HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201100071 Legacy Document 2011-07-25ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
Project # /Name
ARB- 2011 -71: Re- Store'n Station Convenience Store and Fuel Pump Canopy and Signs
Review Type
Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan
Certificate of Appropriateness for Signs
Parcel Identification
Tax Map 55B, Parcel 1
Location
Located on the south side of Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt 250 W) approximately 1500 feet west of the
intersection with Old Trail Drive.
Zoned
Highway Commercial (HC), Entrance Corridor (EC)
Owner /Applicant
Jeffries II LLC, Jeffrey Sprouse/ Jo Higgins
Magisterial District
Whitehall
Proposal
To construct a convenience store with associated fuel pump canopies. To construct an LED illuminated
freestanding fuel sign and a gas pump canopy sign.
Context
The subject parcel is 4.06 acres in size and located south of Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Route 250 West),
approximately 850 feet east of the intersection at Interstate 64. The entire site is grassy, and the front (north) half
of the site is flat, while the rear (south) half slopes down to the adjoining parcels to the rear. An existing wooded
area is located along the east edge of the parcel adjacent to Free Town Lane. To the north across Route 250 lie
two single - family residences and the D and W Market and gas station, with two fuel pumps and a canopy. The
parcel across Free Town Lane to the east is a developed site owned by the Yancey Lumber Corporation
containing a one -story building and multiple trucks and storage containers. The adjoining parcel to the west
contains a one -story building (Crozet Moose Lodge).
Visibility
The proposed building will be highly visible from the EC. The front fuel pump canopy also will be clearly
visible from the EC, but the rear canopy is not expected to be visible from the EC. The proposed monument sign
and fuel pump canopy sign will be clearly visible from the EC.
ARB Meeting Date
August 1, 2011
Staff Contact
Eryn Brennan
Proiect History
DATE
APPLICATION/
RESULT
Compatibility with significant historic sites
REVIEW TYPE
May 16, 2011
ARB- 2011 -16
The applicant submitted a revised preliminary site development plan for ARB review showing
9
Building forms and features, including
the first floor balcony removed based on Zoning's determination that the building could not
• Revise the architectural elevations
exceed 3,000 square feet. Comments were provided to the applicant for the benefit of their next
eliminate the cupola.
to eliminate the cupola.
submission (Attachment A). A site plan is currently under review.
February 1, 2010
ARB- 2009 -102
The ARB reviewed a revised preliminary site development plan based on the ARB's work
forms and features of the significant historic
session comments, and comments were provided to the applicant for the benefit of their next
submission.
May 18, 2009
ARB- 2008 -150
The ARB reviewed a preliminary site development plan for a convenience store and associated
February 2, 2009
ARB- 2008 -151
fuel pump canopies on February 2, 2009. Comments were provided to the applicant for the
Appendix B. The standard of compatibility
benefit of their next submission. The applicant then requested a work session and submitted a
revised concept plan that was reviewed by the ARB on May 18, 2009. Comments were again
unnecessarily increases the height
provided to the applicant for the benefit of their next submission.
ANALYSIS
In the "Issue" column, black text represents May 16, 2011 ARB comments and red text summarizes how the current submittal addresses
those comments. Blue text represents new issues that have been identified based on new changes to the proposal.
REF GUIDELINE
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
Compatibility with significant historic sites
Structure design
9
Building forms and features, including
• Revise the architectural elevations to
• Revise the architectural elevations
roofs, windows, doors, materials, colors and
eliminate the cupola.
to eliminate the cupola.
textures should be compatible with the
• Although the height of the cupola
forms and features of the significant historic
has been reduced from 8' -4" to 5'-
buildings in the area, exemplified by (but
3 ", it is still an architectural
not limited to) the buildings described in
element that is not appropriate for
Appendix B. The standard of compatibility
convenience stores, and it
can be met through scale, materials, and
unnecessarily increases the height
forms which may be embodied in
of the building and emphasizes the
architecture which is contemporary as well
scale of the large structure that is
2
REF
GUIDELINE
ISSUE
RECOMMENDATION
as traditional. The replication of important
sited close to the EC. The applicant
historic sites in Albemarle County is not the
has provided images of nearby
objective of these guidelines.
