Central Virginia
  • Albemarle County
  • Architectural Review Board Meeting 6/20/2023
  • Auto-scroll

Architectural Review Board Meeting   6/20/2023

Attachments
  • Final Agenda.pdf
  • Final Action Memo.pdf
  • Final Action Memo Minutes.pdf
  • ARB2023-51 Collina Farm Initial Site Plan Staff Report.pdf
  • Attach. 1 ARB2023-51 Collina Farm Initial Site Plan.pdf
  • ARB2023-55 999 Rio Road Staff Report.pdf
  • Attach. 1 ARB2023-55 999 Rio Road Initial Site Plan.pdf
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:00:01
      All right, it's 1.07.
    • 00:00:05
      I'm calling the June 20th, 2023 meeting of the Albemarle County Architecture Review Board to order.
    • 00:00:13
      Could we call the roll, please?
    • SPEAKER_03
    • 00:00:16
      Yes.
    • 00:00:17
      Mr. Stoner?
    • 00:00:19
      Here.
    • 00:00:20
      Mr. Matsuno?
    • 00:00:21
      Here.
    • 00:00:22
      Mr. Henningsen?
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:00:23
      Here.
    • SPEAKER_03
    • 00:00:24
      Mr. Hancock and Mr. Van Der Werf are absent today.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:00:28
      All right, thanks a lot.
    • 00:00:30
      Today's meeting is a hybrid meeting.
    • 00:00:33
      The public may access and participate in the meeting electronically.
    • 00:00:36
      Instructions for doing so are posted on the Albemarle County website at the Albemarle County calendar.
    • 00:00:43
      The public has real-time audio-visual access to this meeting over Zoom and real-time audio access over telephone.
    • 00:00:50
      Both is provided in the lawfully posted meeting notice.
    • 00:00:54
      This meeting is being recorded and will be made available on the county's website.
    • 00:00:59
      This meeting is a public record and subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act.
    • 00:01:07
      All speakers, when it is your turn to speak, please first state your name for the record.
    • 00:01:13
      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.
    • 00:01:22
      Staff will let us know when the 15 minutes are up.
    • 00:01:26
      If applicants in the meeting room have team members attending virtually who will need to present, please make that known when you come to the podium.
    • 00:01:34
      Everyone who is participating virtually, please mute your microphone until it is your turn to speak.
    • 00:01:42
      Do any ARB members have anything to disclose?
    • 00:01:46
      No, no.
    • 00:01:48
      Me either.
    • 00:01:51
      Are there any members of the public that want to make a comment about a project that is not on the agenda for review today?
    • 00:02:06
      No.
    • 00:02:07
      All right, thanks.
    • 00:02:10
      Move to the consent agenda.
    • 00:02:12
      We have one consent agenda item today, which is ARB 2023-51, Kalina Farm Initial Site Plan.
    • 00:02:23
      Do any ARB members want to move the Kalina Farm application off the consent agenda for discussion?
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:02:30
      No.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:02:32
      Me neither.
    • 00:02:38
      Yes, would anyone like to make a motion to approve the consent agenda?
    • 00:02:45
      So moved.
    • 00:02:47
      Second.
    • SPEAKER_03
    • 00:02:49
      Alright, if we can put it to a vote.
    • 00:02:51
      Mr. Stoner.
    • 00:02:53
      Aye.
    • 00:02:53
      Mr. Matsuno.
    • 00:02:55
      Aye.
    • 00:02:55
      And Mr. Henningsen.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:02:57
      Aye.
    • 00:02:59
      Alright, thanks a lot.
    • 00:03:00
      We have one regular review item today, which is ARB 2023-55999 Raya Road.
    • 00:03:10
      It's a presentation, Randy.
    • Mariah GleasonUrban Designer
    • 00:03:23
      Good afternoon, everyone.
    • 00:03:24
      Today I'm going to be presenting ARB 2023-55999 Rio Road for your consideration.
    • 00:03:31
      The site is located at 999 Rio Road East, north of KTEC, east of Harvest Church of God, south of the Belvedere neighborhood and west of the Dunlora neighborhood.
    • 00:03:46
      The ARB previously reviewed a site plan application for this parcel.
    • 00:03:50
      The final site plan received a Certificate of Appropriateness on September 2021.
    • 00:03:54
      The plan included a commercial building fronting the entrance corridor with residential units located beside and behind the commercial use.
    • 00:04:04
      Since the ARB last reviewed the proposal, the applicant requested a zoning map amendment to remove the non-residential uses from the development.
