Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201900001 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2019-05-31LrRGtNh' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 May 31, 2019 Nicole Scro Gallifrey Enterprises 912 East High Street, Suite C Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-218-0513 RE: ZMA201900001— 999 Rio Road Dear Ms. Scro: Staff has reviewed your second submittal for the zoning map amendment, ZMA201900001, 999 Rio Road. Review comments are provided below, organized by department or agency: Planning Comments (Tori Kanellopoulos) 1. Uses and their definitions. a. Would be more clear to specifically list out, instead of referring to Master Plan. b. Square footage would restrict some, but would be better to specifically list out. Supposed to be neighborhood scale in Urban Density Residential. 2. Waivers. a. Agent vs. PC. 3. Standalone parking does not appear appropriate or necessary for Block 1. Additionally, the waiver specifically requests standalone parking for the residential units in Block 2. Revise to only allow for standalone parking in Block 2. 4. Amount of parking spaces. a. Seems max parking would not fit on the site. 5. Sidewalks appear to be shown in the building site for Block 1. Please provide additional details/explanation. 6. It would be more consistent with Neighborhood Model principles and Architectural Review Board Entrance Corridor regulations to have buildings fronting along Rio Road, instead of having parking fronting there. Updated Neighborhood Model Comments Outstanding Neighborhood Model comments are included below: Mixture of Housing Types This principle is partially met. A mixture of housing types is and Affordability proposed, including multifamily housing and single-family attached and/or detached units. While the cottage -style single-family units are assumed to be less expensive than typical larger single-family units, they are not formally affordable units. There is no guarantee they will be affordable to residents at or below 80% AMI. REV 2: Comment remains. Still no guarantee units would be affordable per County/HUD standards. Relegated Parking This principle is partially met. Parking is relegated from Rio Road, however there is significant area between the two blocks dedicated to parking. Consider a more internal street network that provides opportunities for relegated parking. A parking reduction was requested, which supports the Neighborhood Model principle of reducing parking and sharing parking when possible. REV 2: ARB and Planning have comments on the parking that is visible from Rio Road. It would be preferable to have buildings completely front along Rio Road and have parking relegated behind those buildings and out of sight of Rio Road. Inspections (Michael Dellinger) Comments will be made with official site and building plans once submitted. Otherwise no objection. ARB Comments (Margaret Maliszewski) 1. The preference is for Block 1 buildable area to extend along the full length of Rio Road East and Belvedere Blvd. 2. Note that a planting strip and large shade trees will be needed on the perimeter of all parking areas, even if a screening fence is also required. 3. Stand-alone parking is not appropriate for Block 1. 4. Table D Note 4 does not address County approvals required for the fence. Eliminate the note or add text to indicate that resident -approved designs are still subject to County approvals. 5. Please explain why sidewalks are shown through the Block 1 buildable area. ACSA (Richard Nelson) 1. No Objection. Transportation Planning Comments (Daniel Butch) 1. The pedestrian and bike facilities (shared -use path) across the parcel frontage would need to meet VDOT Shared -use path requirements and be dedicated to the public for future maintenance.