Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200800140 Staff Report 2008-10-27ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #: Name ARB- 2008 -140: Crown BMW Retail Parts & Service Building Review Type Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan Parcel Identification Tax Map 78, Parcels 15, 15B and 15B 1 Location 1295 Richmond Road: Located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Richmond Road (Route 250 East) with Pantops Park Drive Zoned Highway Commercial (HC) and Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner Astar ASB VA2 LLC; Rickey Lee and Donna G. Baumgardner Applicant Crown Automotive (Mike Craddock) Magisterial District Rivanna Proposal To construct a 1,500 sf. parts, retail and service building, with associated site improvements. ARB Meeting Date November 3, 2008 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski SITE/PROJECT HISTORY • This proposal includes changes to three parcels on Tax Map 78: Parcels 15, 15B and 15B 1. • Parcel 15 is the site of the existing Crown BMW showroom, which was approved by the ARB in 1999 (ARB- F(SDP)98 -66) as the Pegasus dealership. At that time a future Phase 2 building was planned for the northwest corner of Parcel 15 and the ARB indicated that the design of the Phase 2 building would have to be coordinated with the design of the main showroom. A proposal for the Phase 2 building on Parcel 15 was reviewed and approved by the ARB in 2005 (ARB- 2005 -81) but that proposal is no longer being pursued. • Parcels 15B and B 1 (the site of the proposed parts /service building) were previously the site of the Pantops Service Center (demolition permit issued June 2004). Parcel 15B1 (which is adjacent to the EC) is currently being used as overflow parking for the Crown BMW showroom. • The monument sign on Parcel 15 was approved following ARB review on July 3, 2007. • In September 2007 the applicant submitted a BMW prototype design for the parts /service building on Parcels 15BB 1 for staff review /comment. Staff indicated that the design did not meet the EC Guidelines. • The ARB conducted a preliminary review of the retail parts & service building on February 19, 2008 (ARB- 2008 -03). The action letter from that meeting is included as Attachment A to this report. • In March 2008 the applicant made a submittal (ARB- 2008 -33) for the review of changes to the outdoor display of vehicles at this site. There were issues related to coordination of the display parking and the site plan, and that application was withdrawn by the applicant. • A site plan for the current proposal is under review by the Current Development division (SDP- 2008 -144). ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 1 CONTEXT The site of the proposed development is that of the Pantops commercial area, which is characterized by a number of car dealerships with showrooms and outdoor display of vehicles. The site is situated on the south side of Route 250 East, just west of the existing Crown BMW showroom, and directly east of the Virginia National Bank, which was recently constructed. PROJECT CHANGES • Entrance to the site from Route 250 has been revised. The multiple entrances have been consolidated to a single entrance serving both the existing Crown site and the proposed site. • The configuration of the retaining walls has changed. • The planting plan has been revised, including the addition of a planting strip along the east elevation of the proposed building. • Windows have been added to the proposed building. • Information on rooftop mechanical equipment has been provided. VISIBILITY The proposed building will be clearly visible from the EC. ANALYSIS (based on architectural sheets At. 1-1.4, A2.1 -2.2, A3.1 -3.2 with revision date of 9/15/08; lighting plan with revision date of 8- 20 -08; retaining wall sheets RW1 -6 dated 9/10/08; site plan sheets C1 -30 dated 9/8/08) Issue: Height of parapets, Mechanical equipment Comments: • Rooftop mechanical units are proposed for the building, including one over the service area at the back of the building. The service area does not have a parapet wall, but its roof is lower than most of the front part of the building, and the unit is set back 89' from the front of the building. It is possible that the unit might be visible from the eastern end of the frontage of the existing Crown dealership parcel. If the unit were shifted further to the north, its visibility would be further limited. • Previous comments stated: Add a note to the site plan and architectural drawings indicating that equipment shall not be visible from the EC. This was not done. • Previous review comments included: Reduce the height of the central bay of the building, and make corresponding changes to the heights of the end bays, to reduce the top -heavy appearance of the EIFS and to bring the parts and service building into scale with the dealership building, while maintaining screening of rooftop equipment. This change was not made, and the mechanical information submitted suggests that reducing the height of the two lower parapets will allow rooftop equipment to become visible. On the EC fagade of the existing dealership building, the parapet walls rise 8' above the windows. On the proposed building, the parapet walls rise 10', 12' and 14' above the windows /entrance. The proposed building is 15 -25' closer to the EC than the existing building. Recommendations: • Add a note to the site plan and architectural drawings indicating that equipment shall not be visible from the EC. • Shift the rooftop mechanical unit for the service area northward to ensure that it won't be visible from the EC. • Reduce the height of the central bay of the building, and make corresponding changes to the heights of the end bays, to reduce the top -heavy appearance of the EIFS and to bring the parts and service building into ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 2 scale with the dealership building, while maintaining screening of rooftop equipment. Issue: Parapet wall inside color Comments: Previous review comments included: Indicate the color /finish for the inside surface of the taller parapet wall that is adjacent to the curved parapet. This information was not provided. The perspective drawing suggests that the inside of the parapet won't be visible. However, given the complexities of determining the exact extent of visibility of this type of element, it would be best to ensure that the color is an appropriate one that will not draw additional attention to the parapet if it is visible. Recommendation: Indicate on the drawings the color /finish for the inside surface of the taller parapet wall that is adjacent to the curved parapet. Issue: Materials Comments- • A materials sample board has been submitted. It includes a tan brick, off -white EIFS, gray storefront and brown retaining wall block. The building materials and colors are intended to match those of the existing Crown building. • Windows have been added to the east end of the EC elevation and the north end of the east elevation. This part of the building is for parts storage and it appears that storage units are located at the interior along the windows. The type of glass for these windows is not indicated on the drawings. • Spandrel glass is proposed above the main entrance to the building. A sample has not been provided. Recommendations: • Indicate on the plans the type of glass proposed for the windows in the parts storage area. If other than clear, un- tinted glass, provide a sample for review. • Provide a sample of the spandrel glass proposed for the entrance. Issue: Signs Comments: • Two wall signs are proposed for the front elevation of the proposed building. Previous comments stated: Provide for review all details on the wall sign illustrated in the elevations, and all other proposed wall signs (if any). A sign drawing has been submitted, but it does not include detailed information regarding colors, materials, illumination, etc. The wall signs are not channel letter signs, as the EC Guidelines recommend. • A monument sign currently stands at the east side of the existing entrance to the Crown dealership. The applicant proposes to move the sign to the east side of the new entrance into the site. The landscape plan shows no plants at the base of the sign. A staggered row of Carissa Holly is proposed along the frontage. There is an 8' gap in the row for the sign. The EC Guidelines state: Use ground cover, shrubs, andlor trees to integrate freestanding signs into the overall landscape development of the site. This has not been done. • NOTE: The applicant should note that all signs require sign permits from the County. The sign sizes and locations will not receive final approval until the sign permits are applied for, reviewed, and approved. The location of the monument sign on the site plan at this time is for coordination purposes only. Recommendations: • Provide for review all details on all proposed wall signs. Consult the ARB Sign Review Checklist for requirements. • Revise the landscape plan to show the addition of ground cover or other plants to further integrate the monument sign into the overall landscape development of the site. ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 3 Issue: Retaining walls Comments: • Retaining walls run north -south along the west side of the site, west of the proposed building. They are terraced beginning approximately 130' from the EC, with approximately 31/2' of planting area between walls. These wall lengths run 215', 130', 110' and 35'. At approximately 270' from the EC the walls end and turn to the east with a single wall that runs for approximately 140'. The wall then turns again and runs south for approximately 100'. • Another wall runs along the south and east sides of parcel 1513, extending north and east at the southwest corner of parcel 15. • There appears to be about 31/2' between the retaining walls on the west side of the property. Carolina Rhododendron are proposed in rows of 5 between Willow Oak trees at the base of the wall, and on the terraces. The Rhododendron grow 3 -5' tall x 3 -6' wide. Willow Oaks can grow 50 -80' high x 30 -50' wide. The amount of planting seems sparse given the extent of retaining walls proposed. • An elevation of the west side of the proposed building with the retaining walls has been submitted. However, the retaining walls and railings in the elevation don't seem to match the retaining walls and railings on the plan. The color perspective drawings include some of the retaining walls, but those that would be visible from the EC are either not included in the drawings or are obscured by vegetation in the drawings. • Chain link fence is proposed for the retaining wall on the west side of the site. This chain link would be visible from the EC. The EC Guidelines do not allow chain link fencing to be visible from the EC. • A brown block is proposed for the retaining walls. Manufacturer and color names have not been provided. The block is a modular block, but its size is not indicated on the plans. Recommendation: • Revise the planting plan to increase the quantity of plants along and between the retaining walls. • Revise the site plan and /or elevations to reflect the same retaining wall and railing design. • Extend the perspective view showing the west elevation of the building to include the retaining walls on the west side of the site. Include versions with and without the proposed planting along the walls. • Revise the site plan and site details to eliminate the chain link fence. Show an alternate fence /railing that has an appropriate appearance for the EC. Include a fence /railing detail that identifies railing size, material and color. • Revise the site plan and elevations to indicate the manufacturer name and color name of the block proposed for the retaining walls, as well as the size of the block. Issue: Existing tree lines /tree lines to remain, Tree protection Comments: • Previous comments indicated: Provide accurate "existing tree lines to remain". The plan shows existing trees along the east side of Pantops Park Drive as to remain. It doesn't seem possible that these trees could remain after construction of the proposed retaining walls. Likewise, the tree lines to remain shown along the south and east sides of parcel 15B don't seem possible. • An existing tree is shown as to remain in an island northeast of the dumpsters. It doesn't seem likely that this tree would survive the proposed development that surrounds it. • Tree protection isn't shown on the plans. Recommendations: • Revise the plans to show accurate "tree lines to remain ", particularly in the area along the east side of Pantops Park Drive and along the south and east sides of Parcel 15B. If trees are to remain along Pantops Park Drive, indicate them individually on the plan by size and species and coordinate the proposed trees ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 4 and shrubs with the existing trees. Show tree protection on the landscape, grading, and E &S plans. Revise the plan to move all proposed development away from the existing tree to remain that is located northeast of the dumpster area and show tree protection around the tree, or show that the tree is to be removed and show a replacement tree in this location. Include a note on the landscape plan referencing the Flow site plan (SDP- 08 -38) for planting along the east side of Parcel 15. Issue: Planting Comments: • The quantity of Willow Oak, Red Maple and Clethra listed in the plant list don't match the number illustrated on the plan. • Allowing all proposed trees and shrubs to reach mature size is essential for the long term maintenance of an appropriate appearance along the EC. Recommendation: • Revise the landscape plan and/or plant list to coordinate the quantity of Willow Oak, Red Maple, and Clethra. • Add the following note to the 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 the plant." Issue: Lighting C'ommentc- • Sheet C4 shows two "relocated electric poles" at the Route 250 frontage of parcel 15. The labeling of these poles varies from sheet to sheet. It isn't clear if these are electric poles or light poles. If they are light poles that will be moved from one location to another, a revised photometric plan will be required. • Sheet C4 also shows a light pole relocated near the dumpster area on Parcel 15. The drawing suggests that the original location is next to the proposed location, but the existing conditions plan does not show a light in this area. If the light pole is moved from one location to another, a revised photometric plan will be required. • The lighting schedule includes a note that reads "prorated from standard mounting height ". The meaning of this note is not clear. • The photometric plan was calculated using an LLF of .72. To meet ordinance requirements, the LLF must be 1.0. • Cut sheets were not provided for the various light fixtures, so a complete review of the lighting proposal could not be completed. • One light pole is shown over a pipe on the east side of parcel 15B. • The standard lighting note regarding spillover is missing from the plan. Recommendations: • Clarify and coordinate the site plan sheets regarding the relocated electric and/or light poles. If any changes to the type or location of existing light fixtures on parcel 15 are proposed, provide an updated photometric plan that includes parcel 15. • Clarify the meaning of the luminaire schedule note that reads "prorated from standard mounting height ". • Revise the photometric plan using an LLF of 1.0 • Provide on the plan cut sheets for each proposed fixture that illustrate the location of the lamp within each fixture. ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 5 • Coordinate the light pole and pipe locations on the east side of parcel 15B. • Add the following standard lighting note to the site plan: "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle." Issue: Display parking Comments: To proceed with the proposed development without a special use permit, there can be no addition to the previously approved display parking area. The revised entrance to the site and the changes to the frontage along Rt. 250 have decreased the area of display parking on the existing Crown dealership parcel. There are changes proposed to the west end of this parcel (Parcel 15). Two notes in this area on the plan read, "Existing display parking ", but the plan does not clearly identify the display area that the note references. The note nearest the proposed dumpsters does not appear to relate to any previously approved display area. Recommendations: Revise the site plan to clearly show the exact extent of existing display parking area to remain. Ensure that the entire area to remain corresponds to previously approved display parking area. Issue: Dumpsters Comments: Dumpster pads are provided on the east side of the main travelway into the site, east of the proposed building. A dumpster enclosure detail was not included on the plan. Recommendations: Provide a dumpster enclosure detail on the plan. Ensure that the enclosure is coordinated with the appearance of the proposed development. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. Parapet height at EC elevation 2. Visibility of rooftop equipment 3. Windows at parts and storage area 4. Retaining walls — extent of walls and planting 5. Wall sign type Staff offers the following comments on the proposal: 1. Add a note to the site plan and architectural drawings indicating that equipment shall not be visible from the EC. 2. Shift the rooftop mechanical unit for the service area northward to ensure that it won't be visible from the EC. 3. Reduce the height of the central bay of the building, and make corresponding changes to the heights of the end bays, to reduce the top -heavy appearance of the EIFS and to bring the parts and service building into scale with the dealership building, while maintaining screening of rooftop equipment. 4. Indicate on the drawings the color /finish for the inside surface of the taller parapet wall that is adjacent to the curved parapet. 5. Indicate on the plans the type of glass proposed for the windows in the parts storage area. If other than clear, un- tinted glass, provide a sample for review. 6. Provide a sample of the spandrel glass proposed for the entrance. ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 6 7. Provide for review all details on all proposed wall signs. Consult the ARB Sign Review Checklist for requirements. 8. Revise the landscape plan to show the addition of ground cover or other plants to further integrate the monument sign into the overall landscape development of the site. 9. Revise the planting plan to increase the quantity of plants along and between the retaining walls. 10. Revise the site plan and/or elevations to reflect the same retaining wall and railing design. 11. Extend the perspective view showing the west elevation of the building to include the retaining walls on the west side of the site. Include versions with and without the proposed planting along the walls. 12. Revise the site plan and site details to eliminate the chain link fence. Show an alternate fence /railing that has an appropriate appearance for the EC. Include a fence /railing detail that identifies railing size, material and color. 13. Revise the site plan and elevations to indicate the manufacturer name and color name of the block proposed for the retaining walls, as well as the size of the block. 14. Revise the plans to show accurate "tree lines to remain ", particularly in the area along the east side of Pantops Park Drive and along the south and east sides of Parcel 15B. If trees are to remain along Pantops Park Drive, indicate them individually on the plan by size and species and coordinate the proposed trees and shrubs with the existing trees. 15. Show tree protection on the landscape, grading, and E &S plans. 16. Revise the plan to move all proposed development away from the existing tree to remain that is located northeast of the dumpster area and show tree protection around the tree, or show that the tree is to be removed and show a replacement tree in this location. 17. Include a note on the landscape plan referencing the Flow site plan (SDP- 08 -38) for planting along the east side of Parcel 15. 18. Revise the landscape plan and/or plant list to coordinate the quantity of Willow Oak, Red Maple, and Clethra. 19. Add the following note to the 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 the plant." 20. Clarify and coordinate the site plan sheets regarding the relocated electric and/or light poles. If any changes to the type or location of existing light fixtures on parcel 15 are proposed, provide an updated photometric plan that includes parcel 15. 21. Clarify the meaning of the luminaire schedule note that reads "prorated from standard mounting height ". 22. Revise the photometric plan using an LLF of 1.0 23. Provide on the plan cut sheets for each proposed fixture that illustrate the location of the lamp within each fixture. 24. Coordinate the light pole and pipe locations on the east side of parcel 15B. 25. Add the following standard lighting note to the site plan: "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle." 26. Revise the site plan to clearly show the exact extent of existing display parking area to remain. Ensure that the entire area to remain corresponds to previously approved display parking area. 27. Provide a dumpster enclosure detail on the plan. Ensure that the enclosure is coordinated with the appearance of the proposed development. ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 7 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 March 7, 2008 Richard Ball, Architect Bradley & Ball Architects 5921 -H West Friendly Ave Greensboro NC 27410 RE: ARB2008 -00003 Crown BMW Retail Parts & Service Building Tax Map 78, Parcel 15B Dear Mr. Ball: Fax (434) 972 -4126 The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on February 19, 2008, completed a preliminary review of the above -noted request to construct a 1,500 sf. parts, retail and service building at the southeast corner of Richmond Rd. and Pantops Park Drive, with associated site improvements. The Board offered the following comments for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal. Please note that the following comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments may be added or eliminated based on further review and changes to the plan. 1. Reduce the height of the central bay of the building, and make corresponding changes to the heights of the end bays, to reduce the top -heavy appearance of the EIFS and to bring the parts and service building into scale with the dealership building, while maintaining screening of rooftop equipment. 2. Indicate the color /finish for the inside surface of the taller parapet wall that is adjacent to the curved parapet. 3. Revise the plan to add a planting strip, with planting, along the left elevation. 4. Add the rooftop equipment to the building elevations and sections. Revise the plans to include locations of all equipment, loading and refuse areas, or indicate in writing that no other such areas are proposed. Add a note to the site plan and architectural drawings indicating that equipment shall not be visible from the EC. Elaborate and provide section from Entrance Corridor through the building showing the parapet as it relates to the site line. 5. Revise the grading plan to make all proposed grading complete and legible. Provide accurate "existing tree lines to remain ". Provide top of wall and bottom of wall elevations for the westernmost wall. Correct the wall heights in the vicinity of the southwest corner of parcel 15. Provide material /color samples for the proposed retaining walls. Indicate these materials /colors on the site plan. Revise the building elevations to include the retaining walls. Provide sufficient spacing between the two westernmost walls to accommodate required planting. Revise the perspective drawings to accurately show the retaining walls. 6. Revise the landscape plan to: a. Provide accurate "existing tree lines to remain" (particularly in the vicinity of Pantops Park Drive and south and east of parcel 15B). b. Coordinate the plan with the Flow landscape plan. ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 8 c. Move the electric lines to avoid conflicts with trees. Revise the utility plan and all other sheets of the site plan as necessary. d. Add a note to the plant list indicating that the caliper size rules for the Oak and Maple and the height size rules for the Redbud, Serviceberry and shrubs e. Clarify the location /existence of the "existing overhead electric line" shown along the dealership frontage. f. Identify existing trees to remain as existing trees to remain. g. Revise the Serviceberry trees along the western side of parcel 15131 to large trees. h. Delineate all parking spaces on the plan. Ensure that at least one tree is provided at the interior of the parking area for every ten spaces proposed, evenly distributed throughout the site. i. Provide shrubs, minimum 24" high at planting, along the EC frontage and in the planting islands located between the buildings and the EC. j. Provide a planting area along the left (east) elevation to mitigate the blank wall area. k. Show how the filterras will be coordinated with the planting plan. I. Provide for coordination of the relocated monument sign with the planting plan. m. Revise the perspective drawing to coordinate with the landscape plan. n. Coordinate the landscape proposal with existing landscaping on the Flow parcel. 7. Include the revisions to the entrances in the next ARB submittal. 8. Revise the site plan to include the identification of each type of parking space (display, customer, employee, service, etc.) throughout the site. 9. Provide for review all details on the wall sign illustrated in the elevations, and all other proposed wall signs (if any). Coordinate the new monument sign location with the planting plan. 10. Relieve the blank appearance of the front elevation with architectural features; relieve the blank appearance of the side elevation with landscaping. 11. Provide retaining wall materials. You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms, checklists and schedules are available on -line at www.albemarle.org /planning. Revised drawings addressing the comments listed above are required. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing. Please provide a memo including detailed responses indicating how each comment has been addressed. If 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. If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Margaret Maliszewski Principal Planner Cc: Crown Automotive/ Mike Craddock 3633 -C West Wendover Greensboro Nc 27407 Baumgardner, Rickey Lee Or Donna 1252 Still Meadow Ave Charlottesville, Va 22901 ARB File ARB 11/3/2008 Crown BMW - Page 9