HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201500008 Review Comments 2015-04-14 Mechum's Trestle
99 Bloomfield Road •Charlottesville, VA 22902
April 14,2015
Ms.Megan Yaniglos,APA
Principal Planner
Community Development Department
Planning Services
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road,North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4586
Subject: 1) Mechum's Trestle—Initial Site Plan Submission (SDP2014-052),dated 2.17.15
2) Mechum's Trestle—Request for Special Use Permit,dated 2.17.15
Reference: 1)COA LOD 2012-005,with Attachments A&B,dated 4.22.13
Dear Ms.Yaniglos;
We have received all comments generated in response to subject submissions,and offer the following
responses:
Engineering-Michelle Roberge:
Comment 1: In most cases,the surveyed flood plain limit line is determined in the office by scaling a line
on the survey that is estimated from the FEMA FIRM map.The FEMA FIRM maps are printed at a large
scale(1"=1000),so the line is truly approximate. We can increase accuracy by using FEMA GIS mapping,
and have made slight adjustments to the floodplain limits shown. The line shown on the plan is as exact
as it can be shown given the necessary scaling.
Comment#2: The WPO buffer limits were delineated and labeled on the plan sheets. Section 17-603A
allows for the pre-existing building to remain,and the repairs made to the building will not require any
land disturbance and therefore do not invoke the requirements of the WPO. Additionally,the parking
lot is nonconforming and to preserve that nonconforming status, no land disturbance is occurring in
relation to the parking lot. It is simply being maintained in its nonconforming state.
Comment#3: There is no proposed development or disturbance within the 50 foot stream buffer,as
delineated by Reference 1,and as depicted on the plans.
Comment#4: As delineated in Reference 1, parking lot as depicted is existing,non-conforming. It will
be repaired and maintained,as needed,but it is our understanding that we cannot make any changes to
the parking lot without jeopardizing its nonconforming status,nor are we required to make any such
changes to a nonconforming lot.
Comment#5: Delivery trucks and garbage trucks will not be scheduled to be on site during business
hours so they will have the entire parking area for circulation and loading.
Comment#7: As delineated in Reference 1, parking lot as depicted is existing,non-conforming. Its
usage will continue,unchanged,without disturbance or development. While mention has been made,
elsewhere in these comments,of using semi-permeable pavers as supplemental drainage to the flood
plain,this alteration would represent a significant disturbance to the parking lot, negating its non-
conformity. The existing'best management practice'of this site is widespread sheet flow from the
parking lot to the existing vegetated slope/stream buffer.
Comment#8: The employee parking space idea would be acceptable.However,as stated above,the
garbage truck will service the site during off hours,so no conflicts are anticipated.Grading the dumpster
pad away from the stream would not provide significant benefit,in our opinion.The existing'best
management practice'of the site is widespread sheet flow from the parking lot to the existing vegetated
slope/stream buffer,and it is our opinion that this should be maintained.
Comment#9: The parking lot is nonconforming and not subject to these requirements.
Notwithstanding the foregoing,loading spaces are required for retail and office but not restaurant. No
loading space proposed because loading will not occur during business hours.
Comment#10: As delineated in Reference 1,parking lot as depicted is existing, non-conforming. Its
usage will continue,unchanged,without disturbance or development. As an aside,curbing would
create drainage challenges along Route 240,alter the sheet flow to buffer mechanism already in place,
and would require construction/disturbance within the 100 foot stream buffer and floodplain.
Comment#11: The line in question is the existing asphalt pavement and existing gravel interface.
Comment#12: Grade irrelevant,as parking lot is existing,non-conforming.
Fire Rescue-Robbie Gilmer:
We cannot increase the 16'travel lane to 20'and we cannot increase the minimum radius in question to
25'. Emergency vehicles during business hours will be limited to the 24'drive aisle and will have to back
out. During off hours the parking lot is sufficient for circulation.As delineated in Reference 1, parking lot
as depicted is existing, non-conforming.
Planning Services—Megan Yaniglos:
Comment#4: The dumpster pad on the drawings is 10'x18',with 10'x10'allocated for the dumpster
space,and 8'for the apron.
Comment#5: We may revise the lighting element,and will state accordingly.
Comment#6-Dumpster pad is labeled as concrete.The sidewalk material is not labeled,and will be
addressed.
Comment#7-RWSA has responded to this issue separately,and there is no action required.
VDOT—Troy Austin:
Comment#5: The AM-E spacing exception was completed with the Initial Site Plan Submission. Per
request,this will be resubmitted on line.
RWSA—Victoria Fort:
Comment#4: Easements were obtained by the previous owner,and are still in effect. Proof of same
along the entire course of the force main are available upon request,and are memorialized in the
current deed.
Architectural Review Board—Margaret Maliszewski:
Recommendation to Revise Landscape Plan to show sufficient quantities of frontage,interior parking lot,
and perimeter parking lot trees:
Frontage: Five trees have been proposed,where guidelines call for 7;additional frontage trees cannot
be easily provided without encroachment on VDOT line of sight requirements,or jeopardizing the sole
well site on the property.
Interior Parking Lot: Parking lot is existing,non-conforming. Additional planting are constrained by
Fire/Safety requirements.
Perimeter: While existing large caliber trees will likely satisfy much of this requirement,additional
plantings will lily jeopardize the perimeter slope,and the health of new plantings and existing trees.
While stream bank mitigation has been proposed as a possibility,this activity is precluded by constraints
imposed by the parking lot's existing non-conformity.
Bill McKechnie
Mechum's Trestle, LLC
wmckechnie@comcast.net
434.906.5787
cc: Pete Caramanis, Esq.
