Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900004 Staff Report Zoning Map Amendment 2019-10-22COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA201900004 Breezy Hill Staff: Tim Padalino, AICP PC Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 BOS Public Hearing: November 20, 2019 Owner: Carroll Creek Properties LLC; Applicant: Don Franco, PE, Roudabush Gale & Assoc.; Kimco LC; Breezy Hill at Keswick LLC; Hawkins, Charlie Armstrong, Southern Development Clarence M or Beatrice B TMP(s): 094000000001A0; 09400000000500; DA (Development Area): Village of Rivanna 09400000000600; 09400000000800; Magisterial District: Scottsville 094000000008A0; 094000000008C0; Location: Breezy Hill Lane; South side of Richmond Road 09400000004800; 094000000048A0 (US 250), east of Glenmore Subdivision between Hacktown Acreage: 84 acres (total) Road and Running Deer Drive. Current Zoning: RA Rural Areas; Zoning Overlay Comp. Plan Designation: "Neighborhood Density Districts include Entrance Corridor, Flood Hazard, Residential (Low)" — less than 2 dwelling units/acre, and Steep Slopes — (Managed) and — (Preserved) supporting uses such as places of worship, schools, public By -right use(s): Agricultural, forestal, and fishery and institutional uses; "Parks and Green Systems" — parks, uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre in playgrounds, play fields, greenways, trails, paths, recreational development lots) facilities and equipment, plazas, outdoor sitting areas, natural Rezone: From RA Rural Areas to R-4 Residential areas, preservation of stream buffers, floodplains and steep Proffers: Yes slopes adjacent to waterways. Character of Property: Primarily rural landscape of forest and Use of Surrounding Properties: Nearby successional forest, with residential uses currently or formerly residential districts and uses including the occurring in multiple dwellings and accessory structures, as well as subdivisions of Glenmore, Rivanna Village, agricultural and/or forestal uses and associated structures; tributary and Running Deer; the Development Area streams drain the subject property into Carroll Creek, which runs boundary with the Rural Area is in the along the western boundary. immediate vicinity. Proposal: Rezone a total of approximately 84 acres from Rural Requested # of Dwelling Units: 160 Areas zoning, which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses as Affordable Housing: Proffer #3 — provide well as residential uses (0.5 unit/acre), to R-4 Residential zoning, affordable housing equal to 15% of total which allows residential uses (4 units/acre) with the potential for units constructed, through cash -in -lieu, on - additional units if bonus factors are applied. 160 dwelling units site sale, and/or on -site rental. (maximum) are proposed (1.9 units/acre gross; 2.5 units/acre net). AMI: 80% Factors Favorable: (see pages 8-13 for full details) Factors Unfavorable: (see pages 8-13 for full details) 1. The proposed development includes two 1. The proposed density exceeds the recommendations in entrances as recommended on the "Future Land the Master Plan as well as the guidance provided by the Use Plan" (Detail Map 2). Planning Commission at the work session on 7/30/2019. 2. The proposal is in general conformity with the 2. The proposal does not address the transportation "Parks and Green Systems Plan." improvements identified in the Master Plan as being 3. The proposal includes a multi -use path along US prerequisite to new development through rezoning. 250, as per the "Future Transportation Network." 3. The applicants have not clearly demonstrated that the 4. The proposal includes a (future) vehicular and/or "Transportation/Transit" proffers will sufficiently mitigate pedestrian interparcel connection to the west anticipated impacts to the public road network. across Carrol Creek, as recommended on the 4. The proposal does not contain sufficient information to "Future Land Use Plan (Detail Map 2)." complete an evaluation, or make positive findings, 5. The proposal's Affordable Housing proffer would relative to Neighborhood Model Principles. generate $507,000 (max) of monetary 5. The typical road section does not contain any curb or contributions to support off -site affordable housing curb and gutter, sidewalks, or planting strips. initiatives; or ensure construction of 24 affordable 6. The proposal does not address impacts to public dwelling units (max) for sale or for rent; or an schools, despite known capacity conflicts at Burley adjusted combination of those outcomes. Middle School and Monticello High School. Staff Recommendations: In consideration of the unfavorable factors outweighing the favorable factors, staff recommends that the Commission recommend denial of ZMA201900004 Breezy Hill (as presented and as proffered). ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 STAFF PERSON: Tim Padalino, AICP PLANNING COMMISSION: October 22, 2019 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 20, 2019 ZMA201900004 Breezy Hill PETITION: PROJECT: ZMA201900004 Breezy Hill MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville TAX MAP/PARCEL(S): 094000000001A0; 09400000000500; 09400000000600; 09400000000800; 094000000008A0;094000000008C0;09400000004800;094000000048AO LOCATION: South side of Richmond Road (US 250), east of Glenmore Subdivision between Hacktown Road and Running Deer Drive. PROPOSAL: Rezone multiple properties for a maximum of 160 residential units, with proffers. PETITION: Rezone a total of approximately 84 acres from Rural Areas zoning district, which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses as well as residential uses (0.5 unit/acre density), to R-4 Residential, which allows residential uses (4 units/acre density) with the potential for additional units if bonus factors are applied. 160 dwelling units (maximum) are proposed at a gross density of 1.9 units/acre and a net density of 2.5 units/acre. OVERLAY DISTRICT(S): ENTRANCE CORRIDOR, FLOOD HAZARD, and STEEP SLOPES — MANAGED and PRESERVED. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR (EC): Yes PROFFERS: Yes COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: "Neighborhood Density Residential (Low)" — residential uses (less than 2 dwelling units/acre) and supporting uses such as places of worship, schools, public and institutional uses; and "Parks and Green Systems" — parks, playgrounds, play fields, greenways, trails, paths, recreational facilities and equipment, plazas, outdoor sitting areas, natural areas, preservation of stream buffers, floodplains and steep slopes adjacent to rivers and streams. Village of Rivanna Comp Plan Area. CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE & AREA: The subject property for this Breezy Hill ZMA application includes approximately 84 acres of land on eight parcels of record on Tax Map #94 (identified as Parcels #1A, 5, 6, 8, 8A, 8C, 48, and 48A). These parcels are all within the eastern portion of the Village of Rivanna Comprehensive Plan Area (Village) within the Development Area. The subject property is characterized as a primarily rural landscape of forest and successional forest, with residential uses currently or formerly occurring in multiple dwellings with accessory structures, as well as on -site agricultural and/or forestal operations and associated structures. Tributary streams drain the subject property into Carroll Creek, which runs along the western boundary towards the Rivanna River. (See Location Maps, Attach. 1.) Breezy Hill is in the immediate vicinity of existing relatively low -density residential properties within the Village to the west, including Glenmore and Rivanna Village. The Development Area boundary with the Rural Area is also in the immediate vicinity of the subject property to the east; specifically, the boundary runs along Running Deer Drive, which results in the existing Running Deer low -density residential neighborhood being located partially in the Development Area and partially in the Rural Area. The existing conditions of the subject property are shown on Sheet 2 of the revised concept plan ("General Development Plan," revision date 8/19/2019) (Attach. 8). SUMMARY OF THE ZMA PROPOSAL: The applicants propose to rezone a total of approximately 84 acres from RA Rural Areas zoning, which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses as well as residential uses (0.5 unit/acre density), to R-4 Residential zoning, which allows residential uses (4 units/acre density) with the potential for additional units ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 if bonus factors are applied. 160 dwelling units (maximum) are proposed at a gross density of 1.9 units/acre and a net density of 2.5 units/acre. The applicants have included proffers with this proposal. See pages 6-8 of this report for the specifics of the ZMA proposal; and see pages 8-13 of this report for comprehensive staff analysis of the ZMA proposal. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST: The original Project Narrative submitted on 4/15/2019 (Attach. 2) describes a substantial and increasing market demand for the type of new development that the applicant is proposing: large single-family detached units on large lots. The narrative suggests that the proposed project would help provide a new supply of this type of residential properties in a manner and location that reduces development pressure within the Rural Areas, while situating new residential uses within a portion of the Development Area "that is specifically designated for development of neighborhood residential low density lots." The applicants provide additional justification and explanation in the comment response letter dated 8/19/2019 (Attach. 9). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Future Land Use Plan: As shown in Map 1 (below), the Future Land Use Map in the Village of Rivanna Master Plan (Master Plan) identifies the majority of the subject property as being designated for "Neighborhood Density Residential — Low" uses (shown in pale yellow). Additionally, the Plan recommends "Parks and Green Systems" uses in multiple areas (shown in green), including the riparian areas associated with Carrol Creek as well as a recommended buffer strip of primarily undeveloped land along the subject property's frontage with US 250. nnrae�emn+ a x4 .0,.�. martftc,WNcnr®wi�TV'o.u+w�Ae.cn•Gcrtr aneew Gurdrieea Nr Ge 4miamaima 0.36hgWWe W*NdK[UR �­an­e tore V'c➢ertla wreocO paa oe�erw nalu m»'ts. ^<0�9 Man 1. This map shows the easternmost portion of the Village of Rivanna Land Use Plan, with the Breezy Hill subject properties highlighted with a gold outline. ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 The "Neighborhood Density Residential — Low" future land use designation supports residential uses at a density less than 2 dwelling units per acre. If applied to the subject property without factoring in other future land use recommendations contained in Chapter 4 of the Master Plan, this designation would support a maximum of 168 units (using gross density) or a maximum of 131 units [using net density, after factoring out areas designated for "Parks and Green Systems" on the Future Land Use Plan, in accordance with County policy contained in the Development Areas Strategy 8c (Comprehensive Plan page 8.37: "With the Comprehensive Plan ... density is calculated by measuring the area with the land use designation other than Parks and Green Systems"); see Exhibit 1, below]. However, the "Residential Areas" section of Chapter 4 of the Master Plan also contains detailed language that specifically recommends residential uses in this portion of the VOR Development Area at a density of 1 dwelling unit per acre, and which further expresses that it is appropriate for this portion of the VOR Development Area to be developed for residential uses at the lowest density within the overall VOR Development Area. This location -specific recommendation would equate to 84 units (using gross density) or 65-66 units (using net density, after factoring out areas designated for "Parks and Green Systems" on the Future Land Use Plan, in accordance with County policy contained in the Development Areas Strategy 8c (Comprehensive Plan page 8.37); see Exhibit 1, below). As noted below on pages 5-6 of this report, the Commission affirmed during a 7/30/2019 work session that the "Residential Areas" insert and chart in the VOR Master Plan should be used for density recommendations; and the Commission further affirmed that a net density — and not a gross density — of 1 dwelling unit per acre (equating to a total of 65-66 dwelling units) would be appropriate relative to the multiple recommendations contained in the VOR Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal (160 dwelling units) represents a density that far exceeds these recommendations. so-5r z 4023 00-56 80-588 4036 ti50E 80-64 80-56A 80-49 Go 381] 80-56Ai 1093.18 sq k 4011 4009 2.51 acres 80-64A 4088. 