Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201800162 Review Comments Architectural Review Board Approval 2019-02-14Heather McMahon From: Heather McMahon Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2019 9:51 AM To: Peter Russell (peter@shimp-engineering.com) Cc: Justin Shimp, P.E. Subject: RE: ARB2018-162: Royal Fern Townhomes Final SDP -- submission incomplete Attachments: ARB2018-162 Completeness Checklist for Final SDP 2.pdf Hello Peter, I have reviewed the resubmission materials submitted February 5, 2019 (according to the stamp on the reverse of the documents), and the application for a Final Site Development Plan is still incomplete. This project will not be scheduled for an ARB meeting date until all requested materials are submitted for review. The following items are missing (below, I have copied my comments to you from January 4, 2019 and then added present-day comments in red): Material samples. In an email exchanged between Margaret and Justin on December 10, Margaret offered to check to see whether we had materials on file so that you could forgo a materials submission. However, we received no information as to what materials the project proposes to utilize prior to your submittal and the materials listed on the elevations submitted are vague and incomplete. We cannot check our materials collections to see whether we have the samples on hand without more information. At the very least, to continue with the review of this project for the January 22"d ARB meeting date, we would need to have the manufacturers specifications email to us by Monday end of business; actual samples should be procured by you and brought to the ARB meeting on the 22"d. Material samples are required for review. The architect/client must revise the materials notes on the submitted elevations, page 1 of 9 to clarify the following: a. The name of the brand of brick and its color b. Identify the siding material (is it composite? Wood? What brand?) c. Select a color "tan" for the trim and provide a paint sample d. Name and provide samples for the two paint colors applied to the siding that is shown on the renderings e. Name the brand and provide a paint sample for "iron ore" Note that samples must be provided fore review at this time. However, if between the ARB approval and issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness and the construction of the proposed housing the client wishes to change the approved materials list, that can be achieved through a minor amendment. 2. Lighting plan. As was stated at the time the Initial Site Plan was reviewed and stated again in November, when ARB staff provided comments for your first submission of the final site plan to my colleague, Paty Saternye, any proposed lighting will require a lighting plan with photometric values, a luminaire schedule, and manufacturer's specifications plus the standard note which assures that any light fixture emitting more than 3,000 lumens be full cut-off. The architectural elevations provided illustrate proposed wall -mounted lighting but no other lighting information has been supplied. A model of the proposed wall -mounted light must be selected and the manufacturer's specifications provided for review. If the manufacturer's specifications include a photometric diagram that will verify that no light over half (0.5) a footcandle will spill over onto the right-of-ways (both Fifth Street Ext. and Wahoo Way), then a photometric lighting plan can be omitted from the site plan set. Spillover must be reviewed and verified in some capacity and it is the client's onus to meet the submittal requirements of any application. 3. Architectural plans and renderings. At the level of a final site plan review, more information about the appearance of the buildings is required. Only 3 sheets of elevation drawings have been provided. No plans, color renderings (perspectives), site sections or photographs of the site have been provided in this application. The three pages of elevations previously submitted show a three-story townhouse model, yet the renderings submitted recently show a. mix of three- and two-story units; similarly, the elevations show wooden decks on side and rear elevations that are not shown in the renderings. Supply elevations, plans, and renderings for all proposed unit types. Label them according to the proposed clusters (i.e., T1-5, T-26-31). ARB will review all of the lots facing Fifth Street Extended as well as those on the south end of Wahoo Way. Provide plans for the units. 4. Mechanical Equipment. If ground -mounted mechanical equipment is proposed, it must be shown on the site plan. If roof -mounted mechanical equipment is proposed, it must be shown on the elevations and a roof plan showing the heights of the proposed HVAC units is desired to ensure that the visibility of all mechanical equipment from the EC be eliminated. This last note should be added to the architectural drawings as well. Your transmittal letter dated 2-4-19 and signed by Keane Rucker states "All mechanical equipment will be ground - mounted and placed between the townhouse driveways, thus screened by the buildings from the entrance corridor." Yet the side elevations that were submitted previously show two "outdoor units" on the sides of end units, not between driveways and thus obscured by the building masses themselves. If al/ mechanical units are proposed for the driveways, then add the quoted sentence above to the beginning of note 11 on the cover page of the site plan set and revise the side elevations to show the "outdoor units" in their prescribed locations. I look forward to receiving the missing materials and commencing review of this project. Heather McMahon, Senior Planner Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 x3278 hmcmahon@albemarle.org From: Heather McMahon Sent: Friday, January 04, 2019 5:14 PM To: Peter Russell (peter@shimp-engineering.com) <peter@shimp-engineering.com> Cc: Justin Shimp, P.E. <justin@shimp-engineering.com>; Margaret Maliszewski <MMaliszewski@albemarle.org> Subject: ARB2018-162: Royal Fern Townhomes Final SDP -- submission incomplete Hi Peter, Thank you for taking my telephone call a few minutes ago. As I stated during our phone conversation, I have just completed the completeness check (my apologies for its tardiness, but the recent holidays plus a heavy end -of -year workload delayed my getting to this any earlier) for your submission received December 17, 2018 and slated for the January 22, 2019 ARB meeting. The submission is incomplete and is missing some significant materials, as can be seen in the attached document. In brief, the application is missing: 1. Material samples. In an email exchanged between Margaret and Justin on December 10, Margaret offered to check to see whether we had materials on file so that you could forgo a materials submission. However, we received no information as to what materials the project proposes to utilize prior to your submittal and the materials listed on the elevations submitted are vague and incomplete. We cannot check our materials collections to see whether we have the samples on hand without more information. At the very least, to continue with the review of this project for the January 22"d ARB meeting date, we would need to have the manufacturers specifications email to us by Monday end of business; actual samples should be procured by you and brought to the ARB meeting on the 22"d 2. Lighting plan. As was stated at the time the Initial Site Plan was reviewed and stated again in November, when ARB staff provided comments for your first submission of the final site plan to my colleague, Paty Saternye, any proposed lighting will require a lighting plan with photometric values, a luminaire schedule, and manufacturer's specifications plus the standard note which assures that any light fixture emitting more than 3,000 lumens be full cut-off. The architectural elevations provided illustrate proposed wall -mounted lighting but no other lighting information has been supplied. 3. Architectural plans and renderings. At the level of a final site plan review, more information about the appearance of the buildings is required. Only 3 sheets of elevation drawings have been provided. No plans, color renderings (perspectives), site sections or photographs of the site have been provided in this application. 4. Mechanical Equipment. If ground -mounted mechanical equipment is proposed, it must be shown on the site plan. If roof -mounted mechanical equipment is proposed, it must be shown on the elevations and a roof plan showing the heights of the proposed HVAC units is desired to ensure that the visibility of all mechanical equipment from the EC be eliminated. This last note should be added to the architectural drawings as well. Moreover, in my cursory review, I was unable to identify any retaining walls, and so this is more a question: are any retaining walls proposed? Secondly, if there are any extant or proposed overhead utilities, these should be shown on the utility plan. And lastly, there are two street trees (along the EC, in the southernmost portion of the site) that seem to be located within the ACSA sanitary sewer easement despite a note on the cover sheet of the site plan set that states no trees are permitted within any ACSA 20' easement; this discrepancy should be addressed. Other, smaller details our outlined in the attached document. If you wish to continue with the scheduled ARB meeting date of January 22, 1 would need the missing information by Monday, January 7, by close of business in order to complete a staff report by January 11tn. Otherwise, my staff report will reflect the missing information and it will be staff's recommendation that a resubmission be required. However, if you and your clients wish to postpone the review of your application until the February 4tn ARB meeting, I would need the missing information supplied by Monday, January 14tn If you choose the latter option, please reply to this email requesting a deferral to the February 4th meeting. Either way, please let me know how you would like to proceed, and if you have any questions, please call or write me. Thanks, Heather McMahon, Senior Planner Albemarle County Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-296-5832 x3278 hmcmahon@albemarle.org ARB2018-162: Royal Fern Townhomes, Final SDP HNNM 2/13/19 of �+t� Architectural Review Board s Final Review of a Site Development Plan Checklist for Completeness ® 8 collated copies Ell 1 set of color/material samples A. Written description of the proposal (11 Written description of the proposal. Q1 Explain how the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and the Entrance Corridor. B. Site plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1 "=20', clearly legible and folded): ® Location(s) of proposed building(s) on the site. ® Location of proposed parking, travelways, walkways and other improvements. Q! Mechanical equipment, trash containers, loading and service areas, other similar features and improvements, and associated screening. ® Existing and proposed topography drawn with contour intervals of 5-feet or less, and with sufficient off -site topography to describe prominent and pertinent off -site features and physical characteristics, but in no case less than 50-feet outside of the site. ® Location and size of existing and proposed utilities and easements. Identify type of utility and extent of easement. ® Stormwater management plan. Q� Location of retaining walls indicating top and bottom elevations, maximum wall height, and proposed materials, with material and color samples. ® Sheet number, total number of sheets, date of the drawing, date and description of the latest revision, and contact information for the firm preparing the drawings in the title block on all drawings. For revised drawings, clearly identify revisions made. C. Landscape plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1' —20' orlarger, clearly legible and foldeco: ►/ F1 /1 ■ ■ ■ �� I Proposed landscaping that meets or exceeds the requirements outlined in the ARB guidelines. Existing landscaping to be removed. Include the location, size, and species. Landscape key including all landscape symbols and a description of what they represent. Location of existing and proposed tree lines and tree save areas. Location of existing natural features. Location of individual trees of 6-inch caliper or greater and all significant groups of trees indicated by botanical name and caliper. !Location and height of above -ground utilities and associated easements;, and location of below - ground utilities and associated easements. Stormwater facilities. Provide a signed, tree conservation checklist with all checklist items drawn on the landscape plans. Include tree protection fencing and limits of work on the landscape, grading and E&S plans. I OVER Commented [HM11: None provided. ArchitecVclient needs to 1) Name the brick brand and color 2) Identify whether the siding is composite or wood 3) Choose a tan color for the trim and provide a sample 4) Provide paint samples for paint colors 5) Provide a paint sample for "Iron Ore" Samples must be provided. If the client/architect changes the materials later, then an amendment can be made. Commented [HM2]: Not provided Commented rHM31.' Not orovided Commented [HM4]: Transmittal letter dated 2/4/18 states. "Al mechanical equipment will be ground -mounted and placed between the townhouse driveways, thus screened by the buildings from the entrance corridor." Add to the beginning of note 11 on the cover page of the site plan. "All mechanical equipment will be ground -mounted and placed between the townhouse driveways." Revise the "left" and "right" elevations to show the outdoor units accordingly. Commented [HMS]: No retaining walls proposed l Commented [HM6]: Notprovided ARB2018-162: Royal Fern Townhomes, Final SDP HNM 2/13/19 �. Lighting plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1' =20' or larger, clearly legible and fo/decQ: ❑ Location of all proposed building and site lighting. ❑ Lighting schedule identifying all proposed light fixtures, poles and brackets. ❑ Manufacturer's cut sheets illustrating proposed lighting fixtures and information on illumination type, intensity, style, shielding, color, finish, and installation height. ❑ Photometric plan addressing all fixtures and indicating that lighting does meet the requirements of Section 4.17 of the Zoning Ordinance. ❑ Coordination of lighting with landscaping and other site elements. E. Appearance of the building(s) (architectural elevations, color perspective sketches, site sections): ® Dimensioned architectural elevations of the proposed building(s). Elevations must be drawn to the scale of 1/8"=1'-0". Include a building materials schedule and key on the elevation drawings. Submittal of elevations that are not visible from the Entrance Corridor may be required to clarify the overall building design. 01 Color perspective sketches that show the proposed development as seen from the Entrance Corridor. ❑ Site sections that clarify proposed changes in topography and illustrate the visibility of the proposed development from the Entrance Corridor. Site sections shall indicate the finish floor elevation(s) and roof height(s) relative to the natural elevations along the Entrance Corridor. ❑l One set of all building materials / colors. ❑1 A floor plan adequate to show exterior walls, windows and doors. F. Additional material ❑ Provide labeled, color, 8-%" x 11" photographs of the site as seen from both directions on the Entrance Corridor. ® Signatures 2 OVER Commented [HM7]: None provided. Manufacturer's specifications of the wall -mounted architectural lighting with photometric output diagrams must be submitted for review if a photometric lighting plan will not be created, spillover must be checked Commented [HM8]: 1) Provide renderings in which the "rear elevations" and "side elevations" show decks (which are shown on the elevations) 2) Revise the renderings to have tides so we know whether we're looking at "fronts," "backs," and which unit clusters (i.e., TI-T5 or T26-31) we're looking at Commented [HM9]: Not provided and needed Commented [H M 10]: Not provided and needed