Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201000119 Review Comments Minor Amendment 2010-11-29ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #/Name ARB- 2010 -119: Baugh Auto Body Review Type Final review of a Site Development Plan Parcel Identification Tax Map 32, Parcel 5B 1 Location 4257 Seminole Trail (US 29), just north of the North Fork of the Rivanna River on the east side of US 20, directly opposite the intersection of Camelot Drive and US 29 Zoned Light Industry (LI), Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner /Applicant HMC Holdings LLC/Engineering Design Associates (Randy Hooker) Magisterial District Rivanna Proposal To establish an auto body shop and parking for rental cars associated with the body shop. To install landscaping and site lighting, and to make minor changes to the building. To reface the freestanding sign. Context This site was previously developed for the Badger Powhatan company. The building was constructed ca. 1968 and includes several additions. The front office section of the building is faced with brick. The warehouse areas are metal panels above brick or block bases. The entire building has been painted white. Parking areas exist on the north and west sides of the property. Chain link fence exists on site. A wooded area and steep slope on the south side of the property descend to the North Fork of the Rivanna. The Clayton Homes site is located to the north. The Camelot subdivision is across Route 29 to the west. Visibility The proposed development is visible for approximately 1500' along the Route 29 North Entrance Corridor. The parcel fronts the EC and views into the site from the parcel's frontage and for a distance to the north are open and unobstructed. Traveling northbound on Route 29, the site becomes visible a short distance north of the river, with wooded area providing screening until approximately 100' south of the Badger building as the wooded area thins out, allowing views into the site. Northbound traffic will view the storage area fence through this thin tree cover. Traveling south on Rt. 29, the site becomes visible a short distance north of the International Auto Sport site, descending the hill on Rt. 29. The rental car row is not very visible to southbound traffic from this viewpoint. The storage area fence will be easily visible to southbound traffic. ARB Meeting Date December 6, 2010 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski Project History DATE APPLICATION /REVIEW TYPE RESULT May 17, 2010 ARB- 2010 -39 The ARB conducted an advisory review for the Special Use Permit and a 16 Accessory structures and equipment should be preliminary review of the site plan for this property. The action letter from Add this note to the site and that meeting is Attachment C to this report. September 8, 2010 SP- 2010 -06 The Special Use Permits for Auto Body and Rental Car Outdoor Storage were and shall, to the extent possible, be compatible SP- 1010 -11 approved by the Board of Supervisors ANALYSIS REF I GUIDELINE ISSUE RECOMMENDATION Accessory structures and equipment 16 Accessory structures and equipment should be • A screening fence is required around Add this note to the site and integrated into the overall plan of development the vehicle storage area. The applicant architectural plans: Mechanical and shall, to the extent possible, be compatible proposes a 10' high fence of equipment shall not be visible from the with the building designs used on the site. corrugated metal panels, with block piers at the corners. Entrance Corridor. 17 The following should be screened to eliminate visibility from the Entrance Corridor street: • The metal panels are proposed in a. Loading areas, "light stone" which is a shade of tan. b. Service areas, At its May 17 review, the ARB c. Refuse areas, indicated that a white fence was not d. Storage areas, recommended and that a neutral tone e. Mechanical equipment, with a flat finish was recommended. f. Above - ground utilities, and The tan color appears neutral, but the g. Chain link fence, barbed wire, razor wire, finish is not completely matte. and similar security fencing devices. • The proposed block is split -face CMU in color 2014, which is a mix of tans 18 Screening devices should be compatible with the design of the buildings and surrounding and whites. It is expected to appear natural vegetation and may consist of: coordinated with the metal panels and a. Walls, the building. b. Plantings, and • A row of plants is proposed along the c. Fencing. westernmost and south sides of the fence. The shrubs include Gold Coast juniper (which can grow to 3' tall) and Steeds holly (which can grow to 10' tall). The proposed plants are REF GUIDELINE ISSUE RECOMMENDATION expected to mitigate the length of fence on the west and south sides, as well as any reflective quality the metal might have. • The standard mechanical equipment note is missing from the plan. Lighting 21 Light should be shielded, recessed or flush- The standard lighting note does not Add the following note to the plan: mounted to eliminate glare; appear on the 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. 22 The light should achieve an incandescent Light levels reach a maximum of 25.6 Switch the B2 fixture to a C2 fixture. effect; footcandles below the double fixture labeled B2 located north of the north end of the building. This level is close to the 30 footcandle maximum that is typically applied to display lots, but this area is not intended for display. The proposed C2 fixtures are also double fixtures and their light levels are somewhat lower. Landscaping 27 Landscaping along the frontage of Entrance • In its May 17 review, the ARB Add two 31/2" caliper trees at the south Corridor streets should include the following: reiterated the need for 31/2" caliper end of the EC frontage (north of the a. Large shade trees should be planted parallel shade trees at 35' on center along the densely wooded area). Shift the to the Entrance Corridor Street. Such trees full frontage of the corridor, with southernmost Pin Oak as needed to should be at least 31/2 inches caliper (measured ornamental trees interspersed and 24" accommodate the two trees. 6 inches above the ground) and should be of a shrubs to form a hedge. plant species common to the area. Such trees • 4 Pin Oaks are proposed at 21/2" Revise the plan to make the number of should be located at least every 35 feet on caliper, a size that does not meet the Pin Oak and Nandina consistent in the center. guideline. EC frontage measures plan and schedule. b. Flowering ornamental trees of a species approximately 530' long. At 35' common to the area should be interspersed spacing, 15 trees would be required Add the following note to the plan: All REF GUIDELINE ISSUE RECOMMENDATION among the trees required by the preceding along the frontage. 4 proposed trees site plantings of trees and shrubs shall paragraph. added to the 5 existing trees provide 9 be allowed to reach, and be maintained d. An area of sufficient width to accommodate trees total. The required 35' tree at, mature height; the topping of trees is the foregoing plantings and fencing should be spacing is achieved for less than half prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be reserved parallel to the Entrance Corridor of the EC frontage. pruned minimally and only to support street, and exclusive of road right -of -way and • The southernmost Pin Oak might be the overall health of the plant. utility easements. shifted slightly to the north and two additional trees added at the south end of the frontage to get closer to the required number of trees (for 11 total). • There is a length of 130' along the EC at the center of the site where the existing sign and flagpole stand, that remains without EC trees. The applicant has explained that additional trees in this area will conflict with the flag on the flagpole and with visibility of the sign. Planting beds of annuals with Dwarf Nandina are proposed to mitigate the lack of trees. The addition of planting beds does provide a symmetrical arrangement that coordinates with the office portion of the building and helps place the sign in the landscape. • Four Dogwoods exist on site and shrubs are proposed along the EC side of the parking lot. • On -site planting area is narrow along the west side of the proposed fence, but the ground continues for a distance in the right -of -way before the paving begins. • The numbers of Pin Oaks and Dwarf Nandina in the plant schedule don't match the number shown on the plan. REF I GUIDELINE I ISSUE I RECOMMENDATION Structure 12 Architecture proposed within the Entrance Corridor should use forms, shapes, scale, and materials to create a cohesive whole. The applicant proposes to reface the existing non - conforming sign at this site. The proposal includes a sign panel on a stone base, with external illumination. The panel has a black background, with white text ( "Baugh Auto Body www.bauphautobody.coLn) and a 5' circular logo with a red background, silver `B" and silver and white borders. (See Attachment B for additional details.) The standard landscaping note does not aanear on the clan. The applicant proposes to enlarge two overhead doors on the west elevation from 8' wide to 12' wide and to add two 12' wide overhead doors on the north elevation. To accommodate these doors, two windows on the north elevation and one window on the west elevation will have to be removed. The doors on the north are expected to have limited noticeability. One of the doors on the west will be located within the fenced area. It is anticipated that the other door on the west will retain a compatible appearance with the overall building. Two new pedestrian doors are also proposed on the west elevation. They are required for The addition of the stone at the base of the sign to cover the pole supports is considered an improvement over the existing condition. The general design of the panel appears appropriate. Although the logo is large on the sign, it is balanced by, and coordinated with, the text. The shade of red originally proposed for the logo was Avery cardinal red, which looks like the 2283 Acrylic that the ARB generally does not approve. The applicant indicated a willingness to revise the shade to Avery 9340 or 9343, which are more appropriate shades. Cut sheets have not been provided for the sign spotlights. Ensure that drawings submitted with the building permit application for the window and door work clearly indicate that the new doors will match the color of the building and that the openings will be detailed to match the existing openings. Revise the shade of red for the logo to Avery 9340 or 9343. Provide cut sheets for the proposed lights for the sign. Identify all proposed lighting options. Ensure that the lamps will emit less than 3000 lumens (to meet the requirements of the lighting ordinance). W SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The screening fence materials, colors, planting and general design. The finish of the metal panels. 2. The spacing and number of Entrance Corridor frontage trees. Staff recommends approval of the plan with the following conditions: 1. Add this note to the site and architectural plans: Mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance Corridor. 2. Add the following note to the 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. 3. Switch the B2 fixture to a C2 fixture. 4. Add two 31 /z" caliper trees at the south end of the EC frontage (north of the densely wooded area). Shift the southernmost Pin Oak as needed to accommodate the two trees. 5. Revise the plan to make the number of Pin Oak and Nandina consistent in the plan and schedule. 6. 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. 7. Ensure that drawings submitted with the building permit application for the door widening clearly indicate that the overhead doors will match the color of the building and that the openings will be detailed to match the existing openings. 8. Revise the shade of red for the sign logo to Avery 9340 or 9343. Provide cut sheets for the proposed lights for the sign. Identify all proposed lighting options. Ensure that the lamps will emit less than 3000 lumens (to meet the requirements of the lighting ordinance). 31 ATTACHMENT A SUBMITTALS This report is based on the following submittal items: Sheet # Drawing Name Drawing Date/Revision Date 1 Cover Sheet 10 /1 /10 2 Overall Existing Conditions Plan 10 /1 /10 3 1 Existing Conditions, Demolition and Phase 1 Erosion Control Plan 10 /1 /10 4 Layout Plan 10 /1 /10 5 Landscaping Plan & Details 10 /1 /10 6 Screening Plan, Elevations &Details 10 /1 /10 7 Lighting Plan 10 /1 /10 8 Lighting Specifications 10 /1 /10 9 Lighting Specifications 10 /1 /10 10 Lighting Specifications 10 /1 /10 - Photos of existing landscape (6) undated - Material samples: Split -face CMU, Martinsville Concrete Products, Inc., Color: 2014; MBCI metal roof and walls stems: Signature 200 Standard Color: Light Stone ATTACHMENT B SIGN PROPOSAL Type Refacing of a freestanding sign with the addition of a base Materials Stone, aluminum, vinyl, Sintra Location Existing sign location along the Rt 29 frontage, centered on the office Cabinet Size 6' tall x 12' 2" long Base size 5' 5.39" tall x 12' 2" long Text & Graphic Size `B" = 15" tall; "A" = 7" tall Colors Background Black Text White Graphic Red (Avery 9430) and Silver Base Stone to match the stone wall at the entrance to the research park across Rt. 29 Graphic Stylized `B" in a red circle with silver and white borders Illumination External Landscaping 5 Nandina both sides and Liriope at the base of the Nandina ATTACHMENT C COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126 May 24, 2010 Engineering Design and Associates C/O Randy Hooker P.O. Box 50067 Richmond, VA 23250 RE: ARB201000039 Baugh Auto Body Rental Cars; Tax Map 32, Parcel 5B Dear Mr. Hooker: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on May 17, 2010, completed a preliminary review of the above -noted request. The Board took the following actions. Regarding the request for the Special Use Permit: The ARB has no objection to the request for the special use permits for Baugh auto body and rental car storage, with the following conditions: 1. The Route 29 frontage shall be improved with landscaping to meet the Entrance Corridor guidelines. The landscaping shall be shown on a plan, to be approved with the site plan amendment. The plan shall include identification of existing trees and shrubs on site, although trees and shrubs in the heavily wooded area on the south side of the parcel need not be individually identified. 2. The design of the screening fence shall be subject to ARB approval. The fence shall be supplemented with landscaping, which shall be subject to ARB approval. Sufficient area for planting shall be provided, as determined by the ARB. 3. A planting island shall be added at the west end of the rental car parking row with plants as determined by the ARB. The island and planting shall be shown on a plan, to be approved with the site plan amendment. 4. Rental car spaces shall be striped. 5. Vehicles shall not be elevated. 6. No new chain link, barbed wire, razor wire or other similar fencing or attachments shall be added to this site. 9 Regarding the preliminary proposal, the ARB offered the following comments: 1. Revise the plan to include identification of the existing trees and shrubs on -site. (Trees and shrubs in the heavily wooded area south of the site need not be individually identified.) 2. Provide planting along the EC frontage to meet the EC guidelines, in particular 3' /2" caliper shade trees at 35' on center along the full frontage of the corridor, ornamental trees interspersed among the shade trees, and shrubs, 24" high at planting, to form a hedge along the parking lot. 3. Provide an alternate screening fence design with the site plan amendment. Include identification of proposed materials, finishes, colors, method of construction, planting, etc. 4. Provide a planting island, and tall shrubs in the island, at the west end of the rental car parking row. 5. Supplement the screening fence with planting. The species, size, quantity and interval depend on the fence design. 6. No new chain link, no barbed wire, razor wire or other similar fencing or attachments shall be used. 7. Rental car spaces shall be striped. 8. Vehicles shall not be elevated. 9. Note that a sign permit application must be submitted, reviewed and approved prior to installing a new sign or refacing the existing one. Consult the EC Sign Guidelines. Regarding the fence design, the ARB provided the following direction: 1. A white fence is not recommended. A neutral tone with a flat finish is recommended. 2. A metal panel fence could be appropriate if it is sufficiently mitigated with planting. 3. Piers or planting are required to break up the length of the fence, but not necessarily both. 4. Planting along the EC and planting along the south and southwest faces of the fence would be appropriate. 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, Margaret Maliszewski Principal Planner Cc: HMC Holdings LLC, 995 Windsor Rd, Charlottesville Va 22901 File 10