HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200900099 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2009-12-11ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
Project #: Name
ARB- 2009 -99: Arden Place
Review Type
Final Review of a Site Development Plan
Parcel Identification
Tax Map 61, Parcel 124
Location
Located on the north side of Rio Road East (Route 631), east of Route 29
North and across from Fashion Square Mall
Zoned
Residential (R15), Entrance Corridor (EC)
Owner
Charlottesville Realty Corporation
Applicant
Scott Collins (Collins Engineering)
Magisterial District
Rio
Proposal
To construct a multi - family residential development with 6 apartment
buildings and clubhouse.
ARB Meeting Date
December 21, 2009
Staff Contact
Brent Nelson
SITE/PROJECT HISTORY
• 11/9/09: SDP 09 -91, Arden Place, Final Site Plan, received by Current Development and currently under
review.
• 9/28/09: SDP 09 -9, Arden Place, Preliminary Site Plan, Planning Commission approval of site plan,
critical slope waiver and buffer disturbance granted with conditions.
• 5/4/09: ARB 09 -24, Arden Place, Preliminary Site Plan, Comments were provided for the benefit of the
applicant's next submission (Attachment A).
• 4/6/09: ARB 09 -24, Arden Place, Presented as an Other Business item to the ARB with a request from
staff for direction concerning the extent of review required. The ARB consensus was as follows:
Regarding ARB- 2009 -24, Arden Place it was the consensus of the ARB that: if a 50' minimum
undisturbed buffer composed of existing wooded area is provided between the new development
and the EC, the review of the proposal may be limited to staff review of colors and materials.
PROJECT DETAILS /SITE CONTEXT
The applicant proposes to construct a multi - family residential development on a parcel adjoining the northeast
side of the Rio Road East Entrance Corridor and the southeast rear boundary of the Albemarle Square
Shopping Center. This parcel, with its large stand of mature deciduous trees, is one of the last undeveloped
tracts in this densely developed commercial/residential corridor. The proposal includes an access road from Rio
Hill Drive to the east, a series of connected parking lots, a stormwater management system, trail system, six 3-
story apartment buildings, four 1 -story parking structures and a 1 -story clubhouse. The parcel is bisected by a
zoning demarcation line located approximately 900' northeast of Rio Road East, with the land northeast of the
line containing the development under review, zoned R -15 for multifamily development. The land southwest of
the line is zoned C -1 for commercial development.
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 1
CHANGES TO THE PROPOSAL SINCE THE PREVIOUS REVIEW
• The vehicular roundabout, previously shown at the intersection of the Mall Side Forest Court
extension and the Arden Place entry road, has been replaced with a traditional 4 -way road intersection.
As a result, grading of the adjoining 50' non - disturb buffer has been reduced.
• The orientation of the proposed clubhouse has shifted 90 degrees so that the front elevation, previously
facing the EC (southwest), now faces the Arden Place entry road (southeast).
• A second vehicular entry point from the Gardens Shopping Center has been added at the north end of
the site.
• The apartment building elevations have been modified. These changes include, but are not limited to,
revisions to the roof and window design, materials and colors.
• The addition of two 1- story, 20' x 105', garage structures in the northwest corner of the site and one in
the northeast corner. The addition of one, 20' x 170' carport structure adjacent to the northeast
boundary.
• Minor additions /revisions to the parking and stormwater layout.
EXTENT OF REVIEWNISIBLITY
The proposal is located on a parcel that adjoins the Rio Road East Entrance Corridor. The parcel under review,
at its closest point, is approximately 750' from the Route 29N Corridor. As a result, review of this proposal is
limited to the impacts of the development as viewed only from the Rio Road East Corridor, for the full depth of
the parcel. The proposed 1 -story clubhouse, at 679' from Rio Road East, is the closest building to the Corridor.
Apartment Buildings 1 thru 6 are located 700' to 1500' from the Corridor. Sitelbuilding sections, provided by
the applicant, indicate that views of the clubhouse are expected to be limited to the roof area. The sections
indicate that Apartment Buildings 1 and 2 are expected to block views of Buildings 3 thru 6 with one
exception. Section 1B Rio Road demonstrates that the roof area of Building 4 is expected to be visible when
viewed down Rio Hill Drive. Views of the two proposed 1 -story garage structures in the northwest corner of
the site, the one 1 -story garage structure in the northeast corner, and the carport structure adjacent to the
northeast boundary are expected to be blocked by proposed structures and existing topography /vegetation that
is to remain. Views of Building 1 are expected to be limited to the top two floors and roof area of this 3 -story
building. Views of Building 2 are expected to be limited to the roof area.
