Planning Commission Meeting   2/13/2024

Any updates from UVA?

Excellent.

Can I ask a quick question about that?

Has that been finalized or they?

You're welcome.

Great.

Thanks.

Mr. Albem.

We are working on the state of the forest report, probably towards the end of March to be released to city council The city was awarded a grant and formed a subcommittee to create an RFP for bed regarding the urban forest management plan and training volunteers

I have eight meetings You're a busy guy

Mr. Stolzenberg.

All right.

This is Schwarz.

So at least in this instance, the height did not seem to be an issue.

Creasy, is there anything from NDS?

So I know there are a lot of people here that are very interested in those topics and we'll make sure that you have the information for those meetings.

And by posting the meeting, that will enable us to attend.

Right, so if more than three people go in the room, you'll be okay because it'll be posted for that.

Correct.

Will it eventually be on Munich code or?

So, oh, you want to?

but the PDF document is fully searchable and the Table of Contents is archived, not archived, it's bookmarked essentially within the document.

Like it will still be on the internet?

The second choice is that we PDF it and just put it on our website.

Creasy, will you be moderating?

Heidi, are you able to hear us?

Yes.

Heidi, you can begin.

Thank you.

All right, Chair, we have no other speakers at this time.

Mr. D'Oronzio, do you have comments on the consent agenda?

And as a side note, I'll be abstaining from the 22 minutes.

And I believe there's one other extension, at least, maybe two.

I'll be abstaining from item three, the preliminary site plan, 501 Chair Avenue.

I need to reduce myself from that as well.

Okay, Mr. Solly, it's the second.

I do.

So I believe Mr. O'Call is managing, or as John said, Mr. Warner managing the

Any questions for me about

On the drawing.

Both have that marking.

Could you help me understand what that means?

First off, these are really tiny and I'm realizing I can't read them Point to me on the elevations, there's three elevations on A7 and there's some notes and there's some

So it's on that white wall on the bottom.

Okay, so that is to the back of

If you all think that they could use some cascading landscaping, you can certainly address that.

I think the question is, I think by optional wall, it means if there is no wall, what is in its place?

I'm just saying that what that wall is at the rear there, if it gets built and as it's shown, the material's fine and, but why it's being built, hand it off to them.

Basic geometry says you're not going to see anything on the roof of the building.

I think your review is what do you see from the entrance code?

A general statement not visible from the street.

Blah blah, which it is. Is that what it says? So just to be clear, I don't necessarily see the need for a

You could probably ask what could be done or how best stated.

Right.

The UVA streetscape plan that you referenced, what does it call for?

And I simply asked, well, will that tree on our tree list fit there?

So why add the coordinate part and not just the tree list and space part?

Because one of the things that the guidelines do talk about is, you know, integration of an entrance corridor.

Possibly, yes.

Continuous type of light versus the city where we have all kinds of lights so I think it's it's there's nothing unreasonable about suggesting that and that's what the entrance corridor sort of hopes we work towards I mean I guess if UV I don't I don't think UVA would do this but if they decided that all their street trees were going to be eight foot tall dogwoods

There's nothing we can do if UVA decides to do what they want.

But if what UVA proposed was not great and you and the applicant saw fit for a different tree to go there, that was on the tree list, does that condition give you the discretion to say, well, you've coordinated well enough, we're going to go with.

Well, no, I'm saying that we wanted fuzzy.

It's coordinated, but not dependent upon, dictated by, you know, or whatever.

And if it's appropriate and the planners and zoning say it's appropriate, I'll sign off on it.

I just want to point out it's interesting in the renderings that they are not included in the visualizations that are submitted in this document.

what the design guidelines say as far as the aesthetics go.

And we'll take these notes to those who are working on the site plan as well.

And my understanding with Virginia Code is that if you have a bathroom... I can talk to you right there.

And so on that matter, if there's an issue with

And how that is visibility of that design, then it's under the... Well, I was going to say, if we're reviewing a 10-story massing as part of the Entrance Corridor, and we're looking at documents that show an 11-story massing, that would impact the perception and whether or not this conforms.

So I don't have the latitude to recommend a change in height.

They approved a max height, not a design.

did not meet the zoning or did not meet what is allowed by this PUD, it wouldn't get approved.

Does it come back to this body if it's identified?

But I really don't want to get into the speculation about whether the zoning or what council approved is or is not right or that these drawings don't represent what council approved.

So height is off the table.

Yeah, the irony is you all have probably seen this more than I have in all of the review and discussions last year.

Is that correct, Missy?

I mean, I just, I saw 10 stories and understand the beauty allows a 10 story structure and I'm looking professionally at a building that's an 11 story structure and I just wanted to understand what's, are we, is the PV for an 11 story building or 10, and that's where the confusion is.