Alan Franklin, PE
Eric Goetz,Architect
Short Review Comments Report for:
SDP201500008
SubApplication Type:
Mechum's Trestle - Initial
Initial Site Plan
Date Completed:04/02/2015
Reviewer:Megan Yaniglos CDD Planning
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/06/2015
Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:The ARB took the following action on April 6, 2015
CONSENT AGENDA
a. ARB-2015-24: Mechum’s Trestle Initial Plan - Initial Site Development Plan
(TM/Parcel 057000000031A0)
Proposal: To construct a 4,000 sf restaurant with associated site improvements and a request to
place required frontage landscaping in the right-of-way.
Location: 4294 Three Notch’d Road, at the northwest corner of the intersection of Routes 240 (Three
Notch’d Road), 250 (Ivy Road) and 680 (Browns Gap Turnpike)
Motion to Approve Consent Agenda:
Motion: Mr. Missel moved to approve the consent agenda and forward the recommendations outlined
in the staff report to the Agent for the Site Review Committee, as follows:
• Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4(2), (3) and (5):
1. In areas where wooded area to remain is used to meet perimeter parking lot tree requirements,
identify existing individual large shade trees on the plan by size and species to show that the
minimum requirement can be met.
2. Revise the landscape plan to show a sufficient quantity of trees – proposed and existing to remain
– distributed as necessary throughout the site, to meet frontage, interior parking lot and perimeter
parking lot quantity requirements.
3. Provide 2 additional large shade trees in close proximity to the Rt. 240 property line.
• Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None.
• Regarding recommended conditions of initial plan approval: A Certificate of Appropriateness is
required prior to final site plan approval.
1. Revise the demolition plan to coordinate with proposed construction and planting along Rt. 680.
Identify all trees to be removed.
2. Revise the plan to make all existing tree identifications legible.
3. Show tree protection fencing on the plans.
4. Revise the plan to show a treatment for the retaining wall that is coordinated with the proposed
building.
5. Add the standard plant health note to the plan: “All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be
allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and
trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant.”
6. Provide a complete plant schedule for review.
7. In areas where wooded area to remain is used to meet perimeter parking lot tree requirements,
identify existing individual large shade trees on the plan by size and species to show that the
minimum requirement can be met.
8. Revise the landscape plan to show a sufficient quantity of trees – proposed and existing to remain
– distributed as necessary throughout the site, to meet frontage, interior parking lot and perimeter
parking lot quantity requirements.
9. Add a medium tree, 2 ½” caliper at planting, in the vicinity of the north end of the sidewalk near the
dumpster.
10. Indicate the height of the electric line that runs along the Rt. 240 side of the property. For those
trees close to the line, choose a species whose mature height will not interfere with the electric line.
11. Provide 2 additional large shade trees in close proximity to the Rt. 240 property line.
12. Show all proposed site and building-mounted light fixtures on a lighting plan and provide all
related details for review.
13. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to both the architectural and site plans: “Visibility of
all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.”
14. Show the locations of proposed mechanical equipment – both ground- and building-mounted –
and show how visibility of the equipment will be eliminated. Note that the preference is to locate
equipment so that visibility is eliminated without the need to add screening. If/when screening is
needed, it should be fully coordinated with the architecture of the building.
15. Include a dumpster enclosure detail in the plan. Coordinate the material of the enclosure with the
material of the building.
16. Provide architectural designs for review.
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit:
1. Show adequate tree protection fencing on, and coordinated throughout, the grading, landscaping
and erosion and sediment control plans.
Mr. Lebo seconded the motion.
The motion carried by a vote of 4:0.
Division:
Page:1 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 31, 2017
7. In areas where wooded area to remain is used to meet perimeter parking lot tree requirements,
identify existing individual large shade trees on the plan by size and species to show that the
minimum requirement can be met.
8. Revise the landscape plan to show a sufficient quantity of trees – proposed and existing to remain
– distributed as necessary throughout the site, to meet frontage, interior parking lot and perimeter
parking lot quantity requirements.
9. Add a medium tree, 2 ½” caliper at planting, in the vicinity of the north end of the sidewalk near the
dumpster.
10. Indicate the height of the electric line that runs along the Rt. 240 side of the property. For those
trees close to the line, choose a species whose mature height will not interfere with the electric line.
11. Provide 2 additional large shade trees in close proximity to the Rt. 240 property line.
12. Show all proposed site and building-mounted light fixtures on a lighting plan and provide all
related details for review.
13. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to both the architectural and site plans: “Visibility of
all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.”
14. Show the locations of proposed mechanical equipment – both ground- and building-mounted –
and show how visibility of the equipment will be eliminated. Note that the preference is to locate
equipment so that visibility is eliminated without the need to add screening. If/when screening is
needed, it should be fully coordinated with the architecture of the building.
15. Include a dumpster enclosure detail in the plan. Coordinate the material of the enclosure with the
material of the building.
16. Provide architectural designs for review.
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit:
1. Show adequate tree protection fencing on, and coordinated throughout, the grading, landscaping
and erosion and sediment control plans.
Mr. Lebo seconded the motion.
The motion carried by a vote of 4:0.
Date Completed:03/03/2015
Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections
Review Status:No Objection
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated February 17, 2015.
No comments or conditions.
Division:
Date Completed:03/10/2015
Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Admin
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 2/17/15
1. The travel lane in the parking lot shall maintain 20 ft clear travel way with a minimum radius of 25
ft. The radius of concern is the 10 ft radii on the island located near the dumpster pad.
