ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MINUTES DECEMBER 3, 2012

Transcription

1 ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MINUTES DECEMBER 3, 2012 The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board met on Monday, December 3, 2012, 1:00 p.m., Room 241, Second Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. Those members present were Paul Wright, Bruce Wardell, Charles T. Lebo, Vice Chair, and Fred Missel, Chairman. Absent was John Quale. Staff members present were Margaret Maliszewski, Design Planner; and Sharon Taylor, Clerk. CALL TO ORDER Mr. Missel called the meeting to order at 1:01 p.m. and established a quorum. PUBLIC COMMENT Mr. Missel invited public comment. There being none, the meeting proceeded. REGULAR REVIEW ITEMS ARB : Brown Mercedes Building Renovation - Preliminary Review of a Building Permit (Tax Map 78, Parcel 14A) Proposal: To renovate the exterior of an existing ARB-approved automobile showroom to meet national branding standards. Staff Presentation: Margaret Maliszewski summarized the staff report noting the primary points of discussion as follows: The proposed renovation includes: A new stucco façade to wrap the showroom elevations, extending above the existing walls. Four 20 -tall blue metal columns supporting a dark pewter horizontal steel structural member and low-profile canopy at the front elevation; the canopy turns the corner on the side elevation for a few feet. (Note: The color renderings show the horizontal steel structural member as blue, but dark pewter is the proposed color.) New curtain wall front elevation with storefront glass at the entrance and black spandrel glass to cover the brick walls, extending above the existing front wall. (Note: The color renderings do not distinguish between the storefront glass and the black spandrel glass.) New EIFS entry portal in blue. (Note: The portal is not shown in the side elevations.) Existing brick that is not covered by stucco is to be painted white. Add metal sign band on front elevation, above entrance; add logo signs. There are no changes proposed to the layout or landscaping of the site. These changes are proposed to bring the existing building in line with the Mercedes national branding standards. ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 1

2 Staff recommends the following as the primary points of discussion: 1. The concept of wrapping an ARB-approved building with a trademark design 2. The curtain wall front elevation, including black spandrel glass 3. The white/blue/silver color scheme 4. The coordination of the various building elements 5. Compatibility with historic buildings/balance with the character of the corridor Some of the features in this proposed renovation are found in the typical auto dealership design often seen today. For example, the neutral color walls with the bold color entrance and accents, the façade composed primarily of glass, and often a flat roof or the suggestion of one. Some of these elements have also been approved for the renovation of buildings in the Route 250 East Corridor, but those were buildings originally constructed prior to the establishment of the Entrance Corridors. This proposal is different because the existing building was approved by the ARB and it meets the Guidelines as is. Adding today s standard auto dealership design features to this building would not enhance compatibility with Albemarle s significant historic sites. Instead it would promote corporate identification. The Guidelines do call for a balance between compatibility with historic architecture and compatibility with the character of the Corridor but continued repetition of those standard dealership design elements is not required to establish compatibility, particularly when the existing building is already meeting the Guidelines. In addition, there are issues with the material, scale and the cohesiveness of the overall design as described in the staff report. Staff referenced the recommendations in the staff report. Mr. Missel invited questions for staff. Mr. Wardell asked if there was any precedent of an approved building being reclad. Ms. Maliszewski replied that she could not think of any like this. Mr. Wardell noted that almost every building the ARB sees that is reclad is something that was built prior to the Guidelines. Ms. Maliszewski agreed and said that she could not recall an example where the entire building was being wrapped in something else. Mr. Wardell said he was not aware of anything in the Guidelines that gives us any guidance, and Ms. Maliszewski agreed that there was nothing specific. Applicant Presentation: Jim Grigg, with Daggett and Grigg Architects, stated that this is an approved building and the rebranding is something that the manufacturer has asked the dealership to consider. This is a question before the ARB and is one of precedent going forward. ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 2

