Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200900055 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2009-07-27ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #: Name ARB- 2009 -55: North Fork Regional Pump Station Project Review Type Final Site Development Plan Parcel Identification Tax Map 32, Parcel 6A Location On the west side of Route 29 North, approximately 935 feet north of Lewis and Clark Drive Zoned Planned Development Industrial Park (PDIP), Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner /Applicant University of Virginia Foundation Magisterial District Rio Proposal To construct a wastewater pump station consisting of underground pumps and piping; above - ground generator, transformer and security fence; and a 600 square foot building to house equipment. ARB Meeting Date August 3, 2009 Staff Contact Eryn Brennan SITE/PROJECT HISTORY The site is situated on the North Fork Research Park's 465 acre tract of land, most of which is located west of Seminole Trail, north of Airport Road, and south of Camelot Drive. The portion of the site related to this application is adjacent to the 29N Entrance Corridor. The North Fork Regional Pump Station project also involves the closing of the existing Camelot Wastewater Treatment Plant and the design of the Camelot Pump Station, which will be submitted as a separate site plan application in the future. The ARB conducted a preliminary review of this proposal on May 18, 2009. The action letter from that meeting is included as Attachment A to this report. The board offered a series of comments for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal. The applicant also displayed a drawing at the meeting showing revised locations for the mechanical equipment. It was the consensus of the ARB that the revised locations were acceptable. A final site plan has been submitted to Current Development and is under review. CONTEXT/VISIBILITY The site is located west of Route 29 North, approximately 935 feet north of the traffic light at Lewis and Clark Drive. The site is a heavily forested, undeveloped site, characterized by underbrush and evergreen and deciduous shrubs for the first 50 feet adjacent to the EC. Beyond this initial buffer, the site primarily consists of Virginia pines interspersed with box elders and eastern red cedars. The applicant proposes to construct a 20' x 30' structure that will house equipment necessary to operate a wastewater pump station. The building stands 15'- 3" high and is set back approximately 90 feet from the edge of pavement. Only the east and north elevations are expected to be visible from the EC. An 8' high transparent Aegis security fence with a top rail is proposed to circumscribe the site. Underground pumps, piping, and valves, and an above - ground hoist and monorail are proposed west of the building and are not expected to be visible from the EC. CHANGES TO THE PROPOSAL Changes to the proposal since the last review include the relocation of the generator west of the proposed building, a change in the type of security fencing proposed to circumscribe the site, reconfigured landscaping along the EC, and the elimination of a majority of the detail elements on the proposed building. ANALYSIS based on: • Site Plan Sheets G -1; C -1 -7; C -11; C -13; C- 16 -18, dated 4/23/09 • Site Plan Sheets C -8 -10; C -12; C- 14 -15; C- 19 -20, dated June 2009 • Lighting cutsheets, submitted June 15, 2009 • A 1' -5" x 2' -0" sample board with brick, lintel, roof, and metalwork samples titled, "North Fork Regional Pump Station" Issue: Mechanical Equipment Comments: The revised locations of the generator and transformer are in accordance with the alternate locations proposed and deemed acceptable by the ARB at the May 18, 2009 meeting. Cut sheets of the proposed mechanical equipment have also been submitted; however, the notes concerning the height and visibility of the mechanical equipment have not been added to the site plan. The cut sheets show that the mechanical equipment is proposed to be a bluish - green, which may not be the best shade to blend with the surroundings. An earth tone, such as a dark forest green, dark brown, or black would be appropriate. Color samples should be submitted in order to determine the true color proposed for the mechanical equipment. Recommendations: Add a note to the site plan identifying the height and color of the mechanical equipment and submit a color sample. The color shall be an earth tone that blends will with the surrounding environment. Add the following note to the site plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." Issue: Building Design Comments: All decorative detailing has been removed from the building elevations, excluding the belt course. The belt course is shown on the drawings as a single horizontal band, and identified in the material sample as an accent brick that is a few shades darker than the red brick proposed for the entire building. A horizontal brick band a few shades darker than the brick used for the rest of the building is not a substantial enough change in material or color to relieve the blank walls on the north and east elevations. A material other than brick but compatible with brick, or a brick soldier course, would be appropriate to relieve the facades of blankness. A material schedule has not been provided on the architectural drawings. Recommendations: Revise the building elevations to show either a brick soldier course, or a belt course made of an alternate material compatible with brick, to relieve the expanses