HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP201800011 Review Comments 2019-04-29PROJECT MANAGEMENT
SHIMP' CIVIL ENGINEERING
LAND PLANNING
Mr. Tim Padalino l Y G I N E R N G �'
Albemarle County
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
April 26, 2019
RE: Response Letter #1 for SP-2018-00011 (Regents School — Reservoir Road)
Dear Tim,
Thank you for your review of the above mentioned zoning request. This letter contains responses to County comments
dated August 31, 2018. The letter lists County provided comments in gray followed by our responses in black.
Best,
Kelsey Schlein
Kelsey(&shimp-engineerin .co1 (434) 227-5140
Cc: Valerie Long vlong(a,williamsmullen.com
Justin Shimp Justin ,shimp-en ineering com
Planning
In consultation with County staff and partner agencies, Planning staff has identified issues and questions
that you should be aware of, we remain available to assist you in addressing and resolving these issues,
which include the following:
• Transportation and Traffic Impacts:
o A Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) must be submitted before staff can evaluate potential impacts to
Reservoir Road, Fontaine Avenue Extended, and the intersections associated with the Fontaine
Avenue "interchange" for the US 29 Bypass.
A traffic study was conducted to explore possible approaches to traffic management in the
interim while ultimately awaiting the desired major improvements at the interchange of Route 29
and Fontaine Avenue. A summary of this analysis is included with this resubmittal.
■ Staff are particularly concerned about the performance and safety of the Fontaine Avenue
"intcrchange." The results of the pending TIA will be a major part of the analysis and
evaluation of this proposed development. That TIA is a crucial piece of information.
The traffic information included with this resubmittal illustrates there are peak -hour
delays from existing background traffic and there are anticipated peak -hour delays in
future no -build conditions. The primary movement where the level of service is
compromised in the AM peak hour is the Route 29 Southbound left onto Fontaine
Avenue. The AM peak hour of traffic is from 7:45 a.m. to 8:45 a.m. Trips generated from
the school in the AM peak hour would contribute to increased delays for drivers making
several maneuvers in the AM peak hour, including the Rt29 SB Left. However, if the
school were to start before the peak hour begins at 7:45a.m., the level of service of the
interchange is not further compromised from trips generated by school traffic with school
enrollment capped at 230 students.
Trips generated by school traffic do not significantly impact the peak hour flow of traffic
which is from 4:30 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. because the trips generated by the school in the
afternoon are widely distributed from the end of the school day around 3 p.m. to the end
of extracurricular activities from anytime between 4-5 p.m. for practices and 5-8 p.m. for
games and events.
■ If the TIA does not demonstrate that the proposed development will not negatively impact
the mobility, safety, or level of service for that interchange, then it may be difficult for
Staff to recommend approval of this proposal.
The applicant proposes a 7:45 a.m. school start time with a maximum initial enrollment
of 230 students. These measures ensure that, given the existing infrastructure, the school
would not negatively impact the mobility, safety, or level of service for the interchange in
the peak hours, where at present these measures are compromised.
Prior to enrollment in excess of 230 students either intersection improvements will need
to be completed by VDOT or the applicant shall construct improvements recommended
by the.traffic study, specifically an 1000' right turn lane off of Route 29 south and an
exclusive westbound left turn lane on Fontaine Ave.
Page 2 of 17
The aforementioned applicant -initiated improvements would support a maximum
enrollment of up to 468 students.
o Planned transportation improvements at the Fontaine Avenue "interchange" for the US 29
Bypass would significantly increase the roadway capacity and Level of Service (LOS). Funding
for these planned improvements is not currently in place, but Smart Scale application(s) to
provide funding for the planned improvements at the Fontaine Avenue "interchange" have been
submitted to VDOT and the Coinonwealth Transportation Board (CTB).
■ These Smart Scale applications are pending, and funding decisions will not be made until
Summer 2019. This creates a significant amount of uncertainty with regards to the
capacity of existing (or planned) infrastructure to accommodate the proposed
development.
Proposed traffic improvements at the Route 29/Fontaine Ave interchange did not receive
funding with the most recent round of Smart Scale applications and so, at this time, there
are no major roadway improvements planned for the interchange.
■ It is not clear how Staff will be able to accurately evaluate the potential impacts of this
proposal prior to the CTB announcing which Smart Scale applications have been
award ed/ funded.
The traffic information included with this submittal should help staff evaluate the
potential impacts of this proposal.
o Staff has a 1aniticant amount of overall concern about the proposed level of development on the
subject property, with regards to the existing transportation infrastructure (capacity and level of
service).
■ The project narrative states that an additional 1,161 VDT would be added to the current
400 VDT. Staff are concerned about that potential increase, given the current LOS for the
intersections associated with the Fontaine Avenue "interchange" for the US 29 Bypass,
and considering the current capacity is already in need of improvement.
The intersections associated with the Fontaine Avenue interchange for the US 29 Bypass
do experience a compromised level of service with current capacity; however, level of
service is compromised for an isolated period of time in the AM and PM peak hours.
Regents School proposes a 7:45 a.m. start time, which would require students and staff to
arrive at the school, drop off students or park for the school day, and if dropping off
students, to leave the school campus, prior to the beginning of AM peak hour traffic at
the Fontaine Avenue/Route 29 interchange. With a 7:45 a.m. start time, and a maximum
enrollment of 230 students, traffic generated from the school would not contribute to a
compromised level of service at the interchange.
