Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201600058 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2017-04-10COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Date: November 21, 2016 UPDATED: December 1, 2016 (includes zoning comments) Rev. 1: April 10, 2017 Tim Miller Meridian Planning Group 440 Premium Circle Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: SDP 201600058 Daly's Rent All — Major Amendment Dear Sir: Fax (434) 972-4126 Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 1. E;i.'i.3 i j Fully screen the stacked vehicles waiting for repair from the public streets. One way to accomplish this may be to extend the screening fence further to the east and/or move the parking area for the vehicles waiting for repairs further to the west. Rev. : Comment addressed. 2. [4.12.15(i)] Relocate the handicapped parking spaces near to the existing building so they are closer to the main entrance of the building and so that the need to cross vehicular access aisles is eliminated. Move the handicapped spaces for the existing building to be in the parking bay closer to Greenbrier Drive. Rev. 1: Cornrnent addressed. 3. [32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(1) & 32.6.2(g)] It appears that there is an underground cable and a gas line in or near the property. A buried cable warning marker is in the eastern corner of the property and there is a gas line structure in the western corner of the property. Shown all existing utilities and easements that are within the property boundary. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. An existing gas pipeline structure exists either within, or just adjacent to, the property in the western corner of the parcel. If the structure, any associated gas lines, and/or any associated gas line easements are not within the property then confirm that fact. If any of these are within the property the show them on the site plan and provide the required information on the easement. 4. [32..5.2(a) 03; 32.6.2(c)(1)] It appears that the boundary dimensions are slightly different from the plat specified in the "Source of Boundary" (DB 705 PG 348) and the plat specified in the Schedule A description within the deed specified in the "Source of Title° (DB 4682 PG 153) which is DB 915 PG 662. Revise the bearings of the boundaries or clarify why the bearings shown are correct. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. Page 1 of 7 [32.5.2(a)] Revise the "Overlay Districts:" list to include Entrance Corridor. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. �- 6. [32.5.2(a)] Revise the "Parking Setback:" for adjacent to rural and residential districts to be 20' as specified in section 4.20(a). Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 7. [32.5.2(a)] Revise the setback information to include the side and rear minimum and maximum setback requirements. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. The side and rear setbacks still to not appear to be included in the building setback information on the cover sheet. Revise the building setback information to include minimum and maximum setbacks for the side and rear lot lines when abutting commercial or industrial districts. 8. [32.5.2(a)] Provide labels for the setback lines, specifying distances and maximum or minimum, on sheets C-100, C-101, C-203 & C-204. Rev. 1: Comment sufficleetly a_ddnjs ems. 9. [32.5.2(a)] It appears that the owners name listed for TMP 61 W-2-S-3 is incorrect. Either revise the adjoining property information to include the current owner of the property or provide documentation specifying the owner listed on the site plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 10. [32.5.2(b) & 32.6.2(i)] Revise the parking calculation for office uses to be based on the "net" office floor area. "Net" is deemed to be 80% of the gross floor area unless the applicant requests it be based on actual net floor area as shown on floor plans submitted. See section 4.12.6 for more details. UPDATE: In order to address the issue with the current use and the use that is planned for the existing building provide required parking calculations for both Retail & Office uses. Ensure that there is sufficient proposed parking to meet the requirements of the existing and the proposed uses. For the retail parking calculation, if the existing retail use has less than 80% of its floor area in "retail sales area", it might be beneficial to request the retail parking calculation be based on the actual floor plan. In order to do so a floor plan showing the actual "retail sales area", with dimensions, should be submitted with the resubmission of the site plan to support the areas used in the calculation. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 11. p32.5.2(b)i Current use of the existing building does not appear to be for office use. Please note that if current businesses are to remain the major site plan amendment should allow for that type of use. The medical equipment rental company has previously been calculated as a "retail use" not "office". UPDATE: In order to address the issue with the current use and the use that is planned for the existing building specify both Office & Retail use for the existing building. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. ALcl!�,,nnt has chosen to only address the current use within the existing building_ Please note that any changes of use in the future will require recalculation. See attached zoning comment. 