan will
be able to be approved.
12. [32.5.2(k), 32.7.5.1, 4.1] Water and Server Facilities. The Zoning Ordinance (Section 4.1
Water & Sewer supplies) requires that properties within the Albemarle County Service
Authority Jurisdictional Area be served by both public water and sewer. The site is located in
this area and is required to connect to both. The Site Plan states that utilities will be ACSA,
but no connections to either public water or sewer are shown. If connections are proposed,
they must be shown. If the applicant does not wish to connect, one of the circumstances
described in 4.1 (a) must exist and an exemption must be requested and approved (see this
form:
http://www.albemarle.org/upload/imaqes/forms center/departments/Community Developme
nt/forms%applications/Public Water & Sewer Connection Evaluation.pdf ). Prior to site
plan approval the exemption shall be reviewed and a finding shall be made to either approve
Page 2 of 10
or deny the request. If the request is denied then connections to both public water and
sewer shall be provided. If the exemption request is approved, the Health Department will
be required to review/approve the site plan to assure adequate septic systems are
proposed/provided onsite. All private sewer facilities shall be designed and constructed to
the standards of the Virginia Department of Health and be approved by the Health Director.
Health Director approval is required prior to final site plan approval. Additionally, the location
of both an original and a replacement drainfield shall be shown on the plan. Rev. 1: The
Public Water & Sewer Connection Evaluation form was received. Prior to site plan approval
the exemption must be approved or connections to public water and sewer provided. Rev.
2: Comment addressed. Attached find the water and sewer memo from Mark
Graham.
13. [32.5.2(k) & 26.2(a)] If an exemption to not connect to public water is requested and
approved, provide water usage information to determine if a Special Use Permit is required.
In LI, the following use requires a SP: Uses permitted by right, not served by public water,
involving water consumption exceeding four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day.
Rev. 1: The water usage information has been received and evaluated. The water usage
was shown to be below the maximum specified. Therefore if the exemption to not connect
to the public water system is approved a special use permit will not be required for utilizing
the private water system. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed?. The exemption was requested
and granted. As mentioned in the first review, the documentation on water usage
provided showed that the consumption was below four hundred (400) gallons per site
per acre per day maximum and therefore a special use permit is not required for
utilizing private water.
14. [32.5.2(k) & 26.2(a)] If an exemption to not connect to public sewer is requested and
approved, provide confirmation of the type of sewer discharge created by this use to
determine if a Special Use Permit is required. In LI, the following use requires a SP: Uses
permitted by right, not served by public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage
other than domestic wastes. Rev. 1: Comment not yet addressed. Provide a detailed list of
all products and/or chemicals that would be discharged into the sanitary sewer, other than
the discharges for typical bathroom usage, including all substances and/or chemicals used
in the manufacturing and assembly processes. If the processes generate some waste
products that are removed from the site by other means, such as a hazardous waste
removal service, specify that that type of waste will be produced but will not be disposed of
through the sanitary sewer system. If the exemption to not connect to the public sanitary
sewer system is approved the requested information will determine whether a SP will be
required to utilize a private sanitary sewer system. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed.
The contact for the applicant has stated that "No other sanitary discharge, besides domestic
wastes, will be produced by this facility." This information must be officially submitted and
documented. The CER, that is required and specified in comment #22 below, should
contain this information. The County engineer received the revised CER on Tuesday on
July.5th, 2016. The CER is under review. If additional information is required about sewer
discharge you will be contacted. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed. The letter in lieu of a
CER has been approved by the County Engineer.
15. [32.5.2(k) & 16-1001 If an exemption to not connect to public water and/or sewer is
requested and approved, provide additional information on the existing/proposed water and
septic systems, including the proposed number of connections to each. Each physical
connection to a system (water or septic) is counted, including multiple connections serving
one structure; any more than two connections requires approval by the Board of Supervisors
of a central water supply and/or central sewerage system. A Compliance with the
Page 3 of 10
Comprehensive Plan review may also be required if central system(s) are necessary. Rev.
1: Comment not Vet addressed. Provide additional information on the existing and proposed
private water and septic systems, including the existing and proposed number of
connections to each. Show all existing and proposed water and sewer lines and facilities in
the site plan. Each physical connection to a system (water and septic) and all of their
connections to the building are counted and must be shown even though it is a private
system. Until this information is provided it cannot be determined whether the systems will
be considered central systems and need the Board of Supervisor's approval. Rev. 2:
Comment Addressed. The exemption was requested and granted. Only one water
and one sewer connection are shown as existing in the site plan. Therefore, the
existing private water and sewer systems are not considered "central systems" and
BOS approval is not required for utilizing them.
16. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the proposed building. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
17. [32.5.2(n)] Label all existing and proposed fences and walls. Rev. 1: Comment
Addressed.
18. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.13(c) & 4.12.18] Loading spaces shall be provided in addition to and
exclusive of any parking requirement on the basis of (1) space for the first ten thousand
(10,000) square feet of industrial floor area plus one (1) space for each additional twenty
thousand (20,000) square feet of industrial floor area; provide and/or label a loading space
that meets the ordinance design requirements. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed.
Provide striping and/or signage in order to delineate the loading spaces and specify their
use. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed. Loading space signage has been included in the
site plan. - - --- ----
19. [32.5.2(n), 4.12.13(e & 4.12.19)] Each site plan that depicts a commercial or industrial
building of four thousand (4,000) gross square feet or more shall provide a dumpster pad
that does not impede any required parking or loading spaces, nor any pedestrian or
vehicular circulation aisles; provide and/or label a dumpster pad that meets the ordinance
design requirements. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
20. [32.5.2(n)] Label blank areas around the proposed building with the intended ground
cover/surface treatment. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
21. [32.5.2(r)] Provide a legend showing all symbols and abbreviations used on the plan. Rev.
1: Comment not fully addressed. There are lines on the plan, such as storm sewer lines,
that are not shown in the legend. There are also. lines notet included in the site plan that
are not shown in the legend_but will need to be included once the lines are added to the site
plan. These include the requested water, sanitary sewer, oil and gas lines. All line types
utilized to represent specific types of utilities and/or objects need to be included in the
legend_ Rev. 2: Comment not fug addressed. Include the double dashed lines used to
represent the existing stormwater lines in the legend. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed.
Proposed storm pipe has been added to the legend but existing storm pipe has not. Include
existing storm waterp,ices in the legend and ensure that the line work for ther)roiosed
storm pipe is the appropriate line wei,ght for ropose_ d_ infrastructure.
Rev. 4: Comment Addressed.
22. [32.5.2(s) & 4.14] Performance standards. Each use of an industrial character as
determined by the zoning administrator and each use to which section 4.14 is expressly
applicable to that use (referred to collectively in sections 4.14.1 through 4.14.5 as a "use of
Page 4 of 10
an industrial character") shall be subject to the performance standards in this section
through section 4.14.5. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance or approval of a final site
plan, each prospective occupant of a use of an industrial character shall submit a certified
engineer's report as outlined section 4.14.5, except as provided in subsection (c). While this
Certified Engineer's Report (CER) is not required until the Zoning Clearance, please note
the CER requirement on the Site Plan. The applicant may also want to submit the CER
during site plan review to ensure the use will be permitted. Rev. 1: The "letter in lieu of a
CER" was received and is being evaluated. If additional information is needed for this letter
you will be contacted. Update the note provided on the coversheet of the Site Plan to state
that "Prior to Zoning Clearance a Certified Engineering Report for each..." The CER is not
required at the time of the Site Plan approval. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. The
County engineer received the revised CER on Tuesday on July! 5', 2016. The CER is
under review. Also, see comment ##14 alcove. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed. Letter in
lieu of CER was a3proyect by County Engineer.
23. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.4.('h)] 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 or
to meet conditions of approval, subject to the agent's approval. It seems that some of the
Landscape Plan requirements may be proposed to be met with existing vegetation. If this is
the case, the plan should 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. In addition, the applicant shall sign a
conservation checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be
protected during construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a
particular case, such checklist shall conform to specifications contained in the Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pp III-284 through III-297, and as hereafter
amended. This checklist must be signed, dated and included on the plans. Rev. 1:
Comment not fully addressed. The conservation plan checklist was provided but not filled
out. The checklist must be filled out. Trees to be counted towards requirements must be
conserved as specified in the checklist. Some of the trees shown to be conserved on L1.10
seem to be located in paved areas, which seems questionable. Correct/clarify the plan
accordingly. The driplines of some trees to be conserved seem to be impacted by the
removal or addition of pavement. Show tree protection_fencing all the way around the
dripline of conserved trees on the existing conditions, erosion and sediment control,
landscaping and conservation sheets. Show and label the limits of clearing and grading in
the site plan, including the landscaping and conservation sheets. Limits of clearing and
grading should not cross the dripline of conserved trees. If a tree well or tree wall is needed
to protect the tree's canopy, show this on the site plan and supply the well/wall details. To
eliminate confusion and duplication,rovide a chart for the conserved trees, including
number of trees, species, canopy size conserved, total canopy preserved, and the
landscaping requirement being met (other than tree canopy, if any). Include a north arrow on
U. 10. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed.
❖ The Conservation Plan Checklist has not been completed. Items not checked in items 2,
3,_4, 5, 6, 7, 8, & 13 apply to the tree preservation in this site plan. Complete the
Conservation Plan Checklist. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed.
