HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201300008 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2013-03-29s
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832
March 29, 2013
Scott Collins
Adam Long
Collins Engineering
200 Garrett Street, Suite K
Charlottesville VA 22902
RE: ARB- 2013 -08: Gander Mountain
Dear Scott and Adam,
Fax (434) 972 -4126
I have reviewed your recent submittals for the above - referenced project. The following issues require resolution before I
can issue a Certificate of Appropriateness.
On the architectural elevation sheet, in the southern bay of the west elevation, the wall area below the cornice is
labeled "BIFS 1 Color: Sherwin Williams Balanced Beige SW7073." This appears to be a mistake and should
read "EIFS 2 Color: Sherwin Williams Cobble Brown SW6082" based on the color elevations last reviewed by
the ARB. Also, note that the color number for Balanced Beige is SW7037, not 7073.
Please confirm these two issues.
2. This issue remains from my March 21 comments: An ARB condition of approval stated, Ensure that the
decorative wall lights meet the scale and proportion shown in the elevations. The sizes of the decorative wall light
provided in the cut sheet don't match the size shown in the color elevation drawing the ARB reviewed. Also, the
dimensions of the fixture shown on the more recent black and white line drawing do not match the dimensions
given in the cut sheet or on the color rendering.
Revise the lighting plan to show a decorative wall light that meets the scale and proportion shown in the color
elevations last reviewed by the ARB.
3. This issue remains from my March 21 comments: There are four cut sheets on the lighting plan and three fixtures
in the schedule.
Revise the lighting plan to include the canopy fixture in the luminaire schedule.
4. This issue remains from my March 21 comments: An ARB condition of approval stated, Ensure that the lamps
willprovide a consistent appearance throughout the development by specifying a consistent lamp type. (Metal
halide appears to be a common lamp type in the development)
The four proposed fixtures all appear to have different lamp types. Revise the lighting plan to provide a consistent
lamp type throughout the development. (Metal halide appears to be a common lamp type in the development.)
Typically, catalog numbers are provided on the lighting plan for all proposed fixtures, allowing for the
identification of fixture color. This hasn't been done on the Gander Mountain lighting plan. The standard color for
the parking lot pole light you've proposed is bronze and a range of colors are available for the Westwood fixture.
Confirm the bronze color for the pole light and indicate the color of the Westwood fixture on the plan. Bronze
would be most appropriate.
5. This issue remains from my March 21 comments: Indicate if the entrance element is illuminated. If it is, add the
information to the photometric plan. The photometrics have been changed, but no additional fixtures are
indicated. What are the locations? Where does this information appear on the plan?
Indicate the quantity and locations of the fixtures on the plan, confirm that the photometrics include the
illumination from these fixtures, and indicate the proposed color /finish of the fixtures on the plan.
6. You've added a Progress Lighting fixture. The lamp for this fixture exceeds 3000 lumens and the fixture is not a
full cutoff style.
Revise the lighting plan so that all fixtures emitting 3000 lumens or more are full cutoff fixtures. Include
information on the plan sufficient to confirm this.
7. Ellie has brought to my attention the condition of final site plan approval that requires the "stream valley design"
to be consistent with the design reviewed by the ARB on October 3, 2005. That plan showed the graded slopes in
the stream valley replanted with "indigenous canopy and screening trees." Consequently, the graded slope
between the wetlands and the proposed Redi -rock retaining wall should be planted with new trees.
Please provide:
1. One set of revised drawings addressing each of these issues. Include updated 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.
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.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
cc: ARB- 2013 -08