Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600012 Review Comments 2016-12-22Short Review Comments Report for: SDP201600012 SubApplication Type: Nationwide Homes - Major Major Amendment Date Completed:04/04/2016 Reviewer:Ellie Ray CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:04/04/2016 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:02/29/2016 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated February 22, 2016. No comments or conditions. Division: Date Completed:03/16/2016 Reviewer:Max Greene CDD Engineering Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:VSMP plans will be required for final site plan approval. Due to proposed grading adjacent to property line with TMP 78-49B, a temporary grading easement or letter of intent from the adjacent property owner is strongly recommended. Division: Date Completed:03/11/2016 Reviewer:Joel DeNunzio VDOT Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:04/06/2016 Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:04/15/2016 Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:03/01/2016 Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911 Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:The applicant should contact this office with a list of three (3) road names for the entrance. The plans show two existing structures with a third structure to be built. This will create the need for a private road name for the site and all addresses will be provided off of the new private road name. Division: Date Completed:04/15/2016 Robbie Gilmer Page:1 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:February 08, 2017 Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Admin Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 2/22/16. 1. Please add a note "Knox Box required contact Albemarle County Fire Marshal office about location." Division: Date Completed:08/29/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:07/26/2016 Reviewer:Patricia Saternye CDD ARB Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:7/26/2016 - See ARB201600069 Nationwide Homes for ARB review comments, once they become available, for SDP201600012 Nationwide Homes - Major. Division: Date Completed:07/21/2016 Reviewer:Jay Schlothauer CDD Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:no obj Division: Date Completed:07/27/2016 Reviewer:Max Greene CDD Engineering Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:VSMP plans will need to be submitted and approved prior to final site plan approval. No VSMP plans have been submitted at this time. Division: Date Completed:07/15/2016 Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911 Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments:Approved. Division: Date Completed:07/25/2016 Reviewer:Justin Deel VDOT Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:07/25/2016 Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:07/23/2016 Reviewer:Robbie Gilmer Fire Rescue Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:Based on plans dated 6/30/16. No comments or objections. Division: Date Completed:09/23/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:Special Exception to approve the critical slope waiver is completed and being sent to the BOS to approve on consent agenda at their Oct 12th 2016 meeting. Division: Page:2 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:February 08, 2017 approve on consent agenda at their Oct 12th 2016 meeting. Date Completed:08/26/2016 Reviewer:Max Greene CDD Engineering Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:09/13/2016 Reviewer:Max Greene CDD Engineering Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:VSMP plans #WPO201600052 "2300 Hunters Way" will need to be approved prior to MAjor Amendment approval. Division: Date Completed:09/21/2016 Reviewer:Josh Kirtley Health Department Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:09/19/2016 Reviewer:Justin Deel VDOT Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:10/03/2016 Reviewer:Patricia Saternye CDD ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:09/30/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:09/06/2016 Reviewer:Andrew Slack CDD E911 Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments:Approved. Division: Date Completed:10/14/2016 Reviewer:Patricia Saternye CDD ARB Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:10/14/2016: See ARB201600069 documents for county-wide Certificate of Appropriateness letter. Division: Date Completed:10/12/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:10/14/2016 Reviewer:Patricia Saternye CDD ARB Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments:From: Patricia Saternye [mailto:psaternye@albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, October 14, 2016 11:59 AM To: mark@henningsenkestner.com Cc: chris@henningsenkestner.com; Christopher Perez Subject: RE: ARB201600069 Nationwide Homes (SDP201600012) Mark, I’ve attached the county-wide Certificate of Appropriateness letter for ARB2016-0069 Nationwide Homes (SDP201600012). Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Paty Saternye Senior Planner Division: Page:3 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:February 08, 2017 Subject: RE: ARB201600069 Nationwide Homes (SDP201600012) Mark, I’ve attached the county-wide Certificate of Appropriateness letter for ARB2016-0069 Nationwide Homes (SDP201600012). Please let me know if you have any questions. Thanks, Paty Saternye Senior Planner Date Completed:10/18/2016 Reviewer:Matthew Wentland CDD Engineering Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:10/31/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:11/08/2016 Reviewer:Adam Moore VDOT Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:12/22/2016 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Page:4 of 4 County of Albemarle Printed On:February 08, 2017 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 10-31-2016 Ellie Ray Shimp Engineering 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: SDP201600012 Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment Ms. Ray: Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 1. Revise the notes on sheet C-1, C-3, & C-4 to state: "The furthest building fYoin Hunters Way (address 2302) shall be i�acaiil. This building ii'ill be discom7ecled %rom ii,ell and septic prior to t o assure teat tue site is 111 corupliatice W'1U1 LIIe aDOve regUlreIIleIIt provlQe Q0CUIIleutdU011 tilat the rn nrincv 1 ",v- ­,lit fm-fli—t fi—ni unntorc W-,, (a 1 1rPcc ')!0')`l 11— 1 v 11 illy The revised note required above provides a shared understanding between the County and the applicant of what is expected prior to CO. Comment addressed 11isU, ussuic Luc ucuei ck JC/ vice uVLc uiiu ulcleiu1-AuAeu use iiute 011 JuccL �_i w IllilK 1 up Nvith rhe above discussion. Rev 2. Comment addrevved. 2. [18-4.2] Critical Slopes. The proposal disturbs areas containing critical slopes, which requires approval of a critical slopes waiver. The waiver request has been received and is being processed. Approval of the waiver by the Board of Supervisors is required prior to site plan approval. Rev 2. Critical slopes waiver is scheduled for the BOS Oct 12"` meeting on consent agenda with staff recommendation of approval. Pending the results of that meeting. If approved, please provide a note on the plans that documents the date of the Board approval of the critical slopes disturbance. Rev 3. Comment addressed. 3. [Comment] Virginia Department of Health (VDH) approval is required prior to site plan approval. The comment response letter states that VDH approval package was provided to staff; however, it was not in the resubmittal packet. Provide this documentation. Rev 2. Comment addressed. VDH has no objections and is ready to approve the plans. 