12. [Cornn2ent: 4.12.6 & 5.1.31] The stacked parking spaces for vehicle waiting for repair should not be included in the "provided" number of parking spaces. In order for parking spaces to count toward the "required parking spaces" they must meet the minimum design requirements in 4.12.15 including access aisles. UPDATE: The stacked parking spaces for vehicle awaiting repair should not be included in the "provided" number of parking spaces. The required parking in 4.12.6 and the need for screened parking in 5.1.31(b) are two different code requirements and not associated with one another. All spaces counted toward the 4.12.6 requirement must meet the minimum standards for parking areas including drive aisles (4.12.15, 16 & 17). If the area where the 4.12.6 required spaces are located cannot be appropriately screened to meet the 5.1.31(b) requirements then it is allowable to have an additional area, as shown in your site plan, for storing of automobiles awaiting repair (5.1.31(b)) and it is acceptable for them to be as you have shown if they are fully screened from any public streets or residential area. There is no minimum number of spaces specified for the screened spaces required by 5.1.31(b). T herefore, it may not be necessary to have all 12 of the spaces you have shown in the first submission. The number of vehicles that will be expected to be waiting for repair is the number of spaces that will needed to be provided to meet the 5.1.31(b) requirement. The number of spaces provided for 5.1.31(b), and designated as such on the site plan, will be the maximum allowed for Page 2 of 7 vehicles awaiting repair once the site is constructed. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. The number of vehicles to be stored in the "screened vehicle sjoraRe area" are no loM, 'r_ncluded in rkip calculation as was specified. Enouqh area for approximately{ six vehicles has been provided within the "screened vehicle storage area". Keep in mind that al; vehicles that will be stored awaiting repair must be stored in the screened area. 13. [32.5.2(b)] Provide a note for the maximum amount of impervious cover on the site plan. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. A land use table has been added to the coversheet. However, "impervious" is not specifically listed. Please include that specifically either in the table or in a note below the table as "maximum impervious area". Also, the calculation should not have a total of 102%. Ensure that the areas total 100%. 14. [32.5.2(d)] Provide either in the legend or on sheet C-101 a note specifying the hatch type for the areas of critical slopes. Rev. I:Comment addressed. 15. [32.5.2(e) & 32.6.26)] Provide on the existing condition sheet the existing landscape features within the parcel. Also, show any existing landscape features that are to remain on the landscaping sheet and differentiate them from the proposed landscaping. Provide the information specified in 32.7.9.4(c). If existing trees are to be counted towards the landscaping calculations also include the information required in 32.7.9.4(b). Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following issues: • Because existing trees are to be utilized for the required landscaping calculations: o Provide a preservation Checklist, which must be filled out and signed before the site plan can be approved. o Provide a tree preservation detail. o Show the tree protection fencing on the existing conditions and demolition, gradinq and utility, and landscaping plan sheets. o Show the limits of clearing and grading on the existing conditions and demolition and grading and utility sheets. o The existing trees utilized to meet landscape requirements must be protected and preserved. • The existing tree by the door of the existing building does not appear to be the same type of tree as the others along the road. Correctly identify this tree and include the appropriate information in the landscape schedule and landscape calculations. 16. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Revise the locations of the storm drainage pipes and easements, or the location of the proposed building (and footing), so that they do not conflict with each other. The buildings and building footings must be outside of any existing or proposed easement. Rev. 1: Comment not fullv addressed. There is an existina portion of the stormwater pipe that is to remain that is labeled as "Existing 15" Sanitary". Revise this label to correctly represent the tvpe of pipe. Also. provide a label on sheet C-202 for the existina drainaae easement in the western corner of the property. 17, [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Provide the location for the proposed storm drainage system that does not conflict with the required landscaping (see the landscaping comments below). Consider locating the storm drain pipes behind the proposed building. UPDATE: Prcvide the location for the proposed storm drainage system that does not conflict with the required landscaping. Code 32.7.5.2(d) states, "Installation of utilities in or adjacent to the right-of- way shall not preclude the installation of street trees or required landscaping." .rev. •tComment addressed. - 18. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Revise the label for the New 20' Drainage Easement to include that the easement is "Public". Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Revise the label for the New 20' Draina a Easement on the north side of the parcel to include that the easement is "Public". Page 3 of 7 19. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Submit an easement and a deed of easement and plat for the relocated 20' Public Drainage Easement for review. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Submit an easement and a deed of easement and plat for the relocated 20' Public Drainage Easement for review. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. 20. [32.5.2(k) & 32.6.2(e)] Submit a deed of easement for the proposed Storm Water Management Basin SWM-1 and its outfall pipe. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. Rev. 1: Comment not addressed. Submit a deed of easement for the proposed Storm Water Management Basin SWM-1 and its outfall pipe. County Attorney's approval will be required prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. 