HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201100020 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2012-01-10Phone (434) 296 -5832
�'IRGI1`�ZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
MEMORANDUM
Fax (434) 972 -4126
TO: Ron Lilley, Facilities Development
FROM: Margaret Maliszewski, Principal Planner
CC: John Reno, PHRA, 58 Kenmore St., Harrisonburg, VA 22801
Todd Willoughby, Grimm & Parker, 1355 Beverly Road, Suite 105, McLean VA 22101
Ellie Ray, Senior Planner
RE: ARB- 2011 -20: Crozet Library Phase 2
DATE: January 10, 2012
I have reviewed the Crozet Library Phase 2 resubmittal including site plan drawings dated 10 -31 -211 and
architectural drawings dated 12/29/11. The issues identified in my November 11, 2011 memo have not
been fully resolved. Staff review comments based on the recent resubmittals are provided below
following the November comments.
5. Provide a complete lighting/photometric plan as part of the site plan. Include all exterior
lighting, both site lights and wall lights.
11 /11 /11 response: A photometric plan has been provided but it is not complete. It does not include a
luminaire schedule and cut sheets for all proposed fixtures were not included in the site plan. Revise the
site plan to include a luminaire schedule that includes all proposed design features for all exterior lighting
— both site and wall lights. Include manufacturer's cut sheets for each fixture in the site plan. Ensure that
the cut sheets show that each fixture that emits 3000 lumens or more is a full cutoff fixture. Resubmittal
required.
1/10/12 comments:
• The color /finish of the parking lot light poles and fixtures have not been identified in the lighting
schedule. Include the color /finish of the poles and fixtures in the schedule. Bronze, black or brown
can be approved.
• The maintenance factor (LLF) was not identified in the schedule. The photometrics must be
calculated using an LLF of 1.0. Indicate the LLF on the lighting plan and update the photometrics if
1.0 was not previously used.
Resubmittal required.
6. Coordinate all drawings to clearly distinguish Phase 1 and Phase 2 work.
11 /11 /11 response: The notes regarding Phase 1 landscaping need clarification. Revise note 1 on the
demolition plan C3.1 to read as follows: "Preserve trees and shrubs in this area if possible. If unable to
protect during construction, replace with same species and size." Revise all other similar notes throughout
the plan, as well (for example, on sheet C2.0). Add the Phase 1 landscape schedule to the landscape plan
C7.1 (to facilitate replacement of plants in the event that demolition occurs) and add a note referring back
to the demolition plan. Also, the numbered list of notes on the demolition plan C3.1 does not correspond
to numbered notes on that plan. Revise the C3.1 note list to coordinate with the plan. Resubmittal
required.
1/10/12 comments: The landscape preservation notes on C3.1 and C2.0 were revised, but not exactly as
directed. Revise the notes to read as follows: "Preserve trees and shrubs in this area if possible. If unable
to protect during construction, replace with same species and size." Also, the landscape plan sheet number
has changed since the previous submittal. Consequently, the note on C3.1 references sheet C7.1, but
should reference C6.1. Resubmittal required.
7. Add shrubs at the west end of the transformer pad to screen the equipment from the Entrance
Corridor.
11 /11 /11 response: The site plan shows five abelia added west and south of the transformer. The
applicant's response memo indicates that shrubs can't be added in this location and a white vinyl fence is
proposed. A white vinyl fence is not shown on the plan and it is not expected to have an appropriate
appearance for the EC. The shrubs are appropriate. Please clarify the transformer screening situation. If a
fence is proposed, provide for review an alternate material /color that will blend with the surroundings,
and ensure that the site plan includes the corresponding fence detail. Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments: The equipment screening has been resolved, but trees previously proposed on the
south side of the parking lot have now been removed from the plan. These trees are needed to meet the
EC Guidelines perimeter parking lot tree requirement. Provide 21 /z" caliper shade trees, 40' on center, on
the south side of the parking lot. Resubmittal required.
8. Add this note to the site and architectural plans: Mechanical equipment shall not be visible
from the Entrance Corridor.
Staff response: The note has been added to the site plan but the architectural plans were not submitted.
Provide the architectural plans for review. Include this note on the architectural plans: "Mechanical
equipment shall not be visible from the Entrance Corridor."
Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments: Note added. No further comments.
9. Provide planting at the west end of the south elevation.
Staff response: Seven ilex crenata and one sophora Japonica have been added at the west end of the south
elevation. The three mature oak trees currently located in this area are now proposed to be removed.
Provide updated architectural elevations (line drawings) so that a determination can be made regarding
the need for replacement trees. Also in this area, the retaining wall at the southwest corner of the library
has been revised since the last ARB review. Indicate on the plan the material proposed for the retaining
wall and include a retaining wall detail in the site plan. Provide a material /color sample for review.
Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments:
• Trees are added off -site on the south side of the building. Provide evidence of a planting easement.
• The retaining wall at the southwest corner of the building is proposed as a poured -in -place concrete
wall. The concrete wall will be visible from the EC. The concrete is not expected to have an
appropriate appearance for the EC and it cannot be approved by staff. It is recommended that the
stone be re -used to build the new retaining wall. If there isn't sufficient stone to build the entire wall,
the stone should be used first to rebuild the portion of the wall that runs parallel to Crozet Avenue and
an alternate material that is more compatible with the architectural design of the building should be
proposed for the remainder of the new retaining wall.
• The retaining wall details should be included as part of the site plan set. They are currently only
included in the architectural site. Identify the retaining wall materials and colors in the site plan
details.
• The retaining wall details shown on the architectural plans don't match the retaining wall information
in the site plan. Revise and coordinate.
• Detail A7 on architectural sheet A0.3 illustrates a trash enclosure of block and brick. Detail 8 on site
plan sheet C7.1 illustrates a screen fence. Coordinate the dumpster details throughout the architectural
and site plan sets. The brick -faced screen is more appropriate.
Resubmittal required.
10. Provide a material schedule on the architectural elevation drawings.
Staff response: Architectural drawings were not submitted. Provide the architectural drawings listed in the
ARB final SDP checklist for review. Provide a material schedule on the architectural elevation drawings.
Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments: Schedule provided. No further comments.
11. Submit all final ARB review documents.
Staff response: The submittal failed to include all the items listed in the ARB final SDP checklist. Provide
the following items for review.
D. Lighting plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1 " =20' or larger, clearly legible and
folded):
❑ Lighting schedule identifying all proposed light fixtures, poles and brackets.
❑ Manufacturer's cut sheets illustrating proposed lighting fixtures and information on
illumination type, intensity, style, shielding, color, finish, and installation height.
E. Appearance of the building(s) (architectural elevations, color perspective sketches, site
sections):
❑ Dimensioned architectural elevations of the proposed building(s). Elevations must be drawn
to the scale of 1/8 " =F -0 ". Include a building materials schedule and key on the elevation
drawings.
❑ One set of all building materials / colors.
❑ A floor plan adequate to show exterior walls, windows and doors.
Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments: See #5 for lighting comments.
12. Window glass reflectance off the outside pane shall be limited to 7%.
Staff response: The applicant indicated in a memo that glass reflectance shall be 7 %. The information
must appear on an approved drawing. Provide the glass specifications for review and include the glass
spec, including the 7% reflectance off the outside pane, in the materials schedule. Resubmittal required.
1/10/12 comments: Spec sheet identifies 6% reflectance for the proposed glass. No further comments.
Please provide:
1. One full set of revised drawings addressing each of the above comments where resubmittal is
required. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing.
2. A memo including detailed responses indicating how each condition has been satisfied. 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.
3. The attached "Revised Application Submittal" form. This form must be returned with your
revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution.
When staffs review of this information indicates that all conditions of approval have been met, a
Certificate of Appropriateness may be issued. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
of �L�
,.i UrAG1N1�F_
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
REVISED APPLICATION SUBMITTAL
This form must be returned with your revisions to ensure proper tracking and distribution. County staff has
indicated below what they think will be required as a resubmission of revisions. If you need to submit additional
information please explain on this form for the benefit of the intake staff. All plans must be collated and folded to
fit into legal size files, in order to be accepted for submittal.
TO: Margaret Maliszewski DATE:
PROJECT NAME: ARB201100020 Crozet Library Phase II
Submittal Type Requiring Revisions ( ) indicates Submittal Code
County Project Number
# Co ies
Erosion & Sediment Control Plan (E &S)
# Copies
Distribute To:
Mitigation Plan (MP)
1
Margaret Maliszewski
Waiver Request (WR)
Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
Road Plan (RP)
Private Road Request, with private /public comparison (PRR)
Private Road Request — Development Area (PRR -DA)
Preliminary Site Plan (PSP)
Final Site Plan (or amendment) (FSP)
Final Plat (FP)
Preliminary Plat (PP)
Easement Plat (EP)
Boundary Adjustment Plat (BAP)
Rezoning Plan (REZ)
Special Use Permit Concept Plan (SP -CP)
Reduced Concept Plan (R -CP)
Proffers (P)
Bond Estimate Request (BER)
Draft Groundwater Management Plan (D -GWMP)
Final Groundwater Management Plan (F -GWMP)
Aquifer Testing Work Plan (ATWP)
Groundwater Assessment Report (GWAR)
Architectural Review Board (ARB)
ARB2011 -20
1
Other: Please explain
(For staff use only)
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
Submittal Code
# Copies
Distribute To:
ARB
1
Margaret Maliszewski