HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201500001 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2015-03-09RIV rs)MR.13olun;�.11�
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176
March 9, 2014
Ms. Sue Albrecht
255 1ps-Mch Place
Charlottesville VA 22901
RE: SP201500001 Roslyn Farm
Dear Ms. Albrecht --
Thank you for the recent application for this special use permit. Please find review comments
included in this letter.
Please see the attached re -submittal schedule for a list of dates on which you can submit your
revisions and responses to review comments (below and attached), as well as for possible
Planning Commission dates. (Please note that the listed dates are the earliest possible, but actual
dates need to be selected to suit the revision schedule for each project.)
Review Comments
Planning — Rural Areas Scott Clark
■ Please note that, as with any special use permit, this request will be evaluated based on its
appropriateness under the County°s land -use goals in the Comprehensive Plan and on its
impacts (safety, traffic, noise, etc.) for the surrounding area. As noted in the pre -
application meetings, we expect noise and traffic to be significant issues during this
review. Water -quality impacts will also be important, especially given this proposal's
proximity to the South Fork Rivanna reservoir and the use of structures in the stream
buffer.
Application Narrative:
c Traffic: The trip -generation counts on page 7 appear to be off by a factor of
two -- they seem to be counts of vehicles, not trips. Please confirm and
correct.
o Noise
■ Please provide more specifics on precisely how the barn would he
constructed/renovated to reduce sound impacts.
■ We would recommend that the prohibition on outdoor amplification
apply to all sound, not just to music.
■ Would the barn entrance include a vestibule, which might help limit
the noise that gets out, or would the door(s) open directly into the area
where the amplified sound would be?
a Note that expanding the number of events from 24 per year to 52 per year, as
requested, is a significant increase compared to other similar uses and would
noticeably increase impacts on the surrounding area. It might be advisable to
apply for a smaller number of events, establish the use and demonstrate that
noise, traffic, and other impacts can be managed appropriately, and then
apply to amend the permit to request more events.
o Also —please clarify the number of events. The application requests 52
events per year, and seems to imply that only one would be held per week.
However, other venues typically have multiple events per week during warm
weather and few/none in the winter. PIease verify that you are requesting one
event per week, and not 52 events that could be scheduled at any time of
year.
• Conceptual Plan:
o Elevation contours should be shown on the plan.
• Please clarify the "preservation area" that is labeled on the plan (or remove
the label). No boundaries for this area are shown, and the plan does not
establish any standards for what would be preserved or prohibited in this
area.
a Existing and proposed tree/vegetation lines should be shown on the plan.
o The location of the stream buffer established by the Water Protection
Ordinance should be shown on the plan.
o Proposed grading should be shown on the conceptual plan.
a Along the driveway to the barn, parking spaces are separated from the
driveway by area that appear to include grass and/or trees. Parking spaces
should be directly accessed from the paved/surfaced driveway. Also, as noted
above, existing and resulting tree lines should be shown.
o The area of 20 parking spaces near the existing house also has many spaces
that area not directly accessed from the driveway, but across an area of grass
or trees. These spaces need to be accessed from a driveway, and may need o
be moved.
o Please show the actual boundaries of the cemetery on the plan, and establish
the distance from the adjacent parking spaces to the cemetery boundary.
a The inset photo of the Roslyn Farm house is not needed on the plan.
Zoning jFrancis MacCalI)
Please see attached memo.
Planning — Current Development (Megan Yani Ios
• A site plan will be required for this use.
• If parking can be seen from either Hydraulic Road or adjacent residences, landscape
screening in accordance with 32.7.9 will be required during the site plan.
Historic Resources/Architectural Review Board Mar aret Maliszewski
■ In terms of historic resources, there is no objection to the proposal if the architectural and
historical significance of the property is not compromised by the proposed use.
• DHR survey information indicates that the Roslyn Farm property was surveyed in 1988
and was recommended not eligible for listing. Please indicate where Roslyn Farm stands
in the current designation process and forward any preliminary comments received from
the Department of Historic Resources so far in this designation process.
■ The applicant's narrative suggests that the barn would be considered a significant,
contributing structure. As such, there is a concern that the proposed expansion could
jeopardize its integrity and potential contributing status. Please clarify how the
architectural and historical significance of the barn will be maintained with the proposed
expansion.
• Indicate if the other outbuildings are being considered significant structures that
contribute to the historic and architectural integrity of the overall property.
Engineering (Michelle Rober-e
• Please see attached memo
Fire/Rescue (Robbie Gilmer)
• A fire safety plan will be required. Please contact the FM offices for direction on the
plan.
• For weddings with 250 people, one trained crowd manager will be required_
• Water supply shall be addressed either with a dry hydrant installed at the pond or a new
pressurized hydrant at the end of the driveway.
Vir inia Department of Trans ortation f Shelly Plaster
• Please see attached memo
Virginia Department of Health Josh Kirtley�
■ VDH staff has requested that you meet in person with them to discuss the proposed use
and the related water and septic -system issues. We would recommend that you have that
meeting and revise the application accordingly before resubmitting.