    • 00:04:14
      That request was approved by the Board of Supervisors last month on May 3rd.
    • 00:04:20
      This image here is of the revised and approved application plan.
    • 00:04:27
      The initial site plan that's under review today shows the residential buildings and stormwater facilities in the same locations as the approved application plan from the rezoning.
    • 00:04:36
      The initial site plan did not include landscape plans, architectural drawings, elevations, or renderings.
    • 00:04:43
      In speaking with the applicant, they have indicated that the side elevations of the residential units which face Rile Road East, the entrance corridor, will be the same as those previously proposed.
    • 00:04:53
      And these are the elevations from the previous application.
    • 00:05:03
      The primary issues at this time result from the removal of the fronting non-residential building.
    • 00:05:08
      With that removal, the stormwater management facility, parking area, mechanical units, all service and utilitarian features will be more visible and prominent.
    • 00:05:20
      Also, the site layout does not establish an appropriate relationship between the site elements and the entrance corridor.
    • 00:05:25
      Residential units are arranged perpendicular to the entrance corridor and sent back from it by approximately 90 to 190 feet.
    • 00:05:32
      This orientation and distance diminish the visual connection to the entrance corridor.
    • 00:05:37
      Also, the grouping of units is not organized to establish a coordinated appearance from the entrance corridor, but rather units are organized around the Belvedere Boulevard entrance.
    • 00:05:48
      In addition, existing and proposed easements along the entrance corridor frontage will severely limit if not eliminate the ability to plant appropriate landscaping for screening or softening the visual impacts of these components.
    • 00:06:02
      The result is a development whose back is turned to the entrance corridor with insufficient space for mitigation.
    • 00:06:08
      These conditions do not support an integrated site design nor an orderly and attractive appearance from the entrance corridor street.
    • 00:06:14
      Staff recommends approval of the proposal with the conditions listed in the staff report.
    • 00:06:23
      The conditions are shown here.
    • 00:06:25
      I'd be happy to answer any questions you have.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:06:29
      All right, thanks a lot.
    • 00:06:32
      Tara, do you have any questions?
    • 00:06:34
      I don't.
    • Taro MatsunoMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:06:34
      Thank you for the presentation.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:06:39
      Frank, do you have any questions?
    • 00:06:41
      Was any landscape plan submitted in conjunction with this or not?
    • Mariah GleasonUrban Designer
    • 00:06:46
      No, not with this application.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:06:47
      Okay, I don't have any other questions.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:06:52
      I guess my question is, you mentioned some easements on the entrance corridor that, were they, they were not shown on the plan that we got or could you describe what the easements are?
    • Mariah GleasonUrban Designer
    • 00:07:08
      So it's, I'll bring them up.
    • 00:07:18
      The last approved plan.
    • 00:07:23
      and that's under review.
    • 00:07:24
      But they're right along the frontage of the entrance corridor and then go into the site about at least 25 feet in some areas.
    • 00:07:40
      But let me pull up the plan and you can look at it.
    • 00:08:03
      This would be one of them.
    • 00:08:05
      The second, and then the stormwater facility is a third.
    • 00:08:26
      Probably a better image.
    • 00:08:29
      You can actually see the lines on this one.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:08:34
      All right.
    • 00:08:54
      Thank you.
    • 00:09:01
      And I guess if there are no more questions for staff, we'll move on to the applicant's presentation, if they have one.
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:09:18
      Good afternoon.
    • 00:09:19
      My name is Nicole Skrow.
    • 00:09:20
      I'm the applicant for this project.
    • 00:09:25
      Just a little bit of background.
    • 00:09:27
      We've been before you previously, back in 2021, as Mariah said.
    • 00:09:33
      In that application, we had stacked units, one over ones, along Belvedere Boulevard, and like Mariah pointed out, it had a side elevation facing Rio Road, and then we had a commercial building where the stormwater pond is, and that face, Rio Road, and then a cottage cluster in the back.
    • 00:09:57
      Because site work doubled during the time that we were going through
    • 00:10:02
      the site plan process.
    • 00:10:03
      We had to make adjustments and unfortunately that included daylighting the stormwater facility.
    • 00:10:10
      And the location had to be, because of some grading, had to be along the front, which is along Royal Road.
    • 00:10:18
      So I know it's not ideal, but we do plan on providing more detailed
    • 00:10:27
      We're working with Jessica Primm, who's a landscape architect.