buildings that have cupolas;
however, none of these structures
are convenience stores nor are they
sited at grade with and close to the
EC.
i12
Architecture proposed within the Entrance
• Remove the faux window openings on
• Eliminate spandrel glass from the
Corridor should use forms, shapes, scale,
the east and west elevations with the
proposal. Should the ARB
and materials to create a cohesive whole.
transom and shingle sheathing infill.
consider allowing spandrel glass,
Incorporate an alternate design
identify on the elevation drawings
treatment to eliminate any appearance
the window openings where
of blankness along the walls.
spandrel glass is proposed,
• The faux window openings have
provide a sample of the spandrel
been removed, but the applicant has
glass, and include it in the material
indicated in a memo that spandrel
schedule.
glass is to be used in some of the
• Revise the brick wall on the
window openings on both the east
second floor of the north elevation
and west elevations. However, the
so that the columns are sitting on
windows where spandrel glass is
top of piers.
proposed are not identified on the
• Revise the materials on the second
elevation drawings, spandrel glass
floor of the west elevation to
has not been included in the
present a more coordinated
material schedule, a note in the
appearance. Extending the
material schedule indicates that all
horizontal siding to the rear corner
window glass is clear, and a sample
of the elevation may be
of the spandrel glass has not been
appropriate.
submitted. Spandrel glass is not an
appropriate material for the
window types proposed for this
convenience store.
• The two columns located on top of 2nd
story brick wall above the gabled
entrance of the north elevation do not
sit on a pier as the other second floor
REF I GUIDELINE I ISSUE I RECOMMENDATION
VA
The requirements of the Guidelines
regarding landscaping are intended to
reflect the landscaping characteristic of
many of the area's significant historic sites
which is characterized by large shade trees
and lawns. Landscaping should promote
visual order within the Entrance Corridor
and help to integrate buildings into the
existing environment of the corridor.
columns do. This presents an awkward
appearance.
The change in material from horizontal
siding to brick on the west elevation
does not correspond to a change in
plane as it does on the east elevation,
which presents an uncoordinated
Revise the planting scheme along the
western parcel boundary to present a
more natural appearance similar to the
planting scheme along the EC.
Incorporate irregular spacing and
diverse plant species, including
flowering ornamentals.
• The linear row of trees along the
western parcel boundary is not
coordinated with the staggered,
more natural planting scheme along
the EC or with the rural character
of the area.
The number of red maples shown on
the landscape plan is not coordinated
with the number provided in the Plant
Schedule.
Revise the planting scheme along
the western parcel boundary to
present a more natural appearance
similar to the planting scheme
along the EC. Incorporate
irregular spacing and clustering of
diverse species.
Coordinate the landscape plan and
plant schedule regarding the
number of red maples proposed on
the site.
M
DETAILS OF RE- STORE'N STATION SIGN PROPOSALS
FREESTANDING SIGN
Type
Monument sign composed of a cabinet on a masonry base
Materials
Cabinet: Lexan and aluminum; Base: Brick to match building
Location
On the west side of the entrance into the site from Route 250
Overall Sign Size
7' -0" total sign height
Cabinet
8' -0" (W) x 4' -0" (H) x F -0" (D)
Base
9' -4" (W) x 3' -0" (H) x 2' -0" (D)
Text
"Re- Store'N Station "; "Diesel "; "Regular"
Colors
appear to meet setback requirements.
Background
Yellow Pantone 1205C, Green Pantone 377C
Text
Yellow Pantone 1205C, White
Graphic
Brown Pantone 126C, Yellow Pantone 1205C, Green Pantone 377C, Dark Green Pantone 350C
Graphic
Farmhouse, silo, and field inside text
Illumination
Internally lit with fluorescent tubes; LED units for gas price panels; daytime intensity limited to 70% of
maximum intensity; Nighttime intensity limited to 16% of maximum intensity with automatic dimming at dusk,
all backgrounds opaque.
ANALYSIS
REF
I CHECKLIST ITEM
NOTES
RECOMMENDATION
SCALE AND SIZE
4.b
Signs may not exceed the size, height
The monument sign meets ARB design
Staff is only recommending approval
and setback requirements as outlined in
guidelines; however, the location does not
of the monument sign design and
Section 4.15 of the Albemarle County
appear to meet setback requirements.
landscaping at this time, but not the
Zoning Ordinance (unless the sign has
Minimum sign setback in the HC Zoning
location of the sign. Site plan approval
received a variance).
District is 5'.
does not include approval of the
monument sign location. Prior to
construction, a building permit will be
required for the monument sign, and
the location will be reviewed at that
time.
FUEL PUMP CANOPY SIGN
Type
Channel letter
Materials
Aluminum, Lexan
Location
Centered vertically at the western end of the north fascia of both fuel pump canopies, approximately 12"
from the corner of the canopy
Sign Size
11.993" (H) x 3'- 4.85" (W) x 5" (D)
Text
"FUEL"
Colors
Letters
Dark Green PMS 350C
Trimcap & Returns
Dark Green PMS 350C
Illumination
Internal Neon
ANALYSIS
The fuel pump canopy sign meets the EC Sign Guidelines. Staff recommends approval as submitted.
WALL SIGNS
Wall sign details were not included with this application, so a review could not be completed. However, the north elevation drawing shows a sign
on the brick wall above the gabled entrance on the second floor, the general location of which appears to be appropriate. EC review of the details
regarding the size, location, color, and material of the sign is required with the sign permit application prior to installation. Also two signs are
shown in the cornice of the 2nd story porch on the east elevation. These signs appear to obscure architectural elements and would not be
approvable in this location. If signs are desired in this general location, the signs should be reduced in size to fit within a sign band or the
architectural design should be revised to accommodate the signs in an appropriate manner.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. The appropriateness of spandrel glass for this project.
2. The landscaping along the western parcel boundary.
Staff recommends approval of the site development plan with the following conditions:
1. Revise the architectural elevations to eliminate the cupola.
31
2. Eliminate spandrel glass from the proposal. Should the ARB consider allowing spandrel glass, identify on the elevation drawings the
window openings where spandrel glass is proposed, provide a sample of the spandrel glass, and include it in the material schedule.
3. Revise the brick wall on the second floor of the north elevation so that the columns are sitting on top of piers.
4. Revise the materials on the second floor of the west elevation to present a more coordinated appearance. Extending the horizontal siding to
the rear corner of the elevation may be appropriate.
5. Revise the planting scheme along the western parcel boundary to present a more natural appearance similar to the planting scheme along
the EC. Incorporate irregular spacing and clustering of diverse species.
6. Coordinate the landscape plan and plant schedule regarding the number of red maples proposed on the site.
*Staff is only recommending approval of the monument sign design and landscaping at this time, but not the location of the sign. Site plan
approval does not include approval of the monument sign location. Prior to construction, a building permit will be required for the monument sign,
and the location will be reviewed at that time.
*Wall sign details were not included with this application, so a review could not be completed. However, the north elevation drawing shows a sign
on the brick wall above the gabled entrance on the second floor, the general location of which appears to be appropriate. EC review of the details
regarding the size, location, color, and material of the sign is required with the sign permit application prior to installation. Also two signs are
shown in the cornice of the 2nd story porch on the east elevation. These signs appear to obscure architectural elements and would not be
approvable in this location. If signs are desired in this general location, the signs should be reduced in size to fit within a sign band or the
architectural design should be revised to accommodate the signs in an appropriate manner.
7
APPENDIX A
This report is based on the following submittal items:
Sheet #
Drawing Name
Drawing Date/Revision Date
SKI
Elevation Drawings
6/15/2011
Freestanding Sign Drawing
Submitted 6/20/2011
C1 -13
Site Plan
6/13/11
Material Sample Board
Submitted 2/7/2011; Awning sample
submitted 6/20/2011