The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutARB201700050 Correspondence 2017-05-15 r✓ r.r Margaret Maliszewski From: Patricia Saternye Sent: Monday, May 15, 2017 11:07 AM To: Margaret Maliszewski Subject: SDP2017-25 Field School Ph1. Initial./ FW: PreApp201700054 Field School fields Margaret, As discussed, the 3rd email down has the answers to the questions that were asked, or brought up, in the Pre-App meeting (PreApp201700054) for SDP2017-25 Field School Ph1. Initial. As also mentioned since they had a pre-app just one week before their submission they did not address some of the things specifically outlined in the answers to their questions. Because of the insufficient time between the Pre-App and the submittal Justin states in the email below "I think we will have to work out some of these details between the SRC meeting and ISP approval." Also, in discussions with other staff members, between the Pre-App and the submittal, there was some question about requesting they change the orientation of the buildings (#16 below), which you and I discussed as an EC review issue. Although the concept plan (sheet 4 of 5) on the SP graphics did not show buildings other sheets in that submission had the orientation as they are showing them now. So, I don't know how that plays into the EC review and asking for buildings aligned to the road, but I just wanted to point that out just in case it changes how you would word things. Thanks, Paty Saternye Senior Planner Community Development Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 ext.3250 psaternye@albemarle.org www.albemarle.org From: Patricia Saternye Sent: Monday, April 24, 2017 10:49 AM To:Justin Shimp, P.E. <justin@shimp-engineering.com> Cc: Kelly Strickland <Kelly@shimp-engineering.com>; Todd Barnett<toddhbarnett@gmail.com> Subject: RE: PreApp201700054 Field School fields I will forward the additional question/clarification on to zoning. The name was on the sign in sheet, but hard to read. In retrospect, I think it may have been the young man who was part of your party. 1 4141, Thanks for forwarding it to Mr. Barnett. Mr. Barnett although on the sign-in sh had not include his email address. Paty Saternye Senior Planner Community Development Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 ext.3250 psaternye@albemarle.org www.albemarle.org From:Justin Shimp, P.E. (mailto:iustin@shimp-engineering.com] Sent: Monday,April 24, 2017 10:37 AM To: Patricia Saternye<psaternye@albemarle.org> Cc: Kelly Strickland <Kelly@shimp-engineering.com>;Todd Barnett<toddhbarnett@gmail.com> Subject: Re: PreApp201700054 Field School fields Hi Paty, Thanks for sending this along, I think we will have to work out some of these details between the SRC meeting and ISP approval. A quick question though, looks to me like items 1 and 6 are contradictory. If the field is a primary use (aka the school) then how is its construction not commencement of the project? I don't think it really matters, but I did believe all along that the field was not an accessory use so it seems odd that its commencement wouldn't count as the start of the project. No rush on this issue,just an observation. I've CC'd Todd on this email, I'm not sure where the other email/name came from? Justin Shimp, P.E. 434-953-6116 On Apr 21, 2017, at 2:52 PM, Patricia Saternye <psaternye(ialbemarle.org> wrote: Mr.Jackson,Justin and Mr. Strickland, Here are follow up items to the preapp meeting we had on the field school fields(Preapp201700054) this last Monday. I apologize for the length of this email, but there were many topics discussed that needed follow up. 2 ' =*^ 1. The fields will beco ^"."' nedaspartoftheschom| andtheneforeas aprinmaryuse. Therefore, an initial site plan without the school buildings would be allowed, assuming it meets other items mentioned below and in the ordinances. 2. VSMP requires that an initial site plan be approved first(17-412(a)). Therefore,you can't just submit a mass grading plan. 3. It appears there is an issue with using a well for irrigation of the fields. However, more research is required to confirm this and ensure there are no special circumstances for irrigation that we have not yet found in the code. 4. Although more research would be necessary, one thing that came up in discussion is possibly using the existing pond for the irrigation. All the aspects of that would need to be looked into and we are not yet certain what type of review and requirements would be needed, but it is felt that the Health Department would likely need to be part of the review process. 5. The use of the port-a-potty appears that it may be a problem. The ordinance does not appear to have any provisions except for temporary usage. More research would be required on this and the Health Department would likely need to be part of the review if it would be allowed at all. O. The creation of the field, entrance, access ways and required landscaping would not be considered commencement of construction of the school (SP Condition#9). Therefore, something additional would need to be included in the site plan in order for building to the site plan to be considered commencement. As discussed at the preapp meeting a waterline or structure could meet that requirement. 7. Since the Port-a-Potty is an issue you may want to consider building a portion of the future building that would include the bathrooms and maybe the lockers. Then the rest of the building could be added at a future date with a different site plan. Since the bathrooms would necessitate the installation of a water line and a septic field then it would address SP Condition#9. 8. Creating a small bathroom building, as the first part of one of the future buildings, would also help with SP Condition #5 which states "No construction for use shall begin without written approval of the proposed septic facilities from the Virginia Department of Health." 9. Any building proposed would have to meet SP#1 and be in general accord. 10. Because the usage of the field could be more often than once a week there has been some internal discussion as to whether grass parking areas would be allowed/sufficient. This will be fully evaluated in the Site Plan review processes when full details have been provided. 11. U required landscaping and buffers will be required with the site plan. f for any reason a port-a-potty is allowed it must not be visible from the Entrance Corridor. . The proposed stormwater ponds need to appear as a natural landscape feature and not as taciUties. ou|dthetmpognsphygoinUuptothebasomfthefie|d bernodUledtmaUpvva |ayeroftreeoto Oengineered help block the view of the fields from the Entrance Corridor? Because of the elevation change from the Entrance Corridor(EC)to the field it is felt that any screening and landscaping along the EC may not sufficiently mitigate the view of the fields from the EC. 15. As mentioned at the meeting the timing of the turn lanes may be very important. This will be covered with the submission of the site plan. Cr.t. ltsnoted that the buildings are not ohoxvnoriented tovvardsthe Entrance Corridor. The 1 -^ oui|dingsshould the focus ofthe site, asviewed from the Entrance Corridor and not the fields. 17. For future reference: It was notice that the existing topography and critical slopes, as shown in the SP graphics, do not appear to match. This could be an issue if the disturbance varies from what was approved with the critical slopes waiver. Thanks, Paty Saternye Senior Planner 441111F 1411 Community Development Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 434-296-5832 ext.3250 psaternye@albemarle.org www.albemarle.org 4