HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900009 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2020-01-30COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832
August 2, 2019
Rev1: January 30, 2020
Kelsey Schlein and Justin Shimp
Shimp Engineering
912 E High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ZMA2019-009 River's Edge South
Ms. Schlein:
Fax (434) 972-4176
Staff has reviewed your resubmittal for a zoning map amendment (ZMA) for the River's Edge South
development. We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be addressed before
we can recommend favorably on your ZMA request. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these
issues. Our comments are provided below:
Rezoning
General Application Comments:
I. H community meeting nas not been conducted for this application to date. Please coordinate with staff
to schedule the meeting. Attached to this comment letter is the notification list.
Rev1: Comment Addresser
2. The proposed density of 72 maximum units is above the Comprehensive Plan recommendation for
density. A maximum density of 34 dwelling units per acre are recommended under the comprehensive
plan designation of Urban Density Residential. Excluding the land under the Water Protection
Ordinance stream buffer, flood plain, and steep slopes, the maximum density would equate to 41
dwelling units. Revise the application to meet the comp plan recommendations for density.
Rev1: New information was provided on the project size and buildable area. However, there is
conflicting information. The response to comments states that there is 1.97 buidable acres, but
the application plan, on sheet 5, states 1.33 acres. If 1.97 acres, the density equals 66 units max,
if 1.33 acres, the density equals 45 units max. Please clarify.
3. 1 i iei e is cunnicui iy ii uui niauui i wiu iii i ii ie apPncauui i as n HdIdLUs w resiuei ivai uses. IL is bLdLUU III
various places that the proposal is for "multi -family", however there is also a statement on Sheet 2 that
states that townhomes and single family attached are permitted. Please clarify the intent and if multi-
family is the intention, a commitment should be made that the type of housing will be limited to multi-
family. If other types of housing are expect, additional requirements may be needed, such as a second
access for fire/rescue. Additionally, if the property is subdivided for townhomes, street frontage, building
sites, and other requirements will be needed.
Rev1: Comment addressee'
4. Additional Comment: A special use permit is needed for the pedestrian bridge based upon
Zoning determination dated January 10, 2020.
5. Additional Comment: If a central system is proposed, it will need to be approved in conjuction
with this rezoning. See County Engineer comments below.
Application Plan:
Planning/Zoning (Megan Nedostup; Lea Brumfield):
1. Show the proposed entrance and street network for North Pointe that this development will be using for
access. While the site plan and road plans for that development have not received final approval, they
are close and that information should be shown on the plan.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. Please show how this development will connect to North Pointe
and the proposed road design for that development.
2. Will the access easement that was provided through North Pointe be adequate for this development?
Coordination will need to occur with North Pointe. Please note that the design will only allow right in and
right out off of the proposed street within North Pointe for this development. Include in the application the
instrument ensuring access to the site through tax map parcel 03200-00-00-022K0. Current development
plans for that site do not conform to the alignment of the access easement portrayed on Sheet 9 of the
application plan, Proposed Circulation.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. Please revise. Also, accurately show the granted
easement.
3. The existing conditions sheets does not show the basketball/asphalt play court that is on site. Show all
existing conditions, facilities, and units.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
4. Conceptual grading is only shown for the buildings and parking, will there be additional grading needed
for the access into the site? If so, show the conceptual grading for the access.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. Grading needs to be shown for access.
5. Indicate the type of street proposed or it it is an accessway only. Un Sheet 6 it states "right of way
reservation" in the table. Clarify.
Rev1: Comment addresses'
6. Stepbacks for buildings over 40 feet tall or the third story are required per 4.19. There is a maximum
building height regulation of 65 within the PRD section of the ordinance, but if you wish to be more
retrictive, that can be done with your note. However, the setback language should be added to the
application.
Rev1: Comment not addressed.
7. 4.19 does not cover maximum yard setbacks. for non-infill for PRD zoning. This will need to be stated
either to list the maximum or state "no max".
RPv1 -CnmmPnt arlrlrPssPd_
8. Sheet 6 of the application plan, Land Use, shows 3.43 acres of the parcel designated as "Preservation
Area," with permitted uses including utilities and primitive buildings. However, the County definition of
"preservation area" describes an area with "natural features such as non -tidal wetlands, floodplain,
streams and stream buffers that are to be preserved in a natural state and not be developed with any
manmade feature." (Emphasis added.) Either remove the reference to utilities and primitive buildings,
or adjust the plan to show which areas will be "preserved areas" and which will permit manmade features.
