Architectural Review Board Meeting   5/2/2022

All right, so the time is 1.01 PM.

I'm calling the May 2nd, 2022 meeting of the Albemarle County Architecture Review Board to order.

This meeting is being held pursuant to and in compliance with ordinance number 20-A16, an ordinance to ensure the continuity of government during the COVID-19 disaster.

The quorum is present.

Architectural review board members present electronically are Dade Van Der Werf, Frank Stoner, and myself, Chris Henningsen.

Frank Hancock and Taro Matsuno are recusing from the one item we have today.

Opportunities for public access to this meeting are posted on the county's website at the county calendar.

The public has real-time audio-visual access to this meeting over Zoom and real-time audio access over telephone, both as provided in the lawfully posted meeting notice.

This meeting is being recorded and will be made available on the county's website.

This online meeting is a public record and subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.

All speakers, when it is your turn to speak, please first state your name for the record.

Everyone who is participating today, it is good practice to mute your microphone until it is your turn to speak.

Applicants who are making presentations, note that your presentation is limited to a total of 15 minutes, which you can divide among your team members.

Carolyn will let us know when the 15 minutes are up.

Disclosures, do any board members have anything to disclose?

All right.

All right, great.

So we do not have a consent agenda today, so we will move on to the regular review item, which there is one on the list.

which will be presented by Chris Taggart from the Planning Division of Community Development.

It is ARB 2022-29 TJA CH Premier Circle Initial Site Plan.

Chris, are you ready with your presentation?

Yes, Chris.

Are you viewing the slideshow?

Yes, yep.

The application I'm presenting on today is the initial review of architecture and site plan for the first phase of the three-phase development.

This phase includes a four-story, 80-unit building with associated site improvements.

The site is located at 405 Premier Circle and contains a motel that predates the entrance corridor.

They are being reviewed but did not recommend approval of the initial site plan for a Lytle grocery store in 2017.

A revised initial site plan to address ARB comments for Lytle was not submitted by that applicant.

The rezoning for this site was approved February of last year, which included comments from design staff regarding frontage landscaping and the building design of the entrance quarter facing elevation of the phase three building.

To summarize the staff report, the focus is largely on the site landscaping and the building design of the entrance quarter facing elevation of the phase one building.

Building design is contemporary in nature, but uses brick and metal which reflect building materials used historically within the county, providing some connection to local historic architecture.

The Dover white brick color does not represent the red brick color found in the surrounding context, but based on the manufacturer's description.

The building's form and contrasting materials and colors help to break up the building's mass and establish rhythm as a view from the entrance quarter.

The varying materials also add a level of human scale, but the end elevations visible from the entrance quarter have design issues that result in varying levels of blankness.

Regarding the landscaping for the site, no frontage landscaping is provided in this phase, but in the original overall landscape plan, there are multiple conflicts with the utilities and easements along the frontage and the perimeter of the parking lot adjacent to the entrance quarter, which did not allow for landscaping that met entrance quarter guidelines as specified in the approved code of development for the rezoning.

There are also issues with the quantity of the interior parking lot trees provided in the overall landscape plan.

After the staff report was finalized, the applicant made revisions to the overall landscape plan, which shows landscaping along and near the frontage that generally meets entrance core guidelines and is better coordinated with utilities and easements.

Based on the revised overall landscape plan, staff now recommends approval of the initial site plan with the revisions listed in the staff report to be addressed with the final site plan submittal.

Thank you, Chris.

Sure, yeah.

Chris, thank you for your presentation.

I guess just one, as I recall, I think there's a recommendation in the guidelines for buildings to be parallel to the entrance corridor where feasible.

We did with this phase one building that's being reviewed.

It was kind of reviewed generally as generally parallel.

The phase three building, when we do get to that phase, will be parallel to the entrance quarter.

All right, thank you for that.

All right, thanks, Frank.

All right, thank you.

I don't have any questions either.

Hi, I'm Whitney McDermott.

I'm with BRW Architects.

I am ready.

I can go ahead and share my screen.

So thank you all for taking the time to review this project.

I wanted to take a small amount of time to review the overall vision for the project and then provide kind of response to some of the comments that were in the staff report.

It seems like the landscape has been addressed in the previous,

Chris's presentation, but we just wanted to touch on some other components as well.

So first, the TJAC Premier Circle initial plan before you today.