3 Mr. Lebo asked if he saw anything that is traditional about this architecture for the area. Mr. Grigg replied no, that it is very difficult to try, from his perspective, to take this auto house brand and apply it to this type of building. It is just like oil and vinegar frankly. However, the manufacturer has asked them to do what they have done and it is up to the ARB to provide some guidance for the owner. Board Discussion: Mr. Lebo noted that he finds the existing building one of the more attractive buildings in the Pantops area and hates to see it go away. Mr. Wright noted that it is one of the buildings they used to justify the building of other buildings around it. The existing building has set the tone for a lot of other buildings on Pantops. Mr. Missel noted that the building was unique because it was not like the other car dealerships. Mr. Lebo noted that the brick and metal roof are attractive. Mr. Wright noted that they have the rare opportunity to have a building that fits the Guidelines already up. This would replace it with a building that does not meet the Guidelines according to the report and what he has looked at. Mr. Wardell agreed that it did not seem that the proposal works as is. However, he would not want to say that it does not work because it is white, because it has a blue portico on it, or because it uses spandrel. He would want to be careful on their language. Mr. Missel said it is the form and materials that all play into what is appropriate. He agreed with Mr. Wardell that there were certain ways some of those materials could be used in conjunction with more traditional materials in the area and create an appropriate design. This proposal does not do any of that. The other thing is, when they look back at the Toyota dealers and others, they were going from a building that was not ARB approved or appropriate and creating a situation where they were trying to work to something that was honestly a reasonable compromise and maybe not a great design but something that was reasonable. Mr. Lebo said there were no elements in the proposal that he could support the way it is presented today. Mr. Wardell said he was not ready to support it either. However, he thought one could potentially accomplish what they are trying to accomplish successfully. Mr. Wright suggested that the best thing to do is to move for denial and then if the applicant wanted to come back with another design later they are not precluded from doing so. They just cannot come back with this design. It seems from staff and the Board comments that there really ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 3

4 is very little support for this proposal. He thought they would do everybody a favor by not tinkering around with something he did not think would get them to where they want to go. Motion: Mr. Wright made a motion to deny the proposed design for the ARB : Brown Mercedes Building Renovation. Mr. Lebo seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4:0. (Quale absent) WORK SESSION ARB : Northtown Center Phase 2A (Gander Mountain) Work Session (Tax Map 45, Parcel 111) Proposal: To construct a Gander Mountain retail store as Phase 2A of the development for the buildings proposed for the southwest corner of the Northtown Center site. Staff Presentation: Margaret Maliszewski summarized the staff report noting the concerns as listed in the staff report. The ARB reviewed architectural designs for buildings in the entire development back in However, after that the project was divided into phases and only the northern section moved forward with final site plan approval. That was in In early November of this year staff met with the applicant to discuss a preliminary design for this proposal. The informal comments made at that meeting were copied into the staff report. The elevation drawing included in today s submittal included a list of modifications that were made to the standard prototype design. In the past couple of weeks staff had a meeting for a potential auto dealership building to go behind the Stellar One Bank. So that is something the ARB may be seeing in the near future. This proposed building would be readily visible from the Entrance Corridor with southbound traffic having a clear view of the entrance elevation and the Entrance Corridor elevation. Northbound traffic would view the west end of the back of the building and also the Entrance Corridor elevation. The gable of the entrance element, because of its height, would be visible for greater distances along the Corridor. The back of the gable might eventually be screened by landscaping. However, until that landscaping reaches maturity it would likely have some level of visibility. As stated in the staff report, the proposed design does not meet the Entrance Corridor Guidelines even with the additions that had been made to the prototype design. The primary difficulty here is that the proposed building is basically a really big box with a big entrance feature. The solution that has been chosen to resolve the problem of meeting the Guidelines is to simply add elements to that box. That solution limits the chance for success since the result is a box with architectural features that have more of a ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 4