I am the architect that is here to answer questions.

Can you hear me?

Would you like for me to just sort of answer the questions in the order they were asked?

It's going to be presenting at all.

I'm happy to just give a quick overview if you would like.

Visual, before we get into that, would be of certain value, especially, you know, with the building.

So this is, did you have a comment?

I'll save it.

In that picture, why is the top plants?

And it's shown on the plants and the roof plants.

They're just in little squares, right?

We're still working on the landscape plants.

All right.

I think everybody's very familiar.

Which one?

The cylinder inside is brick.

It's wood.

Interesting.

Of course.

It looks just like the rotunda.

It is a species color that's matched to match the red brick of the rotunda, but it's wood.

OK, so a bit of a lost.

We think drainage will work better if we eliminate the wall.

So it's optional for discussion for you guys and not for us to discuss.

And it's actually better if we don't have that wall there for the drainage.

Because isn't there a wall immediately behind it?

Are you talking about a wall on the other side?

I'm curious what.

I think it's on plan, you can see it.

So basically you're proposing removing the retaining wall and letting the building wall carry down?

That leaves us space to handle the drainage from offsite, because we can work with the elevation that way.

Drained wise or storm water wise?

The main concern is that area.

Why did it first show up?

We weren't sure about the retaining portion of the building.

Are you looking for us for guidance?

I mean, do we have a strong opinion?

I'm not certain we have it, at least in this board.

And these CRP, I don't know if we do, but I think it's just an additional material that you wouldn't see otherwise.

So I don't care about this specific question.

Wonderful.

Let's see.

And then any other questions that we haven't addressed?

Oh, the screening.

So that is screening the amenity space.

They don't want students wandering on the roof.

So, you said you were going to place it from the edge, but if I'm looking at this west elevation right at the bottom, it looks like it goes right up to the edge, right, on the right hand side, and that is the street.

It's actually set further back.

Okay.

The fence?

Edge?

No, along Ivy there would not be that privacy fence.

Or sorry, do you have more presentation or is this question time?

I'm happy to answer questions.

I think it's probably one prior to the, well, I don't know, it's the same order as this one.

That's the one we looked at today.

Why is it just very slightly asymmetrical by cutting off like three panes on the left side?

So it's really functional in terms of if we look at the roof plan.

And so there's no need to go any further.

Correct.

But you say it's an aesthetic element as your pseudo cornice.

But if you look at the language of the parapet, we actually stepped the parapet in various locations as well So we weren't thinking that it was such a departure to step that or to not show it as a continuous element

It's like three slides down.

And the composite panel, we have... We use a dark brick with a matching mortar.

So the mortar's going to be red, right?

So if you look at BRK-01, it's Manganese iron spot.

Okay.

So the intent is that we don't want to show something that appears to be faux brick, but we wanted to show something that had a texture and a color that works with the context of the surrounding area.

That's a renter error.

That is correct.

It's going to be straight up.

It'll be a stacked bond pattern, correct.

And that pattern will not then, in different parts of the panels, OK.

That's not the intent.

But I'll use my imagination.

And yeah, it is meant to be stacked bond.

Yeah.

Yeah, they're about like 18 inches high by 8 feet to 10 feet long, the panels.

But they're, they look like they're scored horizontally, is that?

No, so the gray panels are not scored at all.

Okay.

We're trying to give... Okay.

They look like they're about a foot tall.

So I think it... They're about 18 inches high.

18.

All right, maybe.

But the joints, there was a question about the joints.

I had a question about the joints.

Are you talking about the vertical?

No, I'm looking at, so I'm looking at the rendering of some page A8 and it looks like there's a strong horizontal pattern, but this does relate to the joints and I guess I'm... It does.

I see what you mean.

So,

What we would be seeing, I think I just heard you say, it would be an 18-inch high space between horizontal lines.

They offer a cock-free joint and it is a very, very thin reveal and it appears to be the same color as the adjacent panel.

So we're going to see, we'll see a very thin vertical reveal in all of these fiber cement panels.

At about 8 feet to 10 feet.

And the horizontal joints will just be, is that a lap?

At the floor, there's flashing at the floor, but every 18 inches it is actually a T-joint.

So that's the cockless clip.

So it's gonna be the exact same joint, horizontal and vertical.

Correct.

Okay.

Okay.

Or is that driven by like a building need, like getting light into the windows?

I think that's a good observation.

Would you make it like the windows on the left or would you put the black all the way along for the whole length of it?

So like this would be down there, down on the, yep, exactly.

But not this part or including that?

And you have the pairs that are joined.

OK.

