HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201100076 Review Comments Letter of Revision 2 2013-10-220 A
_ .. IRGINZQ"
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
October 22, 2013
Ron Lilley
Senior Project Manager
Office of Facilities Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: LOR #2 for SDP - 201100076, Tax Map /Parcel #056A2010001800
Dear Mr. Lilley,
This letter approves your submitted Letter of Revision for the above referenced site.plan. The letter of revision
proposes the following changes:
1. Revise landscaping to provide for better alignment with LEED goals for native species.
.2. Add crushed stone sidewalk along western edge (Crozet Ave.). frontage to provide ADA /pedestrian access
to lower levels (and safe egress).
3. Add asphalt path connections to Tabor Church (to South.).
4. Reduce "Fire Lane" signs along front entry area.
This is the third (2 "d) Letter of Revision for this site. Three (3) Letters of Revision are allowed, after which all
required changes must submitted in the form of a site plan amendment.
Sincerely,
C]. tab
Ellie Carter Ray, CLA
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902 -4596
Phone: (434)296 -5832 Ext 3432
Attachments: Letter of Request
Site Plan Change
aLg���r
U ®�D CrJ
�'IRGINZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Facilities Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 228
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 872 -4501 Fax (434) 972 -4091
August 8, 2013
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Re: Crozet Library - SDP 2011 -00076 (TMP 56A2 -1 -18)
Application for Letter of Revision
To Whom It May Concern:
In support of our Application for Letter of Revision for the subject site plan, here is a summary
of the proposed changes:
1. Revise landscaping to provide for better alignment with LEED goals for
native species.
2. Add crushed stone sidewalk along western edge (Crozet Ave) frontage to
provide ADA/pedestrian access to lower levels (and safe egress).
3. Add asphalt path connections to Tabor Church (to south).
4. Reduce "Fire Lane" signs along front entry area.
The basis for the changes is:
Item 1 — Improved incorporation of LEED principles into the landscaping.
Item 2 — The iniiiai plan assumed completion of Streetscape Proj ect sidewalks by the
time the building would be ready for occupancy, but the Streetscape Project got delayed.
However, the Streetscape Project sidewalks are now realistically expected to be constructed
within the next few months and we are trying to avoid more costly concrete or asphalt sidewalks
that will be demolished in the near future, so crushed stone (tightly packed) is proposed. Code
Official Jay Schlothauer indicated this would be acceptable for ADA access purposes.
Item 3 — To fulfill a promise to Tabor Church in exchange for a temporary grading
easement on their property, two pathways from the library parking lot to the church circulation
lane are being provided. The Church will likely use the library parking lot (public) in support of
some of their functions.
Item 4 — The number fire lane signs required by the Fire Marshal for the length of Fire
Lane provided is only one, but three were shown on the plan. With three, the signs are
considerably more dominant of the front entry area than is desirable.
This change is reflected in the attached Sheets C -4.1, C4.3, and C -6.1 (revised).
Sincerely,
Ronald A. Lill y
Sr. Project Manager
Ellie Ray
From:
Ellie Ray
Sent:
Thursday, September 19, 2013 3:12 PM
To:
Ron Lilley
Subject:
SDP201100076 Crozet Library LOR #2
Attachments:
SDP201100076 LOR2 - ARB - REV1.pdf
Ron,
Please see below for my comments on the revised LOR #2 submittal. The initial comments are listed with the revision
comments in red. ARB comments are attached as well.
A pipe is shown on the south side of the site that was not on the previously approved site plan. Two trees are
shown on top of the pipe. Confirm that trees can be planted on top of the pipe, or adjust the pipe /tree locations
to avoid conflicts.
• Rev1: comment addressed.
2. Show the proposed asphalt paths on the landscape plan to ensure coordination of the path and tree locations.
It appears that as currently proposed, a tree will be planted in the middle of one of the paths.
• Rev1: comment addressed.
3. Sourwood is classified as a small tree on the County's Approved Plant List. I can approved the use of a small tree
instead of a medium tree (as required by the ordinance) in the internal parking island, but the ARB requires a
large tree to be used on the perimeter; please revise according to ARB comments.
• Rev1: comment not fully addressed. It appears that some 'existing' trees planted with Phase I are now
proposed to remain, with the addition of one (1) hackberry and (1) linden. However, the 'existing' tree
symbols are not labeled along the southern boundary and the plant schedule still calls for the removal of
many phase I trees. Please clarify the proposal by labeling the plant symbols and revising the Phase I
portion of the plant schedule to accurately reflect which trees will remain.
4. The plant schedule lists 10 sourwood, however there only appear to be 9 on the plan; please revise.
• Rev1: comment not fully addressed. Now the plant schedule lists 5 sourwood, but only 4 are indicated
on the plan; please revise.
5. The plant schedule lists 2 hackberry (in Phase 1), but there appear to be 3 (total) on the plan; please revise.
• Rev1: comment not fully addressed. Now the plant schedule lists 1 'new' hackberry, but 2 are indicated
on the plan; please revise. See comment #3 for guidance on the discrepancy on 'existing' hackberries.
6. The plant schedule lists 16 ilex crenata (in Phase 1), but there appear to be 21 (all Phase 1) on the plan; please
revise.
• Rev1: comment addressed.
7. Clarify why the site plan and grading sheets were not included in this submittal.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks,
Ellie Carter Ray, PLA
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
Planning Division
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432
fax: 434.972.4126
Ellie Ray
From: Ellie Ray
Sent: Monday, August 19, 2013 11:43 AM
To: Ron Lilley
Subject: SDP201100076 Crozet Library LOR #2
Attachments: SDP201100076 LOR2 - ARB.pdf
Ron,
Please see below for my comments on the proposed LOR #2. ARB comments are attached. Engineering, Fire Rescue and
Inspections all have no objection.
1. A pipe is shown on the south side of the site that was not on the previously approved site plan. Two trees are
shown on top of the pipe. Confirm that trees can be planted on top of the pipe, or adjust the pipe /tree locations
to avoid conflicts.
2. Show the proposed asphalt paths on the landscape plan to ensure coordination of the path and tree locations.
It appears that as currently proposed, a tree will be planted in the middle of one of the paths.
3. Sourwood is classified as a small tree on the County's Approved Plant List. I can approved the use of a small tree
instead of a medium tree (as required by the ordinance) in the internal parking island, but the ARB requires a
large tree to be used on the perimeter; please revise according to ARB comments.
4. The plant schedule lists 10 sourwood, however there only appear to be 9 on the plan; please revise.
5. The plant schedule lists 2 hackberry (in Phase 1), but there appear to be 3 (total) on the plan; please revise.
6. The plant schedule lists 16 ilex crenata (in Phase 1), but there appear to be 21 (all Phase 1) on the plan; please
revise.
Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.
Thanks,
Ellie Carter Ray, PLA
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Community Development
Planning Division
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
ph: 434.296.5832 x. 3432
fax: 434.972.4126
Ellie Ray
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. (VDOT) [ Joel .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:38 AM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: SDP - 2011 -00076 Crozet Library Phase II Final
SDP - 2011 -00076 Crozet Library Phase II Final
Ellie,
I have reviewed the subject site plan and have no objections. The proposed sanitary sewer line in the Route
240 right of way will require a Land Use Permit from VDOT.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
VDOT Culpeper
Land Development
434 - 589 -5871
ioel . den unzioCd)vdot.virginia.gov
Ellie Ray
From: Alex Morrison [amorrison @serviceauthority.org]
Sent: Monday, April 23, 2012 10:20 AM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: SDP - 2011 -076: Crozet Library (Phase II) Final
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Dear Ellie :
The Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) has received and reviewed the plan /document /project described above.
All ACSA comments have been addressed by the applicant. The ACSA hereby approves the plan /document /project
described above.
Please feel free to contact me at the number below with any comments or questions you may have.
Thank you.
Alexander J. Morrison, EIT
Civil Engineer
AGMO"k cnniv
Service AuAil 4
168 Spotnap Road
Charlottesville, VA 22911
Office: (434)977-4511 EXT: 116
Cell: (434) 531 - 7434
This email may contain confidential information that should not be shared with anyone other than its intended
recipient(s).
Phone (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: February 9, 2012
I have reviewed the Crozet Library Phase 2 resubmittal with drawings revised 1/30/2012 and your
2/6/2012 responses to my questions emailed on 2/3/2012.
Outstanding issues include submittal of the planting easement for the trees on the south side of the site
and the inclusion of relevant retaining /dumpster wall details in the site plan set.
The planting easement is not an EC issue alone; Ellie Ray, the lead plan reviewer for the library project,
has identified receipt of the easement document as a condition of site plan approval. As such, I will leave
the planting easement issue for Ellie to resolve.