Alternatively, if "preservation area" as shown on the application plan is intended to serve as "Open
Space," change the designation on the plan. Currently there is no dedicated "Open Space" on the plan.
Additionally, note that only 80% of the required open space may be located on preserved slopes. The
plan appears to conform with this requirement, but the area designated as an open space amenity must
be accessible to the residents for recreational use.
Rev1: Comment amended: Creation of PRD district: The River's Edge South ZMA proposal relies
on TMPs 32-5A and 32-5A1 for fulfillment of open space and recreational area requirements, and
refers to all three parcels as part of the same development, but the ZMA for those two TMPs has
not yet been approved, and the three parcels are under two different ownerships. Under County
Code Section 18-8.3, a planned development must be under unified control and planned and
developed as a whole.
The parcels containing the open space and recreational area requirements must be included
within this application, under unified control, and developed in conjunction with this
application. They may be developed in a separate phase, but they must be completed before
50% of the units have received certificates of occupancy.
9. Managed and Preserved Slopes:
a) The proposed development as shown on Sheet 7 of the application plan snows structures ana
parking areas encroaching upon managed slopes. The applicant should note that encroachment
onto the managed slopes will require adherence to design standards as outlined in Zoning
Ordinance section 30.7.5.
b) The proposed development as shown on Sheet 7 of the application plan shows structures narrowly
avoiding preserved slopes. The applicant should note that encroachment onto the preserved slopes
is not permitted, and staging for the construction of the development also may not disturb the
preserved slopes. Fencing and other measures to avoid encroachment onto the preserved slopes
will be required at the site plan stage. If encroachment is not avoidable, a VSMP will be required.
"- ` Commenf —ill be addres--d at site plan staar
10. Parking: The proposal lists a potential of up to 72 units, portrayed on Sheet 7 of the application plan,
Conceptual Stormwater & Grading, as multifamily units. However, 72 units would require an absolute
minimum of 90 parking spaces for 72 units under 500 sf, with a likely requirement of upwards of 120
parking spaces for a mix of one and two -bedroom units. Parking reductions are unlikely due to the
location of the project. Please demonstrate how parking requirements may be met under these
conditions.
Rev1: Comment not addressed. Include information to confirm adequate area for parking. A
quick calculation based on the measured area provided for parking would equate to 66 spaces
(150' length/9=16 spacesx4 rows=66). For 67 units parking needed would be anywhere from 84-
134 depending on number of bedrooms. For 45 units, parking required would be from 57-90
spaces (see comment above for density).
11. Will retaining walls be required for the development? If so, a note/commitment should be made that in
order to address the Neighborhood Model principles, that all retaining walls should meet the design
standards set forth in Section 30 for managed slopes in the ordinance.
Rev1: Comment not addressed.
12. The majority of the open space depicted on the plan is located on preserved slopes or within the 100-
year floodplain. Per Section 18-4.7(c)(3) of the County Code, no more than 80% of the required
minimum open space (25% of the total acreage) may be located on preserved slopes or within the 100-
year floodplain. While there is a note that states the requirement, demonstrate on an exhibit how this
requirement will be met.
Rev1: Revised comment: Creation of PRD district: The River's Edge South ZMA proposal relies
on TMPs 32-5A and 32-5A1 for fulfillment of open space and recreational area requirements, and
refers to all three parcels as part of the same development, but the ZMA for those two TMPs has
not yet been approved, and the three parcels are under two different ownerships. Under County
Code Section 18-8.3, a planned development must be under unified control and planned and
developed as a whole.
The parcels containing the open space and recreational area requirements must be included
within this application, under unified control, and developed in conjunction with this
application. They may be developed in a separate phase, but they must be completed before
50% of the units have received certificates of occupancy.
13. Required recreational areas per 4.16 are not shown on the plan. Demonstrate on the plan potential
locations for a minimum of a 2,000 square foot fenced tot lot per 4.16.2. The tot lot may include
alternative play equipment, and may demonstrate "potential" locations, but the plan must demonstrate
the potential to devote 2,000 square feet to the lot in addition to the proposed building. Label on the
plan the open space dedicated to satisfy the requirements of 19.6.
Rev1: See revised comment #11 above. Additionally, the response noted that recreational area
was intended to be shared between all three TMPs, 31-5A, 32-5A1, and 32-22K1. However, a
stream and steep terrain separates TMP 32-22K1 from the other TMPs. As the purpose of a tot
lot is to provide safe and convenient recreational area for small children, a separation of steep
terrain and a stream will not serve that purpose adequately.
14. The Affordable Housing Policy of the Comprehensive Plan recommends that 15% of housing be
affordable. Will affordable units be provided? Please address this policv
Rev1: Comment addressed.
15. The Places29 Master Plan shows a multiple trails through these properties. One that is along the
Rivanna and another multi -use trail along Route 29 frontage. Indicate whether or not a trail will be
provided, show the trail, and indicate the type of trail. Also, state whether it will be dedicated to the
County for public use. Currently there is a primitive trail system shown that does not match those
recommended in the Master Plan.
Rev1: Comment partially addressed. The trails shown on Sheet 9 do not show connections up
to the proposed development. How will residents of the development get to the trails? Show the
overall pedestrian circulation on site see Nei hborhood Model rinciples).
40
16
r -I
A forested buffer is recommended in the Places29 Master riai i at a minimum of 50' along Route 29.
This is shown the Frontage Conditions Map, and detailed information is outlined in Chapter 7. Provide
the buffer as recommended in the Plan. See comments from Margaret Maliszewski ARB below.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
17. The Natural Resources Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan has the following objective regarding Parks
and Green Systems and stream corridors as identified on the Land Use map. These properties contain
a large portion of Parks and Green systems that should be designated on the plan as conservation
area. In addition, the uses permitted in the conservation area should be limited to trails, utilities if no
reasonable alternative exists, stream restoration. Comments by the Natural Resources Manager will be
forthcoming following this comment letter.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
Strategy 4h: Preserve existing vegetation in areas shown as Parks and Green Systems on Development
Area Master Plans.
Each Development Area Master Plan describes the importance of preserving stream corridors and other
environmentally sensitive areas. These places are especially important to biodiversity as are other
areas shown as Parks and Green Systems in the Master Plan maps. The Neighborhood Model princi-
ples., found in the development Areas Chapter,, describe the importance of parks, recreational
amenities, and open space in creating and maintain high quality neighborhoods. Wooded areas, ri-
parian areas, and undeveloped well -vegetated land connecting these areas helps retain habitat
corridors.
Architectural Review Board (Margaret Maliszewski):
1. The Places 29 master plan designates the subject parcel for "forested buffer frontage". This buffer has
a 50' minimum depth and is composed of naturally arranged trees and a dense understory of shrubs.
Maintaining the existing wooded area, and in particular its scale, character and density, would maintain
an appropriate appearance on the Entrance Corridor.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
Engineering (Frank Pohl) Comments replaced with those below:
1. [Chapter 18 Section 30.7.4] Disturbance of preserved slopes for private stormwater discharges is not a
by -right use. State regulation [9VAC25-870-66.B] requires release of concentrated flows into a
conveyance system. Returning concentrated flows to sheet flow may still result in increased volumes of
sheet flow that may cause erosion to the stream bank. If this occurs, level spreaders would not be
allowed, and a channel would need to be constructed to the stream channel through the preserved
slopes.
2. [16-101] — Definitions, "The term "central sewerage system" means a sewerage system consisting of
pipelines or conduits, pumping stations, force mains or sewerage treatment plants, including but not
limited to septic tanks and/or drain fields, or any of them, designed to serve three (3) or more
connections, used for conducting or treating sewage." It is not clear if the proposed system is a central
system or not. Please note central systems are considered by the Board of Supervisors as outlined in
16-102 through 16-106. If requirements of 16-102 are not provided with this application, a separate
notice and board hearing will be required.
Transportation (Adam Moore (VDOT)):
1. Entrance onto Route 29 will have to meet the Access Management Design Standards for Entrances
and Intersections. Please see VDOT Road Design Manual, Appendix F.
Rev1: Comment addressed.
2. Provide trip generation data for the seventy-two units.
Rev1: Comrr` zed.
Albemarle County Service Authority (Richard Nelson):
1. Water pressure may be high in this area. PRVs may be required if pressure is above 80 psi on site.
2. Contact ACSA for draft connection fees if not already provided. This parcel falls in the North Fork South
Zone Special Rate district (sewer connection fees will be higher). Explore connecting water and sewer
to North Pointe. Reach out to the design engineer for North Pointe to possibly negotiate upsizing water
main at the along Dillon Ct to provide adequate water supply to parcel.
Rev1: Comments have not been provided by ACSA to date. Will forward comments on as soon
as they are received.
Comprehensive Plan
As stated above in detailed comments, there are items that need to be addressed to conform with the
recommendations within the Places29 Master Plan and the Comprehensive Plan. Additional comments will be
provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report that will be prepared
for a work session or public hearing.
The properties are within the Hollymead area of the Places29 Master Plan and are designed as Urban Density
Residential- residential use (6-34 units/acre); supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools,
commercial, office and service uses; Privately Owned Open Space; Environmental Features- privately owned
recreational amenities and open space; floodplains, steep slopes, wetlands, and other environmental features.
Neighborhood Model
Revised per Resubmittal
Pedestrian . Will the accessway/street provide sidewalks that connect to North Pointe? How
Orientation will pedestrian orientation be provided on site?
This principle is not met.
Mixture of Uses The proposal is for residential uses only, however there will be a mixture of uses
within the immediate area including other residential and commercial uses in
North Pointe.
Neighborhood This principle is not applicable. A center designation is not recommended for this
Centers site or adjacent to the site.
Mixture of 15% affordable housing is provided per the current Housing Policy.
Housing Types The proximity to North Pointe allows for a mixture of housing within the area and
and one housing type could be appropriate at this site.
Affordability . This principle is met
Interconnected ' As stated above, information regarding the connection to North Pointe needs to
Streets and be provided.
Transportation This principle is not met.
Networks
Multi -modal . Trails have been provided on site. Additional information needs to be provided on
Transportation connections to and from adjacent developments (north and south).
Opportunities . This principle is not met.
Parks,
. As state above, clarification around recreation, amenities, and open space is
Recreational
needed.
Amenities, and
. This principle is not met.
Open Space
Buildings and
Due to the environmental constraints on the site, the buildings cannot be oriented
Space of
toward Route 29. However, it is unclear if the buildings will be of scale internal to
Human Scale
the site. The siting of the buildings and pedestrian ways should consider the
recommendations within the Neighborhood Model section of the Comp Plan.
Relegated
Due to the environmental constraints on the site, parking is the central component
Parking
of the design but relegated away from Route 29. Due to the vegetation and
distance from Route 29 and the accessway, parking is inherently regulated.
This principle is met.
Redevelopment . This proposal is on property that is currently not developed, therefore, this
principle does not apply.
Respecting . It is unclear if there will be retaining walls needed for the development of the site.
Terrain and If retaining walls are proposed, a commitment to meet the design requirements
Careful for managed slopes (walls no taller than 6 feet, etc) should be provided.
Grading and 9 This principle is not met. J
Re -grading of '
Terrain
Clear . The property adjacent to the site that is zoned Rural Areas is buffered by the
Boundaries Rivanna River and the proposed open space.
with the Rural . This principle is met.
Area
Action after Receipt of Comments
As you will read in this comment letter, staff recommends changes to your project to help you achieve
approval. Without these changes, staff cannot recommend approval to the Planning Commission.
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit after requesting deferral, please use the attached form. There is a fee for the second
resubmittal. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience.
Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My phone number is (434) 296-
5832, x. 3004, and my email address is: mnedostup@albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
11 �, r 111�1 -
Megan Nedostup, AICP
Principal Planner
Planning Services
Cc: INCHEON HOLDINGS LLC
2027 WOODBROOK CT
Charlottesville, VA 22901
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER
RESUBMITTAL
Please do one of the following:
(1) Request a Planning Commission public hearing date be scheduled
(2) Resubmit in Response to Review Comments
(3) Withdraw your application
(1) Request a Planning Commission public hearing date be scheduled
You may request that your application to be scheduled for public hearing with the Planning
Commission. Please note, once a Planning Commission date is requested, no additional information,
revisions, documents, etc will be accepted for review and analysis.
(2) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments
Make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a resubmittal date as published in the project review
schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at
the Community Development page. In your comment response letter with your resubmittal, please
indicate whether or not you would like to proceed straight to the Planning Commission without getting
comments back, or if you prefer to have comments. If you choose to go straight to the Planning
Commission, please note that no additional information, revisions, documents, etc will be accepted
after your resubmittal. Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your comment letter
with your submittal.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one resubmittal.
Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee Schedule.)
(3) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Failure to Respond
Revised 9-17-19 MCN
An application shall be deemed to be voluntarily withdrawn if the applicant requests deferral pursuant
to subsection 33.52(A) and fails to provide within 90 days before the end of the deferral period all of
the information required to allow the Board to act on the application, or fails to request a deferral as
provided in subsection 33.52(B) or (C).
Fee Payment
Fees paid in cash or by check must be paid at the Community Development Intake Counter. Make
checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the Review Coordinator.
Fees may also be paid by credit card using the secure online payment system, accessed at
http://www.albemarle.org/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=21685.
Revised 9-17-19 MCN
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # or ZMA #
Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt Ck# Bv:
Ok A
Resubmittal of information for Special Use Permit or
Zoning Map Amendment
PROJECT NUMBER: ZMA ZO([ 60 PROJECT NAME: ;
Resubmittal Fee is Required ❑ Per Request ❑ Resubmittal Fee is Not Required
M?,q an t�
Comm ty Dev opm t P 'ect oordinator Name of Applicant Phone Number
' I / -'? I bo. 2-0
SiNr H
I Dke Signature Date
FEES
Resubmittal fees for Special Use Permit — original Special Use Permit fee of $1,075
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$538
Resubmittal fees for original Special Use Permit fee of $2,150
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,075
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688
❑ First resubmission
FREE
Each additional resubmission
$1,344
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763
❑ First resubmission
FREE
❑ Each additional resubmission
$1,881
❑ Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request — Add'1 notice fees will be required
$194
To be paid after staff review for public notice:
Most applications for Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission
and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing
a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice
are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be
provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body.
MAKE CHECKS TO COUNTY OF
AT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COUNTER
I ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices I $215 + actual cost of first-class postage
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
1/24/I7 Page 1 of I
2020 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Resubmittal ❑ates (1st,
3rd, and 5th Monday of
the month)
Comments given to the
Applicant
Applicant requests PC
Public Hearing AND
Payment ❑ue for Legal
Ad (no additional
resubmittals)
Planning
Commission Public
Hearing No sooner
than* COB Auditorium
Monday
Wednesday
Friday
Tuesday
Jan 06
Feb 05
Feb 14
Mar 10
Jan 21
Feb 19
Feb 28
Mar 24
Feb 03
Mar 04
Mar 13
Apr 07
Feb 78
Mar 18
Mar 27
Apr 21
Mar 02
Apr 01
Apr 10
May 05
Mar 16
A r 15
A r 24
May 19
Mar 30
A r 29
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 06
May 06
May 08
Jun 02
Apr 20
May 20
May 22
Jun 16
Ma 04
Jun 03
Jun 12
Jul 07
Ma 18
Jun 17
Jun 26
Jul 21
Jun 01
Jul 01
Jul 10
Aug 04
Jun 15
Jul 15
Jul 24
Aug 18
Jun 29
Jul 29
Aug07
Sep 01
Ju106
Aug05
Aug07
Sep 01
Jul 20
Aug 19
Aug 28
Sep 22
Aug03
Sep 02
5ep 11
Oct 06
Aug17
Se 16
Sep 25
Oct 20
Aug31
Sep 30
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 08
Oct 07
Oct 16
Nov 10
Sep 21
Oct 21
Oct 30
Nov 24
Oct 05
Nov 04
Nov 06
Dec 01
Oct 19
Nov 18
Nov 13
❑ec 08
Nov 02
Dec 02
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Nov 16
Dec 16
Dec 18
Jan 12 2021
Dec 21
Jan 20 2021
Jan 29 2021
Feb 23 2021
Jan 04 2021
Feb 03 2021
Feb 05 2021
Mar 02 2021
Bold italics = submittallmeeting day is different due to a holiday.
❑ates with shaded background are not 2020.
2021 dates are tentative.
*Public hearing dates have been set by the Planning Commission; however, if due to unforeseen
circumstances the Planning Commission is unable to meet on this date, your project will be moved to
the closest available agenda date.
Stephen C. Brich, P.E.
Commissioner
W
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Gulperw Virginia 22701
January 9, 2020
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Andy Reitelbach
Re: River's Edge South -Zoning Map Amendment
ZMA-2019-00009
Review #2
Dear Mr. Reitelbach:
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the River's Edge South Zoning Map Amendment, as submitted by Shimp
Engineering, P.C., dated June 17, 2019, revised December 16, 2019, and find it to be generally
acceptable. The plans provided appear to be planning to access the property via a future
secondary road. No additional access to Route 29 has been evaluated at this time.
A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The
owner/developer must contact the VDOT Charlottesville Residency Land Use Section at (434)
422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. If further information is desired, please
contact Willis C. Bedsaul at 434-422-9866.
Sincerely, I
Adam J. Moo , P.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING