Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutSDP201900012 Action Letter 2019-03-29COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 March 29, 2018 Michael Myers 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Dr. Palmyra, VA 22963 RE: Parking Determination — Stonefield Block D2 Phase Two Parking Reduction Request SDP-2019-12 TMP 61W-03-D2A, 22-61 and 90-104 Dear Mr. Myers: This letter is an official determination in response to your request for a parking variation to allow a 35% reduction in the minimum number of required parking spaces for Stonefield Block D2 Phase Two. The request is being made in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 4.12.8, and as permitted by the Code of Development for Albemarle Place (Code Section 5. Parking and Loading, p. 31, paragraph 2). The Stonefield Block D2 - Phase 2 - Major Site Plan Amendment (SDP-2019-12) proposes 160 apartments and 20,000 gross square feet of office/retail. Per the Code of Development for Albemarle Place, the required number of parking spaces for the proposed use is 352 parking spaces. 160 apartments (1.75 spaces/unit): 280 required parking spaces 20,000 GSF Office/Retail (4.5 spaces/1000 NSF): 72 required spaces Total: 352 required parking spaces The above referenced site plan currently demonstrates 240 total parking spaces, 32% less than what is required by the Code of Development. The applicant is requesting a reduction of the full 35% allowable by the Code of Development and in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 4.12.8. The following "alternatives available to provide minimum number of parking spaces" were submitted as justification for the parking reduction intentions of the applicant. For simplicity these alternatives were reviewed as "Combinations of alternatives" and were collectively used to justify the reduction. The responses provided below, in bold italics, address each alternative individually, and as a group. Shared Parking The reduction request suggests that the offsetting peak -hour parking demands of the proposed residential and office use will provide an approximate 17% reduction in the required number of parking spaces. March 29, 2019 Stonefield Block D2 Phase Two Parking Determination Page 2 Staff agrees that the proposed residential and office uses will have offsetting peak hour demands. This determination is not only consistent with previous parking determinations but is supported by the data submitted by the applicant and is in accordance with Section 4.12.10 of the Zoning Ordinance. Because parking spaces are shared and peak demand hours are at separate times for the two uses, the total number of parking spaces that would otherwise be required can be reduced. Availability of Mass Transit The reduction request suggests that the proximity and availability of the Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) will reduce parking demand by up to 10%. Staff agrees that the availability of mass transit, a Transportation Demand Management (TDM) tool in Section 4.12.12 of the Zoning Ordinance, will effectively reduce the need to provide some of the required parking spaces. However, because the ordinance specifically requires "safe movement" as a condition of these alternatives, these reductions are contingent on the development of the pedestrian link as shown on the site plan connecting Block D2 to the bus stop on Commonwealth Dr. Walkability and Bikeability of the Site The reduction request suggests that the mixed use nature of the nearby site and the pedestrian improvements proposed on the site plan will reduce parking demand by up to 10%. Staff agrees that the walkability and bikeability of the site will have some impact on the parking demand. Reduced Car Ownership of Renters The reduction request suggests that the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) parking rates more accurately reflect the actual demand for parking for the residential use than what is required by the Code of Development. Section 4.12.7 of the Zoning Ordinance provides that for mixed uses a parking study, including estimates by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, may be considered in making a parking recommendation. Additionally, staff has access to the 5tn edition of the Parking Generation Manual written by the Institute of Transportation Engineers. This manual suggests that 245 bedrooms (based on 75 one -bedroom apartments and 85 two -bedroom apartments, confirmed by the applicant) would produce an average parking demand of 184 parking spaces for mid -rise multifamily housing, and 162 parking spaces for low rise multifamily housing (see attached reports). Based on this data and in accordance with Section 4.12.7 staff agrees that the reduced car ownership of renters will greatly reduce the demand of parking on site from the 280 spaces required in the Code of Development. Based on the combination of transportation alternatives and transportation demand management tools described above, it is my official determination to approve this requested parking reduction of 35%. The evidence suggests that given a 35% reduction the site will still provide a sufficient number of parking spaces to meet its needs. This reduction in parking requirements is made in accordance with Section 4.12.7-4.12.12 of March 29, 2019 Stonefield Block D2 Phase Two Parking Determination Page 3 the Zoning Ordinance, the Code of Development of Albemarle Place, as well as the relevant data, alternatives, and TDM tools described above. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty (30) days of this notice, in accordance with Virginia Code § 15.2-2311. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal may be taken only by filing an appeal application with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals, in accordance with § 34.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, along with a fee of $258 plus the actual cost of advertising the appeal for public hearing. Applications for Appeal of the Zoning Administrator's Determination are available at the Department of Community Development located at 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 or online at www.albemarle.org/cdapps. This form applies to the appeal of a decision of the zoning administrator or any other administrative officer pertaining to the Zoning Ordinance. Regulations pertaining to the filing of an appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals are located in Chapter 18, Section 34.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. They may be reviewed online at www.albemarle.ora/countvcodebza. (Please note that our online documents are in Adobe Acrobat PDF format and must be viewed with the Adobe Acrobat Reader or an equivalent. A link to download the free plug-in is available at the bottom of www.albemarle.org/cdapps.) Please contact me if you have questions or require additional information. Sincerely, Kevin McCollum Planner Designee to the Zoning Administrator Kevin McCollum From: Mike Myers <mike@30scale.com> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 1:05 PM To: Kevin McCollum Subject: RE: Stonefield Parking Reduction Request Kevin, I checked in with the owner and architect, and the current bedroom is 75 1-BR and 85 2-13R. Bedroom Breakdown follows: Each level has: 15 - 1-BR (includes 1 studio apartment) 17 - 2-BR 49 bedrooms per level At 5 levels, that is 245 bedrooms total. This number will likely fluctuate as the building plans progress, but will be pretty close. Please let me know if you need anything else, Mike Michael F. Myers,, P.E., C.F.M. 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 P h : 434-242-2866 Email: mike@30scale.com Website: www.30scale.com From: Kevin McCollum <kmccollum@albemarle.org> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2019 11:29 AM To: Mike Myers <mike@30scale.com> Subject: Stonefield Parking Reduction Request Hey Mike, Just wanted to update you on where we were with this request. I am meeting with Bart tomorrow (he's been out of the office this week) to go over the draft of the parking reduction determination I have been writing. At this time, I don't see any reason to deny the 35% reduction. What you submitted I think provides enough evidence to support the reduction, and I don't think there is any evidence to support a denial of this request. In the meantime, could you send me an estimate or detailed, if you have it, information on the type of units? When we talked on the phone you suggested that the layout was 85 1 bedrooms and 75 2 bedroom units. This information would be helpful like I said before because the ITE Parking Generation Manual provides parking demands per number of bedrooms. Given these numbers the ITE book suggests that peak parking demand for the residential use is 176. Because 3/28/2019 https: flitepa rkgen.o rg/P ri n tG raph. htm ?code =221 & iv la be I= 0 IDS B D&ti meperiod =OAF M E&x=245&ed ition =41 6& locationCode=Ge nera I Urb... Multifamily Housing (Mid -Rise) -------------- - ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(-221)---- ----------- ----- ------ ---------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Bedrooms On a: Weekday (Monday - Friday) Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban (no nearby rail transit) Peak Period of Parking Demand: 10:00 p.m. - 5:00 a.m. Number of Studies: 35 Avg. Num. of Bedrooms: 294 ----------------- I ------------------ - -- - -------------- - -- - ------------ - ------ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- - - - - - - ----------------------- Peak Period Parking Demand per Bedroom i ( 33rd / 85th 95% Confidence Standard Deviation Average Rate Range of Rates Percentile Interval 1 (Coeff. of Variation) --- ------------------- ------------------- ---------------- --------------------- 0.75 0.41 -1.00 0.65 / 0.87 0.70-0.80 0.15 (20%) - ------------- ------- ------------ I ---------- ----------- ----------- Data Plot and Equation 1,500 1,000 x 0- n RR x 500 x x x x x x 184 181 x xv x - ---------------- 245 ---------------------- 0 200 400 600 800 1,000 1,200 - - -------- 1,400 X = Number of Bedrooms X Study Site Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: P = 0.82(X) - 20.37 R 2= 0.94 Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition * Institute of Transportation Engineers https://Iteparkgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=221&Ivlabel=0DSBD&timeperiod=OAFME&x=245&edition=416&locationCode=GeneraI Urban/Suburban ... 1/1 3/28/2019 https -//iteparkgen.org/Pri ntGraph. htm?code=220&ivlabel=O IDS BD&timeperiod =OAF M E&x=245&ed ition =41 6& locationCode=Ge neral Urb Multifamily Housing Low-Rise) ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 220)----- - ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peak Period Parking Demand vs: Bedrooms On a: Weekday (Monday - Friday) Setting/Location: General Urban/Suburban (no nearby rail transit) Peak Period of Parking Demand: 11:00 p.m. - 6:00 a.m. Number of Studies: 45 Avg. Num. of Bedrooms: 215 ------------ - - --------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------- --- ------- — - — --- - - - ------------ - -------- - ------------ Peak Period Parking Demand per Bedroom T----------------------------------- ------ - ------------------------------- 33rd 85th t 95% Confidence Standard Deviation Average Rate Range of Rates Percentile Interval (Coeff. of Variation) ----- -------------- ------------ - --- - --------- ----- --- ------------ -- --- --- I ---------- -- - --------- ------- --------------- - ------------------------- 0.66 0.37-1.38 0.61 0.86 0.62-0.70 0.15 (23%) ---------- ------------- --- - ------- - - -- -------------- ---- I - ----------- ----------------------- - --- --- -----------------► --------------- Data Plot and Equation 500 x x x 400 x x > 300' x x x x x 0- x x x 200 x 162 xx x x x 154 x x x 100, x x X X X xxx >vX*X 0% ------------- --- ------- -- ------- --- ------------- --- ------- --- N-5 -- - ------ --- --- - - - --------------------------- ----------------------------- 0 200 400 600 X = Number of Bedrooms X Study Site Fitted Curve Average Rate Fitted Curve Equation: Ln(P) = 0.95 Ln(X) - 0.19 R 2= 0.93 Parking Generation Manual, 5th Edition * Institute of Transportation Engineers https-.//iteparkgen.org/PrintGraph.htm?code=220&iviabel=0DSBD&timeperiod=OAFME&x=245&edition=416&locationCode=GeneraI Urban/Suburban ... 1/1 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 Ph. 434.242.2866 mike@30scale.com March 4, 2019 Mr. Bart Svoboda Chief of Zoning County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 s\o RE: Stonefield — Block D2 -- Phase Two — Parking Reduction Request Albemarle County TMP 61W-03-D2A, 22-61 AND 90-104 Dear Bart, This is a request for a parking variation to allow a 35% reduction in the minimum number of required parking spaces for the above -referenced project. The request is being made in accordance with Zoning Ordinance Section 4.12.8, and as permitted by the Code of Development for Albemarle Place (Code Section 5. Parking and Loading, p. 31, paragraph 2). The 35% reduction request is supported by four major factors, including: 1. Shared parking of the residential and office uses. 2. Availability of mass transit to the site. 3. Walkability and "bikeability" of the Stonefield shopping center and surrounding area. 4. Reduced car ownership of renters. Although the above factors may alone justify a 35% reduction, the parking ratio used to establish the baseline in the COD, or Base Parking Ratio, is 20% higher than the rates published in Shared Parking by the Urban Land Institute. Shared Parking is regarded as an authority on all matters related to shared parking and is referenced in the Code of Development. Shared Parking describes the Base Parking Ratio with the term "cornfield" rate, defining a project as a free-standing land use in an area with little or no transit and only weak pedestrian connections with other uses. In contrast, Stonefield has a strong transit program with bus service throughout the shopping center, including along the site frontage with Inglewood Drive and Hydraulic Road. Pedestrian connections are made throughout Stonefield and adjacent the subject parcel with concrete sidewalks, crosswalks and curb ramps. Notwithstanding the Base Parking Ratio used in the Code of Development, the following describes the four major factors in justifying the reduction: 1. Shared Parking The proposed residential and office use have offsetting peak -hour parking demands. This provides an approximate 17% reduction in the required number of parking spaces based on an analysis of the Shared Parking Time -of -Day Reduction Factor as found in Shared Parking, Table 2-5 (pp. 16-17). See 1 Pale 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 Ph. 434.242.2866 mike@30scale.com s�o Appendix A for site parking tabulations and Appendix B for an analysis of Table 2-5, deriving the 17% reduction factor. 2. Availability of mass transit The Charlottesville Area Transit (CAT) provides bus service within 450 feet of the site on District Avenue and on Commonwealth Drive following construction of the pedestrian link as shown on the Site Plan. Availability of mass transit reduces parking demand by up to 10%. V:--.\ moo TF E3 E3 low E3 � r PHASE 1THs r J 260' TQ HYDRAULIC-----�r PHASE2 ROAD SUS STOP AT B-- LQCK D2 REGAL DINEty'iA z 7-1 M ICEDSE - r jo OD DRIVE BUS STOP f - .0d� Map Showing Nearby Bus stops 3. Walkability and Bikeability of the site The Shops at Stonefield consists of existing retail stores, a grocery store, movie theater, office space, restaurants, apartments and is located adjacent Northrop Grumman, a major employer in the County. This mix of uses in the Development Area presents employment opportunities for residents who can walk or bike to work and may reduce the parking demand by up to 10%. To improve the connectivity of the site, the owner is constructing a pedestrian stairwell and bike ramp connection to the adjacent shopping center at the intersection of Hydraulic Road and Commonwealth Drive. This will allow more convenient access for residents on Commonwealth and Turtle Creek Condominiums, and will also serve as a means for apartment residents at Stonefield to more conveniently access employment areas along Commonwealth Drive, Greenbrier Drive, and Berkmar Drive. 2 1 -. 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 Ph. 434.242.2866 mike@30scale.com s\o Finally, a bicycle trail connection is planned by County Transportation that will connect Stonefield with the east side of Seminole Trail via a flyover connection with Zan Road, which will create additional non -automobile commuting opportunities. 4. Reduced Car Ownership of Renters A significant trend in developments is to create live/work/play environments, typified by the Shops at Stonefield. Another trend is to place mass transit nearby. The result of combining these trends is fewer car trips. To recognize this, the Institute of Transportation Engineers has separated residential uses into a number of different categories including adding Use Group 221, Low -Rise Apartments. The average parking ratio for a suburban low-rise apartment is 1.2 spaces per unit (see Table 4-19 from Shared Parking below) which represents a 31% reduction in the COD base parking ratio of 1.75 spaces per unit. For comparison, this represents a 20% reduction in the ULI "cornfield" base parking ratio of 1.5 spaces per unit. .. - Peak -Hour Parking Accumulations at Residential Land Uses (Spaces/Dwelling Unit) rbowt« LOW H1- Loc su� Suburbar su� Man Urban &-tes 6 3 1-2 7 1. ? 167-1 q? 104-196 O,�, 143 I t5-151 85th rw&Ajie.. LN4 # « 1,68 .f, AXm oo ii. 4!J 1.46 Wo a Table 4-19 — Shared Parking, by ULl The alternatives presented above to justify the parking reduction also meet the requirements listed under Zoning Ordinance Section 4.12.8, to wit: 4.12.8. Shared parking allows parking spaces to be shared among two (2) or more uses that typically experience peak parking demands at different times and is located on the same lot or on nearby lots. Because parking spaces are shared, the total number of parking spaces that would otherwise be required may be reduced. In addition to all other applicable requirements of this section, the following requirements shall apply to shared parking: a. Types of alternatives. The parking alternatives consist of street parking, as provided in section 4.12.9, shared parking, as provided in section 4.12.10, off -site stand alone 31 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 Ph. 434.242.2866 mike@30scale.com S\� parking, as provided in section 4.12.11, and other reductions resulting from the provision of mass transit or other transportation demand management tools. Street Par kinq : Per Z.O. 4.12.9, street parking may count toward the parking requirement for a lot if the space abuts the lot. The 18 parallel spaces along the private street, Inglewood Drive, are directly adjacent to Block D2. These spaces were counted to meet the parking requirement for Block D2 on the approved Site Plan SDP 2014-00070 and have not been counted to meet the minimum parking requirement of Hyatt or any other use. Shared Par kinq : Shared parking is being provided per Z.O. 4.12.10. As shown in the parking tabulations in Appendix A. ten (10) tandem parking spaces located in the parking garage have not been counted toward the number of shared parking spaces. These spaces will be reserved for rental - occupied units. Other