The retaining and dumpster wall details, including the material and color information that is critical to the
EC review, are provided on various sheets of the site plan and architectural drawings. Ellie has identified
details in the architectural set that should be included in the site plan set. Meeting Ellie's condition in this
regard will be sufficient for EC purposes.
Please provide me with a copy of the revised drawings that you will submit to meet Ellie's conditions of
approval. Assuming that no unrequested changes or changes that impact the appearance of the
development from the EC are made, I anticipate issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness based on that
revised set.
If you have questions about this action, please feel free to contact me.
of ALg�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126
Memorandum
To: Ron Lilley, Albemarle County Facilities Development (rlilley(a_albemarle.orq)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: jer 23, 2011
Revl : January 11, 2012
Rev2: February 8, 2012
Subject: SDP 2011— 00076 Crozet Library Phase II - Final
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been
identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.):
[Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
[32.5.6(a)] Revise the sheet index to include all sheets; it appears C -2.0 is missing from the index.
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, it appears some sheet numbers have changed; please make
sure all sheet and detail cross - references are accurate.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. It appears there are still some inaccuracies on the details and
cross references. On sheet C4.1 the `Hatching Key' detail keys point to sheet C6.2 for the
corresponding details. However, there is no such sheet; it appears these should reference C7.2.
Details 1, 3, 5, and 12 (on sheet C7.1) refer back to sheet C4.0. Again, there is no such sheet; it
appears they should reference C4.1. There is no reference to detail 6 (on sheet C7.2) on the
referenced sheet C4.2. The detail below 6 (on sheet C7.2), "sewer pipe bedding detail ", appears to
be inaccurately numbered and it references a non- existent sheet. Additionally, there doesn't appear
to be any reference to this detail on the plan sheets. These items will not prevent approval of the
plan; they are provided for your reference.
2. [32.5.6(a)] Revise the setback information provided to indicate both the minimum and maximum setbacks
for building and parking; include front, side and rear setback requirements (see 206.3). Indicate all
setbacks graphically on the site plan and label as minimum and maximum.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.6(a)] Verify that the maximum front setback along Crozet Avenue is being met.
Rev1: This has been sent to Zoning to verify that it meets their requirements for adhering to the
`build to' line; I will forward their comments once received. Please also verify there has been no
change in the building location from the approved preliminary plan.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
4. [32.5.6(a)] Provide boundary dimensions.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please add markers at each corner (IS, IF, etc) and dimension
each boundary section separately. It appears some sections are labeled incorrectly; please verify all
dimensions.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
5. [32.5.6(b)] The maximum acreage indicated for the proposed use (library) is listed at 2.085 acres, which
exceeds the size of the site; please revise.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.6(b)] Maximum square footage for the library is provided as 20,000 SF on the cover sheet, however
the maximum footprint is provided as 17,454 SF and the building is indicated as two- story. Please verify the
maximum square footage.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.6(b)] The parking requirement listed does not match the maximum square footage indicated for the
building. Please provide a calculation to demonstrate the parking requirement (see 20B.4(B)2).
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, please separate the motorcycle spaces out of the official
count and list the parking provided as 54 spaces and 2 motorcycle spaces to avoid any confusion
regarding the actual number of spaces provided that meet County code.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
8. [32.5.6(b)] Provide six bicycle parking spaces (see 20B.4(B)3).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.6(b)] Please provide a sum figure for maximum paved parking and vehicular circulation areas.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.6(e) and 32.7.9.4 (b)] The landscape plan should also indicate the trees to be saved, limits of
clearing, and location and type of protective fencing. See comment #19 below.
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, since you are stating that plants within the tree preservation
area should be preserved `if possible', please remove the Conservation Plan Checklist. The
checklist only applies when plants must be saved. Revise your plant replacement note as requested
by the ARB.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
11. [32.5.6(i)] Provide the right -of -way lines and widths, and pavement widths for all existing streets.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
12. [32.5.6(m)] Show and provide more detailed infor- cation -^^ erning the ingress /egress for the property.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
13. [32.5.6(n)] Dimension all improvements including any walkways, fences, walls, trash containers,
landscaped areas, parking lots, and other paved areas. Provide maximum height of all retaining walls.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please provide dimensions, height of walls, and slopes for
stair and ramp entrance along Library Avenue.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. 1131, A1, and A7 on sheet A -0.3 provide information required for
Site Plan approval. Sheet A -0.3 will need to be included in all future Site Plan submittals and
included in the Sheet Index.
