Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201000126 Legacy Document 2011-02-03COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: ARB- 2010 -126: Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines February 2, 2011 Update ACTION: X INFORMATION: SU BJECT /PROPOSAL /REQUEST: Ratify Phase 1 of the revised Entrance Corridor Design CONSENT AGENDA: Guidelines, which bring them in conformance with long- ACTION: INFORMATION: standing practices of the ARB and clarify typical design requirements for applicants. ATTACHMENTS: Yes STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Foley, Davis, Kamptner, and Cilimberg; and Ms. Maliszewski REVIEWED BY: LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: County Code § 18- 34A.2(a) directs the Architectural Review Board ( "ARB ") to promulgate design standards for ratification by the Board of Supervisors. The ARB's Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines have not received a comprehensive update since their ratification in 1994. Over the years, updates have been made to specific sections of the guidelines, including lighting, fuel pump canopies and signs (see Attachment A). The Entrance Corridor Overlay District regulations in the Zoning Ordinance were amended in early 2010. DISCUSSION: The ARB and staff will be considering revisions to the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines in phases to allow for more timely progress in recognition of the fact that staff resources available for this undertaking are limited. The four recommended phases are as follows: Phase 1 includes minor and new text revisions to bring the guidelines up to date with long- standing practices of the ARB and to clarify standard design requirements as well as guidelines which have proven difficult for applicants to understand. This phase will also eliminate from the guidelines lists and process - related information (as opposed to design - related information) because the lists and process information are now easily available at the County's web site where they can be updated quickly and easily. (See www.albemarle.org /ARB) Eliminating this information will streamline the guidelines, allowing for more timely updates in the future. These revisions are separated from the subsequent phases because they do not involve actual changes to current requirements or practice. Phase 2 will bring the guidelines in line with the County's expectations for the Development Areas. This will include coordination with the Neighborhood Model and the master plans for Crozet, Pantops, Places 29 (when adopted), and the Village of Rivanna. Updates to the Development Area guidelines are an important second step in this process since the majority of ARB applications are for sites in these areas. This phase of updates will begin to address the issue of context in the Entrance Corridors more specifically. To this end, qualifications will be added to the guidelines to distinguish appropriate treatments sought /desired in the Development Areas against what is considered appropriate in the Rural Areas. (For example, a rustic split rail fence might be appropriate in the Rural Areas but generally not at a commercial development in the Development Areas.) Phase 3 will begin after completion of the upcoming Comprehensive Plan review and will ensure that the guidelines are consistent with the County's expectations for the Rural Areas using the updated Comprehensive Plan as guidance. This phase will complete the revisions needed to address context issues in the Development Areas and the Rural Areas. Phase 4 will incorporate any updates that are necessary to bring the guidelines into conformance with revisions made to the site plan review process, which is currently under development. The ARB has already promulgated the Phase 1 Guidelines. Attachment B is a black -line draft and attachment C is the clean draft of the proposed Phase 1 Guideline revisions as recommended by the ARB at its November 1, 2010, November 15, 2010 and January 3, 2011 meetings. (See Attachments D, E and F for the ARB's actions.) The revisions: AGENDA TITLE: ARB- 2010 -126: Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Update February 2, 2011 Page 2 1) Eliminate process - related information and lists, much of which is outdated and is now available on the County's website, such as: • Identification of types of projects that require ARB review • Steps in the ARB review process • Submittal requirements • How to appeal a decision of the ARB • The list of the County's Entrance Corridors • Explanation of what falls within an Entrance Corridor • The County's Entrance Corridor map • The County's recommended tree list 2) Further clarify standard design requirements, such as: • Additional information on window glass to clarify that highly tinted and highly reflective glass is generally not appropriate in the Entrance Corridors, with detail on the acceptable level of reflectance and the submittal items required for review. • Clarification on the appropriate treatment of equipment and other objectionable features in the Entrance Corridors, clarifying that appropriate siting of such features is the first step, followed by the addition of screening to eliminate visibility. • Addition of information on the typical maximum light level found appropriate for display lots in the Entrance Corridors. • Clarification on the size of trees required along interior roads, pedestrian ways and parking areas. • Information directing applicants to add standard equipment, landscape and lighting notes to their plans. 3) Provide assistance on guidelines that have proven difficult for applicants to understand, such as: • Clarification on the ornamental tree spacing requirement along the EC frontage. • Clarification on the appropriate appearance of the illumination from site lights in the Entrance Corridors. • Clarification on the desired appearance of grading proposed in the Entrance Corridors. These revisions clarify long- standing practices of the ARB and do not revise current guidance or process. Staff anticipates that these changes will improve efficiency in the review and approval of ARB applications. BUDGET IMPACT: None. RECOMMENDATIONS: The ARB and staff recommend that the Board ratify the revised Guidelines set forth in Attachment C and endorse the phased approach to the Guideline revisions as outlined in this Executive Summary. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: History of Updates to the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Attachment B: Black -line Revisions to the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Attachment C: Proposed Revised Text - Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Attachment D: ARB November 1, 2010 Action on the Proposed Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Attachment E: ARB November 15, 2010 Action on the Proposed Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines Attachment F: ARB January 3, 2011 Action on the Proposed Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines