The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZMA200200008 Correspondence 2002-08-26 a OF A,,�L�L `1RGINIP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Planning &Community Development 401 McIntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296 - 5823 Fax (804) 972—4012 August 26, 2002 Tim Miller Rivanna Engineering P.O. Box 7603 Charlottesville, VA 22906 RE: ZMA 02-008 South Pantops Office (revised 8/12/02) Dear Mr. Miller: The staff has reviewed your recently submitted rezoning proposal referenced above. The following paragraphs and pages provide comments that are designed to provide information and suggestions for this rezoning. Please be advised that this project is scheduled for a Planning Commission public hearing on October 1, 2002, however, ARB staff has indicated that you are not scheduled for ARB review until October 7, 2002. We cannot take this proposal to the Planning Commission until we have a recommendation from the ARB. A new hearing will be scheduled once we consult with ARB staff. Comments from the Planning Department are below. Comments from Building Codes and Zoning Services, Fire and Rescue, Engineering, VDOT, and the Service Authority are provided on the attached pages. The following Planning Department comments are meant to inform you about what the County expects in terms of development design and provide very detailed suggestions on how you might be able to rethink this project and how closely it compares to the Neighborhood Model. The following is a list of the Principles with staff suggestions underneath. Principles of the Neighborhood Model: Pedestrian Orientation Thank you for adding sidewalks and crosswalks to the plan however please provide crosswalks at your parking lot intersection with Hansen and Abbey Roads. These crosswalks will aid 1 pedestrians to other sites within the shopping center. Neighborhood Friendly Streets and Paths Staff sees this as a strong pedestrian orientated commercial neighborhood center. However, this layout does not contribute to the friendliness/safety of the streets. On an aesthetic realm, the parking layout you are proposing,with spaces next to the street makes it appear as though there is more asphalt than green space. • It is strongly recommended, at the very least, that the buildings be moved to the front of the site so that their faces are along Hansen and not a parking lot. • Both buildings should be accessed by the parking lots from behind. Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks • Staff has been investigating the possibility of building a connector road from the end of Rolkin Drive westward across the southern end of your property. It appears that this road would not affect the layout of your proposal. Would you be interested in conveying the land for such a project through a proffer? • Staff appreciates that you have provided a bus shelter on this site, however the location shown is impractical for a public transportation stop. The shelter should be along Hansen Road with a pull-in lane so that stopped buses do not interrupt traffic along Hansen Road. Parks and Open Space Thank you for providing a courtyard and existing conditions. Neighborhood Centers N/A-this is a neighborhood center. Buildings and Spaces of Human Scale It appears that the proposed building to lot ratio is very small because of the large amount of "natural" open space. This is acceptable. • Relegated Parking As stated earlier, it is staffs opinion that this particular proposed layout does not accomplish this Neighborhood Model edict- all but a few of the parking spaces can be seen from internal primary roads. • Staffs strongest recommendation is to move the buildings closer to the street and place the parking behind the building. Mixture of Uses N/A Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability N/A 2 `,. Redevelopment Rather Than Abandonment N/A Site Planning That Respects Terrain Manmade or not, it appears that your proposal will encroach on a large area of critical slopes which would require a waiver from the Planning Commission. • A repositioning of the buildings might alleviate some of this encroachment. The parking lots can be repositioned around these slopes. Clear Edges N/A Additional Information Needed Elevations: The Planning Commission has an expectation that elevations will be provided with proposed developments accompanying a rezoning. When you decide on the building types for the parcels,please provide elevations and consider proffering characteristics of those elevations. Cross sections will better help staff make alternate design recommendations. In addition to elevations, this site will be highly visible from the Entrance Corridor. Staff believes that the Commission will be concerned with the visibility of your buildings. As part of your landscaping plan, we suggest that you provide larger trees than would normally be expected on a typical site so that the building will not be so obvious. Surrounding neighborhood: Please add the current uses of the surrounding properties to help staff assess how your proposal fits into the surrounding neighborhood and the terrain/densities/amenities/connections contained within. ARB: Staff would like advisory comments from the Architectural Review Board before we make a recommendation to the Planning Commission. Please contact Margaret Maliszewski at 296- 5823 for advice. Proffers: My impression from your submittal is that you are requesting this rezoning with proffers. The plan provided with this submittal could be proffered with this rezoning. Please be advised that the level of variation from the plan would be entirely within the purview of the Zoning Administrator. The Planning Director could not approve variations to the plan. For that reason, if you proffer the plan, it is important that you highlight the features that are essential to the design and development. Proffers have traditionally been used by developers to promise elements of the plan that are normally not allowed by right-things like variations in setback, certain architectural details/features,public infrastructure improvements, etc. Some standard language for proffers is provided below: 1. Development of the parcel shall be in general accord with the (application)plan entitled "xx" dated"xx" and last revised"xx" (where applicable)herein referred to as "The Plan" Specific features of The Plan which are proffered are: 3 a. spell out the feature, such as, "a central amenity", relegated parking as shown on the plan. pedestrian access as shown, etc. 2. Conformity with the following features of the elevations entitled"xx" dated"xx". 3. Screening for the full-length of the northern boundary of the site where the parcel adjoins with TM 91 Parcel 13 (if considered necessary by the Schools Division). 4. Sidewalks consisting of(specs - asphalt or concrete) shall be installed (where specifically) and completed before release of the performance bond. 5. Where site grading is performed, the owner shall minimize use of slopes steeper than 3:1, subject to approval by the Department of Engineering and Public Works. The Applicant shall install additional low maintenance vegetation to provide stabilization for proposed slopes steeper than 3:1 as approved by the County's Landscape Planner. Nothing contained in these proffers shall be deemed a waiver of the Planning Commission's review of Applicant's critical slope waiver under Section 4.2.5 of the Ordinance. 6. The Owner shall limit the number of residential units on the parcel to "xx"residential units. 7. (If you want to make a cash proffer or off-site improvement) By not later than(some point in time or key event),the owner shall provide to the County(cash for a County improvement relating to the rezoning or and off-site improvement). Should (that improvement)not take place within the next (specific time period) from the approved proffer date, it shall be refunded to (whom?). Should you have any questions please call me at(434) 296-5823 ext. 3297. Sincerely, Michael Barnes Yadira Amarante Attachments. 4