Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutARB201500103 Staff Report 2015-09-14ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT Project #/Name ARB -2015-103: Mezeh Restaurant Renovations Review Type Countywide Certificate of Appropriateness for a Minor Amendment Parcel Identification 061 WO0300019AO Location 2015 Bond Street, on the south side of Bond Street in Building A3 of the Stonefield Town Center Zoned Neighborhood Model District (NMD)/Entrance Corridor (EC) Owner/Applicant Albemarle Place EAAP LLC/Dwight Smith Magisterial District Jack Jouett Proposal The applicant proposes to renovate the exterior of a tenant space in the Stonefield Town Center to accommodate a new restaurant. Renovations include the addition of an awning on the west elevation supported by a vertical trellis at the south end, railings along the west side, and a shaped metal panel on the south elevation. Signs are also proposed for the new business, but signs require a separate application. Context The restaurant will occupy a space in the Stonefield Town Center. The tenant space fronts on a side street within the center, and on the parking lot located between Trader Joe's and Pier 1. Visibility The rear elevation of the tenant space is visible across the parking lot from both the Rt. 29 and Hydraulic Road Entrance Corridors. The space is situated approximately 350' away from both corridors. ARB Meeting Date September 21, 2015 Staff Contact Margaret Maliszewski PROJECT HISTORY The applicant submitted a building permit application for renovations to a portion of Building A3 in the Stonefield Town Center. Because the changes impacted elevations visible from the ECs, staff informed the applicant that an ARB application would be required. The application was submitted, and staff consulted with the ARB on August 17, 2015 about the proposed renovation. The ARB indicated that the proposal should be undertaken as a full ARB review, rather than a staff level review. The Board noted that a revised design could turn the corner (from the west elevation) to the rear (south) elevation, but the current proposal was not appropriate. Previously, during the original review of the architecture for the buildings in the town center, the ARB determined that the west elevation of Building A3 did not require ARB review. Based on that determination, staff agreed to sign off on the building permit for the work on the west elevation, once the work proposed for the south elevation had been removed from the permit application. A separate permit for the work on the south elevation will be submitted following ARB review and approval of the proposal. ANALYSIS REF GUIDELINE ISSUE RECOMMENDATION Structure design 1 The goal of the regulation of the design of The shaped metal panel on the south elevation Revise the proposal on the development within the designated Entrance has no particular connection to historic south elevation to Corridors is to insure that new development within architecture of the county. The shape of the coordinate better with the the corridors reflects the traditional architecture of the panel doesn't coordinate with the details of the approved building design. area. Therefore, it is the purpose of ARB review and existing center, and it doesn't appear to have a Options include, but are of these Guidelines, that proposed development strong relationship with the awning and trellis not limited to, the use of a within the designated Entrance Corridors reflect proposed for the side elevation of the restaurant. traditional style awning in elements of design characteristic of the significant A portion of the wall area where the panel is an approved color historical landmarks, buildings, and structures of the proposed is a typical location for an awning (Sunbrella Black 08, Charlottesville and Albemarle area, and to promote above a storefront, but the panel is taller than a Natural 04, Charcoal Gray orderly and attractive development within these typical awning and located well above the 44, Navy Blue 26, Alpine corridors. Applicants should note that replication of service door on this side. Other nearby tenant Green 55, Panorama historic structures is neither required nor desired. spaces with upper wall treatments are Noodles Taupe 48), or a treatment and Blue Ridge Mountain Sports. Noodles has a incorporating cedar 3 New structures and substantial additions to existing structures should respect the traditions of the brown metal panel (Benjamin Moore #994 panels. architecture of historically significant buildings in the Fallen Timber) above the store entrance. BRMS Charlottesville and Albemarle area. Photographs of has stained wood in the large space above its historic buildings in the area, as well as drawings of entrance. Both of these stores also have signs architectural features, which provide important above their entrances. A key difference is that examples of this tradition are contained in Appendix Mezeh has no windows or customer entrance A. below the proposed metal panel. An awning of more traditional size, style and location would 4 The examples contained in Appendix A should be used as a guide for building design: the standard of compatibility with the area's historic structures is not intended to impose a rigid design solution for new development. Replication of the design of the important historic sites in the area is neither intended nor desired. The Guideline's standard of compatibility can be met through building scale, materials, and forms which may be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well as traditional. The Guidelines allow individuality in design to accommodate varying tastes as well as special functional requirements. Building forms and features, including roofs, windows, doors, materials, colors and textures should be compatible with the forms and features of the significant historic buildings in the area, exemplified by (but not limited to) the buildings described in Appendix A [of the design guidelines]. The standard of compatibility can be met through scale, materials, and forms which may be embodied in architecture which is contemporary as well as traditional. The replication of important historic sites in Albemarle County is not the objective of these guidelines. It is also an important objective of the Guidelines to establish a pattern of compatible architectural characteristics throughout the Entrance Corridor in order to achieve unity and coherence. Building designs should demonstrate sensitivity to other nearby structures within the Entrance Corridor. Where a designated corridor is substantially developed, these Guidelines require striking a careful balance between harmonizing new development with the existing character of the corridor and achieving compatibility with the significant historic sites in the area. 