If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that
time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your
application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as
mutually agreed to with staff,, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. If none of these actions is taken, staff will schedule your application for
a public hearing based on the information provided with your original submittal.
Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the
Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The
only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the
project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been
brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the Planning
Commission meeting.
Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. I would be
happy to meet with you to discuss the issues raised by this application.
Sin rely,,
�r
f Scott Clark
Senior Planner, Planning Division
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Scott Clark, Senior Planner
From: Francis MacCall, Principal Planner
Division: Zoning
Date: February 27, 2015
Subject: SP 2015-001 Roslyn Farm — Special Events — initial zoning comments
Please consider the following comments:
If you have duplicative comments then please disregard mine.
1. Provide documentation from the Health Department regarding the private water supply and the
onsite sewage system that will serve the proposed special event site, the ability of the water
supply and the onsite sewage system to handle the proposed events, and any need to improve
the supply or the system in order to handle the proposed events. Any improvements needed
should be incorporated into a condition.
2. The narrative describes parallel parking and I did not see that on the plan. Please clarify.
3. The parking areas shall be screened from abutting parcels by topography, structures or new or
existing landscaping. I looks like additional screening along the property line shared with TMP
61-2D and along the southern side of the new access road being proposed will be needed.
4. Provide a note to the plan that the grass parking areas shall be reseeded yearly or as
determined by the zoning administrator.
5. The concept plan should show locations for directional signage that directs exiting guests to
the entrance/exit on Roslyn Ridge Rd. That said, having a gate at the farm/residential
entrance on Roslyn Heights Road should be considered.
6. The narrative describes fighting to be used. Show the areas where the lighting will be provided
and provide a note to the plan that all new lighting will comply with the requirements of Section
4.17.
7. Label the setbacks on the plan. The area is shown with dotted lines but there is no label noting
what the distances are. Front 75' Side 25' and Rear 35'. The rear is superseded by the 100'
stream buffer that should be shown on the concept plan as well.
8. A condition that there shall be no outdoor amplified music will be needed.
9. As noted in the narrative regarding sound attenuation there should be a condition for use of in
house sound equipment that will limits DBs with some sort of built-in governor on sound output.
In addition to this there should always be someone onsite with a sound meter and that person
should be accessible by phone to the neighbors, An appropriate condition can be formulated
for this.
10. As noted in the narrative all amplified sound should be cutoff after 10pm. I would think that all
events should end by 12am.
11. It is recommended that they ask the BOS to waive the requirement of a site plan.
commended that a condition be provided that the site be used for special events in
al accord with the conceptual plan drawn by DESIGN ENVIRONS CORPORATION dated
1015 and revised ...
eve that the date on the plan should have been 2015 and not 2014)
dditional fee for the special exceptions to modify Section 5 is needed. That fee is $425.
!'hone 434-296-5832
County- of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Memorandum
To:
Megan Yaniglos
From:
Michelle Roberge, Engineering Department
Division:
Engineering
Date:
March 4, 2015
Subiect:
Roslvn Farm
Fax 434-972-4126
I have reviewed the plan for the applications noted above and offer the following recommendations for the
applicant. The comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments may be added
or eliminated based on further review.
SP201500001 Special Use Permit
1) It appears the existing driveway surface is asphalt. The proposed travelways appear to be a different
surface material. Please clarify if you intend to use a different material.
2) The applicant is proposing more than 4 parking spaces. Per section 4.12.15(a), paved surfaces are
required. A waiver can be submitted to the County Engineer for an alternative road surface.
3) Where is the drain field proposed? Please show outside the stream buffer area.
4) There are perpendicular parking spaces along the travelway. 1 do not recommend this along the existing
drive with 6% grade. All parking should be 5% in all direction. Please note a VSMP application will be
required at the site plan phase. When sheet flow is not possible, it may be easier to treat runoff if
parking is clustered within a fat.
5) Clarify the travelways and surface material for the horse drawn carriage. There are travelways that
extend to TMP61-1 D. Is it intended for horses to use the adjacent property?
6) Please note all proposed travelway, including paths for horses, will be included in the limits of
disturbance. Erosion control and stormwater management should be addressed. This can be submitted
at the site plan phase.
7) It appears the rain harvesting system will not meet the quality requirement. Additional stormwater
management may be necessary on site. This can be verified at the site plan phase. Rainwater
harvesting must meet the following design criteria to apply as a valid BMP.
• Annual runoff reduction volume credit is only awarded for dedicated year-round
drawdownldemand for the water. Seasonal practices (such as irrigation) may be incorporated
into the site design, but the cistern design must be supplemented by a secondary runoff
reduction drawdown practice with an equal or greater drawdown rate during the non -seasonal
months in order to be credited with an annual runoff reduction volume credit (for stormwater
purposes).
Therefore, the basic cistern design configurations include the following:
■ 1. Year-round indoor use with seasonal indoor and/or outdoor uses;
■ 2. Year-round indoor use with seasonal indoor and/or outdoor uses that are supplemented with
a secondary runoff reduction drawdown practice; and
• 3. Seasonal indoor and/or outdoor uses that are supplemented with a secondary runoff
reduction drawdown practice.
