Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201700067 Review Comments Major Amendment, Final Site Plan 2018-03-12Short Review Comments Report for: SDP201700067 SubApplication Type: Virginia Asphalt Services, INC Major Amendment Date Completed:12/19/2017 Reviewer:Margaret Maliszewski CDD ARB Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:The following information is required to complete the review of the as-built plan. Additional comments may follow once this information is received: 1. Indicate on the plan the height of all planted screening trees, ornamental trees, and shrubs. 2. Indicate on the plan the species of all planted shade trees and shrubs. In addition, the following revisions are needed to be consistent with the approved plan: 3. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8’ tall at planting, to complete the staggered row around the curve and north end of the paved lot. 4. Add two screening trees, minimum 8’ high at planting, at the south end of the parking area as shown on the approved plan. 5. Add shrubs, minimum 18" high at planting, to fill the gaps in the hedge along the east side of the paved lot. 6. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8’ tall at planting, along the southern property line, west of the manhole, as shown on the approved plan. 7. Replace the dead dogwood with a new tree, minimum 6’ high at planting. 8. Shift the three trees that are in the right-of-way to on-site locations as shown on the approved plan. Alternatively, plant three new trees on site, minimum 6’ high at planting, in the corresponding on-site locations. Also, please note the following: 9. The 2’ increase in the elevation of the paved lot increases the visibility of the equipment that was supposed to be screened from the road. Plant heights shorter than the approved will not provide required screening; taller heights might be required. ARB input will be required. Division: Date Completed:01/09/2018 Reviewer:Matthew Wentland CDD Engineering Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments:1. The asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. 2. Continue the gutter to the previous extense. 3. Concentrated flows will need to be released into an adequate channel (comment on VSMP plans). 4. WPO Amendment shall be approved prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. Division: Date Completed:01/14/2018 Reviewer:Shawn Maddox Fire Rescue Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:Fire Rescue has no objections. SNM Division: Date Completed:01/05/2018 Reviewer:Adam Moore VDOT Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:01/09/2018 Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA Review Status:Requested Changes We are not recommending approval at this time. Per our comments we are requesting that the Major Site Plan Amendment be updated to reflect the as-built water meter location and 1” service line (on the landscape plan and site plan). Once updated the applicant will need to resubmit so we can review and approve. Division: Page:1 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:June 26, 2018 Reviews Comments:We are not recommending approval at this time. Per our comments we are requesting that the Major Site Plan Amendment be updated to reflect the as-built water meter location and 1” service line (on the landscape plan and site plan). Once updated the applicant will need to resubmit so we can review and approve. Date Completed:01/11/2018 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:01/11/2018 Reviewer:Lisa Green CDD Code Enforcement Ofc. Review Status:See Recommendations Reviews Comments:Per conversations w/ Lisa at SRC, the timeline moving forward is as follows: 1) 1-11-18 Applicant received comments from SRC 2) 1-25-18 within two weeks of SRC comments applicant expect to resubmit (The applicant will distribute the plans to all reviewers) 2a) This resubmittal should also include the WPO amendment, which is close but not yet approvable. 3) 2-15-18 Second rounds of review on the plans should be completed: The result will either be we are ready for approval OR more comments will come from reviewers at which point we go through another round of review till it’s all correct/approvable. 4) Once the WPO is approved and the Major Amendment is approvable, the applicant needs to submit 4 hard copies with signatures/sealed by the Engineer. SRC staff has 10 days to get signatures on the plans. (Lisa has agreed to light the fire under all SRC reviewers and get it signed quickly bc it's an active violation utilizing a building without a CO). 5) Once everyone from SRC signs it, then Chris will sign the plans as the Agent and it will be approved. 6) Once it is approved they need to build to the new plans and then request Lisa come inspect it for final CO. CPP Division: Date Completed:12/14/2017 Reviewer:Michael Dellinger CDD Inspections Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:No Objection Division: Date Completed:01/08/2018 Reviewer:Josh Kirtley Health Department Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:12/11/2017 Reviewer:Elise Kiewra CDD E911 Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:per site plan dated 11/22/17 Division: Date Completed:03/01/2018 Reviewer:Alexander Morrison ACSA Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: From: Alexander Morrison [mailto:amorrison@serviceauthority.org] Sent: Monday, February 05, 2018 10:11 AM To: Alan Franklin, PE <alan@alanfranklinpe.com> Subject: Virginia Asphalt Services Alan, I had Richard recommend approval of the major amendment. He sent the approval to Chris this morning. Let me know if there is anything further that you need. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (O) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 Division: Page:2 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:June 26, 2018 Alan, I had Richard recommend approval of the major amendment. He sent the approval to Chris this morning. Let me know if there is anything further that you need. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E. Senior Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22911 (O) 434-977-4511 Ext. 116 (C) 434-981-5577 (F) 434-979-0698 Date Completed:03/01/2018 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Requested Changes Reviews Comments: Division: Date Completed:02/22/2018 Reviewer:Matthew Wentland CDD Engineering Review Status:No Objection Reviews Comments:WPO Amendment shall be approved prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. MW WPO approved on 3-12-18. CP Division: Date Completed:03/12/2018 Reviewer:Christopher Perez CDD Planning Review Status:Approved Reviews Comments: From: Christopher Perez Sent: Monday, March 12, 2018 9:54 AM To: 'Alan Franklin' <alan@alanfranklinpe.com> Cc: Matthew Wentland <mwentland@albemarle.org> Subject: FW: Virginia Asphalt Services Alan, Resending the following email in light of engineering’s WPO approval. There is nothing further to modify on the site plan; except to put the correct title on the plans. Please relabel them “Virginia Asphalt Services, Inc. SDP2017-67 Major Site Plan Amendment to SDP2015-40.” Please submit 4 signed and sealed copies for County approval. Christopher P. Perez | Senior Planner Department of Community Development |County of Albemarle, Virginia 401 McIntire Road | Charlottesville, VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 Division: Page:3 of 3 County of Albemarle Printed On:June 26, 2018 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434)296-5832 03-01-2018 Alan Franklin 4247 Cranberry Lane Crozet VA 22932 RE: SDP201700067 Virginia Asphalt Services — Major Site Plan Amendment Mr. Franklin: Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 1. [35.1] Fees. The public notification fee of $215 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee prior to any further review/action of the plan. Rev 1. Comment not addressed. 2. [SP2014-19 Condition 1(b)] Sipe of the Sales, Storage, and Display Area. Verify the equipment storage area square footage is accurate on the site plan. Previously the original curbing was further from the preserved slopes; however, the as -built curbing is now closer to the preserved slopes allowing slightly more area for equipment storage. It has been determined that this small increase is in general accord with the SP; however, any further increase will require a SP amendment prior to approval of the site plan. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 3. [30.7.3] Preserved Steep Slopes. It appears a small area of preserved slopes was clipped/disturbed with the installation of the as -built curb. When the curbing is replaced to be concrete, no further incroachement of these slopes will be permitted. If additional preserved slopes are disturbed they shall all be returned to their original condition or a rezoning will be required prior to site plan approval. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 4. [32.7.9] Landscape Plan. The landscape plan is unreadable with both the as built plantings and the previously approved plantings overlayed. Revise the landscape plan to remove the previously approved plantings and only depict the proposed/as-built plantings. Also, on the revised landscape plan provide a legend with symbology corresponding to the various plantings. Also, provide caliper and height at the time of planting and revised tree canopy calculations. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 5. [4.12, 32.5.2(b)] Parking. The cover sheet lists 3 different numbers for the maximum number of employees assigned onsite; 13, 12, and 8. Ensure the maximum number of employees onsite is consistent throughout the entire plan. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 6. [4.12.16(e)] Bumper Blocks. Provide the two parking spaces adjacent to the building with bumper blocks. This is required because this area does not contain curbing. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 7. [4.12.16] Parking Minimum Design. The two parking spaces adjacent to the building does not meet minimum parking standards for length nor width. Minimum length is 18 feet and minimum width is 9'. Additionally, as currently depicted one of the two spaces is completely blocked in when the adjacent 10th space is parked. Revise to correct this. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 8. [4.12.16] Parking Minimum Design. Adjacent to the 10 spaces fronting Avon Street Extended nearest the entrance to the site is a 17.82 feet long remanent of a former l I' parking space, which was depicted on the approved final site plan. The curved curb has caused this space to no longer meet the minimum design standards. Either provide no parking sign, and/or no parking hatching, and/or curb painting "no parking" in this area. OR correct the curbing to allow a paking space which meets design standards to be in this area. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 9. [4.12.15] Minimum Design Requirments for Parking Area. Provide curbing at the edges of all parking areas and access aisles. Asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 10. [26.4] Structure Height. Provide the height of the building. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 11. [Comment] If the optional lockable cable with removable bollard is to be installed, it needs to be labeled. As I recall, this aspect of the plan was how the site was to ensure it would not to be open to the public during off hours. This was not a County requirement but of the applicants own wishes. The reason why it was so deep into the site was because of VDOT entrance requirements. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 12. [32.5.2(n), 4.17] Outdoor lighting. Is there any outdoor lighting onsite. Previously the building was provided with recess lighting. As such sheet 4 was provided with spillover calculations for lighting. If outdoor lighting is provided onsite (of any kind), provide such calculations on the plan and label the lighting, also provide fixture cutsheets. Rev 1. Comment addressed. 13. [Comment] When you revise the plans to meet all reviewer comments please discontinue the double layering of what was previously approved and the as built. Instead revise the plans to only depict what is approvable based on all reviewer comments (with the exception of existing conditions sheets, that should remain true to the existing conditions), as this will eventually become the final site plan (once approved). Rev 1. Comment addressed. 14. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee (SRC) have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Below I have provided the various reviewer comments below. Rev 1. Comment addressed/approved. Engineering - Matthew Wentland Rev 1. WPO Amendment shall be approved prior to approval of the Maior Site Plan Amendment. ARB - Margaret Maliszewsk Rev 1. ARB comments no loner aDDly. ACSA - Alex Morrison We are not recommending approval at this time. Per our comments we are requesting that the Major Site Plan Amendment be updated to reflect the as -built water meter location and F service line (on the landscape plan and site plan). Once updated the applicant will need to resubmit so we can review and approve. Rev 1. Comment addressed/approved. VDOT — Adam Moore Previously approved Building Official — Michael Dellinger No objections Virginia Department of Health (VDH) Previously approved Fire and Rescue - Shawn Maddox Fire Rescue has no objections SNM 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 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. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Planning Division Christopher Perez From: Christopher Perez Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 1:18 PM To: 'Alan Franklin, PE' Cc: Lisa Green; Margaret Maliszewski; David Benish;Andrew Gast-Bray Subject: RE: SDP201700067 Virginia Asphalt Services— Major Site Plan Amendment Attachments: SDP201700067 -Virginia Asphalt Services,Inc - Major Amendment 1-11-18.pdf;VDH approval - SDP201700067 VA Asphalt Major Amend. 1-9-18 (2).pdf;VDOT approval - SDP201700067 VA Asphalt Major Amend. 1-9-18 (1).pdf Alan, RE: SDP201700067 Virginia Asphalt Services—Major Site Plan Amendment Attached are the review comments for the above referenced application. Also, attached are full PDF approvals from VDOT and VDH. Per conversations w/ Lisa at SRC, the timeline moving forward is as follows: 1) 1-11-18 Applicant received comments from SRC 2) 1-25-18 within two weeks of SRC comments applicant expect to resubmit (The applicant will distribute the plans to all reviewers) 2a) This resubmittal should also include the WPO amendment, which is close but not yet approvable. 3) 2-15-18 Second rounds of review on the plans should be completed: The result will either be we are ready for approval OR more comments will come from reviewers at which point we go through another round of review till it's all correct/approvable. 4) Once the WPO is approved and the Major Amendment is approvable, the applicant needs to submit 4 hard copies with signatures/sealed by the Engineer. SRC staff has 10 days to get signatures on the plans. (Lisa has agreed to light the fire under all SRC reviewers and get it signed quickly be it's an active violation utilizing a building without a CO). 5) Once everyone from SRC signs it, then Chris will sign the plans as the Agent and it will be approved. 6) Once it is approved they need to build to the new plans and then request Lisa come inspect it for final CO. Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Department of Community Development 1County of Albemarle,Virginia 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 434.296.5832 ext. 3443 1 srr' ! COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road,North Wing I Charlottesville,Virginia 22902-4596 !l/ Phone 434 296-5832 1-11-2018 Alan Franklin V vis 4247 Cranberry Lane '^-� t. Crozet VA 22932trv,r- "/f r RE: SDP201700067 Virginia Asphalt Services-Major Site Plan Amendment nt - �0 4.41 /;9 . Mr. Franklin: � �„ f�„3 ., v,bJa�,'•n OVer, Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 1. [35.1]Fees. The public notification fee of$215 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting.Please pay the fee prior to any further review/action of the plan. 2. [SP2014-19 Condition 1(b)]Size of the Sales, Storage, and Display Area. Verify the equipment storage area square footage is accurate on the site plan.Previously the original curbing was further from the preserved slopes;however,the as-built curbing is now closer to the preserved slopes allowing slightly more area for equipment storage.It has been determined that this small increase is in general accord with the SP;however,any further increase will require a SP amendment prior to approval of the site plan. 3. [30.7.3]Preserved Steep Slopes.It appears a small area of preserved slopes was clipped/disturbed with the installation of the as-built curb. When the curbing is replaced to be concrete,no further incroachement of these slopes will be permitted.If additional preserved slopes are disturbed they shall all be returned to their original condition or a rezoning will be required prior to site plan approval. 4. [32.7.9]Landscape Plan. The landscape plan is unreadable with both the as built plantings and the previously approved plantings overlayed. Revise the landscape plan to remove the previously approved plantings and only depict the proposed/as-built plantings.Also,on the revised landscape plan provide a legend with symbology corresponding to the various plantings.Also, provide caliper and height at the time of planting and revised tree canopy calculations. 5. [4.12,32.5.2(b)]Parking. The cover sheet lists 3 different numbers for the maximum number of employees assigned onsite; 13, 12,and 8. Ensure the maximum number of employees onsite is consistent throughout the entire plan. 6. [4.12.16(e)]Bumper Blocks. Provide the two parking spaces adjacent to the building with bumper blocks.This is required because this area does not contain curbing. 7. [4.12.16]Parking Minimum Design. The two parking spaces adjacent to the building does not meet minimum parking standards for length nor width. Minimum length is 18 feet and minimum width is 9'.Additionally,as currently depicted one of the two spaces is completely blocked in when the adjacent 10th space is parked. Revise to correct this. 1 8. [4.12.16]Parking Minium Design. Adjacent to the 10 spaces front`f 'Avon Street Extended nearest the entrance to the site is a 17.82 feet long remanent of a former 11th parking space,which was depicted on the approved final site plan. The curved curb has caused this space to no longer meet the minimum design standards. Either provide no parking sign,and/or no parking hatching, and/or curb painting"no parking"in this area.OR correct the curbing to allow a paking space which meets design standards to be in this area. 9. [4.12.15]Minimum Design Requirments for Parking Area. Provide curbing at the edges of all parking areas and access aisles.Asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. 10. [26.4]Structure Height. Provide the height of the building. 11. [Comment] If the optional lockable cable with removable bollard is to be installed, it needs to be labeled.As I recall, this aspect of the plan was how the site was to ensure it would not to be open to the public during off hours. This was not a County requirement but of the applicants own wishes. The reason why it was so deep into the site was because of VDOT entrance requirements. 12. [32.5.2(n),4.17] Outdoor lighting. Is there any outdoor lighting onsite.Previously the building was provided with recess lighting.As such sheet 4 was provided with spillover calculations for lighting. If outdoor lighting is provided onsite(of any kind),provide such calculations on the plan and label the lighting, also provide fixture cutsheets. 13. [Comment] When you revise the plans to meet all reviewer comments please discontinue the double layering of what was previously approved and the as built.Instead revise the plans to only depict what is approvable based on all reviewer comments(with the exception of existing conditions sheets,that should remain true to the existing conditions),as this will eventually become the final site plan(once approved). 14. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee(SRC)have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me.Below I have provided the various reviewer comments below. Engineering-Matthew Wentland 1. The asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. 2. Continue the gutter to the previous extense. 3. Concentrated flows will need to be released into an adequate channel(comment on VSMP plans). 4. WPO Amendment shall be approved prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. ARB-Margaret Maliszewsk The following information is required to complete the review of the as-built plan.Additional comments may follow once this information is received: 1.Indicate on the plan the height of all planted screening trees,ornamental trees,and shrubs. 2. Indicate on the plan the species of all planted shade trees and shrubs. In addition,the following revisions are needed to be consistent with the approved plan: 3.Add 3 screening trees,minimum 8' tall at planting,to complete the staggered row around the curve and north end of the paved lot. 4.Add two screening trees,minimum 8' high at planting,at the south end of the parking area as shown on the approved plan. 5.Add shrubs,minimum 18"high at planting,to fill the gaps in the hedge along the east side of the paved lot. 6.Add 3 screening trees,minimum 8'tall at planting,along the southern property line,west of the manhole,as shown on the approved plan. 7. Replace the dead dogwood with a new tree,minimum 6' high at planting. 2 8. Shift the three trees thatarein the right-of-way to on-site locations as`' iwn on the approved plan. Alternatively,plant three new trees on site,minimum 6' high at planting, in the corresponding on-site locations. Also,please note the following: 9. The 2' increase in the elevation of the paved lot increases the visibility of the equipment that was supposed to be screened from the road.Plant heights shorter than the approved will not provide required screening;taller heights might be required.ARB input will be required. ACSA-Alex Morrison We are not recommending approval at this time.Per our comments we are requesting that the Major Site Plan Amendment be updated to reflect the as-built water meter location and 1"service line(on the landscape plan and site plan). Once updated the applicant will need to resubmit so we can review and approve. VDOT—Adam Moore The Department of Transportation,Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section,has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Terra Concepts,dated 22 November 2017,and find it to be generally acceptable.If further information is desired please contact Justin Deel at(434)422-9894. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way.The owner/developer must contact the Charlouesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at(434)422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Building Official—Michael Dellinger No objections Virginia Department of Health(VDH) As requested,I've reviewed the site plan amendment,dated November 22,2017,for the proposed facility,referenced above. It does not appear that any of the deviations from the previously approved site plan (SDP20I5-40) have had any effect on the approved drainfield area or abandonment of the existing well. Recommendation: Approval Conditions: None If there are any questions or you wish to discuss,please give me a call,434-972-4306. Fire and Rescue-Shawn Maddox Comments pending,to be forwarded once received. 