14. [32.6.6(e)] Provide the radiu. of curb returns.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. [32.6.6(g)] For all parking areas, indicate on the site plan: the size, angle of stalls, and width of aisles and
travelways.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
16. [4.12.19(b)] The dumpster pad shall extend beyond the front of each dumpster so that the front wheels of a
truck servicing the dumpster will rest on the concrete, but in no case shall the length of a concrete pad be
less than eight (8) feet beyond the front of the dumpster; verify the dumpster pad provided is adequate for
the size dumpster intended to be used.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
17. [32.7.9.4(a)] Please add notes to the landscape plan indicating which sections of code you are addressing
and verification that the landscape requirements have been satisfied. An example can be provided upon
request.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please revise your note regarding Section 20B.5(A) to say `not
applicable on this site'.
0 -2: Comment addresser'
18. [32.7.9.4(a)] Include Phase I landscape schedule on the landscape plan, indicating which plants are to be
saved and removed. Also, as indicated in ARB comment #6, please clarify the note regarding replacement
of any plants damaged during construction.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that the plant schedule has a couple of
inconsistencies. It looks like 6 Acer rubrum are being removed from the Phase I planting schedule
(leaving 3, plus the 9 proposed in Phase I1 ... totaling 12) and that 17 Ilex verticillata are being
removed (leaving 8, plus the 6 proposed in Phase I1 ... totaling 14); please verify and correct. Please
also provide trees along the southern boundary as requested in ARB comment #7.
Rev2: Comment addressed. However, a permanent easement for the three Acer rubrum proposed
on the neighboring property is required. I understand this is in process; please be aware that this
will involve submitting an easement plat for review, and this site plan cannot be approved until the
plat and associated deed are approved.
19. [32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be N. u,,erved in lieu of planting new materials in order to
satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved;
limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and
trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, the applicant shall sign a
conservation checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be protected during
construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case, such checklist shall
conform to specifications contained in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393
through III -413, and as hereafter amended. (32.8.2.3, 7- 10 -85; Amended 5 -1 -87, 10- 3 -01).
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, due to the `if possible' nature of the tree preservation on this
site, it has now been determined that the Conservation Plan Checklist is not necessary; please
remove it from the plan.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
20. [32.7.9.5(b)] Label all pervious areas of the site with whatever material will be used to provide permanent
protection from soil erosion.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
21. [32.7.9.7(b)] Please provide a calculation and documentation demonstrating that an interior area equal to
5% of the paved parking and vehicular circulation is provided and landscaped with trees or shrubs.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [32.7.9.8(c)3] Provide more detailed information regarding the dumpster screening to verify this
requirement is satisfied.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
23. [4.17] ARB review of the lighting plan has already requested revisions to the lighting plan as follows; 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. Please include these revisions on the site plan review
copies as well. Also show the light fixture locations on the landscape and site plan sheets to verify that no
location conflicts exist.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please see ARB comment #5 for more information regarding
the lighting plan requirements. All lighting information submitted to the ARB should also be
included on the site plan.
Rev2: Comment addressed.
24. [Comment] As indicated in comments provided by Engineering, a WPO application is required and must be
approved before approval of the Final Site Plan can be granted.
Rev1: Comment not addressed.
Rev2: Comment not addressed; please see engineering comments for additional information.
25. [Comment] Please remove any notes that are no longer applicable. For example, it appears the note on
sheet C -1.2 that reads 'Survey performed prior to Main Street construction' is no longer valid.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. Upon further review, it appears there are notes remaining that
are no longer applicable. For example, Note #3 on sheet C1.2 refers to the property as being two
separate parcels. County records now show one parcel; the plat was recorded in Deed Book 3990
Page 302. Please revise this note and verify that all other notes reflect accurate information.
26. [Comment] Please add a valid revision date for all revision submittals.
Rev2: Comment not fully addressed. For recordkeeping purposes, please also add the date of the
first revision submittal.
Please contact Ellie Ray in the Planning Division by using eray(jr.albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832 ext. 3432 for
further information.
of ALg�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126
Memorandum
To: Ron Lilley, Albemarle County Facilities Development (rlilley(a_albemarle.orq)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: -r T1 Wn1
Rev1: January 11, 2012
Subject: SDP 2011— 00076 Crozet Library Phase II - Final
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been
identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.):
[Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
1. [32.5.6(a)] Revise the sheet index to include all sheets; it appears C -2.0 is missing from the index.
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, it appears some sheet numbers have changed; please make
sure all sheet and detail cross- references are accurate.
2. [32.5.6(a)] Revise the setback information provided to indicate both the minimum and maximum setbacks
for building and parking; include front, side and rear setback requirements (see 20B.3). Indicate all
setbacks graphically on the site plan and label as minimum and maximum.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
3. [32.5.6(a)] Verify that the maximum front setback along Crozet Avenue is being met.
Rev1: This has been sent to Zoning to verify that it meets their requirements for adhering to the
`build to' line; I will forward their comments once received. Please also verify there has been no
change in the building location from the approved preliminary plan.
4. [32.5.6(a)] Provide boundary dimensions.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please add markers at each corner (IS, IF, etc) and dimension
each boundary section separately. It appears some sections are labeled incorrectly; please verify all
dimensions.
5. [32.5.6(b)] The maximum acreage indicated for the proposed use (library) is listed at 2.085 acres, which
exceeds the size of the site; please revise.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
6. [32.5.6(b)] Maximum square footage for the library is provided as 20,000 SF on the cover sheet, however
the maximum footprint is provided as 17,454 SF and the building is indicated as two- story. Please verify the
maximum square footage.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
7. [32.5.6(b)] The parking requirement listed does not match the maximum square footage indicated for the
building. Please provide a calculation to demonstrate the parking requirement (see 20B.4(B)2).
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, please separate the motorcycle spaces out of the official
count and list the parking provided as 54 spaces and 2 motorcycle spaces to avoid any confusion
regarding the actual number of spaces provided that meet County code.
8. [32.5.6(b)] Provide six bicycle parking spaces (see 20B.4(B)3).
Rev1: Comment addressed.
9. [32.5.6(b)] Please provide a sum figure for maximum paved parking and vehicular circulation areas.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
10. [32.5.6(e) and 32.7.9.4 (b)] The landscape plan should also indicate the trees to be saved, limits of
clearing, and location and type of protective fencing. See comment #19 below.
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, since you are stating that plants within the tree preservation
area should be preserved `if possible', please remove the Conservation Plan Checklist. The
checklist only applies when plants must be saved. Revise your plant replacement note as requested
by the ARB.
11. [32.5.6(i)] Provide the right -of -way lines and widths, and pavement widths for all existing streets.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
12. [32.5.6(m)] Show and provide more detailed information concerning the ingress /egress for the property.
Rev1: Comment aclrlracced.
13. [32.5.6(n)] Dimension all improvements including any walkways, fences, walls, trash containers,
landscaped areas, parking lots, and other paved areas. Provide maximum height of all retaining walls.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please provide dimensions, height of walls, and slopes for
stair and ramp entrance along Library Avenue.
14. [32.6.6(e)] rrovide the raaius or cure returns.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. [32.6.6(g)] For all parking areas, indicate on the site plan: the size, angle of stalls, and width of aisles and
travelways.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
16. [4.12.19(b)] The dumpster pad shall extend beyond the front of each dumpster so that the front wheels of a
truck servicing the dumpster will rest on the concrete, but in no case shall the length of a concrete pad be
less than eight (8) feet beyond the front of the dumpster; verify the dumpster pad provided is adequate for
the size dumpster intended to be used.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
17. [32.7.9.4(a)] Please add notes to the landscape plan indicating which sections of code you are addressing
and verification that the landscape requirements have been satisfied. An example can be provided upon
request.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please revise your note regarding Section 20B.5(A) to say `not
applicable on this site'.
18. [32.7.9.4(a)] Include Phase I landscape schedule on the landscape plan, indicating which plants are to be
saved and removed. Also, as indicated in ARB comment #6, please clarify the note regarding replacement
of any plants damaged during construction.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. It appears that the plant schedule has a couple of
inconsistencies. It looks like 6 Acer rubrum are being removed from the Phase I planting schedule
(leaving 3, plus the 9 proposed in Phase I1 ... totaling 12) and that 17 Ilex verticillata are being
removed (leaving 8, plus the 6 proposed in Phase I1 ... totaling 14); please verify and correct. Please
also provide trees along the southern boundary as requested in ARB comment V.
19. [32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to
satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved;
limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and
trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, the applicant shall sign a
conservation checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be protected during
construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case, such checklist shall
conform to specifications contained in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393
through III -413, and as hereafter amended. (32.8.2.3, 7- 10 -85; Amended 5 -1 -87, 10- 3 -01).
Rev1: Comment addressed. However, due to the 'if possible' nature of the tree preservation on this
site, it has now been determined that the Conservation Plan Checklist is not necessary; please
remove it from the plan.
