HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201900084 Staff Report 2019-08-14I:1T . IV N DION to.._
Project #/Name
ARB-2019-84: Georgetown Hydraulic Professional Offices
Review Type
Preliminary Site Development Plan and Architectural Drawings
Parcel Identification
060F0000000300
Location
Northwest corner of Hydraulic Road (Rt. 743) and Georgetown Road.
Zoned
Neighborhood Model District (NMD)/Entrance Corridor (EC)/Airport Impact Area (AIA)
Owner/Applicant
CKW 2 LLCBMC Holdings Group (Reid A. Murphy)
Magisterial District
Jack Jouett
Proposal
To develop a previously -undeveloped 1.05-acre parcel with a 6,775-sf office building and associated improvements.
Context and
Visibility
The parcel lies on the west side of Hydraulic Road, an EC. The surrounding area is primarily multi -family housing and a few commercial buildings. (The parcel to the
southwest is undeveloped and zoned RA; the parcel to the northwest is zoned R6 and features townhomes; the parcel to the north is C1 and holds a small commercial
building;the parcels to the east across Hydraulic Road are zoned R15 C1 and R2• and the parcels to the south are zoned PRD. [Figure 1 Visibility from Hydraulic
p Y � P )L g j �' Y
Road will be clear.
ARB Meeting Date
August 19, 2019
Staff Contact
Heather McMahon
4
f l-1
r21
I .i �I•.II. I I
I,
Q&}M
"a
W
N 7'
brill Pulk
u6.Tii -
'm fL
Figure 1: map showing TMP 60E-3 (zoned Neighborhood Model District) and surrounding parcels with RA, R2, R6, Rl S, and Cl zoning.
2
PROJECT HISTORY
DATE
APPLICATION/REVIEW TYPE
RESULT
10/16/2000
ARB-2000-42PS: Georgetown Hydraulic Convenience Store
The ARB reviewed a Preliminary Site Plan for a convenience store and fuel pumps at this location.
2/20/2001
ARB-2000-59: Georgetown Hydraulic Convenience Store
The ARB issued a Certificate of Appropriateness for a convenience store and fuel pumps at this location.
10/16/2006
ARB-2006-118: Hydraulic & Georgetown Road, Conceptual
Plan
The ARB reviewed a conceptual site plan for a 2-story office building at this location and did not recommend approval
for ZMA-2006-14 based on concerns with the site plan
3/5/2007
ARB-2007-8: Hydraulic & Georgetown Road, Preliminary
Site Plan and Advisory Review for Rezoning
The ARB reviewed the Preliminary Site Plan for a 2-story office building at this location and recommended approval
for ZMA-2006-14 which was approved by the Board of Supervisors on 3/19/2008
6/11/2008
ARB-2008-64: Georgetown/Hydraulic Office Building,
Preliminary Site Plan
The ARB approved the Preliminary Site Plan for a 2-story office building at this location
8/4/2008
ARB-2008-89: Georgetown/Hydraulic Office Building, Final
The ARB reviewed the Final Site Plan for an office building at this location
11/3/2008
ARB-2008-139: Georgetown/Hydraulic Office Building,
Final Site Plan
The ARB reviewed, for the second time, the Final Site Plan for an office building at this location and approved it with
conditions
12/1/2008
ARB-2008-139: Georgetown/Hydraulic Office Building,
Final Site Plan
The ARB held a work session on the revised submittal of the Final Site Plan
5/6/2019
ARB-2019-28: Georgetown Hydraulic Professional Offices,
Initial Site Plan
The ARB approved this Initial Site Plan on the consent agenda [see Attachment A for action letter]
8/19/2019
ARB-2019-84: Georgetown Hydraulic Professional Offices,
Preliminary Site Plan and Architecture
The ARB will review architectural drawings for this project for the first time.
CHANGES SINCE LAST REVIEW(S)
The initial site plan that was approved on the May 6, 2019 consent agenda has not been revised for this submission. The architectural elevations and renderings submitted with this application have not
been reviewed prior, and thus this review will focus more on the architecture than the site configuration. The site analysis in this report is repeated from the May 6 staff report.
Architectural elevations were provided with the Final Site Plan (ARB-2008-139) that was reviewed by the ARB thrice a decade ago. [Figure 2] The neo-traditional style exhibited in that design was a
direct result of the Code of Development for this parcel, which established eight architectural and landscape standards. Those standards are listed in Figure 3 and Table 1.
tM M
M
MW
FGM
—!l
ELEVATION FROM HYDRAULIC
ELEVATION FROM GEORGEFOWN
Figure 2: architectural elevations provided with a Final Site Plan reviewed in November and December of 2008 (ARB-2008-139).
LIMEHOUSE
ARCHITECTS, LC
7
v>
LLJ
0 U,
LLJ LL.
U—
C)
0 —j
LLJ <
C) -7 AH
U
LU
< LL
02 0
>- CL
A-. — —.,
,,I- nMftaff. zowfflym—t
A3
Amenities consist of enhonCed pedestrian walk and plazo. vwilh seating and
landsct ping, Picnic area odjoceni to building and parking,
2OA_5_e - Reougernents & Re=trigbons reloled to Use:
None.
?0A_5,f -Uses exnrgssly rarahib;teU:
Any uses not listed in Section 2O_A6_n.
20A,S.o-,Archite tarrol & LandsccaaaSIon dord5:
1, Form, Massing & Proparlion. 2•stcary, veillcally proporiion2d dcaars
punched windows,
2. Architectural Style: Jeffersor ran Classical/ TradiNorweal'.
3. Materials, ccWors, textures-, Brick masonry w/ cost stone trial.
4. Root Form & Pitch: hipped or gable pitched roof, 41 E 2 a 912 range.
5_ Arahitecturail Ofn amentatiom Classically deica ed trim, eaves, rcOlings.
Lobby. Metal roof of tower.
6. Fa;ade Treotmesnt; Brick ww/ regvlcr spacing for punched
windows/doors.
7. Landscape Treatments- Trees. Shrobs and Beds fo surrxaLrnd building �
porklnrg areas.
8. Preservation of Filstgric 5lructures/Sites: Not opplicoble, rune existing.
�A. _h - Prellr'riihrary Lot Lgytaut:
See accompanybg submittal drawings.
20A.5.i - Blocks:
Nate: Parcel is nner black Moo: at these items do not apply, or are rdvplicates from
20A.5_g.
I , Range of Uses Permitted: Profresslanal Office 5uilding and other uses per
20. A.5.g
2. Reclorernents/Restocil of Uses: See 2CA-5_r,
3. Build -To Lines: varies s 9.6' to 21.9' �5ee olan�
4. Minimum/Mox murn Yard Dimensions: the lot size is 1.056 ccr€:s
5, Maximum Building ,Height: 2-slorles, 50' arneosured al the froni foradet.
3-sloriees, 60' (measured of the back ;o inclu,cle
bosernerr).
