Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201800154 Staff Report 2019-01-02F.11 I&N_.1 V W X61 to__. / _tll 1 Project #/Name ARB-2018-154: Hyatt House at Stonefield Town Center Review Type Preliminary Review of a Major Site Plan Amendment; preliminary review of an architectural design Parcel Identification 061 WO0300019AO (portion) Zoned Neighborhood Model District (NMD), Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner/Applicant OTC Stonefield Property Owners, LLC/nbj Architecture (Neil Bhatt) Magisterial District Jack Jouett Proposal To construct a six -story (maximum 80 feet tall) hotel building encompassing 92,247 square feet and a single -story retail component encompassing 12,567 square feet on an undeveloped, 1.04-acre portion of this parcel. Location/Context The site is situated approximately 475 feet north of Hydraulic Road and approximately 830 feet west of Seminole Trail (Route 29), within The Shops at Stonefield town center. Commercial enterprises as well as services characterize the area: the Hyatt Place hotel lies to the immediate west, across District Avenue, and various restaurants and retail businesses lie to the south and east, along Bond Street. The lot has been cleared and graded and is currently vacant. Visibility The site will have maximum visibility from Hydraulic Road and via District Avenue through the surface parking lot south of the Hyatt Place hotel; the Regal Cinema and retail buildings, however, block the visibility of the lower stories from view. [Figures 1 and 2] The hotel will also be visible from the intersection of Commonwealth Drive and Hydraulic Road, traveling eastward. [Figure 3] The upper portions of the side (east) and rear (north) elevation will be visible from Seminole Trail (Route 29). [Figure 4] ARB Meeting Date January 7, 2019 Staff Contact Heather N. McMahon Figure 1: Proposed location of the Hyatt House hotel, as seen from intersection of Hydraulic Road and District Avenue. View northeast. Photo by Heather McMahon, 12-7-18 Figure 2: Proposed location of the Hyatt House hotel, as seen from Hydraulic Road, view northeast. Photo courtesy Google Street View, June 2018 Figure 3: Proposed location of the Hyatt House hotel, as seen from Hydraulic Road east of intersection with Commonwealth Drive; view northeast. Photo courtesy Google Street View, June 2018 Figure 4: Proposed location of the Hyatt House hotel, as seen from Route 29, northbound lanes, view southwest. Photo courtesy Google Street View, June 2018 PROJECT HISTORY The Albemarle Place rezoning was approved in 2003. ARB review of some site plans for the development followed in 2005 and 2006. This was followed by a change in developers, and no plans received final approval. In 2011, review resumed with the Regal Cinema, the Hyatt Place Hotel, and 8 of the retail buildings in Blocks A, B and C, with approvals in 2012 and 2013. The townhouses in Block D and shops in Blocks F and G were approved in 2014 — 2016. Approximately 80 sign and County -wide Certificate of Appropriateness applications were approved administratively throughout these years. This is the first review of the Hyatt House Hotel proposal by the ARB. (See Attachment A) REF GUIDELINE ISSUE RECOMMENDATION GENERAL GUIDELINES Pur ose 1 The goal of the regulation of the design of development This proposal is for a 104,814 square foot, six- Provide renderings of the within the designated Entrance Corridors is to ensure that story building that will provide 12,567 square feet east and north elevations. new development within the corridors reflects the of retail space on the ground floor and 92,247 traditional architecture of the area. Therefore, it is the square feet of hotel use on the ground and upper Revise the renderings of purpose of ARB review and of these Guidelines, that floors. Visibility of the corner tower element, the south and west proposed development within the designated Entrance which dominates the southwest corner of the site, elevations to show all Corridors reflect elements of design characteristic of the will be clear down District Avenue; the top of the proposed architectural significant historical landmarks, buildings, and structures tower (at 79'-3" from grade) and the upper floors features. of the Charlottesville and Albemarle area, and to promote of the main block (which rises 65'-6" and 70' orderly and attractive development within these above grade) will be visible from Hydraulic Road Provide dimensioned corridors. Applicants should note that replication of and Route 29, both Entrance Corridors. elevations of all four historic structures is neither required nor desired. Architectural elevations have not been provided for the north, east and west elevations. The south elevations with materials and colors identified. 2 Visitors to the significant historical sites in the Charlottesville and Albemarle area experience these sites elevation does not identify materials and colors, Provide material and as ensembles of buildings, land, and vegetation. In order but a finish board has been provided. No color samples for review. to accomplish the integration of buildings, land, and renderings have been provided of the east and vegetation characteristic of these sites, the Guidelines north elevations. Similarly, the renderings that require attention to four primary factors: compatibility show the south and west elevations do not illustrate with significant historic sites in the area; the character of a pergola or other outdoor roof element within the the Entrance Corridor; site development and layout; and enwalled courtyard that figures in the provided landscaping. first -floor floorplan; these renderings should be revised to show the projected (semi-) permanent architectural elements, as this outdoor area will be viewed from the Hydraulic EC. A cluttered courtyard area would not have an appropriate appearance for the EC. Compatibility with significant historic sites: 3 New structures and substantial additions to existing While this contemporary design does not reflect the Revise the architectural structures should respect the traditions of the architecture traditional architecture of the region in terms of design to reduce the of historically significant buildings in the Charlottesville style, materials, or scale, it does reflect the amount of EIFS used and and Albemarle area. Photographs of historic buildings in contemporary building common in this Entrance to increase materials that the area, as well as drawings of architectural features, Corridor. The proposed building's maximum reflect the traditional which provide important examples of this tradition are height is 80 feet; at six stories, the scale is much architecture of the area. 4 contained in Appendix A. The examples contained in Appendix A should be used as a guide for building design: the standard of compatibility with the area's historic structures is not intended to impose a rigid design solution for new development. Replication of the design of the important historic sites in the area is neither intended nor desired. The Guideline's standard of compatibility can be met through building scale, materials, and forms which may be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well as traditional. The Guidelines allow individuality in design to accommodate varying tastes as well as special functional requirements. SPECIFIC GUIDELINES Compatibilitv with significant historic sites Structure design Building forms and features, including roofs, windows, doors, materials, colors and textures should be compatible with the forms and features of the significant historic buildings in the area, exemplified by (but not limited to) the buildings described in Appendix A [of the design guidelines]. The standard of compatibility can be met through scale, materials, and forms which may be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well as traditional. The replication of important historic sites in Albemarle County is not the objective of these guidelines. larger than most of the low -slung buildings in the area, even within the Stonefield shopping center. However, this scale is appropriate for Stonefield, which is predicated on a density and walkability that is more urban than the suburban character that typically predominates on Hydraulic Road or Route 29. The materials are stone veneer and EIFS; while these are not traditional, they are common to contemporary designs and have figured in several buildings recently approved in the EC overlay districts. However, the amount of EIFS (everything above the first floor) is inappropriate for the size, mass, and prominence of a building visible from two Entrance Corridors. The Hyatt Place hotel used a greater combination of materials, including two shades of brick veneer, stone veneer, EIFS (stucco) and Alpolic copper panels. [Figure 5] In a hierarchy of materials by quality, EIFS is at the low end of the spectrum; again, a building of this size and prominence should utilize higher quality materials in its design. The scale of the building is compatible with the higher density of development intended for Stonefield and mirrors the Hyatt Place hotel directly across District Avenue. [Figure 5] Extending nearly 80' from grade, the first floor is 14' tall while subsequent floors are 10' in height. The articulation and change of materials and colors sufficiently reduces the massiveness of the building in comparison to the adjacent low -slung retail buildings. However, the maximum height requested (80') will require a Special Exception. The Code of Development for Stonefield states that any building taller than 5 stories in Block D receive a Special Exception from the Board of Supervisors. Ensure that the parapet coping is not illuminated. Note that a separate sign application is required. Back-lit/halo-lit channel letter signs are consistent with the shopping center. The six -story Hyatt Place hotel received a special exception for height in May 2011. In terms of materials and colors, the first floor is clad in stone veneer (Charles Luck Stone, a blend of `Chocolate Dove Grey' and `Sterling Rustic Brown', colors previously approved for the Hyatt Place hotel) while the upper floors consist of EIFS panels in shades of white (SW 0050 `Classic Light Buff) and grey (SW 7017 `Dorian Gray' and SW 7020 Black Fox). The color palette complements the other buildings in Stonefield. However, the amount of EIFS is inappropriate for the size, mass, and prominence of a building visible from two Entrance Corridors The form is a rectangle with projections and relief. The southwest corner tower, rising 79'-3" from grade, is the dominant feature of a mass that has a rectangular footprint but which is rendered in layers: the first is the planar -walled main block, which rises 65'6" (1.5' above the roof level, at 64' above grade) above grade and is clad in smooth finish EIFS, a white color; this block is regularly and symmetrically fenestrated with rectangular punch -out windows. It is broken up on the south elevation by three projecting tower elements (and on the west by one) that rise to 70' above grade and are clad in smooth finish EIFS in a medium -grey. The corner tower has two of these vertical elements, and the recessed corner is clad in a dark grey EIFS with white horizontal striations denoting the floor levels. This is capped with a wide, flat roof; this form is not traditionally found in architectural precedents in the area. The amount of coping between the tops of the tower elements i.e., 70') and the bottom of the deeply eaved roof (i.e., 79'), at about 9 feet, suggests that it may be used as a sign band (some Hyatt House hotels use this space for signage; see Figure 6). Note that County Code (Chapter 18, Section 4.15.8) limits wall sign height to the cornice line of a building, and where no cornice exists, to the corresponding line along the top of a wall where a cornice would traditionally be located. In all cases, the "cornice line" applies to the main walls of a building and not to features that extend above the main walls. Hence, in the proposed Hyatt House design, the top of a sign may not be placed any higher than 65'-6", which is the top of the hotel block's main walls. Furthermore, the ARB has reviewed another hotel project with a similarly over -scaled, single -slope roof on its tower, in which the intent was coping illumination. These roof forms are large, conspicuous, and without reference to historic architecture of the area. Any illumination of this broad expanse at this height would be inconsistent with previous ARB approvals and it would make the building significantly more noticeable at night and from greater distances. It would not contribute to unity and coherence along the corridor. Walls signs are shown at the corner tower. A separate sign application will be required in the future for all proposed signs. Stonefield has an approved Comprehensive Sign Plan (CSP). The Hyatt Place hotel and the Regal Cinema were exempted from the CSP. Those two signs are halo - lit letters. Maintaining this sign type for the Hyatt House would be appropriate. Figure 5: Hyatt Place Hotel, District Avenu, in Stonefield Shopping Center. Photo courtesy of Google Street View, ca. 2017 15 Trademark buildings and related features should be This is a trademark design, similar to the Hyatt Provide more opacity at modified to meet the requirements of the Guidelines. House is in Raleigh, N.C. [Figure 6] The marked the ground level through difference between the two is the opacity on the increased fenestration. ground level: the urban Hyatt House in Raleigh exhibits a large storefront window system across Revise the design of the the entire fagade that wraps around the corner tower to reduce its mass onto the side elevation, while the proposed model by eliminating the over - in Albemarle has a less -transparent ground floor scaled single -slope roof. (stone veneer with rectangular apertures) until the retail component (with storefront windows) at the east end of the site is encountered. The corner tower with flat roof is a form not traditionally found in architectural precedents in the area. This element should be revised to eliminate the conspicuous trademark reference and the over -scaled appearance. Figure 6: Hyatt House Hotel in Raleigh, N. C. Photo courtesy of Google Street View, ca. 2017 10 Co m atibili with the character of the Entrance Corridor 5 It is also an important objective of the Guidelines to While the design of the building is contemporary None. establish a pattern of compatible architectural and similar to other buildings in Stonefield, the characteristics throughout the Entrance Corridor in order scale is larger than the majority of buildings on to achieve unity and coherence. Building designs should this Entrance Corridor, which has a predominantly demonstrate sensitivity to other nearby structures within suburban character. However, a denser, more the Entrance Corridor. Where a designated corridor is pedestrian -oriented urban fabric is desired for the substantially developed, these Guidelines require striking Stonefield shopping center, and this increased a careful balance between harmonizing new development density may establish the new character on this with the existing character of the corridor and achieving Entrance Corridor in the future. compatibility with the significant historic sites in the area. Landscaping 7 The requirements of the Guidelines regarding landscaping This preliminary site plan proposes no new None. are intended to reflect the landscaping characteristic of landscaping. It does not include expansive lawns many of the area's significant historic sites which is with large shade trees or naturalistic woodlots; it characterized by large shade trees and lawns. Landscaping intends to take advantage of the street trees that should promote visual order within the Entrance Corridor already exist on District Avenue and Bond Street. and help to integrate buildings into the existing The plan proposes to preserve all but one of the environment of the corridor. current street trees; one tree on Bond Street will be removed to accommodate the carport area. 8 Continuity within the Entrance Corridor should be obtained by planting different types of plant materials that share similar characteristics. Such common elements allow for more flexibility in the design of structures because common landscape features will help to harmonize the appearance of development as seen from the street upon which the Corridor is centered. SPECIFIC GUIDELINES Compatibility with significant historic sites Structure design 10 Buildings should relate to their site and the surrounding While the scale is larger than most of the See recommendations in context of buildings. surrounding buildings, it does complement the Hyatt Place hotel across District Avenue. A more #15. 11 The overall design of buildings should have human scale. Scale should be integral to the building and site design. human scale could be achieved with greater opacity at the ground level, as in the Raleigh 12 Architecture proposed within the Entrance Corridor should use forms, shapes, scale, and materials to create a Hyatt House example, in which glass storefront cohesive whole. systems predominate, and with the revision of the tower's roof form. 13 Any appearance of "blankness" resulting from building A low stone wall(surrounding a courtyard) will Provide foundation design should be relieved using design detail or be visible on the southwest corner of the site. This plantings along the vegetation, or both. could be mitigated and softened with plantings at exterior of the courtyard the foundation; currently none are proposed, wall and against the east although the floorplan suggests interior planters. building wall within the courtyard. 14 Arcades, colonnades, or other architectural connecting No such connecting device is proposed. None. devices should be used to unify groups of buildings within a development. 16 Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should not be The standard window -glass note has not been Provide the standard highly tinted or highly reflective. Window glass in the provided on the architectural drawings. window -glass note on the Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria: architectural elevations. Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed Provide glass sample 30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should and/or manufacturer's be submitted with the application for final review. specifications that provide the VLR and VLT values. Accessory structures and equipment 17 Accessory structures and equipment should be integrated An on -site dumpster and an associated loading Provide a roof plan that into the overall plan of development and shall, to the area for the retail and hotel use is proposed behind shows the dimensions of extent possible, be compatible with the building designs the hotel, on the northeast corner of the site. These all proposed rooftop used on the site. will not be visible from either Entrance Corridor. Similarly, there is a carport on the south elevation mechanical equipment and show rooftop 18 The following should be located to eliminate visibility from the Entrance Corridor street. If, after appropriate siting, (fagade) and another asphalt loading/service area mechanical equipment on these features will still have a negative visual impact on the on the north (rear) elevation; the carport may be the architectural Entrance Corridor street, screening should be provided to partially visible to eastbound traffic on Hydraulic elevations. Show how all eliminate visibility. Road. visibility of mechanical a. Loading areas, equipment from the b. Service areas, Mechanical equipment is presumably roof- Entrance Corridors will c. Refuse areas, mounted; while a roof plan has been provided, the be eliminated. d. Storage areas, locations and dimensions of mechanical e. Mechanical equipment, equipment have not been provided, and it is not Provide top -of -wall and f. Above -ground utilities, and possible to determine whether these will be visible bottom -of -wall g. Chain link fence, barbed wire, razor wire, and similar over the parapets. A profile/sight-line analysis or a dimensions of the security fencing devices. roof plan providing the height dimensions of all proposed mechanical equipment should be proposed courtyard wall. Provide material and 19 Screening devices should be compatible with the design of the buildings and surrounding natural vegetation and may provided in future. Similarly, rooftop equipment color samples for the consist of should be shown on the elevations. Vent screens wall. 12 a. Walls, are shown adjacent to windows on the elevation; b. Plantings, and these vent screens should be painted to match the Ensure that the HVAC c. Fencing. wall surface to mitigate visibility. vent screens match the color of the surrounding No above -ground utilities or fencing is proposed, wall. but a low stone wall around an exterior courtyard on the southwest corner of the site is proposed. The top of wall and bottom of wall dimensions should be called out on the site plan and material and color samples should be provided. 20 Surface runoff structures and detention ponds should be An underground SWM system exists throughout None. designed to fit into the natural topography to avoid the need the Stonefield complex which will be utilized by for screening. When visible from the Entrance Corridor this project. street, these features must be fully integrated into the landscape. They should not have the appearance of engineered features. 21 The following note should be added to the site plan and the Note not provided. Provide the mechanical architectural plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment equipment note on the from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated." site plan set and on the architectural drawings. Li tin 22- General Guidelines No lighting plan has been submitted. While site Provide a lighting plan 29 lighting may not be proposed, the lighting plan must include all proposed architectural (wall- and for review. Provide standard lighting note on 30- Guidelines for the Use of Decorative Landscape Lighting 31 ground -mounted) lighting. the lighting plan. Landscaping 32 Landscaping along the frontage of Entrance Corridor The lot does not abut either Entrance Corridor, so None. streets should include the following: this guideline does not apply. a. Large shade trees should be planted parallel to the Entrance Corridor Street. Such trees should be at least 3'h inches caliper (measured 6 inches above the ground) and should be of a plant species common to the area. Such trees should be located at least every 35 feet on center. b. Flowering ornamental trees of a species common to the area should be interspersed among the trees required by the preceding paragraph. The ornamental trees need not alternate one for one with the large shade trees. They may be planted among the large shade trees in a less regular spacing 13 pattern. c. In situations where appropriate, a three or four board fence or low stone wall, typical of the area, should align the frontage of the Entrance Corridor street. d. An area of sufficient width to accommodate the foregoing plantings and fencing should be reserved parallel to the Entrance Corridor street, and exclusive of road right-of-way and utility easements. 33 Landscaping along interior roads: Existing trees line District Avenue and Bond None. a. Large trees should be planted parallel to all interior Street. This preliminary plan proposes the roads. Such trees should be at least 2'/Z inches caliper removal of one street tree on the north side of (measured six inches above the ground) and should be of a Bond Street to accommodate an entrance drive plant species common to the area. Such trees should be and carport. located at least every 40 feet on center. 34 Landscaping along interior pedestrian ways: a. Medium trees should be planted parallel to all interior pedestrian ways. Such trees should be at least 2'/z inches caliper (measured six inches above the ground) and should be of a species common to the area. Such trees should be located at least every 25 feet on center. 35 Landscaping of parking areas: The development proposes to utilize extant See recommendation in a. Large trees should align the perimeter of parking areas, parking within the Stonefield shopping center #6. located 40 feet on center. Trees should be planted in the with no additional parking spaces created. Hence, interior of parking areas at the rate of one tree for every 10 the landscaping of parking areas is not required. parking spaces provided and should be evenly distributed throughout the interior of the parking area. b. Trees required by the preceding paragraph should measure 2'h inches caliper (measured six inches above the ground); should be evenly spaced; and should be of a species common to the area. Such trees should be planted in planters or medians sufficiently large to maintain the health of the tree and shall be protected by curbing. c. Shrubs should be provided as necessary to minimize the parking area's impact on Entrance Corridor streets. Shrubs should measure 24 inches in height. 36 Landscaping of buildings and other structures: No vegetation is proposed around the building. Consider providing a. Trees or other vegetation should be planted along the There is an opportunity to provide foundation foundation plantings on front of long buildings as necessary to soften the landscaping around the courtyard wall and the south face of the 14 appearance of exterior walls. The spacing, size, and type between the sidewalk on Bond Street and the building. of such trees or vegetation should be determined by the south face of the building, which would soften the length, height, and blankness of such walls. 14-foot tall stone veneer first floor elevation. See recommendation in b. Shrubs should be used to integrate the site, buildings, #13. and other structures; dumpsters, accessory buildings and structures; "drive thru" windows; service areas; and signs. Shrubs should measure at least 24 inches in height. 37 Plant species: This plan proposes no new landscaping. If planting is added, a. Plant species required should be as approved by the provide plant species that Staff based upon but not limited to the Generic Landscape are native to the region Plan Recommended Species List and Native Plants for from the approved plant Virginia Landscapes (Appendix D). list. 38 Plant health: This plan proposes no new landscaping. If planting is added, add The following note should be added to the landscape plan: the standard plant health "All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to note to the plan. 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 lant." Site development and layout 6 Site development should be sensitive to the existing The site has been previously graded and cleared; Consider adding natural landscape and should contribute to the creation of the lot on which the building is proposed is structured parking. an organized development plan. This may be currently vacant. It is surrounded by the accomplished, to the extent practical, by preserving the Stonefield retail development and associated Ensure that the proposal trees and rolling terrain typical of the area; planting new surface parking on all sides. Across District includes the necessary trees along streets and pedestrian ways and choosing Avenue is another mid -rise Hyatt Place hotel; this amount of open space to species that reflect native forest elements; insuring that will act as a compatible anchor to the intersection fulfill the Code of any grading will blend into the surrounding topography of District Avenue and Bond Street. The design Development thereby creating a continuous landscape; preserving, to the intends to take advantage of extant street trees. requirements. extent practical, existing significant river and stream There are no natural features to retain. valleys which may be located on the site and integrating these features into the design of surrounding development; While there is currently an excess of parking and limiting the building mass and height to a scale that within Stonefield which this project proposes to does not overpower the natural settings of the site, or the utilize, other future development of Block D could Entrance Corridor. create parking shortages. Hence, incorporating structured parking into the hotel project should be considered at this time. 15 39 The relationship of buildings and other structures to the The proposal is an infill project; as such, an Note that additional Entrance Corridor street and to other development within organized pattern of roads, sidewalks, travel ways, pedestrian and bicycle the corridor should be as follows: and parking areas already exist within the amenities and a. An organized pattern of roads, service lanes, bike paths, Stonefield development. connections, as well as and pedestrian walks should guide the layout of the site. the provision of open b. In general, buildings fronting the Entrance Corridor The building is parallel to the Hydraulic Road space on this lot, will street should be parallel to the street. Building groupings Entrance Corridor but is located approximately likely be called for during should be arranged to parallel the Entrance Corridor street. 460 feet north of one Entrance Corridor the site plan review c. Provisions should be made for connections to adjacent (Hydraulic Road) and approximately 830 feet process to meet Code of pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems. west of the other Entrance Corridor (Route 29); Development d. Open spaces should be tied into surrounding areas to the visibility of the lower floors will be obscured requirements. provide continuity within the Entrance Corridor. by extant 2- and 3-story buildings in between e. If significant natural features exist on the site (including Hydraulic Road and Bond Street. creek valleys, steep slopes, significant trees or rock outcroppings), to the extent practical, then such natural Some vehicular and pedestrian connections are features should be reflected in the site layout. If the already in place, and some open/green space provisions of Section 32.5.6.n of the Albemarle County exists in the development. However, additional Zoning Ordinance apply, then improvements required by pedestrian and bicycle amenities and connections, that section should be located so as to maximize the use of as well as the provision of open space on this lot, existing features in screening such improvements from will likely be called for during the site plan review Entrance Corridor streets. process to meet Code of Development f. The placement of structures on the site should respect requirements. existing views and vistas on and around the site. No significant features or significant viewsheds worth preserving exist. However, the erection of the hotel will block the view of the Southwest Mountains from higher locations to the west, such as from the intersection of Commonwealth Drive with Hydraulic Road. Site Grading 40 Site grading should maintain the basic relationship of the The site has been previously graded and cleared None. site to surrounding conditions by limiting the use of and is relatively flat. retaining walls and by shaping the terrain through the use of smooth, rounded land forms that blend with the existing terrain. Steep cut or fill sections are generally unacceptable. Proposed contours on the grading plan shall be rounded with a ten -foot minimum radius where they meet the adjacent condition. Final grading should achieve a natural, rather than 16 engineered, appearance. Retaining walls 6 feet in height and taller, when necessary, shall be terraced and planted to blend with the landscape. 41 No grading, trenching, or tunneling should occur within the The proposal intends to retain all but one of the Provide adequate tree drip line of any trees or other existing features designated extant street trees bordering the lot on Bond Street protection fencing on site for preservation in the final Certificate of Appropriateness. and District Avenue; therefore, adequate tree plans for future review. Adequate tree protection fencing should be shown on, and protection fencing should be shown on future site coordinated throughout, the grading, landscaping and plan sets. erosion and sediment control plans. 42 Areas designated for preservation in the final Certificate of Appropriateness should be clearly delineated and protected on the site prior to any grading activity on the site. This protection should remain in place until completion of the development of the site. 43 Preservation areas should be protected from storage or movement of heavy equipment within this area. 44 Natural drainage patterns (or to the extent required, new Drainage is in place through underground None. drainage patterns) should be incorporated into the finished stormwater management. site to the extent possible. -0511l1 � 1 : I�1 OMI Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The need for a Special Exception for the proposed height. 2. Roof form on the tower. 3. Proposed building materials (whether the appropriateness of the amount of EIFS proposed for a building of this scale, size, and prominence on two Entrance Corridors). 4. Appropriate landscaping of the courtyard wall and south elevation 5. Increasing the opacity of the first floor on the south and east elevations. Staff offers the following comments on the site plan amendment, for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal: 1. Provide renderings of the east and north elevations. 2. Revise the renderings of the south and west elevations to show all proposed architectural features. 3. Provide dimensioned elevations of all four elevations with materials and colors identified. Provide material and color samples for review. 4. Revise the architectural design to reduce the amount of EIFS used and to increase materials that reflect the traditional architecture of the area. 5. Ensure that the parapet coping is not illuminated. 17 6. Note that a separate sign application is required. Back-lit/halo-lit channel letter signs are consistent with the shopping center. 7. Provide more opacity at the ground level through increased fenestration. 8. Revise the design of the tower to reduce its mass by eliminating the over -scaled single -slope roof. 9. Provide foundation plantings along the exterior of the courtyard wall and against the east building wall within the courtyard. 10. Provide the standard glass note on the elevations: Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%. 11. Provide glass sample and/or manufacturer's specifications that provide the VLR and VLT values. 12. Provide a roof plan that shows the dimensions of all proposed rooftop mechanical equipment and show rooftop mechanical equipment on the architectural elevations. Sow how all visibility of mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridors will be eliminated. 13. Provide top -of -wall and bottom -of -wall dimensions of the proposed courtyard wall. Provide material and color samples for the wall. 14. Ensure that the HVAC vent screens match the color of the surrounding wall. 15. Provide the standard mechanical equipment note on the site plan set and on the architectural drawings: Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated. 16. Provide a lighting plan for review. 17. Provide standard lighting note on the lighting plan: Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3, 000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one half footcandle. 18. Consider providing foundation plantings on the south face of the building. 19. If planting is added, provide plant species that are native to the region from the approved plant list. 20. If planting is added, add the standard plant health note to the 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. 21. Consider adding structured parking. 22. Ensure that the proposal includes the necessary amount of open space to fulfill the Code of Development requirements. 23. Note that additional pedestrian and bicycle amenities and connections, as well as the provision of open space on this lot, will likely be called for during the site plan review process to meet Code of Development requirements 24. Provide adequate tree protection fencing on site plans for future review. 18 This report is based on the following submittal items: Sheet # Drawing Name Drawing Date/Revision Date T100 Cover Sheet 11/26/18 C-1 Cover Sheet 11/20/18 C-2 Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan 11/20/18 C-3 Preliminary ARB Site Plan 11/20/18 A101 First Floor Plan 11/26/18 A102 Second Floor Plan 11/26/18 A103 Third Floor Plan 11/26/18 A104 Fourth Floor Plan 11/26/18 A105 Fifth Floor Plan 11/26/18 A106 Sixth Floor Plan 11/26/18 A107 Roof Plan 11/26/18 A201 Building Elevations 11/26/18 View 1 n.d. View 2 n.d. View looking towards site from Hydraulic Road n.d. View looking towards site from Route 29 n.d. Finish Board n.d. 19 ATTACHMENT A — Stonefield Review History DATE APPLICATION REVIEW TYPE RESULT 8/1/03 ARB-2003-87 Albemarle Place, Advisory Review The ARB provided recommendations on the Code of Development 12/19/05 ARB-2005-133 Albemarle Place, Work Session for Preliminary Site Plan The ARB provided recommendations to the applicant 5/15/06 ARB-2006-30 Albemarle Place, Sign and Final Site Plan The ARB recommended a work session 6/5/06 ARB-2006-31 Albemarle Place, Sign and Final Site Plan, Work Session The ARB provided comments 9/15/08 ARB-2008-131 Albemarle Place, Work Session The ARB rovided recommendations to the applicant 1/3/11 N/A The Shops at Stonefield-Town Center, Work Session The ARB provided comments 4/18/11 N/A The Shops at Stonefield-Town Center, Work Session on Hyatt Place The ARB provided comments 5/16/11 N/A The Shops at Stonefield-Town Center, Work Session on conce t elevations for Regal Cinema and Trader Joe's The ARB provided comments 6/6/11 N/A The Shops at Stonefield-Town Center, Work Session on Town Center Buildings The ARB provided comments 6/20/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB held a work session on Regal Cinema and Trader Joe's elevations and provided comments 7/5/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB provided comments for a future resubmittal 7/5/11 ARB-2011-63 Hatt Place at Stonefield, Preliminary Site Plan The ARB provided comments for a future resubmittal 7/18/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB provided comments for a future resubmittal 8/15/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB held a work session on Regal Cinema and provided comments 8/15/11 ARB-2011-79 The Shops at Stonefield Town Center, Preliminary Site Plan The ARB directed the applicant to return for a work session on buildings A1, A3, and B1 9/6/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB provided comments for a future resubmittal 9/19/11 ARB-2011-79 The Shops at Stonefield Town Center, Work Session The ARB provided comments 10/3/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan The ARB held a work session on Regal Cinema and provided comments 10/3/11 ARB-2011-79 The Shops at Stonefield Town Center, Work Session The ARB provided comments 10/3/11 ARB-2011-93 Hatt Place at Stonefield, Final Site Plan Approval with conditions for administrative review 10/17/11 ARB-2011-62 The Shops at Stonefield, Regal Cinema, Final Site Plan Colors approved with conditions* 20 10/17/11 ARB-2011-112 The Shops at Stonefield, Final Site Plan Approval with conditions for administrative review 12/19/11 ARB-2011-112 The Shops at Stonefield, Work Session The ARB provided comments on signs and awnings 2/6/12 ARB-2012-6 Regal Cinemas at the Shops at Stonefield Approved illuminated wall sign with conditions 3/5/12 ARB-2012-20 The Shops at Stonefield, Building and Site Lighting The ARB provided comments for future submittal 3/19/12 ARB-2012-20 The Shops at Stonefield, Building and Site Lighting Approved with condition to be administrative) reviewed 4/2/12 ARB-2012-28 The Shops at Stonefield, Comprehensive Sign Plan The ARB provided comments for future submittal 8/5/13 ARB-2013-86 The Shops at Stonefield, Blocks F and G, Initial Site Plan The ARB provided recommendations to the site agent 3/28/14 ARB-2013-157 Stonefield, Phase 2, Final Site Plan The ARB approved the request and a CoA was issued 6/2/14 N/A The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2 Parcel G, Final Site Plan — introductory Work Session The ARB provided recommendations to the applicant 12/15/14 ARB-2014-133 Stonefield Townhomes D2 , Final Site Plan The ARB provided comments for future submittal 115115 ARB-2014-133 Stonefield Townhomes (132), Final Site Plan Approved with conditions for administrative review 115115 ARB-2014-140 The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2 Parcel G, Final Site Plan — first review The ARB provided recommendations to the applicant 1/20/15 ARB-2014-140 The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2 Parcel G, Final Site Plan — second review The ARB approved the request with conditions 2/16/16 ARB-2016-2 The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2, Parcel G, Bldg. G1, Amendment (Jared Jewelry Store) — first review The ARB provided recommendations to the applicant 3/7/16 ARB-2016-2 The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2, Parcel G, Bldg. G1, Amendment (Jared Jewelry Store) — Work Session The ARB provided recommendations to the applicant 4/18/16 ARB-2016-2 The Shops at Stonefield Phase 2, Parcel G, Bldg. G1, Amendment (Jared Jewelry Store) — third review The ARB approved the request with conditions 1/7/19 ARB-2018-154 Hatt House at Stonefield, Preliminary Site Plan This will be the first review of the Preliminary Site Plan *Two meetings, in September 2013 and March 2014, were held in reference to the copper panels on the Hyatt Place Hotel, which were ultimately approved. 21