20. [32.7.9.5(b)] Label all pervious areas of the site with whatever material will be used to provide permanent
protection from soil erosion.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
21. [32.7.9.7(b)] Please provide a calculation and documentation demonstrating that an interior area equal to
5% of the paved parking and vehicular circulation is provided and landscaped with trees or shrubs.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
22. [32.7.9.8(c)3] Provide more detailed information regarding the dumpster screening to verify this
requirement is satisfied.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
23. [4.17] ARB review of the lighting plan has already requested revisions to the lighting plan as follows; 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. Please include these revisions on the site plan review
copies as well. Also show the light fixture locations on the landscape and site plan sheets to verify that no
location conflicts exist.
Rev1: Comment not fully addressed. Please see ARB comment #5 for more information regarding
the lighting plan requirements. All lighting information submitted to the ARB should also be
included on the site plan.
24. [Comment] As indicated in comments provided by Engineering, a WPO application is required and must be
approved before approval of the Final Site Plan can be granted.
Rev1: Comment not addressed.
25. [Comment] Please remove any notes that are no longer applicable. For example, it appears the note on
sheet C -1.2 that reads `Survey performed prior to Main Street construction' is no longer valid.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
26. [Comment] Please add a valid revision date for all revision submittals.
Please contact Ellie Ray at the Division of Current Development by using eray(a)albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832
ext. 3432 for further information.
Phone (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
`J I1 pJ11 �11'] �J, r, �) ifilly
Service Authority
TO: Ellie Ray Carter
FROM: Alexander J. Morrison, Civil Engineer
DATE: December 29, 2011
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: SDP2011076 — Crozet Library (Phase II) Final
TMP# 56A2 -01 -18 & 56A2 -01 -19
The below checked items apply to this site.
✓ 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for:
✓ A. Water and sewer
B. Water only
C. Water only to existing structure
D. Limited service
✓ 2. A 6 inch water line is located approximately on site distant.
3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is
Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
✓ 4. A 10 inch sewer line is located approximately on site distant.
5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
✓ 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
7. and plans are currently under review.
8. and plans have been received and approved.
9. No plans are required.
10. Final and plans are required for our review and approval prior to
granting tentative approval.
11. Final site plan may /may not be signed.
12. RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections.
13. City of Charlottesville approval for sewer.
✓ Comments:
• Feel free to contact me at 434 - 977 -4511 ext. 116 to discuss comments.
• Relocate water meter closer to the existing line.
• Fire line cannot go through water meter and must be a separate tap.
• Add gate valve on fire line (this will be the end of ACSA ownership).
• PIV must be on domestic side of fire line gate valve.
• Provide ACSA easements on domestic water service line, including water meter vault.
• Provide ACSA easement on fire line, including gate valve (10 foot off end of gate valve).
• Provide fixture counts so water meter can be sized.
168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698
www.serviceauthoriy.org
Ellie Ray
From: DeNunzio, Joel D., P.E. [ Joel .DeNunzio @VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, December 06, 2011 1:07 PM
To: Ellie Ray
Subject: SDP - 2011 -00076 Crozet Library Phase II
Ellie,
I reviewed the Crozet Library Phase II plan and the location of the entrance is the same as before so it is OK.
do have a couple comments:
1. The existing entrance is a type CG -13 and flush with the sidewalk unlike a CG -11 which has a curb line
and curb ramps. Tying in the proposed CG -2 directly to the back of the CG -13 will not work very well for the
grading behind the curb and give a 6 inch difference in elevation from the top of curb to the sidewalk. The
designed needs to provide a detail of this transition which could be a flush curb at the back of the CG -13. The
curb could be wiped out along the grade of the driveway behind the CG -13 until it is flush at the sidewalk.
2. A land use permit will be required for the utility connections within the Route 240 right of way.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Thanks
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
VDOT Culpeper
Land Development
434 - 589 -5871
ioel .denunzioCcbvdot.viroinia.4ov
`J I1 pJ11 �11'] �J, r, �) ifilly
Service Authority
TO: Ellie Ray Carter
FROM: Alexander J. Morrison, Civil Engineer
DATE: November 30, 2011
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: SDP2011076 — Crozet Library (Phase II) Final
TMP# 56A2 -01 -18 & 56A2 -01 -19
The below checked items apply to this site.
