HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900004 Correspondence Zoning Map Amendment 2019-08-19ROUDABUSH, GALE &ASSOCIATES, INC. 8
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION S p
LAND SURVESTNG Serving ti,ifginia Since 1956
ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING ENGINEERING DLPARTMEN'l SURVEY DERARTMEN I
172 SOI! I I I PANTOPS DRIVE. S I L: A 914 NIONTICELLO ROAD
JI\4 L. IAGGARI. P.L. CI LARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22911 CI IARLOTIESVILLL. VA 22902 NA ILLIAM J. LEDBEI TER. L.S.
DON FRANCO. N.E. PI ]ONE (434) 979-8121 PI IONE t 134) 977-020? BRIAN D. JAMISON, L.S.
DAVID NI. ROBINSON. P.L. FAX (434) 979-1681 FAY (434) 296-3-130 NICI IOLAS M. I It I( I IINSON. L.S.
AMMY M. CEORGE. PTA INFO a ROI;DABUSI LOOM
August 19, 2019
Mr. Tim Padalino, Senior Planner
Albemarle County
Community Development
401 McIntire Road
North Wing
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Breezy Hill, ZMA-2019-4
Dear Mr. Padalino,
I have reviewed your comments from May 31, 2019 and those of Planning Commission. You
will find my responses below.
Planning
1. (Growth Capacity)
Water/sewer availabilitX
ACSA has indicated there is no capacity issues in water or wastewater related to
the Breezy Hill rezoning application. We will continue to coordinate with
ACSA/RWSA as this project moves forward in regards to timing of improvements
and buildout.
Transportation
Transportation is an important issue surrounding this project and there are
opportunities to improve the situation on US 250. Several transportation
improvements will be made prior to or concurrent with new development at
Breezy Hill. However, as the memo from the County Transportation Planner
pointed out that many of the previously recommended improvements may no
longer be recommended because of changes in travel patterns and new strategies
to address transportation issues." At the work session, Planning Commissioners
agreed with the County Transportation Planner's assessment.
The one sentence in the Village of Rivanna (VoR) Master Plan referencing that all
desired infrastructure improvements should be in place prior to any rezoning
must be viewed in the context of the entire 43-page Master Plan document and in
the context of the Comprehensive Plan covering the entire County. There are
hundreds of other priorities in those documents must be balanced. Enabling
growth in the growth area and discouraging growth in rural areas is an
ZMA-2019-4
overriding principal that directly conflicts with any statement that implies that
development in a growth area should be discouraged.
Mr. McDermott listed the completion date of the Interchange improvements at I-
64 and Route 250 East as 2023. This improvement will greatly improve the traffic
conditions within the area. Based upon a typical timelines for site plan approvals,
site work, and house construction, the earliest possible date for the first home
coming online would be mid-2022. This should coincide with the completion of
the 1-64 /Route 250 interchange improvements.
The VoR Master Plan states: "Fixed -route transit service should be provided to
the Village of Rivanna when ridership levels can support transit. As part of our
transportation proffers, Breezy Hill is proffering to fund the County's portion of
funding that would be needed to establish a JAUNT CONNECT route to the growth
area. The recently launched Crozet CONNECT service is seeing tremendous
success. A fixed -route bus will remove cars from the corridor, provide options for
disadvantaged and disabled persons, and yield environmental benefits.
Breezy Hill is also proffering a complete reconfiguration of the signal timing
systems at the Milton Road and Louisa Road intersections with US 250. This will
improve the volume to capacity ratio of Route 250 between Glenmore Way and
the City of Charlottesville. The VoR Master Plan only calls for volume to capacity
ratio improvements between Louisa Road and the City of Charlottesville, so this
proffer is above and beyond what is recommended in the VoR Master Plan.
Improvements to the PM peak hour will be particularly noteworthy.
