HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201000008 Review Comments Final Site Plan and Comps. 2010-02-09ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
Project #: Name
ARB- 2010 -08: Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage and Office
Building
Review Type
Final Review of a Site Development Plan
Parcel Identification
Tax Map 78, Parcel 20M
Location
Approximately 1,500 feet south of Richmond Road (Route 250 East) in the
Peter Jefferson Place Development.
Zoned
Planned Development Mixed Commercial (PDMC), Entrance Corridor (EC)
Owner
Martha Jefferson Hospital
Applicant
Matthews Development Company (Mike Matthews)
Magisterial District
Rivanna
Proposal
To construct a parking deck and office building adjacent to the approved
hospital.
ARB Meeting Date
February 16, 2010
Staff Contact
Margaret Maliszewski
SITE/PROJECT HISTORY
On January 4, 2010 the ARB conducted a preliminary review of this proposal to construct a parking garage
and office building adjacent to the approved hospital. The ARB identified no issues to be resolved with the
architecture or layout of either building. Instead, the focus of the ARB's comments was the lighting on the
roof of the parking deck. The ARB's comments from that meeting are summarized in the action letter that
is included as Attachment A to this report.
CONTEXT
The parking garage and office building are proposed to be located in close proximity to the hospital
building. The garage would be located on the southeast elevation of the hospital and the office building
would be located off the eastern corner of the parking garage. On the approved site plan, the building
locations are parking lots.
CHANGES TO THE PLAN SINCE THE LAST REVIEW
Three of the four comments made at the last review asked for minor changes to notes on the plan regarding
lighting and landscaping. Those changes have been made. In response to the other comment, the applicant
has reduced the height of the deck -top pole lights from 17' to 15' and reduced the lamps in those fixtures
from 250 watt to 200 watt metal halide. (There are ten pole lights with paired fixtures proposed at the
center of the deck along the ramp.) The applicant has also reduced the height of the stair towers on the
west elevation by 7' 1 ".
ARB 2/16/2010 Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage - Page 1
VISIBILITY
The hospital site falls within the I64 Entrance Corridor. The hospital, which is under construction, is
visible from I64. The vantage point with greatest visibility is at Exit 121A (eastbound) where there is a rise
in the corridor. From this point, the site is approximately 2' /a miles away. As viewed from 164, the parking
garage and office building would be located to the right of the hospital itself, with existing wooded area
partially blocking some of the structure. The impact of the garage and office building during the day is not
expected to be much greater than that of the hospital itself due to the compatibility of materials and forms.
However, at night there may be an increase in noticeability due to the illumination from the lights on the
upper level of the parking garage.
ANALYSIS (based on plans EL100, EL100A, EL101, EL101A, EL102, EL102A, LS1, LS3, LS3B, LS5, LS5B
revised 1/25/2010; Architectural sheets 9, 10, 20 -28 revised 1/25/2010; 5 architectural sheets dated 2/1/2010,
including Site Diagram A and Sight Distance Diagram)
Issue: Lighting on the top deck of the parking garage
Comments:
At its last review, the ARB made three recommendations regarding the deck -top lighting:
1. Providing as low a level of lighting on the parking deck surface as code allows is preferable.
2. Providing as even a level of lighting on the parking deck surface as code allows is preferable.
3. Elimination of all direct views of the light source is preferable.
The ARB also discussed the following recommendations:
4. Consider the use of occupancy sensors.
5. Use fewer fixtures at the center ramp.
6. Consider changing the color of the concrete on the upper level deck.
The applicant has made these changes and comments:
1. Pole height has been reduced from 17' to 15'.
2. The metal halide lamp wattage has been reduced from 250 watts to 200 watts.
3. The occupancy sensors will not work well with the start-up time of the metal halide lamps and the
switching on and off could be distracting.
4. Studies using fewer fixtures at the ramp led to an uneven lighting layout.
5. There would be a substantial cost premium for adding a colored top coat on the concrete. The
colored surface would impact the reflected light, not the light levels addressed in the photometric plan.
Table 1 outlines the light levels proposed in the last review, the revised light levels proposed in the current
review, and the Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IES) and the National Fire Protection
Association (NFPA) recommended minimums. The applicant is attempting to meet the IES and NFPA
standards.
IES recommendations are based on maintained luminance, which takes into account factors that reduce
light levels over time, like dirt and lumen depreciation. Albemarle County requires that photometric plans
show initial light levels, which are higher than maintained values. The lighting levels displayed in the
statistics table on the lighting plans (and listed under "deck" and "ramp" in Table 1) correspond to the
initial illumination of the fixture. Consequently, over time, these values will decrease.