In the current application, a significant stand of mature deciduous trees, located between the Corridor and the
development area, are designated as to remain. It should be noted, however, that these trees are located on land
that is not controlled by the applicant. Development of the commercial section of this parcel, and the likely
removal of these trees, could increase visibility of the Clubhouse and Apartment Buildings 1 and 2. As a result,
it should be assumed that the entire roof area of the clubhouse and the entire southwest end (EC) elevation of
Apartment Building 1 will be visible. The top half of the southeast front and northwest rear elevations for
Apartment Building 1 and the roof area of Apartment Building 2 are expected to be visible as well. Due to the
significant distance from the Rio Road East Corridor, review of this proposal is limited to general mass and
color of the buildings, the orientation of those buildings to each other and the surrounding development, and
the location and extent of proposed tree canopy and canopy that is to be preserved.
ANALYSIS based on drawings submitted:
Site Plan:
• Sheet 1: Cover, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 2: Existing Conditions & Boundary Line Adjustment, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 3: Entrance Corridor Site Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 4: Site Sections from Rio Road, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 4A: Site Sections from Rio Road, latest revision date November 2, 2009
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 2
• Sheet 5: Site Sections from US 29, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 6: Site Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 7: Landscaping Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 7A: Landscaping Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 7B: Landscaping Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 8: Landscaping Notes and Details, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 9: Lighting & Photometric Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 9A: Lighting & Photometric Plan, latest revision date November 2, 2009
• Sheet 10: Lighting Details, latest revision date November 2, 2009
Architectural drawings:
• Sheet A0.01: Cover Sheet, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.01: Building Type 1- Basement Level, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.02: Building Type 1- Level 1, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.03: Building Type 1- Level 2, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.04: Building Type 1- Level 3, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.05: Building Type 1- Roof Plan, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.06: Building Type 2- Basement Level, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.07: Building Type 2- Level 1, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.08: Building Type 2- Level 2, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.09: Building Type 2- Level 3, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.11: Building Type 3- Basement Level, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.12: Building Type 3- Level 1, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.13: Building Type 3- Level 2, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.14: Building Type 3- Level 3, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.16: Building Type 4- Basement Level, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.17: Building Type 4- Level 1, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.18: Building Type 4- Level 2, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.19: Building Type 4- Level 3, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.20: Building 5, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.21: Clubhouse Floor Plans, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.22: Clubhouse Elevations, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.23: G -1 Garages, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A2.24: G -2 Garages, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A4.01: Building Type 1- Elevations, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A4.02: Building Type 1- Elevations, date November 2, 2009
• Sheet A4.03: Conceptual Building Elevations, date November 2, 2009
Previous samples submitted:
• Roof Shingles: Tamko Weatherwood
• Brick: Dark Terracotta (manufacturer and product ID not provided)
• Vinyl Siding: CertainTeed Light Maple
• Retaining wall: Redi -Rock "natural" (sample and product information provided)
Additional samples and photos provided with this submission:
• Building Stone: Owens Corning Cultured Stone, Country Ledgestone "Chardonnay ", Photograph
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 3
• Vinyl siding: CertainTeed Cedarboard (including proposed colors Arbor Blend, Savannah Wicker, &
Light Maple)
• Retaining Wall: Redi Rock sample (product ID not provided)
Issue: The applicant did not address all the ARB comments from the last review.
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to:
• Revise Sheet]] Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations and Sheet 12 Arden Place Exterior
Building Elevations to include roof plans of the clubhouse and apartment buildings. Roof plans
of the clubhouse and the visible Apartment Buildings 1, 2 and 4 are not included in this
submission.
Revise Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations to show a redesigned entry bay and
pediment whose height and width are more proportional with each other and the overall
elevation. The applicant's memo accompanying this latest submission states that the entry bay has
been redesigned as requested; however, the current and previous designs appear to be the same. In
the current proposal, the clubhouse orientation has been shifted 90 degrees so that the entry bay,
previously facing the Rio Road E Corridor (southwest), now faces Rio Hill Court (southeast). The
resulting angular orientation of the entry bay combined with the building's 680' distance northeast
of the corridor adequately mitigate the visual impact of this issue.
