The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP202000064 Review Comments Letter of Revision 1 2021-07-23c nor County of Albemarle Khris Taggart kta a a a rt P a l b e m a r l e.o rg Community Development Department tel: 434-296-5832 ext. 3278 ��BGIN�r' July 23, 2021 To: David Timmerman dtimmerman(o)brw-architects.com. Vy Do vdo@brw-architects.com. Daniel Hyer dhyer@line- grade.com, From: Khris Taggart, Planner RE: ARB2021-89: Rio Hill Final I have reviewed the plans with the revision date of June 28, 2021 submitted for the Rio Hill Redevelopment. The changes made in these plans do not address all the conditions of approval outlined at the ARB meeting held on February 1, 2021. The following revisions are requested to make the proposal consistent with the Entrance Corridor Guidelines (note the number below refer to original conditions from the action letter dated February 2, 2021): 4. Provide a lighting plan for review. Over -illumination of the building is not appropriate. a. Two F1 fixtures (F1-A, F1-B) are noted on the site plan amendment but only one is noted on the architectural drawings. Revise the architectural drawings to note both fixtures. The F-2 fixtures have been noted on the architectural drawings but no cutsheet information on the fixtures is included in the site plan amendment. Revise the site plan to provide cutsheet information and the photometric plan to include the fc values at the ground for these fixtures. Also clarify (with illustrations and/or notes) how the fixtures are attached and where the light is aimed. Four different F3 fixtures have been noted on the architectural drawings s (F3-A, F3-B, F3-C, F3-D) but site plan cutsheet information has been provided for only 2 fixtures. Additionally, the total lumens for the F3-A fixtures have not been provided. Revise the site plan to provide cutsheet information for the F3-C and F3-D fixtures, and include the total lumens for all the fixtures. Three different F4 fixtures have been noted on the architectural drawings (F7-A, F7-B, F7-C) but site plan cutsheet information has been provided for only 1 fixture. Revise the site plan to provide cutsheet information for the F7-B and F7-C fixtures, and include the total lumens for all the fixtures. Three different F5 fixtures have been noted on the architectural drawings (F5-A, F5-B, F5-C) but site plan cutsheet information has been provided for only 2 fixtures. Additionally, the total lumens for these fixtures have not been provided, and the fixtures near Burlington (F5-C) and TJ Maxx and Sierra (F5) noted as 'Greenwall' uplights do not appear to coordinate with the green screens in these locations. Revise the site plan to provide cutsheet information for the F5-B fixtures, include the total lumens for the fixture, and coordinate the locations of the "Greenwall" uplights. Three different F6 fixtures have been noted on the architectural drawings (F6-A, F6-B) but site plan cutsheet information has been provided for only 1 fixture. Revise the site plan to provide cutsheet information for the F6-B fixture, and include the total lumens for the fixture. Two different F7 fixtures are (F7-A, F7-B) noted on the site plan but only one is noted on the architectural drawings. Revise the architectural drawings to note both fixtures. W W W.ALBEMARLLORG 401 McIntire Road, Suite 228 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 b. The lighting plan proposes up -lights and building illumination greater than what has historically been approved for most EC buildings. Additional information on the intensity of illumination on the building is required. Revise the plan to show in footcandles the intensity of the illumination on the building elevations. Confirm that all uplights are aimed at the building and will not project light beyond the building elevations. Regarding the architectural drawings, on page 10 (page 19 on the for print version) the southwest elevations note M-2 and MP-3 metal panel materials but there are no corresponding materials listed on the material key on page 14 (page 26 on the for print version). Please double-check notes for consistency with the materials schedule. If notes are accurate confirm that material samples have been provided or provide samples for the proposed materials. Sincerely, Khris Taggart, Planner W W W.ALBEMARLE.ORG 401 McIntire Road, Suite 228 1 Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Phone (434) 296-5832 February 2, 2021 David Timmerman BRW Architects 112 41h St. NE Charlottesville, VA 22902 Fax (4341 972-4126 RE: ARB-2020-135/ARB-2020-133/134: Rio Hill Redevelopment / TJ Maxx/Sierra Signs (TM P: 04500-00-00-094A0) Dear Applicant(s), The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above noted item at its meeting on Monday, February 1, 2021. The Board unanimously approved the request, pending staff administrative approval of the following conditions: Regarding the site plan and architectural design for TJ Maxx and Sierra. 1. Provide samples for all materials and colors that confirm the use of warm tones. 2. If any new mechanical equipment is proposed, show how it will be screened from view from the EC. 3. Provide the standard mechanical equipment note on the architectural drawings. 4. Provide a lighting plan for review. Over -illumination of the building is not appropriate for the EC. 5. Identify the species proposed for the green screens on the site plan. Regarding the site plan and the overall architectural design. 1. Provide samples for all materials and colors that confirm the use of warm tones. 2. If any new mechanical equipment is proposed, show how it will be screened from view from the EC. 3. Provide the standard mechanical equipment note on the architectural drawings. 4. Provide a lighting plan for review. Over -illumination of the building is not appropriate for the EC. 5. Identify the species proposed for the green screens on the site plan. 6. If the architectural designs proposed for TJ Maxx and Sierra receive approval prior to the design of the overall shopping center, coordinate the overall design with TJ Maxx and Sierra. Regarding the CSP and the signs for TJ Maxx and Sierra. 1. Revise the CSP to include the following detail regarding graphics colors: "no limit to graphics colors as long as the total is limited to three, plus black and white." 2. All raceways must be painted or replaced so that the raceway color matches the color of the wall to which it is attached. 3. The signs for TJ Maxx and Sierra are approved as proposed. Please provide: 1. One full set of revised drawings addressing each of these conditions. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing. 2. A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. I' changes other than those requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also. Highlighting the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval. 3. The attached `Revised Application Submittal' form. This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. When staffs review of this information indicates that all conditions of approval have been met, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be issued. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Khris Taggart Planner ktaggart@albemarle.org cc: Beth Robinson Hightech Signs 2165 Seminole Trail Charlottesville, VA 22901 Albert Fitch / Josh Kagan Hart Realty Advisors 92 Hopmeadows St. Weatogue, CT 06089 SCR Rio Hill C/O Rosenthal Properties 300 Galleria Parkway, 121h Floor Atlanta, GA 30339 File 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: Khris Taggart DATE: PROJECT NAME: Rio Hill Submittal Type Requiring Revisions () indicates Submittal Code 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 ARB-2020-135 Other: Please explain (For staff use only) Submittal Code # Copies Distribute To: Submittal Code # Copies Distribute To: ARB 1 Khris Taggart