of blank wall. Provide a material schedule on the architectural drawings identifying all the proposed building materials; include details such as color, manufacturer name, and brand. Issue: Lighting Comments: Lighting cut sheets and a photometric plan have been submitted with the application; however, the cut sheets have not been included in the set of full size site plan/lighting plan drawings as previously requested. A luminaire schedule has been provided, but no LLF calculations or fixture colors have been included in the schedule. Fixture A is described in the manufacturer note in the luminaire schedule as having a 413 Optic, but is shown in the cut sheet as having a 2B Optic. Fixture A is also shown with a mounting height of 30', which is significantly taller than the approximately 15' high building proposed on the site. As the EC guidelines state, mounting heights should correspond to nearby building height; hence, a 15' tall light fixture would be appropriate for this development. The standard lighting note regarding full cutoff light fixtures has not been included on the photometric plan. Recommendations: Include the cut sheets for the proposed lighting within the set of full size site plan/lighting plan drawings. Include the LLF calculations, the lumens, and the watts in the luminaire schedule. Indicate in the luminaire schedule the color and finish of all light fixtures and light poles for the proposed development. Dark brown, dark bronze, or black are appropriate colors for free - standing pole mounted light fixtures in the EC. Revise the manufacturer note in the luminaire schedule for Fixture A to correspond to the cut sheet. Reduce the height of light fixture A to 15'. Include the following note on the photometric 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: Landscape Plan Comments: 1. The applicant was asked to provide a plan to clarify the issue of planting in the utility easements on and around the site, but that plan was not provided. Plants are not proposed within the 50' easement that is located north of the proposed driveway, nor within the easement located south of the generator. Trees and shrubs in these areas are needed to integrate the new development with the existing wooded area to remain. If trees cannot be planted due to easement issues, shrubs should still be provided, and those shrubs would need to be thoroughly integrated with the proposed planting along the EC and in front of the development. Extending the tree and shrub planting further along the EC, to both the north and the south, could also help with integration. 2. At maturity, the proposed Loblolly pines reach 60' -80' high, with little to no branches on the lower potion of the tree. This branching pattern would not be appropriate along the EC or in front of the development due to their reduced ability to visually mitigate the impact of the development on the EC over time. Small to medium evergreen trees or deciduous shrubs with low, dense branch patterns, such as serviceberries or eastern red cedars, would be appropriate along the EC and in front of the proposed development. 3. An overhead power line runs parallel to the EC. The applicant has indicated there is no easement associated with this line. The location of a southern red oak proposed in front of the development conflicts with this line. 4. A Plant Schedule has been provided, but does not include the size of the proposed shrubs at planting. Shrubs should measure at least 24" in height at planting. 5. The standard note regarding site plantings has not been included on the landscape plan. 6. The Existing Landscape Conditions plan on Sheet C -11 shows a proposed treeline that does not correspond to the proposed tree outline on the Proposed Landscaping Plan. Recommendations: 1. Show all of the proposed utility lines and their easements on the landscape plan. Highlight or lightly shade the easement areas so they are clearly identifiable. Identify areas where no plantings are allowed on the applicant's property. 2. Revise the landscape plan to show small to medium evergreen trees or deciduous shrubs with low, dense branch patterns interspersed with the shrubs and shade trees proposed along the EC and in front of the development, specifically within the 50' easement that is located north of the proposed driveway and within the easement located south of the generator. 3. Revise the landscape plan to shift the southern red oak to avoid conflict the overhead utility line. 4. Revise the plant schedule to show that the shrubs proposed on the landscape plan will be at least 24" in height at planting. 5. Add the following note 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 the plant." 6. Eliminate the proposed treeline on the Existing Landscape Conditions plan on Sheet C -11. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The landscape plan. 2. The belt course on the proposed building. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: 1. Add a note to the site plan identifying the height and color of the mechanical equipment and submit a color sample. The color shall be an earth tone that blends will with the surrounding environment. Add the following note to the site plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." 2. Revise the building elevations to show either a brick soldier course, or a belt course made of an alternate material compatible with brick, to relieve the expanses of blank wall. Provide a material schedule on the architectural drawings identifying all the proposed building materials; include details such as color, manufacturer name, and brand. 3. Include the cut sheets for the proposed lighting within the set of full size site plan/lighting plan drawings. Include the LLF calculations, the lumens, and the watts in the luminaire schedule. Indicate in the luminaire schedule the color and finish of all light fixtures and light poles for the proposed development. Dark brown, dark bronze, or black are appropriate colors for free - standing pole mounted light fixtures in the EC. Revise the manufacturer note in the luminaire schedule for Fixture A to correspond to the cut sheet. Reduce the height of light fixture A to 15'. Include the following note on the photometric 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." 4. Show all of the proposed utility lines and their easements on the landscape plan. Highlight or lightly shade the easement areas so they are clearly identifiable. Identify areas where no plantings are allowed on the applicant's property. 5. Revise the landscape plan to show small to medium evergreen trees or deciduous shrubs with low, dense branch patterns interspersed with the shrubs and shade trees proposed along the EC and in front of the development, specifically within the 50' easement that is located north of the proposed driveway and within the easement located south of the generator. 6. Revise the landscape plan to shift the southern red oak to avoid conflict the overhead utility line. 7. Revise the plant schedule to show that the shrubs proposed on the landscape plan will be at least 24" in height at planting. 8. Add the following note 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 the plant." 9. Eliminate the proposed treeline on the Existing Landscape Conditions plan on Sheet C -11. Attachment A ��pF aLg� ti � �IRGINZ�FJ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 May 22, 2009 Charles Luck, P.E. c/o Whitman, Requard & Associates LLP 9030 Stony Point Parkway, Suite 220 Richmond, VA 23235 RE: ARB- 2009 -25: North Fork Regional Pump Station Project Tax Map 32, Parcel 6A Dear Mr. Luck, The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on May 18, 2009, completed a preliminary review of the above -noted request to construct a wastewater pump station consisting of underground pumps and piping; above - ground generator, transformer and security fence; and a 600 square foot building to house equipment. 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. Revised plan for entrance submitted 5/18/09 is acceptable. 2. Revise the site plan to locate the mechanical equipment west of the proposed building so that it is not visible from Route 29N. The revised location on the 5/18/09 plan is acceptable. Add a note on the site plan identifying the height and color of the mechanical equipment and submit a color sample. A dark green color is acceptable. Add the following note to the site plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." 3. Revise the grading south of the generator and east of the entrance drive to blend more with the existing topography and to avoid an "engineered" appearance. 4. Revise the 8' high Omega security fence circumscribing the development to an Aegis fence with a top rail. 5. Revise the building design to eliminate the pilasters, east elevation door, and faux windows with brick infill. Minimalist detailing, such as a brick soldier course, may be appropriate to relieve blankness. 6. Indicate that no lighting is proposed for the building or site. Or, if lighting is proposed, identify any proposed light fixtures on the site plan and include the cut sheets for the proposed lighting within the set of full size site plan /lighting plan drawings, and submit a photometric plan. Specify motion sensor lighting. 7. Revise the site plan to show the eastern utility easement line for the 16" sanitary force main and the utility easement for the 2" water line, both of which are proposed south of the development. Show all utility easement lines on the site up to the paved parking area. 8. Obtain a report from a certified horticulturist or arborist analyzing the existing tree types on the site and revise the plantings proposed on the landscape plan to be compatible with the existing tree species. Provide an existing conditions landscape plan detailing, in particular, extant plantings along the EC. A landscape architect could assist in developing an appropriate planting scheme specific to this area. 9. Revise the landscape plan to show the location of the proposed tree line once the utility easements would be cleared. Show tree protection fencing along the proposed tree line to ensure that no grading will occur within the drip line of the tree canopy on the site. 10. Provide a complete landscape schedule for any new plantings on the site. For large shade trees along the EC, a 3'/2' caliper is required. Minimum shrub size at planting is 24 ", but larger sizes may be required. 11. Provide a plan showing all the utility easements on the site shaded or highlighted to clearly identify the areas that are restricted from planting. For those easements with planting restrictions, clearly outline the restrictions and identify tree and shrub species that are acceptable to the easement holders. 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 and an ARB approval signature panel. 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, Eryn Brennan Senior Planner Cc: Albemarle County Service Authortiy (Tom Garrison) 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 University Of Virginia Foundation P O Box 400218 Charlottesville, VA 22904