Prior to enrollment in excess of 230 students either intersection improvements will need
to be completed by VDOT or the applicant shall construct improvements recommended
by the traffic study, specifically an 1000' right turn lane off of Route 29 South and an
exclusive westbound left turn lane on Fontaine Ave.
The aforementioned applicant -initiated improvements would support a maximum
enrollment of up to 468 students.
Page 3 of 17
Due to concerns about the adequacy of Reservoir Road, Reservoir Road would need to be
upgraded. to VDOT standards ( subject to input and approval by VDOT, the County
Engineer, and the Director of Planning).
The proposed development would improve adequacy of Reservoir Road by increasing the
shoulder width, cutting the existing bank near the proposed entrance and re -grading two
crests in the road near the proposed entrance. These measures would contribute to greater
site distance for those entering and exiting the site as well as those driving along
Reservoir Road. Revised road plans have been included with this resubmittal to illustrate
the proposed improvements to Reservoir Road affiliated with this development.
Staffmay also recommend that the owner dedicate ROW to accommodate fUttlre bicycle
and pedestrian mobility (multi -use path).
The concept plan depicts a 25' ROW reservation to be dedicated to public ROW upon
demand by the County or VDOT. This ROW area could accommodate a multi -use path
in the future to serve bicycle and pedestrian mobility.
o VDOT indicated on August 14 that their traffic rc Vort data can be used as background baseline
data for the TIC.
■ Please submit tlic TIA for review by the County and by VDOT.
Information regarding background traffic and proposed trips generated by the school is
included with this submittal.
• Entrance Corridor:
o Site visibility and project visibility need to be more fully determined, including from 29, 64, at
interchange;I 18, and from 64 west approaching the 118 interchange.
Additional cross sections are provided with this submittal. These cross sections show some of
the proposed buildings on the site at a given cross section "cut" from varied viewpoints along
the EC roadways. An exhibit showing the street view looking towards the site from the I-64
on ramp is included with this submittal. The street view images show there is ample
vegetation immediately adjacent to the entrance corridor and this vegetation along with the
vegetation depicted in the "existing vegetation to remain area" of the site will provide several
hundred feet of vegetated buffer from the entrance corridor to the proposed buildings.
Since the site is visible from the Entrance Corridor, it is subject to Entrance Corridor
regulations and review by the Architectural Review Board. The applicant understands that
prior to commencement of construction of any building on the site visible from the entrance
corridor the site plan and proposed building design will be subject to ARB review and a
certificate of appropriateness will be required as a condition of site plan approval.
The proposed athletic field creates questions and concerns about outdoor athletic lighting,
including the height of light poles, the type of luminaire.. and the freouency and duration of the
use of outdoor athletic lighting
Most likely, the proposed lighting system and fixtures would be the same as those recently
approved for the UVA Outdoor Tennis Facility at the Boar's Head Resort, and for Peachtree
Baseball at Crozet Park.
Page 4 of 17
■ PrevIenting glare and spillover (beyond a set level/location) are Code requirements.
The applicant understands preventing glare and spillover are Code requirements and will
comply with all applicable requirements of Sec. 4.17 of the Albemarle County Zoning
Ordinance.
■ Scr4ning of outdoor athletic lighting may need to be considered.
The applicant understands that based on visibility of proposed outdoor lighting, especially
from the entrance corridor, screening may need to be considered. Relevant lighting
information such as location and manufacturer information such as lighting make, cut-off,
and lumens are requirements that will be included in the site plan.
o Sec, reviccomments (below) from Margaret Maliszewski, Chief of Planning — Resource
Manaaenl nt.
* ,architectural Re ,iew Board staff in CDD-Planning; Services Division:
o From Mar aret ltilaliszewski (see attached review comments elated 08/15,12018):
The applic nt correctly notes that some buildings in the proposed development will be visible
from the 0itrance Corridors and, consequently, the site plan and architectural design will
require AR B review and approval. Although wooded area on preserved slopes is expected to
limit some visibility, note that screening the development from the EC is not the goal. Instead,
appropriately designed buildings organized in an orderly and integrated layout, and enhanced
by landscaping are desired. Note the following potential areas of concern:
Thank you for pointing out the potential areas of concern that may arise during ARB review
so that the applicant may take these areas of concern into account prior to site plan submittal.
The applicant understands the site plan and the architectural design will be subject to ARB
review.
• 1. Th> Illustrative Plan suggests that significant grading, 2-1 slopes, and retaining walls
are necessary to develop the school as desired by the applicant. This intense level of
gradilig is inconsistent with the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines.
The concept plan has been revised to include a "vegetated area to remain;" this area,
combined with the vegetated area directly adjacent to the ROW establishes several
hundred feet of vegetated buffer between the Entrance Corridors and the proposed
buildings. In regards to grading and land disturbing activity, the applicant understands
the site plan must adhere to Sections 30.6.3 (d)-(f) of the Albemarle County Zoning
Ordinance, among other standards, that will ensure protection measures are in place to
preserve the vegetated buffer and slopes within the vegetated buffer.
2. The lighted ball field could have a negative impact on the Entrance Corridors. Details
on the anticipated type of fixtures proposed for the ball field would help determine
impacts: number of poles, pole height, fixture type (full cutoff?), lamp type, intensity of
illumination_ etc.
Most likely, the proposed lighting system and fixtures would be the same as those recently
approved for the UVA Outdoor Tennis Facility at the Boar's Head Resort, and for Peachtree
Page 5 of 17
Baseball at Crozet Park.
School Operatio s:
o A Parking tudv must be prepared and submitted for evaluation by the Zoning Administrator, in
order to deOralne parking requirements (per Z.O. 4.12.6). See Zoning comments (page 9).
Parking information is included with this resubmittal, please see attached "Parking Study."
o The applicants need to provide the proposed hours of operation (for school as well as for other
activities at,the theater, gymnasium and/or athletic field, including after school hours and/or
weekends). 11
The school day will begin at 7:45 a.m. After school practices will be held every school day
and afternoon and games/rehearsals will likely be held at least two times per week with the
afterschool game/rehearsal commencing between 5 p.m. and 8 p.m. There will be the
occasional weekend event such as a school play or concert and there will likely be sports
practices on Saturday mornings.
The after school sports practices, involving approximately 30 students at a time, would
disperse the afternoon trips as parents would pick up those students from practice based on
practice end time.
o More inforz ation about the school bus operations should be provided, including whether one bus
parking spa e will be adequate (and if so, for how long).
A letter of intent from Trinity Church has been provided; this letter includes the church's intent
to allow Regents School overflow parking to utilize the church's lot during major school events.
If additional bus parking is required and cannot be incorporated into the site plan, the applicant
could park buses at Trinity Church. The exact number and location of bus parking will be
decided at the site plan development phase.
o The amount} location, and type of outdoor lighting for areas other than athletic field is a question
,vhich should be ,u]dressccl (M ]cast conceptually) during the SP review process.
The site plan will comply with all applicable regulations of Sec. 4.17 of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance. The site plan will be subject to ARB review and approval and it is
anticipated the ARB will consider how lighting on the site may impact the Entrance Corridors,
providing an additional level of review. The "vegetated area to remain" on the concept plan is a
preservation area on the site and will not include lighting. This ample vegetated buffer ensures
that on -site lighting, outside of the proposed athletic field, will be contained to a compact school
campus.
Also enclosed is special exception request pertaining to the proposed athletic field lighting.
Tl,ie athletic field may necd to include act fencing to help contain sports equipment on site and
within the intended area (not in storinwater management facilities, not in preserved steep slopes
or t6hut;irN to Mpore's Creek, etc.).
Thank you for bringing this to our attention; as grading, on the site is finalized the applicant will
be able to determine with more certainty whether net fencing may be required to help contain
sports equipment, but acknowledges it may be appropriate to include. As this net fencing is
typically black/gray, of a fluid fabric, and highly transparent it is not anticipated for this site
Page 6 of 17
feature to have a significant impact on the Entrance Corridors.
Terrain I Topography
o Staff has a significant amount of overall concern about the proposed amount and configuration of
development on the subject property, with regards to the existing topography, and as shown on
the conceptual grading plan shown on the illustrative plan.
■ For example, the reliance on extensive 2:1 slopes and numerous retaining walls
(som�;times in very close proximity to preserved steep slopes) as shown on the illustrative
plan ire a concern. This appears to represent a level of development that pushes the limits
ofwl{iat this site can appropriately accommodate while still meeting ?neighborhood Model
Prindinles.
The Comprehensive Plan identifies two land use designations on this site: neighborhood
density residential and greenspace. The proposed development and land disturbing
activity on this site is entirely limited to the area within the area designated as
neighborhood density residential and therefore is consistent with the County's and the
community's development expectations for the site. An exhibit showing the limits of
disturbance of the proposed development overlain on the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map is included with this submittal to show the land disturbance is within the
developable land use designation and the areas to remain undisturbed are within the
greenspace area. Additionally, the limits of disturbance includes the area which will
contain all proposed disturbance on the site, including footers for retaining walls.
If the property were developed to a residential density of six dwelling units per acre on
average as recommended by the Comprehensive Plan (equating to 66 residential units)
similar grading would likely occur on the site, especially if the development were a
townhome development requiring extensive pad preparation. We contend this proposal
achieves an appropriate balance between the development area goals of the
Comprehensive Plan and preservation of the natural elements on site. Of the total site
acreage, approximately 31 % of the total site area will remain undisturbed.
• 2:1 sl�pes should be minimized: 3:1 slopes are strongly encouraged.
Per the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual, the maximum steepness of constructed
slopes is 2:1. All proposed grading on the site will occur within the limits of disturbance and
the maximum steepness of constructed slopes will not exceed 2:1. 3:1 slopes will be utilized
on the site to the greatest extent reasonably possible.
Sec "Development Areas" chapter of Comp Plan -- Strategy, 'p and Strategy 2q.
These strategies "encourage developers to design buildings that fit into the terrain rather than
flattening the land for trademark buildings," and "require that re -graded slopes result in
smooth rather than abrupt or steep grades that are difficult to vegetate and maintain."