It's a component of a larger vision that is a partnership between the Thomas Jefferson Area Coalition for Homelessness, TJAC, Virginia Supportive Housing, who is developing the building in front of you today, and Piedmont Housing Alliance.

TJAC, they work to reduce homelessness by initiating creative solutions and coordinating regional resources and services.

And they have partnered with Pacham and are currently operating on this site at Premier Circle using the existing motel units to provide temporary emergency housing.

And they want to do that throughout the

Development of this parcel as long as possible to provide that emergency shelter.

And so that actually kind of went into a lot of the design thinking for the situation of this Virginia supportive housing building, trying to get utilities to continue to be working on site to allow for the existing hotel units to continue to be operating.

and then Virginia Supportive Housing, the one developing this building.

They have a mission to end homelessness by providing permanent housing and supportive services.

And so with this building, it's VSH that's initiating this next phase of the overall master plan for the site through the building with 80

single occupancy residences for formerly homeless, and the building will have full onsite program support as well.

And then in the future, not a part of this application in front of you today, but I mentioned it just to give kind of the overall context, Piedmont Housing Alliance plans to build a multifamily affordable building in the back half of the parcel if this were a 29 down

at the bottom of the page, premier circle here.

And then the ultimate phase three that Chris was referencing has a mixed use building in the plan directly adjacent to the entrance corridor.

So that's just an overview of the project.

And then some of the specific comments in the staff report, the comment about frontage and utility

As Chris mentioned, Timmons worked with staff to revise the landscape plan and to look specifically at those utility easements.

And so what they've done is just pull back out of the easements and try to work with the proposed master plan for the parcel

to balance the utility easements, the entrance corridor requirements, and the future development of the project.

And so this sheet here, this slide just shows that Timmons has also revised their plant schedule, thinking specifically about species of tree that is best suited for kind of in and around the utility lines, a red maple,

Hoping that it will grow up under the utilities and not pose a problem.

You can also see that they have anticipated the number of species and trees that are meeting all of the entrance corridor requirements and have summarized that in these tables.

The second comment I wanted to address was this idea of blankness at this wall here of the building.

And what I present to you is a first study just to start a conversation about we'd be open to suggestions, but to understand that on the interior, there is actually the bedroom portion of the single residency.

I can see where we think the bed would go in the unit is basically in this area.

And then there's a bathroom in this area.

And so

We first study a proposing perhaps how could we include some smaller windows that are similar to the ones on the southeast of the building.

And so here that is an elevation, those new windows here, which was previously the blank wall.

Third comment I wanted to address had to do with the elevator tower.

And I also threw in there the mechanical units on the roof.

Elevator tower is kind of in the middle of this intersection of the two pieces of the building.

And from my studies, our studies in our rendering program, these things are modeled accurately, but I can't quite pick them up

and the typical street level view from the tool I have on hand.

And so from my understanding, they aren't necessarily visible.

We can continue or take suggestions about how to study this further.

But what I see here in this bottom left is you can just see this is actually

A large piece of mechanical equipment.

And you can just start to see it when from my program year 21 feet above Route 29.

And that has to maybe to do with the site topography.

There's kind of this berm along the front of 29.

And then just the setback of the building.

And so that is a quick

Overview of some initial responses, again, just to get a conversation going.

And I just wanted to say thanks again for having us in front of you today.

All right, well, thanks a lot for that presentation.

I just had one.

Whitney, do you have any idea how tall the building on 29 will be?

The proposed future building along 29.

I think it can be up to four stories.

I don't remember the number of feet that it is.

OK.

That's all I got, Chris.

Sure.

Thank you, Chris.

And thank you, Whitney, for your presentation.

I guess following up on my earlier question for Chris Taggart, were you all able to give any consideration during design to making the, I guess it's the east facade of the proposed building parallel to the entrance corridor?

Yeah.

I can start.

Basically, yes, it's a tight site.

We're trying to save those existing motels and save access to them both vehicularily and also utilities.

And I think the type of building and the type of financing is low-income housing tax credit.

Building.

And so it has certain requirements also about universal design and access all around the site.

And so when you throw in the utilities, the grading and kind of just the general need and needs of the building and program, this is the best.

Well, I don't know.

It's the best that we could come up with in terms of saving all of those and also trying to think about

The landscape and amenities and the circulation between the building and those amenities.

Yeah, I think definitely as Whitney was mentioning, we're trying to preserve as many of those utilities that are in there.

So that's one of the reasons for the L-shaped building.

We're working around some sewers and powers and water.

And also, as Whitney was mentioning, that front building will in the end be the main parcel that fronts on 29.

Premier Circle then kind of takes an arc, a loop around.

And so the other buildings kind of follow that

and more fronting on Premier Circle.

So yeah, the goal is kind of have that front one aligned with 29 and then kind of fan out around as we follow Premier Circle.

Yeah, kind of, the new showing there kind of shows it.

And then also, we're kind of going from a rectangular parcel in the front to rectangular in the back.

Okay, thank you both.

All right, thanks a lot, Dave.

I just had one question and you kind of addressed it with the revision to that portion of the facade on the, I guess it's the north side, where you added the small windows.

There was an additional comment on the staff report regarding if you

It is a similar situation.

And, well, in fact, on those, it is actually the kitchen on that interior portion.

All right, great.

Thank you.

That was the only question I had.

All right, great.

So the ARB will now go into discussion.

I appreciate the applicant's response to the staff comments about the landscaping.

I guess from my questions you can gather, I have some concerns about the orientation relative to the EC, but I think like staff, I'm satisfied that the future phase three development and maybe ultimate other development on the entrance corridor could address that so that this building doesn't need to be strictly parallel.

I appreciate the applicant considering options to

Relieved blankness consistent with the interior organization of the building.

Chris, I don't really have any meaningful comments other than to add to what Dave said.

I think that the applicant addressed the landscaping issues to my satisfaction.

I understand the issue.

relative to parallel orientation to 29.

But I think given the fact that building the third phase of this project will result in a building, presumably at least two stories tall, maybe up to four, I think a lot of that concern will be mitigated when that phase is built.

So I think it's a nice application.

All right, thanks a lot.

I agree with everything that was said previously.

I think due to that phase three building hopefully being placed parallel to the entrance corridor, I think having this building more in the background, not being oriented is not a big problem.

I was gratified.

to see the addition of more of those small windows.

I noted that comment on the staff report and kind of like that, those small windows.

And I think what stood out about them was the fact that they were kind of isolated.

There weren't any more of them on the building.

So I think

The addition of some more kind of gives them a little bit more reason to be there.

I think just it would have been helpful to see the other two elevations just for my own reference, just to get a more of a feel of just how the building is as its own thing, even though they're not visible from the entrance corridor.

But that was

Not really curiosity, but not really a big comment.

So as my colleagues indicated, I'm also prepared to give my go ahead on this too.

Are you viewing the memo?

Yeah, yep, sorry.

You've already changed it just like in the presentation to have the one right.

And then just kind of cover all bases because there's wording regarding

That's kind of been resolved with the most recent landscape plan.

I guess I was thinking about comments number two and three.

And that was really the only comment I had or change.

I don't think so.

All right.

I'm happy to move for approval of this item with the recommendations outlined in the staff report, with revisions noted as follows.

As updated by staff, strike the first bullet point after requirements and replace with the ARB recommends approval of the initial site plan.

Based on the revised landscape plan presented at the May 2nd meeting, which resolves the easement and landscape conflicts along the frontage, revise under the items regarding the final site plan, revise item two to add, consider revising before the text and item three, also add the text, consider revising.

And for item 14, strike the first sentence

Thanks.

I'll second that.

Mr. Stoner?

Aye.

Aye.

Thank you.

So the motion passes and I guess we do not have a work session this week.

So on to other business.

Approval of the April 18th, 2022 minutes.

Mr. Stoner?

Aye.

All right.

So the next meeting is scheduled for May 16th.

And I guess

I plan on being there.

Yeah, I'm planning to attend.

Yeah, I think so.

Sorry, I'm trying to get to my calendar.

My computer is frozen.

Oh, there we go.

16th.

Oh, okay.

All right.

Well, I guess we'll check with Frank and Taro and hope we can get a quorum for that.

I was just going to add for the May 16th meeting, we should be getting around to having the template ready for

OK, great.

Nothing for me.

I'm not sure.

Frank, you were here.

We were talking with Carolyn before we were in session.

Apparently, we will be returning to in-person meetings in June.

Returning when?

In June, I believe.

Possibly the first meeting in June.

May end up being the second meeting, I'm not sure.

Alright, well if no one has any other items,

We'll adjourn to the next meeting on Monday, May 16th.