Revise Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations by identifying proposed materials
and colors, and configuration of the cupola. Proposed materials, colors and the method of
construction were not indicated in the resubmission.
• Revise the site and building layout to more consistently address the requirements of the site
grading guidelines listed under "Development Pattern". With the exception of the proposed
vehicular connection to the Gardens Shopping Center at the north end of the site, this comment
has not been addressed. The building and site layout, with minor exceptions, remains basically the
same as in the previous review. As previously noted, the current site design, including grading and
layout, was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on September 28, 2009. The
impacts of this issue are reduced by the proposal's significant distance from the Corridor.
Recommendations: Provide roof plans of the proposed clubhouse and Apartment Buildings 1, 2 and 4. Revise
the clubhouse elevations to identify the proposed materials, colors and method of construction for the cupola.
Building Design
Issue: Additional Site Sections Provided/Visibility
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to Provide a site/building section demonstrating
visibility of the proposal as viewed from the Rio Road East Corridor across the Rio Hill Drive right -of -way.
Provide a section from Rio Road across the battery shop, the Albemarle Square entrance road, the center line
of the connector road, and through the retaining wall, as it is anticipated to be developed. Site sections were
provided with this submission as requested and are described in the Extent of Review/Visibility section of this
report on Page 2.
Recommendations: None.
Issue: Clubhouse/Revised Design
Comments: As previously noted, the clubhouse orientation has shifted 90 degrees so that the front southeast
elevation faces Rio Hill Court and the side southwest elevation faces the Rio Road E. Corridor. Only the top
section/roof area of the southeast and southwest elevations is expected to be visible from the Corridor. The rear
northwest elevation, not expected to be visible, has been revised to reflect a 2 -story elevation (lower level
walkout). The EC southwest (side) elevation on Sheet A2.22 Clubhouse Elevations (C6 — Clubhouse Side
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 4
Elevation) shows a single window -like opening near the west (left) end of the elevation. The applicant has
verbally indicated that it is to be a louvered opening in the same Light Maple color as the other windows. The
terracotta brick, previously proposed in all 4 elevations, has been replaced with Owens Corning Cultured
Stone, Country Ledgestone "Chardonnay ". The previously proposed white trim and window color has been
replaced with a Light Maple color (sample provided). The Tamko Weatherwood roof shingle, previously
proposed, is included in this proposal. Whereas the proposed colors appear to complement each other, only a
photograph of the Chardonnay stone material (no sample) was provided with this submission. Photographs are
not a reliable medium for demonstrating the true color of a building material. Sheet A2.22 Clubhouse
Elevations has the front and rear elevations mislabeled (reversed). The elevations are not labeled for their
direction, e.g. Front Southeast Elevation. Indicating the direction of the elevation is of particular relevance
when the building is located at a significant distance from, and angular orientation to, the Corridor as this one
is.
Recommendations: Provide a sample of the Owens Corning Cultured Stone, Country Ledgestone
" Chardonnay" for review. Revise the EC southwest (side) elevation drawing on Sheet A2.22 Clubhouse
Elevations (C6 — Clubhouse Side Elevation) by labeling the proposed louvered opening near the west end of
the elevation and by including the proposed material and color. Revise the clubhouse elevation labels on Sheet
A2.22 Clubhouse Elevations to indicate their direction e.g. Front Southeast Elevation and correct the
mislabeled (reversed) front and rear elevation labels.
Issue: Apartment Buildings /Elevations/Nomenclature
Comments: As previously noted, Buildings 1 (Type 3), 2 (Type 4) and 4 (Type 2) as shown on Sheet A0.01
Cover Sheet are expected to be visible from the Corridor. The applicant has verbally indicated that the
elevations shown on Sheet A4.01 and Sheet A4.02 Building Type 1 — Elevations represent the design for
Building 1 (Type 3) as well. Elevation drawings for Buildings 2 (Type 4) and 4 (Type 2) are not included in
this submission. The applicant has verbally indicated that the different building types represent variations of
the same general design including materials and colors. The applicant's method of labeling building elevations
with both building number and building type is confusing. Individual elevation drawings of each building (1, 2
and 4) are needed for review. Each elevation should be labeled for the building number, without reference to
the building type, and note the direction of the elevation e.g. Front Southeast Elevation.