We're complying with these recommendations, sensitive by constraining development. There
are no trademark or big -box or cookie buildings proposed for the site. Concept plan is
cognizant of these recommendations by limited.
Complying with County Engineer Comments, following recommendations that constructed
slopes meet steep slopes design standards.
Page 7 of 17
o Staff has a �igtuficant amount of overall concern about the amount, extent, and type of grading in
proximity t� preserved steep slopes and stream buffer.
Grad�ng and development may need to be subject to "enhanced" erosion and
sedirf entahon control measures to protect the tributary to Moore's Creek and steep slopes,
subj ,ct to decision by County Engineer.
The County Engineer recommended a 20% increase in erosion and sediment control
measures. We contend that a 20% increase in storage volume in sediment traps and
sediment basins is reasonable.
i
■ Grading and retaining walls may need to be subject to Steep Slopes Standards, subject to
decis on by County Engineer.
The County Engineer has recommended constructed slopes meet the steep slopes design
standards as outlined in paragraphs b, c and d of Section 30.7.5 of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance. The applicant intends to comply with the standards outlined in
paragraphs b, c, and d and accepts these standards as a condition of approval.
• Cou y Engineer play recommend that the stormwater facilities shall not discharge waters
over )I- across steep slopes (and must be piped or otherwise conveyed to an appropriate
desti ation).
The County Engineer recommended discharge of SWM facility located adjacent to the
proposed gymnasium shall be piped to join the discharge of the SWM facility located
behind the proposed library (each as shown on the illustrative plan) to minimize
disturbance of preserved slopes. This recommendation was based on the illustrative plan
which was included to provide greater clarity about site programming, the applicant
cannot commit to this specific recommendation made by the County Engineer because
this illustrative exhibit is not part of the concept plan. The applicant recognizes design
standards outlined in Sec.30.7.5(d) and will find discharge alternatives that minimize
disturbance of preserved slopes.
• Natural Resoure":
o The site's acjjacency to a designated Stream Conservation Unit along the tributary to Moore's
Creek is a concern, due to possible erosion and sedimentation associated with extensive clearing.
grading, and creation of managed steep slopes.
In accordance with See.30.6.3(e), the applicant shall sign a conservation checklist provided by
the director of planning or his or her designee (the "director of planning") specifying the method
for preserving the designated features, and the method shall conform to the specifications
contained in Standard and Specification 3.38 at pages III-393 through III-413 of the Virginia
Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook; provided that the architectural review board, or the
director of planning, may require alternative methods of tree protection if greater protection is
deemed necessary.
c The site's proximity to an "Important Site" on (Fox Haven Farm) identifiedby Albemarle
County Natural Heritage Committee is also a concern, as this designation highlights the overall
environmental sensitivity and biological importance of this area at the edge of the Ragged
Mountains.
Page 8 of 17
Comment received. There are numerous environmental protections in place on the property,
namely the Water Protection Ordinance Buffer and the Steep Slopes Overlay, to protect the
most environmentally sensitive areas of the property. As noted earlier, 31 % of the site area,
5.99 acres of the total site area is school preservation area, this area includes all sensitive areas.
In addition to complying with existing regulations, the applicant has preserved portions of the
site outside of the floodplain, the WPO, and preserved slopes as preservation areas.
The location of the site, at the edge of the Ragged Mountains, offers a unique opportunity to
locate a school in an area of rich biodiversity. This location creates the opportunity for children
to be immersed in nature throughout their education at Regents School while still enabling the
property to be developed given its designation for development in the County's
Comprehensive Plan.
o Please scc t o attached review comments froDavid Hannah, Natural Resources Manager for
Albemarle Cm ounty, dated 8/8!2018.
Conceptual Plan:
o Identify proposed "use envelopes" within proposed "limits of school campus" area identified as
13.2 acres.
■ Staff acknowledge the level of (conceptual) details contained in the "Illustrative Plan of
Development Exhibit" that was provided with this submittal, but that is described as being
for illustrative purposes only. In contrast, the Concept Plan (Sheet C3 of 4) does not
indicate proposed (conceptual) locations, areas, or envelopes for structures; parking;
athletic fields; or other improvements.
The concept plan has been revised to provide additional information about the proposed
use envelopes. Major elements of the plan include a ROW reservation area, a no parking
area, and a school facilities envelope to include building, parking, and recreation areas.
■ The "1 iinits of school campus" appear to be analogous to a "limits of disturbance" exhibit;
more information about the proposed uses should be included in this Concept Plan sheet.
Further specificity regarding use envelopes has been added to the concept plan.
Cumulative Effect of Anticipated Impacts:
o Staff have concerns about the overall appropriateness of thus proposed use at these specific
subject prop-�rties and location?
• Can the existing transportation infrastructure accommodate this type and intensity of
development" If not, how will infrastructure iliiprovcnit n*s he realized — and when?