Division:
Date Completed:03/27/2015
Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:•ACSA Jurisdictional Area Designation: Limited Service for sanitary sewer through the use of a pump
station and associated force main to serve the existing use (restaurant plus associated apartment for
employee), existing structure (with the exception of façade treatment and those expansions which do
not require variances or modifications to the ordinance), and existing capacity (equivalent of 100 seat
restaurant generating no more than 5,000 gallons per day only).
•RWSA approval is required for the force main connection.
•The applicant shall show a private water meter on the waterline from the well on the site plan. Notes
shall be added that the final location shall be approved by the ACSA. The water meter, installed by
the applicant, shall be compatible with the ACSA’s meter reading equipment. For more information
the applicant should contact Kenny Barrow at 434-977-4511, ext. 151.
Division:
Page:2 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 31, 2017
the applicant should contact Kenny Barrow at 434-977-4511, ext. 151.
Date Completed:04/01/2015
Reviewer:Troy Austin VDOT
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:03/30/2015
Reviewer:Steve Watson Albemarle County Police Dept
Review Status:See Recommendations
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/07/2015
Reviewer:Michelle Roberge CDD Engineering
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:
Division:
Date Completed:04/09/2015
Reviewer:Victoria Fort RWSA
Review Status:Requested Changes
Reviews Comments:1. The proposed development is within the Beaver Creek Dam Inundation Zone for a 12-hour PMF
with a dam breach. The dam was recently upgraded to high-hazard based on an analysis of
inundation areas, and it was determined that the spillway will require upgrades to meet current DCR
Dam Safety Regulations.
2. The proposed development is downstream of the Lickinghole Creek Dam; however, a recent dam
breach analysis (currently under review by DCR) showed that a culvert under the CSX railroad
downstream of the dam (upstream of the proposed restaurant) limits the amount of flow that passes
downstream. Due to this constriction and the relatively small size of the impounded reservoir, a
breach of the dam would have a negligible impact on flooding during a 100-year storm and would not
flood any existing or proposed structures in the event of a sunny day breach.
3. The existing force main must be pressure tested and approved prior to the development going
online.
4. From available information, it is unclear whether the previous owner obtained an easement for the
4” force main when it was installed. The applicant should obtain easements as necessary to operate
and maintain the sewer force main.
Division:
Page:3 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:January 31, 2017
ACCREDITED LAW ENFORCEMENT AGENCY
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Initial Site Plan
Lead Reviewer: Megan Yaniglos
Item Number: SDP201500012
Project Name: Mechum's Trestle
Due Date: April 6th, 2015
POLICE DEPARTMENT
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * **
All Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) recommendations are considered to be advisory. The
recommendations are meant to be utilized as a design strategy to create a safer environment for future consumers and
staff at the restaurant.
Advisory Landscaping Recommendations
All shrubbery and ornamental grasses used in foundation planting areas should follow the CPTED two foot six foot rule.
Shrubs should be no taller than two feet in front of building windows. Tree crowns in common areas, near buildings,
and along pedestrian walkways should be pruned no less than six feet from ground level to maximize surveillance
opportunities. Shrubbery should always remain below the window line so natural surveillance is not hindered from the
building interior out onto property grounds.
All shrubs, grasses, and ornamental flowering trees should be planted no less than four to six feet from pedestrian
walkways to eliminate concealment and ambush opportunities.
All landscaping material planted along the 10' parking setback should follow the CPTED two foot six foot rule to
maintain maximum natural surveillance and eliminate concealment and ambush opportunities.
Advisory Lighting Recommendations
All lighting should be within the IESNA guidelines for minimum security lighting standards for parking lots.
It is advised that the entire parking lot, any rear service entrance, and the 10' parking setback be illuminated to a
minimum 3.0 fc horizontal on pavement and a minimum of .5 fc to .8 fc vertical 5' above ground.
All lighting on site should be at a 4:1 average to minimum ratio (background to face), and designed to limit light
trespass and glare.
All lighting on site should be sufficient to allow facial recognition at thirty feet. Security lighting should be no less than
.5 fc to .8 fc vertical 5' above ground. Thirty feet is the minimum for reaction time to determine if the person is friendly
or hostile.
It is advised that the lighting sources in the parking area be pedestrian scale to eliminate shadowing between vehicles
and potential light pollution in the rural area.
If lighting in the rural area is a concern, the security lighting could be set on timers or operated manually to come on at
dusk and turn off or dim after all customers and employees have left the site.
All Luminaire locations should take foliage placement and growth rate into account. Future tree crown growth should
not obscure proper security lighting on site.
Security lighting in the parking lot will alleviate the potential for premises liability lawsuits involving injuries from
unseen hazards or criminal activity.
Advisory Territorial Recommendations
All sidewalks and entranceways should be constructed with textured and colored concrete or pavers which demonstrates
territorial reinforcement and adds to the development of a celebrated entryway.
Property boundaries should be delineated by dwarf variety shrubbery to demonstrate territoriality and define transition
zones. The use of dwarf shrubbery will eliminate potential concealment and ambush opportunities along the boundaries
of the site.
MPO Steve Watson, ICPS, CPD
Albemarle County Police Department
Crime prevention Unit
Engineering Review Comments
Page 2 of 2
5) Please address the largest truck that will need to circulate the site. It appears even a garbage truck
will not safely circulate the site. Clarify. This will affect the parking layout.
6) The minimum centerline radius of 120' is required to maintain sight distance for parking on the
inside of curved travelway. See Albemarle County Design Standards Manual.
7) Per 4.12.15(b.), please address the drainage system for site. Also, what type of facility will be used
to satisfy the treatment criteria of a VSMP?