So I think it would actually be stronger to carry the language through and actually add that recessed panel, that black, on the third and fourth floor.

And I want to emphasize here that I'm not suggesting a change.

I don't think there's any architect, correct me if I'm wrong, that would say that they would never change anything when they were finished with it.

Oh, but there's lots that would say they'd never change anything on my impetus.

So it is supposed to be, it is intentionally broken horizontally there and there, but I do think it would be a stronger vertical in that one little area.

Interesting.

I'm not trying to make that a condition or not approve this based on history.

And then prior to that though, I would make sure that the other members of the ERP.

If anyone else even likes what we're talking about.

If you're out on an island, let's not sketch anything, right?

We feel that that's a minor suggestion and also an improvement.

On the right-hand side, there's the... Rory's going to have a Photoshopped it about a second.

Yeah.

Vertical Band of Black that will be extended down.

I think Mr. Stolzenberg will be very articulate when he puts together the motion to outline what happens.

I was getting ready to say I was convinced by Jeff that everything is subjective and fake and I don't have any moral authority to do any of that.

I think you've got enough folks there, and yeah, it's a good idea that you might want to get that included in the motion.

I mean, is this what you're saying you would do?

Why he's fast?

That would make it actually symmetrical.

I'll give you that.

And if you look at the other elevations, it's sort of a language and a pattern to see how it's going to get to the right from these other elevations.

So it's just a continuation with the theme on all the elevations.

So because it's recessed, it's going to kind of read dark, like the windows read dark, so it'll be kind of just a big... Well, I mean, that's what you're saying.

And that's why we selected the darker material, too, because it's a choice of recessed material.

Which I can Photoshop up for you, if you want.

That's a good point.

Before we continue designing this for you, why don't we see if there are any more questions, and then we can get into, you know,

Which we'd like to think of as a noble material.

So I'm okay with it, but like I said, I'm not an expert in it.

So what made you guys go with that stacked bond, like the grid rather than more of a, because I feel like that's going to make it, even though it's brick-shaped sort of, I feel like that's going to distinguish it from brick, which might be a good thing because it's not brick.

I've actually seen larger portions of this texture and it really reads more textural.

This will camouflage the joints much more.

Absolutely.

So that's why it's used down there.

The transformers, sorry, not the generators.

We have to have a generator as required by code and really one of the best locations for the generator room is close to that and that all wants to be located in close proximity and there's just really not any room on the site.

They're talking about the transformer, the three transformer boxes outside.

The intent is to apply artwork.

Jeff, I'm looking at you really without screening or anything like that in what sort of precedent?

There's quite a large transformer right out in the corner right there.

If you go with a rap route, I don't know if I'm super excited about that.

Not in love with the Windows XP one, but... I think with...

And I think, well, I have some notes we can discuss in a bit.

So I think the art idea is a great idea, but you have to execute it well, which don't ask me how to do that.

We actually thought it might be fun to do something referencing bicycles or multimodal transportation, because it's been such a huge topic of conversation, and we've got the bike room located in close proximity.

Do we know that?

I'm not sure how graffiti proof, but basically they've been tested for just that reason.

Oh, sure.

The wrap, has that been confirmed with Dominion that they allow wraps on their equipment?

And it was actually noted on the PUD as such.

My first question regarding the piers, again, because they're not in the renderings, are they intended, and I looked at the elevations, they don't have a call-out tag, are they intended to be concrete, or will they be brick-clad?

So, the intent is to candidate as much as possible, but I'm sure that we're going to end up having to have some sort of columns, and the intent is that they would be clad in brick.

I just wanted to confirm that those peers, if exposed, if they end up staying in the project, that they would be Clyde and Brick.

Are you talking about the north elevation?

appeared to show up in the renderings, and so I just wasn't sure what the intent was with those exposed structural elements, because they don't look wider in the plan, so it didn't appear that they had cladding on them.

So we're happy to say that there's no board form, concrete finish.

That's all I have.

So why don't we just begin with the architects, Mr. Schwarz?

So yeah, that's me.

We're beginning to craft emotion.

I think it would make for a more compatible project to the existing context and add architectural interest into the design that's proposed here.

I am also looking at that façade driving down IV towards the city and it is a big kind of blank white clad portion of the building right here I'm not sure what I would change design-wise but I can look with it Mr. D'Oronzio

Anyway, I will point out that my front yard has one extraordinarily large crape myrtle and one extraordinarily large dog with a tall shade in front of my property, just fine.

Otherwise, I think we're on track here.

Mr. Stolzenberg, do you have anything to add or would you like to craft the motion?

Oh gosh.

He's still resigning.

which I also lean towards

I don't know.