Proposed infrastructure improvements to Reservoir Road include widening of the
shoulder and cutting the crest of a hill that at present limits site distance on
Reservoir Road. Traffic generated from the school would warrant improvements at
the Route 29/Fontaine interchange at a max enrollment of 468 students however; the
applicant plans to initially limit enrollment to 230 students and begin the school day
at 7:45 a.m. as these proposed conditions do not compromise the level of service or
increase delays of the interchange and therefore do not warrant improvements at the
intersection. If the applicant exceeds a maximum enrollment of 230 prior to the
implementation of roadway improvements at the interchange by VDOT, then the
Page 9 of 17
applicant will be responsible for mitigating traffic impacts. Prior to increasing
enrollment above 230 students or altering the school day start time to a time within
the peak hour of traffic, the school must either 1.) provide an updated traffic study
showing the additional enrollment will not compromise the level of service or
increase delays of the interchange or 2.) construct a right turn lane from Route 29
South to the intersection with Fontaine and an exclusive westbound left turn lane on
Fontaine Ave.
■ Is t ere too much program for this site (relative to site-spccifc environmental
cot strai nts)?
The site has two comprehensive plan future land use designations,
neighborhood density residential and greenspace. The proposed land
disturbance on the site is within the area designated as neighborhood density
residential. Of the 19.5 acres that comprise the property area, approximately
8 acres are within preserved greenspace, these areas lie outside of the limits
of disturbance. The extent of development on the site is consistent with the
comprehensive plan recommendation for the area of developable land on the
property.
Coinnninitv ffceting
Staff acknowledge tha the required Community Meeting was conducted at the Regents School's current
location on Ivy Road qn Thursday, August 30. A summary of the applicants' discussion with members of
the public during the Community meeting include the following questions_ issues, and concerns:
■ t'roject scaleiiitensi: questions and concerns about the proposed size of the school and
number/frequency of school activities (including rental of school properties; -facilities to non -school
entities) at this'constrained site, off of a relatively unsafe Reservoir Road, in this location with
significant exisIting traffic congestion issues.
■ Project phasin questions about the general timeframe and sequence for constructing the various
improvements -,hown on the conceptual plan.
o Applicant's response: This would not all be constructed at one time; this is a long-term
master)]an intended to be constructed in phases. The "early phase," which has a general
time ho izon of four years, tentatively includes the athletic field and either the gymnasium
buildin or one lower school building.
School operahtjns: questions about school drop-off details: questions and concerns about frequency
and size of school activities and parking capacity during various activities. questions and concerns
about outdoor lighting.
Transportation impacts to Reservoir Road: concern about current road deficiencies and safety;
concerns about increased traffic volume; questions about proposed improvements to the roadway;
questions and concerns about the sight distances and safety of the two proposed entrance locations;
concerns about safety during University Montessori School operations (drop-off'/ pick-up when
parents and children park at Trinity Presbyterian Church and walk across Reservoir Road).
Trans ortation im acts to Fontaine Atienue %Fontaine Avenue Extended / US 29 Bypass: concerns
about current roadway and intersection deficiencies and level of service, concerns about impacts to
Buckingham Circle residents; questions about transportation improvement plans, funding. and
tinging.
Page 10 of 17
C2�errszve Plan
Initial comments on how your proposal generally relates to the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan
{Comp Plan) are prllWed below, additionally, comments regarding conformity with the Comp Plan will
be provided to theP � and BOS as part of the staff report.
The Comp Plan designates the majority of these subject properties for "Neighborhood Density Residential"
Land and use(Is) in the Future Land Use Plan for the Southern and Western Urban Neighborhoods Master Plan
(,.Master Plan). As nowd in the "Land Use Categories and Guidelines" in the Master Plan (S-�-W. 34), this
designation represents "residential areas with a desired density of 3 — 6 residential dwelling units per acre."
Primary uses are residential uses.- and private schools are included in the list of secondary uses "where they
are deemed compatib,c with nearby and adjoining land uses,"
A portion of these properties is designated for "Parks and Green Systems" future land uses. This
desi-nation corresponds with natural
Z:! resources and environmental features, such as the tributary to
Moore's Creek. the floodplain around the tributary, and preserved steep slopes.
The Master Plan also movides additional information and recommendations regarding this area of Fontaine
Avenue Extended and the nearby US 29 / Interstate 64 interchange, as follows:
"Nezghborhood Ccn.1c rs
• There are two des6mated Centers near the subject property
o The "Morey Creek Center" (Center 4) is located near the intersection of Fontaine Avenue
Extended and Reservoir Road. The Master Plan states that "it will be a major employment
center which is affiliated with UVA and recommends that "the uses be limited to office uses
and commercial uses in conjunction with those offices. The Plan highlights the importance of
providing pedestrian connectivity to uses and Centers on the other (eastern) side of US 29.
(S+W 36)
o The other ('enter is the "southwest quadrant of the Route 29 and 1-64 interchange" (Center 6).
This is designated for "Regional Mixed Use," to include Industrial uses and Parks and Green
Systems uses. However, despite the proximity to the subject properties, this Center has very
little land use relationship with the subject property due to the separating presence of Interstate
64, and the lack of vehicular, pedestrian, or bicycle connectivity. (S—W 37)
"Other Areas ol'Impottancc - —
Foxhaven Farm, located across Reservoir Road from the subject properties, is identified as an "Other
Area of tmportanc�" for its potential to accommodate future "educational uses, including but not
limited to, a research station." (S+W 46)
o However, considering the ownership of Foxhaven Farm (The UVA Foundation), the future
..educational uses" appropriate for this area likely refer to University -affiliated education and
research, and not necessarily a private school unaffiliated with the University.
