Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200800074 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2008-09-29ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #: Name ARB- 2008 -74: Crozet Station, Phase 1 Review Type Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan Parcel Identification Tax Map 56A2, Section 1, Parcel 29 Location 5730 Three Notch' d Rd.: Located on the north side of Three Notch' d Rd. (Route 240) approximately 700 feet east of Crozet Ave. (Route 810) at the existing IGA shopping center. Zoned Downtown Crozet District (DCD), Entrance Corridor (EC) (formerly Commercial - C 1) Owner Crozet Shopping Center, LLC Applicant Atwood Architects (Ashley Cooper) Magisterial District Whitehall Proposal To establish 30 residential units above the IGA shopping center and to undertake related site improvements. ARB Meeting Date October 6, 2008 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski SITE/PROJECT HISTORY • The ARB conducted a preliminary review of this proposal on March 3, 2008. See Attachment A for the comments from that meeting. • Following the March meeting, the applicant submitted a revised design, which staff reviewed. A staff report was prepared and the item was scheduled for review by the ARB on July 7, 2008. Based on the comments in the staff report, the applicant deferred the July 7 ARB review and submitted a revised design. That revision is the subject of this report. • The Board of Supervisors approved the Special Use Permit for this proposal on November 14, 2007. CONTEXT The site of the proposed project is the Crozet Shopping Center, which is located on the north side of Route 240 in Crozet. The shopping center, which predates EC regulations, is set back from the EC approximately 175', with the area between the building and the street occupied by a parking lot. The building is at a lower level than the street and retaining walls with chain link fence exist on the south, east and west sides of the site. Immediately to the east of the Crozet Shopping Center is the site of the Birchwood Place development, which was reviewed and approved by the ARB. To the west is a series of commercial buildings. ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 1 PROJECT DETAILS /CHANGES The proposal includes residential units to be constructed over the existing commercial space of the Crozet Shopping Center, a pedestrian arcade directly in front of the retail shops, and associated site improvements. The general design concept for the residential units remains similar to the design presented at the ARB meeting in March. Primary changes since that review include: • The parking structure behind the building is no longer proposed. Surface parking is proposed. • Eleven Crabapple trees are proposed in planters along the EC. The planters extend down to the parking lot below. • The eastern part of the building now incorporates what appear to be five separate townhouses, and the western part has four. The open space between the two parts of the building has increased. VISIBILITY The residential structures will be clearly visible from the EC. Cars parked behind the building are expected to be visible from the EC when traveling westbound. ANALYSIS (Based on Al Elevations dated July 25, 2008; Al and A2 Floor Plans dated July 25, 2008;A5 Sections dated July 25, 2008; A3 Elevations dated May 15, 2008; A4 Elevation from Road dated May 15, 2008; A5 Sections dated July 25, 2008, A6 Elevation Detail dated May 15, 2008; Color perspectives (2) and color elevation, all undated; Lighting information: Stresscrete concrete pole information, K729 Aurora Jr. light fixture cut sheet, King Luminaire Co WAS K804 elevation, Eurotique Stockholm series luminaire cut sheet, aluminum poles and arm, Lithonia shoe box fixture cut sheets, miscellaneous wall lamp cut sheet; photometric plan; Site Plan with revision date of 7- 24 -08, including sheets T1.0, C1.0,C1.1, C1.2, C1.3, C2.0, C2.1, L1.0, Lt. 1; and material samples (see below).) Issue: Materials Comments: • Proposed building materials include: o Lawrenceville "Monticello' brick • Hardieplank siding • Stucco • Atas standing seam metal in "Black 02" and `Brite Red 17" • Pavers in New Holland block, ground face "Adobe G1028" • Materials are identified generically on the elevations, but a materials schedule identifying specific manufacturers and colors has not been included. • Lap siding is identified on the elevations. Because vinyl siding could be considered lap siding, the drawings should clearly identify Hardieplank as the type of siding proposed. • Material/color samples have not been provided for the proposed stucco. Colors have not been identified for the siding. • The shade of red proposed for the standing seam metal is very bright. • The applicant has indicated that the parking lot concrete color will match the neutral sandy tone of the light specs found in the paver sample. • The color of the balcony railing and the proposed fence is not identified on the plans, but the applicant has indicated that it will be black. Recommendations: Include a materials schedule on the elevations sheet. Clarify in the schedule the material of siding; vinyl is not appropriate. Provide material /color samples for the stucco. Provide color samples for the siding. Specify railing and fence colors on the plans. Provide an alternate, less bright, shade of red for the standing seam metal. ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 2 Issue: Building Height Comments: At the last review, the ARB discussed the possibility of reducing the height of the western building and modifying the dormers on the east end to reduce the visual impact of the scale of the project. In the current proposal, the buildings reach 53' high, which is the maximum height shown in the previous submittal. The roof design has changed, but gables and dormers remain. The base of the existing building stands at an elevation of approximately 708'. The EC elevation along the frontage of the site ranges from 712' to 722'. Consequently, the building sits below street level — a full story at the west end. Also, the space between the two buildings has increased in length. Recommendations: None. Issue: Arcade Openings Comments: ARB comments from the last review included: "Revise the arcade openings to improve proportions and the relationship to the upper stories." The brick pier supports have been redesigned and now have proportions that coordinate better with the buildings they support. However, one pier on the westernmost unit of the eastern building group is slightly offset from the edge of the unit. Also, the columns that support the non -brick facades don't appear to have changed in design, but a photocopy of Tuscan wood columns has been submitted. Building elevations at 1/16" scale were provided. Larger drawings would be useful. Recommendations: Provide the architectural elevations at 1/8" scale. Align the pier of the westernmost unit of the eastern building group so that it is not offset from the edge of the unit. Issue: Building details Comments: In the last review, several details were identified on the elevation drawings for revision. Two of these appear to remain unchanged. One is the position of the louver in the gable end of the second unit from the east in the eastern building group. The comment from the last review was that the louver should be lowered. The other detail relates to the same unit and is the relationship between the outer edge of the second story windows and the point where the gable begins. The comment was that the point where the gable begins should not be over the window. Recommendations: Regarding the second unit from the east in the eastern building group, lower the louver in the gable and revise the design so that the point where the gable begins is not directly over the window. Issue: Landscaping Comments: • Eleven planters are proposed along the EC to accommodate street trees. A black metal fence is proposed between the planters. • The planters have been significantly reduced in size from the previous proposal that was reviewed by staff. They are now more appropriately scaled to the streetscape. • The planters extend down to parking lot level. • The site plan does not identify the proposed material of the planters, but the architectural drawings indicate that they are to be brick. • Crabapple trees are proposed in the planters along the EC at a height of 6' -7'. Standard EC trees are large shade trees at 3'/2" caliper. The smaller species is acceptable due to the utilities in the vicinity. Perimeter parking lot trees have not been provided at the north end of the eastern property line. The parking lot abuts the property line. Trees are proposed in tree islands in this area. A water line runs close to the trees proposed along the east side of the site. No easement associated with the water line is shown on the plans. If an easement exists, there is not sufficient space for trees to be planted along this perimeter of the parking lot with the current layout. ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 3 A row of five White Pines is proposed at the west end of the north side of the property. The pines are proposed too close together and, as they mature, will not provide screening near the ground level. Recommendations: Indicate on the site plan that the planters will be constructed of brick to match the building. Indicate if there is an easement associated with the water line that runs along the east site of the site. If there is an easement, show it on the plan and ensure that the trees are located in a planting area that is outside the easement. Replace the White Pines with an alternate appropriately spaced evergreen. Issue: Lighting Comments: Cut sheets have been provided for the proposed light fixtures, but they are not included on the plan. The cut sheet for the Hi -Lite fixture is not legible. It is not a full cutoff fixture, so the manufacturer's information must clearly show that it emits less than 3000 lumens. The number of wall fixtures shown on the lighting plan does not coordinate with the number of fixtures shown on the architectural elevations. The luminaire schedule includes 5 OA fixtures, but only 4 are found on the plan. The height of the King Luminaire (P) fixture is not included in the luminaire schedule. Notes on the cut sheets indicate that the shoebox fixtures are to have a black finish, but the color is not indicated in the schedule. Five light fixtures are proposed in