5 cosmetic appearance than being an integral part of an architectural design. There is a lack of depth and possibly a lack of function that contribute to that. Some of the features are elements that have been used in historic architecture of the area like the reddish brown brick, cornice and gables. However, the coordination of those elements does not produce a building with an overall coordinated appearance or one that meets the Design Guidelines. The large size of the building, and the overscaled elements that are applied to it, both further distance the design from local historic buildings and also from the buildings that are nearby on the corridor. So, despite the addition of architectural features to the building there are also long expanses of wall area without interruptions. Being a work session, a number of recommendations have been provided in the staff report for ARB review. Suggestions for how to address them from the ARB would be most helpful. Applicant Presentation: Wendell Wood represented the property owner United Land Corporation. He apologized because Scott Collins who was going to make the presentation was late due to his late plane arrival. In the meantime they have three gentlemen present from Gander who could assist in dealing with the issues. Derek Matter, representative for Gander Mountain Corporate, said he wanted to hear the ARB s comments and feedback on the building. They did not want to price themselves out of the market in Charlottesville because they were not big box retail with only 45,000 square feet. Board Discussion: The ARB discussed the proposal with staff and the applicant concerning the issues raised by staff in the report and provided comments included in the following summary. It was suggested that the applicant review other building designs in the area due to the visibility, size of building, and its distance from the Entrance Corridor. It would be helpful to the ARB for the applicant to present the elements of the building in a way that is linked to the Guidelines. 1. Revise the design to reflect the historic architecture of Albemarle County. 2. Revise the design, using forms, features, materials and scale that are compatible with the historic buildings of the area. Eliminate the cosmetic appearance of the architectural treatments. 3. Revise the design to show some relationship to the Stellar One bank building. 4. Revise the design to incorporate human scale into the building. 5. Establish a more cohesive architectural design; consider increasing the depth of the window bays, adding arcades or colonnades, stepping back the parapet, and starting with a less regular building form that incorporates significant recesses/projections. 6. Further reduce blankness. Further limit the expanse of walls without relief. 7. Consider an alternate, less noticeable treatment for the back of the entrance gable or consider an alternate gable design. 8. Clarify the type of windows proposed for the EC elevation. If they are not true windows that provide visibility into the building, provide additional information to clarify their appearance and details on how they will be constructed. ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 5

6 9. Revise the elevation drawings to show the location and height of rooftop equipment. Ensure that all equipment will not be visible. 10. Extend the architectural detailing on the south elevation at least to the point where the building steps back for the loading area. Provide site section addressing visibility of the southwest corner. 11. Include the following note on the architectural elevations: Visibility of all mechanical equipment from the Entrance Corridor shall be eliminated. 12. If landscaping is shown on the elevations, be sure the landscape plan shows the same plants. Coordinate plant locations with architectural elements. 13. Combined with other architectural measures, consider adding trees along the west end of the front (north) elevation to help relieve blankness. 14. Increase and extend the landscaping at the western end of the southern property line. Provide a mix of evergreen and deciduous trees. Extend the planting to the location of the proposed tree line. 15. Add the following note to the landscape plan: All site plantings of trees and shrubs shall be allowed to reach, and be maintained at, mature height; the topping of trees is prohibited. Shrubs and trees shall be pruned minimally and only to support the overall health of the plant. 16. Limit the number of proposed plants for any one species to 25% of the total proposed for that plant type (tree or shrub). 17. Identify the color/finish of the Redi-Rock retaining wall. 18. Provide complete information on building and site lighting for review. Minimize the illumination of the building for purposes other than safety/security. 19. Update the lighting notes on the cover sheet to read as follows: Each outdoor luminaire equipped with a lamp that emits 3,000 or more initial lumens shall be a full cutoff luminaire and shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from adjoining residential districts and away from adjacent roads. The spillover of lighting from luminaires onto public roads and property in residential or rural areas zoning districts shall not exceed one-half footcandle. Scott Collins, applicant s representative, arrived at 2:06 p.m. after the discussion. OTHER BUSINESS Approval of Minutes October 15, 2012 Motion: Mr. Lebo moved for approval of the minutes of October 15, Mr. Wright seconded the motion. The motion carried by a vote of 4:0. (Quale absent) Mr. Wright pointed out he would tender his resignation for January 1. However, he would be willing to stay until a replacement has been made at the pleasure of the Board. ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 6

7 Ms. Maliszewski noted the following matters coming up in January: The new site plan review process starts in January where initial site plans will come to the ARB on the consent agenda for action. Staff is gearing up to do the next phase of the update to the Design Guidelines, hopefully starting in January. Mr. Wright suggested that they look at relegated parking at that time. Next ARB Meeting: Monday, December 17, 2012 ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned at 2:11 p.m. to the next ARB meeting on Monday, December 17, 2012 in Room 241, Second Floor, County Office Building at 1:00 p.m. Fred Missel, Chairman (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards) ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - PAGE 7