HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201900019 Staff Report 2019-03-25I:1T . IV 11 DION to.._
Project #/Name
ARB-2019-19: Hyatt House at Stonefield Town Center
Review Type
Final Site Development Plan
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 (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
April 1, 2019
Staff Contact
Heather N. McMahon
� Jr:
`__� _ i �� _' � ,j�WIUiIII�i 1111GI' 91i11� Illlllll �I�I a�; .' uu iuu� r �r lira t�
— - — _ _. �`.► ��� �i '� ¢ Ire,
I
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.
The ARB conducted a Preliminary Review of a Major Site Plan Amendment and accompanying architectural design on January 7, 2019. The ARB offered 23 comments on the site plan amendment for
the benefit of the applicant's next submittal. (See Attachment A) The ARB will review the Final Site Plan for the proposed Hyatt House hotel at Stonefield at the April 1, 2019 meeting.
REF
GUIDELINE
1/7/2019
CURRENT ISSUE
CURRENT
RECOMMENDATION
RECOMMENDATION
GENERAL GUIDELINES
Purpose
1
The goal of the regulation of the design of development
Provide renderings of the east
This proposal is for a 104,814 square foot, six -story building
Coordinate all architectural
within the designated Entrance Corridors is to ensure that
and north elevations.
that will provide 12,567 square feet of retail space on the
drawings and renderings.
new development within the corridors reflects the
ground floor and 92,247 square feet of hotel use on the ground
Show planking, not EIFS, at
traditional architecture of the area. Therefore, it is the
Revise the renderings of the
and upper floors. Visibility of the corner tower element, which
the one-story extension on the
purpose of ARB review and of these Guidelines, that
south and west elevations to
dominates the southwest corner of the site, will be clear down
west elevation.
proposed development within the designated Entrance
show all proposed
District Avenue from Hydraulic Road; the top of the tower (at
Corridors reflect elements of design characteristic of the
architectural features.
79'-2.375" from grade) and the upper floors of the main block
significant historical landmarks, buildings, and structures
(which rises 65'-6" and 70' above grade) will be visible from
of the Charlottesville and Albemarle area, and to promote
Provide dimensioned
Hydraulic Road and Route 29, both Entrance Corridors.
orderly and attractive development within these
elevations of all four
corridors. Applicants should note that replication of
elevations with materials and
Since the last review, all architectural elevations have been
historic structures is neither required nor desired.
colors identified. Provide
material and color samples
provided. Sheets A201 and A202 include a legend that
identifies materials and colors, and a revised finish board has
2
Visitors to the significant historical sites in the
Charlottesville and Albemarle area experience these sites
for review.
been submitted. In addition, the two previously -submitted
as ensembles of buildings, land, and vegetation. In order
renderings have been revised to show the west and south
to accomplish the integration of buildings, land, and
elevations together and the east and north, respectively. The
vegetation characteristic of these sites, the Guidelines
revised rendering of the west/south elevations depicts the
require attention to four primary factors: compatibility
proposed pergola within the enwalled courtyard illustrated on
with significant historic sites in the area; the character of
the first -floor floorplan. However, discrepancies between the
the Entrance Corridor; site development and layout; and
renderings and the elevations persist: the one-story extension
landscaping.
on the west elevation, which acts as a backdrop for the
courtyard, is shown in the rendering as having horizontal
planking while the elevations suggest that material is largely
EIFS. The presence of the pergola will mitigate the blankness
of the south wall, while proposed vegetation will soften the
west wall of this one-story extension. Nevertheless, all
drawings should be coordinated.
Compatibility with significant historic sites:
3
New structures and substantial additions to existing
Revise the architectural
While this contemporary design does not reflect the traditional
Revise the architectural
structures should respect the traditions of the architecture
design to reduce the amount
architecture of the region in terms of style, materials, or scale, it
design to reduce the amount
of historically significant buildings in the Charlottesville
of EIFS used and to increase
does reflect the contemporary building common in this
of EIFS used in the east and
and Albemarle area. Photographs of historic buildings in
materials that reflect the
Entrance Corridor. The proposed building's maximum height is
north elevations and to
the area, as well as drawings of architectural features,
which provide important examples of this tradition are
contained in Appendix A.
traditional architecture of the
area.
80 feet; at six stories, the scale is much 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
increase materials that reflect
the traditional architecture of
the area.
4
The examples contained in Appendix A should be used
as a guide for building design: the standard of
that is more urban than the suburban character that typically
Provide alternative colors for
compatibility with the area's historic structures is not
predominates on Hydraulic Road or Route 29. Fundamentally,
the synthetic wood planking
intended to impose a rigid design solution for new
none of the proposed materials reflect the traditional
that are warmer in tone, but
development. Replication of the design of the important
architecture of the area.
still coordinated with the
historic sites in the area is neither intended nor desired.
Hyatt Place hotel.
The Guideline's standard of compatibility can be met
The materials palette has been revised slightly since the last
through building scale, materials, and forms which may
submission. The stone veneer is the same as last review. It is a
be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as
mix (50150) of "Chocolate Dove Grey" and "Sterling Rustic
well as traditional. The Guidelines allow individuality in
Brown" by Charles Luck Stone, which was used at the
design to accommodate varying tastes as well as special
neighboring Hyatt Place Hotel across District Avenue; the use
functional requirements.
of stone veneer at the "foundations" of both hotels will visually
tie the two together. Fiber cement panels, in "Dorian Grey"
color, were proposed previously; now two fiber cement panels
are proposed: one in a horizontal planking pattern in Sherwin
Williams "Library Pewter" color and the other in a block panel
pattern in Sherwin Williams "Skyline Steel" color. The color
choices are a warmer tone of taupe and browns than the
previous greys; this color palette will provide a continuum
between the warmer colors of the Hyatt Place Hotel and the
cool greys that comprise the majority of the Stonefield's
commercial core. While color samples have been provided,
actual material samples and brand name(s) of the fiber cement
panels have not been provided so textures and finishes cannot
be assessed. The only new material proposed is a "synthetic
wood plank to match clear maple" to be used at the tower. A
small sample has been provided, but no brand or manufacturer
name. The lightness of the clear maple color may be an issue
given the amount of the material that will be used in a
prominent location.
In the previous submittal, the dominant material was EIFS
(smooth finish, in Sherwin Williams "Classic Light Buff' and
Sherwin Williams "Black Fox" — an ivory and a chocolate -
grey, respectively). Staff noted that large amounts of EIFS are
not appropriate for architecture in the Entrance Corridors. In
response, the applicant has replaced the EIFS panels on the
south elevation (facing Hydraulic Road) with the
aforementioned fiber cement panels. However, EIFS panels (in
Sherwin Williams "Library Pewter" and "Skyline Steel" colors
to match the fiber cement panels) still constitute the majority of
wall planes on the west and south elevations of the mechanical
room and comprise nearly the entireties of the north and east
elevations. Note that the upper stories of the proposed hotel
will be visible from Route 29, just as the upper stories of the
extant Hyatt Place are currently visible from Route 29 (see
Figure 4). Therefore, the previous comment that large expanses
of EIFS are inappropriate for the Entrance Corridor applies to
the east and north elevations as well.
SPECIFIC GUIDELINES
Compatibility with significant historic sites
Structure design
9
Building forms and features, including roofs, windows,
Ensure that the parapet
The scale of the building is compatible with the higher density
Note that a separate sign
doors, materials, colors and textures should be
coping is not illuminated.
of development intended for Stonefield and mirrors the Hyatt
application is required. Back -
compatible with the forms and features of the significant
Place hotel directly across District Avenue. Extending nearly
lit/halo-lit channel letter signs
historic buildings in the area, exemplified by (but not
Note that a separate sign
80' from grade, the first floor is 16' tall while subsequent floors
are consistent with the
limited to) the buildings described in Appendix A [of the
application is required. Back-
are 9.5' in height. The maximum height requested (80') will
shopping center.
design guidelines]. The standard of compatibility can be
lit/halo-lit channel letter signs
require a Special Exception, and application for which has been
met through scale, materials, and forms which may be
are consistent with the
received but not reviewed or approved yet. Note that the Code
See #15.
embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well
shopping center.
of Development for Stonefield states that any building taller
as traditional. The replication of important historic sites
than 5 stories in Block D receive a Special Exception from the
in Albemarle County is not the objective of these
Board of Supervisors. The six -story Hyatt Place hotel received
guidelines.
a special exception for height in May 2011.
The hotel form is comprised of five upper stories rising in an L-
shape from a roughly rectangular first -story footprint. One-
story projections are located on the east end of the south
elevation for the commercial space; on the west elevation for
the mechanical room; and on the northeast elevation for the
indoor pool and ancillary spaces. The core is articulated on the
exterior with projections and relief. The southwest corner
tower, rising 79'-2.375" from grade, is the dominant feature of
a mass that is rendered in layers: the first is theplanar-walled
main block, which rises 65'6" (1.5' above the roof level, at 64'
above grade) above grade and is regularly and symmetrically
fenestrated with rectangular punched windows and multi -pane
fixed windows. The south elevation is articulated with three
projecting vertical bays that rise to 70' above grade. There is
one such vertical bay on the west elevation, which is regularly
fenestrated. The east elevation is broken into two planes: the
southeast elevation, or the end of the long arm of the ell, has a
flat -roofed profile with no projections or recesses; it is blind
save for five rectangular punched windows in the center and a
utilitarian side door. The northeast elevation, or the short arm
of the ell, has two 70' vertical bay articulations and is regularly
fenestrated. The north elevation has two projecting vertical
bays; the easternmost one is much wider than the others, which
average 29' wide. The north elevation along the long arm of the
ell is regularly fenestrated; the north elevation of the short arm
of the ell has the very utilitarian appearance of a true "rear"
elevation.
The materials cladding the corner tower have been revised
since the last submittal: the recessed portion is synthetic wood
planking while the projecting vertical bays are fiber cement
panels in the darker of the two colors proposed. It is still
capped with a wide, flat roof, which is a form not traditionally
found in architectural precedents in the area. A note has been
provided on A201 that "parapet coping is not illuminated."
The two projecting vertical bays on the corner tower are
illustrated with proposed wall signage. 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 this proposal, the tops of the
signs are below the 70' line of the tops of the parapets and thus
meet the standards stated above. Their locations are
appropriate. Note that 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.
i
Trademark buildings and related features should be
Provide more transparency at
This is a trademark design, similar to the Hyatt House is in
Provide more transparency at
modified to meet the requirements of the Guidelines.
the ground level through
Raleigh, N.C. [Figure 5] The marked difference between the
the ground level on the
increased fenestration.
two is the opacity on the ground level: the urban Hyatt House
southwest corner of the hotel
in Raleigh exhibits a large storefront window system across the
block through increased
Revise the design of the
entire fagade that wraps around the corner onto the side
fenestration.
tower to reduce its mass by
elevation, while the proposed model in Albemarle (similar to
eliminating the over -scaled
what has been realized in neighboring Hyatt Place hotel) has a
Revise the design of the
single -slope roof.
less -transparent ground floor (stone veneer with rectangular
tower to reduce its mass by
apertures) until the retail component (with storefront windows)
eliminating the over -scaled
at the east end of the site is encountered. The previous review
single -slope roof.
resulted in the request that the applicant provide more
transparency at the ground level through increased fenestration.
Identify the material of the
No additional or larger apertures have been provided to the
tower roof on the drawings.
south elevation (fagade) of the hotel, but a storefront window
Provide a sample for review.
has been added to the west elevation of the commercial
component abutting the southeast corner of the facade (which
will not be visible from the EC). Although the west elevation
drawing was not previously submitted, comparison of the
renderings from the last review to these suggest no additional
windows were added to the west elevation of the hotel, either.
The proposed plantings will help mitigate the blankness,
however.
The corner tower with flat roof is a form not traditionally found
in architectural precedents in the area. In the last review, it was
recommended that this element be revised to eliminate the
conspicuous trademark reference and the over -scaled
appearance. The applicant has responded that the "projection of
the tower" has been reduced, yet a comparative analysis shows
that the width of the tower cap in both current and previous
drawings is nearly 53 feet, and the width of the tower itself has
remained consistent at nearly 42 feet. In addition, the color of
the capped roof has changed to a lighter color, which may draw
increased attention to its scale. The material of the tower roof
has not been identified.
Figure 5: Hyatt House Hotel in Raleigh, N. C. Photo courtesy of Google Street View, ca. 2017
Compatibility with the character of the Entrance Corridor
5
It is also an important objective of the Guidelines to
None.
While the design of the building is contemporary and
None.
establish a pattern of compatible architectural
similar to other buildings in Stonefield, the scale is
characteristics throughout the Entrance Corridor in order
larger than the majority of buildings on this Entrance
to achieve unity and coherence. Building designs should
Corridor, which has a predominantly suburban
demonstrate sensitivity to other nearby structures within
character. However, a denser, more pedestrian -
the Entrance Corridor. Where a designated corridor is
oriented urban fabric is desired for the Stonefield
substantially developed, these Guidelines require striking
shopping center, and this increased density may
10
a careful balance between harmonizing new development
establish the new character on this Entrance Corridor
with the existing character of the corridor and achieving
in the future.
compatibility with the significant historic sites in the area.
Landscaping
7
The requirements of the Guidelines regarding landscaping
None.
Large shade trees and lawns are not featured in this
None.
are intended to reflect the landscaping characteristic of
urban design. The proposed landscaping is decorative
many of the area's significant historic sites which is
and small in scale — shrubs, ornamental grasses,
characterized by large shade trees and lawns. Landscaping
flowers, and groundcover — around the building's
should promote visual order within the Entrance Corridor
foundation. Only one small ornamental tree is
and help to integrate buildings into the existing
proposed. Street trees exist on Bond Street and
environment of the corridor.
District Avenue. As the site does not abut either the
Hydraulic Road or Route 29 Entrance Corridors, the
8
Continuity within the Entrance Corridor should be
obtained by planting different types of plant materials that
scale of proposed landscaping is sufficient.
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
See recommendations in #15.
While the scale is larger than most of the surrounding
See recommendations in #15.
context of buildings.
buildings, it does complement the Hyatt Place hotel
across District Avenue. A more human scale could be
1 1
The overall design of buildings should have human scale.
Scale should be integral to the building and site design.
achieved with greater opacity at the ground level, as in
the Raleigh Hyatt House example, in which glass
12
Architecture proposed within the Entrance Corridor
should use forms, shapes, scale, and materials to create a
storefront systems predominate, and with the revision
cohesive whole.
of the tower's roof form.
13
Any appearance of "blankness" resulting from building
Provide foundation plantings
A low stone wall (surrounding a courtyard) will be
None.
design should be relieved using design detail or
along the exterior of the
visible on the southwest corner of the site. The
vegetation, or both.
courtyard wall and against the
landscape plan (sheet L1.0) depicts several shrubs and
east building wall within the
liriope layered around the base of the wall, which will
courtyard.
soften its appearance from the Hydraulic EC.
14
Arcades, colonnades, or other architectural connecting
None.
No such connecting device is proposed, although a
None.
devices should be used to unify groups of buildings within
pergola features in the courtyard abutting the
a development.
southwest corner of the building that will have an
appropriate appearance and relates to traditional forms
of architecture in this region.
16
Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should not be
Provide the standard window-
The standard window -glass note has been provided on
None.
highly tinted or highly reflective. Window glass in the
glass note on the architectural
the sheets A201 and A202 of the architectural drawing
Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria:
elevations.
set. Manufacturer's specifications for Energy Select
Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below
23, triple -silver, Low-E coated glass has been
40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed
Provide glass sample and/or
submitted, but no window sample has been provided
30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should
manufacturer's specifications
for review. The VLT listed in the specs is 50%, while
be submitted with the application for final review.
that provide the VLR and
the VLR is 22%; these values meet the limits
VLT values.
established in this criterion.
Accessory structures and equipment
17
Accessory structures and equipment should be integrated
Provide a roof plan that
A dumpster and an associated loading area are
Clarify the material of the
into the overall plan of development and shall, to the
shows the dimensions of all
proposed behind the hotel, on the northeast corner of
port cochere canopy on the
extent possible, be compatible with the building designs
proposed rooftop mechanical
the site. These will not be visible from either Entrance
elevations and provide a
used on the site.
equipment and show rooftop
mechanical equipment on the
Corridor. There is a carport on the south elevation
(fagade) and another asphalt loading/service area on
material sample for review.
18
The following should be located to eliminate visibility from
the Entrance Corridor street. If, after appropriate siting,
architectural elevations. Show
the north (rear) elevation; the carport may be partially
Provide a roof plan that
these features will still have a negative visual impact on the
how all visibility of
visible to eastbound traffic on Hydraulic Road. Its
shows all proposed
Entrance Corridor street, screening should be provided to
mechanical equipment from
canopy is minimalist and angled; it should have an
mechanical equipment with
eliminate visibility.
the Entrance Corridors will be
appropriate appearance from the Entrance Corridor
their dimensions, including
a. Loading areas,
eliminated.
depending on the proposed material, which has not
heights. Provide the profile of
b. Service areas,
been identified on the elevations.
the proposed elevator tower
c. Refuse areas,
Provide top -of -wall and
on the elevations and
d. Storage areas,
bottom -of -wall dimensions of
Mechanical equipment is presumably roof -mounted,
renderings.
e. Mechanical equipment,
the proposed courtyard wall.
but it is not shown on the roof plan. The locations and
f. Above -ground utilities, and
Provide material and color
heights of all proposed units are needed to determine
Show the sanitary sewer and
g. Chain link fence, barbed wire, razor wire, and similar
samples for the wall.
whether the tops of the units will be visible over the
water connections to the
security fencing devices.
Ensure that the HVAC vent
parapets. Although the equipment is not depicted on
the elevations, the standard mechanical equipment
building on the site plan.
19
Screening devices should be compatible with the design of
the buildings and surrounding natural vegetation and may
screens match the color of the
note has been added to A107, A201, and A202 as well
consist of:
surrounding wall.
as the cover sheet of the site plan set. Three other
a. Walls,
rectangular objects have been illustrated on the roof
b. Plantings, and
plan but not depicted on the elevations or in the
c. Fencing.
renderings; these should be identified. It is presumed
that the elevator tower will be visible and should
therefore be added to the elevations and renderings. It
will likely be visible from the Rt. 29 EC. The vent
screens shown adjacent to windows on the elevation
are shown to be painted to match the wall surface on
the renderings.
12
No above -ground utilities are shown; underground
water, sanitary sewer, and stormwater utilities are
depicted, but where the water and sanitary sewer lines
enter the building (the connections) are not shown.
No fencing is proposed, but a low stone wall around
an exterior courtyard on the southwest corner of the
site is proposed. Its top -of -wall elevation is 3 feet
above grade; this and its materiality (the same mix of
two Luckstone stone veneer as proposed for the
foundation of the hotel) are expressed on the elevation
sheet A201.
20
Surface runoff structures and detention ponds should be
None.
An underground SWM system exists throughout the
None.
designed to fit into the natural topography to avoid the need
Stonefield complex which will be utilized by this
for screening. When visible from the Entrance Corridor
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
Provide the mechanical
The note has been provided on Sheet 1 of the site plan
None.
architectural plan: "Visibility of all mechanical equipment
equipment note on the site
set as well as sheet A201 and A202 (architectural
from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated."
plan set and on the
elevations).
architectural drawings.
Li tin
22-
General Guidelines
Provide a lighting plan for
No lighting plan has been submitted. While site
None.
29
review. Provide standard
lighting note on the lighting
lighting may not be proposed, the site plan set should
include a lighting plan that provides all proposed
30-
Guidelines for the Use of Decorative Landscape Lighting
31
plan.
architectural (wall- and ground -mounted) lighting's
photometric values and manufacturer's specifications.
Architectural fixtures should be drawn on the
elevations. Both Bond Street and District Avenue are
private streets; the half-footcandle spillover regulation
therefore does not apply. Furthermore, Sheet 1 of the
site plan set includes the standard lighting note about
luminaires that emit more than 3,000 lumens must be
full cut-offs; this should preclude the installation of
fixtures that are not full cut-off that emit over 3,000
lumens.
Landscaping
13
32
Landscaping along the frontage of Entrance Corridor
None.
The lot does not abut either Entrance Corridor, so this
None.
streets should include the following:
guideline does not apply.
a. Large shade trees should be planted parallel to the
Entrance Corridor Street. Such trees should be at least 3'/2
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
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.
3
Landscaping along interior roads:
None.
Existing trees line District Avenue and Bond Street.
None.
a. Large trees should be planted parallel to all interior
This preliminary plan proposes the removal of one
roads. Such trees should be at least 2'/2 inches caliper
street tree on the north side of Bond Street to
(measured six inches above the ground) and should be of a
accommodate an entrance drive and carport. The loss
plant species common to the area. Such trees should be
of the one tree on the south side of the building is not
located at least every 40 feet on center.
an adverse effect on the appearance of the site from
the EC.
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:
See recommendation in #6.
The development proposes to utilize extant parking
None.
a. Large trees should align the perimeter of parking areas,
within the Stonefield shopping center with no
located 40 feet on center. Trees should be planted in the
additional parking spaces created. Hence, the
interior of parking areas at the rate of one tree for every 10
landscaping of parking areas is not required.
parking spaces provided and should be evenly distributed
throughout the interior of the parking area.
14
b. Trees required by the preceding paragraph should
measure 2'V2 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:
Consider providing
Vegetation is proposed on the southwest (hotel half),
Revise the plant schedule so
a. Trees or other vegetation should be planted along the
foundation plantings on the
west, and northwest sides/corners of the building as
that the minimum height of
front of long buildings as necessary to soften the
south face of the building.
well as in an island at the carport. All of the shrub
all proposed shrubs at time of
appearance of exterior walls. The spacing, size, and type
sizes are listed in the landscape schedule as 18"-24" at
planting is 24".
of such trees or vegetation should be determined by the
See recommendation in #13.
time of planting, which does not meet the guidelines.
length, height, and blankness of such walls.
b. Shrubs should be used to integrate the site, buildings,
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:
If planting is added, provide
Out of 20 proposed plant species, only 2 are native to
Revise the plant schedule to
a. Plant species required should be as approved by the
plant species that are native to
North America and one of those is native to this
include a majority of species
Staff based upon but not limited to the Generic Landscape
the region from the approved
region of Virginia (central Piedmont). Seven species
that are native to this country
Plan Recommended Species List and Native Plants for
plant list.
were chosen that are not within County lists of
and preferably native to this
Virginia Landscapes (Appendix D).
approved or recommended plant species, and four of
region. Eliminate the use of
the exotics proposed are considered invasive species
species that are considered
to Albemarle County and should be avoided.
invasive in Albemarle
Replacing these exotic species with natives to the
County, including Nandina
region would foster stronger habitats for wildlife and
domestica, Ilex cornuta
help limit the spread of invasive species.
`dwarf Buford, ' Spirea
japonica, and Miscanthus
In addition, the landscape plan has a number of
sinensis. Provide plant
missing labels and errors that could be prevented with
species found in the County's
careful proofreading, such as: The one label for `AP'
list of approved and
is incongruously listed as `QN' in the plant schedule;
recommended plants.
this incongruity must be rectified in favor of one or
the other; provide a label for the LMV (presumably)
Rectify all omissions and
north of the port cochere; provide a label for the 2
errors in the landscape
(presumably) SJ on the east end of the island in the
schedule L1.0 .
15
south entrance drive; provide a label for the 1 BMG
(presumably) on the west side of the entrance and
change the quantity of BMG in the landscape schedule
from 16 to 17; provide the exact quantity of LMV and
rectify the incongruity between the existing label for
151 LMV and the quantity in the schedule that
accounts for 150 LMV; provide a label for the HP
(presumably) on the north side of the entrance on the
west elevation; move the labels so as not to obscure
the utilities; rectify the discrepancy between the drawn
s mbols for PL and PLM.
38
Plant health:
If planting is added, add the
The note has not been provided on the landscape plan
Provide the standard plant
The following note should be added to the landscape plan:
standard plant health note to
(L 1.0).
health note on the landscape
"All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to
the plan.
plan (sheet L1.0).
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."
Site development and layout
6
Site development should be sensitive to the existing
Consider adding structured
The site has been previously graded and cleared; the
Submit your proposal to the
natural landscape and should contribute to the creation of
parking.
lot on which the building is proposed is currently
SRC for review. If changes to
an organized development plan. This may be
vacant. It is surrounded by the Stonefield retail
the site plan result from SRC
accomplished, to the extent practical, by preserving the
Ensure that the proposal
development and associated surface parking on all
comments, they will require
trees and rolling terrain typical of the area; planting new
includes the necessary
sides. Across District Avenue is another mid -rise
further ARB review.
trees along streets and pedestrian ways and choosing
amount of open space to
Hyatt Place hotel; this will act as a compatible anchor
species that reflect native forest elements; insuring that
fulfill the Code of
to the intersection of District Avenue and Bond Street.
any grading will blend into the surrounding topography
Development requirements.
The design intends to take advantage of extant street
thereby creating a continuous landscape; preserving, to the
trees. There are no natural features to retain.
extent practical, existing significant river and stream
valleys which may be located on the site and integrating
Note that this proposal has not been submitted or
these features into the design of surrounding development;
reviewed by other intra- and inter -agency parties that
and limiting the building mass and height to a scale that
comprise the Site Review Committee review process.
does not overpower the natural settings of the site, or the
It has been brought to staffs attention that, while
Entrance Corridor.
there is currently ample parking in Stonefield,
competing projects in Block D will eventually
necessitate structured parking to fulfill additional
parking requirements. There is also an open space
requirement in the Code of Development that has yet
16
to be determined whether it has been met; this lot had
been used as a grassy open space for public gatherings
and festivals, and its replacement has not been
proposed. Note that the SRC process may require
additional pedestrian connections, solutions to
parking, and/or additional designation of green space
to meet the comprehensive planning of this
development, in which case this site plan may have to
be adjusted. At such a time, ARB review will be
needed.
39
The relationship of buildings and other structures to the
Note that additional
The proposal is an infill project; as such, an organized
Note that additional
Entrance Corridor street and to other development within
pedestrian and bicycle
pattern of roads, sidewalks, travel ways, and parking
pedestrian and bicycle
the corridor should be as follows:
amenities and connections, as
areas already exist within the Stonefield development.
amenities and connections, as
a. An organized pattern of roads, service lanes, bike paths,
well as the provision of open
well as the provision of open
and pedestrian walks should guide the layout of the site.
space on this lot, will likely
The building is parallel to the Hydraulic Road
space on this lot, will likely
b. In general, buildings fronting the Entrance Corridor
be called for during the site
Entrance Corridor but is located approximately 460
be called for during the site
street should be parallel to the street. Building groupings
plan review process to meet
feet north of one Entrance Corridor (Hydraulic Road)
plan review process to meet
should be arranged to parallel the Entrance Corridor street.
Code of Development
and approximately 830 feet west of the other Entrance
Code of Development
c. Provisions should be made for connections to adjacent
requirements.
Corridor (Route 29); the visibility of the lower floors
requirements.
pedestrian and vehicular circulation systems.
will be obscured by extant 2- and 3-story buildings in
d. Open spaces should be tied into surrounding areas to
between Hydraulic Road and Bond Street.
provide continuity within the Entrance Corridor.
e. If significant natural features exist on the site (including
Some vehicular and pedestrian connections are
creek valleys, steep slopes, significant trees or rock
already in place, and some open/green space exists in
outcroppings), to the extent practical, then such natural
the development. However, additional pedestrian and
features should be reflected in the site layout. If the
bicycle amenities and connections, as well as the
provisions of Section 32.5.6.n of the Albemarle County
provision of open space on this lot, will likely be
Zoning Ordinance apply, then improvements required by
called for during the site plan review process to meet
that section should be located so as to maximize the use of
Code of Development requirements.
existing features in screening such improvements from
Entrance Corridor streets.
No significant features or viewsheds worth preserving
f. The placement of structures on the site should respect
exist. However, the erection of the hotel will block the
existing views and vistas on and around the site.
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
None.
The site has been previously graded and cleared and is
None.
site to surrounding conditions by limiting the use of J
relatively flat.
17
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
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
Provide adequate tree
The proposal intends to retain all but one of the extant
Ensure compliance with the
drip line of any trees or other existing features designated
protection fencing on site
street trees bordering the lot on Bond Street and
approved site plan: if trees are
for preservation in the final Certificate of Appropriateness.
plans for future review.
District Avenue; tree protection fencing has been
lost as a result of
Adequate tree protection fencing should be shown on, and
shown on the Existing Conditions & Demolition Plan
construction, they must be
coordinated throughout, the grading, landscaping and
(sheet 2) of the site plan set. However, the canopies of
replaced in kind.
erosion and sediment control plans.
eight trees fall within the project boundary as do the
centers of three of those trees, raising the question of
42
Areas designated for preservation in the final Certificate
of Appropriateness should be clearly delineated and
whether the retention of those eight trees is realistic. If
protected on the site prior to any grading activity on the
those trees are lost, they must be replaced.
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
None.
Drainage is in place through underground stormwater
None.
drainage patterns) should be incorporated into the finished
management.
site to the extent possible.
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. 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).
Staff offers the following comments on the site plan amendment, for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal:
1. Coordinate all architectural drawings and renderings. Show planking, not EIFS, at the one-story extension on the west elevation.
2. Revise the architectural design to reduce the amount of EIFS used in the east and north elevations and to increase materials that reflect the traditional architecture of the area.
3. Provide alternative colors for the synthetic wood planking that are warmer in tone, but still coordinated with the Hyatt Place hotel.
4. Note that a separate sign application is required. Back-lit/halo-lit channel letter signs are consistent with the shopping center.
5. Provide more transparency at the ground level on the southwest corner of the hotel block through increased fenestration.
6. Revise the design of the tower to reduce its mass by eliminating the over -scaled single -slope roof.
18
7. Identify the material of the tower roof on the drawings. Provide a sample for review.
8. Clarify the material of the port cochere canopy on the elevations and provide a material sample for review.
9. Provide a roof plan that shows all proposed mechanical equipment with their dimensions, including heights. Provide the profile of the proposed elevator tower on the elevations and renderings.
10. Show the sanitary sewer and water connections to the building on the site plan.
11. Revise the plant schedule so that the minimum height of all proposed shrubs at time of planting is 24".
12. Revise the plant schedule to include a majority of species that are native to this country and preferably native to this region. Eliminate the use of species that are considered invasive in Albemarle
County, including Nandina domestica, Ilex cornuta `dwarf Buford, ' Spirea japonica, and Miscanthus sinensis. Provide plant species found in the County's list of approved and recommended
plants.
13. Rectify all omissions and errors in the landscape schedule (L 1.0).
14. Provide the standard plant health note on the landscape plan (sheet L 1.0): 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.
15. Submit your proposal to the SRC for review. If changes to the site plan result from SRC comments, they will require further ARB review.
16. 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.
17. Ensure compliance with the approved site plan: if trees are lost as a result of construction, they must be replaced in kind.
TABLE A
This report is based on the following submittal items:
Sheet #
rawing Name
Drawing Date/Revision Date
T100
Cover Sheet
2/15/19
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
L1.0
Landscape Plan
2/15/19
A101
First Floor Plan
2/15/19
A102
Second Floor Plan
2/15/19
A103
Third Floor Plan
2/15/19
A104
Fourth Floor Plan
2/15/19
A105
Fifth Floor Plan
2/15/19
A106
Sixth Floor Plan
2/15/19
A107
Roof Plan
2/15/19
A201
Building Elevations
2/15/19
A202
Building Elevations
2/15/19
View of site looking North/East
n.d.
View of site looking South/West
n.d.
View of building in site from Hydraulic Road
n.d.
View of building in site from Swanson Dr. and Bond St.
n.d.
Finish Board
n.d.
19
F11=017.TQ UT I WON W1
0
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
1}rparlm nl. or C'nmmuni1v Dcvrtnpment
401 htetntive load, North %ring
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
Phone (434129"&12 Fax 1434) 972-4126
January 11, 2019
Neil Bhatt, rAIA
NBJ Architecture
11537-B Nuukuls Road
Glen Allen, VA 23064)
RE: ARIJ-2018-114: Hyatt Haute at Stonelidd Town Center, Preliminary
Dear Mr_ Bhati,
The Albemarle County Architectural Reviews Beard, at itq mooing an lanuary7,2019 cnmplcted a prr1iminary
review ofthe above -noted request to construct a six -story (maximum 90 fect tall) hotel buildingencornpassing
92,247 square feet and a single -story retail component encompassing 12,567 square feet on an uMcveloped,
1,04-acre portion of this parcel. The Board offered the following comments for the lxmctit of the applicant's
next siibmi:ttal. Please note that the following remnants are those that have bern identified at this time.
Additional eommenls may be added or climinatcd based an further review and changes to the plan_
I. Provide renderings of the east and north elevations. Provide additional perspcctive views that show
the proposed building in the context of adjacent buildings, and particularly in respect to the
existing Hyatt place Hotel. Provide perspectives from Bond Street as well as District Avenue.
2. Revise the renderings of the south and west elevations to show all prupused architectural features.
3_ Provide dinars iuoed elevations of all fora elevations with materials and Colors identifier Provide
material and eolorsamplcs for review.
4.. Revise the architectural design to rcduea the amount of Ells used and to increase materialx that
reflect the traditional architecture of the area.,
5. Fissure that the parapet coping is not illuminaied,
6. Note that a separate sign application is required. Back-liu7talo-lit channel letter signs are consislentt
with the shopping center_
7_ Provide more nanapareney at the yronnd level through increased frnestmttnn.
8, Revise the design of tlic tower to reduce its mass by eliminating the ovcr-scaled single -slope roo£
9. Provide foundation plantings along the exterior ofthe courtyard wall and against the east building
wall within the couttyard,
t 0. Provide the standard glass note on the elevations: Window glass in fire Enfrarrce Cavrido s should
meet the fullawing criteria: Visible 101 "nsminance (VLT) shall not drop befataOil% Visible
light rg7erta"ee {ViR)shall not exceed 30;{:
11. Provide glass sample andror rnanufasturcr's specifications that provide the VLR and VLT values.
12. Provide a roof plan tlhal shows the dimensions ofatl proposed rooftop mechanical equipment and
show rooftop mechanical equipment on (he architectural elevations. Sow how all visibility of
mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridors will be elitrunated.
13. Provide top -of -wall and bottom -of -wall dimensions of the proposed courtyard wall. Provide
fraternal and. color samples for the wal1.
14. Ensttre that the HNAC vent screens match the color of the suriTianding wall.
15. Prnvidc the standard mechanical equipment note on the site plan set and on thr architcchual
drawings; lasrbiftyor'oftmecherrriclrfequipmen frrrstthe £s'rutf=-Corridnr,rhallbediminated.
16. Provide a lighting plan Far review.
17. Provide standard lighting note on the lighting plan: Each outdoor lutninalfre egyu Ail with aar lamp
that emits 3, 000 or more initial famens shaflbe a lustl ratafffamfnarre Lind shall be arranged or
shrelded fo rejfecl light arw*, from adjoining residential disrricis aced ntty rftam adjacent roads.
The spilfo stir ref fthlingfirnm luminaires aerlo public roads and prarrrerh- in resrdenefaf or rural
orra s zoning distazcLs .chaff not exceed one half foorcandle.
19. Corisiderproviding foundation plantings on the south face of the building,
19. If planl.ing .is added„ provide plant species that wv native to the region from the approved pliant list.
20, Ifplanting; is added, add the standard plant health note to the plain! AFlsire pfanttrrgs c!ftrers avid
shrubs shall be allowed to reach, arid be maintained al, rnatrare freight. the rapping gfrrres is
prohibited Shrubs and trees shall be pruned mnrimaf y arrd orgy^ to support the Overall health of
tlreplane.
21. Ensure that the proposal irwludes the necessary annotint at open $Paco to fulfill the Code of
Development rcquirvmenis,
22. Note that addilional pedt%trian and bicycle amenities and coniteetions, as well as the provision of
open space on this lot, will likely Ise called for during the site plan TCVirYV process to mrx.t Carle of
Development requirements
23, Provide adequate tree protection fencing on site Plans for future reviews.
You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest conveniencc. Al+phcation forms.
checklists and schedules .are available on-line at wn~w.albemarle.org/AR3,
Revised drauangs addressing the carnments listed above are required- Includr updalyd A.RB revision dates on
each drawing. Plraxc provide a memo including tictsi led respommsi indicating howl each ctanuncnt has been
addrsssetl, if chain outer than ththec rcquastc,4 have horn made, id<ntify those chango in the tree mo also.
Highlighting the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval.
If you have any questions roneerning any of thr above, please~ feel free la contact me.
Sinccrc ly,
Heather MLA'Jahon
Senior Plrtnner
Cc; OCT Stoncticld Property Owners, t.LC
535 Madison Ave, bah Floor
Now York City, MY 10022
File ARE-201S-154
20