Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB200200144 Staff Report 2003-01-06 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project#:Name ARB-2002-82: CVS Preliminary Review Type Preliminary review of a site development plan and advisory review of a special use permit for a drive-through window Parcel Identification Tax Map 32,Parcels 41A and 41D1 Location 3420 Seminole Trail,west side of Route 29 North at northwest corner of Timberwood Boulevard Zoned Entrance Corridor(EC),Commercial(C1) Magisterial District Rivanna Proposal To redevelop the"dance studio"site with a CVS store,including a drive- through window ARB Meeting Date January 6, 2003 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski PROJECT HISTORY The dance studio building on this site was constructed prior to the establishment of Route 29 North as an Entrance Corridor.The site is adjacent to the proposed site of the Hollymead Town Center,which was recently reviewed by the ARB. In mid-September,staff provided comments on early designs for the building.The ARB reviewed conceptual designs for the CVS building at its meeting on November 4, 2002. The comments made at that meeting are included in the Analysis section of this report. EXISTING CONDITIONS The front half of the site has been developed with a flat, gravel parking area to the front and rear of the building(dance studio),with a gradual slope at the rear of the site. A portion of the rear sloped area has been regraded and seeded. The remainder of the back half of the site consists of conifers (scrub pines). The dance studio is located approximately 100' from the right-of-way,though a demolition plan has not been submitted to confirm this. There is an existing entrance from Route 29 that is shared with the Seminole Commons development at the north end of the parcel. The entrance drive then becomes part of the parking aisle for the existing parking spaces at the south end of the Seminole Commons development. This travelway must be maintained. There are existing utilities on-site. Overhead wires are located in the planting strip between Route 29 and the parking area. A 12" water line is located within the first row of parking spaces and along the northern travelway. PROJECT DETAILS General Description of Proposed Site Changes:The existing building would be demolished and a new building constructed approximately 160' from the right-of-way. Four rows of parking would be created between the building and the EC. Another row is located on the south side of the site,for a total of 71 spaces.The existing shared entrance from Route 29 would be retained.A second entrance is proposed on the south side of the site. This access point is from an extension of Timberwood Boulevard. This entrance would eventually be relocated ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 1 250' to the west,when Timberwood Blvd. is extended. A loop drive is proposed around the building,with a lane providing access to the drive-through window on the north side of the building.A loading/service area is provided at the back of the site. A proposed sanitary sewer pipe is shown running parallel to Route 29, within the parking area closest to Route 29 and along the southern travelway. Substantial regrading is proposed to the rear(west),north and south of the site and it appears that all existing vegetation would be removed. The plan provides two different figures for the proposed building area. The title box indicates 11,970 SF and the checklist indicates 11,516 SF. General Description of Proposed Building:The applicant has revised the design of the building in an attempt to be more reflective of the historic architecture of the area. The main block of the building has been given a hipped roof The prototype corner entry has been redesigned with columns on brick bases supporting an arcade and hipped roof with gabled dormers. The arcade theme is carried through to the walls of the main building where series of decorative brick panels take the place of true windows and doors. A drive through structure composed of a hipped metal roof supported by brick piers is located on the north side of the building.All walls of the building that are visible from the EC are faced with brick. Wall lights are shown on all elevations. "CVS/pharmacy"signs are shown on both sides of the corner entrance. ANALYSIS Context: General Character of the Area:This part of Route 29 North is a developing commercial area.Less intensively developed land to the south and west is proposed to be developed as the Hollymead Town Center. To the south of the site is a 50' access easement that has been cleared. • Nearby Buildings: The Seminole Commons shopping center is adjacent to the north. The Hollymead Town Center is proposed to the south and west. The Forest Lakes shopping center,banks,and fast food restaurants are located across Route 29 to the east. Most of the buildings in the immediate vicinity utilize brick as a predominant material. Surrounding Landscape:Presently,the landscape to the south and west of the site is primarily vacant,wooded land. The Seminole Commons site is landscaped according to the ARB guidelines,with shade and ornamental trees planted parallel to Route 29 and screening shrubs located along the parking area. Visibility: The building will be clearly visible from the EC. The drive-through structure will also be visible, although as it is currently proposed it is situated toward the rear of the site and is small in comparison to the overall building. Site Development Layout: With the building 160' from the road and 4 rows of parking at the front of the site, parking is established as the focus of the development. The proposed layout does not align with the existing adjacent development and therefore does not provide for coordinated appearances along the EC.Moving the building closer to the road would be more appropriate. However,the applicant has indicated that the building cannot be moved closer to the EC because the drive-through cannot be accommodated with the desired store layout and the site constraints. Locating the service area behind the building is appropriate. ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 2 1 , Grading. Grading has been proposed for the site. The existing grades in the front portion of the site are flat with a 15%slope rising to the rear of the site. The existing contour along Route 29 is at elevation 90 and the contour at the rear of the site is at elevation 125 The parking areas have proposed slopes between 2%-3%, draining from the southwest to the northeast. The first floor elevation for the building is 100.00' although the adjacent sidewalk to the east of the building has a 4.5% slope. The rear of the site has been graded to a 2:1 slope and it appears that no existing vegetation will remain,although existing and proposed tree lines have not been shown on the plan.An alternative to the 2:1 slope would be to design a retaining wall arid preserve the existing vegetation to the rear of the site. A retaining wall is proposed to the north of the building,running along the property line for approximately 80'.The maximum height of the wall is 3'. Off-site grading is shown to the north of the wall and to the south of the site,within and beyond the 50' access easement. Landscaping • Landscaping has been proposed along Route 29 North,but it does not meet the minimum requirements of the ARB Guidelines. 3.5"caliper shade trees are required 35' on center along the EC with interspersed ornamentals.Following the ARB guidelines,there should be 4 evenly spaced shade trees along the EC, though the proposed plan shows only a pair of large shade trees (Sawtooth Oak)at either end of the site with an adjacent medium shade tree(Katsuratree,2.5"caliper).Four ornamental trees(Japanese Snowbell) are shown 15' on center running parallel to the EC. Shrubs(Dwarf Burford Holly and Cherry Laurel)are shown screening the parking from the EC. The Dwarf Burford Holly are shown at 4' on center,but the plant list indicates that they are to be planted 2' on center. The ARB guidelines require the shrubs to adequately screen the cars from the EC and to be a minimum of 24"at the time of planting.The proposed planting height is only 18"-24". Plants need to be added to the sides of the parking area to adequately screen the cars from the EC. • Regarding interior parking lot trees, only 5 of the required 7 trees are shown, and they(Zelkova) are all shown in the center island. Shade trees (Zelkova) are shown along the access road to the south of the building. Creeping Juniper is proposed as groundcover at the entrances to the parking area but a specific variety must be selected and the proposed height at planting must be included in the Plant List. Winter Jasmine is proposed for the slope to the rear of the site. All slopes 3:1 or greater should be planted with groundcover rather than grass. Fences/Walls A wall is proposed around the dumpster,although a detail has not been submitted.A retaining wall is shown to the north of the building along the property line. The maximum height of the wall is 3'. Details of the wall have not been submitted. Site Lighting Lighting has not been proposed for the parking area. If lighting is to be proposed,pole and fixture details and photometrics are required. Structure Compatibility with historic sites/structures: The proposed building utilizes the following elements that have a basis in the historic architecture of the area: brick wall surfaces, brick detailing, metal roof, hipped roof forms,arcades. The applicant has indicated that the proposed 18-degree roof pitches are reflective of traditional design proportions. Storefront windows have divided light transoms. Despite the use of these traditional elements,the prototype form of the building remains evident. ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 3 i Scale:Features have been incorporated into the building design to help create human scale. Brick detailing at window sills,window heads,arches,column bases,and at the base of the building, and the use of a variety of brick bonds,helps create interest and human scale.The length of the blind arcades on the side walls tends to dilute the effectiveness of these features.The difference in the scales and proportions of the entrance arcade and the blind wall arcades reduce the compatibility and effectiveness of the whole. Greater compatibility between these elements could result in a more coordinated overall appearance. The drive-through structure appears small in relation to the length and detailing of the left side wall and the overall building. The corner entrance element is more in scale with the main block of the building than in the standard prototype design. Material/Colors: Building matenals are proposed as follows:Brick veneer in red/brown; darker accent brick; gray standing seam metal roof;white detailing.As illustrated,the materials and colors appear to be appropriate, but samples are required. Forms and Features: The corner entrance bay remains the primary feature of the design. The columns, pyramidal roof form, dormers, and signs further accentuate this element.,A design that is not based on the standard prototype would offer more-opportunities for accentuating appropriate forms and features. Blankness: Windows and doors are proposed only at the southeast corner of the building,within the entrance bay. Most of the building remains blank. The proposed design attempts to relieve the blankness with the addition of a series of blind arches in brick. On the side walls(particularly the right side),the repetition of the arches tends to emphasize the length of the wall. Accessory Structures and Equipment: A note indicates that mechanical equipment will be placed on the flat roof of the building and will be screened by the metal roof. The drive-through structure appears as a minor addition to the building. Building Lighting: Wall fixtures are shown below the cornice on the three walls visible from the EC. Wall lights are also shown between each of the arches on the elevations. The illumination of sidewalks around the building may be necessary,but ARB policy has been to not illuminate buildings for purposes other than safety and security. Bollard lights could provide illumination of sidewalk areas without over-illuminating the building. Complete details on all proposed lighting are required. Signs: Signs composed of red channel letters reading"CVS/pharmacy"are located in the sign band on both sides of the corner entrance bay.A note indicates that the signage is 24"high. Complete sign information is required,including exact sizes, color samples, and information on proposed freestanding signs. Analysis based on the ARB's Previous Recommendations: (Previous recommendations are shown in italics.) 1 The building should reflect the historic architecture of Albemarle County. The revised building design incorporates some elements that typically appear in historic architecture of the County,but the prototype form remains. 2. Without a site plan, comments on orientation,placement, context, etc. cannot be made. The building should be coordinated with its surroundings. A site plan has been submitted. It shows four rows of parking between the building and the EC. This layout makes parking the focus of the development.Moving the building closer to the road and moving parking to the back would be more appropriate.Moving two rows of parking to the back would allow the CVS building ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 4 to align with the Seminole Commons building, coordinating it better with its surroundings. 3. The building design should include architectural elements that make it unnecessary to decorate blank walls to relieve blankness. True windows and doors have not been incorporated into'the majority of the building.Decorative arched brick panels have been added to relieve blankness. 4 The oversized corner signband/entrance element is an inappropriate feature for the EC. The prototype form remains, but the scale of the entrance "canopy" is better coordinated with the overall building and the signband appears to have been reduced in size from the standard prototype (although measured drawings have not been submitted). 5 The architectural design should clearly indicate that the display of signage is not the purpose of the building. Signage is shown on both sides of the canopy. The signs do not appear oversized for the area,based on the drawing submitted. At 2' high x 24' long(approximately),the focus on signage has been reduced. 6. If visible from the EC, the drive-through should be fully coordinated with the architecture of the building Canopy lights should be flush-mounted. The design of the drive-through is coordinated with the design of the main building. Its size is appropriately small in comparison to the main building. Lighting has not been addressed. 7. The applicant should consult the ARB Guidelines. 8. The building should be compatible with its surroundings. The applicant should review the proposals for the Hollymead Town Center, including Target, because this site will be viewed as a part of that larger development. The designs for the Hollymead Town Center are not complete.Nearby existing buildings utilize brick walls and metal roofs. 9. Of the three designs presented, the Richmond design was preferred because it shows: articulation; hierarchy; human scale; an appropriate scale for a one-story building; brick that is treated better, sensitivity to context; more appropriately scaled signage, more real materials. 10 The other designs are not considered good architecture. Articulation,brick detailing, appropriately scaled signs, and"real"materials are incorporated into the current proposal. The resulting scales are somewhat different. The Albemarle design retains more of the prototype form than the Richmond example. 11. A metal roof is preferred to a shingle roof A gray standing seam metal roof is proposed. 12. Signs must be designed to the building-not to the maximum Zoning allowance. Complete information has not been submitted,but the wall signs appear to be smaller than the allowable area. The signs are estimated at 2' tall x 22' long. The size of the sign band, which is designated by a decorative brick pattern,is estimated at 4' tall x 40' long. 13. Real windows are preferred to blank walls. The more daylight visible in the store, the better. Use less merchandise in the front of the building. ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 5 Real windows have not been incorporated into the previously blank portions of the walls. The addition of real windows would further improve the front and side elevations. 14 Classical proportions and rhythm should be present, but an "old fashioned" appearance is not a requirement. An old fashioned appearance is not proposed.Rhythm is generated by the arcades. The arches of the entrance canopy and those of the side walls could be better coordinated in terms of proportion and scale. • 15. The location of the building on site will be extremely important. See comment#2, above. SUMMARY The applicant has revised the design of the building elevations in an attempt to reflect the historic architecture of the County. The revised design is an improvement over'the previous submittals, and it could continue to be improved, but the prototype building plan is still proposed. To accommodate the prototype plan with a drive-through window on this parcel(with the other limitations imposed by utilities and required travelways), it is not possible to place the building in an appropriate location from an EC perspective.Four rows of parking between the building and the Entrance Corridor are inappropriate. The proposed location is not compatible with the adjacent building,it allows no relationship between the building and the EC,and it allows the parking lot to be the focus of the development. Staff cannot support the request for the Special Use Permit for the drive-through for these reasons. RECOMMENDATIONS: Regarding the request for the Special Use Permit: Staff recommends that the ARB forward the following recommendation to the Planning Commission: The ARB cannot support the request for the Special Use Permit because the proposed building location, which is established by the drive-through, is inappropriate for the Entrance Corridor based on the following: 1. The proposed building location is not compatible with the location of the adjacent building, 2. The proposed location allows no relationship between the building and the EC, 3. The proposed location allows the parking lot to be the focus of the development. Regarding the preliminary site plan: Staff offers the following comment: 1. Revise the layout so that an appropriately designed building is the focus of the development—not parking. Aligning the building and parking with the building and parking on the adjacent site would be appropriate. When a revised layout is submitted, additional comments can be provided. 2. Submit a demolition plan to confirm the location of existing site conditions. 3. Submit a grading easement for off-site grading. 4. Provide information(site section and/or revised building elevation)addressing the grade change along the front of the building. 5. Provide complete elevations that are to scale. 6. Provide an alternative to the 2:1 slope behind the building and show existing trees to remain. 7. Provide a signed conservation plan checklist on the plan and include all details that relate to the proposed development. ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 6 8. Provide details for the dumpster wall and retaining wall. 9. Confirm the building square footage and correct the plans. 10. Add building dimensions to the site plan. 11. Submit a lighting plan to include pole and fixture details and photometrics. 12. Regarding the landscaping: • Provide 3.5"caliper shade trees 35' on center along the EC with interspersed ornamentals. • Provide plant quantities to the Plant List. • Revise the Dwarf Burford Holly note in the Plant List to read 4' o.c. • Revise the Dwarf Burford Holly and Cherry Laurel planting heights to 36". • Add shrubs to the sides of the parking area to adequately screen the cars from the EC. • Provide 7 interior parking lot trees as per ARB Design Guidelines. • Specify the variety for the Creeping Juniper and the proposed height at planting in the Plant List. • All slopes 3:1 or greater shall be planted with groundcover rather than grass. • All planting islands shall be a minimum width of 5' from inside curb to inside curb. • Note#9 on Sheet LA-2 regarding plant substitutions must include the statement that the County of Albemarle must approve any plant substitutions. • Show existing and proposed tree lines on the plan. Regarding the building design: Staff offers the following comments: 1. Remove the upper wall lights from the proposal. 2. Remove all wall lights from the right elevation. 3. Indicate if lights are proposed to be located within the ceiling of the entrance canopy and/or the drive- through. 4. Provide complete details on all proposed lighting.All fixtures shall be full cutoff fixtures. 5. It is recommended that the long expanses of blind arches on the side walls be relieved with true windows. 6. Create a stronger relationship between the arches of the entrance canopy and the blind arches of the blank, walls. 7. Provide material and color samples. 8. Provide complete sign information. ARB 1/6/2003 CVS Preliminary Site Plan Review-Page 7