Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201800032 Review Comments Minor Amendment 2018-06-05 1 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22902 Phone 434-296-5832 Fax 434-972-4126 Memorandum To: Craig Kotarski, P.E. (craig.kotarski@timmons.com) From: Paty Saternye, Senior Planner Division: Planning Date: May 25, 2018 Rev. 1: June 5, 2018 Subject: SDP 201800032 GROPEN Design and Fabrication Facility - Minor The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.): [Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision/Zoning Ordinances unless otherwise specified.] 1. [26.2(a)] Reduce the maximum number of employees on the site plan to 32. There are two issues limiting the number of employees on the site that cannot be studied in the time frame for which the applicant requires approval of this site plan. Those two issues are: a) The Department of Health has commented (see attached) that at this time they cannot approve more than 32 total employees on the existing septic system. Therefore, for approval of this minor amendment in the time frame the applicant requires they have specified that they will reduce the number total number of employees within the parcel down to 32. b) Because this parcel utilizes a private well instead of public water there is a limit on the amount of water usage. Section 26.2(a) of County Code limits how much water can be used per acre per day when on a private well without requiring a special use permit. The previously approved site plan showed a total of 32 employees. Any increase in employees beyond that number would trigger review of the site under 26.2(a). Also, please be aware that there are possible changes to the County Code that could be put in place in the near future that will also impact water usage when utilizing a well. A zoning staff member will be contacting the applicant to discuss this issue. For future reference, connection to the public water system would eliminate this issue. Rev. 1: Comments addressed. 2. [32.5.2.a & 32.6.2(a)] Revise the following general information: a) Since the address of the engineer has changed, a cloud should be put around and a number label should be placed at the new address and the change in address should be added to the minor site plan amendment changes list. b) Above the “Minor Amendment To..” in the title add “SDP201800032” as the project number for the minor amendment. c) The sheet index should not have been reduced down to the sheets included in this minor amendment submission. Revise the sheet index to look like, and include all of the information in, the Previous Major Amendment (SDP201600019) with the one exception mentioned below. d) Continue to include the new sheet C7.0 in the sheet index, since this new sheet is required and included. However, revise the name of the sheet, since that name was already used in 2 the full sheet set from the major site plan amendment SDP201600019. “Overall Proposed Plan” may be an appropriate sheet name. Rev. 1: Comments addressed. 3. [32.5.2.a & 32.6.2(a)] Address the following in reference the “Minor Site Plan Amendment Proposed Changes:” listed on the coversheets and labeled throughout the site plan amendment: a) On sheet C2.0 the cloud for the removal of the fuel tanks and the oil tanks only encircles the fuel tanks. The “C2” label does not appear to be associated with the removal of the oil tanks and it should be. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. b) Revise the note for the “C3” change to specify “See sheets C4.0, C5.0 & C7.0”. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. c) Revise the note for the “C4” change to specify “See sheets C4.0, C5.0 & C7.0”. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d) Revise the note for the “C6” change to specify “See sheets C4.0, C5.0 & C7.0”. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. e) Revise the note for the “C9” change to specify “See sheets C4.0, C5.0 & C7.0”. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. f) Please note that the change for “L1” and “L2” only increase the London Plane Trees by 4, but it appears from the Plant Schedule on sheet L1.00 that four new London Plane Trees have been added (see below). Ensure that the Narrative of Changes correctly represents the changes being made. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Revise change item “L2” to specify that there were 3 London Plane Tree added, and not 2. A third was added in a parking lot island near the handicapped parking spaces and appears to already be included in the counts in the Plant Schedule. ALSO, ensure that a label of “L2” for the addition of that third London Plane Tree is added to all sheets showing the tree (L1.00 & L1.10). g) [Rev. 1: NEW COMMENT] Sheet C7.0 is an added sheet and needs to be shown and listed as a change. Address the following: i. Listed the addition of the sheet in the “Narrative of changes”. ii. The sheet must be clouded in the Sheet List Table. iii. The correct change label must be placed next to the cloud in the Sheet List Table. 4. [32.6.2(h)] Remove the signature panel for the reviewers but leave the space empty. Since this is a minor site plan amendment only the planning reviewer signs and that signature is handled by a stamp. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 5. [32.5.2(b) & 32.6.2(i)] Address the following in reference to parking and employees: a) Revise the “Parking required:” calculation and the number of spaces provided (if necessary). Address the following items: i. Although the parking calculation utilized for the “industrial use” is correct a different calculation must be used for the other uses now on the site. The “Contractor’s (Construction office, shop, equipment storage and materials yard)” is the parking calculation that should be utilized for those other uses, based on what has been communicated to the County about them. That calculation is “One (1) space per employee assigned to work on-site plus one (1) space per facility vehicle.” ii. Ensure spaces for the facility vehicles for each of the “Contractor’s” businesses on the parcel are provided. iii. Revise the parking calculation on the coversheet to have different sections that are labeled for the industrial use employee parking, the industrial use public parking, the contractor’s use employee parking and the contractor’s use facility vehicle parking. iv. Although the area open to the public was listed in the calculation, the number of required spaces for that portion of the calculation was not included in the total number of spaces 3 required. When revising the total for the required parking spaces ensure all aspects of the required parking are part of that total Rev. 1: Comments addressed. b) Although the number of employees have been increased the ITE chart in the bottom left of the coversheet has not been updated to reflect this changes. Update the ITE chart. Rev. 1: Comment no longer needed. Employee count has been revised back to 32. c) Add a cloud and change number around the ITE chart and include the change in the chart in the minor amendment change list. Rev. 1: Comment no longer needed. Employee count has been revised back to 32. 6. [32.5.2(j), 32.5.2(d) & 32.6.2(a)] Address the following in reference to the existing conditions sheets: a) Include in the sheet set “C0.1 Overall Plan” which shows the existing conditions for the whole parcel and ensure that any of the previously existing conditions that were not part of the Major amendment (SDP201600019), or where not shown correctly in that site plan, are included in this minor amendment (SDP201800032). i. The existing well and septic lines to the “Metal Building/Garage”. ii. The reserve drainfield. The reserve drainfield was shown as being near Route 20 on SDP201600019. However, the reserve drainfield is shown as being near the 30” magnolia on the Health Department paperwork and approvals. The minor site plan amendment should show the reserve drainfield in the correct location. iii. The existing tree line in the upper left corner of the site (southwest corner) was shown incorrectly. Revise the tree line to show the tree line as it exists. Rev. 1: Comments addressed. b) Ensure all changes to sheet C0.1 are clouded and have the appropriate number for the minor site plan amendment changes. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. c) Ensure that sheet C0.1 still shows the legend and the hatching for the managed slopes that were included in the previous site plan amendment. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d) Rename C0.1 to be “Overall Existing Plan”. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Although sheet C0.1 was renamed, and the change was shown clouded in the appropriate places, the label placed next to it on the Cover Sheet in the Sheet List Table is incorrect. The label currently shows “C10”. That change is listed as “C13” in the Narrative of changes. Revise the label to be correct. e) Ensure that the items specified above are also shown correctly on sheet C2.0, are clouded and have the appropriate number for the minor site plan amendment changes. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 7. [32.5.2(j) & 32.6.2(a)] Revise the plan to show the correct reserve drainfield location on all sheets. It appears on sheets C4.0, C5.0, C7.0 & L1.00. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 8. [32.5.2(n) & 32.6.2(a)] Revise site plan sheets C4.0, C5.0 and C7.0 to show all of the gates in the proposed fences. Some of them are not shown. Rev. 1: Comment sufficiently addressed. Gates are shown on sheet C7.0. 4 9. [32.5.2(p) & 32.6.2(j)] Address the following in reference to the Landscape Plan sheets and how landscaping is shown on other sheets: a) The Tree Protection Fencing (TPF) line appears to have been removed for about half of the southern property line, shown on the left side of the sheet, on sheet L1.00. Ensure this tree protection fencing is shown for its full length and extents. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Although tree protection fencing was added it was not added in the appropriate location. The tree protection fencing is meant to protect the existing trees. It is therefore supposed to be put along the outside edge of the dripline of the existing trees. Address the following: i. Show the existing tree line in sheets L1.00 and L1.10. This tree line is already shown correctly in sheets C0.1, C2.0, C4.0, C5.0, C6.0 & C7.0. The Landscaping sheets must show this same tree line. ii. Show the proposed tree protection fencing in sheets L1.00 and L1.10. This tree protection fencing is already shown correctly in sheets C0.1, C2.0, C4.0, C5.0, C6.0 & C7.0. The Landscaping sheets must show this same tree protection fencing. iii. Ensure that the tree line and the clouding for changes in the minor amendment do not look the same. b) The plant schedule appears to add four London plane trees to the site plan. However, only three tree symbols for that type of tree seem to have been added to the site plan. Add another London plane tree symbol to the site plan or update the plant schedule. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. c) Since the total proposed plant canopy has changed the Plant Schedule total should be clouded. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. d) There is an existing tree, adjacent to the proposed parking spaces along Route 20, that is labeled “Existing Volunteer to Remain. However, this tree appears to be very close to the underground propane tank that was added to the site. Do one of the following: i. Change that tree from an existing to remain tree to a proposed tree. Provide the correct symbol and label and include it in the proposed landscape schedule. ii. Add a note to the landscape plan that states, “All existing trees to remain will be replaced in kind if damaged by proposed improvements.” Rev. 1: Comment sufficiently addressed. Note has been added. e) Provide sheet L1.10 and revise it for the changes that are taking place with this site plan amendment and/or to correct things not shown in the previous amendment. This should include revisions to all provided and required calculations as well as areas. Parking spaces, parking perimeter, tree save area and provided canopy totals have all changed. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. Although the sheet has been added, and changes shown, no clouding or labels have been added to this sheet to specify the changes from the approved minor site plan amendment. Include the clouding and the labels for all landscape related changes to the site plan. f) Revise sheet L1.10 to show the updated landscape layout including all landscaping changes and additions specified in the comments. Rev. 1: Comment not fully addressed. See Rev. 1 comment directly above on clouding and labeling the changes on this sheet. 10. [32.6.1(e)] Revise sheet C5.0 to include the missing information on the spot elevations, FEE, BS, TS. Etc. Many text labels are not included that were included in the previous site plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. 5 11. [Comment] The Code Enforcement Officer, when reviewing the site found the following items that do not reflect what is shown on the approved site plan. These items must either be adjusted on site or adjusted in the site plan to match the site. Address the following: a) Ensure parking spaces meet the minimum size requirement. Some of the parking spaces along the edge of Route 20 do not meet the minimum depth of 18’ or the minimum width of 9’ and therefore cannot be counted towards the provide parking spaces unless they are adjusted to meet the minimum required sizes. Also, a reduction in depth cannot be granted when there is an obstruction within the first 2’ of the edge of the pavement/space. Ensure that the drive aisles continue to meet the required width of 24’ if modifications are made in the drive aisle in order to rectify the parking space issues. b) Rev. 1: Comment appears to have been addressed. However, see comment 11. e) below in reference to inspection. c) Ensure all bollards shown on the site plan are installed on site. The bollards around the dumpster pad area have not yet been installed. Rev. 1: See comment 11. e) below in reference to inspection. d) The 12’x9’ shed was not shown in the previously approved site plan, but it is shown in the submitted amendment that is currently under review. Therefore, that issue should be rectified with this site plan amendment, once it is approved. Rev. 1: See comment 11. e) below in reference to inspection. e) [Rev. 1: NEW COMMENT] There are proposed lighting fixtures on the site plan that do not appear to have been installed yet. Those light fixtures must be installed prior to receiving the CO. f) [Rev. 1: NEW COMMENT] The items listed in this comment will be checked by the Code Enforcement Officer at time of inspection. They have been included in these comments so that the applicant is aware of outstanding issues that need to be completed prior to receiving the CO. 12. [Comment] Attached find the comments from the other reviewers. This site plan amendment cannot be approved until the Health Department has approved the plan. Rev. 1: Comment addressed. See the Health Department’s approval attached. 13. [Rev. 1: NEW COMMENT] Sheet C7.0 shows two different location for the proposed propane tank and gas line. Revise C7.0 to only show the correct location for the proposed tank and line. Ensure that the labels for the tank and the line are adjusted to point to the new location. 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 be 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 final site plan 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. Please contact Paty Saternye in the Planning Division by using psaternye@albemarle.org or 434-296- 5832 ext. 3250 for further information. June 4, 2018 Paty Saternye, Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Gropen Design & Fabrication Minor Site Plan Amendment SDP2018-32 Ms. Saternye: As requested by your department, I have reviewed the latest revision of the subject site plan, dated 5/31/18, for compliance with VDH regulations, and have no further comments. Recommendation: Approval Conditions: None If there are any questions or you wish to discuss, please give me a call, 434-972-4306. Sincerely, Alan Mazurowski Environmental Health Supervisor Thomas Jefferson Health District alan.mazurowski@vdh.virginia.gov