10 Buildings should relate to their site and the surrounding context of buildin!s. 12 Architecture proposed within the Entrance Corridor should use forms, shapes, scale, and materials to be appropriate and more consistent with the surroundings. A treatment using stained wood instead of orange metal would also be more consistent with the approved building design. The form of the metal panel, the orange color, and the steel and aluminum mesh materials are not consistent with other ARB approved materials and colors in the shopping center. Orange is not an approved awning color. The metal panel measures 6' high and 17' long. At its deepest point, it projects 1' 10" from the wall surface. The length of the panel fits the width of the bay. The bottom of the panel is meant to align with the top of the awning/trellis on the west elevation. The color of the existing stucco wall changes from tan to gray approximately 1'3" below the bottom of the panel. A portion of the wall area where the panel is proposed is a location for an awning above a create a cohesive whole. storefront. Here, there is no storefront, and, compared to an awning, the metal panel looks 11 The overall design of buildings should have human scale. Scale should be integral to the building and site overscaled. A treatment using a traditional design. awning in an approved awning color would be appropriate. A treatment using cedar panels would be compatible with the approved building design. 13 Any appearance of "blankness" resulting from The proposal would not increase blankness. None. building design should be relieved using design detail Instead, it would reduce the uniformity of the or vegetation, or both. rear elevation of the building. 14 Arcades, colonnades, or other architectural This proposal only applies to a portion of one None. connecting devices should be used to unify groups of building. buildings within a development. 15 Trademark buildings and related features should be Other Mezeh restaurants are operating and/or None. modified to meet the requirements of the Guidelines. are under construction. The completed restaurants do not include the same orange metal panel that is proposed here. 16 Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should not be No new glass is proposed. None. highly tinted or highly reflective. Window glass in the Entrance Corridors should meet the following criteria: Visible light transmittance (VLT) shall not drop below 40%. Visible light reflectance (VLR) shall not exceed 30%. Specifications on the proposed window glass should be submitted with the application for final review. 17-21 Accessory structures and equipment No new accessory structures or equipment are None. included in this proposal. A service area already exists on the rear elevation of Building A3, adjacent to this tenants ace. 22-31 Lighting No new lighting is proposed with the None. renovation. 32-38 Landscaping The proposed metal panel would overlap the Indicate how the existing upper part of an existing green screen. The green screen on the south plans do not identify the green screen for side of the building will be removal and do not address modifications that treated to coordinate with might be needed for the green screen and metal other elements of the SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The appropriateness of the color and materials of the metal panel. 2. The appropriateness of the size and shape of the metal panel. 3. Coordination of the existing green screen with the renovation. Is it appropriate to eliminate a green screen? Staff offers the following comments on the proposed renovation: 1. Revise the proposal on the south elevation to coordinate better with the approved building design. Options include, but are not limited to, the use of a traditional style awning in an approved color (Sunbrella Black 08, Natural 04, Charcoal Gray 44, Navy Blue 26, Alpine Green 55, Panorama Taupe 48), or a treatment incorporating cedar panels. 2. Indicate how the existing green screen on the south side of the building will be treated to coordinate with other elements of the renovation on the south side of the building. 3. Note that illumination options for the channel letter sign on the south elevation are limited to: no illumination, external illumination, or halo illumination. panel to coexist. The green screens are present renovation on the south to help eliminate the blankness of the building side of the building. design. 39 Development pattern No significant changes to the site layout are None. proposed. The proposed awning and railings on the west elevation would establish the bounds of an outdoor seating area. 40-44 Site Grading No grading is proposed. None. Signs Although a separate permit is required for signs, Note that illumination the signs that will be proposed are included on options for the channel the renovation drawings. The primary sign on letter sign on the south the south elevation is composed of backlit elevation are limited to: no acrylic letters with white faces. A secondary illumination, external sign is acrylic letters with black faces. illumination, or halo Illuminated channel letters with white faces illumination. meet the approved sign criteria for this building, but the illumination must be external or "halo' style. Note that Zoning does not consider the metal panel to be a part of the sign, but the metal panel may appear as such from the Entrance Corridors. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The appropriateness of the color and materials of the metal panel. 2. The appropriateness of the size and shape of the metal panel. 3. Coordination of the existing green screen with the renovation. Is it appropriate to eliminate a green screen? Staff offers the following comments on the proposed renovation: 1. Revise the proposal on the south elevation to coordinate better with the approved building design. Options include, but are not limited to, the use of a traditional style awning in an approved color (Sunbrella Black 08, Natural 04, Charcoal Gray 44, Navy Blue 26, Alpine Green 55, Panorama Taupe 48), or a treatment incorporating cedar panels. 2. Indicate how the existing green screen on the south side of the building will be treated to coordinate with other elements of the renovation on the south side of the building. 3. Note that illumination options for the channel letter sign on the south elevation are limited to: no illumination, external illumination, or halo illumination. This report is based on the following submittal items: Sheet # Drawing Name DrawingDate A10.0 Cover 29 July 2015 A10.2 Elevations 29 July 2015 A10.3 Steel Details 29 July 2015 Al0.4 Steel Details 29 July 2015 Material/color samples: Cedar wood with clear matte finish; Expanded aluminum (McNichols); Paint: Sherwin Williams 6880 Energetic Orange