HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800023 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2018-05-25
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
May 21, 2018 (UPDATED: May 22, 2018) (UPDATED: May 25, 2018)
Mr. Cody Pennetti, P.E. – Timmons Engineering
608 Preston Ave., Suite 200, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-327-1692 / cody.pennetti@timmons.com
Albemarle Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA)
P.O. Box 7047, Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: SRC Review Comment Letter for SDP-2018-00023 (Albemarle SPCA – Major Amendment)
Dear Mr. Pennetti and Albemarle SPCA:
The Planner for the Planning Services Division of the Albemarle County Community Development Department
(CDD) and other members of the Site Review Committee (SRC) have reviewed the site plans (dated 4/9/2018) for
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 Building Inspections – (attached)
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) – (attached)
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue – (pending) (update 5/25: attached)
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) – (attached)
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) – (attached)
Virginia Department of Health (VDH) – (attached)
Final approval of this major site plan amendment is subject to the following review comments being satisfactorily
addressed. [Each comment includes reference to the applicable section(s) of the County Code Chapter 18 / “Zoning
Ordinance” (Z.O.).] Review comments reflect information available at the time the development proposal was
reviewed, and should not be considered final. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based
on further review. Please work directly with each SRC plan reviewer to address their review comments. Approvals
from each SRC plan reviewer should be forwarded to the Planner upon receipt.
Additionally, please be advised that administrative approval of this major site plan amendment is not possible unless
and until action is taken by the Board of Supervisors (BOS). Specifically, final approval of this major site plan
amendment is dependent upon BOS approval of SP201700022, ZMA201700008, and the associated Special
Exception request. The specific details of the Board’s actions may require modifications to the review comments
contained in this letter, and may give rise to additional review comments.
Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions, or require additional information or assistance.
Sincerely,
Tim Padalino, AICP / Senior Planner / tpadalino@albemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner)
Tim Padalino, tpadalino@albemarle.org – Requested Changes (5/21/2018):
1. As noted above, this major site plan amendment cannot be administratively approved without the Board of
Supervisors’ legislative approval(s) of SP201700022, ZMA201700008, and the associated Special Exception request.
The BOS is scheduled to conduct public hearings for these requests on June 13.
2. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a) and 32.5.2(a)]: Provide all information about all applicable conditions of approval and
proffers, including the application numbers of approved SP and ZMA applications which may be in effect (as may be
applicable), pending action by BOS on SP201700022, ZMA201700008, and the associated Special Exception request.
3. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a) and 32.5.2(a)]: Add a note stating that the subject properties are located in the Rio
Magisterial District.
4. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(a), 21.7, and 4.20(a)]: Two of the proposed additions are not permissible as shown
on Sheet C2.0 without an approved Special Exception, due to the applicable setback requirements established in Z.O.
21.7 and contained in Z.O. 4.20(a). However, Staff acknowledge the applicants’ pending Special Exception request
which, if approved by the BOS as recommended by Staff, would allow for the proposed additions to be sited as shown
[partially located within fifty (50) feet of the rear property boundary and adjoining R6 Residential district, which
would otherwise be prohibited].
5. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(b), and 4.12.6]: The site plan appears to show 97 proposed off-street parking spaces,
five (5) of which appear to be designated to meet ADA accessibility standards. In order to determine if this amount
is compliant with applicable off-street parking requirements, provide a written schedule or other tabulation which
identifies the minimum parking requirements as calculated based on the proposed use(s).
UPDATE (5/25): A (draft) Letter of Determination from CDD-Zoning staff has provided a preliminary indication
(subject to final confirmation) that the proposed 97 parking spaces are acceptable for the proposed use.
6. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(n), and 32.6.2(k)]: Staff acknowledge that the Legend on Sheet C1.0 includes a “Site
Light,” Sheet C2.1 designates existing light fixtures for removal, and Sheets 3.0 and 3.1 include existing light fixtures
to be retained – but the plans do not appear to include any icons for “Proposed Site Light(s),” and no product cut
sheets or other outdoor lighting information is provided in the details sheets. Provide information about proposed
outdoor lighting, including a photometric plan and location, description, and photograph or diagram of each type of
outdoor luminaire that may be proposed (as may be applicable).
7. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(j) and 32.7.9]: Sheet L1.0 includes two notes that are partially contradictory: A note states
“Frontage landscaping to be improved with additional plantings. See note this sheet.” and the corresponding
“Landscape Note” states that “At the perimeter of the site, existing vegetation is intended to remain and satisfy buffer
requirements. If needed, supplemental landscaping will be provided.” Staff are concerned that the language in these
two notes is unclear, and will potentially create difficulty during the inspections process.
However, the intention to comply with applicable landscaping requirements seems to be clear. Therefore, to clarify
the language and to enable this issue to be more easily addressed and resolved during the inspections process (after
permitted construction takes place), revise the “Landscape Note” on Sheet L1.0 as follows:
“At the perimeter of the site, existing vegetation is intended to remain and satisfy buffer requirements.
Supplemental landscaping will be provided if it is determined to be necessary by the Zoning
Administrator or her designees. Supplemental landscaping will include evergreen trees, such as Eastern
Red Cedar and American Holly.”
8. [Z.O. Sections 32.6.2(a), 32.5.2(o), and 32.7.1]: (Note: Advisory Comment – no action necessary at this time.) Staff
acknowledge the proposed reservation of land along Berkmar Drive for future dedication to Albemarle County for
public use (towards establishing a 44’ wide ROW along this section of Berkmar Drive). To formally dedicate land
that has been reserved, a plat and corresponding deed of dedication will need to be submitted for approval and
recordation at such time that the County demands.
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer)
John Anderson, janderson2@albemarle.org – Requested Changes (5/21); see attached comments.
Albemarle County Building Inspections
Michael Dellinger, mdellinger@albemarle.org – See Recommendation (5/4/2018); see attached comments.
Albemarle County Information Services (E911)
Elise Kiewra, ekiewra@albemarle.org – No Objection (4/26/2018).
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue
Shawn Maddox, smaddox@albemarle.org – Pending (as of 5/21); review comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
UPDATE (5/25): No Objection (5/24/2018).
Albemarle County Service Authority
Richard Nelson, rnelson@serviceauthority.org – See Recommendation (5/7/2018); see attached comments.
Virginia Department of Transportation
Adam Moore, Adam.Moore@vdot.virginia.gov – Requested Changes; see attached comment letter (4/26/2018).
SDP201800023-SPCA Engineering Review Comments (summary)
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 5
Author: mwentland
Date: 4/20/2018 3:03:01 PM
Color:
show existing MH
Engineer (11)
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 10
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:19:10 PM
Color:
show safety slab for drops >12'
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 10
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:19:48 PM
Color:
show safety slab for drops >12'
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 10
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:21:45 PM
Color:
Provide compaction and fill specifications for pipe
installed in fill
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 5
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:29:23 PM
Color:
dimension loading space
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 5
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:29:27 PM
Color:
label sidewalk width; also, provide bumper blocks,
else 6' walk width
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 5
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:29:38 PM
Color:
show dimensions, dumpster pad
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 4
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:29:51 PM
Color:
Provide note if Ex. UG detention will remain.
VSMP review may result in additional SP
comments.
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 9
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:36:54 PM
Color:
Provide dumpster pad section detail with Site
Details
show existing MH
show safety slab
for drops >12'
show safety slab
for drops >12'
Provide compaction
and fill specifications
for pipe installed in fill
dimension loading
space
label sidewalk width;
also, provide bumper
blocks, else 6' walk
width
show dimensions,
dumpster pad
Provide note if Ex. UG
detention will remain.
VSMP review may
result in additional SP
comments.
Provide dumpster pad
section detail with
Site Details
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 1
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/21/2018 9:09:56 AM
Color:
1. VSMP Plan approval is required prior to MIA
approval.
2. VSMP/WPO bond is required prior to MIA
approval.
3. Easements must be recorded prior to MIA
approval.
Subject: Engineer
Page Label: 6
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/21/2018 9:11:45 AM
Color:
Provide guardrail to ensure adequate parking lot
safety.
Subject: Group
Page Label: 10
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:26:56 PM
Color:
VSMP plan should consider proposed effect on Ex.
UG detention system.
Group (2)
Subject: Group
Page Label: 12
Author: mwentland
Date: 5/18/2018 1:34:41 PM
Color:
Provide additional detail; i.e. Stormceptor Mfr.
installation guidelines /details
1. VSMP Plan approval is required prior to MIA approval.
2. VSMP/WPO bond is required prior to MIA approval.
3. Easements must be recorded prior to MIA approval.
Provide guardrail to
ensure adequate
parking lot safety.
VSMP plan should
consider proposed
effect on Ex. UG
detention system.
Provide additional detail; i.e.
Stormceptor Mfr. installation
guidelines /details
May 21, 2018
Tim Padalino, Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: Albemarle-Charlottesville SPCA
Major Site Plan Amendment
SDP2018-23
Mr. Padalino:
As requested, I’ve reviewed the subject plan, dated April 9, 2018, for the facility
referenced above. Since both water and sewer will be served by public systems, VDH
will have no involvement.
If there are any questions or concerns, please give me a call, 434-972-4306.
Sincerely,
Alan Mazurowski
Environmental Health Supervisor
Thomas Jefferson Health District
alan.mazurowski@vdh.virginia.gov