8) The dumpster pad area blocks a parking space. I recommend that space to be employee parking
only. Also, the note states the dumpster pad is on existing grade. Please grade away from the
stream for runoff to be treated.
9) Address 4.12.15(e.) Accessibility to loading spaces, loading docks and dumpsters. Where is the
loading space? The design standards can be found in 4.12.18. Also, a loading space is 12'x25'.
10) Address 4.12.15(g.) Curb and gutter in parking areas and along travelways.
"Curbs shall be established at the edges of parking areas or access aisles in the following
circumstances: (1) in all commercial or institutional developments requiring eight (8) or more
parking spaces; (2) in all multi - family dwelling and townhouse developments requiring eight (8) or
more parking spaces; (3) where necessary to control or direct stormwater runoff; (4) where a
sidewalk is located closer than four (4) feet from the edge of an access aisle; and (5) where
necessary to contain vehicular traffic to protect pedestrians and/or property. Gutters shall be
required where necessary to control or direct stormwater runoff. The county engineer may waive or
modify this requirement if deemed necessary to accommodate stormwater managementBMP
facility design or existing uses located in the Rural Areas (RA) zoning district."
11) What is the line through center of lot?
12) Sites with less than 6' of grade change should consider using smaller contour intervals.
Final Site Plan
1) Address Virginia Stormwater Management Plan (VSMP Plan).
Current Development Engineering is available from 2:30 -4:00 PM on Thursdays to discuss these review
comments. Please contact Michelle Roberge at 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3458 or email mrobergegalbemarle.org
to schedule an appointment.
r� Ot'AL
p�r
� IRGS?at�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Alan Franklin (alanfranklin @waterstreetstudio.net
From: Megan Yaniglos- Principal Planner
Division: Planning Services
Date: April 3, 2015
Subject: SDP - 2015 -008 Mechum's Trestle- Initial Site Plan
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Department Community
Development will recommend approve 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.) [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to the Albemarle
County Code.]
Requirements:
1. [32.5.2(a)] The special use permit will need to be approved prior to approval of the final
site plan. Any conditions imposed with the special use permit must be incorporated in
the site plan.
2. [32.5.2(a)] Variance 95 -05 was approved by the Board of Zoning Appeals that had a
condition that stated "Any additional square footage which would encroach the
required setback, or any chance which is determined to be substantial by the Zoning
Administrator, shall require amendment of this variance." Based on the variance report,
this is a setback reduction to seven feet from Rt 680 and nine feet from Rt. 240. It is
difficult to tell if this condition is being met. Show the distance from each of these rights
of way to the building to ensure the condition is being met.
3. [32.5.2(e)] The conservation checklist needs to be filled out, signed by the owner, and
added to the landscape sheet before final approval.
4. [32.5.2(n)] The dumpster pad does not meet the requirements. The concrete pad is
required to be eight (8) feet beyond the front of the dumpster.
5. [32.5.2(n)] State that no outdoor lighting will be proposed on the cover sheet.
6. [32.5.2(n)] Indicate the paving material for the sidewalk and dumpster pad.
7. [32.5.2(t)] Information has been sent to DCR and the dam owner for this development
since it is within the Dam Inundation Zone. Further information will be forthcoming.
Please contact Megan Yaniglos at the Department of Community Development 296-
5832 ext. 3004 for further information.
ref*
e 'gyp
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper >rrgmia 22701
Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E.
Commissioner
April 1, 2015
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: SDP- 2015 -00012 Mechum's Trestle Initial Site Plan
Dear Ms. Yaniglos:
We have reviewed the initial site plan for Mechum's Trestle dated 2/17/15 as submitted by
Waterstreet Studio and offer the following comments:
1. The guard rail shown at the new entrance should not extend radially along the entrance.
Instead, it should stop short of the entrance and a GR -9 end treatment provided.
2. A sight line easement needs to be provided at the southeast corner of the parcel to
maintain an unobstructed sight line.
3. Additional right -of -way should be provided at the intersection of Route 240 and Route
680 so that the radius of this intersection is contained within right -of -way.
4. I question the ability of the street trees along Route 680 to survive without damaging the
retaining wall as the trees mature. They are proposed to be planted close to the retaining
wall.
5. An AM -E spacing exception will be required for this proposed entrance. I will support
approval of this exception due to the frontage improvements proposed as part of this site
development.
If you need additional information concerning this project, please do not hesitate to contact me at
(434) 422 -9782.
Sincerely,
'- �41 ALL
1�
Troy Austin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Culpeper District
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
�pF A
vt�r�1Q
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: Mechum's Trestle
Plan preparer: Waterstreet Studio, LLC
Owner or rep.: Mechum's Trestle, LLC
Plan received date: 6 Mar 2015
Date of comments: 7 Mar 2015
Reviewer: Michelle Roberge
Engineering has completed the review of SDP201500008. The following comments should be
addressed with the initial site plan. These comments are detailed for an initial site plan since there
are design constraints on site. It will be better to address now than at the final site plan phase.
1) The 100 year flood plain limit is stated as approximate. It should not bean approximate line, but
rather what is shown on a FIRM. Please revise.
2) This parcel is classified within a protected water supply area. Section 17- 600(B) applies. The
WPO buffer is not delineated on the plan. Please address.