3934 lL5 111 00- 3815 OZ02 a9 5 areezv �� 699Ba qft i� 7 534'4 sq k 2009Z s9 k -�'4130 94-4 0,12 acres 0.46 a 3995 q `s 94 3 3983 4150,. G 4057 ]3 4 1 5Z]156 sq ft �� 94-BA 13,25 as �s 944ZA 41 93A4-- _ 948 94-4]B 1340 94-48A 4A6A ]360 94-5 94-49B 5) 8] 94-49C -� c= 1400 3100 94] 1114 1385 94-6 3135 / s 94 8F 115 p 4� 3050 3090 6E 4- T 94-7A 9446A1 30]5 W-edYhsY-ry 31-',Ci 949-?4-#642 1435 94-ZB 1450 3117 94-10 94-11A £•F-sl 9L46A9 9L1zC1 Exhibit 1. GIS-Web was used to identify and quantify the portions of the subject property designated as "Parks and Green Systems" on the Future Land Use Plan. The total area of the subject property with this designation (shown in dark green) is approximately 18.31 GIS acres. The Future Land Use Plan designates the remaining approximately 65.69 GIS acres of the subject property for "Neighborhood Density Residential — Low" future land uses. ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 The Neighborhood Model: As explained on pages 6-7 of this report, the revised concept plan (dated 8/19/2019) does not contain sufficient information to conduct a complete evaluation, or make positive findings, relative to Neighborhood Model (NM) principles. Please refer to pages 6-7 of this report for additional information. This area is not designated as a "priority area" for development or capital investment in the Comprehensive Plan or Master Plan. APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS — COMMUNITY MEETING: The Community Meeting for this proposed project was held on June 24, 2019 during a meeting of the Village of Rivanna Community Advisory Committee (VORCAC). Attendees representing Albemarle County included County Supervisor Rick Randolph, David Benish (Interim Director of Planning and Chief of Planning), and Tori Kanellopoulos (Senior Planner). A large number of interested members of the public attended the community meeting. The issues and concerns addressed during the meeting are identified in the Community Meeting Notes (Attach. 5). Many of the concerns raised by the community were re -articulated by members of the public, and addressed by the Planning Commission, during the Planning Commission work session (see below). Following the community meeting, a relatively large number of interested members of the public communicated their concerns to staff. An email update group was established to quickly notify a large number of community members about upcoming public meetings or other notable project updates. APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS — PLANNING COMMISSION WORK SESSION: On July 30, 2019, the Planning Commission conducted a work session for ZMA201900004 to provide direction for the applicant and staff, and to provide interpretation of the master plan for the community and for future applications. The staff report for that work session is provided as Attach. 10. During this work session, the Planning Commission provided the following guidance (below, 1-4). Please also note that the Meeting Minutes for the 7/30/2019 Planning Commission work session are provided as Attach. 11, and a podcast of the work session is available at the following link: https://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Development/forms/podc ast/2019 Podcasts/2019 07 30 PC Meeting.mp3 1. Infrastructure Capacity and Adequacy: The Commission indicated that the Transportation Planner's updated comments and recommendations are relevant and require careful consideration. The Commission also affirmed that the transportation improvements identified in the VOR Master Plan continue to be highly important, and that the recommendations contained in the VOR Master Plan remain in effect. The Commission further affirmed that the applicants' proposal should substantially conform with and be responsive to the recommendations in the Master Plan, and that staff must carefully evaluate the proposal relative to the recommendations in the VOR Master Plan. 2. Residential Density: The Commission did not explicitly specify an exact density or an exact number of dwelling units that would be appropriate for the subject property. However, the Commission did generally affirm staff's recommendations that the "Residential Areas" insert and chart in the VOR Master Plan should be used for density recommendations; and the Commission further affirmed that a net density — and not a gross density — of 1 dwelling unit per acre (equating to a total of 65-66 dwelling units) would be appropriate relative to recommendations contained in Chapter 4 of the VOR Master Plan. 3. Unit Types: The Commission indicated that dwelling unit types other than single-family detached dwellings would be appropriate towards the northern and western portions of the subject property, in locations closer to the Village of Rivanna "Center" and farther from the adjoining Running Deer community (provided that the unit types are permissible in the requested R-4 zoning district). 4. Affordable Housing: The Commission confirmed staff's recommendation that a monetary contribution to support off -site affordable housing initiatives within the County would be appropriate, ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 in lieu of providing affordable housing on site — provided that such a proffer is eventually voluntarily made (as has been verbally indicated by the applicant), and provided that the amount of the proffered monetary commitment is determined to be sufficient. ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND COMMENTS: This proposal has generated significant and sustained levels of interest and concern among members of the public. Staff and County officials have received two public petitions, with the signatories primarily concerned about the proposal's impacts to the Village of Rivanna (and the Running Deer neighborhood) and impacts to the public road network. Those petitions are summarized as follows: • "Stop Breezy Hill!" petition (dated 10/8/2019), signed by concerned residents of the Running Deer neighborhood (75 signatures) (Attach. 12) • Improve 250 Before Breezy Hill" petition (dated 9/23/2019), signed by concerned residents of Glenmore and other surrounding areas (269 signatures) (Attach. 13) Additionally, staff and County officials have received numerous other comments and correspondence, articulating concerns about the proposal. Major themes of this public commentary include the following: • Increased residential development at Breezy Hill would harm the character of the existing Running Deer neighborhood (because of the number of new dwelling units and the density of the proposed development, in comparison to `rural' Running Deer). • Increased traffic on Route 250 would be inappropriate due to existing issues with congestion/capacity, especially during peak hours (expressed as a quality of life issue and also as a public safety issue, with regards to concerns about the ability of fire, police, and ambulance to quickly travel east or west on 250 during peak hour congestion). SPECIFICS OF THE ZMA PROPOSAL: The applicants propose to rezone eight Development Area properties totaling approximately 84 acres from RA Rural Areas zoning (which allows residential uses at 0.5 unit/acre density) to R-4 Residential zoning (which allows residential uses at 4 units/acre density, with the hypothetical potential for additional units if bonus factors were to be applied). The applicant proposes a maximum total of 160 dwelling units at a proposed gross density of approximately 1.9 units/acre and a proposed net density of approximately 2.5 units/acre. (See Project Narrative dated 4/15/2019, Attach. 2.; and see Comment Response Letter dated 8/19/2019, Attach. 9.) The proposal is depicted on the revised concept plan ("General Development Plan," revision date 8/19/2019) (Attach. 8). Staff has identified the following notable characteristics of the concept plan. • The proposed development is shown as having a full -access commercial entrance on US 250, and an emergency -access -only entrance on Running Deer Drive. These two entrances are proposed in locations that are recommended on the "Future Land Use Plan (Detail Map 2)" in the Master Plan. • The proposal is in general conformity with the "Parks and Green Systems Plan" in the VOR Master Plan, in the following ways: ■ The proposal includes "conservation area" designations for portions of the subject property that contain critical resources (such as floodplains, stream buffers, and preserved steep slopes) and which otherwise contain environmentally sensitive and important areas (such as the forested riparian corridor along Carrol Creek). ■ The proposal includes "semi-public open space" designations and trails around the perimeter of the proposed development, in general conformity with what is recommended in the Parks and Green Systems Plan in the Master Plan. • The proposal includes a "multi -use path" along US 250, as recommended in the "Future Transportation Network" section of the Master Plan. ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 • The proposal includes an area reserved for (future) dedication to the County for use as a (future) vehicular and/or pedestrian interparcel connection to the west across Carrol Creek, as recommended on the "Future Land Use Plan (Detail Map 2)" in the Master Plan and as articulated in the "Pedestrian and Bicycle Network" recommendations on pages 39-40 of the VOR Master Plan. Beyond those characteristics and details, the revised concept plan (dated 8/19/2019) does not contain sufficient information to conduct a complete evaluation, or make positive findings, relative to Neighborhood Model (NM) principles. In contrast, the original concept plan and other application materials (submitted 4/15/2019) contained more details and more clearly demonstrated a commitment to NM principles. However, the revised concept plan appears to have fewer conceptual elements and less detail than the original application materials. For example: • The revised concept plan does not provide a conceptual depiction of the open space system's pocket parks, which were shown on the 4/15/19 concept plan as being integrated into the interior portions of the proposed residential community. • The revised concept plan does not provide a conceptual depiction of the internal road network. • The revised concept plan does not contain information about conceptual lot layout or how the proposed internal street network would give form to proposed blocks. (Concept plan Sheet 3 does show "blocks," but that information seems to relate to potential phasing and unit types, and does not express the physical or spatial configuration of proposed blocks or lots.) • There is no revised/resubmitted exhibit that correlates with the "Conceptual Lot Layout Exhibit" provided with the original application (submitted 4/15/2019). Additionally, the concept plan does provide a clear detail of a typical road section on Sheet 1. A 50' public right-of-way is shown, with 12' wide travel lanes, 6' wide grass shoulders, and 6' wide grass -lined ditches. The typical road section is rural in nature and does not include any sidewalks, which is not consistent with County policy contained in the Development Areas Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, including Strategy 2a ("Continue to require and provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths in the Development Areas," page 8.15) and Strategy 2k ("...encourage the building of complete streets," page 8.21). Additionally, this proposed road section would also not be compliant with the applicable "on -site improvements and design standards" contained in County Code §§ 14-411 and 14-410.H ("In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips."), unless a special exception was requested and approved; however, no such special exception request was included with the ZMA application. PROFFERS: The proposal includes an undated Draft Proffer Statement (Attach. 14). The applicant prepared these proffers pursuant to the new proffer laws (Code of Virginia § 15.2-2203.4) which went into effect on 7/1/2019, and submitted them with the revised resubmittal materials on 8/19/2019. The proffer statement includes the following voluntary commitments, as summarized below. (Please see Attach. 14 for complete details). Staff comments on these proffers are provided on pages 8-13 of this report. 1. Proffered Plan: Improvement to the property shall be in general accord with the concept plan, including eight (8) major elements, one of which is the specified density limit of 160 dwelling units (maximum) — see proffer 1.h. 2. Transportation/Transit: a. The owner shall design and install, with input and approval from VDOT, signal timing and coordination improvements to the Route 250 corridor that improve the flow of traffic and improve the volume to capacity ratio on Route 250 at the intersections with Route 729 (N. Milton Road) and Route 22 (Louisa Road). b. The Owner shall contribute to the County $50,000 per year for a period of ten years to be used for operating expenses relating to fixed -route transit service to the Village ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 of Rivanna or the operating expenses of a comprehensive transit service that serves the Village of Rivanna as part of a larger system serving the US Route 250 corridor. 3. Affordable Housing: a. Cash Proffer: In lieu of constructing affordable dwelling units for 15% of the total number of units, the Owner has the option to make a cash contribution to Albemarle County, Piedmont Housing Alliance, Habitat for Humanity, or another local non-profit affordable housing provider in the amount of $21,125 for each such cash -in -lieu -of - construction unit prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for that unit. This proffer specifies a maximum cash proffer of $507,000. b. For -sale Units: The Owner maintains the right to construct and sell all or a portion of the affordable units within the property. The "Affordability" section of this proffer defines "affordable housing" as "units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median income [AMI] ... such that housing costs ... do not exceed 30% of the gross household income." c. For Rent Units: The Owner maintains the right to construct and rent all or a portion of the affordable units within the property. The "Affordability" section of this proffer defines "affordable housing" as "units affordable for rent by households with incomes less than 80% of the area median income [AMI] ... such that rent payments ... do not exceed 30% of the gross household income." 4. Cost Index: This proffer establishes a method for the amount of each cash contribution required by proffer 3 to be adjusted annually, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index. 5. Counterparts: This proffer establishes that "This Proffer Statement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and which shall constitute but one and the same instrument." STAFF ANALYSIS: Relationship between the application and the intent and purposes of the requested zoning district: The intentions of the requested R-4 Residential zoning district are contained in Zoning Ordinance (ZO) Section 15.1, and include the following: "This district is created to establish a plan implementation zone that: Provides for compact, medium - density, single-family development; Permits a variety of housing types; and Provides incentives for clustering of development and provision of locational, environmental, and development amenities." Staff notes the discrepancy between the permissible density in the requested R-4 district and the proposed density of this ZMA proposal: this application requests R-4 Residential zoning for the subject property, which would allow residential uses at a density of 4 units/acre; but the application only proposes residential development at a gross density of 1.9 units/acre and a net density of 2.5 units/acre. Staff also notes that one of the codified purposes of the R-4 district is to "provide for compact, medium -density, single-family [residential] development." However, this application proposes relatively low -density residential development, at a development density approximately half of what would otherwise be permissible in the R-4 district. Anticipated impact on public facilities and services: Streets: Page 43 of the VOR Master Plan states that "Addressing traffic issues on US 250 is the highest priority for the Village of Rivanna.... approval of any development by rezoning will be predicated on the completion of a number of transportation improvements, which are identified in the tables in this chapter. These improvements are needed to improve the volume to capacity ratio of US 250 between Route 22 ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 (Louisa Road) and the City of Charlottesville.... It is essential that all of the US 250 improvements be constructed before new development occurs in the Village." The Traffic Impact Assessment (TIA) provided with this ZMA application indicates that the proposed development would generate an average of 1,922 new daily vehicle trips, and would generate 143 and 193 new vehicle trips in the AM and PM peak hours, respectively. Staff acknowledges that these estimates were reduced to 1,602 daily trips, 118 AM peak hour trips, and 160 PM peak hour trips in the "Breezy Hill Supplemental Study" dated 9/3/2019, in accordance with the revised ZMA proposal to reduce the maximum number of dwelling units to 160. (Please see page 10 of this report for more detailed information about this "Supplemental Study.") This ZMA proposal includes a "Transportation/Transit" proffer which attempts to mitigate transportation impacts in two ways. One proffered commitment is to provide annual monetary contributions "to the County to be used for operating expenses relating to ... transit service." Specifically, the proffer commits $50,000/year, for a maximum total of 10 years and $500,000, to help fund fixed -route transit service to the Village of Rivanna or to help fund a comprehensive transit service that serves the Village of Rivanna as part of a larger system serving the US Route 250 corridor. This proffered contribution is envisioned by the applicants as a catalyst for establishing a "JAUNT CONNECT" route (or similar) to the Village of Rivanna. Staff acknowledges that such contributions would help address one of the recommendations in the VOR Master Plan, and that such transit service would theoretically generate public benefit. However, staff have identified the following concerns regarding this proffer: • It is unclear how much transit service would be provided through a $50K/year contribution, in terms of frequency of trips or location of routes. • Each such proffered annual monetary contribution would be conditioned on the continuous operation of a fixed route transit service the 12 preceding months — meaning that if no such service exists, this particular proffered commitment would be void. At this time, no such fixed - route transit service currently exists, and it is not clear that any such service is planned or funded (in full or in part). Additionally, if a transit route is established to and from the Village, but becomes ineffective at any time, then the County likely wouldn't continue its operation — which could render this proffer useless. • Further, because no transit service currently serves this area of the County, and because this area of the County is developed at a relatively low density, such monetary contributions are not guaranteed to translate into actual transit service or into any demonstrable public benefit (or to otherwise mitigate transportation impacts). • Finally, the "Supplemental Study" dated 9/3/2019 assumed that the transit service would reduce both the AM and PM peak hour traffic by 20 vehicle trips. Based on data from other commuter routes operating in the region, and in consideration of the land use factors that contribute to transit ridership, staff believes this is an optimistic assessment of potential ridership — and therefore an optimistic projection of how this commitment will mitigate impacts to Route 250. The second proffered commitment is to design and install signal timing and coordination improvements along 250 at the N. Milton Road intersection and Louisa Road intersection, using the signal equipment existing at each intersection. This would partially address one of the recommended transportation improvements identified in the Master Plan. However, these proffered "signal timing and coordination improvements to the Route 250 corridor" have not been verified by County staff or VDOT as being sufficient for appropriately mitigating the reasonably anticipated impacts, particularly in relation to the underlying conditions (such as the longstanding and ongoing congestion and "volume to capacity" issues on US 250) that the Master Plan recommendations attempt to address. Mr. Adam J. Moore, P.E., Area ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 Land Use Engineer — VDOT Charlottesville Residency, commented on 9/25/2019 that "It is not possible at this time to determine what, if any, impact this would have on delay or overall travel times." Although the proffered signal timing and coordination improvements could partially address one of the recommended transportation improvements identified in the Master Plan and intended to address traffic conditions along the Rt. 250 corridor, the proposal does not directly address the recommended improvements relating to 1.) widening US 250; 2.) (all) intersection improvements at US 250 and Milton Road (note: on N. Milton Road, the existing turn lane has not been extended and no additional turn lane has been constructed); 3.) US 250 bridge improvement over the railroad at Route 22 (note: this bridge has previously been replaced by VDOT, but has not been improved to increase capacity or address congestion); or 4.) the addition of eastbound and westbound turn lanes on US 250 at Black Cat Road. Additionally, the proposal does not include proffered commitments to address the transportation improvements identified as updated recommendations by Mr. Kevin McDermott, Albemarle County Transportation Planner, as contained in the memo dated July 14, 2019 (Attach. 6). Specifically, the following Transportation Planner comment (#3) is not addressed: "At a minimum, constructing a reversible three -lane section from the end of the current four -lane section near the 1-64 interchange to the Route 22 (Louisa Road) intersection should be considered necessary to address this Comprehensive Plan requirement [to "Four -lane US 250 from the US 250/1-64 interchange to Route 729 (Milton Road) and, possibly, Glenmore Way."]. Finally, staff have also identified concerns with the intersection of US 250 and Route 22 relating to safety and congestion which are not addressed with this proposal. Separately, staff acknowledges that the applicants, in consultation with Engineering & Planning Resources, P.C., have prepared a memo ("Breezy Hill Supplemental Study" dated 9/3/2019) which is intended to "examine the traffic operations at the intersection of Route 250 and Route 22 and the intersection of Route 250 and N Milton Road" and "examine if the 2023 build scenario with [proffered] coordinated traffic signals and [proffered] bus service will have improved traffic operations compared to 2023 no build scenario with existing traffic signals. However, this supplemental study was prepared after the 8/19/2019 resubmittal date and provided separately from the other resubmittal materials (which had already been distributed to all applicable reviewers). As a result, staff was unable to conduct a detailed review of this supplemental study or prepare any detailed staff analysis and still keep this application review process on track for the October 22 public hearing date with the Commission (as requested by the applicants). Although staff has not conducted a thorough interdivisional/interagency review and has not completed any comprehensive analysis of this supplemental study, the study asserts that the proffered commitments to mitigate transportation impacts would actually decrease delays and improve levels of service and intersection performance along the 250 corridor — including during peak hour traffic — despite the development of 160 new residential units at Breezy Hill. As alluded to in the preceding paragraph, due to the timing of the submittal of the "supplemental study" relative to the review process and public hearing schedule requested by the applicants, Staff cannot presently verify these conclusions or otherwise determine if the proffered commitments would offset the anticipated impacts of the proposed development, and/or create a net positive effect on the performance of this corridor (as indicated by the supplemental study). In conclusion, the intent of the Master Plan's transportation recommendations is that no rezoning should be approved until significant improvements have been made to the existing deteriorated traffic conditions on Route 250. However, sufficient improvements have not been made, or committed to, on Route 250 to address the existing traffic conditions; and this this proposal's proffered commitments have not been verified by County staff or VDOT as being sufficient for appropriately mitigating the reasonably anticipated impacts, particularly in relation to the underlying conditions (such as the longstanding and ongoing congestion and "volume to capacity" issues on US 250) that the Master Plan recommendations attempt to address. ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 Its] , hnnls- The proposal includes a maximum of 160 dwelling units. The subject property is within the Southern Feeder Pattern, and residents of the proposed Breezy Hill neighborhood would attend Stone -Robinson Elementary School, Burley Middle School, and Monticello High School. The Analysis table on page 10 of Albemarle County Public Schools' "Long Range Planning Advisory Committee - Final Report 2019" (Attach. 15) identifies the following notable characteristics with these public schools: • Stone -Robinson Elementary School currently has low capacity conflicts. • Burley Middle School currently has moderate capacity conflicts and a high population growth forecast. ACPS has identified the following capacity recommendation: "middle school facility planning study" • Monticello High School currently has high capacity conflicts and a high population growth forecast. ACPS has identified the following capacity recommendation: "high school center expansion" However, the proposal does not address impacts to public schools, despite identified capacity conflicts. Residential development at a density recommended in the Master Plan would produce comparatively less impacts to these schools than what is currently proposed in this ZMA application. Fire & Rescue: The proposed Breezy Hill development would be located in close proximity to the East Rivanna Volunteer Fire Company. Albemarle County Fire & Rescue indicated "No Objection" to this proposal on 9/29/2019, citing the revisions made to the resubmitted application materials (resubmitted 8/19/2019). Utilities: The subject property is within the ACSA water and sewer service jurisdictional area, and both services are available. Regarding utilities and infrastructure capacity, the VOR Master Plan states the following: • "Approval of future development proposals should occur simultaneously with or follow provision of adequate infrastructure." ... "Approval of future development should be monitored in conjunction with improvements to US 250 and available sewer capacity so that approval of new units or uses does not exceed capacity of the sewage treatment plant or the road system." (Master Plan p. 7) • "Additional development in the Village currently is limited by ... the capacity of the sewage treatment plant which was installed for the Village.... The actual number of additional units which may be approved for development in the future depends on the capacity of the sewage treatment plant.... Monitoring of available capacity is essential for any future development." (Master Plan p. 43) Dyon Vega, P.E., Civil Engineer for RWSA commented on 6/11/2019 that there are no known issues or "red flags," but also commented that "This proposal requires RWSA [sewer] capacity certification." Additionally, Mr. Alexander J. Morrison, P.E., Senior Civil Engineer with ACSA, communicated the following via email on 7/19/2019: • (Regarding water utilities and capacity): "There is no water capacity issues that would restrict the rezoning and development of Breezy Hill." • (Regarding wastewater utilities and capacity): "The ACSA conducted a study on the existing wastewater plant serving Glenmore and the surrounding community. During this study, the ACSA took into account the approved Village of Rivanna Master Plan and applied additional density factors to the undeveloped areas. The ACSA has concluded that there are no wastewater capacity issues associated with the full buildout of the Village of Rivanna Master Plan." ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 Is Anticipated impact on environmental, cultural and historic resources: The proposal would require significant land clearance and land disturbance (primarily in upland areas), which would necessarily result in the loss of wildlife habitat and loss of forested land cover. However, the proposal does designate approximately 11 acres (or 13% of the subject property) as "conservation area," which would primarily protect the forested riparian area along Carroll Creek and associated critical resources such as floodplain areas, stream buffers, and preserved steep slopes. The proposal also designates approximately 21 acres (or 25% of the subject property) as "open space," where it appears that no grading or land disturbance would occur, as shown on the "Conceptual Mass Grading Plan" on sheet 4 of the concept plan. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties: The revised and resubmitted proposal was modified in response to public comments provided during the PC work session. These modifications include the elimination of a full -access vehicular entrance on Running Deer Drive; and the siting of single-family attached and/or townhouse dwelling unit types in the northeastern portions of the subject property, so that all dwelling unit types closer to the existing Running Deer neighborhoods would be single-family detached and thereby have a similar residential character to the adjoining neighborhood. Staff acknowledge that any land development and/or land use changes to this partially undeveloped subject property on the edge of the Development Area will likely be perceived as having a negative impact on the adjoining and nearby properties within the Rural Area. Public need and justification for the change: Albemarle County's Growth Management Policy provides an overarching policy position that development should primarily occur within the Development Area. This ZMA proposal does conform to this countywide policy of concentrating new land development into designated Development Areas. However, as noted elsewhere in this report, this proposal does create particular concerns among staff regarding appropriateness and justification for the proposed ZMA with regards to timing and adequacy of infrastructure. STAFF ANALYSIS — SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. The proposed development includes two entrances in locations that are recommended on the "Future Land Use Plan" (Detail Map 2) in the VOR Master Plan. These include a proposed full -access commercial entrance on US 250, and an emergency -access -only entrance on Running Deer Drive, which is a private street to the east of the proposed project. 2. The proposal is in general conformity with the "Parks and Green Systems Plan" in the VOR Master Plan, in the following ways: a. The proposal includes "conservation area" designations for portions of the subject property that contain critical resources (such as floodplains, stream buffers, and preserved steep slopes) and which otherwise contain environmentally sensitive and important areas (such as the forested riparian corridor along Carrol Creek). b. The proposal includes "semi-public open space" designations and trails around the perimeter of the proposed development, in general conformity with what is recommended in the Parks and Green Systems Plan in the Master Plan. 3. The proposal includes a "multi -use path" along US 250, as recommended in the "Future Transportation Network" section of the VOR Master Plan. 4. The proposal includes an area reserved for (future) dedication to the County for use as a (future) vehicular and/or pedestrian interparcel connection to the west across Carrol Creek, as recommended on the "Future Land Use Plan (Detail Map 2)" in the VOR Master Plan and as articulated in the "Pedestrian and Bicycle Network" recommendations on pages 39-40 of the VOR Master Plan. 5. The proposal includes an Affordable Housing proffer. This proffer would generate a maximum of $507,000 of monetary contributions to support off -site affordable housing initiatives in Albemarle ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 Im County, or a maximum of 24 affordable dwelling units being provided for sale or rent, or some adjusted combination of those outcomes that would support the County's Affordable Housing Policy. Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request- 1 . The density of the proposed residential use exceeds the recommendations contained in the VOR Master Plan and the guidance provided by the Planning Commission at the work session on 7/30/2019. 2. The proposal does not include proffered commitments to address the recommended transportation improvements that are identified in the VOR Master Plan as being prerequisite to additional development through rezoning. 3. The applicants have not clearly demonstrated that the "Transportation/Transit" proffers will sufficiently mitigate anticipated impacts to the public road network. 4. The revised ZMA application materials (particularly the "General Development Plan" concept plan dated 8/19/19) do not contain sufficient information to complete an evaluation, or make positive findings, relative to Neighborhood Model Principles. 5. The typical road section (as shown on Sheet 1 of the "General Development Plan" concept plan dated 8/19/19) does not contain any curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks, or planting strips — and is therefore not consistent with Comprehensive Plan recommendations and would not be compliant with applicable County Code requirements. 6. The proposal does not address impacts to public schools, despite known capacity conflicts at Burley Middle School (moderate capacity conflicts) and Monticello High School (high capacity conflicts). RECOMMENDATION — ZMA201900004: In consideration of staff evaluation and analysis of this proposal relative to the factors contained in Zoning Ordinance Section 33.27.13, and based on the unfavorable factors substantially outweighing the favorable factors, staff recommends denial of ZMA201900004 "Breezy Hill." PLANNING COMMISSION POSSIBLE MOTIONS — ZMA201900004: A. If the ZMA is recommended for approval: Move to recommend approval of ZMA201900004 "Breezy Hill" for [state reasons for recommending approval]. B. If the ZMA is recommended for denial: Move to recommend denial of ZMA201900004 "Breezy Hill" for the reasons stated in the staff report. ATTACHMENTS: 1 — Location Maps 2 — Original Project Narrative (4115119) 3 — Original "General Development Plan" Concept Plan (4126119) 4 Draft Proffer Statement (514a'49) (replaced with revised proffer statement submitted 8119119 — see Att. 14) 5 — Community Meeting Notes (6124119) 6 — Review Comments from Mr. Kevin McDermott, Principal Planner — Transportation (7114119) 7 — Traffic Impact Study (excerpt / pp. 1-20) Q 2/18) 8 — Revised Concept Plan ("General Development Plan") (8119119) 9 — Comment Response Letter (8119119) 10 — PC Work Session Staff Report (7130119) 11 — PC Work Session Meeting Minutes (7130119) 12 — Public Petition ("Stop Breezy Hill!") (1018119) 13 — Public Petition ("Improve 250 Before Breezy Hill") (9123119) 14 — Revised (Draft) Proffer Statement (undated; submitted 8119119) 15 — ACPS Long Range Planning Advisory Committee — Final Report 2019 (7111119) ZMA 2019-00004 Breezy Hill Albemarle County Planning Commission Public Hearing: October 22, 2019 13