❖ "Limits of grading' have been shown on the site plan instead of "limits of clearing and
grading". "Limits of grading" do not represent the areas where asphalt is to be removed
or added and therefore does not accurately represent all of the possible damage to the
existing landscaping. Also, "limits of clearing" is specifically mentioned in the
Conservation Plan Checklist and therefore must be shown on the plan in order to meet
the requirements specified in the list. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed.
Page 5 of 10
❖ Removing from the calculations the trees adversely affected by the removal and/or
addition of asphalt, as noted in the site plan and comment response letter, is acceptable.
One tree that has an "' specifying it is not being used for the calculations, the Catalpa
speciosa, is colored as if it is being used in the calculations. Clarify this or remove the
coloring and ensure the tree is not included in any calculations. Also, one tree that will
be adversely impacted by the removal of ground and the addition of asphalt, the Triple
maple between the entrance corridor and existing parking, should be removed from all of
the calculations and should not be colored. Rev. 3: Comment Addressed.
An area of existing trees, adjoining the NMD zoned parcel TMP 90-28, has been shown
to be preserved in this site plan submission that was not previously shown. It appears
that they are being utilized to meet Code requirements for screening. All of the
requirement for identification and preservation, provided for the other existing trees,
must be provided on the site plan for these trees in order to utilized as screening. Also,
once specific tree location, species, size and canopy are identified any additional
planting needed to supplement these existing trees should be added outside of the 30'
buffer to fully screen the property from the view of the adjacent parcel. Rev. 3:
Comment Addressed.
24. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5] The subject parcel has more than 350' of street frontage, not 93' as
noted. Provide street trees to meet this requirement. If a portion of the street tree
requirement is proposed to be met through the preservation of existing trees; provide
information on the existing trees proving they meet the requirement, provide tree protection
fencing where the proposed disturbance is close to existing trees and add a conservation
plan checklist as indicated in the comment above. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed.
See comment #23 above. Update the required number of Entrance Corridor Street Trees to
specify_ 17. A specific tree cannot be counted towards two calculations, other than the
overall canopy. For example a street tree cannot be counted towards the parking lot tree
calculation. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
25. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.5 & 5.1.31] Provide parking screening shrubs along the parking on the
entrance road to mitigate the visibility of the parking area from Route 20. Rev. 1: Note that if
the existing vegetation along the Entrance Corridor is modified or removed in the future
additional parking lot screening may be required. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. A
note has been added to the plan stating that if "... existing buffer plantings along the north
east parking lot are removed in the future, screen plantings will be implemented consistent
with the Albemarle County Entrance Corridor Guidelines." Change the wording to state "..
existing and/or proposed plantings between the parking lots and the Entrance Corridor are
removed in the future screen plantings will be implemented consistent with the Albemarle
County Entrance Corridor Guidelines." Rev. 3: Comment Addressed. _
26. [32.6.2(]) & 32.7.9.6] Provide information to demonstrate that an area equal to at least 5%
of the paved parking and vehicular circulation area is landscaped with trees and shrubs.
Additionally, provide a note indicating that the required number of parking lot trees have
been provided in this area. The plan states 0 parking spaces, but parking is proposed. Rev.
1: Comment not fully_ addressed. There seem to be more interior parking lot trees provided
then specified. There seem to be fewer perimeter parking lot trees then specified. Please
clarify these calculations. The calculation you provided to meet the 5% of paved parking
and vehicular circulation area should be based upon the square feet of planting beds not
canopy. Recalculate adjusa t plantings as needed and update oy ur landscaping notes. Rev
2: Comment not fully addressed. 32.7.9.6.a. specifies that the "... area shall be landscaped
with trees or shrubs." Therefore, the meadow plantings should not be counted towards the
Page 6 of 10
landscape area for the parking lot requirement. The landscape plan includes a significant
number of existing and proposed trees and shrubs in the vicinity of the parking spaces. It is
possible that there is sufficient area to meet the minimum landscape area for a parking area.
Please follow the following criteria when calculating this area. 1) The area should have
trees and/or shrubs planted in it. 2) Only count the areas either within parking islands or
within 10' of the back of curb adiacent to parking spaces or parking drive aisles. 3) As
specified in 32.7.9.6.a "Neither the areas of street trees and shrubs required by sections
32.7.9.5(d) and (e), nor shrubs planted between a parking area and a building on the site
shall be counted towards the minimum area landscaped area for a parking area."
Therefore, planting areas for the street trees along the Entrance Corridor should not be
included in the parking landscape area calculation. We will accept however including any
portion of the the drive aisle for a depth of 10', where you have preserved or are proposing
trees and/or shrubs. For the purpose of the general site plan review we consider that a
drive aisle because of the parking located along it. Also, please move the Platanus x
acerfifolia next to the four parking spaces on the west side of the plan so that it is not on top
of the curb. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following:
Because there are multiple types of hatches shown on Sheet No. 1-1.00 (Planting
Plan) add labels to the areas hatched to represent the parking landscaping areas.
Rev. 4: Comment Addressed.
• In the Plant Schedule separate the London Plane Trees into two different rows. One
for the 3 W caliper trees along the Entrance Corridor and the other for the 2 '/z"
caliper trees in the parking area. Ensure that the canopy for the 2 '/2" caliper trees is
shown and calculated appropriate for that size tree. 3'/a" and 2'/2" caliper trees do
not have the same canopy at 10 years growth. Rev. 4: Comment Addressed.
• In the Plant Schedule the number of Arrowwood Viburnums have been increased.
However, there still seems to be only 22 shown on Sheet No. L1.00. Please specir"y
where the additional two plants are located or update the_schedule to be correct.
Rev. 4: Comment Addressed. —
• In the Plant Schedule the number of Dwarf Fothergiilas have been increased.
However, there still seems to be only 10 shown on Sheet No. 1-1.00. Please specify
where the additional three plants are located or update the schedule to be correct.
Rev. 4: Comment Addressed.
27. [32.6.20) &-. 32.7.9.7] If a dumpster enclosure is proposed, provide the height of the
dumpster enclosure. Rev. 1: If the proposed duster will be visible from Route 20 provide
dumpster screenina. If the dumpster will not be visible from the EC in proposed site plan if
in the future changes are made in the EC plantings screening for the dumpster may be
required. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed. The dumpster pad is now located on the far
side of the building from the Entrance Corridor.
28. [32.6.20) & 32.7.9.7] Industrial uses and parking lots consisting of four spaces or more
shall be screened from adjacent residential uses/districts; provide screening that meets the
ordinance between the building/parking and the adjacent NMD parcel. Be aware that any
disturbance in the required 30' buffer (even to plant required screening) requires a special
exception. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The preservation of the existing trees and
the addition of the London plane trees along this edge of the parcel partially screen the _
parking lots from the ad'acent NMD parcel However, additional screening is needed to
_meet this_reguirement._Provvide,evergreen trees between the_london plane trees, in the
section not screened by the existing hollies, at a spacing that will fully screen all of the
parking lots from view. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. As specified in 32.7.9.7.d. the
minimum spacing rye uirements for screening vegetation should be either "... a double
-- -- ---
staggered row of evergreen trees_planted fifteen f 15) feet on center, or_ a_ double_ stag, p
Page 7of10
row of evergreen shrubs planted ten (10) feet on center, or alternative vegetative screening
approved by the agent." It seems that the landscape plan is truing to achieve a more
naturalistic appearance then what double staggered rows of the same evergreens may
allow. However, the equivalent screening must be achieved between the subject parcel and
TMP 90-28. Please provide additional screening and show that the existing and proposed
landscaping can meet or exceed the screening requirement. Mixing evergreen trees and
evergreen shrubs of the specified heights for screening, and/or intermixing different species
of evergreens may help in accomplishing the screen without sacrificing a more natural
appearance. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed. Update the Plant Schedule to specify.
20 Eastern Red Cedars. There appears to be 17 in the screening area and 3 along the
Entrance Corridor. Rev. 4: Comment Addressed.
29. [32.6.2U) & 32.7.9.7] The required tree canopy applies to the entire site, not just the limits
of construction. It appears that existing trees may be adequate to meet this requirement,
but they should be shown/noted on the plan and protected (as indicated above), if
necessary. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See comment #23 above. Do_ not
included in the canopy calculation trees that are not protected by the preservation measures
specified in the Conservation plan Checklist. Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. Confirm
that any tree being utilized in landscaping calculations is either fully protected by tree
protection fencing or is at least 40' from any construction activity. As specified in the
Conservation Plan Checklist item #8, "Trees to be retained within 40' of a proposed building
or grading activity shall be protected by fencing." This should also include any construction
staging, equipment and material storage and/or stock pile storage activities. Rev. 3:
Comment Addressed.