"Development within a water supply protection area or other rural land. If the development is
located within a water supply protection area or other rural land, stream buffers shall be retained if
present and established where they do not exist on any lands subject to this chapter containing
perennial or intermittent streams, contiguous nontidal wetlands, and flood plains. The stream
buffer shall extend to whichever of the following is wider: (i) one hundred (100) feet on each side
of any perennial or intermittent stream and contiguous nontidal wetlands, measured horizontally
from the edge of the contiguous nontidal wetlands, or the top of the stream bank if no wetlands
exist; or (ii) the limits of the flood plain. The stream buffer shall be no less than two hundred (200)
horizontal feet wide from the flood plain of any public water supply impoundment."
3) Please note that structures, improvements and activities may be authorized by the administrator
within the landward 50 horizontal feet. It appears there is disturbance beyond 50 feet. See Section
17- 604(A).
4) The site plan calls out a gravel or tar & chip parking lot. I do not recommend gravel as it will be
difficult to delineate the curviliniear parking and striping. I also do not recommend a tar & chip
parking lot. The EPA classifies coal tar pavements a carcinogen. Also, the parking lot is adjacent
to Lickinghole Creek and is within a water supply protection area. Please note per 4.12.15(a.), all
parking areas consisting of four (4) or more spaces shall be surfaced. The surface materials for
parking areas and access aisles shall be subject to approval by the county engineer, based upon the
intensity of usage and Virginia Department of Transportation pavement design guidelines and
specifications. The county engineer may approve the use of alternative surfaces deemed equivalent
in regard to strength, durability, sustainability and long term maintenance for the intensity of the
use.
Mechum's Trestle
99 Bloomfield Road • Charlottesville, VA 22902
February 16, 2015
Ms. Megan Yaniglos
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
SUBJECT: 1) Mechum's Trestle—Initial Site Plan Submission (SDP2014-052),dated 2.17.15
2) Mechum's Trestle-Request for Special Use Permit,dated 2.17.15
REFERENCE: 1) COA Response to Mechum's Trestle Pre-application Plan;dated 8.1.14
2) COA LOD 2012-005,with Attachments A&B,dated 4.22.13
Dear Ms.Yaniglos:
The purpose of this letter is to Introduce the combined submittal of SDP2014-52; Initial Site Plan, as well
as to make application for a Special Use Permit associated with same.
To review,this site plan is for the construction of a 4,000 square foot restaurant. While the property
has a long history as the location of multiple restaurants over the years, and while it's zoning
classification (C-1) supports this use by right, the site has been unoccupied for over 20 years due to
complications associated with restoration of an approved site plan. Despite diligent efforts by this
owner to pursue restoration of a restaurant use at the site,the property remains an underused and
unattractive asset on an entrance corridor to Albemarle County. It is our intent to transform this highly
visible piece of property into both an attractive landmark, consistent with the 'look and feel' of the
setting, as well as an additional, productive element of the commercial tax base.
Reference 1) provides the County's response to our Pre-Site Plan application. In responding to these
comments,we rely heavily upon Reference 2), COA Letter of Determination 2012-005, and Its findings.
Specifically, it states:
"In summary, the parking lot on subject property that is beyond the 50ft buffer from the Mechums
River is legally nonconforming to parking setbacks. It is an approved accessory use on the property
based on two different site plan approvals. It has continued in essentially the same use and a similar
structural condition. It has not discontinued for more than two years based on the diligent and good
faith efforts to obtain an occupant or use the site. As long as the nonconforming accessory parking
use is maintained, it may serve a future new primary use."
The accompanying site plan Includes the delineation of the 'red line' referred to In LOD—2012—005,
and is premised upon this determination. In light of this determination, we have enumerated our
responses to the items required/requested by the County under Reference 1):
Special Use Permits Required:
1. Water Usage exceeding 400 gallons per site acre per day: This SUP application Is submitted
simultaneously under a separate section.
2. Proposed grading activities In the floodway fringe: Per the attached plan, the entire parking
area is depicted inside the boundary determined by COA LOD 2012-005(Attachment 2), and Is
found to be legally nonconforming. This parking lot will continue to be maintained in
accordance with Its nonconforming status.
Special Exceptions Required:
1. The landscape buffer shown closest to Route 240 adjacent to the parking lot is required to be
located in the parking setback.This requirement will need to be modified to allow the landscape buffer
to be located in the right of way. Per the attached plan, the entire parking area is depicted inside the
boundary determined by COA LOD 2012-005(Attachment 2), and is found to be nonconforming.
2. Exception to allow development within the stream buffer.The program authority is only
authorized to allow development within the landward 50' of buffer in accordance with Water Protection
Ordinance section 17-604A.Section 17-408 allows a possible exception to this in the context of the
overall VSMP package. Per the attached plan, the entire parking area is depicted inside the boundary
determined by COA LOD 2012-005(Attachment 2), and is found to be nonconforming and Is being
maintained consistent with such nonconformity.
3. [4.2] Disturbance of critical slopes. No disturbances to critical slopes on site are
contemplated at this time
4. [4.12.15(g)] Modification to allow no curb or gutter within parking area. Per the attached
plan, the entire parking area is depicted inside the boundary determined by COA LOD 2012-005
(Attachment 2),and is found to be nonconforming. It will be maintained in accordance with said
nonconformity.
Virginia Department of Transportation:
1. VDOT-AME spacing exception for the entrance. Application for this exception has been made
with this submission.
Required changes:
We believe that each of the required changes noted have been addressed in the body of the Initial Site
Plan. We make the following comments relative to specific items as noted:
of ALkl‘
��dlllll,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126
April 22, 2013
Pete Caramanis
Royer, Caramanis & McDonough, PLC
200-C Garrett St.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Official Zoning Determination (LOD 2012-005) Mechums Trestle, LLC (Tax Map 57,
Parcel 31A)—Determination on "Nonconforming Parking Lot"
Dear Pete,
This is in response to your letter of determination request dated June 22nd. Your letter asked
for a finding in three areas: setbacks, nonconforming parking and requirement for site plan
approval. My letter dated July 10, 2012 is a final determination with regards to setbacks and the
requirement for site plan approval.
