HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800018 Approval - County 2018-05-23
1
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 23, 2018
Mr. Scott Collins – Collins Engineering
200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-293-3719 / scott@collins-engineering.com
Mr. Alan Taylor – Riverbend Development
435 2nd Street SE, Suite 400, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-245-4970 / alan@riverbenddev.com
RE: Conditional Approval of SDP-2018-00018 (Martha Jefferson Hospital Apartments – Initial Site Plan)
Mr. Collins and Mr. Taylor:
The Agent for the Board of Supervisors hereby administratively grants conditional approval to the above
referenced Initial Site Plan (dated 3/26/2018). The Final Site Plan will not be approved until all review
comments identified in the attached SRC review comment letter (updated 5/23/2018) have been
addressed and resolved to the satisfaction of each applicable SRC Plan Reviewer, and until each SRC
Plan Reviewer have indicated in writing their (tentative) approval.
Please note important updates or clarifications to the following Planning comments contained in the SRC
review comment letter: comment #2, comment #3, and comment #5. Please also reference updated
VDOT comments (attached, dated 5/16/2018) regarding the need to submit for VDOT review and
acceptance a “justification report” for any potential crosswalk across Peter Jefferson Parkway at an
unsignalized location. Community Development staff remain available to assist with the coordination of
this “pedestrian walkway” at an unsignalized location.
This conditional approval shall be valid for a period of five (5) years from the date of this letter, provided
that the developer submits a Final Site Plan for all or a portion of the site within one (1) year after the
date of this letter as provided in section 32.4.3.1 of Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle,
and thereafter diligently pursues approval of the Final Site Plan.
In accordance with Chapter 18 of the Code of the County of Albemarle, Section 32.4.2.8, Early or Mass
Grading may be permitted after the following approvals are received:
1. Engineering approval of a VSMP plan meeting the requirements of Chapter 17 of the Code of the
County of Albemarle.
2. Approval of all easements for facilities for stormwater management and drainage control.
3. Submittal of a tree conservation checklist with areas for tree preservation identified.
2
Please be advised that the Final Site Plan will not be considered to have been officially submitted until
the following items are received:
1. A Final Site Plan that satisfies all of the requirements of Section 32.6 of Chapter 18 of the Code.
2. A fee of $1,613.00 per Section 35.1.d(3) of Chapter 18 of the Code.
Please submit a minimum of eight (8) copies of the Final Site Plan to the Community Development
Department (CDD). The assigned Lead Reviewer will then distribute the plans to all reviewing agencies.
(Note: for ACSA, please coordinate directly with Mr. Alex Morrison or Mr. Richard Nelson to determine
how many copies ACSA requires; it may be more than the one (1) minimum copy specified below). CDD
staff will then provide you with the first comment letter containing each agency’s review comments for
the Final Site Plan; after receiving that letter, please work directly with each plan reviewer to address and
resolve their respective agency’s requirements.
The Community Development Department shall not accept submittal of the Final Site Plan for final
approval signatures until each of the following agencies/reviewers indicate in writing that the Final Site
Plans satisfy the attached conditions* and all other applicable requirements, and have been given
(tentative) approval:
SRC Members:
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) – 2 copies
Albemarle County Engineering Services (Engineer) – 1 copy
Albemarle County Information Services (E911) – 1 copy
Albemarle County Inspections Services (Inspections) – 1 copy
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue – 1 copy
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) – 1 copy (minimum); please coordinate directly with
ACSA to determine total number of copies
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) – 1 copy
If you have any questions about this conditional approval, or the Final Site Plan submittal requirements,
or any other aspect of your application(s), please feel free to contact me using the information provided
below. Community Development staff remain available to assist.
Thank you; sincerely,
Tim Padalino, AICP
Senior Planner / tpadalino@albemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088
*Attached conditions:
SRC comment letter (dated 5/8/2018; updated 5/23/2018)
Page 1 of 6
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 8, 2018 (UPDATED: May 23, 2018)
Mr. Scott Collins – Collins Engineering
200 Garrett Street, Suite K, Charlottesville, VA 22902
(434)-293-3719 / scott@collins-engineering.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 Padalino, AICP
Senior Planner / tpadalino@albemarle.org / (434)-296-5832 x 3088
Page 2 of 6
Albemarle County Planning Services (Planner) – Tim Padalino, tpadalino@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, 21.7, 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).
UPDATE (5/23): County Staff reviewed this issue in detail and conducted research on the applicable elements
of the approved ZMA application as well as the County Code. Although building setbacks or stepbacks can be
established through an approved ZMA Application Plan, this was not done on the approved ZMA application
(ZMA2001-15) – so the standards contained in the Code (and referenced above) are applicable.
3. [Z.O. Sections 32.5.2(b), 25A.6, 21.4, and 4.20]: 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).
UPDATE (5/23): County Staff reviewed this issue in detail and conducted research on the applicable elements
of the approved ZMA application as well as the County Code. Although building setbacks or stepbacks can be
established through an approved ZMA Application Plan, this was not done on the approved ZMA application
(ZMA2001-15) – so the standards contained in the Code (and referenced above) are applicable.
4. [Z.O. Section 32.7.2.3]: 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 32.7.2.3]: A safe, convenient, direct “pedestrian walkway” or pedestrian connection must be
provided to enable access 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.
UPDATE (5/23): This “pedestrian walkway” or pedestrian connection is subject to VDOT acceptance of a
“justification report” as outlined in comments provided by Mr. Adam Moore, PE (attached, dated 5/16/2018).
This pedestrian connection requires continued coordination with VDOT and with Mr. Kevin McDermott,
Albemarle County Principal Planner (Transportation). Community Development staff remain available to assist
with the coordination of this “pedestrian walkway” at an unsignalized location.
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
Page 3 of 6
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.5]: 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:
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 4.12.6]: 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 4.12.4]: 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.
9. [Z.O. Sections 32.7.2.3 and 4.12.16]: 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 30.7.5]: 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 30.7.5]: 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).
Page 4 of 6
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
“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 4.16]: 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:
Page 5 of 6
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).
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-B, 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.”
I. 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 #78-20M1
(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, djames@albemarle.org – Requested Changes (5/7/18); see attached comments.
Page 6 of 6
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, mdellinger@albemarle.org – Requested Changes (4/30/18); see attached comments.
Albemarle County Department of Fire Rescue
Shawn Maddox, smaddox@albemarle.org – PENDING; review comments will be forwarded upon receipt.
Albemarle County Service Authority
Richard Nelson, rnelson@serviceauthority.org – No Objection (5/4/18); see attached comments.
Virginia Department of Transportation
Adam Moore, Adam.Moore@vdot.virginia.gov – Requested Changes (4/26/18); see attached comments and letter,
as well as attached comments regarding the need for a
“justification report” for a pedestrian crossing of Peter Jefferson
Parkway.
Points of Interest
AIRPORT
COLLEGE/UNIVERSITY
COMMUNITY
FIRE/RESCUE STATION
GOVERNMENT
HOSPITAL
LIBRARY
POLICE STATION
POST OFFICE
RECREATION/TOURISM
SCHOOL
Parcel Info
Parcels
Map is for Display Purposes Only • Aerial Imagery from the Commonwealth of Virginia and Other Sources May 4, 2018
GIS-Web
Geographic Data Services
www.albemarle.org
(434) 296-5832
Legend
(Note: Some items on map may not appear in legend)
240 ft