Recommendations: Provide individual elevation drawings for Buildings 1, 2 and 4, labeled for the building
number, with the direction of the elevation e.g. Front Southeast Elevation included in the label.
Issue: Apartment Building 1/Revised Design
Comments: The proposed elevations for Building 1 (as shown on Sheets A4.01 and A4.02), located at the
southwest end of the site, have changed since the previous review. The overall building footprint, previously
180' x 80', has grown to 225' x 80'. Revisions include changes to the roof, window and chimney forms as well
as to some materials and colors. Tamko Architectural Roof Shingles Weathered Wood, previously proposed,
are included in this proposal. The previously proposed dark terra cotta brick has been replaced with the Owens
Corning Cultured Stone, Country Ledgestone " Chardonnay" (also proposed for the clubhouse). Additional
CertainTeed vinyl siding colors, Arbor Blend and Savannah Wicker (samples provided), have been added to
the Light Maple previously proposed. The colors of the proposed materials blend well, complimenting each
other and the overall site. Whereas the use of vinyl siding is not encouraged for developments within the
Entrance Corridor, its application here is not expected to be discernible due to the significant distance from the
Corridor. The applicant has verbally indicated that all six proposed buildings will use the same approved
palette of materials and colors. This should be noted on the drawings included in this submission.
Recommendations: Revise the applicable drawings to include a list of all approved materials and colors for the
building elevations. Include a note indicating that all the proposed buildings will use the same approved palette
of materials and colors.
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 5
Issue: Proposed Apartment Building 1/Blank Appearance/False Window
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to Revise the southwest end elevation ofApartment
Building 1, to relieve its blank appearance, by adding windows or replacing the vertical siding with the
proposed brick. Consider redesigning the center section of the elevation to project inward or outward. In
response to the comment, the applicant has revised the elevation as shown on Sheet A4.02 Building Type 1
Elevations, Right Side Elevation. In the previous submission, the 46' wide center bay of this elevation
contained no windows and showed contrasting vertical siding outlined with vertical and horizontal bands of
white cementitious trim in the center of the elevation in an attempt to break up the blank appearance. In the
current submission, the applicant is proposing a central element composed of pairs of windows at the two
upper stories, flanked by pilasters and topped by a gable. The applicant has verbally indicated that the windows
are to be "false" with no opening into the space behind. Real window frames and clear glass are to be installed
with the wall behind the windows darkened to disguise their nature. Such false windows have been determined
to be inappropriate for some locations closer to the EC, but in this case the distance from the EC may mitigate
the false appearance. Details describing how the windows will be constructed and maintained are needed to
confirm this.
Recommendations: Revise the elevation drawings for the southwest end of Building I to include notes
indicating the false nature of the windows in the center bay along with details of how the windows would be
constructed/installed and maintained. Include details of the proposed colors and method used to darken the
wall behind the windows.
Site Design
Issue: Proposed Retaining Wall/Material/Perimeter Parking Lot Trees
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to Revise the interior parking lot tree count to not
include perimeter parking lot trees. Revise the site /parking design to allow for a 10' wide planting strip along
the full length of the eastern boundary, free of retaining walls, for perimeter parking lot trees, 40' on center, 2
'/z" caliper minimum. In the current submission, the parking lot tree count has been revised to not include the
required number of perimeter parking lot trees. Sheet 6 Site Plan shows a retaining wall offset approximately
10' from the east boundary along the perimeter of the proposed parking lot and carport structure. The wall is to
be constructed with a gray Redi Rock stone (18" (h) x 40" (w) each). Wall heights in this location range from
6' to 8'. The manufacturer's name and product ID for the wall material are not included on the site or
landscape drawings. Required perimeter parking lot trees, previously shown between the wall and the northeast
boundary, have been removed. In their place, the applicant is showing existing wooded area that is to remain in
the 10' wide strip between the retaining wall and boundary line. The locations (and types) of individual trees in
this 10' wide strip are not identified; therefore, it cannot be determined if the existing trees would satisfy the
required perimeter parking lot tree requirement. However, construction of the retaining wall would likely
damage the root system of these trees, leading to their eventual demise.
Recommendations: Revise the landscape drawings to show medium size shade trees, 21 /z" caliper min, 40' on
center, along the full length of the eastern boundary line. Provide the manufacturer's name and product ID for
the retaining wall materials on the landscape plan.
Landscape Design
Issue: Proposed Species Monoculture
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to Revise Sheet 7 Landscaping Plan with the
addition of 2 large canopy species and 1 understory species with proposed quantities for both categories as
near equal as possible. In the current submission, the applicant has increased the number of large canopy
species as requested but the number of large trees of each species is not near equal, as requested. The number
of understory species has increased as requested. Proposed quantities of the understory species, while not
equal, are close enough to provide the species diversity encouraged by EC Guidelines and avoid the impact of
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 6
disease that can occur with a monoculture.
Recommendations: Revise all landscape drawings to show the number of large canopy trees of each species as
near equal as possible.
Lighting
Issue: Building Lighting Locations /Site Lighting Conflicts
Comments: In the previous review, the applicant was asked to:
• Revise the lighting proposal to include all exterior building lighting. All such lighting in excess of 3,000
lumens shall meet full cut off requirements.
• Revise Sheet 7 Landscaping Plan and Sheet 6 Site Plan by including the location of all proposed site
lighting. Avoid conflicts with proposed plantings or existing and proposed utilities.
The applicant's memo accompanying this submission states No exterior building lighting is proposed;
however, exterior wall -mount light fixtures are shown on the clubhouse elevations. Sheets 6 and 6A Site Plan
and Sheets 7, 7A and 7B Landscaping Plan have been revised to show the location of proposed site lighting.
Conflicts with proposed landscaping exist at the following locations:
• The proposed Green Ash (FP) at the west end of Building 5.
• The proposed Allee Elm (UP) at the northeast corner of Building 4.
• The proposed Crape Myrtles (LI) at the east and west ends of the parking lot adjoining the southeast side
of Building 1.
Recommendations: Revise the lighting proposal to include all exterior building lighting. All such lighting with
3,000 lumens or more shall meet full cut off requirements. Revise Sheets 6 and 6 A Site Plan and Sheets 7, 7A
and 7B Landscaping Plan by correcting site lighting /tree conflicts in the following locations:
• The proposed Green Ash (FP) at the west end of Building 5.
• The proposed Allee Elm (UP) at the northeast corner of Building 4.
• The proposed Crape Myrtles (LI) at the east and west ends of the parking lot adjoining the southeast side
of Building 1.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. The proposed building materials and colors.
2. The site and building layout.
3. The southwest elevation of Building 1, the blank wall treatment, and the use of false windows.
4. Perimeter parking lot trees along the northeast boundary line.
Staff recommends approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness, pending staff administrative approval of the
following conditions:
1. Provide roof plans of the proposed clubhouse and Apartment Buildings 1, 2 and 4. Revise the clubhouse
elevations to identify the proposed materials, colors and method of construction for the cupola.
2. Provide a sample of the Owens Corning Cultured Stone, Country Ledgestone "Chardonnay" for review.
Revise the EC southwest (side) elevation drawing on Sheet A2.22 Clubhouse Elevations (C6 — Clubhouse
Side Elevation) by labeling the proposed louvered opening near the west end of the elevation and by
including the proposed material and color. Revise the clubhouse elevation labels on Sheet A2.22
Clubhouse Elevations to indicate their direction e.g. Front Southeast Elevation and correct the mislabeled
(reversed) front and rear elevation labels.
3. Provide individual elevation drawings for Buildings 1, 2 and 4, labeled for the building number, with the
direction of the elevation e.g. Front Southeast Elevation included in the label.
4. Revise the applicable drawings to include a list of all approved materials and colors for the building
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 7
elevations. Include a note indicating that all the proposed buildings will use the same approved palette of
materials and colors.
5. Revise the elevation drawings for the southwest end of Building 1 to include notes indicating the false
nature of the windows in the center bay along with details of how the windows would be
constructed/installed and maintained. Include details of the proposed colors and method used to darken the
wall behind the windows.
6. Revise the landscape drawings to show medium size shade trees, 21/2" caliper min, 40' on center, along the
full length of the eastern boundary line. Provide the manufacturer's name and product ID for the retaining
wall materials on the landscape plan.
7. Revise all landscape drawings to show the number of large canopy trees of each species as near equal as
possible.
8. Revise the lighting proposal to include all exterior building lighting. All such lighting with 3,000 lumens
or more shall meet full cut off requirements. Revise Sheets 6 and 6 A Site Plan and Sheets 7, 7A and 7B
Landscaping Plan by correcting site lighting /tree conflicts in the following locations:
• The proposed Green Ash (FP) at the west end of Building 5.
• The proposed Allee Elm (UP) at the northeast corner of Building 4.
• The proposed Crape Myrtles (LI) at the east and west ends of the parking lot adjoining the
southeast side of Building 1.
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 8
Attachment A
aL
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 8, 2009
Scott Collins
Collins Engineering
800 East Jefferson Street
Charlottesville VA 22902
RE: ARB2009- 00024; Arden Place
Tax 61, Parcel 124
Dear Mr. Collins,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on May 4, 2009, completed a preliminary
review of the above -noted request to construct a six - building, 187 -unit, multi - family residential development.
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. The ARB supports the maintenance of the 50' buffer and supports a road configuration that minimizes
the impact on the 50' buffer.
2. Provide a site /building section demonstrating visibility of the proposal as viewed from the Rio Road East
Corridor across the Rio Hill Drive right -of -way. Provide a section from Rio Road across the battery shop,
the Albemarle Square entrance road, the center line of the connector road, and through the retaining
wall, as it is anticipated to be developed.
3. Revise Sheet 6 Site Plan and /or Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations, as needed, to
correct the lack of coordination between the design of the building footprint and the building elevations.
Revise Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations and Sheet 12 Arden Place Exterior Building
Elevations to include roof plans of the clubhouse and apartment buildings.
4. Revise Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations to show a redesigned entry bay and
pediment whose height and width are more proportional with each other and the overall elevation.
5. Revise Sheet 11 Arden Place Clubhouse Exterior Elevations by identifying proposed materials and
colors, and configuration of the cupola.
6. Revise the southwest end elevation of Apartment Building 1, to relieve its blank appearance, by adding
windows or replacing the vertical siding with the proposed brick. Consider redesigning the center section
of the elevation to project inward or outward.
7. Revise Sheet 7 Landscape Plan to show an evergreen species in place of the semi - evergreen Burkwood
Viburnum proposed around the perimeter of the ground- mounted HVAC units at each end of the
Attachment A
apartment buildings.
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 9
8. Revise the site and building layout to more consistently address the requirements of the site grading
guidelines listed under "Development Pattern ".
9. Revise the interior parking lot tree count to not include perimeter parking lot trees. Revise the site /parking
design to allow for a 10' wide planting strip along the full length of the eastern boundary, free of retaining
walls, for perimeter parking lot trees, 40' on center, 2'/2" caliper minimum.
10. Revise Sheet 7 Landscaping Plan by showing the street trees, 2' /z" caliper, 40' on center, on both sides
the entry roads and roads extending from them.
11. Revise Sheet 7 Landscaping Plan with the addition of 2 large canopy species and 1 understory species
with proposed quantities for both categories as near equal as possible.
12. Revise the lighting proposal to include all exterior building lighting. All such lighting in excess of 3,000
lumens shall meet full cut off requirements. Revise Sheet 10 Lighting Details to include the catalog
numbers with the cutsheets. These numbers shall be coordinated with the catalog numbers in the
Luminaire Schedule.
13. Revise Sheet 7 Landscaping Plan and Sheet 6 Site Plan by including the location of all proposed site
lighting. Avoid conflicts with proposed plantings or existing and proposed utilities. Revise Sheet 9 Lighting
Plan to include the following note: 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.
14. Designs for all freestanding signage visible from the Corridor will need to meet ARB Sign Guidelines, with
locations free of conflicts with utilities and landscaping. An ARB sign application for freestanding signage
is an additional application that can be submitted separately from the ARB site plan application. For
building signage visible from the Corridor, provide revised elevations showing the sign location along with
details, including materials, colors and dimensions, of the sign design. Wall and freestanding signs will
require a sign permit in addition to ARB approval.
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,
Brent Nelson
Landscape Planner
cc: Coleway Development LLC
610 Preston Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22902
James E Kelley Jr
2555 Temple Trail
Winter Park FL 32789
Charlottesville Realty Corporation
P. O. Box 6340
Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 10
Gerald Gatobu, Current Development
ARB 12/21/2009 Arden Place, Final - Page 11