✓ 1. This site plan is within the Authority's jurisdictional area for:
✓ A. Water and sewer
B. Water only
C. Water only to existing structure
D. Limited service
✓ 2. A 6 inch water line is located approximately on site distant.
3. Fire flow from, nearest public hydrant, located distant from this site plan, is
Gpm + at 20 psi residual.
✓ 4. A 10 inch sewer line is located approximately on site distant.
5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
✓ 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
7. and plans are currently under review.
8. and plans have been received and approved.
9. No plans are required.
10. Final and plans are required for our review and approval prior to
granting tentative approval.
11. Final site plan may /may not be signed.
12. RWSA approval for water and /or sewer connections.
13. City of Charlottesville approval for sewer.
✓ Comments:
• Feel free to contact me at 434 - 977 -4511 ext. 116 to discuss comments.
• Correct fire department note to call out the correct connection.
• Relocate water meter closer to the existing line.
• Fire line cannot go through water meter and must be a separate tap.
• Add gate valve on fire line (this will be the end of ACSA ownership).
• PIV must be on domestic side of fire line gate valve.
• Provide ACSA easements on domestic water service line, including water meter vault.
• Provide ACSA easement on fire line, including gate valve (10 foot off end of gate valve).
• Provide fixture counts so water meter can be sized.
168 Spotnap Road • Charlottesville • VA 22911 • Tel (434) 977 -4511 • Fax (434) 979 -0698
www.serviceauthoriy.org
of ALg�
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Phone 434 - 296 -5832 Fax 434 - 972 -4126
Memorandum
To: Ron Lilley, Albemarle County Facilities Development (rlilley(@albemarle.org)
From: Ellie Ray, CLA, Senior Planner
Division: Planning
Date: November 23, 2011
Subject: SDP 2011— 00076 Crozet Library Phase II - Final
The County of Albemarle Planning Division will recommend approval of the plan referenced above once the
following comments have been satisfactorily addressed (The following comments are those that have been
identified at this time. Additional comments or conditions may be added or eliminated based on further review.):
[Each comment is preceded by the applicable reference, which is to the Subdivision /Zoning Ordinances unless
otherwise specified.]
1. [32.5.6(a)] Revise the sheet index to include all sheets; it appears C -2.0 is missing from the index.
2. [32.5.6(a)] Revise the setback information provided to indicate both the minimum and maximum setbacks
for building and parking; include front, side and rear setback requirements (see 208.3). Indicate all
setbacks graphically on the site plan and label as minimum and maximum.
3. [32.5.6(a)] Verify that the maximum front setback along Crozet Avenue is being met.
4. [32.5.6(a)] Provide boundary dimensions.
5. [32.5.6(b)] The maximum acreage indicated for the proposed use (library) is listed at 2.085 acres, which
exceeds the size of the site; please revise.
6. [32.5.6(b)] Maximum square footage for the library is provided as 20,000 SF on the cover sheet, however
the maximum footprint is provided as 17,454 SF and the building is indicated as two - story. Please verify the
maximum square footage.
7. [32.5.6(b)] The parking requirement listed does not match the maximum square footage indicated for the
building. Please provide a calculation to demonstrate the parking requirement (see 20B.4(B)2).
8. [32.5.6(b)] Provide six bicycle parking spaces (see 20B.4(B)3).
9. [32.5.6(b)] Please provide a sum figure for maximum paved parking and vehicular circulation areas.
10. [32.5.6(e) and 32.7.9.4 (b)] The landscape plan should also indicate the trees to be saved, limits of
clearing, and location and type of protective fencing. See comment #19 below.
11. [32.5.6(i)] Provide the right -of -way lines and widths, and pavement widths for all existing streets.
12. [32.5.6(m)] Show and provide more detailed information concerning the ingress /egress for the property.
13. [32.5.6(n)] Dimension all improvements including any walkways, fences, walls, trash containers,
landscaped areas, parking lots, and other paved areas. Provide maximum height of all retaining walls.
14. [32.6.6(e)] Provide the radius of curb returns.
15. [32.6.6(g)] For all parking areas, indicate on the site plan: the size, angle of stalls, and width of aisles and
travelways.
16. [4.12.19(b)] The dumpster pad shall extend beyond the front of each dumpster so that the front wheels of a
truck servicing the dumpster will rest on the concrete, but in no case shall the length of a concrete pad be
less than eight (8) feet beyond the front of the dumpster; verify the dumpster pad provided is adequate for
the size dumpster intended to be used.