30. [32.6.20)] There are several inconsistencies/inaccuracies in the plant schedule/landscape
plan, revise accordingly:
The plan shows 10 Fothergilla, not 13.
Platanus x acerfolia provides 479 sf of canopy, not 471.
Acer rubrum `Armstrong' at the proposed caliper provides 53 sf of canopy, not 44.
• Fothergilla gardenii and Prunus `Otto Luyken' do not reach 5' in height within 10 years
and, therefore, should not be included. in the tree canopy calculation.
There are several tree/plant symbols shown along the street frontage that are not
specified.
Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. There are trees shown in the upper riqht hand corner
of sheet number L1.00 that are not labeled on that sheet. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
The requested labels have been added.
31. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] Please clarify if Light Fixture B is existing or proposed. If proposed,
provide a cut -sheet. If existing, verify that the photometric information provided includes
these fixtures. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
32. [32.6.2(k) & 4A7] Provide photometric information to the right-of-way line of Route 20 to
verify the spillover requirement is met (or show less than 0.5 fc before the property line).
Rev. 1: Comment Addressed.
33. [32.6.2(k) & 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
Page 8 of 10
one-half foot-candle. Rev. 1: Because there is one existing light that has spillover into the
public road that exceeds one-half foot-candle update the note to state "... The spillover of
lighting from proposed luminaries onto public roads...". Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
The note has been updated.
34. [32.6.20 & k)] ARB approval of the site plan is required. Rev. 1: See the attached ARB
requested changes. Rev. 2: Comment Addressed. See the attached ARB approval.
35. [17-1000] If an exemption to not connect to public water is requested and approved, provide
either a Tier 3 or Tier 4 groundwater assessment, and the associated fee. The type of
assessment required is determined by water use and potential central water supply. Rev. 1:
This comment is not yet addressed. Once it is determined whether the system will be
considered a central water supply system submit the fee for the groundwater assessment
required. Note that the information required to determine whether the water system will be
considered a central water system has not been submitted. See comment # 15 above.
Rev. 2: Comment not fully addressed. After this recent site plan submittal that showed only
one water connection, and as long as the proposed water use will be less than 2,000
gallons/day (average) as shown in previously submitted document, it appears that a Tier 3
groundwater assessment will be sufficient. The applicant's primary contact was provided
this information on June 27, 2016 and has confirmed that the Tier 3 groundwater
assessment submittal documents will be submitted to the county for review with the review
fee in a couple of weeks. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed. The Tier 3 Groundwater
Assessment was received by the plan reviewer on 9/6/16. Information will be forwarded to
you once the assessment has been reviewed. See the Enaineerina comments. Rev. 4:
Comment Addressed.
36. [Comment] VDH approval is required if private water/sewer is proposed. Rev. 1: See the
attached requested changes from the Health Department. Rev. 2: Comment not yet
addressed. See comment #11 above. VDH approval is required prior to site plan approval.
We will forward the Health Department Comments when they become available. Rev. 3:
Comment not fully addressed. See VDH comments. VDH approval is required prior to site
plan approval.
Rev. 4: Comment not fully addressed. See VDH comments. VDH approval is required
prior to site plan approval.
37. [Comment] The WPO application must be approved prior to Site Plan approval. Rev. 1:
Comment Addressed.
38. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the Site Review
Committee (SRC) have been addressed. Any comments not available at the time of the
SRC meeting will be forwarded once received. Rev. 1: SRC comments available at this time
have been attached. We are waiting on comments from VDOT. They will be forwarded to
you when available. Rev. 2: SRC comments available at this time have been attached. We
are waiting on comments from VDH and Inspections. They will be forwarded to you when
available. Rev. 3: Comment not fully addressed. SRC comments have been attached.
Engineering and VDH approvals are still required prior to site plan approval.
Rev. 4: Comment not fully addressed. VDH comments have been attached. VDH
approval are still required prior to site plan approval.
39. [New Comment] Provide the acreage of the parcel on the coversheet and in the Overall
Plan sheet CO.1 Rev. 2: Comment Addressed.
Page 9 of 10
Staff has provided references to provisions of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of
Albemarle. The Code is kept up to date by the County Attorney's office. The Code may found
on the County Attorney's website which may be found under "Departments and Services" at
Albemarle.org.
In accord with the provisions of Section 32.4.3.5 of Chapter 18 of the Code if the developer fails
to submit a revised final site plan to address all of the requirements within six (6) months after
the date of this letter the application shall be deemed to have been voluntarily withdrawn by the
developer.
If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me.
Sincere'
Paty Sa
Senior f
Planning Division
M
Page 10 of 10