It's like a 2% change.

So great, even though it's not functional.

So if you miss something, I'll help you with it.

Gosh, did we want anything beyond Jeff's proposed?

And we've got the rooftop screening that we need to think about.

Did you see the drawing?

So we're happy to look in 3D in terms of the effects of whether you can or cannot see them.

The only remaining debate beyond Jeff's recommendations are tree size.

So, Dan just left, but I was going to say, since we've got a planning department here, I don't need to push that, as long as everyone understands that's the goal.

I want as big as we can get.

And I don't know if we have, as the interest quarter review board, do we have an ability to prevent that?

Well, the condition presented explicitly says, from the city tree list, not the city shrub list.

Going on tonight that's going to be carried forward because this zoning ordinance is going to bring things like this and we've spent almost an hour and a half on this so it's going to be, there's a lot to think about.

See if we had mandated that every building be the Wells Fargo building, we wouldn't have so much ambiguity.

As you guys have done your site plan process, I mean how far have you dug into the burying the power lines and knowing how much room you have for utilities and things like that?

We can't do that because they're not on the approved street tree list.

I guess it's maybe less distrust of you guys as it is just the site plan process We also had a pre-app meeting with utilities to discuss connections It's not 100% design, but we are thinking about every aspect at this early phase

So do you have a condition or a word that you'd like to recommend?

Biger trees are possible from the list.

I'm fine with that.

Just using Latin Roman numerals.

Balcony, the rod and clevis, the... Oh, let's talk about that.

I'll second the procedure.

So, Rod and Clevis, I have no strong opinions on, but Michael doesn't like it, I'm fine with saying it's bad.

So that was my take.

They're not like structurally holding up the balance, right?

Okay, good structure.

It holds the base, the balcony up, back to a knife plate that ties back into the structural elements of the building.

Sorry, forgive my sarcasm.

I think what I would say is shaking being at, but okay.

I would say that they're used consistently, but I don't think the guidelines say yes, no.

To add, we only have four balcony stacks, and they're all within the internal courtyard.

That's why they have such wrong opinions on it, right?

It was just, again, having looked at the options, it's hard to make a case of how they would be in addition to the architectural merit of the building.

But I'm not going to change my vote over that.

Alright, alright.

Keep calling.

So, anyone else?

We can just add it as a condition.

I'd be happier.

And I, no, I'm not the deciding vote here, I don't have any opinions.

I think we are so lukewarm on this thing that we just started to just keep going and leave it out.

that a preference to not happen.

Freedom Transformers, yeah, because they have something they'd like to say.

There's a way to make them.

They look very fancy over there.

But if it is, and there's art that is designated, is there any further review by the city?

But maybe we could ask for that to come to us if you guys have an update.

I just want to make sure that, you know, a year from now, you know, or whenever this happens, it's suddenly not people aren't going, oh my God, I cry foul, you guys should not get any of these transformers.

Let's not get the applicant to die and do it.

And maybe that helps them blend in more.

We just wanted to.

Certainly rather deferred to Jack Yeah, I certainly would not want to prohibit the raps I think that you would be hard to mess up the art so badly that it's worse than the free box that you're going to get from Damien So if they're going to allow it Yes, please Yeah, I'll just note, so I was one who suggested wrapping the boxes based on experience in a prior community where we had a community art program We wrapped all the utility boxes in the right of way in the city

Probably a better utility than Dominion.

But theoretically, it's possible.

It's a new one for me.

We're at the weave.

We're leaving that.

Do it the way you've got it done.

To allow it to be as proposed?

We did not prohibit them.

Because I thought that you did.

OK.

Come on, Rory.

So I guess we'll call the question.

Krusey, would you hold the board?

Mr. Solla-Yates?

Aye.

Mr. D'Oronzio?

Aye.

Mr. Stolzenberg?

Aye.

Mr. Habab?

Aye.

Mr. Schwarz?

Yes.

All right.

Thank you very much.

I love aesthetic reviews.

Yeah.

as well.

All right, we are back in order, and I think it's before we leave this conversation.

And I will.

Did we find our Zoom in friends?

Thank you, Neil.

Good evening, Mr. Riordan.

I'm looking forward to it if needed.

I think we'll begin with UVA, but before we toss the ball to Mr. Joy, are we going to be able to see the top of this building from the long?

and they may have been brought up during a portion of one of the previous public hearings, possibly at City Council, but certainly could bring those again next month.

So thank you.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

Are you sure you guys want to hear from me?

Lehmann, who has no reason or business to be commenting on these things.

So who are you asking?

Why did you do this alternating sides, if you understand what I'm talking about here, or I'm referencing?

So I get it.

Or is that what you're explaining?