The determination about the "nonconforming parking lot"was made in the July 10th letter and
was later revoked with a September 10th letter. This is a determination under the Zoning
Ordinance and does not constitute a finding under the Water Protection Ordinance or other
regulations that I do not administer. The parking nonconformity addressed herein relates to the
parking setback and not to the design and construction standards for the parking lot.
Nonconforming Parking Lot
As stated in my joint 2005 determination letter with Jack Kelsey (and originally from the letter
dated May 11, 2004), "for the evaluation of parking setback nonconformity when parking is a
permitted use, a parking lot is most similar to a nonconforming accessory structure." The 2005
determination confirmed the presence of parking in this area prior to the 1997 approval of the
site plan (SDP 96-051 Café No Problem)which expired on October 8, 2002. The Mechums
River Farmers Market site plan (SDP 2001-054)was approved on October 4, 2001. The
Wayside Stand plan (SDP 200471)was approved by letter from Bill Fritz dated September 29,
2004 (attachment A).
The Wayside Stand use began and onsite accessory parking served the use. This plan has not
expired. This plan was approved with a condition which limited the location of parking to the
"red shaded area shown on the attached plan." The letter further states that the parking limit
was determined by Glenn Brooks based on a field visit to ascertain the extent of nonconforming
parking area. A more recent plan with the Mechums River and buffer is provided in attachment
B. The area in red(the line between the two other lines) corresponds with the 50 ft.
encroachment of the buffer and with the"red shaded area"from the Wayside Stand site plan.
There are approximately three or four parking spaces outside of the 50 ft encroachment and
closer to the river. These spaces are not found to be legally nonconforming because they were
Page 2
LOD 2012-005) Mechums Trestle, LLC--Nonconforming Parking Lot
April 22, 2013
not approved by the most recent approved and commenced site plan.
This nonconforming parking use has continued. As part of my travels between work and home,
I regularly observe parking (of both private and public vehicles) on this property. Vehicle
parking onsite is visible from both the google street view for this property and the 2007 aerial
photos maintained by the County Geographic Information System. While some minor
maintenance has been done, the parking area has been maintained in the then-structural
condition.
§6.3 G "Nonconforming Structures" states:
G. Discontinuance of use of nonconforming structure. Use of a nonconforming
structure shall be discontinued, and the structure shall thereafter comply with the
regulations set forth in this chapter applicable to the district in which the structure
is located, if the occupation or use is discontinued for more than two (2) years,
regardless of whether the prior occupancy or use of the structure was continuous
or seasonal. The two(2)-year period shall be tolled during any periods during
which the owner diligently and in good faith pursues obtaining an occupant or
use for the structure and during the period during which the owner diligently and
in good faith extends, enlarges, repairs, reconstructs or alters a structure as
authorized in this section 6.3.
As evidenced by the spreadsheet you have provided, the property owners have continued to
diligently and in good faith pursue obtaining an occupant or use for the structure. Marketing has
continued during the entire period from 2005 through today. At least five (5) separate actions
have been taken towards either agency approval or construction and design of a use on this
property. In addition, the owners have communicated with 13 different business prospects for
this site.
In summary, the parking area on the subject property that is beyond the 50ft buffer from the
Mechums River is legally nonconforming to parking setbacks. It is an approved accessory use
on the property based on two different site plan approvals. It has continued in essentially the
same use and a similar structural condition. It has not discontinued for more than two years
based on the diligent and good faith efforts to obtain an occupant or use the site. As long as the
nonconforming accessory parking use is maintained, it may serve a future new primary use.
If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty (30) days
of this notice, in accordance with Virginia Code§ 15.2-2311. If you do not file a timely appeal,
this determination shall be final and unappealable.
An appeal may be taken only by filing an appeal application with the Zoning Administrator and
the Board of Zoning Appeals, in accordance with § 34.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, along with a
fee of$240 plus the actual cost of advertising the appeal for public hearing.
Applications for Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's Determination are available at the
Department of Community Development located at 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia
22902 or online at www.albemarle.org/cdapps. This form applies to the appeal of a decision of
the zoning administrator or any other administrative officer pertaining to the Zoning Ordinance.
Page 3
LOD 2012-005) Mechums Trestle, LLC—Nonconforming Parking Lot
April 22, 2013
Regulations pertaining to the filing of an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals are located in
Chapter 18, Section 34.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. They may be reviewed online at
www.albemarle.ora/countvcodebza.
(Please note that our online documents are in Adobe Acrobat PDF format and must be viewed
with the Adobe Acrobat Reader or an equivalent. A link to download the free plug-in is available
at the bottom of www.albemarle.orq/cdapps.)
If you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
II
i
Sincerely,
Ondtc/L, /4,, ,
Amelia G. McCulley, A.I.C.P.
Zoning Adminstrator
Attachment A—Action Letter for SDP 2004-071 Mechum's Trestle Wayside Stand
.
3
Y x.
4.
L. F
3 *d =6
i .'S T t
/ l
4 a
)-.'..?`.4';..
.-144':.
SE
E y �re4
�� t R�%gS �-.I.,,,,,,,,,,,...
+C
....42;,..,,,,,,,,..„,
�' 'YA 'r� ''�9Y _.tY45 ^y'
co
rrw
c
U
N
N O N c
D =
E N I
= I c 1
U N o t)
cu D N N
� F0a
6. Existing and proposed improvements. No other lighting beyond that which Is
associated with the building Is contemplated.