Also, it is not clear what the daily water demand is for the barn. Applicant noted rain harvesting
system will be used for a maximum of 250 guests, drinking water for an unknown number of horses
and livestock, unknown irrigation size, etc. Please clarity.
The Virginia Cistern Design spreadsheet is primarily intended to provide guidance in sizing cisterns
for purposes of achieving a runoff reduction volume credit for storms less than or equal to a depth of
1-inch. This credit is then entered into the VRRM compliance spreadsheet for compliance with the
water quality requirements.
8) 1 recommend for the applicant to verify with the Health Dept that catered events above horse stables is
compliant with health codes.
9) There are critical slopes near the proposed main entrance. Please note a critical slopes waiver is
required. I recommend submitting the waiver at this time to verify that the main entrance is a suitable
location.
10) Please clarify the limits of the preservation area and cemetery. Also, provide more info on the
preservation area. Is this existing and platted? It is not clear if the proposed road and parking is within
the preservation area.
11) Please address noise impacts to adjacent properties. No assessments have been submitted.
Please contact Michelle Roberge in the Engineering Department at mroberge{cDalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832
ext. 3458 for further information.
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1801 Orange R ?Ad
CulAeoer Virginia 2-2701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
February 26, 2015
Mr. Scott Clark
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SP-2015-00001 Roslyn Farm
Dear Mr. Clark:
We have reviewed the Special Use Permit for Roslyn Farm, submitted by Sue Albrecht on
January 16, 2015 and offer the following comments:
l . Adequate sight distance should be demonstrated for the proposed entrances.
2. The proposed entrances should meet the commercial entrance standards, which can be
found in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual.
3. The proposed entrances will need to meet the corner clearance requirement, as defined in
the Access Management Regulations in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual.
4. We recommend removing the proposed entrance, located on Roslyn Heights Road, since
it will not meet the comer clearance requirements.
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 Enj�, neer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
2015 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Written Comments and Earliest Planning Commission Public Hearing*
Resubmittal
Dates
Comments to
applicant for
decision on whether
to proceed to Public
Hearing *
Request for PC
Public Hearing,
Legal Ad
Payment Due **
Planning Commission
Public Hearing
No sooner than*
COB Auditorium
Monday
Wednesday
Monday
Tuesday
Nov 03
Dec 03
Dec 22
Jan 13
Nov 17
Dec 17
Jan 05
Jan 27
Dec 01
Tue Dec 30
Jan 05
Jan 27
Dec15
Jan 14
Feb 02
Feb 24
Jan 05
Feb 04
Feb 09
Mar 03
Tue Jan 20
Feb 18
Feb 23
Mar 17
Feb 02
Mar 04
Mar 16
Apr 07
Tue Feb 17
Mar 18
Mat-30
Apr 21
Mar 02
Apr 01
Apr 13
May 05
Mar 16
Apr 15
A r 27
May 19
Apr 06
May 06
May 11
Jun 02
Apr 20
May 20
Ma 25
Jun 16
May 04
Jun 03
Jun 22
Jul 14
May 18
Jun 17
Jun 22
Jul 14
Jun 01
Jul 01
Jui 06
Jul 28
Jun 15
Jul 15
Jul 27
Au 18
Jul 06
Aug05
Aug 10
Sep 01
Jul 20
Aug19
Tue Sep 01
Sep 22
Aug 03
Sep 02
Sep 14
Oct 06
Aug 17
Sep 16
Sep 28
Oct 20
Tue Sep 01
Sep 30
Oct 19
Nov 10
Sep 14
Oct 14
Oct 26
Nov 17
Oct 05
Nov 04
Nov 16
Dec 08
Oct 19
Nov 18
Nov 23
Dec`15
Nov 02
Dec 02
Dec 21
Jan 12 2016
Nov 16
Dec 16
Dec 21
Jan 12 2016
❑ec 07
Jan 06
Jan 11 2016
Feb 02 2016
❑ec 21
Jan 20 2016
Feb 01 2016
Feb 23 2016
Jan 04 2016
Feb 03 2016
Feb 08 2016
Mar 01 2016
Bold italics = submittallmeeting day is different due to a holida y.
Dates with shaded background are not 2015.
2016 dates are tentative-
' The reviewing planner will contact applicant to discuss comments of reviewers and advise that changes that are needed are
Significant enough to warrant an additional submittal or advise that the the project is ready for a public hearing. If changes needed
are minor, the planner will advise that the project go to public hearing.
— The legal ad deadline is the last date at which an applicant can decide whether to resubmit or go to public hearing. If an
applicant decides to go to public hearing against the advice of the reviewing planner. a recommendation for denial will liXely
result. Generally, the applicant wrli will have only one opportunity to defer the PC public hearing for the project once it has been
advertised for public hearing. Additional deferrals will not be allowed except in extraordinary circumstances such as a major
change in the protect proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously been brought to the
applicant's attention.