"I'ianfin- I-utitre Par-ks and Green Sisiems
• Natural Resource Protection Recommendations (S-�-W 539:
o '*The strewn buffers, systems of steep slopes, floodplain, and wetlands adjacent to ... `vloore's
Creek ... should be preserved,"
"Minimize stream impacts and improve theheattli/quality of Moore's Creek..,"
• Cultural and Scenic Resources Protection Recommendations (S-+-W 53):
"Preserve and maintain the vegetation that exists along Entrance Corridors and especially 1-64
... to protect the qualitt, and character of these roads and help to provide a visual and sound
buffer to developments."
Trails Recommendations (S+W 54):
Page 11 of 17
o "Provide a greenway trail to the Ragged Mountain Natural Area."
"11(112for- Euture D-dnsporlalion A'etimrlf
I
• Transportation Phan for Western Urban Neighborhoods (S+W 57):
o Figure 37 identifies the US 29 / Fontaine Avenue interchange as one of two targeted
Intersectic n Improvement projects.
• Transit Recommendations (S—W 63):
o "Provide transit service on Fontaine Ave. Extended to connect Morey Creek Office Park to
other Uni�ersity-rclated uses."
I
In summary, the prop sal to develop these subject properties for use as a private school are potentially
partially consistent w th the Master Plan. A private school might be an appropriate secondary use, if it is
developed and operated in a way that is '*compatible with nearby and adjoining land uses."
However, as noted thioughout this review comment letter, the compatibility and appropriateness of this
development proposal has not been determined. That evaluation depends on outstanding issues and details,
including but not I Hni cd to: operational details of the private school and its facilities; the preparation and
submission of the required Traffic Impact Analysis, and the findings and conclusions contained therein;
and the funding and construction of planned transportation improvements. among other things (such as the
conceptual grading pI n, potential 'impacts to natural resources, and potential impacts to the Entrance
Corridor).
Additionally, the "Lin its of School Campus" shown on the Illustrative Plan and Concept Plan appear to
leave approximately 31 0/'o' of the subject properties out of the school campus, and presumably in open
space; but the limits 0 the development extend to the very edge of areas designated as Parks and Green
Systems, such as the presciied steep slopes. It would be appropriate for the Illustrative Plan and the
Concept Plan to minis ire potential impacts to preserved steep slopes and other natural resources within
areas designated as P4ks and Green Systems on the future land use plan.
Thank you for this summary of feedback from the neighborhood meeting and comprehensive analysis
of consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. With this resubmittal the applicant has provided the
following supplemental information to help staff farther evaluate potential impacts from the
development and consistency with the Comprehensive Plan:
e traffic information
• limitations on school operations and enrollment to mitigate traffic impact (notably, a 7:45 a.m.
start time and initial maximum enrollment of 230 students)
• proposed traffic mitigation measures when warranted by enrollment numbers in excess of 230
students or a school start time within the peak hour of traffic
• additional information about general school operations including extracurricular activities and
school events
1110dek-
In 2001. the County adopted the Neighborhood Model, The Neighborhood Model was developed to guide
the "form" of dev cloprucrit. The Neighborhood Model recommends that the Development Areas and new
dcvcloprnent have twelve characteristics. General comments on how well the proposed development meets
the twelve principles of the Neighborhood Model arc provided below. More detailed comments may be
provided at a later date if changes are made and;/or after more detailed plans are provided.
Page 12 of 17
Pedestrian
Principle inet:
Orientation
* Sidewalks and crosswalks are shown within the proposed private school campus.
0 Street trees are shown along the improved edge of Reservoir Road along the majority of
the front property line,
1,1411ciple Not Lillet:
Street trees and other landscaping Should he provided between the front line
property and
the curb./front drive aisle.
At site plan the applicant will provide a landscape plan in accordance with applicable
regulations in Sec. 32.7.9 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance.
• The applicant has discussed potentially providing a low architectural wall or kneewall
along, a portion of the property's frontage, to contribute to a sense of spatial enclosure
and to enhance the pedestrian orientation of the development (without bringing the
primary structure any closer to the ROW). However, no such feature is proposed or
provided on the application plan,
Per Sec. 32.7.9.5(a), development on the site will require street tree installation. These
street trees will contribute to a sense of spatial enclosure and will provide shade adjacent
to Reservoir Road. The applicant has provided for a ROW reservation area to be dedicated
upon demand of the County or VDOT, this area could accommodate a multi -modal path in
the future and the proposed street trees would contribute to a sense of spatial enclosure
along the path. At this time a commitment to a knee wall is not provided with this
application.
Mixture of Uses
I fie proposed use is a private school. 'f lie future land use designation is Nei-liborl-Lood
Density Residential, whicli primarily calls for Residential uses (at a density of 3-6
�tllits!lacre), and which supports private schools as a secondary use. The future land use plan
.foes not call for 1uiXCd uses in this location.
is not inct, but this principle is 1101fil/11V applicable to this location.
