Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201800016 Review Comments Special Use Permit 2018-12-21COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 December 21, 2018 Mr. Justin Shimp, P.E. — Shimp Engineering 912 East High Street, Charlottesville, VA 20902 (434)-227-5140 / justinkshimp-en ine�ering co EcoVillage Holding Inc. — c/o Mr. Tom Hickman 480 Rio Road East, Charlottesville, VA 22901 (434)-989-7083 / thickman56ggmail.com RE: Review Comment Letter #2 for SP-2018-00016 (EcoVillage Charlottesville — Steep Slopes) Mr. Shimp and Mr. Hickman: Your request for Special Use Permit SP-2018-00016 (EcoVillage Charlottesville — Steep Slopes) has been reviewed by members of Albemarle County staff and our partner agencies. Review comments are provided below, organized by Department, Division, or agency. Planning staff will be preparing a staff report, including staff analysis and recommendations, for delivery to the Planning Commission prior to the public hearing scheduled with the Commission on January 15, 2019. That staff report will be available for your review no later than January 8, 2019. As always, CDD staff remain available to provide assistance and discuss this comment letter, and any other aspect(s) of your application, at your request. Please contact me with any questions and/or requests for assistance you may have. I can be reached at tpadalino(abalbemarle.org or 434-296-5832, ext. 3088. Sincerely, Tim Pa alino, AICP I Senior Planner I Planning Services Division Page 1 of 7 Planning: In consultation with County staff and partner agencies, Planning staff has identified issues and questions that you should be aware of; we remain available to assist you in addressing and resolving these issues. General Comments: • Intent of Steep Slopes Overlay District: o When evaluating the appropriateness of the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes in isolation (as opposed to evaluating it in combination with other elements of the overall proposed development), Staff continues to have some concerns relative to the "purpose and intent" contained in Z.O. Section 30.7.1. o Staff acknowledges that the resubmittal application materials contain conceptual proposals for incorporating "appropriate consideration and care" into the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes, particularly with regards to stormwater management issues. Specifically, the "Supplementary Documentation" packet contains information about existing stormwater management conditions and issues, as well as proposed mitigation practices that could be incorporated into the proposed project to protect downstream lands and waterways and (in particular) moderate excessive stormwater runoff. Staff believes there is an opportunity to potentially create a net positive effect on the overall stormwater management issues in the immediate vicinity, if the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes is approved, and if sufficient mitigation practices (such as those partially outlined in the resubmittal materials) is implemented. However, staff also acknowledges and brings attention to the strong potential for this proposed new entrance and access way, and associated tree clearing and grading activity, to exacerbate an already problematic stormwater situation if not carefully mitigated. Separate from stormwater management, staff also believes there are other issues which require "appropriate consideration and care," such as issues of grading and re -grading, and in particular the removal of existing vegetation on the existing preserved steep slopes. More specifically, staff believes it is necessary to demonstrate how landscaping could be used to mitigate potential impacts created through the disturbance of preserved steep slopes and the removal of the vegetation on those preserved steep slopes (such as rapid or large-scale movement of soil and rock, or both; excessive stormwater runoff; the degradation of surface water flowing towards nearby Meadow Creek; and diminishment of the character and beauty of the steep slopes along this heavily -travelled corridor within the development area). Therefore, staff recommend and request additional information (such as a conceptual landscaping plan and planting schedule showing the types, species, approximate quantity, and size of any proposed landscaping materials) in order to demonstrate "appropriate consideration and care" for the mitigation of proposed grading and the associated removal of vegetation. o Staff acknowledges that some of these details will be addressed at an appropriate scale and level of detail through the preparation and submittal of the required WPONSMP Plan, and through the preparation and submittal of a Final Site Plan. • Permissibility and Appropriateness of Proposed Disturbance for "Private Facilities": o Per Z.O. 30.7.4.b.2, a two-step evaluation is required to determine if the proposed special use is potentially permissible in the Steep Slopes (Preserved) Overlay District. The question of permissibility includes an evaluation of (eligibility) and (necessity), pursuant to Z.O. 30.7.4.b.2.1, which states the following: Page 2 of 7 "The only use permitted by special use permit on preserved slopes are private facilities such as accessways, utility lines and appurtenances, and stormwater management facilities, not otherwise permitted by right under subsection (b)(1)(e), where the lot does not contain adequate land area outside of the preserved slopes to locate the private facilities. " o (Entrance and Access Way): Zoning staff have concluded that the proposed new entrance required for the proposed use is an eligible "private facility." Separately, it must also be clearly demonstrated that it is necessary to locate the proposed new entrance within the preserved steep slopes because the lot otherwise does "not contain[ing] adequate land area outside of the preserved slopes to locate the private facilities." County staff acknowledge that VDOT has reviewed the existing entrance location as well as the proposed new entrance location. Staff further acknowledges that VDOT has stated (in an Interdivisional Meeting conducted on 12/5/2018) that the use of the existing entrance for the proposed change in use is not acceptable, and that the proposed relocation of the entrance and access way (which would constitute the vast majority of the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes) is appropriate. o (Parking): Zoning staff have concluded that the proposed private parking areas required for the proposed use are an eligible "private facility." Separately, it must also be clearly demonstrated that it is necessary to locate private facilities proposed pursuant to Z.O. 30.7.4.b.2.1 within preserved steep slopes because the lot otherwise does "not contain[ing] adequate land area outside of the preserved slopes to locate the private facilities." The project narrative indicates that EcoVillage's proposed alternative combination and configuration of residential lots, "pedestrian streetscapes," non -vehicular circulation features, and common open space features — combined with the approximately seventy (70) feet of grade change that is not within the steep slopes overlay district — necessitates the location of private parking spaces on the periphery of the site, thereby resulting in minor disturbance of preserved steep slopes. At an Interdivisional Meeting conducted on 12/5/2018, an evaluation of this issue by the County Engineer, CDD-Zoning staff, and CDD-Planning staff led to the conclusion that the proposed private facilities do not necessarily need to be sited in the proposed locations that require disturbance within the Steep Slopes (Preserved) Overlay District. There could still be reasonable use(s) of the property without siting the private facilities (and specifically the access road / private street and the parking areas) in locations that require disturbance within the Steep Slopes (Preserved) Overlay District. However, staff acknowledge that the specific overall proposed site layout and configuration of proposed uses and improvements, combined with the site -specific constraints and features, give rise to the need for another (more nuanced) layer of evaluation. Using a broader contextual evaluation, it could be argued that the proposed private facilities (and specifically the proposed parking areas) do need to be sited in locations that require disturbance of preserved steep slopes, in order to achieve the specific overall development proposal that is shown on the conceptual plan (SDP-2018-00056), and which is consistent with Future Land Use Plan designations and which supports and advances numerous Comprehensive Plan recommendations, as described in more detail below (pages 5-6). • Characteristics of Preserved Steep Slopes which are Proposed to be Disturbed: o Staff believes the steep slopes on Tax Map Parcel #61-210 have characteristics of "preserved" steep slopes as well as characteristics of "managed" steep slopes, as defined in Z.O. 30.7.3. Additional evaluation of the characteristics of the existing steep slopes on the subject property Page 3 of 7 will be provided in the staff analysis contained in the staff report that is being prepared for the 1/15/2019 Planning Commission public hearing. Conceptual Plan: o The corresponding Initial Site Plan (SDP-2018-00056) was used as the "conceptual plan" for this special use permit application. Although these are separate applications, the special use permit and the initial site plan have a fundamental interdependence. Potential revisions to the site plan will substantially affect the special use permit proposal, and vice versa. If any revisions to the site plan are anticipated, especially those involving the entrance, access road, stormwater management, and/or preservation ("maintenance") of wooded areas, it would be critically important to consider such changes during the evaluation of the special use permit. o There is a similar interdependence with the (impending) Water Protection Ordinance Plan. Grading and stormwater management issues which will be dealt with in full detail on the WPONSMP Plan may substantially affect the special use permit proposal (and staff evaluation of it), and vice versa. o As noted above (page 2), staff acknowledges the materials contained in the "Supplementary Documentation" which show and describe proposed strategies to mitigate and improve stormwater management issues. Please also provide additional information (in narrative and graphic format) to identify any other proposed practices to further mitigate the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes and associated removal of existing vegetation, either through landscaping or other materials or methods. Specifically, staff believes a conceptual landscaping plan and planting schedule showing the types, species, approximate quantity, and size of any proposed landscaping materials should be provided to demonstrate "appropriate consideration and care" for the mitigation of proposed grading and removal of vegetation. • Special Use Permit Evaluation Criteria ("Factors to be Considered"): o Please note that your application for SP-2018-00016 will also be evaluated relative to the factors identified in Z.O. Section 33.40.B.(1-4) (see below). This evaluation will be contained in the staff report for the PC public hearing on 1/15/2019. 1. No substantial detriment. Whether the proposed special use will be a substantial detriment to adjacent parcels. 2. Character of the nearby area is unchanged. Whether the character of the adjacent parcels and the nearby area will be changed by the proposed special use. 3. Harmony. Whether the proposed special use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this chapter, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with the regulations provided in Section 5 as applicable, and with the public health, safety, and general welfare. 4. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. Whether the proposed special use will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Community Meeting: Staff acknowledge that the required Community Meeting was conducted at the County Office Building, in conjunction with the Places29-Rio Community Advisory Committee regular meeting on Thursday, September 27. The community meeting included discussion of the following questions, issues, and concerns: ■ Stormwater Management: Current conditions include significant issues with stormwater runoff affecting downslope properties. Concerns were raised about the potential for this proposed new entrance and access way, and associated tree clearing and grading activity, to exacerbate an already Page 4 of 7 problematic stormwater situation. Discussion also included the possibility of using the proposed disturbance as an opportunity to address and improve the stormwater runoff situation in that immediate vicinity. The applicants expressed their willingness to coordinate with neighbors and address concerns, including the intention to "over -spec" the underground stormwater retention equipment in order to capture and retain more stormwater on site than would otherwise be required. ■ Access and Connectivity: Questions were raised about the northern "emergency" vehicular access, and also about the proposed public connection(s) through the site (including if the connection would accommodate bicycles or just pedestrians). Comprehensive Plan: Comments on how your proposal generally relates to the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan (Comp Plan) are provided below. Additional detailed analysis regarding conformity with the Comp Plan will be provided to the PC and BOS as part of the staff report for the PC public hearing on 1/15/2019. — The property is located within a portion of the County that is included in the Places 29 Master Plan. The subject properties are designated for "Neighborhood Density Residential" future land uses, which envisions single-family detached and attached housing with a gross density range between 3-6 units/acre. — The proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes in order to locate and develop private facilities for the proposed development is an activity that would be inconsistent with certain Comprehensive Plan goals, objectives, and/or recommendations. o For example, Strategy 5c in the Natural Resources chapter encourages the protection of steep slopes in the Development Areas that are shown for preservation on Master Plan maps. — However, the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes in this context may potentially allow for the overall development of the proposed EcoVillage project to be realized in ways that support and advance other Comp Plan goals, objectives, and/or recommendations. Potential examples (subject to regulatory review and subject to revision by the applicants) include the following: o Enabling compact new residential development (inclusive of affordable housing) within the Development Area, as encouraged by Strategy 1 a in the Growth Management chapter, and by Objective 5 of the Development Areas chapter. o Supporting site planning features that embody Neighborhood Model Principles contained in Objective 2 of the Development Areas chapter, such as compact/cluster development and open space; pedestrian orientation ("walking streets"); and relegated parking. In summary: the proposal would have significant inconsistencies with the Comprehensive Plan if the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes was not directly related to the overall proposed development shown on Final Site Plan SDP201800056. However, when the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes is evaluated in the context of the overall development proposal for EcoVillage — including site -specific constraints and existing conditions, the necessity to relocate the entrance to a different location that is acceptable to VDOT, as well as the numerous sustainable and unconventional concepts which would embody and advance Neighborhood Model principles in the Development Areas (as described below) — the proposal represents a complex combination of favorable and unfavorable factors relative to Comprehensive Plan policies. Neighborhood Model: In 2001, the County adopted the Neighborhood Model. The Neighborhood Model was developed to guide the "form" of development. The Neighborhood Model recommends that the Development Areas and new development have twelve characteristics. General comments on how well the proposed development meets the twelve principles of the Neighborhood Model are provided below. More detailed comments on Page 5 of 7 Neighborhood Model principles will be provided in the staff report for the PC public hearing on l/15/2019. The only directly -applicable Neighborhood Model principle for SP201800016 is "Respecting Terrain and Careful Grading and Re -grading of Terrain." The proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes, when analyzed in isolation, does not support or advance this principle — especially without more information to demonstrate a commitment to "appropriate consideration and care" for mitigating the proposed grading and removal of vegetation. However, when analyzed more comprehensively in the context of the overall proposed EcoVillage development, the relegation of vehicular parking to the outer edges of the site (and the resulting disturbance of preserved steep slopes) helps to advance several Neighborhood Model principles, including (but not necessarily limited to): Pedestrian Orientation; Relegated Parking; Parks, Recreational Amenities, and Open Space; Mixture of Housing Types and Affordable Units; and Multimodal Transportation Opportunities. CDD-Zoning: Written review comments have not been provided by CDD-Zoning for the resubmittal materials. However, Principal Planner Francis MacCall verbally agreed with the County Engineer's conclusions at the end of the group evaluation that took place in the Interdivisional Meeting conducted on 12/5/2018, when Mr. Pohl concluded that a different site layout could allow these proposed impacts to preserved steep slopes to be avoided (see below). Additionally, please note that Mr. MacCall previously provided the following review comment: "Zoning has no objection to the proposed disturbance of the preserved slopes to accommodate the entrance, travel ways and parking for the proposed development. Review of any proposed condition(s) will be needed prior to report to PC." CDD-Engineering: Written review comments have not been provided by CDD-Engineering for the resubmittal materials. However, County Engineer verbally offered the following conclusions at the end of the group evaluation that took place in the Interdivisional Meeting conducted on 12/5/2018: At a conceptual level, the proposed grading is not problematic or objectionable from an engineering perspective (as it relates to technical aspects of grading and stormwater management). The proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes for the proposed new entrance appears to be necessary, in connection with VDOT standards for entrances. However, the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes for the access road / private street and for the parking areas does not appear to be necessary in the locations shown. A different site layout could allow those proposed impacts to preserved steep slopes to be avoided. VDOT: No review comments for the resubmittal materials for SP201800016 have been provided by VDOT to date. Any review comments received by VDOT will be forwarded upon receipt. However, as noted above (page 3), County staff acknowledge that VDOT has reviewed the existing entrance location as well as the proposed new entrance location. Staff further acknowledges that VDOT has stated (in an Interdivisional Meeting conducted on 12/5/2018) that the use of the existing entrance for Page 6 of 7 the proposed change in use is not acceptable, and that the proposed relocation of the entrance and access way (which would constitute the vast majority of the proposed disturbance of preserved steep slopes) is appropriate with regards to sight distances and stopping distances required by the recorded design speed of vehicles using Rio Road. VDOT also provided a comment on 10/25/2018 that the previously -provided site plan review comments for Initial Site Plan SDP201800056 are still applicable, and must be addressed through the final site plan review process. Albemarle Fire -Rescue: Shawn Maddox of Albemarle County Fire — Rescue provided the following comments on 9/19/2018: "Fire Rescue has no objections to the special use permit application." Action after Receipt of Comments: Staff acknowledges that your application for SP-2018-00016 has been scheduled for public hearing by the Planning Commission on 1/15/2019, and further acknowledges that all required legal ad notification fees for that hearing have been paid on 12/21/2018. Notification and Advertisement Fees: Prior to scheduling public hearings with the Planning Commission, payment of the following fees is necessary: $602.00 = Cost for newspaper advertisement for Planning Commission public hearing $215.00 = Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage/$1 per owner after 50 adjoining owners) $817.00 = Total amount due pFioF to Planning Commission publie hearing for- SP 2018 0001-6 PAID (12/21/2018) Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for the Board hearing is needed, as follows: $602.00 = Additional amount due prior- to Board of Supervisors publie hearing for SP 2018 000166 PAID (12/21/2018) $0.00 = Total amount of remaining fees for all notifications for SP-2018-00016 Fees paid — thank you. Page 7 of 7