8. The building footprint associated with this site plan Is smaller than that which has
been previously reviewed and approved,
11. The proposed well will not be located on its own lot,
We look forward to submitting the Final Site Plan on this project, and to working with the County to
improve and beautify this highly visible commercial property on this entrance corridor to Albemarle
County and the City of Charlottesville.
Si c= ely;
/
Wi lam McKechnie
Member
Mechurn's Trestle, LLC
Ntlow Nolo"
�
61,
•
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,Room 227
Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596
Phone(434)296-5832 Fax(434)972-4126
• September 29,2004
Mechum's Trestle LLC
99 Bloomfield Road
Charlottesville,VA 22903
RE:SDP 2004—71 Mechum's Trestle Wayside Stand. •
Dear Sirs:
I have reviewed the plan submitted for a wayside stand on property located at the intersection of Routes 250/240/680. The
plan indicates a small stand area near Route 240 and use of all the parking areas shown on the previously approved,but
now expired,Cafe No Problem site plan. I cannot approve the plan as submitted but can approve it with the following
condition.
•
1. Parking is permitted only in the red shaded area shown on the attached plan.
This site is largely included within the Stream Buffer required by the Water Protection Ordinance,17-317B. Generally no
activity is permitted within the stream buffer, However some impact on the stream buffer is permitted based on Section
Sec.17-321 which states in part:
Types of development which may be allowed in stream buffer by program authority.
Development in a stream buffer may be authorized by the program authority in the circumstances
described below,provided that a mitigation plan is submitted to,and approved,by the program authority
pursuant to section 17-322:
3,on a lot which:(a)is located within a water supply protection area;or(b)was of record
on or after the date of adoption of this chapter and is located within other rural land:within,the fifty(50)
horizontal feet of stream buffer that is the most landward,but only for stormwater conveyance channels or
other necessary infrastructure,and only if such development is determined by the program authority to be
necessary to allow a reasonable use of the lot.In all cases under this paragraph,the building site and the
sewage disposal system shall be located outside of the stream buffer;
5.on a lot on which the development in the stream buffer will consist of the construction
and maintenance of a driveway or roadway,and the program authority determines that the stream buffer
would prohibit reasonable access to a portion of the lot which is necessary for the owner to have a
reasonable use of the lot;
Glenn Brooks,who may act as the program authority,has field visited the site and determined the limits of the buffer and
it is this information that was used to determine where the parking may be approved. In making his determination staff
has used the location of trees on site which appear to be older than 6 years to determine the extent of any non-conforming
parking area for purposes of the Water Protection Ordinance, (The Water Protection Ordinance was adopted in August
1998).
New- u4katie
• , it
As provided for by the Water Protection Ordinance,you may appeal the decision regarding the limits of the buffer to the
County Engineer,Jack Kelsey and then to the Board of Supervisors.(Reference Section 17-311)
If you have any questions regarding this letter please feel free to contact me.
Sincere' ,
•
William D.Fritz,AICD
Chief of Current Development
_ . .,.........._
___. . . .. . . . ..„ ___ ..._ ........ - .—_
c 7".---- ., • 1 —
../146 -----
CY' ?
70 .. 1
e9
..,,,••/ F:-.4 •
.. c ..•••...-, , F 24 ‘
PoiirCe/ 314
.zi • l„,. ,
\
I<14 efi,v iii 4.s. I Y E
: 1...-c7IP 141 I
i Lit 1 c \
11 .0(..e. IvA/4.0 prob le 144 f v ow
to !':
i ti c's i1 i
-A •`". y:
. A.c 71:3,•
\, p.
flf...:; ••;A
r,r•
v r• • % % \ kit „...
"YY
T.'t itT% ! \ h,..•‘.‘ ' :.-- s.
1 1/A: .\ \ Pi'
' ., ...„,
V. 4,1... .(st %,'I. •
f
AV xi
IA • •...._.,x . •.>•
s, -1,..,
.. ..
• -5, .);$ 4, ; 71 .s.. J. . \, "....:_ ..•••.„. .•'...
Ts* .. , ', •
.R r-'
ieF
R 4
. It tl 11.. \ '1) Ki,f.1_._it /.. ' 4,,', `0,4.• • . %
1....r ‘..ki•,
,,
p I, ,..* r pi , ....., •N\ '.• ..,', .,N• 1., i
•
,.2,. ...g „• ••• .1....'1 •, 4'4", -..'" r
. ' N .'...• g
0, q -4 .
..
....
. x . ‘
a ft.
:: ,
, •...i . 4. ,..,
- i ,
y y ', ‘‘ "..- •,,,..„ .--,
'‘.
:• 'k 1 ulut
:-.
...
s‘. v''ithIlkik..14)'"\''...04....\''''t•\'‘.\\ • \‘`' ' \\ \'
...m
F A 4 it . . . ' •' .., %.••,•..‘•',:-.1-., I ' '. \-0\ \
i• 1„,,s ..0 S 7 g %. .
•
!i,'.* .*Atli:. .-"--/1,:1:11;: ;T.' ', • ' k
x , \
i "1 • gR !. 1.sk).AN Lit k4 ' l'',11'. . 6' ,., 1 • •
..f.-
‘..... ..- ,V2 1 •••I "..•031.* 1 iii- ,.. ',•36;i1111 :• a • 1 I
i -.1 '....- '' Ntliirek *" N.4... Itit.iir\r-,.',1 .• . 47: r 't
. '. t . 4
•
D !..•N L.,n Itik EmX1,iot .. 1 4;,t,.,, , : ,1
'I 4 Vim • i I/ ,' 1 ini 4i.., Iv 51\10,\I''t‘ ' 't r.3 r : li If
" Z. .....— .., F. !.•:'' ir.i. , s SRai ' ':''',,,zil sti'''Itli'll.v i i si is
"4 ''' '4-'--.-. , lilt '';: '.esli 711'5111111t . I ,, , ;:i
•;...;. " . ' ' -j 1 i 41
, r• I, r•
, tdi l'. ------------1' '-%' :$11.1- --•7..''..4 l''' lfti , 1g ';1,1:4111101/.i; ' 1 ii i
- Ni - alli.'•iii,i... i •%. 0 :
a)
. , „i ii• ,. ,. ,.. ,.. A
R A .,... z•es i, . -",,,,,,, ; , AV `10 1:111,1 ,11,1,1, ..„, i ,, :
1 «7>"- if, .t.; : ' F: .i:4" •••10 V,ii Ai, :.• lk )1'41r./M: 111,1111101;0:1/: ; I 1. I i i,
1 •,j 4 ....: .,.R r• .1: ,. , .,,i...•••••,,.•••••,,„,. .4144,.0.0, 1.4.',\:„ ....Lk I al,:.•,...., ,
‘44 .'" g..1. .9•••• fi
; 1
,.., / ..!g f-1 :1F9' Vie.% ,„,. *A. .,.4,„i•i•ifq1.1„:iiii., 1 ••,1,
,, ./ ,:ii .., ; • ,
t: ..• .°.i t•./. I'..1...l:I FTirz, il= i- 54 i.•,,, .;4 r,-1I 0 •,,/\ ...,if.
.,...\- ..z'.r4ikl,iitt\t?„,, ...6.,,:,•.,• .i,t-i...tg1;.„.,,.i,f•i,r;.,,A•ijr.,12„8, .• 1..1
/
• • ,..rg.., -....,.....
•:g- , •, ..0 '''
. I • ,,f., v., '.; k it ..31r, ,r,15.,.. , ,
,—..1 :..e.—: , :,. g : .. ..... ...,..,2,,T ,.,, .1.1., f'i A,I• IST4 ' ' / /
': ' ..• V 1 /1••,..
,•••::. t '' .. ...4.11iiii, 1 0 ,.• ' °4” r I . / / /
•
I • s.‘....,...::::• 1 ,f,.1/4 *•.',...:1‘„,_ . i . .N.,, g I , / /
<.• l•,,•e• ..-1.. Ai,ii,.,'''
d'• .1 "1;? ''' ' .''!*561';44.0>Nt&Vilt11,.{,i)!t'',..);:‘°,:11..;:ii.t•Pt.1-• : h V.3,
,
: 1 1
C
..,s\
\
4. 1 1
i i.i,•' I i i
-4-- - i . I •-14r fl•
•. •*9,•..I ' I / 1 r iie •
F '
r A ki
• 1• t• :
\ I
_. , , , ./..............: .., ,
.1
•••_.... e:- • 7/ ,' .,-- :-. !/ ').-.1-
..-- -- -.1 f
\ „al 1
_ -- , .... ,•-• .., .
-.......„-...-.7-- •,_,, -T.- , - ... . „,
.,
----. .. -.. ,....--- - -/ , .--- ---- .... / / --
.• ----.. ----v \ , .,-_-_--,-/—• ...c.
•—.. ---• .
• - 14‘ er, 1 T•Is A
4.s.1,-,•,'.
•
•
"I \ \, \i
5 \ (C'te N '1. • .el..$.>s,
1., • •
r.....1 74,--. ' • \
. -4.1•:•:. • ._ •c, •• v 14•0.
I ---.4
\ ••••'‘--- A.-
Meerwins . •,. ,. -..., .; '''1,1••••• .'••• ..
FII ver 1.t. ,1 \ tt.,... \ --....• •..•••,1•• '. •".„ 1 %
....,..,
\ . \ \ • ,-: ,
. . .
•r
\ \ t I
-.....____: __ '•\ \
't A
•
.. .'''':7.:-. •*7-..r.:-.77:-F--..7:-...7-17 :-.111:-_-......=:-...-1-z.-_-,...7-71:r_-:-_-_-.•.-7•-,::-.=----.7.-.....•717:--Fii=--77F!--.-..7-7:7.-7.7.F.:-. 7: -.7:7..77:.:i.E..:'I-- - -.--""777 77 7:
.,
SI TE RAtt
i T. to:1•i: BOON BUST-S, GALE C ASSOC,. 114C
41r{[k )1.. IA,NAP$1 I... i'
• ' , SIC nIC 740 f%I S. 01( MO 1 , r. /, 0
. ..:,,..1 ,' 4.* :. i ::: !,
: . . '
C I 1,41..117.., %...1.1AL ..ttl.,I..4.0
CAFE NO PROBLEM ' :. i 1 '"-
i T I " ' • -• • :.....,r•1::..J.,: ,i:41.1. "to.,
I . 4M...A.t<Cu. •10a1.1. I • I ! '.
, . ..•
• ' ""." r
•
,e,"'
N,,,...„„
aP€° ANN _AL *HAk,c�E MUig141 HAS• . ( w
all 3
midi
PANEL .
70 '; '
= 51003CO235D
e 42005
`°J -LUCK[
F
i
/
/
k
x
PANEL ' `
�r
11 3CO245D > �.
AREA{i��d AZARE ) mat '
ell)IN
#,
t.
,r tee+.:• -
d
� w