Neighborhood
lie proposed project is a private school, which does riot appear to have any direct
Centers
ossociation with. or impact (positive or negative) on, the recommended future Centers.
the applicants stated during the community meeting (8/30/2018) that they intend to rent the
,-,ymnaslum., athletic field, and/or possibly other facilities to community groups or other
!organizations, potentially to include providing use of facilities at reduced costs or for no co-�
if such rental/use is allowed, the private school would serve some community purpose
! !,Cvorld its primary intended use (private school). But even this extended use would not
establish the private"
school as a "*neighborhood centeras defined in the Master Plan,
-inciple is not illilliedittle1v applicable,
Mixture of Housing
''his principle is not inuuediately applicable the proposed project is a private school.
Types and
_kffordability
I 'i"ciple is not applicable_
Interconnected
i lie applicants stated during the community meeting (8/30/2018) their intention to provide ii
Streets and
:;.cure interparcel pedestrian connection to Trinity Presbyterian Church which adJoins the
fransportation
t10kjest properties to the east.
Net,works
Vpciph' is Partial& the
The applicant has provided a note on the concept plan depicting the approximate location of
the pedestrian path connecting Trinity Presbyterian Church and the Regents School Property.
Exact location and design standards of the path will be determined at site plan.
Page 13 of 17
Multi -modal
phis private school proposal includes school taus services. Bicycle 1. ,%:.. )it the site could
Transportation
support and advance the use of alternative transportation modes.
Opportunities
i,rwil!a1,' is parlialltinct.
Noted, the inclusion of bike racks on the site may be explored during site plan.
Parks, Recreational
7 i s i_ .trit, of 3t kl vfl Campus°" shown oil the Illustrative !'lan and Concept Plan appear to
Amenities, and Open
;cave approximately 31 `% of the subject properties out ofthe school campus, and presumably
Space
!l open space, but the limits of the development extend to the very edge of areas designated
. s Parks and (been Systems, such as the preserved steep slopes.
Principle is parlit1111, file/.
Greater detail has been provided on the conceptual plan to note limits of disturbance and
preservation areas. As aforementioned, 31 % of the site area is designated as preservation area.
An additional 25% of the school campus is designated as open space. In total, more than 55%
of the site area is designated as open space or preservation area. This commitment to
greens ace far exceeds recommendations for greenspace per the Comprehensive Plan.
Buildings and Space
er discussion at the community meeting (8`30i2018), the proposed buildings would be sited
of Human Scale
an elevation below Reservoir Road, and would be low in height (potentially one story).
his concept would likely lead to a setting; where travelers in the Reservoir Road right of
gay would be looking down onto the roofs (and mechanical equipment) of the school
)llildings, and would produce a public right of way with no spatial enclosure or any other
rchitectural-structural presence along Reservoir Road.
In order to bring the proposed buildings to grade with Reservoir Road, extensive use of
fill would be required, possibly contributing to a greater visual impact on the entrance
corridor.
The proposed buildings will likely incorporate basements into building design in order to
maximize interior space while remaining cognizant of the existing topography.
Irillc1 Ile is 1101 ;11et.
Delegated Parking
"is Illustrative Plan and Concept Plan do not show any parking between primary build!n=-s
'Id the public right of way.
'=i;�ci��1c is 1net,
Redevelopment
lie subject properties are currently undeveloped.
i'l11c•iple is ;lot applicclhlc.
lRespecting T errain
1,,e proposed amount and configuration of development on the subject property, with regar(=
and Careful Grading
the existing topography, and as shown on the conceptual grading plan and illustrative play
and Re -grading of
Cate concerns among staff. It appears that extensive cut and fill operations are be trg
herrain
reposed to create an unnaturally large plateau of relatively Mat ground (or "pad"), instead of
$lining any terracing or similar practices to better situate this campus into a site with
_ nificalit existing topography. Staff have specific concerns about the amount, extent, and
_)e of proposed gradin(, activity in proximity to preserved steep slopes, floodplain, and
vam buffer.
The proposed site development is cognizant of existing environmentally sensitive features and
does not proposed disturbance for building construction outside of the limits of disturbance.
Reiterate how much of the site is in peresertvation, how much of site can be reasonably
graded to 3:1 slopes
1;1L`iplc is not Incl.
Page 14 of 17
Clear Boundaries I The sub , ject properties are not adjacent to a Rural Area 11OUndar,
A,ith the Rural Area I, princij)lc is 11ol alydicable,
The following written l review comments were.provided by Zoning staff on 8.121 1122018 regarding the above
noted application. Those comments are also attached as a memo.
1. Please submit parking study to address required parking for the proposed use. Please include
information as to number of faculty and staff in your submittal. The study should include ally
existing data frorn the schools current locations.
From Zoning Qrdinancc Section 4.12.6:
Schools: The number of proposed spaces shall be shown in a parking study submitted by the school
division (public schools) or the school (private schools). The number of required spaces shall be
determined by the zoning administrator. In making the determination, the administrator shall
Z-n
consider the rccommendations in the parking study, traffic generation figures either known to the
industry or est mated by the Institute of Transportation Engineers peak parking demands, and other
relevant inforiVation. (Amended 2-5-03).
There are con cierns that what has been shown on the application plan will be adequate to support
peak parking dernand, such as times when the school will have multiple after school events
including spolng events, theater events. and gyrrinastiLli-a Uses.