islands where trees are also proposed. Street lights are proposed; consequently, spillover into the right -of -way exceeds .5 fc. The applicant will need to coordinate approval of the street lights with Zoning and Current Development. Recommendations: Include the fixture cut sheets as part of the site plan set. Ensure that all cut sheets are legible. Ensure that the manufacturer's information for the Hi -Lite fixture states that it emits less than 3000 lumens. Coordinate the lighting plan with the elevations. Coordinate the plan and schedule regarding the number of OA fixtures. Include the height of the King Luminaire fixture in the schedule. Include the color of the shoebox fixtures in the schedule. Include the following note on 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." Coordinate approval of the street lights with Zoning /Current Development. Issue: Signs Comments: The applicant has indicated that no freestanding sign will be proposed. The elevations show the location of a 2' tall sign band on the south and west sides of the building. External illumination is proposed for the wall signs. The applicant proposes to paint the signs directly on the sign band. The sign band location and size, and the external illumination are appropriate for this building and site. Given these design parameters, details regarding sign colors could be provided for review at a later date. Recommendations: An application shall be submitted for a comprehensive sign review prior to the installation of the first wall sign for this development. (The applicant should plan for a minimum 6 -week review period prior to the approval of the first sign. A separate fee will be required.) Issue: Off -site grading Comments: Off -site grading is required at the northeast corner of the site. The proposed grading is shown tying in with the existing condition on the adjacent property. The approved plan for the Birchwood Place development on that property shows a different grading condition. Two approved plans can't show two different conditions for the same area without additional clarification. Recommendations: Regarding the off -site grading onto the Birchwood Place site, add the following note to the plan: "Grading is subject to change with development of adjacent parcel ". ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 4 Issue: Missing information/Inconsistencies Comments: The following information appears to be missing from, or inconsistent within, the submittal: • There are "shop sign" and "open" notes misplaced on the "west" and "west gap" elevations. • A new tree line is shown along the north side of the property, but not along the sides of the new drainage easement. A note on the plan states, "Remove chain link fence when no longer needed to protect construction site." The plan does not clearly show all existing chain link fence locations and that all chain link is to be removed. Recommendations: Remove the misplaced "shop sign" and "open" notes from the "west" and "west gap" elevations. Revise the drawings to show proposed tree lines at the drainage easements. Add the following note to the site plan: "All chain link fencing shall be removed and replaced with approved fencing by final zoning." SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. Building materials /colors, including the stucco, siding and red standing seam metal 2. Landscaping 3. Overall building design Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Include a materials schedule on the elevations sheet. Clarify in the schedule the material of siding; vinyl is not appropriate. Provide material /color samples for the stucco. Provide color samples for the siding. Specify railing and fence colors on the plans. Provide an alternate, less bright, shade of red for the standing seam metal. 2. Provide the architectural elevations at 1/8" scale. Align the pier of the westernmost unit of the eastern building group so that it is not offset from the edge of the unit. 3. Regarding the second unit from the east in the eastern building group, lower the louver in the gable and revise the design so that the point where the gable begins is not directly over the window. 4. Indicate on the site plan that the planters will be constructed of brick to match the building. Indicate if there is an easement associated with the water line that runs along the east site of the site. If there is an easement, show it on the plan and ensure that the trees are located in a planting area that is outside the easement. Replace the White Pines with an alternate appropriately spaced evergreen. 5. Include the fixture cut sheets as part of the site plan set. Ensure that all cut sheets are legible. Ensure that the manufacturer's information for the Hi -Lite fixture states that it emits less than 3000 lumens. Coordinate the lighting plan with the elevations. Coordinate the plan and schedule regarding the number of OA fixtures. Include the height of the King Luminaire fixture in the schedule. Include the color of the shoebox fixtures in the schedule. Include the following note on 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." Coordinate approval of the street lights with Zoning /Current Development. 