21. [32.6.2(e)] Provide the profiles and a drainage summary table for the proposed storm sewer systems showing existing and proposed grades. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 22. [32.5.2(rr)] Provide labels specifying paved and gravel sections of the existing parking area on the existing conditions sheet C-101. Rev. 1: Cornrblent addressed. 23. [32.5.2(n)] Provide either a hatch or labels that clearly differentiate the existing and proposed sidewalks within the property. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 24. [32.5.2(n)] Dimension the dumpster pad(s). Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. There appears to be a problem with the doors and dimensions on the dumpster detail shown on sheet C-205. Revise the detail to fix these problems. 25. [32.5.2(n) & 32.6.2(k)] The plan specifies that there will be no outdoor lighting. If there are to be any light fixtures on the exterior of the proposed building, or the addition or modification of light fixtures on the existing building, those lights are considered outdoor lighting and information on those light fixtures must be provided and the light fixtures must meet code requirements. Provide the location and required information for any outdoor lighting. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Address the following issues: • The light fixtures are not shown in the same location on the Lighting Plan as they are on the other plan sheets. Ensure that all sheets show them in the same location. • There appears to bean "F-2" light fixture but not an "F-1 ". Update the lighting plan so that if there is only one "F" light fixture it is numbered "F-1 ". • Provide information on the size of the light pole and base of "F2-2" or relocate light fixture. On the Lighting Plan sheet fixture "F2-2" has been located in, or adjacent to, the 2' overhand area for vehicles in 16' deep parking spaces. The pole for the light fixture, and the base if not flush to the ground, can not be located within the 2' of parking overhand. • Confirm that the light fixtures will not be tilted. 26. [32.5.2(r), & 32.5.2(i) & 4,.12.16.C.6] Revise the Khan such that all 16' deep parking spaces allow for 2' of unobstructed overhang. The six parking spaces adjacent to the wood screening fence do not have 2' of unobstructed overhang. Expand those parking spaces to have a depth of 18' or adjust the location of the parking spaces or fence so that there is a 2' unobstructed overhang. Rev. 1: CorJ:ment addressed. 27. F32.5.20n) 32.6.2(1)1 Provide a backing area for the end of the parking access aisle for the parking bay closest to Greenbrier Drive and the existing building. Rev. 1 Comment addressed. 28. [32.5.2(n)] Provide the location of the handicapped parking signs in the plan and not just in the detail. Label the sign locations. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 29. ;532.5.2(n)] !devise the handicapped parking space detail and the plan to not show stop block 2' off of the curb. That standard is based on a parking space with a full 18' depth and not reduced 16' deep Page 4 of 7 spaces. With the reduction in depth the curb will already be in the location where the tire stops would have been in a normal depth parking space. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 30. [32.5.2(n)) Provide a handicapped ramp detail and specify the location for the handicapped ramps in the plan. Rev. is Comment addressed. 31. [32.5.2(n)] Provide a typical section for the parking lot and access aisle pavement. l'aey. 1: Comment addressed. 32. [32.5.21p) & 32.1.9.7] Provide information demonstrating how the dumpster, loading area and stacked parking area will be screened. Include in the site plan a detail for the new 6' wood screening fence. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 33. [32.7.9 & 32.6.20)] Revise the landscape plan to meet all requirements of section 32.7.9. Address the following comments: • Provide street trees along the entire length of the street frontage at 40' on center as specified in the Entrance Corridor Guidelines for interior streets. The 513' street frontage should be used to calculate the number of required street trees. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The requirement for 40' on center, in this case, is from the Entrance Corridor Guidelines. For the EC guideline it also specifies that the trees are to be large. Therefore, the medium trees that have been specified along the road (Sassafras albidum) does not meet the requirement. Revise the landscaping plan to provide large shade trees along the streets. • If the hatched area on sheet C-203 is meant to represent the required parking lot planting areas then either provide a label or legend specifying that. Provide plantings within the parking lot planting spaces as required in 32.7.9.6. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide additional landscaping in areas that are to meet the 5% requirement. There are two "Landscape areas" of significant size that show only one tree proposed. • Provide the required parking lot trees. Trees utilized to meet the parking lot tree requirement must be large or medium shade trees and be located adjacent to parking spaces. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. As specified in 32.7.9.6(a), areas of shrubs required by section 32.7.9.5(e) shall be counted toward the minimum area of parking area landscaping. Therefore, the area of landscaping that is for the parking space screening can not be used to meet the 5% area requirement in 32.7.9.6(a), Revise the landscaping plan so that the 5% landscaping area does not include landscaping required in either 32.7.9.5(d) or (e). • Ornamental trees do not meet the requirement, only 5 trees are currently shown adjacent to the parking areas and 7 trees are required if there are 63 parking spaces. Rev. 1: Comment Addressed_ • Provide additional shrubs to screen the parking spaces from the public street. The site plan does not show the parking spaces near the proposed building and stormwater pond as being screened from the public road. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Provide screening for the five parking spaces near the road and adiacent to the stormwater pond. The additions of screening shrubs in the planting bed adjacent to the side of the closest parking space would meet this screening requirement. • Provide screening for the stormwater detention pond (32.7.9.7). Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Screening fences are required to be 6' in height. Revise the site plan to provide a 6' screening fence for the stormwater pond. • Ensure that the landscaping shown in the plan matches that shown in the landscape schedule. There are more white oaks and Japanese hollies specified in the landscaping schedule then are shown in the plan. Update the calculations in the landscape schedule once the landscaping plan is revised. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. However, update the schedule and calculations in order to address the comments requested. • Provide a tree planting detail. Rev. 1: Comment addressed Page 5 of 7 [NEW COMMENTI Revise the landscaping plan to provide at least 2 1/2 inch caliper trees along the roads. Since this parcel is in the Entrance Corridor (EC) landscaping requirement must meet the EC minimums. [NEW COMMENTI Landscaping of parking areas within the Entrance Corridor requires lame trees that are 2 % inches in caliper at planting. Revise the landscaping plan to show 2'/2 inch caliper large shade trees for trees that are to meet the parking lot tree requirements. [NEW COMMENTI Revise the Landscape Schedule to correct the typographical error in plan name. "iles crenata" should be "ilex crenata". 34. [Comment] Revise the deed book and page information provided for the storm drainage easement in the western corner of the site. It appears that either the deed book or page number is incorrect. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 35. [Comment] If any off -site easements are required, they must be approved and recorded prior to Site Plan approval. Proposed grades are shown to the edge of the property and the new drainage pipe for off -site stormwater is located 3' off of the property line. The Albemarle County Design Standard Manual, on page 22 (8.c.) states when off -site easements are required. Rev. 1: Comment not yet fully addressed. It is recommended with the proposed grading extending to the property line and 1' high modified CG-2 being proposed within two feet of the property that off -site easement be acquired. 36. [Comment] The major site plan amendment will not be approved until the WPO plan is submitted and approved. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. The major site plan amendment will not be approved until the WPO plan is approved. 37. [Comment] Zoning is reviewing this submission. Their comments will be forwarded when they are available. UPDATE: Zoning's comments have been integrated into these planning comments with this update. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 38. [Comment] The major site plan amendment will not be approved until Engineering, Inspections, E911, VDH, ARB, ACSA, VDOT, Fire Rescue and Zoning grant their approval. See the attached comments for these reviewers. Any outstanding review comments will be forwarded to you when they have been received. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See the attached comments from the reviewers. 39. IIEYV C')M1AENT:4A2.13(a.)] UPDATE: Revise the layout so that the loading space is adjacent to the structure it serves. Loading spaces are required for office and retail. 7 hey are not required for automobile repair. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 40. [NEW COMMENT: 32.5.1(c), 32.5.2(1) & 32.6.2(g)] UPDATE: Show the sewer easement for the sewer line just north of the north property line. A portion of that easement is within the subject parcel. Ensure that any items not allowed within a utility easement are not within the easement's area. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Deedbook 425 page 143 appears to show a 10' wide easement centered on the existing sewer line, which is a smaller easement than usual. However, the sewer line seems to be less than 5' from the property line. If this is correct then the sewer line easement should be shown in the site plan because it would extend slightly into the property. Either show this easement or provide information on why it is not actually within the property. 41. JNEVY CO[ViMiiENT: 32.5.2(n), & 32.6.2(i) & 4.12.1G.C.6] UPDATE: In order to provide 2' of clear overhang for the 16' deep parking spaces a retaining wall to mitigate the grade change between the two parking bays is an option as long as all other ordinance requirements are met. Rev. Comment addressed. Page 6 of 7 42. [NEW COMMENT] UPDATE: Revise the labels for the parking spaces to specify the correct parking space size. On sheets C-001 and C-201 there are labels that specify 18' deep parking spaces. Rev. 1: Comment addressee;. 43. [NEVV COMK4ENT] UPDATE: It has been confirmed that the 2' overhang for the 16' deep parking spaces must meet the same parking setback requirements as the parking space. Rey. 1: Comment addressed. 44. [NEW COMMENT] Provide information on the height of the retaining wall on the edge of the stormwater pond. Also, provide permanent safety railing along the sides of the stormwater pond where the screening fence is not proposed. The combination of screening fence and safety railing should encircle the whole stormwater pond. 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 major site plan amendment 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. Sincerelv. Paty at Senio P Planning uivision 434-296-5832 ext.3250 psaternye(o)albemarle.org CC: Greenbrier East, LLC Page 7 of 7