Additional parking information has been provided with this resubmittal in the "Parking Study."
2. There are also concerns about the amount of fighting shown on the plan. Parking lot lighting as
well as the "Lighted Ball Field" were major concerns. Section 4.17 of the Zoning Ordinance
outlines standard outdoor lighting regulations this development must abide by. More information
on the height of poles, lighting used, direction of illumination, etc, shall be provided to allow LIS to
confirm that thf s application plan is abiding by this section of the ordinance.
i I
The site plan will include a lighting plan to comply with all applicable regulations of Section 4.17
of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance.
I There are addit onal concerns about the width of lanes and site lines along Reservoir Road as many
other dep,- �ts have mentioned,
Revised road plans are included with this resubmittal to provide additional information about the
site lines along Reservoir Road and proposed shoulder widening.
4. Lastly, there are concerns about the amount of preserved slopes on the site and how close some of
the retaining walls come to these preserved slopes. It should be noted that retaining wall footers are
often Much voider than the wall themselves. so be aware ho", close these retainim-, walls are built to
preserved slopes because even in the wall isn't impacting the slope, the construct —Ion and footers
Could be. Section 30.7 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the regulations for steep slope.,,
The limits of the school campus does not conflict with preserved slopes on the site. The limits of
disturbance shall contain retaining wall features to include retaining wall footers.
Engineering
No written review comments have been received from Engineering Division staff. Engineering revie
w lew
comments will be forwarded upon receipt. Please note that the Planning comments (above) were
Page 15 of 17
composed in collaboration with County Engineer Frank Pohl, PE, CFM.
Mr. Adam J. Moore, E, Area Land Use Engineer, provided the following review comments on
8/30/2018 (below). Tese comments are also attached as a memo.
1. The provided �iarrative proposes to make improvements to Reservoir Road including widening the
shoulder and �Icaring vegetation; however, those improvement details were not found in the
received plans!.
Revised road plans have been included with this resubmittal to show shoulder widening,
vegetative clearing, and proposed re -grading of portions of the road.
Previous disc ssions included the need for crest grading to achieve stopping sight distance along
Reservoir details, for those improvements were not found.
Details for crest grading to achieve stopping sight distance along Reservoir Road are included
with this resubmittal.
3. The DepartnICIII understands that the County will require a4 IA t'Or this project in order to better
understand hot, the proposed development will impact surrounding roads and future
improvements �projects. The Department will provide comments on the TIA once it is received.
Traffic inform altion is included with this resubmittal.
4. Note that the final site plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual
Appendices B(II) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other
requirements. i
Noted.
The following cornme is related to ACSA have been provided by Richard Nelson on 8/15112018 (below).
These comments so attached as a memo.
There are no objection for this SP. The following "red flags" regarding service provision do need to be
addressed prior to site tklan approval: Call out RWSA raw water main. Show ACSA water main along
Reservoir Road. Show sewer connection proposed sewer connection to existing sewer. Approval of church
and DECK will be required if connection to private pump station is proposed. Demonstrate how required
fire flow will be rnet,
Rivanna Wateran_d Newy-r-Authorift-
RWSA has reviewed the special use permit application for the Regents School at Reservoir Road (TMP
76-17) and the associatIed exhibit entitled -Illustrative Plan of Development" as prepared by Shimp
Engineering and dated I /l 6/20 18 and recommends approval of the special use permit. With this approval.
RWSA offers the folloivin,� general comments for the applicant:
4n
1. RWSA has concerns regarding the proposed gradini, over the existing 18" raw water main (built in
approximately 1008) for the proposed exit driveway. Depending on the timing of construction,
RWSA may request that a portion of the raw water main be replaced with ductile iron prior to
placing fill o%,,cr this area. Coordination between the property owner and RWSA will be necessary,
Page 16 of 17
during construction to minimize other impacts to the existing raw water main.
The property owner will coordinate with RWSA during construction to minimize impacts to the
existing raw water main and representatives of the applicant and RWSA have already met on site
to discuss potential coordinated.
2. No trees will be allowed within the existing RWSA water line easement.
Noted.
3. Per VA Waterworks Regulations, horizontal separation of 10' is required between water lines and
sewer lines. T�c proposed sanitary sewer line is shown approximately 7-8 feet from the existing
raw water line!
Noted, at the time of site plan, we will need to maintain horizontal separation of 10' between
water lines and sewer lines. All applicable VA Waterworks Regulations will be adhered to in the
site plan. I
1
4. RWSA is currently in the preliminary phases of design for anew ra"v water main to replace the
existing 1908 cast iron raw water main. The project will also include a new raw water pump station
for which a site has not yet been selected. TMP 76-1 -11 has been identified as a possible location for
the raw water pump station., therefore RWSA may be interested in obtaining easements andl/or a
small piece of . roperty on MP 76-17 for construction of the water main and pump station. We are
currentlyimg constructiori in 2022-2023.
The property owner remains available for discussions about any proposed easements but we
understand the authority has decided against using this site at this time.
No written review cot merits have been received from Fire Rescue staff. m
Fire Rescue continents will be
forwarded upon receip�
Page 17 of 17
RECEIVED
APR 2 9 2019
COMMUNITY•[1�{
DE. d L'+�✓ �Ai'i�M "