4. [17-1000, 17-1003] Groundwater Assessment. Provide a Tier 3 groundwater assessment and associated fee. The administrator may require that a Tier 4 assessment be submitted instead of a Tier 3 assessment if the special areas of concern identified in subsection (A) have not been adequately addressed by the additional groundwater assessment data. Rev 2. Comment not addressed. Rev 3. Comment addressed. 5. [Chapter 17] Water Protection. A WPO application is required to be submitted and approved prior to site plan approval. Rev 2. The County received and has provided required changes to the applicant for WP02016-52. Max Green has accepted a position elsewhere and will be leaving the County, thus the plan will be reassigned to a new Engineer. If you have further questions about this please contact Frank Pohl. Rev 3. Comment still relavent. 6. [32.6.2(J&1)] ARB approval of the site plan is required. Rev 2. ARB review is pending and will be forwarded to you once recieved. Rev 3. Comment addressed. 7. [32.5.2(b)] Parking. Number the bays within the auto repair shop/newbuilding. Rev 2. Comment addressed. 8. [Comment] The clouding on sheet C2 for Existing Woods to be Removed conflicts with the clouding on sheet C4 for the trees being preserved along Hunters Way. Revise clouding on sheet C2 to clearly distirnguish between the two areas of trees (those being removed and those remaining). Rev 2. Comment addressed. 9. 132.6.20) & 32.7.9.4(b)] Provide a cutsheet for the type of tree protective fencing being used. Rev 2. Comment addressed. 10. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee (SRC) have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Attached I have provided comments from the various SRC reviewers. Rev 3. Pending VDOT review/approval. Will be forwarded once recieved. 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. Sincerely, A��— Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Planning Division SHIM PROJA CIVIL ECT ME NGINEERINGNAGEMENT LAND PLANNING ENGINEERINGe October 18, 2016 Christopher Perez Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Regarding: SDP 2016-00012— Nationwide Homes— Major Amendment Dear Chris, Thank you for your review of the major site plan amendment for Nationwide Homes. We have reviewed and revised the plan per the most recent comments dated September 30, 2016. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments. Planning: 1 , 2. The waiver was approved by the BOS on 10/12; a note has been added to the Cover Sheet under "Critical Slopes". 3. Com! e e A copy of the Tier 3 groundwater assessment is included in this resubmittal package. It was also forwarded by email on 10/18/16. A WPO application is under review (WPO201600052); the owner is working on the nutrient credit contract. "13:--The ARB Certificate of Appropriateness was issued 10/14/16. 7. Comment addressed. 8. Comment addressed. 9 Comment addressed 10. Comments from other SRC reviewers are addressed below. Engineering (Max Greene): '1. The owner is working on the nutrient credit contract; it will be submitted for review once completed (WPO201600052). erdt E911 (Andrew Slack): . 1. Comment addressed. ARE (Paty Saternye): 1. The Certificate of Appropriateness was issued 10/14/16. ,^-) VDOT (Justin Deel)i 1. Noted; the sight distance profiles have been updated to reflect a 30 MPH design speed. Ni- 2,(\) . This issue has been resolved via telephone call on 10/18/16. k h‘i'. 3. This issue has been resolved via telephone call on 10/18/16. 4. Acknowledged. If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at (434) 227-5140 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail. Best Regards, Ellie C. Ray, PLA Shimp Engineering, P.C. Attachments: 3 sets of the Major Site Plan Amendment COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 September 30, 2016 Ellie Ray Shimp Engineering 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: SDP201600012 Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment Ms. Ray: Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 2. [18-4.2] Critical Slopes. The proposal disturbs areas containing critical slopes, which requires approval of a critical slopes waiver. The waiver request has been received and is being processed. Approval of the waiver by the Board of Supervisors is required prior to site plan approval. Rev 2. Critical slopes waiver is scheduled for the BOS Oct 12"' meeting on consent agenda with staff recommendation of approval. Pending the results of that meeting. If approved, please provide a note on the plans that documents the date of the Board approval of the critical slopes disturbance. 3. 4. [17-1000, 17-10031 Groundwater Assessment. Provide a Tier 3 groundwater assessment and associated fee. The administrator may require that a Tier 4 assessment be submitted instead of a Tier 3 assessment if the special areas of concern identified in subsection (A) have not been adequately addressed by the additional groundwater assessment data. Rev 2. Comment not addressed. 5. [Chapter 171 Water Protection. A WPO application is required to be submitted and approved prior to site plan approval. Rev 2. The County received and has provided required changes to the applicant for WP02016-52. Max Green has accepted a position elsewhere and will be leaving the County, thus the plan will be reassigned to a new Engineer. If you have further questions about this please contact Frank Pohl. 6. [32.6.2(J&K)] ARB approval of the site plan is required. Rev 2. ARB review is pending and will be forwarded to you once recieved. 7. 0 10. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee (SRC) have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Attached I have provided comments from the various SRC reviewers. Rev 2. Comment still relavent. 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. Sincerely, Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Planning Division Christopher Perez From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH)<Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 3:08 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: SDP2016-12 Good afternoon, Chris. �! I have reviewed the site plan amendment and compared it to the VDH approval dated March 22, 2016. 1 do not note any potential issues with the sewage disposal system with the proposed amendment. If you have any questions, please let me know. Josh Josh Kirtley Environmental Health Technical Consultant Onsite Sewage and Water Programs Thomas Jefferson Health District Office (434) 972-6288 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@albemarle.org) Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:00 AM To: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) Subject: Heads up there is mail in your mailbox here at the County. Josh, Heads up, there is mail in your mailbox here at the County. Specifically a site plan that is dated 9-6-16 for your review. Christop4r 1'. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 Christopher Perez From: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) <Joshua.Kirtley@vdh.virginia.gov> Sent: Tuesday, September 20, 2016 3:08 PM To: Christopher Perez Subject: SDP2016-12 Good afternoon, Chris. I have reviewed the site plan amendment and compared it to the VDH approval dated March 22, 2016. 1 do not note any potential issues with the sewage disposal system with the proposed amendment. If you have any questions, please let me know. Josh Josh Kirtley Environmental Health Technical Consultant Onsite Sewage and Water Programs Thomas Jefferson Health District Office (434) 972-6288 From: Christopher Perez [mailto:cperez@albemarle.org] Sent: Thursday, September 15, 2016 9:00 AM To: Kirtley, Joshua (VDH) Subject: Heads up there is mail in your mailbox here at the County. Josh, Heads up, there is mail in your mailbox here at the County. Specifically a site plan that is dated 9-6-16 for your review. Christopher P. Perez I Senior Planner Department of Community Development ICounty of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road I Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper. Virginia 22701 September 19, 2016 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment SDP -2016-00012 Review #2 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, last revised 2 September 2016, and offers the following comments: 1. The intersection sight distances are too short; the required length for a 30 mph design speed is 335'. The sight Iine should be measure along the centerline of the roadway, which may be helpful in this case. The left sight line profile is less than 6 inches off the proposed grade; please note that as -built sight distance will be a condition of permit completion. 2. The existing entrance radius of 25 feet is inadequate. The minimum entrance radius for a commercial entrance without a separate truck access is 42 feet; it appears as though proposed entrance will be the only access for delivery vehicles. 3. The entrance width of 20 feet is inadequate. The minimum commercial entrance width on a local street is 24 feet. 4. Note that the Department is in the process of posting a 30 mph speed limit on Hunters Way. An entrance permit, based on a 30 mph design speed, cannot be issued until this process is complete. Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING September 19, 2416 Christopher Perez Page 2 A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper. Virginia 22701 September 19, 2016 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment SDP -2016-00012 Review #2 Dear Mr. Anderson: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, last revised 2 September 2016, and offers the following comments: I . The intersection sight distances are too short; the required length for a 30 mph design speed is 335'. The sight line should be measure along the centerline of the roadway, which may be helpful in this case. The left sight line profile is less than 6 inches off the proposed grade; please note that as -built sight distance will be a condition of permit completion. 2. The existing entrance radius of 25 feet is inadequate. The minimum entrance radius for a commercial entrance without a separate truck access is 42 feet; it appears as though proposed entrance will be the only access for delivery vehicles. 3. The entrance width of 20 feet is inadequate. The minimum commercial entrance width on a local street is 24 feet. 4. Note that the Department is in the process of posting a 30 mph speed limit on Hunters Way. An entrance permit, based on a 30 mph design speed, cannot be issued until this process is complete. Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING September 19, 2016 Christopher Perez Page 2 A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING PROJECT MANAGEMENT Noe ',ewe SHIMP `ti . CIVIL ENGINEERING �1,' LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING t \ September 2, 2016 Christopher Perez Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Regarding: SDP 2016-00012—Nationwide Homes— Major Amendment Dear Chris, Thank you for your review of the major site plan amendment for Nationwide Homes. We have reviewed and revised the plan per the most recent comments dated August 29, 2016. See below for detailed responses to each of your comments. Planning: 1. s previously discussed, there is no documentation of the locations of the existing connections to the septic system and well. The VDH permit (provided via email 8/30/16) shows the conceptual septic/drainfield layout and the location of the well, but no information about connection locations. The previous site plan also does not provide any information on septic or well connections. Each existing structure only has one connection to each system. All notes have been revised as requested. 0.) As previously discussed, the critical slopes shown on the site plan are now calculated from field run topography instead of using GIS data. This more accurate depiction of critical slopes shows that no slopes of 25% or greater exist in the area where the 12SF of disturbance was previously shown. The slopes were shown accurately on the critical slope waiver request; we understand that the waiver will o to the BOS on 10/12 (on the consent agenda) with a recommendation of approval. „ 3-. 1g-lie VDH approval package was provided via email dated 8/30/16. . The Tier 3 groundwater assessment is under way and will be provided once complete. A WPO application is under review (WPO201600052). cknowledged. ote has been provided on the auto repair shop indicating the number of bays proposed. Sheet C2 has been revised to more clearly show that not all trees are proposed to be removed. The portion of existing treeline that will remain is noted and the area to remain is reflected on the layout, grading and landscape sheets. ...9( A tree protection fencing detail is now shown on sheet C7. v1'0. Comments from other SRC reviewers are addressed below. Engineering (Max Greene): 1. VSMP plans were submitted 8/19/16 (WPO201600052). E911 (Andrew Slack): 1. A revised road name has been added to the plans; E911 has been notified about this change. ARB (Paty Saternye): 1. The applicant's architect is coordinating the ARB application and will address this comment. 2. The applicant's architect is coordinating the ARB application and will address this comment. 3. The items required by the Conservation Plan Checklist have been added to the plan. No existing landscape within 40' of building or grading activity is being used to satisfy landscaping requirements. 4. No existing landscape within 40'of building or grading activity is being used to satisfy EC requirements. 5. No existing landscape within 40' of building or grading activity is being used to satisfy landscaping requirements. The owner would like to preserve as many trees along Hunter's Way as possible; therefore, tree protection is shown in this area. 6. Tree protection fencing is shown on the landscape and grading sheets; erosion and sediment control sheets are not part of the Site Plan plan set but tree protection was also shown on that submittal. 7. The exact locations of private water and sewer lines are rarely documented; we researched both the previous VDH permit and the previous site plan and neither provided locations of these private utility connections. Site surveys don't cover private laterals. All utility and easement information is reflected on the plan set as provided from the surveyor. We contacted the surveyor to inquire specifically about the hydrant and overhead utility lines and were told all easement information they could find is shown on their survey. 8. No evidence of an overhead utility easement could be found, but the proposed large shade tree has been moved away from the utility line as space allowed. Proposed landscaping is not within any easements. 9. The calculations for EC versus non-EC street tree requirements have been separated. Previously, all street trees were proposed to be 3.5"caliper at 35' on center, but the plan has now been revised and the calculations separated accordingly. 10. New trees to meet the street tree requirement are now proposed along the entire length of Hunter's Way. The new trees will be planted amongst the existing trees being retained. 11. Existing trees are no longer being used to meet the street tree requirement; this note has been removed. 12. The trees in the parking islands have been moved. 13. A legend of existing landscaping has been provided as well as information regarding the size of the plants. The full species name cannot be provided as no information is available on exactly what species were installed; the previously approved site plan does not show these plants. Common names were provided by the surveyor as indicated in the legend. Guideline#36 appears to reference landscaping along the fronts of long buildings, while these buildings are both residential in style. All existing shrubs are at least 24" in height. 14. Existing plantings along the interior walkways have been identified as indicated above. These plantings will remain, but no preservation measures are indicated on the plan as they are all well behind the curb that serves as the limit of disturbance. 15. The landscape plan has been revised to provide a greater variety of plant species. No more than 25% of the shrubs and trees provided are of any one species. 16. The area for vehicles awaiting repair has been shown and screened. No other areas are proposed. 17. The applicant's architect is coordinating the ARB application and will address this comment. 18. The applicant's architect is coordinating the ARB application and will address this comment. A VDOT (Justin Deel): 1. This note has been removed; no realignment is proposed. 2. The entrance meets current access management regulations. The design vehicle is a car; the existing 25'entrance curb radii are not being modified. This information and sight distance profiles are provided on Sheets C3 and C8. 3. Sight distance information is provided on Sheet C8. 4. The resurfacing of pavement is now proposed to end outside of the right-of-way; this revision is reflected on the plans. 5. Design speed of Hunter's Way is 30 MPH; this information is provided on the plans. If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions please feel free to call me at (434) 227-5140 and we can discuss any questions that you may have in further detail. Best Regards, ell:Lit A-(4i Ellie C. Ray, PLA Shimp Engineering, P.C. Attachments: 5 sets of the Major Site Plan Amendment COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 August 29, 2016 Ellie Ray Shimp Engineering 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: SDP201600012 Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment Ms. Ray: Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: L 132.5.2(b) & 16-1001 Well and Septic. As you know more than two connections to the well and each of the septic systems require approval of a central water supply and/or central sewerage system. The applicant has indicated they do not wish to pursue central systems. Thus verification is required to assure compliance. On the plans depict and label the number of physical connections to the septic system and to the well, as multiple connections from a single building are each counted towards the maximum of two (2) before a central system is required to be authorized. For connections being removed, the site plan shall clearly depict and label that the connections being removed. Revise the notes on sheet C-1, C-3, & C-4 to state: "The furthest buildingfrom Hunters Way (address 2302) shall be vacant. This building will be disconnected.from well and septic prior to issuance of a CO for the Auto Repair Shop. " To assure that the site is in compliance with the above requirement provide documentation that the proposed "vacant building" furthest from Hunters Way (address 2302) has been successfully disconnected from both well and the septic prior to CO for the new Auto Repair Shop. Also, assure the water & sanitary service note and the proposed use note on sheet C 1 to match up with the above discussion. 2. [18-4.2] Critical Slopes. The proposal disturbs areas containing critical slopes, which requires approval of a critical slopes waiver. The waiver request has been received and is being processed. Approval of the waiver by the Board of Supervisors is required prior to site plan approval. Notably the critical slope waiver request only covers one of the two areas depicted on sheet C4 as disturbed critical slopes? The request does not cover the 12 SF being impacted by new parking and grading fronting Hunters Way. Please revise the critical slope waiver request to include the 12 SF of additional area of disturbance. 3. [Comment] Virginia Department of Health (VDH) approval is required prior to site plan approval. The comment response letter states that VDH approval package was provided to staff; however, it was not in the resubmittal packet. Provide this documentation. 4. [17-1000, 17-10031 Groundwater Assessment. Provide a Tier 3 groundwater assessment and associated fee. The administrator may require that a Tier 4 assessment be submitted instead of a Tier 3 assessment if the special areas of concern identified in subsection (A) have not been adequately addressed by the additional groundwater assessment data. 5. [Chapter 171 Water Protection. A WPO application is required to be submitted and approved prior to site plan approval. 6. [32.6.2(J&K)] ARB approval of the site plan is required. 7. [32.5.2(b)] Parking. Number the bays within the auto repair shop/newbuilding. 8. [Comment] The clouding on sheet C2 for Existing Woods to be Removed conflicts with the clouding on sheet C4 for the trees being preserved along Hunters Way. Revise clouding on sheet C2 to clearly distirnguish between the two areas of trees (those being removed and those remaining). 9. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4(b)] Provide a cutsheet for the type of tree protective fencing being used. 10. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee (SRC) have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Attached I have provided comments from the various SRC reviewers. 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. Sincerely, Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Planning Division County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum To: Christopher Perez, Current Development planning and zoning review From: Max Greene, Current Development engineering review Date: 26 August 2016 Subject: Nationwide Homes (SDP201600012) critical slope waiver request The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed. The engineering analysis of the request follows: Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: This is a slope created by the construction of Hunters Way, State Route 1146 off of State Route 250 West of Charlottesville, Virginia. Shown on Site Plan # SDP198600029. The proposed disturbance is for the reshaping of the slope to allow the construction of an Auto Repair Shop. Areas Acres Total site 1.46 acres approximately Critical slopes 0.3322.8% of site Critical slopes disturbed 0.08 124.1 % of critical slopes Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable alternative locations: This disturbance is not exempt. Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18-4.2: "movement of soil and rock" Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil. "excessive stormwater runoff' No additional Stormwater runoff in this area, as the slopes will be reshaped and the additional impervious are will be captured and treated per State DEQ requirements. "siltation" Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability. "loss of aesthetic resource" This area is visible from the roads and buildings in the development. The slopes were created with the roads and will be gently reshaped in a similar manner as with the road construction. "septic effluent" This commercial development is serviced by private sewer. Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns which prohibit the disturbance of the critical slopes as shown. file: CDDE1 csw MRG Nationwide Homes.doc COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 August 3, 2016 Mark Kestner Henningsen Kestner Architects, Inc. 1108 E. High Street Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: ARB -2016-69: Nationwide Homes - Building Dear Mr. Kestner, We have received the above -noted application for a county -wide Certificate of Appropriateness. The following revisions are requested to make the proposal consistent with the design criteria that apply to the County -wide Certificate. Note on the plan the specifications for the window glass. Windows should not be highly tinted or highly reflective. Visible Light Transmittance (VLT) should not drop below 40%, and Visible Light Reflectance (VLR) should not exceed 30%. Samples of tinted window glass should be submitted. REV 1: Comment not fully addressed. _Comment applies to all windows and doors with glass. Provide a note on the architectural application packet drawings with the specifications for the window glass and door glass VLT & VLR ratings. Ensure all glass meets the criteria specified above. Overhead door glass specifications are covered in comment #2 below. 2. Note on the plans the materials and colors for the overhead doors. If they contain glass they must meet the criteria mentioned above. REV 1: Comment not fully addressed. Specify in the note provided which glass surfaces the LLUMAR FROST film will be applied to. If they are only applied to the overhead doors specify that. Also, expand the note to specify the VLT and VLR values for the overhead doors. 3. Include in the site plan the items required by the Conservation Plan Checklist including the tree protection fencing, the limits of clearing and grading, and labels that specify which trees are to be preserved. REV 1: Comment addressed. items in the conservation plan checklist have been added to the site plan. 4. All existing trees and shrubs utilized to mect EC requirements must be preserved. REV 1: Comment addressed. It has been specified that no existing landscaping within 40' of building or grading activity are being used to satisfy EC requirements. 5. Trees to be preserved that are within 40 feet of a proposed building or grading activity, as well as any con struction activity such as equipment or material storage, must be protected with tree protection fencing. REV 1: Comment addressed. It has been specified that no existing landscaping within 40' of building or grading activity are being used to satisfy EC requirements. Page 1 of 3 6. Tree protection fencing should be shown on the landscaping, grading and erosion and sediment control sheets. REV 1: Comment addressed. Tree protection fencing has been shown on the landscape and grading sheets. 7. Show on the site plan the private water and sewer lines, the easement for the public waterline that leads to the fire hydrant along Route 250 and the easement for the overhead utility lines. REV 1: Comment addressed. All information available has been provided on site plan. 8. Once the above mentioned easements are shown on the site plan ensure that the proposed landscaping is not within any utility easements. Move the proposed large shade tree that is furthest southeast on Route 250 so that it is not within the overhead utility easement. REV 1: Comment addressed. Proposed landscaping has been moved to avoid known utility conflicts. 9. Separate the calculations for street trees into two different calculations. One calculation for the EC (Route 250) with a minimum of 3 1/2" caliper trees 35' on center and the other calculation for Hunters Way with a minimum of 2 1/2" caliper trees 40' on center. REV 1: Comment addressed. Calculations have been revised. 10. Include in the site plan street trees along Hunters Way that meet the street tree requirement for its whole length of street frontage. If existing trees along Hunter's Way are utilized for the street tree requirements then provide on the site plan the information required in 32.7.9.4.2(c) (Small groups of trees and individual trees). The location, size and species of any tree of 6" caliper or greater, or ornamental trees of any size, must be included in the site plan. REV 1: Comment addressed. Trees to meet the street tree requirement have been added. 11. The note specifying the replacement of existing trees, on sheet C5, does not specify which trees it is referring to. Landscaping along the two roads, around the parking lot, and in front of the buildings have different requirements for the distance between trees and placement. Modify the note so that it is clear which trees it is referring to. REV 1: Comment addressed. Note has been removed. Existing trees are not being utilized to meet street tree requirements. 12, Move the trees in the parking islands further northeast so that they do not conflict with the proposed parking lot light fixtures. REV 1: Comment addressed. Trees have been moved. 13. Since the existing shrubs and trees between the EC and the existing buildings are being utilized to meet the requirement for landscaping of buildings (#36) more information on the plants is required. Include in the site plan a legend that specifies what species the letters shown on the planting areas represent or label the plants and plant beds with full species names. REV 1: Comment addressed. Legend was provided on sheet C2. 14. Medium trees are required every 25' parallel to all interior pedestrian ways. Existing plantings along the walkways can be accepted to meet this requirement. In order to do so the existing plantings must be identified and preserved. REV 1: Comment addressed. Existing plantings along walkways have been sufficiently identified. 15. Utilize more than one species of evergreen shrub for screening of the dumpster, the parking lot and the site. A mix of shrub species blends more naturally into the EC. Also, no more than 25% of the shrubs or trees provided on tine site should be of any one species. REV 1: Comment addressed. Proposed landscaping has been updated to have a greater variety_. 16. If there will be a loading area, service areas, storage areas or above ground utilities show them in the site plan and screen them from the EC. REV 1: Comment addressed. HVAC units and area for vehicles awaiting repair are sufficiently screened. No other loading, storage, service areas or above ground utilities have been shown to exist on the site plan or architectural application packet drawings. Page 2 of 3 17. No mechanical equipment for the proposed building is shown in the site plan or architectural drawings. Show the mechanical equipment in the site plan and architectural drawings. Ensure that all mechanical equipment is screened from the EC. REV 1: Comment addressed. MVAC units have been shown on the architectural application packet drawings. Since they appear to be sufficiently screened by the proposed building adding them to the site plan will not be required for ARB review. 18. Add the standard mechanical note, shown on the site plan, to the architectural plans. The note states, "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.` REV 1: Comment addressed. The note specified has been added to the architectural application packet drawings. Within 15 days of the date of this letter, please send me a letter (by email is acceptable) indicating whether you will or will not proceed with these revisions. If you choose not to proceed with these revisions, staff will be unable to approve your application. If you choose to proceed with the revisions, please forward me one set of revised drawings together with a memo summarizing the revisions you've made. Your decision to make the revisions will suspend the 60 -day review period associated with your original submittal. However, I expect to complete the review of your revised proposal within 2 weeks of your re -submittal. If you have any questions about this action, please contact me as soon as possible. I look forward to receiving your revisions and completing this review with an approval letter. Sincerely, Paty Sat ye Senior Planner cc: ARB File Page 3 of 3 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 August 3, 2016 Mark Kestner Henningsen Kestner Architects, Inc. 1108 E. High Street Charlottesville VA 22902 RE: ARB -2016-69: Nationwide Homes - Building Dear Mr. Kestner, We have received the above -noted application for a county -wide Certificate of Appropriateness. The following revisions are requested to make the proposal consistent with the design criteria that apply to the County -wide Certificate. 1. Note on the plan the specifications for the window glass. Windows should not be highly tinted or highly reflective. Visible Light Transmittance (VLT) should not drop below 40%, and Visible Light Reflectance (VLR) should not exceed 30%. Samples of tinted window glass should be submitted. 2. Note on the plans the materials and colors for the overhead doors. If they contain glass they must meet the criteria mentioned above. 3. Include in the site plan the items required by the Conservation Plan Checklist including the tree protection fencing, the limits of clearing and grading, and labels that specify which trees are to be preserved. 4. All existing trees and shrubs utilized to meet EC requirements must be preserved. 5. Trees to be preserved that are within 40 feet of a proposed building or grading activity, as well as any construction activity such as equipment or material storage, must be protected with tree protection fencing. 6. Tree protection fencing should be shown on the landscaping, grading and erosion and sediment control sheets. 7. Show on the site plan the private water and sewer lines, the easement for the public waterline that leads to the fire hydrant along Route 250 and the easement for the overhead utility lines. 8. Once the above mentioned easements are shown on the site plan ensure that the proposed landscaping is not within any utility easements. Move the proposed large shade tree that is furthest southeast on Route 250 so that it is not within the overhead utility easement. 9. Separate the calculations for street trees into two different calculations. One calculation for the EC (Route 250) with a minimum of 3 1/2" caliper trees 35' on center and the other calculation for Hunters Way with a minimum of 2 1/2" caliper trees 40' on center. 10. Include in the site plan street trees along Hunters Way that meet the street tree requirement for its whole length of street frontage. If existing trees along Hunter's Way are utilized for the street tree requirements then provide on the site plan the information required in 32.7.9.4.2(c) (Small groups of trees and individual trees). The location, size and species of any tree of 6" caliper or greater, or ornamental trees of any size, must be included in the site plan. 11. The note specifying the replacement of existing trees, on sheet C5, does not specify which trees it is referring to. Landscaping along the two roads, around the parking lot, and in front of the buildings have different requirements for the distance between trees and placement. Modify the note so that it is clear which trees it is referring to. Page 1 of 2 12. Move the trees in the parking islands further northeast so that they do not conflict with the proposed parking lot light fixtures. 13. Since the existing shrubs and trees between the EC and the existing buildings are being utilized to meet the requirement for landscaping of buildings (#36) more information on the plants is required. Include in the site plan a legend that specifies what species the letters shown on the planting areas represent or label the plants and plant beds with full species names. 14. Medium trees are required every 25' parallel to all interior pedestrian ways. Existing plantings along the walkways can be accepted to meet this requirement. In order to do so the existing plantings must be identified and preserved. 15. Utilize more than one species of evergreen shrub for screening of the dumpster, the parking lot and the site. A mix of shrub species blends more naturally into the EC. Also, no more than 25% of the shrubs or trees provided on the site should be of any one species. 16. If there will be a loading area, service areas, storage areas or above ground utilities show them in the site plan and screen them from the EC. 17. No mechanical equipment for the proposed building is shown in the site plan or architectural drawings. Show the mechanical equipment in the site plan and architectural drawings. Ensure that all mechanical equipment is screened from the EC. 18. Add the standard mechanical note, shown on the site plan, to the architectural plans. The note states, "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." Within 15 days of the date of this letter, please send me a letter (by email is acceptable) indicating whether you will or will not proceed with these revisions. If you choose not to proceed with these revisions, staff will be unable to approve your application. If you choose to proceed with the revisions, please forward me one set of revised drawings together with a memo summarizing the revisions you've made. Your decision to make the revisions will suspend the 60 -day review period associated with your original submittal. However, I expect to complete the review of your revised proposal within 2 weeks of your re -submittal. If you have any questions about this action, please contact me as soon as possible. I look forward to receiving your revisions and completing this review with an approval letter. Sincf Pat Se is cc: ARB File Page 2 of 2 C-l'UMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper W gnta 22701 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner July 25, 2016 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment SDP -2016-00012 Review #2 Dear Mr. Perez: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, last revised 30 June 2016, and offers the following comments: I. There is a note on the Existing Conditions sheet stating that the existing entrance is to be re -aligned. It is unclear what this re -alignment will be. 2. Per previous comment, please verify that the entrance meets current Access Management Regulations (Appendix F); spacing, geometry for design vehicle, sight distance, etc. Please show dimensioned intersection sight distance lines and provide sight distance profiles. 3. It is unclear if adequate intersection sight distance is available due to vegetation overgrowth and/or grade. It appears that the entrance has not been maintained for some time. Note that an entrance permit requires that the entrance be maintained by the property owner. 4. Based on the plans it appears that the entire parking Iot, including entrance, will be resurfaced. Per previous comment, the entrance pavement should match the existing pavement of Route 1146. 5. Please include design speed of Hunters Way on plans. Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING July 25, 2016 Christopher Perez Page 2 A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Akg-a'j.' Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Christopher Perez From: Johnathan Newberry Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 9:54 AM To: Alex Morrison Cc: Christopher Perez Subject: FW: SDP201600012: Nationwide Homes - Major Site Plan Amendment Thanks, Alex. I'm copying Chris because he picked -up this one from Ellie. From: Alexander Morrison[mailto:amorrison@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Monday, July 25, 2016 9:52 AM To: Johnathan Newberry <jnewberry@albemarle.org> Subject: SDP201600012: Nationwide Homes - Major Site Plan Amendment JT, I have reviewed the resubmittal and hereby recommend approval of SDP201600012. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper Virginia 22701 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner July 25, 2016 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Christopher Perez Re: Nationwide Homes — Major Site Plan Amendment SDP -2016-00012 Review #2 Dear Mr. Perez: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, last revised 30 June 2016, and offers the following comments: I. There is a note on the Existing Conditions sheet stating that the existing entrance is to be re -aligned. It is unclear what this re -alignment will be. 2. Per previous comment, please verify that the entrance meets current Access Management Regulations (Appendix F); spacing, geometry for design vehicle, sight distance, etc. Please show dimensioned intersection sight distance lines and provide sight distance profiles. 3. It is unclear if adequate intersection sight distance is available due to vegetation overgrowth and/or grade. It appears that the entrance has not been maintained for some time. Note that an entrance permit requires that the entrance be maintained by the property owner. 4. Based on the plans it appears that the entire parking lot, including entrance, will be resurfaced. Per previous comment, the entrance pavement should match the existing pavement of Route 1146. 5. Please include design speed of Hunters Way on plans. Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further information is desired, please contact Justin Deel at 434-422-9894. VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING July 25, 2016 Christopher Perez Page 2 A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, OtL Q- tA�, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING Ellie Ray From: Robbie Gilmer Sent: Friday, April 15, 2016 2:13 PM To: Ellie Ray Subject: RE: February 22 2016 (SDP) SRC Memo.docx - Nationwide Homes SDP201600012 Ellie, Sorry for the delay on this review. I was looking at the wrong date before I left town. Here is my comments and they are also in CV. Based on plans dated 2/22/16. 1. Please add a note "Knox Box required contact Albemarle County Fire Marshal office about location." THANK YOU, ROBERT GILMER, CFEI CAPT/ASSIST FIRE MARSHAL ALBEMARLE COUNTY FIRE RESCUE 460 STAGECOACH ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA. 22902 OFFICE 434-296-5833 CELL 434-531-6606 From: Ellie Ray Sent: Thursday, April 7, 2016 11:08 AM To: Robbie Gilmer <rgilmer@albemarle.org> Subject: RE: February 22 2016 (SDP) SRC Memo.docx - Nationwide Homes SDP201600012 Robbie, Everyone else has provided their comments and the SRC meeting was today... please let me know when you have entered your review in CountyView, otherwise I won't know it's there. Thanks! E//ie Carter Ray, PLA, LEED GREEN ASSOCIATE Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432 From: Ellie Ray Sent: Friday, April 01, 2016 4:56 PM To: Robbie Gilmer <rgilmer@albemarle.org>; Margaret Maliszewski <MMal iszewski@albemarle.org>; Alex Morrison Ellie Ray From: Alex Morrison <amorrison@serviceauthority.org> Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 4:11 PM To: Ellie Ray Subject: SDP201600012: Nationwide Homes Major Site Plan Amendment Ellie, I have reviewed the above referenced project which is located outside of the ACSA's Jurisdictional Area. There is an existing fire hydrant assembly and 16" DIP water main across the frontage of the property (Route 250 frontage). The applicant shall correctly show the existing water main and fire hydrant service line on the plan. The water main shall be noted as an ACSA 16" DIP water main. Michael Vieira will be attending the SRC meeting because I will still be in OSHA traning. Thank you. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (0) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 �'jRGINZP 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 4, 2016 Justin Shimp, P.E. Shimp Engineering 201 E. Main Street, Suite M Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SDP201600012 Nationwide Homes — 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. [32.5.2(a)] Provide boundary dimensions for all boundary lines. 2. [32.5.2(a)] The required minimum setback for both buildings and parking is 10' and there is no maximum setback (the parcel is located on a principal arterial highway). Add this information to the Cover Sheet and show the setback line on the site plan sheet. 3. [32.5.2(a)] Provide the zoning district and present use of abutting parcels. 4. [32.5.2(b) & 5.1.31] Be aware of the requirements of 5.1.31 as they relate to the storage of materials and equipment, and where auto repair services may be performed. Additionally, no vehicle awaiting repair shall be located on any portion of the site so as to be visible from any public street or any residential property, and shall be limited to locations designated on the approved site plan; please designate these locations on the site plan. 5. [32.5.2(b) & 24.2.2.13] Provide water usage information to determine if a Special Use Permit is required. In HC, 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. 6. [32.5.2(b) & 16-100] Provide additional information on the existing/proposed water and septic systems, including how many establishments will be connected 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 of a central water supply and/or central sewerage system. A Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan review may also be required if central system(s) are necessary. 7. [32.5.2(b)] The square footage provided for the two existing structures is not consistent with previously approved site plans or real estate records. According to previous site plans, the total square footage is 4,480sf, while real estate records indicate a total of 4,304 sf. Provide an accurate accounting of all on-site square footage. 8. [32.5.2(b)] Calculate the required parking based on the accurate square footage requested in the comment above, and make sure adequate parking is provided. 9. [32.5.2(b)] Provide the number of stories/maximum height of the proposed building. 10. [32.5.2(d)] Clearly show and label all critical slopes on the site plan sheet. Change any reference to `managed steep slopes' to `critical slopes' as this parcel is located in the rural area. 11. [32.5.2(d) & 4.2] The plan indicates that the critical slopes being disturbed were created by the construction of Hunter's Way and that the disturbance is therefore exempt. This is not one of the possible exemptions (see 4.2.6). A portion of the disturbance may have been eligible for a waiver approved by the agent (see 4.2.5(b)) if all impacted slopes were created during the development of the property pursuant to a site plan approved by the county. However, administrative waivers are no longer permitted. SDP198600029 shows the creation of some critical slopes but not all that are present on site. Please submit a special exception application (and the associated fee) including information regarding which slopes were created by which previously approved plans (include application numbers) and all other information required by 4.2. The Special Exception must be approved by the Board of Supervisors. 12. [32.5.2(e)] Show all existing landscape on the existing conditions sheet; GIS shows some that isn't included in the plans. Make sure all landscaping to be removed is noted as such. 13. [32.5.2(j,k,I)] 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. 14. [32.5.2(j,k,I) & 16-100] Provide clarification on how many connections there are to the new proposed well; a central water supply may need to be approved by the Board of Supervisors. If the owner/developer wishes to keep the number of connections below that which will require approval of a central supply, the physical connection(s) must be removed and documentation must be provided to the County. Additionally, the Site Plan should clearly show that the connection is being removed and that the establishment previously served by this connection cannot be occupied. 15. [32.5.2(j,k,I) & 16-100] Provide clarification on how many connections there are to the private septic system; a central sewerage system may need to be approved by the Board of Supervisors. If the owner/developer wishes to keep the number of connections below that which will require approval of a central system, the physical connection(s) must be removed and documentation must be provided to the County. Additionally, the Site Plan should clearly show that the connection is being removed and that the establishment previously served by this connection cannot be occupied. 16. [32.5.2(1)] Show the distance to the centerline of the nearest existing street intersection from the proposed ingress and egress. 17. [32.5.2(n)] Sign locations are not approved with the Site Plan application; a sign permit application is required. 18. [32.5.2(n)] Show the proposed light fixture locations on the layout plan. Lighting locations should be consistent throughout the plan set. 19. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4] The plant symbols are missing in the landscape schedule; provide the symbols. 20. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.4(b)] Existing trees may be preserved in lieu of planting new plant materials in order to satisfy the landscaping and screening requirements of section 32.7.9 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. 21. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.5] It appears that a portion of the street tree requirement is proposed to be met through the preservation of existing trees; provide tree protection fencing where the proposed grading is close to existing trees and add a conservation plan checklist as indicated in the comment above. Additionally, the area preserved on the subject parcel is very narrow (about 10') which may result in the death of the existing trees; add a note stating that if the existing trees die that street trees will be provided 50' O.C., or increase the preserved strip to a minimum of 20' on the subject parcel. 22. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.5 & 5.1.31] Provide additional parking screening shrubs along the northern side of the entrance and at the western end of the parking lot to mitigate the visibility of the parking area from both adjacent streets. 23. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.7] Provide the proposed height of the dumpster enclosure. 24. [32.6.2(j) & 32.7.9.7 & 5.1.31] Once the location(s) for vehicles awaiting repair are designated, the shrubs used to screen these areas must be 18" in height when planted. 25. [32.6.2(k) & 4.17] The lighting plan submitted contains no information. The lighting plan must provide the following: • A photometric plan showing the locations of proposed fixtures with photometric values extending to the property lines to verify the spillover requirement is met (or show less than 0.5 fc before the property line). • A luminaire schedule listing the number of each fixture proposed, the manufacturer's catalog number, tilt, maintenance factor (LLF), and lumen level. • Manufacturer's cut -sheets indicating lumen level for each proposed fixture shall be included in the plan set; fixtures 3000 lumen or higher (using a maintenance factor of 1.0) must meet the County's definition of full cutoff. • The model numbers shown on the cut -sheets must match those listed in the luminaire schedule. • As noted above, the locations of proposed fixtures should be consistent on the layout and lighting plans. 26. [32.6.2(j & k)] ARB approval of the site plan is required. 27. [17-1000] 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. 28. [Comment] VDH approval is required. 29. [Comment] A WPO application is required to be submitted and approved prior to Site Plan approval. 30. [Comment] If any off-site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site Plan approval. 31. [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. 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. Sincerely, C', 2b Ellie Carter Ray, PLA Senior Planner Planning Division COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 MEMORANDUM TO: Ellie Ray FROM: Margaret Maliszewski RE: SDP -2016-12: Nationwide Homes Major Site Plan Amendment DATE: April 4, 2016 1. A Certificate of Appropriateness is required prior to final approval of this plan. 2. Submit an ARB application. In Part B, check the box under County -wide Certificate of Appropriateness for "Structures located behind another structure that front the EC..." Also submit the corresponding checklist and provide all of the information indicated on the checklist. The County -wide CofA is a staff level review; however, if unanticipated issues are uncovered during the review, staff may ask the ARB for input or for a formal review. 3. The Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines and the design criteria for this specific County -wide CofA apply to this proposal. 4. A site section or sections to clarify the visibility of the new building from the EC would be extremely useful for the EC review. 5. The following comments have been assembled based on a quick review of the site plan dated 2/19/16. A complete review according to the EC Guidelines will be provided when the ARB application is received. a. EC frontage tree spacing is 35' on center. Minimum planting size is 3%" caliper. Interspersed ornamentals are required. b. Trees on Hunter's Way are required at 40' on center. Minimum planting size is 2%" caliper. c. Perimeter parking lot trees are required at 40' on center. Minimum planting size is 2%2" caliper. d. The lighting plan includes no footcandle levels. Revise the lighting plan to show the intensity of the wall lights at ground level. Include a lighting schedule identifying all proposed fixture options. COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper. Virginia 22701 Charles A. Kilpatrick, P.E. Commissioner March 11, 2016 Ellie Ray County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: SDP -2016-00012 Nationwide Homes Major Site Plan Amendment Dear Ellie, We have reviewed the Nationwide Homes major site plan amendment, dated February 22, 2016, as submitted by Shimp Engineering, P.C., and we offer the following comments: 1. Trip generation for the site needs to be provided and adequacy of the Hunters Way (Route 1] 46) and Richmond Road (Route 250) intersection needs to be verified. 2. Based on the trip generation, the geometry of the proposed entrance on Hunters Way (Route 1146) will need to meet the design vehicle standards. "Entrance Design Details" can be found in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual. 3. A plan and profile should be provided to ensure there is adequate sight distance at the proposed entrance. 4. The proposed entrance pavement should match the existing pavement on Hunters Way (Route 1146). 5. A Land Use Permit will be required prior to the beginning of any work within the Route 1146, Hunters Way right-of-way. 6. Additional comments may be made with subsequent submittals. If you need additional information concerning this project, please feel free to contact me. Sicxceraly, oel D. DeNunzio, P.E. Resident Engineer VDOT - Charlottesville