    • 00:10:33
      Craig Builders is now building the entire site out, and so they always do a great job of building
    • 00:10:40
      providing sufficient landscaping.
    • 00:10:41
      So what's before you right now just doesn't have enough detail.
    • 00:10:47
      In speaking with Justin, who is working with Jessica, there is some room in between.
    • 00:10:54
      I think that's an RWSA easement along Ryle Road.
    • 00:10:58
      There is some
    • 00:11:00
      We had initially had some shrubbery because you can still do some shrubbery in the easement area, but it would be ideal to have a shade tree.
    • 00:11:16
      there.
    • 00:11:17
      Anyway, all that to say is the architectural designs for the units along Belvedere will be the same that you all have seen before and then we do need to provide screening and detailing for landscaping of the storm around and within and next to the stormwater pond.
    • 00:11:37
      So thank you for your time today, but we do need to provide more details for that final plan.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:11:45
      All right, thanks a lot.
    • 00:11:48
      We'll see if there are any questions for the applicant.
    • 00:11:54
      Frank, do you have any questions?
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:11:57
      I forget what the elevations look like, and I don't know if they're part of the, we saw the side elevation.
    • 00:12:03
      Do we have any of the front elevations?
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:12:07
      I printed something out, actually.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:12:11
      We may have it.
    • 00:12:15
      Oh, okay.
    • SPEAKER_01
    • 00:12:15
      I have some of the plants too as well.
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:12:23
      I thought we would be in 241, which is more.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:12:28
      I was just curious as to how they address Belvidere Boulevard, which is really not in our purview, but just curious.
    • Taro MatsunoMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:12:40
      Tara, do you have any questions?
    • 00:12:42
      I was also hoping to see the elevations and perspective.
    • 00:12:45
      So I think with that, it would help the discussion.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:12:51
      All right, thank you.
    • 00:12:52
      I don't have any questions.
    • 00:12:55
      So are there any members of the public that would like to make a comment?
    • 00:12:59
      No, there's no members of the public.
    • 00:13:01
      All right, thanks a lot.
    • 00:13:04
      So the ARB will now go into discussion.
    • 00:13:07
      Tara, do you have any comments?
    • Taro MatsunoMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:13:13
      I think it would be helpful to see the landscaping and in the context of the proposed landscaping I'm just wondering if there's any possibility of yeah if we're looking at the front elevation and these are from the previous submittal that they might have chosen to go things could have changed but this is just the previous package
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:13:40
      Is this the elevation facing Belvidere Boulevard or the one facing the parking lot?
    • 00:13:47
      Everyone's.
    • 00:13:52
      That's Belvidere Boulevard.
    • Taro MatsunoMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:14:02
      I guess my thought is just that it's kind of it's not a really
    • 00:14:07
      It's not an uncommon condition to have a stick of townhomes terminating, but to see some attempt to address the entrance corridor with detailing that would relate to the front or rear facades and kind of turn the corner, I think would create a better relationship to the entrance corridor.
    • 00:14:30
      I'm just looking to see what
    • 00:14:34
      be possible, but that would be kind of where I would be interested in seeing a little bit more detail.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:14:43
      All right, thanks.
    • 00:14:44
      Frank, do you have any comments?
    • 00:14:46
      Is it a dry pond, I assume?
    • 00:14:49
      Is it a dry pond or a wet pond?
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:14:52
      Dry.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:14:53
      Dry, OK.
    • 00:14:54
      So would it have to be fenced, or is it shallow enough that it?
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:14:58
      It does not have to be fenced.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:15:00
      OK.
    • 00:15:05
      Well, yeah, echoing what Taro said, I don't necessarily have any problem with the side elevation facing the corridor, but I do feel like it'd be helpful to see a landscape plan, just understand what the perspective would look like.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:15:25
      Thanks, and I guess that gets to my comment too.
    • 00:15:27
      I kind of missed the easements when I was looking at it.
    • 00:15:34
      Initially, I thought that there seemed to be a nice large space for landscaping and buffer against the corridor, which I thought was a really good thing.
    • 00:15:47
      It's a shame that the easements kind of restrict the, I guess,
    • 00:15:55
      palette of options that you can do as far as landscaping, but it didn't seem like there was anything there that would prevent kind of a creative and good landscaping area between the buildings and the corridor.
    • 00:16:14
      And I guess at this kind of early stage,
    • 00:16:19
      I didn't really see anything about the layout of the site that gave me any concerns either.