In addition to the specific contributions contained in the Breezy Hill proffers,
other improvements to Route 250 are either completed, funded and underway, or
no longer recommended, as previously highlighted in staff reports. Below is a
status of each of the VoR transportation implementation projects identified in the
Master Plan:
• I-64 at Shadwell Interchange improvements - Fully funded and scheduled to
be completed prior to or concurrent with the start of Breezy Hill
• Four -lane from Shadwell Interchange to Milton Road or Glenmore Way
entrance - Albemarle Traffic Engineering states "Four-laning this entire
segment of US 250 is neither feasible nor recommended."
• Intersection improvements/optimize signal timing at intersection of US
250 and Route 729 (N. Milton Road) - Breezy Hill is proffering optimization
of signal timing at both identified intersections.
• Bridge over railroad at Route 22 to solve short-term safety - Project
completed in 2012.
• Four -lane from Black Cat Road Route 616 to County Line - This project is
more than 1.4 miles to the east of Breezy Hill, is not impacted by Breezy Hill,
and has not been identified as warranted.
ZMA-2019-4
• Possible replacement of traffic signal at Glenmore Way and US 250 with
roundabout - This is identified as "long-term " and has not been identified as
being warranted or recommended.
• "Regional" TransitExpress Bus (Fluvanna Co. to City on US 250) -Breezy
Hillis proffering to fund the County's entire portion of the cost of a JAUNT
CONNECT service to serve the Village of Rivanna.
We would also like to point out that the original rezoning for Rivanna Village
(ZMA 2001-8) was for a maximum of 521 residential units and 125,000 sf of
commercial space. Rivanna Village rezoning was revised (ZMA 2013-12) so that
there the maximum number of residential units was 400 and the maximum
commercial space was reduced to 60,000 sf. The actual buildout of Rivanna
Village will be even less than the maximum proposed in the 2013 rezoning. The
maximum number of residences has dropped to 313 units.
The combined estimated traffic volume from the Rivanna Village and Breezy Hill
anticipated build -Out is still less than that of the original rezoning of Rivanna
Village.
This traffic estimate is based upon the traffic data from the ITE Trip Generation
Rates - 9th Edition. The residential portion of the estimated traffic volume is
based upon the assumption that there is a 45/55% split between the single-
family detached/single-family attached (ITE Code 210/230). The commercial
portion of the estimated traffic volume is based upon ITE Code 820 Shopping
Center.
2001 Rivanna Village ZMA Estimate VPD
234 SFD 1,257
287 SFA 1,667
125,000 sf Commercial 5,338
Total 8,262 VPD
Rivanna Village Anticipated Build -Out Estimate VPD
141 SFD 1,342
172 SFA 999
60.000 sf Commercial 2.562
Total 4,903 VPD
Breezy Hill Rezoning ZMA-2019-4
Breezy Hill Anticipated Build -Out Estimate VPD
160 SFD (Maximum) 1,523 VPD (Conservative Scenario)
Rivanna Village is going to contribute approximately 5,700 fewer VPD to the
roadways than was expected at the time the VoR Master Plan was developed and
adopted. Breezy Hill will generate only 1,523 VPD. Total traffic in the area will
remain well below what was anticipated when the VoR Master Plan was adopted.
2. (Density):
The maximum number of dwelling units has been revised to be 160. The resulting
density is 1.90 dwelling units per acre, which is within the range of the
Neighborhood Density Residential - Low (2 units or less/acre) specified by the
VoR Master Plan. We acknowledge that the VoR Master Plan has some self -
conflicting language about density, and maintain that appropriate density for
Breezy Hill needs to be evaluated in a larger context, especially considering other
development activities in the Village of Rivanna since adoption of the Master
Plan.
The initial Village of Rivanna rezoning (ZMA 2001-8) had a maximum of 521
residential units or 5.6 units per acre. A second rezoning application (ZMA 2013-
12) reduced the maximum number of residential units to 400 or 4.3 units per
acres. However, the actual build -out conditions will be even lower at only 313
residential units or 3.3 units per acre. This represents a loss of 208 units within
the Village Center, and a density that is much lower than what was approved with
the the two rezoning applications for this property (5.6 du/ac and 4.3 du/ac).
The Commissioners spoke of reducing the density of the Breezy Hill project to
less than 1 unit per acre. However, we feel that the loss in density at the Village
Center should be able to be transferred to the overall growth area of the Village of
Rivanna in order to maintain a balanced scenario across the growth areas of
Albemarle County.
(Consistency):
The Village of Rivanna Master Plan has several points in order to guide the
development in the area where Breezy Hill is located. The revised application is
consistent with those guidelines.
As stated above, the Master Plan designates the Breezy Hill area as Neighborhood
Density Residential - Low (2 units or less/acre). (page 33) The revised density is
1.90 du/ac.
Breezy Hill is in "Area B" which has a "possible density of 1 unit per acre", but
goes on to state that "different mixtures and densities could take place in the
future" within Areas A, B and C. (pages 26 and 27)
' ZMA-2019-4
The Master Plan also suggests that the "density will radiate from the Village
Center with the lowest densities at the edges of the Development Area." The
updated layout reflects a radial progression of density within the Development
Area. The area indicated for Townhouses, Single -Family Attached is clustered in
the northwest portion of the subject property. The Single -Family Detached units
will be adjacent to the properties along Running Deer Drive.
4. Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability. The project narrative appears to indicate
that only single-family detached dwellings would be included in this proposal.
Separately, an affordable housing proffer cannot be considered or discussed at this
time.
Though single-family detached housing will be the predominant typology, and is
appropriate for the entire Breezy Hill area, it is possible that there may be at least
two housing types - single-family attached (duplexes or townhouse) and single-
family detached to provide a range of housing styles, sizes and pricing,
particularly for efforts to provide on -site affordable housing. The single-family
attached products will be located in the northwest portion of the property closer
to Route 250 and the single-family detached products being located in the eastern
and southeastern portion of the property.
S. (Draft) Proffer Statement:
a. Proffered Plan
Please review the referenced date to the "General Development Plan" (June 10,
2013), and correct as may be necessary.
This has been corrected.
ii. This commitment should identify the "major elements" of the proffered plan
(such as entrance locations, street networks, interparcel connections, buffers
and/or setbacks, site layout and/or block layout, density limits, limits of
disturbance, or other elements).
The proffer has been modified.
iii. The proposal to reserve permission for future Variances to Site Plans or
Subdivision Plats is not acceptable; any language to this effect should be
removed.
This has been deleted.
b. Density Limit- Staff acknowledge this voluntary commitment to develop a maximum
of 200 dwelling units. This commitment should be incorporated into the "General
Accord with General Development Plan" proffer as a "major element" of that
proffered plan.
The number of units has decreased by 20% to a maximum of 160 units.
c. Cash Proffer for Capital Improvement Projects - Staff acknowledge this voluntary
commitment to contribute approximately $4M to be used towards unfunded
Breezy Hill Rezoning ZMA-2019-4
transportation improvements that are identified as being necessary prerequisites
for any potential rezoning approvals in the Village of Rivanna. However, at this time,
the County is not able to accept such a proffer, and County staff cannot currently
engage in communications regarding this proposed proffer.
Based on feedback from the PC and community members the cash proffer has
been revised to a proffer to implement specific improvements to US 250 and
fund a fixed transit route, as identified in the VoR Master Plan, concurrent
with the development of Breezy Hill. This is in response to concerns that a
less specific cash proffer might "sit in an escrow fund." It exposes the
developer to some risk of unknown cost to implement the proffer but resolves
two specific yet -incomplete priorities in the VoR master plan implementation
strategy.
d. Affordable Housing - Staff acknowledge this voluntary commitment to help support
and advance certain policies and recommendations in the Comp Plan as well as
other County policies relating to affordable housing. However, at this time, the
County is not able to accept such a proffer, and County staff cannot currently engage
in communications regarding this proposed proffer.
State Law has changed since the last submittal and the applicant desires to
provide affordable housing as part of the development. Please note that at
lower density of development revenue from the development would be too
low and there would not be any money available in the development budget to
fund proffers like affordable housing and transportation improvements.
Increased densities enable contributions to other community priorities.
6. Transportation - In consultation with the Transportation Planner and VDOT, staff
recommends expanding the scope of the TIA to include additional intersections to the
west.
There is no plan at this time to expand the scope of the TIA. VDOT did not have
this a requirement or recommendation on their comments from June 6, 2019.
7. Concept Plan:
a. Please clarify the distinction(s) between the "General Development Plan" document
(dated 4/23/2019), which is referenced in Proffer 1, and the "Conceptual Layout /
General Development Plan" document (dated 3/30/2018), which is not referenced
in Proffer 1.
Please disregard all previous plan submittals. The General Development Plan
has been revised to provide a Block Plan and a Conceptual Mass Grading Plan.
The Block Plan shows the general development pattern and key elements of
the plan.
b. Please consider consolidating all proffered plans into one document, and
consolidating all remaining "conceptual" plans that have been submitted "for
informational purposes" into a second, supplemental document.
Breezy Hill Rezoning ZMA-2019-4
See comment response above. The General Development Plan has been
revised.
The Breezy Hill site is in a portion of the Rt. 250 East EC that is non -arterial, and as
such the EC regulations are not currently being applied along that segment.
However, the concept plan shows a stormwater facility adjacent to Rt. 250. Even if
the street is not an EC, maintaining the rural character along the street is important.
Moving the stormwater facility away from the street and maintaining a landscape
buffer between the street and the facility would support this. Please note that this
recommendation is subject to revision, based on the type and size of the stormwater
facility proposed in this prominent area.
The existing topography along Route 250 drops away from the roadway into a
broad swale. The proposed stormwater management facility will be located in
this swale, as it is the natural low point. Its conceptual location follows the
existing drainage pattern of the site to treat the runoff from approximately
one-half of Blocks 1, 3 and 4.
The rural character of Route 250 is not homogenous; it varies from fields,
mowed lawns, wooded area to parking lots and commercial buildings within
one mile of the proposed entrance. If the stormwater management facility
were to be moved to another area, this would entail bucking the natural
drainage divides and more earthwork. These actions would drastically change
the appearance of the project from Route 250 to create a more engineered
landscape.
Natural Resources Manager
1. Since Carrol Creek is an impaired waterway, land disturbance should not occur near it.
The woody riparian buffer along Carrol Creek should be maintained and left
undisturbed.
Acknowledged. The preliminary grading shows that the grading activities will be
outside of the 100' Stream Buffer and/or the 100-Year Floodplain, whichever is
greater. It is the intent to maintain and protect the existing riparian buffer.
2. A buffer width of more than 100' (as required by the WPO) is recommended.
All grading activities will be kept out of the 100' Stream Buffer and/or the 100-
Year Floodplain, whichever is greater.
3. Preventing land disturbance and maintaining or creating wooded riparian buffers along
the two intermittent streams is also highly recommended. This will help protect Carroll
Creek as well as the section of the northernmost intermittent stream that is impaired
for aquatic life.
The western most portion of the site will be only one dwelling unit on
approximately 8.5 acres exclusive of the open space and conservation area. The
largest expanse of steep slopes and one of the intermittent streams will be
IJ': 1(2 Zv I`.'il' 11 rc,:>>I; ZMA-2019-4
crossed with only one driveway. This provides a more extensive conservation
effort due to the restriction on development at the western most portion of the
property.
4. Preventing land disturbance and maintaining wooded buffers will help conserve areas
of steep slope and possible wetlands that are in close proximity to Carroll Creek and the
intermittent streams.
All grading activities will be kept out of the 100' Stream Buffer and/or the 100-
Year Floodplain, whichever is greater.
Engineering
These comments can be addressed during subdivision/VSMP reviews.
1. The limits of floodway and base flood elevation must be determined by the applicant
prior to VSMP, subdivision or site plan approval [18-30.3.13(C)1]. Grading, even for
a pedestrian trail, cannot occur within the regulatory floodway unless it will be
maintained by the County; however, a primitive trail is allowed in the floodway.
2. It is recommended that proposed grades do not exceed 3:1.
3. Documentation that existing ponds meet current SWM construction standards may
be required.
Acknowledged. The comments from Engineering will be incorporated into the final
design of the project at the site plan/subdivision plan stage.
Albemarle County Service Authority/ ACSA
1. Is this site in the jurisdictional area for water and/or sewer Water/Sewer
2. What is the distance to the closet water and sewer line, if in the jurisdictional area?
Previous meetings discussed a water main extension along Running Deer Lane. Sewer is
along Glenmore.
3. Are there water pressure issues which may affect the proposed use as shown on plan?
4. Are there major upgrades needed to the water distribution or sewer collection system
of which the applicant and staff should be aware?
5. Are there other service provision issues such as the need for grinder pumps? Unknown.
6. Which issues should be resolved at the SP/ZMA stage wand which issues can be
resolved at the site plan/plat stage?
7. If the project is a large water user, what long term impacts or implications do you
forsee?
8. Additional comments? There may be offsite credits for extending water main along
Running Deer. Full water and sewer connection fees apply.
We will continue to collaborate with ACSA as the plan move forwards
Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority
1. Capacity issues for sewer that may affect this proposal. Requires RWSA Capacity
certification.
Breezy Hill Rezoning ZMA-2019-4 v
2. Requires RWSA Capacity Certification - Yes
3. Water flow or pressure issues that may affect this proposal - none known
4. "Red Flags" regarding service provision - none known
We will continue to collaborate with RWSA as the plan move forwards.
Albemarle Count Fire & Rescue
Fire Rescue has no objections to the Zoning Map amendment as submitted but will offer the
following:
1. Prior to the issuance of the 31st building permit, the second entrance/exit shall be
completed.
The plan has been updated to reflect the desire of the community and direction
from the Planning Commission to not direct traffic from the Development Area to
the rural roadway. The road that was previously shown intersecting with
Running Deer Drive is now for emergency access only. The emergency access will
have bollards so that only emergency vehicles can access this community from
Running Deer Drive. Additionally, we have provided for the future right-of-way
reservation(s) for the inter -parcel connections over Carroll Creek that have been
indicated in the Village of Rivanna Master Plan.
2. Travel ways must provide a minimum of 20' clear travel width, on street parking
arrangements should take this in to account.
Acknowledged. The roadway width is based upon VDOT Road Design Manual B(1)
Table 2.
3. Adequate fire flow based on building square footage will be required along with a fire
flow test prior to final acceptance.
Acknowledged.
4. Minimum turning radius shall be 25'
Acknowledged.
5. Any cul-de-sac or turn arounds will be required to meet current fire code requirements.
Acknowledged.
Virginia Department of Transportation
1. Richmond Road (Route 250) is a major collector road and the proposed entrance
doesn't meet spacing requirement of 660', please refer to VDOT's Road Design Manual,
Appendix F-pg. F-23, minimum spacing standards for commercial entrances,
intersections, and median crossovers. Current design will require an AME.
The entrance has been relocated so that it is 660' from Running Deer Drive.
2. The provided TIA shows that peak hour through volume on Route 250 will increase in
the am peak by 8.8% at intersection #3 and 15.5% at intersection #4, pm peak
increases are 8.8% at intersection #3 and 13.3% at intersection #4.
Acknowleged.
3. The left turn lane warrants are nearly met at the Route 250/Running Deer intersection.
This calculation is dependent upon an equal distribution of lefts in from Route 250
Breezy Hill Rezoning + . 2 I , - 4
between the two intersections. The layout suggest that it may be quicker for most
people to use Running Deer. VDOT recommends construction of a left turn late at the
site entrance to address safety concerns (Route 250 is 55mph) and to encourage use of
the new entrance (given location approval).
A left turn lane has not been added at the site entrance. Instead, the number of
proposed dwelling units has been reduced from 200 to 160, which will further
reduce the number of trips and the left turn lane warrants. In addition, the layout
of the site has been revised so that the intersection onto Running Deer Drive is
now an emergency only access point. The intersection was updated in response to
feedback received from the community and direction from the Planning
Commission. If a future TIA shows that a left turn lane is warranted, the issue will
Breezy Hill Rezoning ZMA-2019-4 10