HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800018 Review Comments Initial Site Plan 2018-05-08COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
May 8, 2018
Mr. Scott Collins — Collins Engineering
200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-293-3719 / scott e collins-en ing eering com
Mr. Alan Taylor — Riverbend Development
435 2nd Street SE, Suite 400, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-245-4970 / alan@riverbenddev.com
RE: Site Review Committee (SRC) Comment Letter for SDP-2018-00018
(Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments — Initial Site Plan)
Dear Mr. Collins and Mr. Taylor:
The Planner for the Planning Division of the Albemarle County Community Development Department (CDD) and
other members of the Site Review Committee (SRC) have reviewed the development proposal referenced above.
Initial review comments from the following SRC members are attached:
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) — (attached)
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) — (attached)
Albemarle County Building Inspections — (attached)
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue — PENDING
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) — (attached)
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) — (attached)
Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference to Chapter 18 of the Albemarle County Code (Zoning
Ordinance / Z.O.), unless otherwise specified. (The following comments are those that have been identified at this
time; additional comments may be added or eliminated based on further review.)
The Planner will either approve with conditions or deny the Initial Site Plan within 15 days of the SRC meeting.
Please contact me at your convenience if you have questions or require additional information or assistance.
Sincerely,
Tim Pad no, AICP
Senior Planner / Lpadalino e,albemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088
Page 1 of 5
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) — Tim Padalino, tadalino a,albemarle.org — Requested Changes:
1. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(a)]: Please revise title from "Preliminary Site Plan" to "Initial Site Plan."
2. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 25A.6, 21.4, and 4.20]: Maximum front setbacks are thirty (30) feet from the right-
of-way or the exterior edge of the sidewalk if the sidewalk is outside of the right-of-way. The proposed site
layout shows two primary structures near Peter Jefferson Parkway, neither of which meet this maximum front
setback requirement.
Specifically, Building # 1 appears to be sited between 34' and 63' feet from the exterior edge of sidewalk; and
Building #2 is sited 35' from the right-of-way. On any parcel with multiple main buildings, at least one main
building shall meet the maximum setback per Z.O.4.20(a)-1.
This maximum 30-foot front setback requirement may only be increased by special exception to accommodate
low impact design, unique parking or circulation plans, or a unique target market design, and only upon request
from and authorization by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Z.O.4.20(a)-2 and Z.O. 33.9 and Z.O. 8.2(b).
3. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 25A.6, 21.4, and 4.201: Maximum building heights are proposed at sixty (60) feet.
This overall height is permissible; however, the proposed structures must comply with the stepback
requirements. The minimum stepback requirements for any story that begins above forty (40) feet in height or
for each story above the third story, whichever is less, in height shall be as provided in section 4.20
This minimum 15-foot stepback requirement may only be reduced by special exception, upon request from and
authorization by the Board of Supervisors pursuant to Z.O. 4.20(a)-4 and Z.O. 33.9 and Z.O. 8.2(b).
4. [Z.O. Section 32.7.2.31: A sidewalk must be provided, to be generally located along Peter Jefferson Parkway
between the (proposed) northwest entrance and the northwestern property boundary, to establish a safe and
convenient pedestrian connection to adjoining properties and adjacent employment centers. This connection
must be designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards
Manual, provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the
standards of VDOT.
5. [Z.O. Section 32.7.2.31: A safe, convenient, direct pedestrian connection must be provided across Peter
Jefferson Parkway between the subject property and the Martha Jefferson Hospital property. This connection
must be designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards
Manual, provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the
standards of VDOT.
The reasons for this requirement are to proactively address the likelihood of frequent unprotected, unsafe
pedestrian crossings of Peter Jefferson Parkway; and to facilitate safe, convenient pedestrian mobility between
places of residence and a major place of employment.