    • 00:16:28
      So I think I'm interested and kind of curious to see the landscape and kind of the final architecture once it comes through, but at this point I didn't see anything that I thought concerned me.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:16:49
      is that corner easement for?
    • 00:16:50
      The easement at the corner.
    • 00:16:56
      What is that for?
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:16:57
      Oh, the easement at the corner.
    • 00:16:59
      I think, I don't know.
    • 00:17:02
      I guess you can see there's an RWSA line that goes through there.
    • 00:17:07
      Do you know what exactly that corner one's worth?
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:17:09
      Yeah, sorry.
    • 00:17:10
      Justin Shim, engineer for the project, for the record.
    • 00:17:13
      Yeah, so it's a storm drainage easement.
    • 00:17:15
      and you can see the pipe up there.
    • 00:17:17
      So we probably can plant a little bit in that that we can't in the RWSA easement.
    • 00:17:22
      We can, but this kind of pond we have in space, I was actually going to put some trees in the corner of the dry pond.
    • 00:17:28
      So there will be some landscaping in that stormwater facility area.
    • 00:17:33
      But I think as you approach up Rio, looking in the site will help because we can do that pond, you know, one of the
    • 00:17:40
      We had to basically sacrifice underground attention for cost, but we can plant within that a little bit.
    • 00:17:47
      And if we get three or four decent sized trees in that area, I think as you come up Rio and looking into the parking area, it'll kind of break that up a little bit.
    • 00:17:55
      So we'll have that on the final submittal.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:17:58
      Is that a yard drain I'm looking at?
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:18:01
      Yes, it's at the low point of the site, is that drain sort of right in that easement?
    • 00:18:05
      So that's thus the pond and the site drains predominantly down to this direction towards Rio.
    • 00:18:10
      We have to be very careful about, there's no drainage facilities to the back towards the Belvedere or towards the neighborhood there, not Belvedere, Shepherd's Ridge.
    • 00:18:20
      So we're having to put the stormwater off the front for basically, we have no point of discharge to the rear.
    • 00:18:29
      Is that yard drain necessary once you've got... Oh, it's there.
    • 00:18:32
      That's a big, like a concrete DI that picks up the drainage in the whole site.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:18:38
      Yeah, I'm just asking, so water coming out of the detention facility goes into that drain?
    • 00:18:46
      Yes.
    • 00:18:46
      Gotcha.
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:18:47
      Okay.
    • 00:18:47
      And then underneath Raya from there towards the church.
    • 00:18:51
      Gotcha.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:19:04
      Are there any other questions or comments for the applicant?
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:19:12
      Can you plant shrubs in that easement?
    • 00:19:16
      In the storm easement, yes.
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:19:18
      In the artifice A easement.
    • 00:19:21
      Maybe, depending on the language of it.
    • 00:19:23
      They're pretty particular about that.
    • 00:19:24
      But I think we do have enough space.
    • 00:19:27
      There's a space from the back of that pond to the parking area.
    • 00:19:31
      You know, there's a bench there.
    • 00:19:32
      Essentially, we can plant shrubs in that entire zone to screen the parking area.
    • 00:19:38
      And if we can get some trees with sort of different canopy heights in them, in the pond,
    • 00:19:43
      That'll help, you know, with something, something to grow tall, something to grow short, I think will provide an effective screen, you know, of that parking area.
    • 00:19:51
      We do have a little space and it's, it's, it's tight, tight on what we'd like to be, and the easements are unfortunate, but we were also talking about two-story brick, well put together structures.
    • 00:20:02
      I'm, I think that when they address the side view architecturally, a little bit of landscaping, I think we can get to where we need to be with that.
    • Taro MatsunoMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:20:14
      Yeah, I mean, I think I'm curious to see what landscaping comes out just for my part.
    • 00:20:21
      I think it'd be nice to see, I think the thing to avoid would be that the townhome elevation, especially on the plan north unit, that corner unit is sort of the blank face and then there's no landscaping around it.
    • 00:20:35
      So to the extent that that could be addressed through landscaping or through architectural detailing, I think that would be pretty reasonable.
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:20:44
      Yeah, we agree, certainly.
    • 00:20:45
      That makes sense.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:20:49
      Yeah, Craig might even be able to design that unit to orient in a way that doesn't make it obvious that it's the side of the townhouse, right?
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:21:00
      The problem I think they're running into is that they have kind of a front elevation look.
    • 00:21:07
      You saw
    • 00:21:09
      like a whole host of windows along Belvedere, and then also you have your true front along, so that would be three fronts that you would be.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:21:16
      Yeah, but it's just one unit.
    • SPEAKER_00
    • 00:21:19
      That is, it is just one unit.
    • 00:21:20
      We certainly, you certainly can add a
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:21:23
      It would need more windows on that side from the standard view we had before, I think.
    • 00:21:27
      And it's just a matter of what's on that as far as stairs and bathrooms and things like that.
    • 00:21:32
      But there's got to be some space.
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:21:33
      I mean, you can put a patio out there and have access.
    • 00:21:35
      You can have living space on that side, which wouldn't... And we have the most of anywhere right next to that lot one.
    • Justin ShimpFounder and Principal Engineer
    • 00:21:42
      There is really, I don't know, 30 or so feet of this open space between that unit and the easement.
    • 00:21:51
      So that's where we have the most space also.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:21:56
      Alright.
    • 00:22:01
      I guess if we could look at the recommended motion and we'll just see.
    • SPEAKER_01
    • 00:22:40
      So the recommendation is for approval of the initial plan, basically with the conditions listed in the staff report.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:22:49
      All right, thanks.
    • 00:22:51
      Did anyone have any tweaks or anything they would like to make?
    • 00:23:13
      Yeah, this looks okay.
    • 00:23:15
      All right, yeah, and I don't have any issues either.
    • 00:23:20
      Does anybody want to make a motion?
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:23:25
      I move to recommend approval of the initial site plan for the comments listed in the staff report amended as follows to the agent for site review committee.
    • 00:23:36
      There are no amendments.
    • SPEAKER_03
    • 00:23:40
      I second.
    • 00:23:41
      All right, thanks.
    • 00:23:43
      Mr. Matsuno?
    • 00:23:45
      Aye.
    • 00:23:45
      Mr. Stoner?
    • 00:23:46
      Aye.
    • 00:23:47
      Mr. Henningsen?
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:23:48
      Aye.
    • 00:23:51
      All right, well, thanks a lot.
    • 00:23:55
      We don't have any work sessions today.
    • 00:23:57
      So we'll move on to other business.
    • 00:24:02
      First of which is approval of the June 5th, 2023 minutes.
    • 00:24:09
      Would anybody like to move to adopt the June 5th minutes?
    • 00:24:15
      I'll move.
    • SPEAKER_03
    • 00:24:18
      I'll second that.
    • 00:24:21
      Mr. Matsuno?
    • 00:24:22
      Aye.
    • 00:24:23
      Mr. Stoner?
    • 00:24:24
      Aye.
    • 00:24:24
      And Mr. Henningsen?
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:24:26
      Aye.
    • 00:24:27
      All right.
    • 00:24:28
      Thanks a lot.
    • 00:24:31
      Do any board members or staff have any additional items for discussion?
    • 00:24:38
      All right, well then we'll move to the...
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:24:41
      I guess one question from Raya related to the order guidelines, kind of what the status is and when you think those might be done.
    • Mariah GleasonUrban Designer
    • 00:24:54
      We have one more corridor that's under review and then we are actually waiting on information to finish the last of the corridors and then we'll start around two going through.
    • SPEAKER_01
    • 00:25:08
      I can send an email reminder if that would be helpful.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:25:16
      Yes, I'm sure the members who haven't done their things feel quite guilty about that and will endeavor to get that done soon.
    • SPEAKER_01
    • 00:25:32
      Our goal is to have Rio East for the next meeting.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:25:38
      Great.
    • 00:25:42
      Great.
    • 00:25:44
      If we don't have any other items, it does not look like we will have a quorum on July 3rd.
    • 00:25:53
      So the next ARB meeting is scheduled for July 17th, 2023.
    • 00:25:59
      Yes, Frank or Tara, do you expect to be able to attend that one?
    • Frank StonerMember, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:26:08
      Yeah, I will not.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:26:11
      Okay.
    • 00:26:15
      I guess at this point we don't know about Dade or Frank.
    • SPEAKER_01
    • 00:26:18
      I'll double check with them.
    • Chris HenningsenChair, Architectural Review Board
    • 00:26:20
      Okay.
    • 00:26:24
      All right.
    • 00:26:24
      Well, the meeting is tentatively scheduled for the 17th if we can get a quorum and if not, we'll figure something else out.
    • 00:26:39
      So in that case, the meeting is adjourned to the next meeting on July 17th, 2023.
    • 00:26:46
      And it's 133 by my watch.
    • 00:26:54
      Thanks a lot, everybody.