HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201800072 Action Letter 2018-10-31COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone 434 296-5832 Fax 434 972-4126
August 10, 2018
Justin Shimp
CIO Shimp Engineering
912 East High St.
Charlottesville, Va 22902
RE: ARB-2018-72: Pantops Corner
Dear Mr. Shimp,
At its meeting on Monday, August 6, 2018 the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, by a vote
of 3:0:1 voted to forward the following recommendations on the above -noted Initial Site Development
Plan to the agent for the Site Review Committee:
• Regarding requirements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4c(2), (3) and (5) and
recommended conditions of initial plan approval:
o The ARB recommends approval of the initial site plan.
Note that a Certificate of Appropraiteness is required prior to Final Site Plan approval.
• Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None.
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit:
1. Adjust the proposed grading- to eliminate conflicts with wooded area to remain. Show
adequate tree protection fencing on the grading, landscaping and erosion and sediment control
plans.
Regarding the final site plan submittal:
1. The stepped gables of Option 2 are not appropriate for the EC.
2. Revise the corner towers of Option 1 so that they appear more fully as towers or eliminate
them,
3. Revise the EIFS material and detailing of the entrance bay to better reflect the importance of
the entrance function.
4. Note on the elevation drawings that the vents at the windows will be colored to match the
adjacent wall surface.
5. Refine and simplify the hotel design to establish greater coordination of architectural elements
throughout.
6. Clarify the proposed shingle color and note it consistently throughout the drawings.
7. Include the standard window glass note on the drawings and provide specs for review: Visible
light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLP) shall not
exceed 30%.
8. Add a dumpster detail to the site plan. Coordinate cumpster screening materials with the
building materials.
9. Confirm that mechanical equipment for the hotel will be screened by the roof. Note this on the
architectural drawings.
10. Show on the plan where Building A mechanical equipment is located,
11. Add the standard mechanical equipment note to the site and architectural drawings: Visibility
of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.
12. Include details in the lighting plan to confirm that the under -canopy light fixtures are full
cutoff fixtures that do not produce glare.
13. Update the lighting plan to include information on all proposed building lights.
14. Clearly show all utilities and easements on the utility and landscape plans. Provide required
planting free of utilities and easements. A separate diagram of the frontage planting that
details the utility lines and easements in varying colors would help clarify the feasibility of the
proposed planting.
15. Provide large shade trees, 3'/a" caliper at planting, 35' on center, along the Rt. 20 side of the
site. Intersperse ornamentals among the shade trees.
16, Provide medium street trees, spaced 25' on center, parallel to the sidewalks at the hotel and
Building A.
17. Coordinate the number of proposed parking spaces noted on the cover sheet with the number
noted on the landscape plan and the actual number provided.
18. Add trees west of the hotel building to soften the appearance of the west elevation.
19. Eliminate Note 4 on the landscape plan. Provide additional clarification regarding the timing
of EC frontage planting.
20. Terrace retaining walls 6' in height and taller and plant the terraces.
21. Provide top -of -wall and bottom -of -wall elevations for the retaining walls.
22. Adjust the proposed grading to eliminate conflicts with wooded area to remain. Show
adequate tree protection fencing on the grading, landscaping and erosion and sediment control
plans.
In addition to this action, the ARB offered the following comments on the revised design:
The three-story end wing lacks detail and scale, and needs additional fenestration or patterning.
Extending the brick to the third floor of the end wing may resolve the issue.
• The center framed area has no proportion, needs infilL A solution may be continuing the brick up one
story above the rest of the brick facing, inside the arch, and topping the brick with coping.
• Intensify the landscaping to compensate for 8' retaining walls.
You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms,
checklists and schedules are available on-line at www.albemarle.orp-/ARB. Please be certain that your ARB
submittal addresses the above -noted issues.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Chief of Planning/Resource Management
cc: Pantops Corner LC CIO Henry Liscio Company
12704 Crimson Court Suite 10I
Henrico VA 23233
File
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
July 17, 2018
Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
201 East Main Street, Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ARB-2018-72: Pantops Corner
Dear Mr. Shimp,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on July 16, 2018, held a work session on the above -
noted item, focusing on the visibility and orientation of the proposed hotel relative to the Rt. 20 Entrance Corridor. The
ARB offered to hold another work session on the issue at a later date, and provided the following comments on the new
information submitted by the applicant:
1. The flat roof is an improvement.
2. Consider an alternate surface treatment for the wall area inside the frame.
3. Regarding the orientation of the building to Rt. 20, the terrace is a positive gesture, but there should be a response in
the form and mass of the building, not just in the landscape.
4. Continue to study the impact of the height and scale.
5. The design does not appear to address several of the EC guidelines regarding landscaping and grading.
6. The character of the Rt. 250 EC differs from the character of the Rt. 20 EC.
7. An I -shaped, bent, or angled building configuration could address the Rt. 20 EC better.
8. Can the building step more?
9. The towers have visual weight that isn't supported from below.
10. Consider making the building elements relate thematically.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
. A"AZ4 M
Margaret Maliszewski
Chief of Planning/Resource Management
434-296-5832 x3276
mmaliszewski@albemarle.org
cc: ARB-2018-72
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
July 6, 2018
Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
20I East Main Street, Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ARB-2018-72: Pantops Corner
Dear Mr. Shimp,
At its meeting on Monday, July 2, 2018, the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above
noted petition and made the following recommendations:
REGARDING THE INITIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN
The ARB, by a vote of 5:0 voted to forward the following recommendations on the Initial Site Development Plan to
the agent for the Site Review Committee:
+ Regarding requirements 'rements to satisfy the design guidelines as per § 18-30.6.4c(2), (3) and (5) and
recommended conditions of initial plan approval:
o Prior to Initial Plan approval the following items shall be resolved to the satisfaction of the ARB:
1. Clearly show all utilities and easements on the utility and landscape plans. Provide required
planting free of utilities and easements. A separate diagram of the frontage planting that details the
utility lines and their easements in varying colors would help clarify the feasibility of the proposed
planting.
2. Provide large shade trees, 3 %2" caliper at planting, 35' on center, along the Rt. 20 side of the site
within the bounds of the property. Intersperse ornamentals among the shade trees.
3. Provide views (preferably perspectives and site sections) along Rt. 20 to clarify the visibility of the
hotel from the street.
4.. Consider alternate site layout and building footprint to orient the hotel towards Rt. 20 to meet the
EC guidelines.
• Regarding recommendations on the plan as it relates to the guidelines: None.
• Regarding conditions to be satisfied prior to issuance of a grading permit:
1. Adjust the proposed grading to eliminate conflicts with wooded area to remain. Show adequate tree
protection fencing on the grading, landscaping and erosion and sediment control plans.
Regarding the final site plan submittal:
1. The stepped gables of Option 2 are not appropriate for the EC.
2. Revise the corner towers of Option 1 so that they appear more fully as towers or eliminate them.
3. Revise the EIFS material and detailing of the entrance bay to better reflect the importance of the
entrance function.
4. Note on the elevation drawings that the vents at the windows will be colored to match the adjacent
wall surface.
5. Refine and simplify the hotel design to establish greater coordination of architectural elements
throughout.
6. Clarify the proposed shingle color and note it consistently throughout the drawings.
7. Include the standard window glass note on the drawings and provide specs for review: Visible light
transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed
30%.
8. Add a dumpster detail to the site plan. Coordinate dumpster screening materials with the building
materials.
9. Confirm that mechanical equipment for the hotel will be screened by the roof. Note this on the
architectural drawings.
10. Show on the plan where Building A mechanical equipment is located.
IL Add the standard mechanical equipment note to the site and architectural drawings: Visibility of all
mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated.
12. Include details in the lighting plan to confirm that the under -canopy light fixtures are full cutoff
fixtures that do not produce glare.
13. Update the lighting plan to include information on all proposed building lights.
I4. Clearly show all utilities and easements on the utility and landscape plans. Provide required
planting free of utilities and easements. A separate diagram of the frontage planting that details the
utility lines and easements in varying colors would help clarify the feasibility of the proposed
planting.
15. Provide large shade trees, 3'/z" caliper at planting, 35' on center, along the Rt. 20 side of the site.
Intersperse ornamentals among the shade trees.
M. Provide medium street trees, spaced 25' on center, parallel to the sidewalks at the hotel and
Building A.
17. Coordinate the number of proposed parking spaces noted on the cover sheet with the number noted
on the landscape plan and the actual number provided.
18. Add trees west of the hotel building to soften the appearance of the west elevation.
19. Eliminate Note 4 on the landscape plan. Provide additional clarification regarding the timing of EC
frontage planting.
20. Terrace retaining walls 6' in height and taller and plant the terraces.
21. Provide top -of -wall and bottom -of -wall elevations for the retaining walls.
22. Adjust the proposed grading to eliminate conflicts with wooded area to remain. Show adequate tree
protection fencing on the grading, landscaping and erosion and sediment control plans.
REGARDING THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE HOTEL
In addition, individual ARB members made the following comments on the architectural design of the hotel for the
benefit of the applicant's next submittal. Note that these comments were made by individuals; not every comment was
necessarily agreed to by all. The comments are provided because some of the applicant's team members were unable to
attend the meeting.
1. The architecture of the building should address Rt. 20.
2. What is the purpose of the roof overhang?
3. The pitched roof adds too much to the mass and height of the building.
4. Simplify the architectural design. There is too much going on and the elements do not relate to each
other.
5. The framed central bay could be revised to relate more closely to historic architecture of the area.
6. The height of the brick base, which almost divides the building in half, is too high or too low.
7. Both the stepped ends and the tower ends do not relate to the central portion of the building.
8. The windows are uniform. They could be collected into horizontal or vertical elements to improve
scale and provide differentiation.
9. Breaking the mass into figural elements could help mitigate scale and address Rt. 20.
10. The range of materials and colors is too complicated, too busy. Simplify the materials palette.
11. The white modernist central bay framed by brick does not go with the tower ends.
I2. Make the stepback a thing with its own identity.
D. The proposed design does begin to break down the mass for better scale. It is moving in the right
direction. This is a reasonable start.
14. The building is designed for a flat, open site surrounded by parking. A different approach is needed for
this site.
15. Simplicity and coherence are needed.
16. The hotel design does not relate to Building A.
17. The entrance portico is out of place.
18. Consider orienting the hotel better to the new street, step it down at the back and get the entrance
portico closer to the new street.
REGARDING THE WORKS)ESSION
The ARB held a work session on the architectural design of Building A and, in consensus, made the following
recommendations:
1. Develop openings in the elevations that address the Entrance Corridor and the entrance to the development.
2. Unify the scale of the building.
3. Develop elevations so that the scale of the building is increased on the EC.
4. Anticipate that the future pad development will require a connection to Building A in its architectural design.
5. Windows should acknowledge the corner of the site.
6. Make the language of the building consistent throughout the entire building.
You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms, checklists
and schedules are available on-line at www.albemarle.org ARB.
Revised drawings addressing the comments listed above, and those from previous reviews, are required. Include updated
ARB revision dates on each drawing. Please provide a memo including detailed responses indicating how each comment
has been addressed. 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.
Sincerely,
Margaret MaIiszewski
Chief of Planning/Resource Management
cc: Pantops Corner LC c/o Henry Liscio Company
12704 Crimson Court Suite 101
Henrico VA 23233
File