Architectural Review Board Meeting   11/21/2022

Carolyn, can you call the roll, please?

Mr. Stoner?

Here.

Mr. Hancock?

Here.

Mr. Henningsen?

Here.

Mr. Van Der Werf?

Here.

Mr. Van Der Werf is joining me and Mr. Matsuno is out today.

No.

No.

Carolyn, are there any members of the public that want to make a comment about a project that is not on the agenda for review?

No, sir, there isn't.

Do any ARB members want to move the Rile Road Apartments application off the consent agenda for discussion?

Me either.

In that case, would anybody like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda?

So moved.

Carolyn, could we call the vote?

Mr. Stoner?

Aye.

Mr. Hancock?

Aye.

Mr. Henningsen?

Aye.

Mr. Van Der Werf?

Aye.

Thank you.

Mariah?

Yeah.

Oh, okay.

To the man behind the controls.

Oh, so this is the corridor spreadsheet that just has the history, the general characteristics of progression, and the zoning flowed over to the next sheet.

Any comments?

I'll just run through.

Frank Hancock, do you have any comments?

Frank Stoner.

Recap of how you guys got where we are and if you think there are any opportunities maybe to consolidate.

Okay.

Dave, do you have any questions or comments?

to complement that description of it with maybe an excerpt of the map from the small area plan identifying that.

Thank you.

I don't have any comments other than the compliments that have already been expressed.

Thank you.

So there's kind of this stacking of commercial that spans horizontally away from the corridor.

And then

It's kind of acknowledging kind of the screened area, the natural areas, the commercial or residential area, excuse me, being developed at North Point, as well as some of the developed areas and developing areas around that, around Airport Road.

Okay, so moving to the scene between centers.

So it's kind of like an overflow of what's happening on either side, if that makes sense.

We'll have a similar character maybe on the west side as it does on the east side of 29 in the distant future, perhaps.

Do they match up with the master plan or do they include a master plan and extend farther?

And I think it's harder to paint any sort of picture, as you described in these segments, that's distinctive when you have to,

This segment has commercial happening on one side and then residential happening on the other and it flips at the river.

Although you do have some

Well, Dan, from where the, I don't know why I'm drawing a blank on what used to be in that shopping center, the one that got built on the north side that is now Goodwill.

Oh, Gander Mountain.

You have that and you have some additional development that's been done, but it tends to be a little bit more removed because of that service road.

It might have to be put into use before we realize, oh, that would make a lot more sense if it was lined up this way, yeah, but.

Is it Woodbrook Drive?

So it ends up being this very odd shape, but Woodbrook was where they tucked it in.

And just a thought, and maybe there's other corridors that it makes where we can, you know, consolidate, get down our number of segments, but just some things to think about.

Whether those could in fact extend north beyond the limits of the small area plan, I don't know.

Yeah, that one's tricky because the form-based code has design standards that you can't do outside of the form-based code, opting into the form-based code.

You don't have to do the form-based code.

If you weren't familiar with the Rio 29 small area code and you were coming in as a developer, that might be confusing to try to align with a form-based code that actually isn't designated for your area.

when the zoning code gives you so many more options.

Like how, based on kind of the work you've done with these corridor segments, what guidance would we as the ARB probably give them?

I have no idea.

On the other hand, though, just for our work, I'm thinking, huh, yeah, how does that, how do we fit that in?

finding ways to add treatments and break down the mass to make it compatible with the surroundings, the context.

The RIA 29 small area plan doesn't extend that far south, so it would be outside that area.

Something completely outside the box that just happens to have the support of a planning commissioner of the board or whatever.

But this work will help us get there.

I just had a question about the small area plan.

Am I remembering that correctly?

did a lot of review on those concepts and the criteria that are in there so it would be getting a staff level review for consistency and an application for the form-based code would get a staff level ARB review and wouldn't necessarily have to come to the to the full board.

So we still need this segment, still need this in the, okay.

OK.

how we would guide an applicant architecturally because if they go the form-based code route, they're not coming to us anyway.

But at that point, the property would come in as a buy-write, but have some of the design standards of the form-based code.

But because those are spelled out in the form-based code, we don't really do we need to

Does that make sense?

I mean, we would then...

Is your proposal compatible to enough of an extent that is appropriate?

They would they would come to us, but they wouldn't be subject to any of the requirements of a form based code.

Correct.

that a development proposal include the materials that are permitted in the form-based code or not permitted.

It's going to be fun when we click one of these in and we're really doing it.

I think as soon as we start to co-mingle, we run the risk that we're either giving confusing guidance or it's inconsistent.

Be tough.

Oh yes, we should go on.

These are the precedent images.

We instead just pointed to the plans in the footnote.

That seems like a reasonable.

Then the last segment.

I don't know how we manage that tension between the corridor being 29, the ARB corridor, and the fact that the placemaking is really happening off of 29 somewhere.

And I don't have any answers to the questions.

We had some like mitigation strategies or I know we talked about it at an ARB meeting.

That might be misleading, but I think certainly the landscaping would be the key in that situation.

Okay.

But these are the street standards.

And then this is the

Are the precedent images in general intended to be positive precedents or?

Not always.

Should we identify them

On this page as being negative if there are things we don't want.

Yeah, this is an example of acceptable architectural

patterns on this quarter and yet I don't think that's really what we want to incentivize.

Happy to navigate to any of the pages.

Bates still with us?

What are your thoughts?

being more pointed about things that we don't want to see repeated.

certain things that we talk a lot about that are within the guidelines that can use that language to say positive or negative things about it.

We can take another look at those captions and try to be more specific.

you would not want as an example or positive example.

A big red stamp over there.

That's my building.

Yeah, I'm trying not to bring up too much additional questions or comments or

I don't know.

And kind of leave it at.

That would be if we could.

Not sure how to switch the screen.

Like, oh, well, you could have done that in the segment just south of here, but you can't do it here, right?

Right.

That's excellent.

And then in this area, we just acknowledge we could probably gray it out or something as an optional form-based code is subject to, like you said, other documents and standards.

Could somebody build on 29 west of the highway, between the river and Hollymead Town Center?

It's mostly residential zoning and rural areas zoning, whereas south of that South Fork river crossing, it's commercial along the corridor.

That's a weird segment.

I mean, don't tell them, but sorry.

Yeah.

You just have two segments instead of four.

In that same vein, would the Hollymead segment then extend up to Briarwood and capture the residential development and commercial development?

Because then north of that could just be rural.

Just be rural, yeah.

So I think having that in the middle of a segment is a little bit counterintuitive in terms of like how you would experience that.

So we'd have one segment going to Briarwood about in this area.

and the different diet, the characters would be kind of a rural and then commercial centering on the Hollymead area with residential surrounding and then- So more heavily buffered.

Yes.

Very diverse commercial.

With the overlay in there, shaded or whatever, yeah.

I like that.

Works for me.

Me too.

Yeah, that seems like a good clarification.

That is all I have for today.

Thank you.

All right, could we call the vote?

Mr. Stoner?

Aye.

Mr. Hancock?

Aye.

Mr. Henningsen?

Aye.

Mr. Van Der Werf?

Aye.

Thank you.

Are there any board members present who won't be able to attend that?

Yeah, me too.

Alright, me too.

So Margaret, if you're ready.

And so Mariah is opening my PowerPoint.

Great, thank you.

There have been some building permits that in the past on occasion when they're very simple we don't bother with the extra paperwork to getting another application in for the A or B review either full or staff level review and we just do the review with the building permit so if you're all comfortable with that we could go with that option but if there are concerns that you all have that we haven't identified certainly want to hear them.

Frank Hancock.

I don't know if you can tell from the site plan that you've been given or that you prepared yourself about how far off the corridor is this shed located approximately?

Like maybe 200 feet?

Where is this?

Towards Scottsville.

Is it on that road or is it?

Yes, it's Route 20.

Route 20.

I think it's beyond the school.

Okay.

Beyond the school and on the other side.

Closer to town, like you're going towards Scottsville?

Yeah.

It also seems temporary, like you could pick it up and move it if you wanted.

I'm not sure about that.

Do we review temporary buildings?

It is not a temporary, it's not classified as a temporary building, temporary structure.

There's nothing like where you bring this application and they have to bring this site into compliance because the pictures show kind of a litany of things we don't encourage.

There's no site plan, so the guidelines that you would apply would, the way we've approached these in the past, the guidelines that you would apply would be focused just on the work that's being done, not for the overall site.

Frank Stoner.

Do we have any oversight over temporary structures?

There's an exemption for temporary, temporary construction yards, temporary, there's a couple of temporary things that it's not everything temporary.

So if this was a mobile home, for example, would we have a view?

I don't know if you could add a mobile home there.

You're going to have to.

We have to review the RV first, then we can read the shed.

How long is temporary?

Yeah, to your point, I think if it comes in on a truck, it could probably go out on a truck, which in my mind kind of makes it temporary.

I don't have any anxiety over this, but I think it does raise some interesting questions about where our limits are.

Because most often, sorry, Chris, this is associated with a single family residential a lot of times, which isn't in our...

Right.

Dade, do you have any concerns or questions?

I think like others, Chris, this instance doesn't really concern me, but it might be helpful to clarify and revisit what is temporary and what we need to revisit.

Yeah, I agree.

So I also don't have any concerns about it.

Thank you very much.

Thanks a lot.

So does anybody have questions on that?

OK.

Sorry about that.

No, it's my fault.

Thanks, Chris.