17. [32.7.9.4(a)] Please add notes to the landscape plan indicating which sections of code you are addressing
and verification that the landscape requirements have been satisfied. An example can be provided upon
request.
18. [32.7.9.4(a)] Include Phase I landscape schedule on the landscape plan, indicating which plants are to be
saved and removed. Also, as indicated in ARB comment #6, please clarify the note regarding replacement
of any plants damaged during construction.
19. [32.7.9.4(b)] When existing trees /plants are to be preserved in lieu of planting new materials in order to
satisfy landscaping and screening requirements the landscape plan shall indicate the trees to be saved;
limits of clearing; location and type of protective fencing; grade changes requiring tree wells or walls; and
trenching or tunneling proposed beyond the limits of clearing. In addition, the applicant shall sign a
conservation checklist approved by the agent to insure that the specified trees will be protected during
construction. Except as otherwise expressly approved by the agent in a particular case, such checklist shall
conform to specifications contained in the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook, pages III -393
through III -413, and as hereafter amended. (32.8.2.3, 7- 10 -85; Amended 5 -1 -87, 10- 3 -01).
20. [32.7.9.5(b)] Label all pervious areas of the site with whatever material will be used to provide permanent
protection from soil erosion.
21. [32.7.9.7(b)] Please provide a calculation and documentation demonstrating that an interior area equal to
5% of the paved parking and vehicular circulation is provided and landscaped with trees or shrubs.
22. [32.7.9.8(c)3] Provide more detailed information regarding the dumpster screening to verify this
requirement is satisfied.
23. [4.17] ARB review of the lighting plan has already requested revisions to the lighting plan as follows; 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. Please include these revisions on the site plan review
copies as well. Also show the light fixture locations on the landscape and site plan sheets to verify that no
location conflicts exist.
24. [Comment] As indicated in comments provided by Engineering, a WPO application is required and must be
approved before approval of the Final Site Plan can be granted.
25. [Comment] Please remove any notes that are no longer applicable. For example, it appears the note on
sheet C -1.2 that reads `Survey performed prior to Main Street construction' is no longer valid.
Please contact Ellie Ray at the Division of Current Development by using eray(a)albemarle.org or 434 - 296 -5832
ext. 3432 for further information.
Phone (434) 296 -5832
�'IRGI1`�ZP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
MEMORANDUM
TO: Ron Lilley, Facilities Development
FROM: Margaret Maliszewski, Principal Planner
CC: John Reno, PHRA, 58 Kenmore St., Harrisonburg, VA 22801
Ellie Ray, Senior Planner
RE: ARB- 2011 -20: Crozet Library Phase 2
DATE: November 11, 2011
Fax (434) 972 -4126
The ARB reviewed the Crozet Library Phase 2 project on April 4, 2011 and approved the proposal
pending staff administrative approval of several conditions. The conditions of approval are listed below
by number. Staff review comments based on the recent site plan resubmittal follow each condition.
1. Reposition the trees near the dumpster to avoid the utilities.
Staff response: The trees at the north corners of the dumpster have been deleted. The loss of these trees is
not expected to have a significant impact on the Entrance Corridor. No further comments.
2. Provide a complete landscape schedule for Phase 2 planting. Ensure that Phase 2 trees have a
minimum planting size of 2112' caliper.
Staff response: These items have been provided. No further comments.
3. Show all of the four Phase 1 trees located on the north side of the parking lot on the Phase 2
plan.
Staff response: The perimeter parking lot trees required on the north side of the parking lot are shown on
the plan, as Phase 1 trees. No further comments.
4. Include this note on the Phase 2 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.
Staff response: The note has been added. No further comments.
5. Provide a complete lighting/photometric plan as part of the site plan. Include all exterior
lighting, both site lights and wall lights.
Staff 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.
6. Coordinate all drawings to clearly distinguish Phase 1 and Phase 2 work.
Staff 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.
7. Add shrubs at the west end of the transformer pad to screen the equipment from the Entrance
Corridor.
Staff 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.
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.
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.
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.
11. Indicate if additional wall signs will be proposed for the building. If so, provide complete
information for review (type, location, size, color, material, etc.).
Staff response: The applicant has indicated that no wall signs will be visible from the Entrance Corridor.
The applicant should be aware that approved sign permits are required before signs can be installed on the
building. No further comments.
12. Confirm that no grading will be required after Phase 1 is completed, or provide a Phase 2
grading plan.
Staff response: A grading plan was submitted. No further comments.
13. 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 l " =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.
14. 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.
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