6. Sidewalk I Pedestrian Paths: Hydraulic & Georgetown Roudl5. Kdened
lordsc€aped sidevaralk.
7. Green 5pace & Amenities: Wooded 1;1uffer at rear (60*-80'1 canal side (20`;i
of properly. Widened landscaped sidewalk, enlry plaza and picnic lobles
8. Conservation/Preservatlon Areas: 20' side & rear gradirng/buffer setbacks
at South and 44esl Properly lines.
9. Parking Areas: Relegaled behind. and tucked under, buudsng
Figure 3: excerpt from the Code of Developmentfor the two-story office building on TMP 60E-3B (ZMA-2006-14) as approved by the Board of Supervisors on February 25, 2008.
The conceptual design provided with the rezoning application (ZMA-2006-14) is a direct expression of the corresponding Code of Development. [Figure 4] The design last reviewed by the ARB (dated
April 28, 2009, submitted with the Final Site Plan ARB-2008-139), is similar [Figure 5].
rGf4 A TWO 'e COFKE o� Ar
A
Figure 4 (top): rendering submitted with ZMA-2006-14, Figure S (bottom): rendering provided with ARB-2008-139, a Final Site Plan, last revised April 28, 2009.
6
The ARB provided very specific comments about the architectural design in the November 3, 2008 meeting, which included:
1. Revise the cast stone to be more similar to the almond C73 mortar submitted.
2. Revise the building elevation drawings to clearly indicate the use of Lawrenceville Brick `Monticello " for the building fagade.
3. Coordinate roofing materials on elevations to show roofing will be copper or painted metal on the tower. Provide paint color sample of the dark green if painted metal is selected.
4. For a work session provide: rake details for the front entry gables and end gables; additional detail for the tower, front and side elevations, including brick detail around the arched window and
circular louvered vents; window frame, sash and muntin details; along with any trim surrounds anticipated for all openings.
Following the work session held on December 1, 2008, the ARB provided the additional comment: "The revisions illustrated in Sheets A3, A4, and A6 with revision date of November 25, 2008 and
Sheet A8 dated November 25, 2008 be approved, and specifically detail 4 on Sheet 8 showing the double brick mould detail is approved." Thus, the architectural detailing and materials and color palette
of the ca. 2009 design were important elements of the proposal.
Final revisions were never submitted, the Final Site Plan was not approved, and the development was not constructed. Ten years on, the applicant has submitted new elevations and renderings [Figure 6]
that are significantly different from what the ARB had reviewed in 2009. The more faithful replication of a traditional vocabulary represented in the ca. 2009 design has been replaced with a minimalist
Classicism more in line with today's prevailing Post -Modernism.
dI
7.3 J-1 . _ i 1 a a 1 a a .11 °. s_ . _ •_ • a .. r+.
r a 1I Ao
,r
Figure 6: rendering submitted with ARB-2019-84 dated May 29, 2019
i7
If the applicant desires an architectural vocabulary different than the one specified in the Code of Development, a Special Exception to revise the Code of Development is required. The following ARB
actions are requested:
1. Recommendation on whether or not the current design satisfies the requirements of the Code of Development.
2. Recommendation on whether or not the current design meets the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines.
3. Recommendation on whether the architectural design should be revised, or the Special Exception should be requested.
TABLE 1: CODE OF DEVELOPMENT ANALYSIS
Code of Development Requirement
2008-09 Design
2019 Design
Recommendations
1
Form, Massing & Proportion: 2-story,
The design exhibits four distinct bays and
This design exhibits a central pavilion flanked
The current design does meet the first
vertically proportioned doors and punched
three entrances.
by non -symmetrical wings (one is longer than
criterion of the Code of Development
windows.
the other) that hold two of three total
entrances.
Pediments interrupt the roofline, centered
Pediments have been eliminated.
above the three doors.
Windows are "punched" two -over -two light
Windows are tripartite fixed windows above
sashes.
operable awning sashes.
The mass is wo stories with vertically
The mass is two stories with vertically
proportioned doors and punched windows.
proportioned doors and punched windows.
2
Architectural Style: Jeffersonian
While this design replicated a traditional
The present design is at best an abstracted
This design does not meet the second criterion
Classical/Traditional.
vocabulary, its "Jeffersonian Classical"
Classicism; it is not a reflection of the
of the Code of Development.
moniker is questionable — the arched window
"Jeffersonian Classical" style. The engaged
(double sash with a fanlight) in the central
pilasters vertically differentiating the bays; a
tower; the Greek Revival door surrounds with
water table, architrave, and cornice; the
sidelights and transoms; the pediments; and
central pavilion "tower" with hipped roof; and
the regular placement of fenestration are all
the regular use of fenestration are elements of
elements of Classical design vocabularies,
Classical architecture but not distinctly
while the elements that could be construed as
Jeffersonian, which is actually a variation of
"Jeffersonian" may stem from the ca. 2009
Palladianism. Elements common to
design's use of red brick and white trim.
Jeffersonian architecture include a central
core with symmetrical wings (not seen here);
a portico with pediment (not seen here);
Classical orders (columns with Tuscan, Doric,
Ionic or Corinthian columns) and mouldings
(not seen here); a piano nobile or elevated
floor (not seen here); red brick construction
with white trim (no white trim observable);
and octagonal forms not seen here).
3
Materials, colors, textures: brick masonry
The materials named in the ca. 2009 design
The current design uses red brick as the
Brick is the primary building material, but the
w/ cast stone trim.
were Lawrenceville "Monticello' brick; cast
primary material and has sills of cast stone.
minimal use of cast stone is a mere nod to the
stone to match almond -colored mortar; and
The latter is hard to discern in the renderings,
third criterion of the Code of Development.
standing seam metal painted dark green. The
and the materials key on the elevations
This criterion has not been met.
trim, rake board, cornice, and window and
(A201) does not call out cast stone. The
door surrounds were white.
elevations specify clear anodized aluminum
window frames, clear anodized aluminum
flashing, and clear anodized aluminum
canopy fascia. The hipped roof above the
central pavilion is to be standing seam metal,
the color of which is not specified but which
appears grey in the rendering.
4
Roof Form & Pitch: hipped or gable
The ca. 2009 design has an unmistakable
This design has a flat roof with a
This design does not meet the fourth criterion
pitched roof, 4/12 — 9/12 range.
gable roof and a hipped roof above the
(presumably) hipped roof only over the
of the Code of Development.
"tower."
"tower."
5
Architectural Ornamentation: Classically
The ca. 2009 design illustrates a cast stone
The applicant describes the current proposal
The level of detail in this abstracted Classical
detailed trim, eaves, railings, lobby, metal
water table and belt course on the "tower"
as having fagade brick that is "corbeled into
design is minimal and does not meet the spirit
roof at tower.
feature; soldier course window lintels and cast
reveals at the water table, columns and
of the fifth criterion of the Code of
stone sills; neoclassical door surrounds with
architrave to create shadow lines" and
Development.
multi -pane sidelights and transoms; paneled
"openings ... created and defined with brick
doors; louvered, semi -circular apertures in the
arches above..." However, no segmented or
pediments; a cornice; and a "metal roof at
full arches are present on any of the
tower."
elevations.
6
FaVade Treatment: Brick w/ regular
This version embodies a brick wall plane
The present design also embodies a brick wall
The present design does meet the sixth
spacing for punched windows/doors.
punctuated at regular intervals by windows.
plan with regular fenestration, yet the
criterion of the Code of Development.
proportion of solid to void (or wall to
window) in the present application is much
eater than in the previous application.
7
Landscape Treatments: Trees, shrubs and
Ample landscaping, comprised of shade and
Ample landscaping, comprised of shade and
This criterion has been met.
beds to surround building and parking
ornamental trees as well as shrubs, was
ornamental trees as well as shrubs, is
areas
illustrated on the landscape plan along the east
illustrated on the landscape plan along the east
side of the building in the ca. 2009 site plan.
side of the building.
8
Preservation of Historic Structures/Sites
Not applicable, none existing.
N/A
N/A
TABLE 2: ENTRANCE CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDELINES ANALYSIS
REF I GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19 1 ISSUE RECOMMENDATION
GENERAL GUIDELINES
Purpose/ Compatibility with significant historic sites
1
The goal of the regulation of the design of development within the
Submit material and color
Dimensioned elevations, perspectival views, and a
Submit revised elevations
designated Entrance Corridors is to ensure that new development
samples, dimensioned elevations,
cross section were submitted in this application,
with legible linework that
within the corridors reflects the traditional architecture of the area.
and floor plans of the proposed
but material samples and floor plans were not. The
accurately illustrates the
Therefore, it is the purpose of ARB review and of these Guidelines,
building for review.
linework on the elevations (such as Sheet A201) is
brick patterns and detailing.
that proposed development within the designated Entrance Corridors
confusing and suggests that the brickwork is
Provide floor plans and
reflect elements of design characteristic of the significant historical
patterned or striated every four courses. If the
material samples for review.
landmarks, buildings, and structures of the Charlottesville and
bonding pattern is common bond, then the
Albemarle area, and to promote orderly and attractive development
linework should faithfully represent that. Similarly,
Clarify the materials key on
within these corridors. Applicants should note that replication of
the lines for the soldier courses that comprise the
Sheet A201 and provide
historic structures is neither required nor desired.
window lintels and the lines for the footer bricks
that comprise the window sills are incomplete.
details of the corbeled
bricks. Clarify where brick
2
Visitors to the significant historical sites in the Charlottesville and
Albemarle area experience these sites as ensembles of buildings,
Details 2 and 3 on Sheet A200 and details 1 and 2
arches are implemented.
land, and vegetation. In order to accomplish the integration of
on Sheet A202 are produced so darkly (because
buildings, land, and vegetation characteristic of these sites, the
they are black -and -white reproductions of color
Guidelines require attention to four primary factors: compatibility
renderings) as to be practically illegible.
with significant historic sites in the area; the character of the
Entrance Corridor; site development and layout; and landscaping.
The narrative that was submitted with this
application states that there are cast stone window
3
New structures and substantial additions to existing structures
should respect the traditions of the architecture of historically
sills, but these are neither shown on the elevations
significant buildings in the Charlottesville and Albemarle area.
and renderings nor listed as a material in the
Photographs of historic buildings in the area, as well as drawings of
materials key provided on Sheet A201. The
architectural features, which provide important examples of this
narrative also makes note of "corbeled" bricks and
tradition are contained in Appendix A.
"brick arches," but neither of these details or
architectural features are visible on the elevations.
4
The examples contained in Appendix A should be used as a guide
for building design: the standard of compatibility with the area's
historic structures is not intended to impose a rigid design solution
for new development. Replication of the design of the important
historic sites in the area is neither intended nor desired. The
Guideline's standard of compatibility can be met through building
scale, materials, and forms which may be embodied in architecture
which is contemporary as well as traditional. The Guidelines allow
individuality in design to accommodate varying tastes as well as
special functional requirements.
10
REF I GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19 ISSUE RECOMMENDATION
Compatibility with the character of the Entrance Corridor
5
It is also an important objective of the Guidelines to establish a
See recommendation in #1.
Two- to three-story apartment buildings
None.
pattern of compatible architectural characteristics throughout the
characterize the area, while a low -slung
Entrance Corridor in order to achieve unity and coherence. Building
commercial building abuts this parcel to the north.
designs should demonstrate sensitivity to other nearby structures
within the Entrance Corridor. Where a designated corridor is
substantially developed, these Guidelines require striking a careful
balance between harmonizing new development with the existing
character of the corridor and achieving compatibility with the
significant historic sites in the area.
p - I
or
+'
IL
r M 4
The corridor includes a mix of building types,
styles, and scales. The character is typically
suburban, with buildings set back from the street
curb and fronted or surrounded by asphalt surface
parking. At two stories, this building is sensitive to
the surrounding built fabric. Sited on the street with
parking relegated behind and under the building,
this project will bring a new layout to the area that
is quintessential to the Neighborhood Model
District.
SPECIFIC GUIDELINES
Structure design
9
Building forms and features, including roofs, windows, doors,
See recommendation in #1.
This pared -down, minimalist building has
See recommendations in #1.
materials, colors and textures should be compatible with the forms
attributes of Classical design, such as regular
and features of the significant historic buildings in the area,
fenestration, engaged pilasters, a water table and
exemplified by (but not limited to) the buildings described in
architrave — but because the materiality does not
Appendix A [of the design guidelines]. The standard of
change between these latter three elements and the
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
compatibility can be met through scale, materials, and forms which
wall plane, they are subtle. The standard of
may be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well as
compatibility with historic structures in the region
traditional. The replication of important historic sites in Albemarle
has been met through scale (as the building is only
County is not the objective of these guidelines.
two stories) and materials (through the use of red
brick). The footprint uniquely responds to the site
conditions by jogging at the rounded corner where
the two roads intersect:
r
Z:
ti i . rye. 7r
h � , F
7Cdndwl+ IlCrw
� •�
, I �jr t47
�.4 r
1 n
The fenestration configuration; the aluminum
window frames, canopies, and coping; and the lack
of ornamentation is squarely a modern aesthetic,
and the overall character of the building is
contemporary.
10
Buildings should relate to their site and the surrounding context of
At two stories and comprised of brick, this design
Provide either increased or
buildings.
does relate to several nearby buildings. Rising 32
more differentiated detailing,
12
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
11
The overall design of buildings should have human scale. Scale
feet from grade, the building is tall for a traditional
ornamentation, or
should be integral to the building and site design.
two-story edifice, especially as the first story is 14-
feet in height. More questionable is the scale of the
architectural relief to better
provide human scale.
12
Architecture proposed within the Entrance Corridor should use
forms, shapes, scale, and materials to create a cohesive whole.
length: the north wing is 100 feet long, the hinge
(central "tower" feature) is 30 feet, and the south
13
Any appearance of "blankness" resulting from building design
should be relieved using design detail or vegetation, or both.
wing is 50 feet. The north wing is divided into six
unequal bays (the two ends are 12'-8", the middle
14
Arcades, colonnades, or other architectural connecting devices
should be used to unify groups of buildings within a development.
four are 14'-0"); the south wing into three unequal
bays (the end two are 12'-8" and the middle 14'-
15
Trademark buildings and related features should be modified to meet
the requirements of the Guidelines.
0"); and the hinge is one single bay measuring 20'-
0". Although two bays on the north wing hold
single entrances marked by canopies, the overall
fenestration is so regular and the detail and
ornamentation so minimal that the bays will hardly
feel differentiated by a passing pedestrian or
motorist. Human scale is achieved not only through
mitigating size but providing variety and visual
interest, which this homogenous design does not.
While the design is not a trademark, it is generic.
Blankness has been resolved through copious
fenestration, but fenestration that is so regular as to
blend into the wall plane. Blankness will depend
ultimately, in this scenario, on the transparency of
the glass.
16
Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should not be highly tinted or
Provide the standard window
The window glass note has not been provided on
Provide the standard window
highly reflective. Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should
glass note to the architectural
the architectural drawings submitted.
glass note to the
meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall
drawings.
Manufacturer's specifications on the glazing will
architectural drawings.
not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed
also be required at the Final Site Plan review to
30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should be
verify that the selected glass brand meets these
Provide manufacturer's
submitted with the application for final review.
limits.
specifications on the glazing
for the Final Site Plan
review.
Site development and layout
6
Site development should be sensitive to the existing natural
None.
The site slopes downward from east to west, while
None.
landscape and should contribute to the creation of an organized
a band of critical slopes bisects the site:
development plan. This may be accomplished, to the extent
practical, by preserving the trees and rolling terrain typical of the
area; planting new trees along streets and pedestrian was and
13
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
choosing species that reflect native forest elements; insuring that any
-
grading will blend into the surrounding topography thereby creating
_ Y
a continuous landscape; preserving, to the extent practical, existing
significant river and stream valleys which may be located on the site
and integrating these features into the design of surrounding
-�
development; and limiting the building mass and height to a scale
j
that does not overpower the natural settings of the site, or the
Entrance Corridor.
_ r
The proposed building is located on the plateau at
the east edge of the site, while a 20-foot buffer, a
preservation area that extends 75 feet at its greatest
depth from the western property line, and a
conservation area that extends 95 feet at its greatest
depth from the western property line, form the
western third of the site. The middle section is
comprised of parking, and the applicants received a
waiver for the critical slopes when ZNIA-2006-14
was approved.
Landscaping
7
The requirements of the Guidelines regarding landscaping are
None.
Lawns are not proposed, although street trees and
None.
intended to reflect the landscaping characteristic of many of the
trees in the parking area are proposed. The
area's significant historic sites which is characterized by large shade
tabulations on the cover sheet (Sheet 1) state that
trees and lawns. Landscaping should promote visual order within the
54% of the site will be dedicated open space
Entrance Corridor and help to integrate buildings into the existing
(approximately 24,908 sf). This is presumably the
environment of the corridor.
western third of the site, which is zoned and
marked as "Preservation Area" and "Conservation
S
Continuity within the Entrance Corridor should be obtained by
planting different types of plant materials that share similar
Area." The fourth proffer in the rezoning
characteristics. Such common elements allow for more flexibility in
application (ZMA-2006-14) stipulates that such
the design of structures because common landscape features will
areas shall be delineated on the preliminary and
help to harmonize the appearance of development as seen from the
final site plans and that any trees larger than 12"
street upon which the Corridor is centered.
dbh removed in the conservation area must be
replaced by two of similar species or quality. The
14
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
"Planting Requirements" table on the Landscape
Plan (Sheet 5) states that 9 trees are to be removed
and the plan provides 18 large shade trees that are
native to this region in compensation.
Accessory structures and equipment
17
Accessory structures and equipment should be integrated into the
None.
No accessory structures are proposed.
None.
overall plan of development and shall, to the extent possible, be
compatible with the building designs used on the site.
18
The following should be located to eliminate visibility from the
If a refuse area is proposed, show
In the previously approved site plan with ZMA-
If a refuse area is proposed,
Entrance Corridor street. If, after appropriate siting, these features will
it on the site plan and include
2006-14, a dumpster was illustrated in the
show it on the site plan and
still have a negative visual impact on the Entrance Corridor street,
details of the dumpster enclosure
northwest corner of the parking area (highlighted
include details of the
screening should be provided to eliminate visibility. a. Loading areas,
in the site plan.
here in yellow):
dumpster enclosure in the
b. Service areas, c. Refuse areas, d. Storage areas, e. Mechanical
equipment,
Substitute evergreen trees with a
a
site plan.
i Above -ground utilities, and g. Chain link fence, barbed wire, razor
height over 10' at maturity for the
" _iy
Substitute evergreen trees
wire, and similar security fencing devices.
5 viburnums presently proposed
a _ `4-
with a height over 10' at
on the southeast corner and the 3
maturity for the 5 viburnums
viburnums presently proposed on
{ .A s ',�
presently proposed on the
the northeast corner of the
_ E
southeast corner and the 3
building.
__
O I
viburnums presently
ry.
proposed on the northeast
Provide the top- and bottom -of-
f w ^`�i`� — ,&
corner of the building.
wall heights for the retaining
' ''" ;
walls surrounding the proposed
Provide the top- and bottom -
ground -mounted HVAC units in
`�� — - �P'���
of -wall heights for the
the southeast and northeast
v ti s ; °
retaining walls surrounding
corners of the building. Provide+'
material samples for the retaining
s ;'� ° 'i _ i`� p
!�H �+
the proposed ground -
mounted HVAC units in the
, 4r
walls and provide a detail of the
walls on the site plan set.
ti , , _
�E „ �° a
southeast and northeast
corners of the building.
' - „`
Provide material samples for
the retaining walls and
provide a detail of the walls
on the site plan set.
No dumpster has been provided in this plan; if a
refuse area is intended, then it must be shown on
the site plan and details of the dumpster enclosure
15
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
must be included in the site plan.
There is a proposed 12' x 25' loading area at the
south (side) elevation of the building, adjacent to
Georgetown Road; it will be visible to northbound
traffic on Hydraulic. Presently, the proposed
screening of this loading area consists of 6 liberty
hollies on the south edge and 5 red balloon
viburnums on the east edge; the former is an
evergreen shrub/specimen tree that can reach 12'
high in maturity, while the latter is a deciduous
shrub that reaches 6'-8' in maturity. The latter may
not provide the necessary screening to eliminate
visibility of this service/loading area, not only due
to its medium height but also because it will not
leaf year -around.
Similarly, 5 viburnums are positioned to screen a
retaining wall on the southeast corner of the
building that is shielding ground -mounted HVAC
equipment; a similar enclosed area with 3
viburnums is proposed for the northeast corner of
the building. The only information provided on
these two walled areas that will be visible from the
EC is a note on Sheet 3, "Retaining wall 6' max w/
railing." Top/bottom of wall measurements should
be provided on Sheet 3 for these two retaining
walls, while the materials, color, and a detail
should also be provided in the site plan set. Again,
the viburnum screening may not fully eliminate
visibility of this area from the EC.
19
Screening devices should be compatible with the design of the
See above recommendation.
Screening of ground -mounted HVAC equipment is
See above recommendation.
buildings and surrounding natural vegetation and may consist of. a.
provided by a combination of retaining walls and
Walls, b. Plantings, and c. Fencing.
plantings. No fencing is proposed.
20
Surface runoff structures and detention ponds should be designed to fit
Relocate the landscape island and
An underground stormwater system is proposed in
Relocate the landscape
into the natural topography to avoid the need for screening. When
tree at the western edge of the
the south end of the site, in the parking lot to the
island and tree at the western
visible from the Entrance Corridor street, these features must be fully
a away from the
rear of the building. A review comment made in
edge of the parking area
16
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
integrated into the landscape. They should not have the appearance of
stormwater outlet.
2008 identified a potential conflict between the tree
away from the stormwater
engineered features.
(then a Zelkova, now a Goldenrain tree) in the
outlet.
island on the western edge of the parking area and
the outlet for the stormwater facility. The tree is
located directly atop the outlet and thereby creates
a conflict.
21
The following note should be added to the site plan and the
Include the mechanical equipment
The note has not been provided on the site plan set
Include the mechanical
architectural plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the
note on the site plan set and
and should also be added to the architectural set.
equipment note on the site
Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated."
architectural drawings.
plan set and architectural
drawings.
Lighting
22-28
General Guidelines
Provide a lighting plan for review
No lighting plan has been submitted for review,
Provide a lighting plan for
that includes a photometric plan,
however, notes on Sheet 1 state:
review that includes a
a luminaire schedule, and
1. Lighting Plan will be provided for final site
photometric plan, a
manufacturer's cut sheets for all
plan review
luminaire schedule, and
proposed wall -mounted and
2. All proposed lighting will not exceed 3,000
manufacturer's cut sheets for
freestanding fixtures.
lumens
all proposed wall -mounted
3. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or
and freestanding fixtures.
shielded to reflect light away from adjoining
residential districts and away from adjacent
roads.
29
The following note should be included on the lighting plan: "Each
Revise the plan to provide the
A version of the note is provided on Sheet 1, the
Provide the standard lighting
outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more
standard lighting note.
cover sheet that reads, "Each outdoor luminaries
note verbatim on the lighting
initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged
[sic] equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or
plan submitted for the Final
or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts
more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaries
Site Plan review.
and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from
[sic] and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect
luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural
light away from adjoining residential districts and
areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle."
from adjacent roads." The second sentence is
missing, and the first sentence has vocabulary
errors. The note must be produced verbatim.
30-31
Guidelines or the Use o Decorative Landscape Lighting
None.
None proposed.
None.
Landscaping
32
Landscaping along the frontage of Entrance Corridor streets should
Ensure that no proposed tree
Rather than evenly -spaced street trees along the
Ensure that no proposed tree
include the following:
conflicts with an existing or
street edge, this plan provides large shade and
conflicts with an existing or
a. Large shade trees should be planted parallel to the Entrance
proposed utility or its easement
understory trees against the eastern and
proposed utility or its
Corridor Street. Such trees should be at least 3'/2 inches caliper
and that large shade trees are
southeastern building fagade. Several of these trees
easement and that large
measured 6 inches above theground) and should be of a plant
placed a minimum of 7 feet from
and shrubs are located within an existing VEPCO
shade trees are placed a
17
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
species common to the area. Such trees should be located at least
the center of a utility line. If trees
easement, so they could be subject to trimming by
minimum of 7 feet from the
every 35 feet on center.
are placed in easements, provide
the power company; assurances that trees can be
center of a utility line. If
b. Flowering ornamental trees of a species common to the area should
documentation from the easement
planted in this easement must be provided.
trees are placed in
be interspersed among the trees required by the preceding paragraph.
holders that the vegetation is
Furthermore, at least two of these trees are located
easements, provide
The ornamental trees need not alternate one for one with the large
permissible.
within 4' o.c. from an existing RWSA water line. It
documentation from the
shade trees. They may be planted among the large shade trees in a less
is County Engineering policy to allow large shade
easement holders that the
regular spacing pattern.
Revise the site plan set to show
trees a minimum of 7-8' from underground
vegetation is permissible.
c. In situations where appropriate, a three or four board fence or low
all utilities and easements
utilities; this plan suggests that insufficient
stone wall, typical of the area, should align the frontage of the
consistently throughout the site
landscape area has been provided to meet the EC
Revise the site plan set to
Entrance Corridor street.
plan set.
standards for planting. Additionally, the RWSA
show all utilities and
d. An area of sufficient width to accommodate the foregoing
water line is not drawn on the landscape plan
easements consistently
plantings and fencing should be reserved parallel to the Entrance
Provide a note that the ginkgoes
(Sheet 5) although it is apparent in other drawings.
throughout the site plan set.
Corridor street, and exclusive of road right-of-way and utility
planted will not be female.
Including it on the landscape plan would facilitate
easements.
review.
Provide a note that the
ginkgoes planted will not be
Six Brandywine red maples at 3.5" caliper are
female.
proposed for the EC frontage, irregularly spaced.
Four columnar ginkgo bilobas are also proposed at
1.25" caliper. Furthermore, previous review
comments in 2008 requested that the ginkgoes be
male species only; a note should be added to the
landscape plan that no female ginkgoes will be
planted.
33
Landscaping along interior roads:
None.
The interior travelway is merely a parking lot lane
None.
a. Large trees should be planted parallel to all interior roads. Such
and there are no trees provided. Pedestrian ways
trees should be at least 2%2 inches caliper (measured six inches above
include sidewalks connecting the building to the
the ground) and should be of a plant species common to the area.
existing 6-foot-wide public sidewalk lining the
Such trees should be located at least every 40 feet on center.
western edge of Hydraulic and the northern edge of
Georgetown Road. The trees that line the building
34
Landscaping along interior pedestrian ways:
a. Medium trees should be planted parallel to all interior pedestrian
suffice as landscaping for these pedestrian ways.
ways. Such trees should be at least 2'/z inches caliper (measured six
Except for the proposed ginkgo bilobas, all trees
inches above the ground) and should be of a species common to the
proposed on the eastern side of the building are a
area. Such trees should be located at least every 25 feet on center.
minimum of 2.5" caliper.
35
Landscaping of parking areas:
Provide four trees in the parking
There are 58 parking spaces proposed although 55
Provide four trees in the
a. Large trees should align the perimeter of parking areas, located 40
area at a minimum of 2.5" caliper.
are required. A note on the landscape plan (Sheet
parking area at a minimum
feet on center. Trees should be planted in the interior of parking
Update the plant schedule on
5) states that 35 of those spaces are surface
of 2.5" caliper. Update the
18
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
areas at the rate of one tree for every 10 parking spaces provided and
Sheet 5 to reflect this change.
parking, although 36 were counted with an
plant schedule on Sheet 5 to
should be evenly distributed throughout the interior of the parking
additional loading area, totaling to 37 surface
reflect this change.
area.
Ensure that no proposed tree
spaces. Therefore, 4 interior parking lot trees are
b. Trees required by the preceding paragraph should measure 21/z
conflicts with an existing or
required. The note continues to state that 4 trees
Ensure that no proposed tree
inches caliper (measured six inches above the ground); should be
proposed utility or its easement.
have been provided, but only 3 Goldenrain trees at
conflicts with an existing or
evenly spaced; and should be of a species common to the area. Such
1.25" caliper have been provided. A fourth tree
proposed utility or its
trees should be planted in planters or medians sufficiently large to
must be provided and all trees in the parking area
easement.
maintain the health of the tree and shall be protected by curbing.
must be planted at a 2.5" caliper minimum.
c. Shrubs should be provided as necessary to minimize the parking
area's impact on Entrance Corridor streets. Shrubs should measure
Large shade trees at 2.5" caliper have been
24 inches in height.
provided on the western edge of the parking area,
in the Conservation Area. However, at least 2 of
these trees are located atop a proposed sanitary
sewer line and an additional 3 trees are located
within 2-5' o.c. from the underground utility. As
stated previously, it is standard County
Engineering staff policy that large shade trees be
located a minimum of 7-8' from underground
utilities lest there be a conflict. This can be
resolved by relocating the proposed sanitary sewer
line eastward.
36
Landscaping of buildings and other structures:
None.
Landscaping has been provided on the eastern
None.
a. Trees or other vegetation should be planted along the front of long
fagade of the building in the form of large shade
buildings as necessary to soften the appearance of exterior walls.
trees, understory trees, and evergreen and
The spacing, size, and type of such trees or vegetation should be
deciduous shrubs. The latter are proposed 24" in
determined by the length, height, and blankness of such walls.
height at time of planting in the plant schedule
b. Shrubs should be used to integrate the site, buildings, and other
provided on Sheet 5.
structures; dumpsters, accessory buildings and structures; "drive
thru" windows; service areas; and signs. Shrubs should measure at
least 24 inches in height.
37
Plant species:
Consider substituting locally
Almost all of the plant species listed in the plant
Consider substituting locally
a. Plant species required should be as approved by the Staff based
native species for the non-native
schedule on the landscape plan (Sheet 5) are
native species for the non -
upon but not limited to the Generic Landscape Plan Recommended
plants proposed.
included in the County's approved plant lists.
native plants proposed.
Species List and Native Plants for Virginia Landscapes (Appendix
However, one shrub variety (Ilex x `Conty) is not
D).
Provide at least two more
found in the approved lists. Three plant species
Provide at least two more
evergreen shrub species so that no
(Ginko biloba, Koelreuteria paniculate, and
evergreen shrub species so
onespecies of shrub proposed
Viburnum x rh tido b lloides "Redell ") are non-
that no onespecies of shrub
19
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
exceeds, in number, one -quarter
natives. The use of native species, and especially
proposed exceeds, in
of the total number of shrubs
those native to the Virginia Piedmont regions, are
number, one -quarter of the
proposed.
encouraged for biohabitat reasons.
total number of shrubs
proposed.
Rectify errors in the plant
The number of Buxus x Glencoe proposed (95)
schedule on Sheet 5.
exceeds one -quarter of the total number of shrubs
Rectify errors in the plant
(130) proposed. It is standard policy to request that
schedule on Sheet 5.
no one tree or shrub species exceed 25% of the
total number of trees or shrubs on the site in order
to avoid a monoculture that could be prone to
disease. Diversity can only be achieved with the
addition of two or more evergreen shrub species to
reduce the numbers of Buxus x Glencoe below the
25% threshold, which is 33 plants.
Errors exist in the plant schedule that must be
corrected: 7 AR and 3 LS are shown on the
landscape plan, not 5 as noted for both.
38
Plant health:
None.
The note has been provided on Sheet 5.
None.
The following note should be added to the landscape plan: "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 theplant."
Site Development and layout
Development pattern
39
The relationship of buildings and other structures to the Entrance
Provide all site elements required
The proposed development shows an organized
Provide all site elements
Corridor street and to other development within the corridor should
by the Proffers and Code of
pattern of travelways and pedestrian connections.
required by the Proffers and
be as follows:
Development approved with
Sidewalks connect the public sidewalk on
Code of Development
a. An organized pattern of roads, service lanes, bike paths, and
ZMA-2006-14, including a
Hydraulic Road and to the building. However, the
approved with ZMA-2006-
pedestrian walks should guide the layout of the site.
widened sidewalk; an entry plaza
Code of Development for this parcel calls for the
14, including a widened
b. In general, buildings fronting the Entrance Corridor street should
with picnic tables; a bicycle rack;
sidewalk on Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads to
sidewalk; an entry plaza
be parallel to the street. Building groupings should be arranged to
and a bus shelter. Show these site
be widened and landscaped, which this site plan
with picnic tables; a bicycle
parallel the Entrance Corridor street.
elements on the site plan.
does not illustrate. Furthermore, the Code of
rack; and a bus shelter.
c. Provisions should be made for connections to adjacent pedestrian
Development calls for an "entry plaza and picnic
Show these site elements on
and vehicular circulation systems.
tables;" while the site plan shows a stamped
the site plan.
d. Open saces should be tied into surrounding areas to provide
concrete area in front of the hinge tower element,
20
REF
GUIDELINE
RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
continuity within the Entrance Corridor.
measuring approximately 35' x 40' at its widest
e. If significant natural features exist on the site (including creek
point, it is unclear whether this element has been
valleys, steep slopes, significant trees or rock outcroppings), to the
considered thoroughly and meets the spirit of the
extent practical, then such natural features should be reflected in the
Code of Development requirement. The design
site layout. If the provisions of Section 32.5.2.n of the Albemarle
does, however, conform very closely to the
County Zoning Ordinance apply, then improvements required by
approved concept sketch in the ZMA-2006-14
that section should be located so as to maximize the use of existing
application plan. [Figure 7]
features in screening such improvements from Entrance Corridor
streets.
Furthermore, two proffers were made at the time of
i The placement of structures on the site should respect existing
rezoning (ZMA-2006-14) which require the
views and vistas on and around the site.
applicant to provide a permanent 5-bike bicycle
rack and a 9-foot-wide bus shelter. These site
elements must be shown on the site plan.
In regard to parking, as per NMD standards, the
parking has been relegated behind the building and
structured parking beneath the building is
proposed. However, this plan differs from
previously approved plans in that it shows double -
stacked parking through the full depth of the
building footprint.
The building mass is oriented parallel to the EC.
Provisions have been made to connect both
pedestrian and vehicular systems. Open space has
been provided in the western third of the site, while
a plaza is proposed on the eastern side of the
building as a public amenity. No significant natural
features or vistas worthy of preservation exist on
this site.
21
Figure 7. Conceptplan as shown in application forZMA-2006-14.
REF I GUIDELINE RECOMMENDATION 5-6-19 1 ISSUE RECOMMENDATION
Site Grading
40
Site grading should maintain the basic relationship of the site to
Provide additional vegetation on
Significant grading is required in the center of the
Provide additional
surrounding conditions by limiting the use of retaining walls and by
the retaining walls in the
site, necessitating two retaining walls in the
vegetation on the retaining
shaping the terrain through the use of smooth, rounded land forms that
southwest and northwest corners
southwest and northwest corners of the parking
walls in the southwest and
blend with the existing terrain. Steep cut or fill sections are generally
of the parking area.
area. They reach as high as 10' and 15'
northwest corners of the
22
unacceptable. Proposed contours on the grading plan shall be rounded
Provide details of the proposed
respectively. Any retaining wall over six feet must
parking area.
with a ten -foot minimum radius where they meet the adjacent
retaining walls in the site plan set
be terraced and landscaped, but this is not shown
condition. Final grading should achieve a natural, rather than
and submit material and color
on the site plan set. A single row of Buxus x
Provide details of the
engineered, appearance. Retaining walls 6 feet in height and taller,
samples for review. Retaining
Glencoe is proposed for the south wall of the
proposed retaining walls in
when necessary, shall be terraced and planted to blend with the
walls over six feet must be
northernmost retaining wall, but it is unclear how
the site plan set and submit
landscape.
terraced and landscaped.
tall this shrub will become in maturity and whether
material and color samples
it will provide sufficient screening. No vegetation
for review. Retaining walls
is proposed for the northwestern wall, a portion of
over six feet must be
which will be visible from the EC. Similarly, a
terraced and landscaped.
single row of Arborvitae is proposed for the north
side of the southernmost wall; this will not serve to
screen the wall from northbound traffic on the EC,
and the 20' ACSA easement spanning the southern
edge of the property appears to have no extant
trees to be retained, and no trees are proposed.
Additional vegetation may be needed to mitigate
the visibility of these walls. Additionally, details of
the proposed retaining walls must be provided in
the site plan set, as well as materials and colors for
review.
41
No grading, trenching, or tunneling should occur within the drip line of
Provide sufficient tree protection
The Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan sheet
Provide sufficient tree
any trees or other existing features designated for preservation in the
fencing around those trees to be
(Sheet 2) of the site plan set shows dozens of
protection fencing around
final Certificate of Appropriateness. Adequate tree protection fencing
preserved and clearly
extant trees on the parcel with an arrow pointing to
those trees to be preserved
should be shown on, and coordinated throughout, the grading,
differentiate between trees to be
two trees in the center and a note which states
and clearly differentiate
landscaping and erosion and sediment control plans.
removed and those to be retained
on Sheet 2 of the site plan set.
"existing trees to be removed." It is therefore
unclear how many trees are being removed and
between trees to be removed
and those to be retained on
42
Areas designated for preservation in the final Certificate of
Appropriateness should be clearly delineated and protected on the
which (if any) are being preserved. The site plan
Sheet 2 of the site plan set.
site prior to any grading activity on the site. This protection should
should clearly differentiate between trees to be
remain in place until completion of the development of the site.
removed and those to be preserved; tree
preservation fencing should be shown around the
43
Preservation areas should be protected from storage or movement of
heavy equipment within this area.
latter.
44
Natural drainage patterns (or to the extent required, new drainage
None.
The proposed stormwater facility has two filterras
None.
patterns) should be incorporated into the finished site to the extent
and a riprap outlet that takes advantage of the
possible.
natural downward slope on the western side of the
parking area.
23
U110Y 10MAIM] 99 OMI]1i 1U 1040 17•� 0 MOM
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. How the building design meets the architectural standards outlined in the Code of Development.
2. How the building design meets the requirements of the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines.
3. Whether the design should be revised to better meet the Code of Development or whether the Code of Development language should be revised/eliminated.
4. The potential visibility of the retaining walls in the southwest and northwest corners of the site and whether additional landscaping will be required.
5. Whether sufficient landscape area has been provided on the east side of the building to ensure that large shade trees will not conflict with utilities and their easements.
Regarding the Code of Development, staff recommends that the ARB forward the following recommendations to the Agent:
1. The proposed design meets requirements 1, 6, and 7, but not 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the Architectural and Landscape Standards outlined in the Code of Development. Therefore, it does not meet the
Code of Development.
2. The ARB recommends that the design of the building be revised to better meet requirements 2, 3, 4, and 5 of the Architectural and Landscape Standards outlined in the Code of Development.
Staff offers the following recommendations for the Final Site Plan submittal:
1. Submit revised elevations with legible linework that accurately illustrates the brick patterns and detailing.
2. Provide floor plans and material samples for review.
3. Clarify the materials key on Sheet A201 and provide details of the corbeled bricks. Clarify where brick arches are implemented.
4. Provide either increased or more differentiated detailing, ornamentation, or architectural relief to better provide human scale.
5. Provide the standard window glass note to the architectural drawings: Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop
below 4001o. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%.
6. Provide manufacturer's specifications on the glazing for the Final Site Plan review.
7. If a refuse area is proposed, show it on the site plan and include details of the dumpster enclosure in the site plan.
8. Substitute evergreen trees with a height over 10' at maturity for the 5 vibumums presently proposed on the southeast corner and the 3 viburnums presently proposed on the northeast corner of the
building.
9. Provide the top- and bottom -of -wall heights for the retaining walls surrounding the proposed ground -mounted HVAC units in the southeast and northeast corners of the building. Provide material
samples for the retaining walls and provide a detail of the walls on the site plan set.
10. Relocate the landscape island and tree at the western edge of the parking area away from the stormwater outlet.
11. Include the mechanical equipment note on the site plan set and architectural drawings: Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.
12. Provide a lighting plan for review that includes a photometric plan, a luminaire schedule, and manufacturer's cut sheets for all proposed wall -mounted and freestanding fixtures.
13. Provide the standard lighting note verbatim on the lighting plan submitted for the Final Site Plan review: Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens
shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires
onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle.
14. Ensure that no proposed tree conflicts with an existing or proposed utility or its easement and that large shade trees are placed a minimum of 7 feet from the center of a utility line. If trees are
placed in easements, provide documentation from the easement holders that the vegetation is permissible.
15. Revise the site plan set to show all utilities and easements consistently throughout the site plan set.
16. Provide a note that the ginkgoes planted will not be female.
17. Provide four trees in the parking area at a minimum of 2.5" caliper. Update the plant schedule on Sheet 5 to reflect this change.
18. Ensure that no proposed tree conflicts with an existing or proposed utility or its easement.
24
19. Consider substituting locally native species for the non-native plants proposed.
20. Provide at least two more evergreen shrub species so that no one species of shrub proposed exceeds, in number, one -quarter of the total number of shrubs proposed.
21. Rectify errors in the plant schedule on Sheet 5.
22. Provide all site elements required by the Proffers and Code of Development approved with ZMA-2006-14, including a widened sidewalk; an entry plaza with picnic tables; a bicycle rack; and a
bus shelter. Show these site elements on the site plan.
23. Provide additional vegetation on the retaining walls in the southwest and northwest corners of the parking area.
24. Provide details of the proposed retaining walls in the site plan set and submit material and color samples for review. Retaining walls over six feet must be terraced and landscaped.
25. Provide sufficient tree protection fencing around those trees to be preserved and clearly differentiate between trees to be removed and those to be retained on Sheet 2 of the site plan set.
25
TABLE 3
This report is based on the following submittal items:
Sheet #
Drawing Name
Drawing Date
1
Cover Sheet
3/7/2019
2
Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan
3/7/2019
3
Site Plan and Typical Sections
3/7/2019
4
Grading & Utility Plan
3/7/2019
5
Landscape Plan, Notes and Details
3/7/2019
A200
Elevations
7/8/2019
A201
Elevations
7/8/2019
A202
Elevations
7/8/2019
A203
Views
7/8/2019
A204
Views
7/8/2019
A203 sic
Site Section
7/8/2019
26
F.111 0 RXIM I L3 I of 1Z 1110.1
a
COLTNTV OF ALBEMARLE
Deip R rf Ment of Community Dkwelapmen t
401 Nicintire Road, North 'Wing
Pficinc(4341 296�5932 CharlottesyWe,Virginia 22902-4596 Pax (434) 972-4126
May7, 2019
Riki Van-Niekark
Roudabush, Gale & Assoc., Inc,
172 South PantDps Drive
Chariottesville, VA 22941
RE; ARB-2019-00028: Georgintown Hydraulic Professional Office, Initial Site Plan
(TWParcel 06CF0000000300)
Dear Mr. Van-Niekork,
At its meeting on Monday: May, 6, 2010 IlheAlblarnaria ClDull!Y Architectural Review Board
unanimous[y voted to forward the foillomrig recommendations on the above -noted Initial Site
Deveroloment Plan to the ageritfor the Site Review Comrnirtee,
• Regarding r�WJCE�rrents to sal!isS, tha design guidelines as per § 118-30,6.4c(2), (3) and (5)
and recommended conditions of irirlial plan approval None Note that a Certificate of
Appropriateness is required prior to fu7@i site plan approval.
• Regarding recommendations on the Plan 03 it relates to the guidelines:: None.
• Regarding conditions 10 be satisfied PvDr to issuance of a grading pemi,t:
1. - Pr
ovide e sufficient tree prolection fencing around those Vees to be preserved and clearly
differentiate betwee-, trees to be removed and those to be relainad or, Sheet 2 of the site
plan set.
• Regarding the fins; s;te pion 6.1mittat-
1 . Architecture ono andsc-ap-rig wil be reviewed with a future submittal. A Carbll of
Appropriateness is required prior to final site plan approval.
2, Submit Material and color samples dirnerisiorad elevations, and floor plans of the
apaltrnent buildings for review.
3. Provide the standard window glass note to tre architectural dra-.,Ang& Window glass if]
thu Entrar3ce Comders sh0did m0el ffm following c6foria: Visible lrghj trafysmittaftce
(VL 7) shall nil [frup below 40%. Viseblu light reflectance (VLR) shall riot exceed 30%.
4. If a refuse area 'S proposed, Show it on the sine plan and include -details of the dumpster
encesule in the sqe plan,
5. Substitute everqrea^ trees with a height Over 10: at maturity Tor tirla, 6 vibumunIs
prasenUy proposed on the southeast comer and tine 3 vibumorris presently proposed on
the northeast comer of the bu rd Mg
6. Provide the top- and bottom -of -wall heights for the retaining walls surrounding the
proposed ground -mounted HVAC units in the southeast and northeast comers of the
building Provide material samples for the retaining walls and provide a detail of the walls
o, the site plan set-
7. Relocate the landscape :stand at the westem edge of the parking area away from the
stormwater outlet eo drawings:
Include the mechanical equipment note of) the Site P)2n Set and architectural I dra jjs:
Visjbihly of all mechanical eq,jllprinent frorp rho Entrance Comd0f shall be elimi'TalOd-
9. Provide a lighting plan for review that includes a photornaltni: plan a luminaire sck�eoue'
and manufacturer s cut sheeks, for all proposed wail -mounted and freestanding fthire5.
10, Revise the p`an to provide the standard lkghting note Each outdoor Id(r7linaire equipped
&,th a lamp Thal
err?
r lumens shad be a full cutoff minaire and
njIs a Goo or fir3ore jnlljFj f
0
shall be arranged or shielded to regect light avay from Irflainmg Fusidenx& d"Stficts and
away from adjacent roads, The spillover of lighting ffom larrjjrairvs onto public roOdS and
property in (esicjerrtraj or jur-,tfimas zoring districts shalt not exCeOfl OFTO half fd0t—rarldf6-
1. Ensure that no proposed tree conflicts with an existing or proposed L
nt
and that large snado trees are placed a minimof 7 feet from the
utility or its easemieasminimumcenter or Iolders that a itii ty line
If trees are placed in easements. provide documentation from the easement ri
the vegetation is perrnissble. tbroughiciut the
12. Revise the site plan got to show all utilities and easernertts cons'stent`IY
site p'an set.
13 Provide a note that the ginkgoes planted will no, be famale.
14. Provide four trees in the parking area at a minimum of 2 Y caliper Update the pant
schedule or Sheet 5 to reflect this change.
15 Consider subsbtlutirij locally 7,ativa species for the non-native plants proposed.
16- provide at least two more evergreen Shrub Species so that no one species of Shrub
proposed exceeds. in number, on"iaqer of the total number of shrubs proposed
17. Rectify arroTs jr-. the plant schedule an Sheet S.
I B. Provide all site elements required by the Proffers and Code Of Development approved
with ZMA-2016-14- including a widened sidewalk; an an" plaza with p;crdc tables; a
bicycle rack and a bus shelter Show these site elements on the site plan
119. Provide additional vegetation an The retaining walls in ti* southwest ana northwest
comers of the parking area.
20 Provide details Of the proposed retaiminig walls in the site plan set and submit material
and r `eat MV5k be terraced and
color samples for review Retwirt ing walls over sox
landscaped
21. Provide s,.tricient tree prote-ction fencing around those trees to he preserved and clearly
dit`eTentata between trees to be removed and these to be retained on Sheet 2 of the sale
plan set.
27