reductions: The other reductions including mass transit, walkability/bikeability of the site, and demographics of the population (renters vs. owners) are transportation demand management tools which are allowed alternatives as described in Shared Parking. b. Combination of alternatives. One or more parking alternatives may be used in combination with one another or with on -site parking to attain the minimum number of required parking spaces. Combining the four alternatives will attain the minimum number of required parking spaces. C. Provision of means for safe movement. Sidewalks and other means for permitting safe movement of pedestrians between the parking area or spaces and the use or structure they serve shall be provided. As part of site plan approval, the owner will provide adequate infrastructure to allow the safe, unencumbered movement of pedestrians and bicyclists, including the connection toward Commonwealth Drive. d. Parking not to be separated from use by major roads. No parking area or spaces shall be separated from the use or structure they serve by a street whose classification is greater than a major collector, unless safe and convenient access is provided from the parking area or spaces to the use or structure and is approved by the director of planning and community development. All parking can be accessed from the property without the need to cross major roads. The reduction in the number of minimum required spaces by shared parking and other techniques was envisioned as an element of the Code of Development that would be best addressed at the time of site plan approval when the uses and parking program could be more clearly evaluated. The residential and office uses have offsetting peak parking demands and are compatible for shared parking arrangements. Other factors including the availability of mass transit, walkability and bikeability of the site, and the reduced car ownership of renters are also considered. Finally, the actual parking 4 1 P a g e 30 Scale, LLC 871 Justin Drive, Palmyra, VA 22963 Ph. 434.242.2866 mike@30scale.com rates published in the COD are approximately 20% higher than industry standard as established by the Urban Land Institute's publication, Shared Parking. The benefits of a parking reduction include greater flexibility and creativity in design, higher density in the development area, and reduction of excess impervious paving surface. Please feel free to call me if you have any questions or would like additional information regarding this request. Sincerely, Cc: John Regan, The Christopher Companies Randy Steck, The Christopher Companies attachments 51Page APPENDIX A Site Parking Calculations REQUIRED PARKING SPACES - BASED ON COD RATES APARTMENTS, RENTAL, LOW-RISE COD APARTMENT PARKING RATE APARTMENT PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 35% REDUCTION OFFICE/RETAIL RATE PER COD OFFICE GSF OFFICE GLA (0.8 X GSF) OFFICE/RETAIL SPACES REQUIRED 35% REDUCTION TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED WITH 35% REDUCTION PROPOSED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES PROPOSED NUMBER OF NON -SHARED PARKING SPACES NET PROVIDED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 160 UNITS 1.75 SPACES/UNIT 280 SPACES 182 SPACES 4.5 SPACES/1,000 SF 20,000 GLA 16, 000 G LA 72 SPACES 47 SPACES 229 SPACES 241 SPACES 10 SPACES 231 SPACES And, for the purposes of comparison to base rates published by ULI: REQUIRED PARKING SPACES - BASED ON ULI BASE RATES ("CORNFIELD" RATES) APARTMENTS, RENTAL, LOW-RISE 160 UNITS BASE PARKING RATE 1.50 SPACES/UNIT APARTMENT PARKING SPACES REQUIRED 240 SPACES 35% REDUCTION 156 SPACES OFFICE/RETAIL RATE PER COD 3.5 SPACES/1,000 SF OFFICE GSF 20,000 GLA OFFICE GLA (0.8 X GSF) 161000 GLA OFFICE/RETAIL SPACES REQUIRED 56 SPACES 35% REDUCTION 36 SPACES TOTAL SPACES REQUIRED WITH 35% REDUCTION 192 SPACES PROPOSED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 241 SPACES PROPOSED NUMBER OF NON -SHARED PARKING SPACES 10 SPACES NET PROVIDED NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES 231 SPACES NET SURPLUS NUMBER OF SPACES 39 SPACES APPENDIX B Shared Parking Analysis for Residential and Office Uses 0 r. N 00 Ln N M \ J 01 t= ® Co 00 tV © N rV rt � J O r,{ a G� O 00 00 C N N .-» O p ri 00 N 00 N © r� C) Cif � M N fV Co N n N c N Cl f� O0 N N O 1 Q Ln N ^ N r can)N lC 00 4,C 4�* 0 N rr N z CL 00 Ln 0`' Vi Ln o� Q r V CIC N 0 N N 0 tkn o Q W W Imm J V Co G ram; w~ 00 M C) CD N LAW< �qm p ~ az o �: ©`o k00 D CC 0 W Cl„ ,,w4 O C )�.� � N C] 2 Q 0' °c LAJ ~ Cr. CL ONO 0 t7 Q N Ln 0 .-� N = Z x wo a CC W G") r� Y O N �" G. Q h �100Y O r N © rN4 CMG O W < _z a IC-t cc V1 Ln N00 N Z 00 4�T N W OQ 00 � M N :IS Q1 N t/1 LW1. cc 0 io %.p /� Ci. 0 0 LnCt f� M N rN � o <'! N O M 00 Co W tD 0 N N V1 r1 W V'1 Q W V N W OPOJ Qt Q Q,. Q N9 zCrmW Z f V W.� W W ..J LA rn MW C� W Um 0cc Cr. 0 �- N