Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201400141 Application 2014-11-25 Albemarle Cc ity Community Development Department 4161clntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902-4596 - Planning Application Voice: (434)296-5832 Fax:(434)972-4126 PARCEL/ OWNER INFORMATION TMPI 05900-00-00-02380 Owner(s): Application # ARB201400141 UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA PHYSICIANS GROUP PROPERTY INFORMATION Legal Description ACREAGE PT L-B Magisterial Dist. Samuel Miller Land Use Primary Commercial Current AFD Not in A/F District Current Zoning Primary Cl Commercial APPLICATION INFORMATION Street Address 2955 IVY RD CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22903 Entered By Emily Lantz Application Type Architectural Review Board 111/25/2014 1 Project Northridge Medical Building Received Date 11/24/14 Received Date Final Submittal Date 11/24/14 Total Fees 225 Closing File Date Submittal Date Final Total Paid 225 Revision Number Comments Legal Ad SUB APPLICATION(s) Type I Sub Applicati l Comment Revisions to Certificate of A ro Iriatene ::='11/24/14 , (APPLICANT/ CONTACT INFORMATION ContactType l Name I Address l CityState Zip I Phone I PhoneCell owner/Applicant toNIVERSIrt OF VIRGINIA PHYSICIANS . 500 RAYC HUNT OR: . . ._CHARLOTTESVILL ;22403-'29' _.22803 29 Primary Contact WILLIAM B DAGGETT 1415 SACHEM PLACE UNIT 2A CHARLOTTESVILL 22901 4349955374 Signature of Contractor or Authorized Agent Date Architectural view Board Applicati.d ' Part A: Applicant, Contact and Parcel Information Project Name: Northridge Medical Building Tax map and parcel(s): Parcel ID: 05900-00-00-02380 Physical Street Address: 2955 Ivy Road Contact Person: William B. Daggett Business Name: DWG Architects Address 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A City Charlottesville Stare VA Zip 22901 Daytime Phone( ) 434-995+55374 Fax ( ) N/A E-mail bdaggett @dwgarchitects.com Owner of Record: University of Virginia Physicians Group Address 500 Ray C. Hunt Drive City State State VA Zip 22903 Daytime Phone( ) 434-295-1000 Fax#( ) E-mail Part B: Review Type and Fee Select review type _ Review by the Architectural Review Board Conceptual Plan/Advisory Review(for a Special Use Permit or a Rezoning) No Fee Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan No Fee _ Final Review of a Site Development Plan $1000.00 ✓ Amendment to an approved Certificate of Appropriateness $225.00 Building Permit Review $590.00 County-wide Certificate of Appropriateness Structures 750' or more from the EC,no taller than 5 stories No Fee _ Structures located behind a structure that fronts the EC No Fee Personal wireless service facilities No Fee Fencing or Equipment or Lighting No Fee Additions to ARB-approved buildings No Fee Minor amendments to site or architectural plans No Fee Building permits where the change is 50%or less of the altered elevation No Fee NOTE: For SIGNS, use the combined APPLICATION AND CHEKLIST FOR SIGNS. FOR OFFICE USE ONLY BP# ARB# Fee Amount$ Date Paid 104,- I N/ By who? Receipt# Check 4 t(Qdd g By/ County of Albemarle Dept of Community Development,401 McIntire Rd,Ch ttesville,VA 22902 Voice:(434)296-5832 Fax:(434)972-4126 11/2010 Page 1 of 2 OVER—> Part C: Description of Prop.,ra1 Describe your proposal.Attach a separate sheet if necessary. Please see booklet entitled "Facade Replacement Project", dated January 5, 2015 Part D: Applicant Agreement Applicant must read and sign • Each application package must contain(8) folded copies of all plans and documents being submitted. Only (1)set of building material samples is required. All submittal items, including building material samples, become the property of Albemarle County. Applicants are encouraged to maintain duplicate copies of all submittal items in their own files. • Only complete application packages will be scheduled for ARB review. The application package is not complete without the appropriate checklist,completed, signed,and included with the required submittal materials indicated on the checklist. I hereby certify that I own the subject property or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application. *See submittal requirements below. I also certify that the information provided on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true, and correct to the best of my knowledge, and that the attached plans cont. crmation required by the appropriate checklist. �� 1�1 November 24, 2014 Sign. /tt4j % er, owner's representative Date or ••fn r.�tr:urchaser William B. Daggett, Jr.AIA 434-995-5537 Printed name,Title Daytime phone number of Signatory *Ownership Information: • If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing above has the authority to do so. • If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. • If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. Attach the owner's written consent. 11/2010 Page 2 of 2 OVER—0 t a _ 0 ` Architectural Review Board Building Permit Review(Preliminary/Final) Submittal Requirements Checklist a a s s� F 4 ,. �.. � pp { P z , f - ,r,,:,.. Project name: Northridge Medical Building Tax map and parcel#: Parcel ID: 05900-00-00-02380 Physical street address (if assigned): 2955 Ivy Road, Charlottesville, VA Location of property(landmarks, intersections, or other): NE Corner of intersection of Ivy Road and Contact person: Business name: Address: City: State: Zip: Daytime phone: Fax: Email: a-v5 xw ,_.y r. .W' ... Important Note: Submittal packages must contain (8) collated copies of all information unless otherwise indicated. A. Written description of the proposal ® Provide a general description of all proposed work. ® Explain how the proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and the Entrance Corridor. B. Site plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1"=20', clearly legible and folded): ® Location of all proposed changes. ® Sheet number, total number of sheets, date of the drawing, date and description of the latest revision, and contact information for the firm preparing the drawings in the title block on all drawings. ® If mechanical equipment or accessory structures are altered or added, then identify those features, their locations, and screening that will eliminate visibility from the Entrance Corridor. C. Landscape plan showing the following (drawn to the scale of 1"=20', clearly legible and folded): ® Proposed landscaping that meets or exceeds the requirements outlined in the ARB guidelines. ® Existing landscaping to be removed. Include the location, size, and species. ® Landscape key including all landscape symbols and a description of what they represent. ® Location of existing and proposed tree lines. ® Location of existing natural features. O Location of individual trees of 6-inch caliper or greater and all significant groups of trees indicated by botanical name and caliper. ® Location and height of above-ground utilities and associated easements, and location of below- ground utilities and associated easements. ® Stormwater facilities. ❑ Provide a signed, tree conservation checklist with all checklist items drawn on the landscape plans. 1 Revised 7/28/10 Please note. No changes to existing exterior lighting planned. D. Lighting plan showing thib,.,sllowing (drawn to the scale of 1"=20; clr..,001 legible and folded if new lighting is proposed or existing lighting will be modified): ❑ Location of all proposed building and site lighting. ❑ Lighting schedule identifying all proposed light fixtures, poles and brackets. ❑ Manufacturer's cut sheets illustrating proposed lighting fixtures and information on illumination type, intensity, style, shielding, color, finish, and installation height. ❑ Photometric plan addressing all fixtures and indicating that lighting meets the requirements of section 4.17 of the Zoning Ordinance. ❑ Coordination of lighting with landscaping and other site elements. E. Appearance of the proposed building(s) IN Architectural elevations of the proposed building(s). Elevations must be drawn to the scale of at least 1/8"=1'-0". Include a building materials schedule and key. © One set of all building material samples and colors. El A floor plan adequate to show exterior walls, windows and doors. F. Additional material © Provide labeled, color, 8-W x 11" photographs of the site as seen from both directions on the Entrance Corridor. © The applicant is welcome to submit any additional material that they believe may make the building permit review more productive. Drawings or other submittal items that clarify topography, visibility, utilities, landscaping, or other unique or unusual conditions are welcome. , z -..t 3 k7f,a fifr'3x '" s;ri- �' �` a .. ''.nWaa:tkti+k g3: ,Ga b xr, r Applicant must read and sign • Each application package must contain (8) folded copies of all plans and documents being submitted. Only (1) set of building material samples is required. All submittal items, including building material samples, become the property of Albemarle County. Applicants are encouraged to maintain duplicate copies of all submittal items in their own files. • All information in this checklist is required, unless specifically waived by the ARB, prior to processing a building permit review by the ARB. Additional submittal materials may be required,depending on the proposal. • Only complete application packages will be scheduled for ARB review. The application package is not complete without this checklist, completed, signed, and included with the required submittal materials indicated on the checklist. In representing the above referenced firm submitting this application for review, l hereby state that the information provided in this application, and all accompanying information, is accurate, true and correct to the best of my knowledge, and that the attached plans contain all information required by this checklist. ` III/f�Jj November 24, 2014 Si;j p,ft r person completing checklist Date William B. Daggett, Jr.AIA 434 995-5537 Printed Name/Title Daytime phone number of Signatory County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 (434)296-5832 Tel, (434)972-4126 Fax www.abemarle.orq 2 Revised 7/28/10 IN ARCHITECTS November 24, 2014 Mr.Joseph Chambers Ms. Marcia Joseph Mr. Charles T. Lebo Mr. Fred Missel, Chair Mr. Bruce Wardell Architectural Review Board Department of Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,Virginia 22902 Re: Northridge Medical Building, Facade Replacement Project Dear Member of the Architectural Review Board, The University of Virginia Physicians Group (UPG) is planning to replace the existing façade of their Northridge Medical Building, located at 2955 Ivy Road. This project will entail the removal of the existing brick veneer, cast stone and glazing systems and their replacement with new materials and systems. Given the scale of the proposed project, UPG saw an opportunity to improve the aesthetics of the building's exterior. UPG has engaged DWG Architects to design the new facades for the building. We met with you on October 6, 2014 and presented our initial design at an informal work session. We are requesting a Certificate of Appropriateness based on a revised design that reflects the comments received from the Board at that meeting. Location and Context- See Attachment No. 1 The Northridge Medical Building is located in the Northridge Medical Park on Ivy Road. It and the UVA Transitional Care Hospital make up the park. The park is located on a sloping stretch of Ivy Road consisting of a series of commercial buildings on the north side of the road, including Bellair Service, the Mosler Radiation Therapy Building, a UVA Facilities Building, and the Volvo dealership. The south side of Ivy Road is tree lined with a mix of pasture and woods behind the tree line. 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville, VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537 Letter to Albemarle County Architectural Review Board November 24,2014 The Existing Building-See Attachment Numbers 2, 3,4 Odell Architects designed the building in 1986 and construction was completed in 1987-88. Originally built as a speculative office building, it was acquired by the University of Virginia Health Services Foundation and later transferred to UPG in 2011. The building design is common to spec office buildings of the period. Two wings flank a central drum structure. The wings are composed of alternating continuous horizontal bands of brick and reflective glass. Cast stone lintels trim the ribbon window heads. These wings contrast with the central drum structure that features a curved curtain wall assembly of reflective glass from base to top. The architectural style can be characterized as a derivative of the International Style, with details common to 1980's commercial architecture, especially strip office and suburban office park architecture. The continuous band of horizontal glazing emphasizes the non-loadbearing veneer quality of the brick as, visually, it accentuates that the brick has no visible means of support. The overall impression of the design is of horizontality, save for the vertical emphasis in the central drum structure. Little of the design, other than the use of brick, is reflective of the architectural heritage of Albemarle County. Indeed, as a derivative of the International Style, the design's composition goes against this heritage, which is based on the principles of classical architecture, Palladianism and rural vernacular architecture. The design makes no attempt to relate human scale to the whole, simply stacking bands of arbitrary heights of glass and brick one on top of the other. The cast stone lintels, because they are used as continuous bands, do little to breakdown or relate the building scale. The use of reflective glass further reduces the ability of the design to relate to human scale by presenting a mirror of the surrounding environs. Since the glazing system uses butt joint details, no mullions are expressed on the exterior that could be used to scale the building. Proposed Façade Replacement- See Attachments 5, 6, 7 The proposal you will find detailed herein seeks to reconfigure the facade so that the building is in keeping with the architectural heritage of Albemarle County. While the palette of proposed materials is not greatly different from what currently exists, the composition of those materials' placement on the facade is significantly different from the existing design. We propose to use brick, the same glass used on the UVA Transitional Care Hospital, aluminum curtain wall framing, cast stone and synthetic stucco. DWG Architects Page 2 of 6 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville,VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537 Letter to Albemarle County Arc`iitectural Review Board November 24, 2014 The architectural composition we propose has one major difference with the existing composition. Rather than emphasize the horizontality of the building wings with continuous bands, we are proposing a design that breaks down the horizontal mass of the wings using a regularly spaced, vertically arranged composition of distinct punched window openings. Between the windows will be vertical sections of brick that act similar to columns or piers in establishing a regular rhythm to the facade, and assist in breaking down the mass of the wings. The first and second story windows are configured to appear as one large window, continuous from the first floor to the top of the second, with the third story windows being separate punched openings The central drum structure will retain its vertical emphasis, which will be heightened by the addition of brick piers laid out in a regular rhythm. In response to ARB comments, we have revised the drum design, projecting the drum's height above the adjoining wings as the existing design does, and terminating it with a simple coping detail. This allows the drum to differentiate itself from the adjoining wings and creates a central emphasis to the design. The projecting cornice of the wings relates to the cornice of the adjacent Transitional Care Hospital. While the proposed design reflects a traditional classical methodology in arranging the facade elements, we are proposing a detail that acknowledges certain modernist principles that have become part of Albemarle's architectural heritage in the late 20th and early 21st centuries. The corners of the building wings will be glazed rather than masonry, as would be expected in a traditionally conceived design. We do this for two reasons: First, the open corners allow the existing small corner offices and exam rooms to retain windows they would otherwise lose with closed corners; and secondly, the open corner is an acknowledgement of the modernist design principles underlying the building's previous design. Existing Tree Issue One issue we discussed with you was the three large Willow Oaks that border the south wing of the building, facing Ivy Road. We reviewed the facade replacement project with a General Contractor and we believe that these trees will not survive the construction operations necessary for the facade replacement. The reasons are twofold: One, that the trees have to be limbed back to allow for erection of the scaffolding to permit construction operations and, two, that machinery and labor traffic will have to traverse within the drip line of the trees resulting in root DWG Architects Page 3 of 6 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville,VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537 Letter to Albemarle County Arccectural Review Board November 24,2014 damage. The combination of these two factors assures the trees will not survive construction. Comments From October 6 ARB Work Session Quoting from an email received from Margaret Maliszewski on October 7, 2014: The ARB held a work session on the Northridge building renovation to receive the applicant's introduction to the project. ARB members made the following comments: 1. The willow oaks will need to be replaced, but the building doesn't need to be screened. 2. Provide an argument for the use of the spandrel glass in a larger context. 3. Consider making a distinction between the barrel and the wings of the building. It may be valuable to look at differentiation and breaking down the scale. 4. Other potential concerns noted were: visibility of roof equipment, alternate spandrel materials/colors, providing samples of all proposed materials/colors. Response to ARB Comments 1. The included landscape plan illustrates our proposal for replacing the existing willow oaks. The proposed trees provide ornamental enhancement of the building,without screening the building. 2. The rationale for using spandrel glass in the design is a result of the specific existing conditions of the Northridge Building, the conditions under which the construction must occur, and the immediate architectural context within which the building is sited. The existing window openings are fixed, with sills occurring at 2'- 8" above the floor and window heads at 8'-0" above the floor. Because the renovation must occur while the building continues to be occupied, and because we must re-use the existing exterior stud framing, we cannot enlarge these existing openings.We can only reduce them. One of the chief flaws in the existing building design was the poorly proportioned ribbon windows that result in strong horizontal banding. In order to reconfigure the design into one that is compatible with Albemarle's architectural DWG Architects Page 4 of 6 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville,VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537 No" Letter to Albemarle County Ariitectural Review Board November 24,2014 heritage, we looked at changing the windows from ribbon windows to punched openings. However, if one simply creates punched window openings that conform to the existing opening limitations, the resultant design is equally misproportioned as the existing design (see Attachment Number 8). Our answer to that conundrum is to use spandrel glass to allow the window openings to appear larger than their actual vision glass components are. This gave us the flexibility to compose window openings proportionately scaled to the facades and permitted us to introduce a verticality in the design of the building wings, offsetting, rather than reinforcing, the horizontal mass of the wings. Spandrel glass is best used in this circumstance because: 1) Spandrel glass is the only material that will work with vision glass to make the openings appear to be one large window and; 2) it will hide the existing stud framing that would be exposed by vision glass. Additionally, we propose to use the same glass specification used on the UVA Transitional Care Hospital. The TCH uses both vision and spandrel lites (see Attachment Number 9), which were approved by the ARB, albeit prior to the current ARB policies on glazing. Using the same glass as TCH will help unify the two buildings' designs, as is appropriate given their use and siting in the same complex. 3. We revised the design of the barrel so that it stands proud of the adjoining wings, with its own unique termination detail at the top, providing a strong central vertical emphasis, similar to the barrel's effect in the existing design. We changed the fenestration pattern of the third floor windows as well to further accentuate the uniqueness of the barrel and to provide additional scale to the design. 4. We are not altering the height of the existing wings' parapets, nor are we adding additional rooftop HVAC equipment that can be viewed from the Entrance Corridor. The Existing rooftop HVAC equipment cannot be seen from the Entrance Corridor. As described in response number 2 above, we feel alternate spandrel materials, such as brick, synthetic stucco, pre-finished aluminum and similar materials will not be as successful as spandrel glass in achieving the appearance of large window openings. Further, the introduction of a material such as pre-finished aluminum or synthetic stucco for the spandrels will have the effect of creating secondary horizontal bands on the façade, denigrating the unified vertical effect of that the spandrel glass creates (See Attachment Number 8). DWG Architects Page 5 of 6 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville,VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537 �.f Letter to Albemarle County Ar hitectural Review Board November 24, 2014 Along with our applications are material samples of the proposed brick, aluminum curtainwall framing, and glass. Conclusion We believe the proposed scheme for the facade replacement will better reflect the architectural heritage of Albemarle County than the current building facades: Compatibility with significant historic sites: By using the composition principles used in the design of Albemarle's significant historic sites, the facades respect the architecture of the historically significant buildings without aping them through overt historicism. Compatibility with the Character of the Entrance Corridor: The section of Ivy Road where the building exists is of a commercial character and the building design is consistent with this character. Site Development and Layout: No major changes are proposed to the existing site development or layout. Landscaping: We identified the one major issue with the existing landscaping. We propose an approach that augments the existing landscaping rather than simply replacing the disturbed landscaping. We look forward to meeting with you on January 5th. We believe the proposed project will be an improvement of the entrance corridor along this stretch of Ivy Road. Best Regards, William B. Daggett,Jr.AIA DWG Architects Page 6 of 6 1415 Sachem Place, Unit 2A Charlottesville,VA 22901 Phone:434-995-5537