The specific rationale for this requirement is that it can be reasonably anticipated that a relatively large number
of pedestrian trips will occur on a daily basis between the two hundred fifty (250) dwelling units and Martha
Jefferson Hospital. Even factoring in the provision of a new sidewalk along Peter Jefferson Parkway (as
required pursuant to Zoning Ordinance §32.7.2.3, and as described above in comment 4), residents of the
proposed apartment complex who want to walk from the apartments to the hospital would have to make the
choice to walk approximately 3,000 linear feet on sidewalks, crosswalks, and walking paths in order to safely
access the hospital — and would have to choose not to exit the development, cross Peter Jefferson Parkway
(without any safe pedestrian infrastructure), and access the hospital via a much more direct route approximately
550 linear feet in length. A diagrammatic exhibit has been prepared and provided with this SRC review
comment letter packet for reference.
6. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 25A.51: Provide safe and convenient on -site pedestrian connections between
apartment buildings, and also between the clubhouse and apartment buildings. These connections must be
designed and constructed to the standards established in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual,
provided that all ramps for persons with mobility impairments shall be designed and constructed to the
standards of VDOT. Specifically, such connections are required as follows:
Page 2 of 5
a) Between the Clubhouse and Building # 1
b) Between the Clubhouse and Building #2
c) Between Building #2 and Building #3
d) Between Building #4 and Building #2 or Building #3
e) Between Clubhouse / Pool area and Building #5
f) Between the two lower parking areas (east of Building #6) and Building #6
7. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 4.12.61: The proposed development appears to contain less than the required
minimum number of parking spaces. A minimum of 425 spaces are required, but it appears that only 421 spaces
are shown on the Initial Site Plan. Please revise to ensure the number of provided parking spaces meets or
exceeds the minimum number of required parking spaces.
8. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 32.5.2(n), 32.7.2.3, and 4.12.41: The proposed development appears to contain a total
of nine (9) parking spaces that satisfy minimum ADA requirements. The "Parking Provided" note in the
General Notes on Sheet 1 (or any other written schedule) does not demonstrate if this total amount is sufficient,
or if any of these spaces are van -accessible. Please demonstrate that the parking areas cumulatively meet or
exceed all applicable minimum requirements as specified by County Code, USBC, and ADA.
[Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 4.12.161: A number of parking spaces in the parking lot "cul de sac" immediately
south of the southern end of proposed Building #3 appear to contain spaces which do not meet the minimum
design requirements and improvements for parking spaces within parking areas. Specifically, nine (9) of the
parking spaces shown in a curvilinear arrangement do not appear to meet the minimum design requirements
specified in Z.O. 4.12.16(c)-4, as they do not meet the minimum width of nine (9) feet as measured at the
narrowest point along the length of the space. Additionally, please demonstrate that proposed parking spaces in
the "corners" of this parking lot "cul de sac" meet all applicable design requirements, and are configured in
such a way that they can be used safely at the same time.
10. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(d) and 30.7.51: The Grading & Drainage Plan on Sheet 6 shows several unlabeled
retaining walls on a portion of the site within an area of Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District zoning.
Please label or otherwise identify the height of all retaining walls in this area. [Note: retaining walls are not
permitted to exceed six (6) feet in height within any Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District, and are subject
to additional Design Standards specified in Z.O. 30.7.5.]
11. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(d) and 30.7.51: The Grading & Drainage Plan on Sheet 6 shows an unlabeled retaining
wall on a portion of the adjoining property within an area of Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District zoning.
Please demonstrate permission from the adjoining property owner for this proposed use and improvements; or,
alternately, please submit for review, approval, and recordation a boundary line adjustment plat (as may be
applicable).
Additionally, please label or otherwise identify the height of all retaining walls. [Note: retaining walls are not
permitted to exceed six (6) feet in height within any Steep Slopes (Managed) Overlay District, and are subject
to additional Design Standards specified in Z.O. 30.7.5.]
12. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(b)]: The "Critical Slopes" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 states that "No impacts
are proposed to the existing preserved slopes." However, Sheets 6 and 7 show the proposed "Primitive Trail"
being sited within portions of the existing Preserved Steep Slopes. This is permissible pursuant to Z.O.
30.7.4(b)-1(d); however, please revise the "Critical Slopes" note on Sheet 1 to clarify the proposed trail's
location within existing preserved slopes.
13. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Show the proposed location(s) of outdoor trash containers. The "Trash Receptacles"
note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 references the proposed provision of a dumpster and trash compacter;
please also provide additional waste and recycling containers in the developed recreation areas and within other
areas of the proposed development, and show these on the final site plan.
14. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Show the proposed location(s) of outdoor lighting. Staff acknowledge that the
Page 3 of 5
"Lighting" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 indicates that this information will be provided with the final
site plan.
15. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Please add graphic depictions and/or notes to Sheets 3, 4, and 5 that clearly identify
the location and size (in square feet) of each proposed recreation amenity (the proposed clubhouse, the pool, the
tot lot, and the passive recreation courtyard).
16. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(n)]: Please revise the "Recreation" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 to identify the
size (in square feet) of each proposed recreation amenity (the proposed clubhouse, the pool, the tot lot, and the
passive recreation courtyard). In doing so, please also clarify if the proposed "trails/walking paths through the
open space areas" is included in this 36,140 SF figure; and if so, identify the quantity (in square feet or linear
feet) of this particular recreation amenity.
17. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b) and 32.5.2(i)]: The "Greenway Dedication" note in the General Notes on Sheet 1 and
the "Dedicated Open Space" labels on Sheets 4 and 5 are unclear; it could easily be misunderstood to suggest
that the 10.33 acres proposed as open space are dedicated to the County for public use. (Note: Staff recognize
that the "Additional Notes" on Sheet 1 make clear that the open space will be retained under private ownership,
and not dedicated to the County for public use).
Please revise Sheets 1, 4, and 5 (and elsewhere, as may be necessary) to clarify this language about the
"dedication" of open space. (One possible example may be to modify the title of that note and to state that the
10.33 acres are "designated... ," not "dedicated... ".)
18. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b) and 32.5.2(i)]: If the proposed "primitive trail" and/or the proposed "trails/walking
paths through the open space areas" are intended to be accessible to members of the general public as a
recreational connection to the Old Mills Trail and the County's Rivanna Greenway and Blueway System, please
ensure the site plans are revised to clearly document this on Sheet 1 ("Additional Notes" as well as the
"Greenway Dedication" and "Recreation" notes in the General Notes); and please also add labels and/or brief
notes to this effect on Sheets 3, 4, and 5.
Additionally, if the intention is for public access, please revise Sheets 1, 3, 4, and 5 (as appropriate) to provide
any pertinent information about any access easements which may potentially be granted (as may be applicable)
in conjunction with the proposed "primitive trail" and/or the proposed "trails/walking paths through the open
space areas." See Comment #20, below, about the possible requirement to prepare and submit easement plats
for these purposes [to be determined, based on the intentions for these recreation amenities, and based on
additional coordination with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department
(ACPR)].
19. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(n) and 4.161: The proposed development does not contain all of the required developed
recreation areas and minimum facilities as specified by Z.O. 4.16. Specifically, Z.O. 4.16.2 ("Minimum
Facilities") requires the following:
• Z.O.4.16.2.1: One (1) tot lot (2,000 SF minimum) shall be provided for the first thirty (30) units and
for each additional fifty (50) units
• As applied to SDP201800018: (250 units = Five (5) tot lots / minimum 10,000 SF total; see 4.16.2.1
for full details of this requirement)
• Z.O.4.16.2.2: One-half (1/2) court for basketball shall be provided for each one hundred (100) units
• As applied to SDP201800018: (250 units = Two (2) half -courts or one (1) full -court; see 4.16.2.2 for
full details of this requirement)
However, pursuant to Z.O.4.16, the planning director has some discretionary authority to consider proposed
substitutions for the facilities that are required by this section of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposed provision
of a "primitive trail" and "trails/walking paths through the open space areas" in lieu of some of the minimum
required facilities would be partially acceptable (provided that the intention is to provide access to members of
the general public), and partially unacceptable. Please revise as follows:
A. Provide calculations (SF) of the required recreation facilities (information summarized above).
B. Provide calculations (SF) of the provided (proposed) recreation facilities (see comment #16 above).
Page 4 of 5
C. Provide a recreation facilities proposal for review by the Planning Director and Chief of Planning
that includes the calculations requested in comments # 19-A and # 19-13, and which describes any and
all requested substitutions with supporting explanations/rationale.
D. If the intent is to provide public access on the "primitive trail" and/or "trails/walking paths through
the open space areas," please add a note that the "primitive trail" and/or "trails/walking paths
through the open space areas" are being proposed as a recreation amenity for use by apartment
residents and by members of the general public, in lieu of providing all of the minimum required
recreation facilities, pursuant to Z.O. 4.16.
E. Increase the size and/or recreation equipment for the one (1) proposed tot lot, and/or provide one (1)
or more additional tot lot(s).
F. Please review the proposed locations, alignments, material specifications, and "Classification" of the
proposed "primitive trail" and any proposed or potential trail -related infrastructure in collaboration
with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department (ACPR).
G. Add a note which states that the "primitive trail" and any proposed or potential trail -related
infrastructure will be designed and constructed in accordance with the applicable specifications in
the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual.
H. Add a note that states the following: "Per County Code 18-4.16.3.2, recreational equipment and
facilities shall be maintained in a safe condition and replaced as necessary. Maintenance shall be the
responsibility of the property owner if rental units or a homeowners' association if sale units."
L Add a note that states the following: "Per County Code 18-4.16.3.3, recreational facilities shall be
completed when fifty (50) percent of the units have received certificates of occupancy."
20. [Z.O. Section 32.5.2(s) ("Additional Information")]: As noted above in comment # 11, this proposed
development (as shown on the Initial Site Plan) requires you to demonstrate permission or authorization from
the adjoining property owner for the proposed use and improvements shown on Tax Map Parcel #78-20M 1
(Worrell Land & Development); or, alternately, requires you to submit for review, approval, and recordation a
boundary line adjustment plat.
Additionally, as noted above in comment #18, it may also be necessary to prepare and submit an easement plat
to establish public access on the proposed "primitive trail" if the intention is to provide members of the general
public with a recreational connection to the Old Mills Trail and the County's Rivanna Greenway and Blueway
System [to be determined, based on the intentions for these recreation amenities, and based on additional
coordination with Mr. Dan Mahon in the Albemarle County Parks and Recreation Department (ACPR)].
Additionally, one or more requests for special exceptions may need to be prepared and submitted for review by
the Board of Supervisors; please see comments #2 and #3 above.
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)
David James, diameskalbemarle.org — Requested Changes (5/7/18); see attached comments.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911)
Elise Kiewra, ekiewra@albemarle.org — Requested Changes (4/16/18); see attached comments and letter.
Albemarle County Building Inspections
Michael Dellinger, mdellingerna,albemarle.org — Requested Changes (4/30/18); see attached comments.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue
Shawn Maddox, smaddoxna-,albemarle.org — PENDING; review comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Albemarle County Service Authority
Richard Nelson, rnelson e serviceauthority.org — No Objection (5/4/18); see attached comments.
Virginia Department of Transportation
Adam Moore, Adam. Moorekvdot.virginia.gov — Requested Changes (4/26/18); see attached comments and letter.
Page 5 of 5
Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources May 4, 2018
1- Label locations of walls maximum height and TW/BW elevations -
Where there are proposed trails provide that they meet County trail standards (Design standards manual, sect- 7H)-
3- Existing conditions — Label the names of watercourses- Show limits of dam break inundation zone- Fix labeling of (managed
versus preserved) slopes-
4- Grading plan -Any cut or fill shall be rounded off to eliminate sharp angles at the top, bottom and side of regraded slopes -
Provide additional retaining wall, reverse slope benches and/or surface water diversions to break up the constructed slopes on
the west side of site [18-30-7-5]-
5- Label entrances, curb & gutter with appropriate VDOT designations (CG-2, etc-)-
6- Label street widths and show stationing-
7- Show profiles for the proposed streets, and cross-sections-
8- Show address sign and stop sign locations at road intersections.