ARB 2/16/2010 Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage - Page 2
TABLE 1: COMPARISON OF PARKING LOT LIGHT LEVELS
Ori inal and Revised Levels with IES and NFPA Recommendations
Jan 4 Pro osal
Feb 16 Pro osal
IES'
NFPA 1012
Deck
Ramp
Deck
Ramp
Average fc
5.3
8.0
4.6
6.4
-
Not less than 1
Maximum fc
16.9
16.6
18.3
18.5
-
-
Minimum fc
1.4
4.8
1.2
3.2
.5
Not less than .1 @ egress path
Max: mina
12.1:1
3.5:1
15.3:1
5.8:1
15:1
Not to exceed 40:1
Ave: min
3.8:1
17:1
3.8:1
2.0:1
-
-
Table 2 provides a comparison between the proposed initial light levels and the corresponding maintained
light levels for the deck -top lights. (The applicant provided the maintained values in response to questions
from staff.)
TABLE 2: COMPARISON OF PARKING LOT LIGHT LEVELS
Initial and Maintained Levels with IES and NFPA Recommendations
Initial Li
ht Levels
Maintained Li ht Levels
IES
NFPA 101
Deck
Ramp
Deck
Ramp
Average fc
4.6
6.4
2.5
3.5
-
Not less than 1
Maximum fc
18.3
18.5
10.1
10.2
-
-
Minimum fc
1.2
3.2
.7
1.8
.5
Not less than .1 @ egress path
Max: min
15.3:1
5.8:1
14.4:1
5.7:1
15:1
Not to exceed 40:1
Ave: min
3.8:1
2.0:1
3.6:1
1.9:1
-
-
Considering maintained luminance, the proposed minimum footcandle level at the deck and the uniformity
ratio (see footnote 3) are close to the IES recommended minimums. Also, the proposed average
footcandles are generally low.
To address the ARB's concern about direct view of the light source, the applicant has submitted a diagram
illustrating the view angle between the I64 Entrance Corridor and the deck -top pole lights. The diagram
confirms that the pole light elevation is higher than that of the EC and that the lights will be visible.
However, given the 2.2 mile distance between the EC and the parking garage, it is anticipated that the view
of the lights will be more of a general glow in the distance, not a direct view of each lamp in each fixture.
Also, the applicant has illustrated that the light from the pole fixtures will not spill beyond the deck.
Recommendations: Given the reduced pole height and lamp wattage, and the proposed maintained
minimum footcandles and uniformity ratio, staff has no further recommendations.
1 Illuminating Engineering Society of North America, recommendations.
2 National Fire Protection Association, Life Safety Code, emergency lighting.
3 Maximum: minimum and Average: minimum are uniformity ratios. A uniformity ratio describes how uniform the light levels
are across an area. This can be expressed as a ratio of the maximum to minimum levels of illumination, or as a ratio of the
average to the minimum levels of illumination.
ARB 2/16/2010 Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage - Page 3
SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion:
1. Revised illumination levels; anticipated impact on the EC
Staff offers the following recommendation on the final site plan:
Staff recommends approval of the proposal as submitted.
ARB 2/16/2010 Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage - Page 4
Attachment A
OF LL-6,
o� �r
�'IRGINZ�
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
January 19, 2010
Mike Matthews
C/O Matthews Development Company
One Boar's Head Pointe, Suite 131
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: ARB- 2009 -98: Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage & Office Building; Tax Map 78, Parcel 20M
Dear Mr. Mathews:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on January 4, 2010, completed a preliminary review of the above -
noted request to construct a parking deck and an office building adjacent to the approved hospital. The Board offered the following
comments for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal. Please note that the following comments are those that have been identified
at this time. Additional comments may be added or eliminated based on further review and changes to the plan.
1. Add notes to the site plan indicating the maximum height for the proposed light fixtures and the colors of the fixtures and
poles.
2. Add the following standard note to the plan: "Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more
initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in
residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one -half footcandle."
3. Providing as low a level of lighting on the parking deck surface as code allows is preferable. Providing as even a level of
lighting on the parking deck surface as code allows is preferable. Elimination of all direct views of the light source is
preferable.
4. Include the following note on the landscape 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."
You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms, checklists and schedules
are available on -line at www.albemarle.ore /Dlannine.
Revised drawings addressing the comments listed above are required. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing and an
ARB approval signature panel. Please provide a memo including detailed responses indicating how each comment has been addressed.
If changes other than those requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also. Highlighting the changes in the
drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval.
If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Maliszewski
Principal Planner
Cc: Martha Jefferson Hospital, 459 Locust Ave, Charlottesville VA 22902; File
ARB 2/16/2010 Martha Jefferson Hospital Parking Garage - Page 5