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 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.If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, Christopher P.Perez Senior Planner Planning Division 3 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434)296-5832 1-11-2018 Alan Franklin 4247 Cranberry Lane Crozet VA 22932 RE: SDP201700067 Virginia Asphalt Services — Major Site Plan Amendment Mr. Franklin: Your Major Amendment application has been reviewed. In order for the amended site plan to be approved the following revisions are required: 1. [35.1] Fees. The public notification fee of $215 was not paid prior to the SRC meeting. Please pay the fee prior to any further review/action of the plan. 2. [SP2014-19 Condition 1(b)] Size of the Sales, Storage, and Display Area. Verify the equipment storage area square footage is accurate on the site plan. Previously the original curbing was further from the preserved slopes; however, the as -built curbing is now closer to the preserved slopes allowing slightly more area for equipment storage. It has been determined that this small increase is in general accord with the SP; however, any further increase will require a SP amendment prior to approval of the site plan. 3. [30.7.3] Preserved Steep Slopes. It appears a small area of preserved slopes was clipped/disturbed with the installation of the as -built curb. When the curbing is replaced to be concrete, no further incroachement of these slopes will be permitted. If additional preserved slopes are disturbed they shall all be returned to their original condition or a rezoning will be required prior to site plan approval. 4. [32.7.9] Landscape Plan. The landscape plan is unreadable with both the as built plantings and the previously approved plantings overlayed. Revise the landscape plan to remove the previously approved plantings and only depict the proposed/as-built plantings. Also, on the revised landscape plan provide a legend with symbology corresponding to the various plantings. Also, provide caliper and height at the time of planting and revised tree canopy calculations. 5. [4.12, 32.5.2(b)] Parking. The cover sheet lists 3 different numbers for the maximum number of employees assigned onsite; 13, 12, and 8. Ensure the maximum number of employees onsite is consistent throughout the entire plan. 6. [4.12.16(e)] Bumper Blocks. Provide the two parking spaces adjacent to the building with bumper blocks. This is required because this area does not contain curbing. 7. [4.12.16] Parking Minimum Design. The two parking spaces adjacent to the building does not meet minimum parking standards for length nor width. Minimum length is 18 feet and minimum width is 9'. Additionally, as currently depicted one of the two spaces is completely blocked in when the adjacent 10th space is parked. Revise to correct this. 8. [4.12.16] Parking Minimum Design. Adjacent to the 10 spaces fronting Avon Street Extended nearest the entrance to the site is a 17.82 feet long remanent of a former l It' parking space, which was depicted on the approved final site plan. The curved curb has caused this space to no longer meet the minimum design standards. Either provide no parking sign, and/or no parking hatching, and/or curb painting "no parking" in this area. OR correct the curbing to allow a paking space which meets design standards to be in this area. 9. [4.12.15] Minimum Design Requirments for Parking Area. Provide curbing at the edges of all parking areas and access aisles. Asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. 10. [26.4] Structure Height. Provide the height of the building. 11. [Comment] If the optional lockable cable with removable bollard is to be installed, it needs to be labeled. As I recall, this aspect of the plan was how the site was to ensure it would not to be open to the public during off hours. This was not a County requirement but of the applicants own wishes. The reason why it was so deep into the site was because of VDOT entrance requirements. 12. [32.5.2(n), 4.17] Outdoor lighting. Is there any outdoor lighting onsite. Previously the building was provided with recess lighting. As such sheet 4 was provided with spillover calculations for lighting. If outdoor lighting is provided onsite (of any kind), provide such calculations on the plan and label the lighting, also provide fixture cutsheets. 13. [Comment] When you revise the plans to meet all reviewer comments please discontinue the double layering of what was previously approved and the as built. Instead revise the plans to only depict what is approvable based on all reviewer comments (with the exception of existing conditions sheets, that should remain true to the existing conditions), as this will eventually become the final site plan (once approved). 14. [Comment] This amendment cannot be approved until all comments from the site review committee (SRC) have been addressed. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Below I have provided the various reviewer comments below. Engineering - Matthew Wentland 1. The asphalt curb will need to be replaced with a VDOT standard concrete curb. 2. Continue the gutter to the previous extense. 3. Concentrated flows will need to be released into an adequate channel (comment on VSMP plans). 4. WPO Amendment shall be approved prior to approval of the Major Site Plan Amendment. ARB - Margaret Maliszewsk The following information is required to complete the review of the as -built plan. Additional comments may follow once this information is received: 1. Indicate on the plan the height of all planted screening trees, ornamental trees, and shrubs. 2. Indicate on the plan the species of all planted shade trees and shrubs. In addition, the following revisions are needed to be consistent with the approved plan: 3. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8' tall at planting, to complete the staggered row around the curve and north end of the paved lot. 4. Add two screening trees, minimum 8' high at planting, at the south end of the parking area as shown on the approved plan. 5. Add shrubs, minimum 18" high at planting, to fill the gaps in the hedge along the east side of the paved lot. 6. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8' tall at planting, along the southern property line, west of the manhole, as shown on the approved plan. 7. Replace the dead dogwood with a new tree, minimum 6' high at planting. 8. Shift the three trees that are in the right-of-way to on-site locations as shown on the approved plan. Alternatively, plant three new trees on site, minimum 6' high at planting, in the corresponding on-site locations. Also, please note the following: 9. The 2' increase in the elevation of the paved lot increases the visibility of the equipment that was supposed to be screened from the road. Plant heights shorter than the approved will not provide required screening; taller heights might be required. ARB input will be required. ACSA - Alex Morrison We are not recommending approval at this time. Per our comments we are requesting that the Major Site Plan Amendment be updated to reflect the as -built water meter location and 1" service line (on the landscape plan and site plan). Once updated the applicant will need to resubmit so we can review and approve. VDOT — Adam Moore The CY"a try s ltt l&t _ , law t d,% *ow wAwovajiw, _Wbultwd Iq Twu CAvoy cimt i listhu listDM at (434),#224W. 1 t ai W 1q1 t: AO�"t—wwr The rfi1 rr� t� .l#�� - ana;K3�xIATA UW0 ll txz tv bU ' . Ws poop. Building Official — Michael Dellinger No objections Virginia Department of Health (VDH) As requested, I've reviewed the site plan amendment, dated November 22, 2017, for the proposed facility, referenced above. It does not appear that any of the deviations from the previously approved site plan (SDP2015-40) have had any effect on the approved drainfield area or abandonment of the existing well. Recommendation: Approval Conditions: None If there are any questions or you wish to discuss, please give me a call, 434-972-4306. Fire and Rescue - Shawn Maddox Comments pending, to be forwarded once received 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 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. If you have any questions about the comments please feel free to contact me. Sincerely, A�:_ Christopher P. Perez Senior Planner Planning Division COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 MEMORANDUM TO: Christopher Perez FROM: Margaret Maliszewski RE: SDP -2017-67: Virginia Asphalt DATE: December 19, 2017 The following information is required to complete the review of the as -built plan. Additional comments may follow once this information is received: 1. Indicate on the plan the height of all planted screening trees, ornamental trees, and shrubs. 2. Indicate on the plan the species of all planted shade trees and shrubs. In addition, the following revisions are needed to be consistent with the approved plan: 3. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8' tall at planting, to complete the staggered row around the curve and north end of the paved lot. 4. Add two screening trees, minimum 8' high at planting, at the south end of the parking area as shown on the approved plan. 5. Add shrubs, minimum 18' high at planting, to fill the gaps in the hedge along the east side of the paved lot. 6. Add 3 screening trees, minimum 8' tall at planting, along the southern property line, west of the manhole, as shown on the approved plan. 7. Replace the dead dogwood with a new tree, minimum 6' high at planting. 8. Shift the three trees that are in the right-of-way to on-site locations as shown on the approved plan. Alternatively, plant three new trees on site, minimum 6' high at planting, in the corresponding on-site locations. Also, please note the following: 9. The 2' increase in the elevation of the paved lot increases the visibility of the equipment that was supposed to be screened from the road. Plant heights shorter than the approved will not provide required screening; taller heights might be required. ARB input will be required. Christopher Perez From: Alan Franklin <alan@alanfranklinpe.com> Sent: Tuesday, December 19, 2017 10:38 AM To: Margaret Maliszewski Cc: Christopher Perez Subject: RE:Virginia Asphalt Landscape Plan Attachments: 114001403_ASBUILT_17289.pdf; SHT-04.pdf Wow, Sheet 4 is difficult to read. Hope this helps. I will deliver copies of the clean plan this week. Alan From: Margaret Maliszewski [mailto:MMaliszewski@albemarle.org] Sent: Friday, December 15, 2017 10:17 AM To: Franklin PE Alan<alan@alanfranklinpe.com> Cc: Christopher Perez<cperez@albemarle.org> Subject:Virginia Asphalt Landscape Plan Alan, Thanks for explaining the tree notations on the Virginia Asphalt landscape plan. I understand that the 2CED3 note means a 2" caliper Cedar with a 3' diameter canopy.Also,the notes that say"TREE" mean that the species was not identified. The plan that overlays the as-built on the approved is helpful. However, to be more certain I'm reading everything correctly, it would help to also have a plan that just shows the as-built plants. If you could provide 2 hard copies of that plan, it would be greatly appreciated. (Digital versions of both plans would also be helpful.) Thanks for your help. Margaret Margaret Maliszewski, Chief of Planning/Resource Management Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 434-296-5832 x3276 mmaliszewskiPalbemarle.org 1 / / higigolg /m= :47o :68 s 9€gm°'§ gi nFmaEi88-; 'y2F9 cSRt€ ; Tmsog A4n6 . ,6e tP° _ SqEF+ /\ iso ygoA1yo n:24 Nei F�� s- 4 /miiimIg1,4g > i9 m _ a =4m b2$R d" oodm R>'�Rg .m =: / cs "_ nn~ gq '; g E%',,'51 >$� !At l 68 / ;45 Ng m I .}§°i / n..o .,tF 2 2 'T b: Ai qq I / -9 $Ra ns E z - , Rf : ` j i/i�' -"fin'122,1 6z k s "g 71 aJ ; �%f C d t i • $ / i £ �.^ f /a iL9 I' YY... ... a�E $ `` ` \`\` / !, 3E i' i 1 ? i 11 `/� a D o 111 1 �1on m'm ilrigU12T888u, m D� '.. O ■ I 11 ;;I • • • i'/ / E�i $ oQm'oo•[E z'°ionom$mi 'I' 11111' i // / o°��B°, R ,s mo��$ge€o .Y , I _ I'I I'i jp g• .ii /: g g c om 0 2 1 m :fin am 01 o>^ i' 8•' RS$: 9 Iii )/ /: n ho 1 m = m , ,� �' *. 'v ' ', 111 I I;, g�� °° " l I k• 11- 1 I a E! ^ I .y FA nd I i ' i 4 Ey..15,1=1, a [a '� ea ge I �LY�'3 S 1 idll ' V I 4:8; 4. b o I R ,, A ''1,I II Ill''' O. I�V ;'1 -"lit1 14 fii /i' e I;1; C i t. fki-11 �a �C� - , I 1 (�' fF�" I m :r • o \ f ._ m it = \ •, 6 I I \ x1 l� 11. 'A 1 ( JIi '€�= I1 f I I:x FYi' II I• \ I 1 t il oa. r� II d 1mrn mza \\\ iiii F Oti�C`�m � I 'Ag Ii\• I i iTY-I 444 G� 1 7----------j* -' '' 14:\ \\. 1 ms 86e I<Xm0 858 ,\ 1iii55—mm zmm I f \6_ g o-m a m 1 io.o< If *110 iii,illi .,,i .: 3;i$ j$ A W _ InI A D 1I'�F "1 Ei, 4 ig p3 i i`, Pi'plii '~ _ mg b ISI gi a Sym Fo1'.=m pi gs5^ b £ ,. Y Al E.8E 'Alc 3 g m o R r _ 4 i { 16 , 01 xxt NI; A[:i giii i , 3a c s , '. g S Z :PF gm R �"' i�b4P ' $ k XSi Ii; q'., glif, -4 i uu°° J,' $ 3 z Z fig` -____ '- 0 0 041 C F EF z x �� a ,,114111111_ I1 - .. o /�z 4,4 In F$ $ Z �cin, ....t _ .,„ c pg t '£s ,. s ,, xxx.,.0 i : i! : ` i�ivlif ii 1 m i Rei y I k1 _t,; iiiiii- I;i i2! gA ':8". ",;., - m g€ z°I _m�eirgWV o �! Y K 2 1�+3 c Iyyl IIY III ' qs°mo° t_.-1.,1- 4L'1,142 _ i v a i to• YY - iris •. m IIII-I III lul K"� 4 - �; o i'�Y ' Jr R� qgm ; �S g A a.°ax°ees°x°e i�o i��'x xi iip" , p, „, '+ _ 5 ro AI= s Q � x Q 3 ££ ° 51't.' z F _=3 a iri�e °c m - ,1', & ono o 4, I� mg -.-CONPACTED ka 7g,� G $ i' $ 'Ag FLL - / n I A II • .40 .f 2a8 / /' /. F • (.,..,...„...,,,...„_.,_,„,_,....._ ,,, 'r 05o /:/ // / gi F •� `'I: dpi ao .1 / / / / / / / I /// // / IIII .Nw. ..[,:� V / / v-�. F jai) 0 -.-A .1,- _ \ \ t. / \ �\ 1\ _ í -- / / litc,,,,,,,„Op 1.8f \ �\ \\ \\ I I 1 i;:/ / 4 F q ,� ; '')-1-45-(//./ / / i 1 III! 1 1 I I 141 / /Hill I ///// , F,.� • 1 ,, / , / i4 , ,. 1 . .......„....,., ., � �,� � _> :J l l 111 r 1 l�� 1 i /. i 1 I , ,I -. re,i, e ,, -, I ' ll/ 0/ 1 ' 11 I 1 I , ,;, .,- =f E a �� 1 X 11 �/ j �,� ° g� 0" ,� (/ i l ii! Q iii:., i I / / 1! I + ®- o', ;