9- Provide a temporary or permanent turnaround at end of road past the proposed SWM pond-
10- Show bumper blocks for parking spaces in front of 5' sidewalks-
11- Show guardrail alongside the road and back of parking lots where there are retaining walls and/or slopes over 3:1-
1- Show street right-of-way and any existing easements with deed book and page references-
13- Show all proposed utility easements-
14- Show any proposed disturbance outside of property line in an easement-
15- Show turn and taper lanes with lengths and widths labeled (taper at 1 :1 with 12' lane widths)-
16- Provide safety provisions for any walls over 30°- This is typically a guardrail, wall, or fencing-
17- Provide certified computations to support the design- All soil and bearing assumptions, as well as reinforcement materials
and assumed loadings must be included-
18- Where any utilities may conflict with retaining walls provide details-
19- Drainage design may be requested to be re5rievied/shown on the site plan-
0- Submit a VMP application & plan for review.
Page: COUnti of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018
Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments
Date Completed: Monday, April 16, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: LEIise Kiewra CDD E911 Requested Changes
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
PLAN REVIEW COMMENTS - E911
APPLICATION#: SDP201800018
TMP: 07800-00-00-020M3
DATE: 4/16/2018
FROM: Elise Kiewra
ekiewra@albemarle.org
Geographic Data Services (GDS)
www.albemarle.org/ads
(434) 296-5832 ext. 3030
The blue, red, and highlighted roadways will each need a name for a total of 3 named
roads. Please call with any clarifications and examples.
r
i
-,n S �� ✓i' Ifl
11
We recommend providing three (3) candidate names for each road to our office for
review, in case your first choices are not acceptable.
A PDF version of the Ordinance and Manual can be found here:
https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms Center/Departments/Geographic Data Service
s/Forms/Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance and Manual.pdf
Please consult the County's Road Name Index to check your road names prior to submittal. The
Index can be found here: httD://www.albemarle.oro/albemarle/unload/imaaes/webanns/roads/
Parcel and mapping information can be found here: http://gisweb.albemarle.or
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact our office.
Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments
Date Completed: Monday, April 30, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionlAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Michael Dellinger CDD Inspections Requested Changes E
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018
Review Comments for SDP201800018 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments
Date Completed: Friday, May 04, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Richard Nelson ACSA No Objection
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018
Review Comments for SL)P201800018 11nitial Site Plan
Project Name: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments
Date Completed: Thursday, April 26, 2018 DepartmentlDivisionfAgency: Review Sys:
Reviewer: Adam Moore VDOT Requested Changes E
ans_ plus
d
Page: County of Albemarle Printed On: 10510812018
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper. Virginia 22701
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
April 22, 2018
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Tim Padalino
Re: Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments- Initial site plan
SDP-2018-00018
Review #1
Dear Mr. Padalino:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Collins Engineering, dated
March 26, 2018, offers the following comments:
Land Use
1. Entrance width needs to be a minimum of 30', please see VDOT Road Design Manual
for commercial entrance designs along highways with curb and gutter. Please see
Appendix F, F-125 and figure 4-10.
2. Please insert WP-2 standard detail.
3. The mill and overlay will require work on Peter Jefferson Parkway. Please provide an
MOT plan in accordance with the Virginia work area protection manual.
4. Please label right of way width, speed limit and route number of Peter Jefferson Parkway.
5. Radii need to be a minimum of 25' on both entrances.
6. Cross walk should be closer to Peter Jefferson. So that the stop bar is behind the
crosswalk. Also pedestrians will be more visible to traffic turning into the entrance.
7. Please provide sight distance lines on plan and profile sheets. Also the end point of sight
distance must be visible. Please refer to Appendix F-Pg.F-40., table 2-5 for
determination of intersection sight distance.
Please note that the final site plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design
Manual Appendices B (1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations, or
other requirements.
Please provide two copies of the revised plan along with a comment response letter. If further
information is desired, please contact Willis C. Bedsaul at 434-422-9866.
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
April 22, 2018
Tim Padalino
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 VDOT Charlottesville Residency Land Use Section at (434)
422-9399 for information pertaining to this process.
Adam J. Moore, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING