HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201800155 Review Comments Architectural Review Board Approval 2019-03-27COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176
March 27, 2019
Jonathan Q. Ritchie, P.E.
Bohler Engineering VA, LLC
28 Blackwell Park Lane
Suite 201
Warrenton, VA 20186
RE: ARB-2018-155: Wawa [at Proffit Road], Final Site Development Plan (TMP 032A0-02-00-
00100)
Dear Jonathan,
We have received revised site and architectural plans for the above -noted application. My review indicates
that your proposal does not meet the following Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines nor the requested
changes made at the January 22, 2019 ARB meeting:
1. Visibility of all mechanical equipment must be eliminated from the Entrance Corridor from the
moment a Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Currently, the arrangement of five deciduous trees and
11 dwarf inkberry hollies (planted at heights of 24"-30") will not eliminate immediately the visibility
of the proposed vent stack pad with bollards, the dimensions and elevation of which have never been
provided, in the northwest corner of the site.
a. Provide a detail of the proposed vent stack and bollards on one of the Construction Details
sheets in the site plan set, providing all dimensions of the apparatus.
b. Substitute the 5 proposed red maples and 11 dwarf inkberry hollies with Cryptomeria
Japonica Yoshino and/or Thuja `Green Giant.' Arrange in a layered semi -circle, spaced 15 feet
on center. Provide at least two deciduous trees to the north and west of this arrangement to
mitigate the vegetative screening.
2. The Landscape Compliance Chart on C-701 states that three canopy trees have been provided on
the Seminole Trail/U.S. Route 29 frontage. Clarify on the landscape plan (C-701) which three canopy
trees this note addresses.
3. The Landscape Compliance Chart on C-701 states that 71 shrubs have been provided on the
Proffit Road frontage. Approximately 52 shrubs, 10 deciduous trees, and 17 evergreen trees have been
counted on the Proffit Road frontage. Clarify on the landscape plan (C-701) which shrubs are
considered contributing to this calculation.
4. ARB staff reviewed the last revision of the landscape easement plat and easement agreement and
requested changes on 2/7/19. An approved landscape easement plat is required prior to the issuance of
a Certificate of Appropriateness.
5. Light models S 1 and S2 (decorative, wall -mounted sconces) are not full cut-off fixtures although
they emit over 3,000 lumens. According to the Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 18, Section 4.17.4.a.4, "If
the total lumens emitted by proposed LED lamps are three thousand (3,000) or greater as indicated in
information provided by the manufacturer, the fixture shall be a full cutoff luminaire."
a. Revise the choice of model to provide a full cutoff fixture.
b. Provide the finish colors for models S 1 and S2 in the manufacturer's specifications on C-
706 and C-707.
6. The highest footcandle value under the fuel pump canopy is 35, well above the maximum of 30 fc
in the Entrance Corridor. Following the ARB meeting on January 22, 2019, some ARB members
recognized the inconsistency of the request with the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines. A
maximum of 30 footcandles is recommended.
7. While the luminaire schedule provided on the lighting plan (C-705) states that all of the light
models proposed will have color temperatures at 40K, the catalogue numbers provided on the
manufacturer specifications on sheets C-706 and C-707 suggest that the proposed color temperatures
range from 35K to 57K. Rectify the discrepancies.
8. Revise the color of the light model WI to better integrate with the wall material. A bronze finish is
recommended.
9. The depth of the proposed landscaping areas along the Rt. 29 and the Proffit Road frontages do
not allow for the viable planting of large canopy trees that are required by the Zoning Ordinance,
Chapter 18, Section 32.7.9, and the Entrance Corridor Guidelines. In addition, the 3 white oaks and 4
Sweetshade Yellowwoods proposed for the Proffit Road frontage lie within 3 feet of the center of an
underground gas utility; recommended distances of large trees from underground utilities is a
minimum of 7-8 feet.
a. Provide increased landscaping area to provide all required plantings free and clear of
proposed and extant utilities.
b. Consider substituting Magnolia virginiana (Sweetbay magnolias) for the proposed Cercis
Canadensis (redbuds) on the EC frontage.
10. Address the landscape gap marked "to be sodded" in the northwest corner of the site by providing
landscaping.
11. Note that the location of the proposed monument signs on this site plan is for informational
purposes only. A separate sign application will be required for final approval of sign location and
design. The sign application drawing should reference the landscaping plants shown on the final site
plan with the final approval date.
12. Complete the plant health note provided on C-701: All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be
allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and
trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant.
13. Eliminate the second note provided on C-702, "Landscape materials are subject to change with
final design." The substitution of plant species contrary to the approved final site plan will require a
Letter of Revision and ARB review.
You are welcome to move forward to the Architectural Review Board with this proposal as is. However,
you may wish to make revisions to address these issues, so that staff can present the ARB with a positive
recommendation. Although this will delay your initial ARB meeting, it could shorten your overall review
time. If you choose to make revisions:
1. Please notify us within 15 days of the date of this letter that you plan to revise your proposal to
address these issues.
2. Receipt of this letter shall suspend the sixty-day review period. The date of the next submittal
deadline following the date that the revised submittal is received by the County will be considered the
new submittal date. Please consult the attached Submittal and Meeting Schedule for the corresponding
ARB meeting date.
If you choose not to make revisions at this time, we would still appreciate a letter from you, within 15 days
of the date of this letter, indicating your choice. If we receive no letter, we will assume that you wish to
proceed with your submittal as is.
If you have any questions about this process, feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Heather McMahon, Senior Planner
hmcmahongalbemarle. org
434-296-5832 x3276
cc: ARB-2018-155 File
Malloy Properties III LLC
1300 Richmond Road
Charlottesville Va 22911
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
REVISED APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. County staff
has indicated below what they think will be required as a resubmission of revisions. If you need to submit
additional information please explain on this form for the benefit of the intake staff. All plans must be
collated and folded to fit into legal size files, in order to be accepted for submittal.
TO:
DATE:
PROJECT NAME: ARB-2018-155: Wawa at Proffit Road Final Site Plan
Submittal Type Requiring Revisions () indicates submittal Cade
County Project Number
# Copies
Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (E&S)
Mitigation Plan (MP)
Waiver Request (WR)
Stormwater Management Plan SWMP)
Road Plan (RP)
Private Road Request, with private/public comparison (PRR)
Private Road Request — Development Area (PRR-DA)
Preliminary Site Plan PSP
Final Site Plan (or amendment) (FSP)
Final Plat FP
Preliminary Plat (PP)
Easement Plat EP
Boundary Adjustment Plat (BAP)
Rezoning Plan REZ
Special Use Permit Concept Plan (SP-CP)
Reduced Concept Plan (R-CP)
Proffers (P)
Bond Estimate Request (BER)
Draft Groundwater Management Plan (D-GWMP)
Final Groundwater Management Plan (F-GWMP)
Aquifer Testing Work Plan (ATWP)
Groundwater Assessment Report (GWAR)
Architectural Review Board (ARB)
ARB201800155
Other: Please explain
(For staff use only)
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
ARB
2
Heather McMahon
Heather McMahon
From:
Heather McMahon
Sent:
Tuesday, December 18, 2018 2:48 PM
To:
Jonathan Ritchie
Subject:
ARB2018-155: Wawa at Proffit Rd, Final -- application incomplete
Attachments:
ARB2018-155 completeness check.pdf
Hello Jonathan,
I have reviewed your application submission for the above -named project for completeness and the application is
incomplete (see attached checklist). Notably, the application is missing the following items:
1) The maximum wall height of proposed retaining or landscape walls as well as details in the site plan set and
material and color samples;
2) A photometric plan that meets the requirements of Section 4:17 of the Zoning Ordinance;
3) Coordination of lighting and landscaping and other site elements;
4) Dimensioned architectural elevations drawn at 1/8"=1'-0" scale that is verifiable.
I conducted this completeness check with some alacrity, so if I have missed information that satisfies any of the above
requests, please let me know.
In regard to number 2, note that your lighting plan shows illumination values in excess of 30 footcandles under the fuel
pump canopy. As has been stated before, during the initial review process, the maximum footcandle allowance in the
Entrance Corridor is 20 footcandles.
In regard to number 3, either the lighting or the landscape plan should show the site lighting so that I can verify that no
freestanding light fixture is proposed in too close proximity to a proposed tree.
And in regard to the last, when to -scale architectural drawings are produced on 11 x 17" paper, they are no longer to
scale; when I take an architect's scale to the paper, the measurements are not accurate. The elevations should be
produced on Arch D-sized paper so that the scale is true and verifiable when using a scale (ruler).
Please let me know how you wish to proceed. I would need 8 hardcopies as well as a digital copy of the missing or
revised sheets by January 7 in order to commence review of a complete application package. However, I can still review
the application submission as is, and my staff report will reflect that information is missing. The ARB may ask for you to
provide that missing information in a future/following review.
Thanks,
Heather McMahon, Senior Planner
Albemarle County Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
434-296-5832 x3278
hmcmahon@albemarle.org
twgzolv-
a$
8 collated copies
VJ44VOA AT _'k.0F1 TIT 12rJ • , F:1_ &fPrt
Architectural Review Board
Final Review of a Site Development Plan Checklist for Completeness
1 set of color/material sam
A. Written description of the proposal
,Written description of the proposal.
❑ 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):
k"Location(s) of proposed building(s) on the site.
Location of proposed parking, travelways, walkways and other improvements.
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.
J�Location of retaining walls indicating top and bottom elevations, maximum wall height, and proposed
materials, with material and color samples. K04
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' or larger, clearly legible and folded):
TKf Proposed landscaping that meets or exceeds the requirements outlined in the ARB guidelines.
I ) �111k Existing landscaping to be removed. Include the location, size, and species.
ESt Landscape key including all landscape symbols and a description of what they represent.
N/A❑ Location of existing and proposed tree lines and tree save areas.
M# ❑ 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.
N/K ❑ Provide a signed, tree conservation checklist with all checklist items drawn on the landscape plans.
NIA ❑ Include tree protection fencing and limits of work on the landscape, grading and E&S plans.
I
OVER
D. Lighting plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1 "=20' or larger, clearly legible and folded):
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. Nr-
❑ Coordination of lighting with landscaping and other site elements. POT T'tZOV%t:> b
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. 7 NI T PP-o1>ucL-T-�, ,—Sc vER1(=1At3L� SCrtZc 0 tt x r ]>A
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.
One set of all building materials / colors.
A floor plan adequate to show exterior walls, windows and doors.
F. Additional material
Provide labeled, color, 8-'/2" x 11" photographs of the site as seen from both directions on the
Entrance Corridor.
0 Signatures
2
OVER ->