6. An application shall be submitted for a comprehensive sign review prior to the installation of the first wall sign for this development. (The applicant should plan for a minimum 6 -week review period prior ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 5 to the approval of the first sign. A separate fee will be required.) Regarding the off -site grading onto the Birchwood Place site, add the following note to the plan: "Grading is subject to change with development of adjacent parcel ". Remove the misplaced "shop sign" and "open" notes from the "west" and "west gap" elevations. Revise the drawings to show proposed tree lines at the drainage easements. Add the following note to the site plan: "All chain link fencing shall be removed and replaced with approved fencing by final zoning." ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 6 aL ti � �IRGINZ�FJ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 March 17, 2008 Atwood Architects C/O William Atwood 250 West Main Street Suite 100 Charlottesville, Va 22902 RE: ARB2008 -00010 Crozet Station, Phase I Tax Map 56A2, Section 1, Parcel 29 Dear Mr. Atwood: Attachment A Fax (434) 972 -4126 The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on March 3, 2008, completed a preliminary review of the above -noted request to establish 30 residential units above the IGA shopping center, to construct a parking structure behind the center, and to undertake related 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. Provide a plant list on the plan, with all standard information. 2. Coordinate the ARB submittal and the other plans provided for County review. 3. Provide trees in the parking lot closest to the Entrance Corridor, or at street level, or provide some alternative. 4. Clarify on the plan the location and design of the planter proposed along the EC. 5. Provide additional detail on the plan to indicate the full extent of planting proposed for the planting areas between the building and the parking lot. (It can be seating for a restaurant and does not all have to be planting.) Clarify what it is and that it is not a huge swath of mulch. 6. Revise the plan to indicate that all chain link that is visible from the EC will be removed from the site. Propose an alternate to the chain link that would have an appropriate appearance for the EC. Include a fence detail on the plan. 7. Provide perimeter parking lot trees, 2'/2" caliper minimum, 40' on center throughout the site. 8. Add architectural detailing to relieve the blank appearance of the lower portion of the residential elevations above the arcade. Revise the elevations to provide detailing that associates the signs with the arcade portion of the elevations, not the upper window area. Provide details on the signage proposed for the building. Indicate proposed sign type, location, type of illumination, colors, etc. Revise the arcade openings to improve proportions and the relationship to the upper stories. 9. In general the ARB does not object to the 3 -story buildings, but it is the height of the west building and the dormers on the east end that could be modified to reduce the visual scale of the project. ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 7 10. Indicate on the plan the location of all three existing freestanding signs and indicate on the plan that all will be removed. Provide for review information on proposed freestanding signs. 11. Provide on the plan complete information on proposed tree /shrub removal and tree protection. 12. Provide on the plan complete information regarding the location of ground equipment, roof equipment, and any other proposed equipment and related elements. Show how existing or proposed architectural elements will screen the equipment from view. 13. Indicate on the plan the proposed color of the concrete in the front parking lot and provide a sample for review. Identify on the plan the impervious and pervious concrete areas. Provide samples for all of the colors. 14. Show the turn lane on the drawings. 15. The ARB requested a full review of the special use permit for phase 1A. 16. Provide at least 3 sections through the EC, the retaining wall, and up to the face of the building. 17. Provide above the elevations (on the same sheet) an outline or plan diagram to clarify the relationship of the different planes of the new structure and to clarify the relationship of the arcade to the fagade(s) behind it. Indicate all changes to existing building facades. 18. Outdoor display that is visible from the Entrance Corridor requires a special use permit and is subject to review. 19. Clarify details for railings on the buildings. 20. Clarify and coordinate on the plans the stairs to the parking garage. 21. Provide a street elevation that includes the proposed building, the bank to the east and the US Joiner building, in scale. Dash in the level of the road. 22. The ARB supported the idea of the applicant providing a CAD drive -by for review. 23. Clarify and further articulate and refine the various architectural elements identified as 1 through 12 by Ms. Smith at the meeting. 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: Crozet Shopping Center LLC P O Box 129 Crozet Va 22932 Summer Frederick, Zoning and Current Development ARB File ARB 10/6/2008 Crozet Station Phase 1 - Page 8