HomeMy WebLinkAbout01 30 2018 PC MinutesALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
401 MCINTIRE ROAD - Room 241
TUESDAY, JANUARY 30, 2018 - 6:00 P.M.
Joint Meeting with Board of Supervisors
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a joint work session with the Board of Supervisors on
Tuesday, January 30, 2018, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Room 241, Second Floor, 401
McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Commissioners attending were Karen Firehock, Jennie More, Bruce Dotson, Daphne Spain, Julian Bivins,
Pam Riley, Vice Chair; Tim Keller, Chair and Bill Palmer, UVA Representative.
Other officials present were Andrew Gast -Bray, Director of Planning and Community Development
Department (CDD), Rachael Falkenstein, Senior Planner, Sharon Taylor, Clerk of Planning Commission
and John Blair, Deputy County Attorney.
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Tim Keller, Chair of Planning Commission, called the Planning Commission meeting to order at 6:01
p.m. and introduced Julian Bivins the new Planning Commissioner for the Jack Jouett District.
The Chair, Ms. Mallek, called the special meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to order
at 6:01 p.m., for the purpose of allowing a quorum of Board members to convene an open meeting, to
receive and discuss a presentation, and consider endorsement of the Rio/29 Small Area Plan Phase 2
design framework.
PRESENT: Mr. Norman G. Dill, Mr. Ned Gallaway, Ms. Ann Mallek, Ms. Diantha H. McKeel, Ms. Liz A.
Palmer and Mr. Rick Randolph.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Jeff Richardson, County Attorney, Greg Kamptner, Clerk,
Claudette Borgersen, and Senior Deputy Clerk, Travis O. Morris.
Agenda Item No. 2. Presentation - Rio/29 Small Area Plan.
Rio/29 Small Area Plan. Staff and consultants will be presenting the final drafts for Phase 2 of the Rio29
Small Area Plan, which includes a connectivity plan, a sample quadrant plan, and images and renderings
demonstrating form and feel. In addition to the designs, staff will share preliminary results from
transportation and market analysis and a summary of implementation recommendations.
The Executive Summary forwarded to the Board states that the County's Comprehensive Plan
lays out a vision for Development Areas that are "vibrant active places with attractive neighborhoods, high
quality, mixed -use areas, thriving business and industry, all supported by services, infrastructure, and
multimodal transportation networks." This vision was further validated during Phase 1 of the Small Area
Plan by citizens, stakeholders and elected officials. The community expressed a desire for the Rio29 area
to transform into a walkable, bikeable, mixed use area with ample green space and recreational
opportunities, all accessible by transit.
To achieve this vision, the Phase 1 land use plan specified that development along Route 29
should be concentrated in centers of development that will begin to set the stage for future transit (this is
often referred to as Transit Oriented Development, or TOD). The Phase 1 visioning for the Small Area
Plan called for the establishment of three centers, or nodes, of development along Route 29 between
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018
FINAL MINUTES
Branchland Blvd. and the Rivanna River, with a priority given to the node centered around the Rio Road
and Route 29 intersection.
The Phase 1 vision stipulated that nodes should be developed strategically to encourage transit
and to also be respectful of existing neighborhoods using a core/edge pattern of development. The most
intense development is expected to be concentrated towards the center of the node, closest to transit.
The height and intensity of development of the node should cascade down to the edges, where
development of lower intensity and height would be found, especially in areas adjacent to existing
residential neighborhoods.
At an August 15, 2017 joint meeting staff presented a conceptual circulation network and design
sketches to the Board and Planning Commission. During that meeting members of the Board and
Planning Commission expressed support for the draft concepts but wanted to see more detail associated
with the designs. The Board and Commission also expressed a desire for the Rio29 area to be unique
and emphasized the importance of placemaking.
The presentation on January 30 will include detailed design plans consisting of a connectivity
plan, a sample quadrant plan, and images and renderings demonstrating form and feel. Staff will also give
a brief overview of implementation recommendations. The design materials will be shared with the Board
and Planning Commission during the presentation on January 30 and no attachments are provided with
this Executive Summary.
The connectivity plan to be presented includes recommendations for a future circulation network
and green infrastructure. The connectivity plan demonstrates a framework of interconnected pedestrian
friendly roadways, trails and green amenities, supported by a centrally located transit station. The
connectivity plan also demonstrates a phasing concept that can be supported by strategically timed public
investments and allows for the phased redevelopment of privately owned strip retail centers.
Phase 2 also includes a sample quadrant plan, which illustrates a redevelopment scenario of an
existing strip retail center that corresponds to the aforementioned connectivity plan demonstrating form
standards. We will provide a phasing exhibit and associated analysis to illustrate how an existing
shopping center could redevelop over time without displacing existing tenants. A feasibility analysis
demonstrates the financial viability of the sample redevelopment within the local marketplace. We will pair
the sample quadrant plan with renderings and images showing the experience and feel for the core and
edges of the development scenario.
Lastly, we will provide an implementation overview to lay out the steps the County can take to
help realize the vision and desired form laid out by the Small Area Plan. The implementation discussion
will be a summary of staff and focus group recommendations to -date and will be for information purposes
during the presentation on January 30. The Board will receive a more detailed presentation and will have
an opportunity to provide staff with direction on the implementation recommendations during a February
14 workshop meeting.
Portions of consultant services for Phase 2 of the Small Area Plan were funded through a
$65,000 Urban Development Area Planning Grant through the Office of Intermodal Planning and
Investment. Additional funds for Phase 2 consultant work have been covered by the $120,000 FY17
budget allocation for the Small Area Plan.
After staffs presentation, questions and discussion, staff recommends the Board and Planning
Commission endorse the Small Area Plan design framework and direct staff to advance the presented
information to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Mr. Andrew Gast -Bray addressed the Board and Commission and stated that he would present
on Phase 2 of the Rio/29 Small Area Plan, which he described as a design, plan, and implementation
framework stage. He stated that Mr. Vlad Gavrilovic of EPR and Ms. Rachel Falkenstein of County staff
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION -JANUARY 30, 2018
FINAL MINUTES
are present at the meeting, and he noted that Mr. Mike Callahan was going to be the principal presenter
but had come down with the flu.
Mr. Gast -Bray reported that the purpose of this meeting is to obtain feedback and endorsement of
the framework and designs for the progress made on understanding the hopes for Rio/29. He stated that
they will be providing a connection from the Phase 1 work, which is a general vision for the area that the
Board and Commission had determined was consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and had captured
what the public wants to see in this area. Mr. Gast -Bray said the vision has certain performance
characteristics such as transit -oriented development that will be discussed in detail, and he emphasized
that what staff is presenting at this meeting is a visualization as to what might be. He stated that the
questions to be answered are whether the designs reflect the vision established in Phase 1, because the
Board and Commission had indicated in August that they wanted more detail and needed more
information as to how it would perform specifically. Mr. Gast -Bray said that because this is affiliated with
the Comprehensive Plan, the Commission is present.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that they also wanted to clarify whether the designs are consistent with
public feedback to date, which both bodies will need to determine. He said they will also want to establish
that they are consistent with strategic plan goals for the project and other things going on within the
County. He added that they will also want to evaluate whether they are ready to advance the framework
and designs to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment phase. If endorsed, this presentation will lay the
groundwork for a later discussion of implementation. Mr. Gast -Bray noted that questions in that scenario
or context are how to realize the vision and what degree of participation will come from the County. He
commented that there is a very capable Planning Commission that can also weigh in on other matters
because they have a lot of experience in general, and that input will be welcomed.
Mr. Gast -Bray pointed out that there are challenges with the precepts, as the County does not
own, nor is it pursuing ownership or development of the area on its own, so any design is unlikely to
develop exactly as visualized. At best, he said, the County can encourage, entice, and inspire a private
developer to achieve the design as presented and/or demonstrate the performance of the endorsed
visualization such that any variation will achieve the same or better performance, even though it may look
different. Mr. Gast -Bray stated that the County has been working with all four quadrants around the
Rio/29 interchange, landowners and stakeholders, as well as the public. He said they are showing
opportunities in one quadrant, the northeast portion that includes Albemarle Square, because it is easiest
to explain how it might be able to evolve in the future. He noted that it is an open area with one owner that
is easier to visualize what might happen, but this does not imply that it is a specific target or particular
beneficiary of any County program, and that landowner has provided a lot of feedback.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that they have had a lot of additional engagement, with many great
comments from the Board and Commission, and stakeholder guidance through the steering committee
and work group. He said there have been special areas in topic guidance — focus groups — which dealt
with issues of connectivity, placemaking, finance and implementation, entrepreneurial infrastructure, etc.
Mr. Gast -Bray mentioned that the Hydraulic area is undergoing a very similar process and that area is
very important to the success of Rio/29. He said they have also had outside expert assistance in the form
of Stantec, which helped with economic analysis for the area; Kimley-Horn, which has performed a
transportation analysis; and Renaissance and EPR, who have been doing the designs and visualizations.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that they have the capacity to field questions from the public should the
Board and Commission choose, but the meeting was not advertised as such because it is mostly for their
own opportunity. He said there had been a public engagement session the previous week and there are
other possibilities, noting that they are in the middle of the process and not at the end by any means. Mr.
Gast -Bray noted that there would be plenty of time for questions afterwards, but they could ask questions
along the way as necessary. He introduced Ms. Falkenstein to continue the presentation.
Ms. Rachel Falkenstein addressed the Board and Commission and presented a slide that showed
this as an 'opportunity plan" — an opportunity for property owners to increase possibilities for development
*A,W- of their property and increase flexibility and use of the property. She said that staff also sees this as a
benefit for the community, supporting the creation of great walkable places that people want to see in the
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 3
FINAL MINUTES
area; and as a benefit for the County because it offers economic development potential of the area and
supports growth management policies.
Ms. Falkenstein reminded them that there is broad policy context, with Places 29 setting the
vision for walkability, the Neighborhood Model, and the growth management policies of the County; and
this plan is focused on one priority area within that development area. She noted that they are now in
Phase 2, working on urban design plans, which are supported by some analysis of transportation and
economics, and if the Boards agree, they can move this forward to a Comprehensive Plan Amendment
and potential zoning and policy updates in the future. She stated that the visualizations shared with them
in August included a draft connectivity plan that begins to lay the groundwork for an interconnected
network of streets, parallel roadways to get traffic off 29 and into the quadrants, and to provide additional
connectivity in the area. Ms. Falkenstein said they also shared a draft detail design that started to
demonstrate the form of the area.
Ms. Falkenstein stated that they had a lot of feedback and discussion on these in August, and
there was a lot of support for the big picture concepts, with people liking the idea of the connectivity,
which they call the "loop concept," and there was support for transit and walkability. Ms. Falkenstein noted
that the Board and Commission wanted to see more detail in terms of appearance and functionality, and
they also guided staff to placemaking and green infrastructure as they felt they were important elements
that could be an organizing feature of future development in the area. She said that staff also heard a lot
from property owners and stakeholders about phasing and form, and people felt it was important for it to
be taller than two to three stories in order to make mixed -use development work. Ms. Falkenstein said
property owners wanted them to avoid showing streets through existing buildings where possible, so staff
reworked the street network, and people also felt that phasing was important. She noted that there are big
shopping centers in the area that have long-term leases, and people wanted the County to envision how
this area could redevelop in phases without displacing those tenants.
Mr. Vlad Gavrilovic of the firm EPR addressed the Board and Commission and stated that he is
privileged to have been part of the large design team that worked on this project and helped bring the
draft vision to realization in the past year and a half. He stated that this is a vision that relies heavily on
the private sector to be implemented, and staff would share the County and public -sector encouragement
that could happen to help realize this vision. Mr. Gavrilovic emphasized that the purpose of this draft is to
encourage, inspire, and create opportunities for the private sector to transform this area in the coming
decades into something with a better quality of life than its current function. He stated that in terms of
connectivity, started in Phase 1 about a year earlier, Rio and 29 are regional crossroads for the area and
form the corner and uptown for this section of the County — but to transform, they lack parallel collectors,
a road network that will support the traffic in this area, and lack transit, walkability, and the features of a
more complete community. Mr. Gavrilovic said that their connectivity concept looks to line up Berkmar
Drive with the signal at Fashion Square south, that looks to realign Hillsdale Drive when it is extended to
this area; so that rather than going off into residential areas to the north and east, it starts to loop around,
parallel 29, and come back in to create a loop system that serves the future redevelopment of the area.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that they have done a lot of work on the connectivity plan in response to
Board, Commission, and public input, and have maintained the kind of loop concept showing the Berkmar
extension to the south, aligning with the traffic signal there and connecting to Hillsdale to form the
southern part of that loop. He explained that they looped it around Fashion Square and Albemarle
Square, but were not quite able to connect it to Woodbrook because of VDOT's spacing requirements to
the existing Rio/29 intersection. Mr. Gavrilovic stated that it helps funnel future traffic around this node
and back onto 29, and said they have done a lot of work with staff on respecting existing property lines
and footprints. He said he would be showing how the area could be phased without affecting tenants,
businesses, and buildings in the area. He added that they have also done a lot of work on green
connectivity, showing how trails could permeate this area and offer green and civic spaces, and he would
demonstrate a typology of what the streets and trails could be in the area.
Mr. Gavrilovic reported that for the big connectors — Hillsdale and Berkmar — there would be
urban rain gardens in the right of way that create buffers and enhance the wide sidewalks along the big
connectors. He stated that for the smaller roads, the local street network, they would have plenty of
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 4
FINAL MINUTES
landscaping, street trees, and tree lawns or parkways that would treat the rainwater before it enters the
storm drain system. Mr. Gavrilovic pointed out that this really enhances the quality of life, walkability, and
Nww character of the local streets. He stated that there would be greenspaces, city spaces that are not just
urban plazas but are pocket parks, and addition of green vitality throughout the development — connecting
it all with a series of multi -use trails, as well as inclusion of daylighted streams. Mr. Gavrilovic said there is
a stream under the pavement north of Albemarle Square, and it could possibly be daylighted, turned into
an amenity, and provide a green connection throughout the area.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that the connectivity plan would be dependent on how the area redevelops
and the pace and pattern of redevelopment, but the design team considered how it could redevelop in a
series of logical phases. He pointed out the existing street network and noted the location of signals at
Fashion Square south, Berkmar, between the malls on Rio Road and Woodbrook, and the existing trail
network that currently goes behind Albemarle Square. He said that in the first phase, they could envision
the realignment of Hillsdale as it comes to the area with a new crossover intersection at Rio Road,
wrapping around while still allowing the existing buildings and street network to maintain in Albemarle
Square but wrapping around that and Fashion Square, going out to Route 29. He noted that the extension
of the existing trail into more of a regional trail network, possibly connecting with the Rivanna River as
part of a regional trail. Mr. Gavrilovic stated that they would also start building a transit network with an
express bus stop at the intersection of Rio and 29.
Ms. Mallek asked which level of street is what they are proposing as northern Hillsdale — the
smaller connector one or the bigger 60-foot wide one. Mr. Gavrilovic replied that it is the bigger connector,
and he does not know how many lanes it would be, but it would have the more urban rain garden
character.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that in the next phase, as the area starts to redevelop, they would build out
the network of local streets, green streets, and trails. He presented an example of a daylighted stream
being turned into a trail network that goes under Route 29 and starts to connect and build a trail network
in each of the four quadrants, so people could someday cross through the area on a system of trails. He
said that once the area builds out and begins to transform through future redevelopment, they would
complete the local street network and system of blocks that are much smaller scale like downtown
Charlottesville, rather than the super -blocks found in a typical suburban strip retail environment. He noted
that this would also be the time when the bus rapid transit would be realized with a transit -oriented
development supporting it, and a possible future roundabout at the intersection there.
Mr. Gavrilovic explained the way the roundabout would work would be that the structure and
tunnel under Rio and the platform above would not be changed, but they would redirect traffic into the
roundabout — which would take out signalization so that right -turning traffic could free flow on the ramps
and left -turning traffic could go around the roundabout. He emphasized that this has potential for
improving pedestrian safety because rather than crossing five or six lanes, you would be crossing two at a
maximum. He noted that this would also allow for a bridge concept so that someday there could be a
bridge above the area, with no traffic/pedestrian interactions. Mr. Gavrilovic pointed out an animation
depicting what this might look like. He stated that there is also the potential for this to allow more traffic
capacity in the area, and ultimately more intense development, taking the capacity of the intersection a
long way into the future.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that in terms of the detail plan, this is a template for the four quadrants that
is intended to inspire how redevelopment could happen and gradually transition from suburban strip retail
to mixed-use/walkable over time. He said they have done a lot of work on this since they last presented it
to them, with an emphasis on making it greener with a trail network going around it and connecting to
trails in the other quadrants. He stated that they have also established a central green plaza so when you
step off the bus rapid transit system, you go down a sidewalk into a green park plaza, with a series of
pocket parks that would take you down to the trail network that goes in the stream valley behind it, loops
around another stream valley and encircles the development.
1%r Mr. Gavrilovic said that he has also shown how this respects the existing buildings and allows for
appropriate phasing, but most importantly, this is based on a study that Stantec did for the County for a
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 5
FINAL MINUTES
15-acre site such as this that shows a market feasible redevelopment with this mixture of uses that
provides an appropriate rate of return. He noted that this shows a two to three-story low-rise retail fronting
Rio and 29, with enclosed parking, and the inner core would be mixed office and retail with structured
parking — with the edges feathering out to lower density and more compatible uses as residential, with a
mixture of structured and surface parking. Mr. Gavrilovic demonstrated how this could be phased,
referencing a slide showing the current Albemarle Square, and the design team believes that in the first
phase the surface parking areas fronting Rio and 29 could be redeveloped into two to three-story
buildings with retail on the bottom and offices above. He noted that they could build podium parking into
the grade, so they would be replacing the parking as well as providing ample parking for these new uses,
and it does not affect the shopping center. Mr. Gavrilovic said that in the next phase, you could take any
internal bays of parking areas and provide pad -ready, shovel -ready sites for redevelopment of a mixture
of office and retail uses, with structured parking that again provides parking for the new uses and replaces
parking with viable shopping center uses and continued leases while redevelopment is occurring. He
stated that as the area transforms, it becomes a 15-minute walkable community where people can live,
work, shop, and recreate — all within an easy walking distance — and it would be permeated with green
spaces, parks, and trails.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that the design team did some computer simulation to demonstrate the
possible look and feel of the area, noting that this is correlated to the market feasibility study done by
Stantec so it reflects the scale, intensity, and mixture of uses called for in the market study. He referenced
what would be visible as a person steps off of the bus rapid transit station, with a sloped sidewalk that
opens into a plaza/urban park with the core of development facing the pedestrian — beginning at six
stories but feathering down to lower heights to be more compatible with surrounding areas. Mr. Gavrilovic
said that both sides would have retail on the ground floor and residential or office above, and there is an
opportunity — particularly in the core area — for the County to make some investments either in civic
spaces, open spaces, or in actual building and uses to catalyze the private investment and development
in the area.
Ms. Falkenstein reported that they have had an opportunity to receive some early feedback on
the designs, with an open house held the previous Thursday, and some themes emerged from the public
comments. She noted that these were also out online for a few days and had some feedback received
there. Ms. Falkenstein reported that they invited the stakeholder group, community advisory committee,
and citizens to attend the open house. She said that what they heard was generally positive reaction,
particularly to the proposed green features, as people liked the idea of more trails, parks, and daylighted
streams. Ms. Falkenstein noted that there were concerns about possible crime and noise in the area, with
a park right next to a busy street, as well as how it might impact the existing neighborhoods in the area.
Ms. Falkenstein stated that there were concerns about existing property owners related to
showing future streets on private property, with some concerns as to how that might impact the financing
or developability of their property in the future. She added that there were also concerns about
affordability for both residential and small businesses who are currently located in this area, in terms of
how this would impact prices. Ms. Falkenstein stated that recurring themes they heard from feedback
relate to the design and how the increased density would impact the area, with concerns about protecting
the views from existing neighborhoods. She said there has also been a theme of flexibility, as people
want the County to maintain flexibility to allow the development to happen in any quadrant and to be
prepared for that development to happen.
Ms. Falkenstein stated that staff has done some initial analysis and feel that it is important for the
designs to be realistic and achievable, so their evaluation considered transportation and the market for
the area. She explained that they worked with Kimley-Horn to do transportation modeling for the area,
and there is much more work to be done if the County moves forward with this design. She said the firm
found that the proposed network's capacity for Rio and 29 could handle almost a doubling in increase of
development of the area. Ms. Falkenstein stated that they have also done some initial intersection
analysis, with the future Hillsdale/Rio intersection chosen to determine whether the proposed
intersections could handle the future development. She said this modeling demonstrated that either a
signal or a roundabout for this intersection could work. Ms. Falkenstein stated that there were benefits to
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 6
FINAL MINUTES
connectivity, creating multiple routes to destinations, improvements to bicyclists and pedestrians, and the
ability to get to densities that would make transit feasible in the area.
Ms. Falkenstein reported that they worked with Stantec to look at the market in the area, and their
analysis demonstrated that a healthy market return was achievable with a mixed -use development in the
area with structured parking. She said they also considered what the market is doing in terms of
absorption and whether it could even handle the additional development in this area, finding a healthy
absorption rate for both multi -family and office use in the area. Ms. Falkenstein highlighted the CBDs,
which represent the Central Business District of downtown Charlottesville, with a current vacancy rate of
zero, indicating that there is a strong desire for businesses to locate in mixed -use walkable communities.
She pointed out that perhaps Rio/29 could provide an alternative area for businesses that want these
features.
Ms. Falkenstein stated that the purpose of her report on implementation is to provide an
overview, and no decisions are expected at this point, although they have been thinking about it and there
is a meeting with the Board in February to start the conversation and get more direction on
implementation. She said this is not a comprehensive list, but is just a list of tools heard from
stakeholders, experts, and citizens about where they should focus implementation efforts. Ms.
Falkenstein stated that staff has delineated this into four separate categories, the first being transportation
improvements. She said staff expects that some portions of the connectivity plan shown would require
some level of public investment, specifically the core streets of Rio, Berkmar, and Hillsdale, as well as the
transit piece. Ms. Falkenstein stated that the phases could be broken down further and this is highly
dependent on how the area redevelops, so the County should be flexible as to how they phase these.
Ms. Falkenstein said the next category is placemaking measures, which are based on the strong
desire heard from the public to have more trails and greenspace in the area, and to have more amenities.
Ms. Falkenstein noted that she has broken this down into two goals — parks/trails and making the public
realm more interesting; and fostering connections to place. She stated that there are some short-term and
long-term recommendations for the Board to consider, including the North Town Trail Study, which has
been in the Comprehensive Plan for many years, to connect the northern development area to the City of
Charlottesville and would pass through the study area. She commented that this could be an early
implementation step the Board could take to start to realize some of those important trail features that
people wanted to see. Ms. Falkenstein stated that the Woodbrook Natural Area is a storm water facility
that the County currently owns behind Albemarle Square and the Woodbrook neighborhood, and there is
currently an informal trail network in the area — and she wonders if the Board would be interested in
opening that up and providing more access to those trails for people to use. She said the next category is
partnerships and incentives, and stakeholders and property owners felt it was important that the County
be a partner in the redevelopment — either through a public/private partnership, locating a core tenant,
strategic infrastructure investments, or financial incentives. Ms. Falkenstein added that staff anticipates
that the Board would be exploring these options further if they move forward with their premarketing
study.
Ms. Falkenstein said the last category is zoning and policy updates, and staff believes that most
of these updates could be achieved in the short term for Rio/29, and the County should allow the desired
form by -right through zoning. She stated a good tool for that could be form -based code, and simultaneous
to that they could look at their review process and how they can encourage developers to want to develop
their property through a fast -track review to get through the process faster.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that to realize this vision, they have five component parts: the transit piece
and orientation and how that impacts community form; the roadway network that connects all of these
modes together including a bike/pedestrian network; and the green network. He said they would take
them all individually just to get the targets in the framework as they move forward, and transit is key to this
image and framework because this area grew up for a reason — and if no alternative to single -occupancy
vehicles driving every place they go, the design would continue in the way it had been with roads and
parking lots. Mr. Gast -Bray noted that transit -ready design has huge impacts because it encourages
parking once so people do not get back in their cars to go to and from different buildings and could
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 7
FINAL MINUTES
instead access everything they need within a short parking distance. He said the idea of designing and
orienting around transit is important to the quality of life in this area.
Mr. Gast -Bray said that community form is directly tied to the orientation and lifestyle, and a
connected network allows people to get easy access to transit from building to building. He stated that the
roadway network has to accommodate more than just cars alone but would also need to address cars,
and when quality places are designed for people to park and drive their cars, it works better for all the
modes, which is key to long-term success. He said there also must be a bike-ped network, and the
networks must be complete in serving all modes in a connected way. Mr. Gast -Bray stated that they have
a green infrastructure network in the plan, which adds uniqueness to the place and adds amenities that
the growing community wants to see. He noted that improving trail connections, open space and park
designs is necessary to inspire people to want to be there. Mr. Gast -Bray commented that the network
also provides a way to look at potential community investments, including infrastructure and future school
plans.
Mr. Gast -Bray asked the Board and Commission if the framework and designs reflect the vision
established in Phase 1, which is consistent with where the Comprehensive Plan wants them to go and the
public feedback to date with strategic plan goals as set by the Board and Commission for this project —
consistent with other strategic plan goals they already have. He stated that the final question is whether
they are ready to advance the framework and design through a Comprehensive Plan Amendment and
process for enabling this to happen, rather than being an impediment to it. Mr. Gast -Bray said that on
February 5, they will learn more about the context of form -based code with a workshop, with a morning
session for the Board to ask questions of an outside expert, Peter Katz, who has been implementing
award -winning form -based code plans throughout the country. He noted that there would be a public
presentation later that evening, and on February 14, there would be some follow up to talk about
implementation.
Ms. Mallek asked if there are questions of staff before entertaining what Mr. Gast -Bray has
outlined. Ms. Spain asked if, pursuant to the Stantec report, the bottom -line message is that there needs
to be structured parking that is publicly funded. Mr. Gast -Bray responded that the report was vague as to
the specifics of the structured parking, but successful development must involve some sort of structured
parking to allow the intensity of development to enable all of these factors. He said they typically need
some sort of investment in the places where it has been successful, but there are lots of ways of
implementing it and they do not want to pre -anticipate the details of how to implement it. Mr. Gast -Bray
stated that the examples around the country that have been most successful have some significant
degree of investment, cooperation, or partnership with community investment.
Ms. Spain asked what the process would be if the county decides to subsidize it and whether it
would go into the CIP for a particular year or some other fund, and asked whether the Board would vote
on that kind of partnership. Ms. Mallek said that they would.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that the Board has not weighed in on that discussion yet, and that is a
possible way of doing it — with staff envisioning pieces of the puzzle so that one entity does not have to
assume the entire burden of structured parking. He said in other places, such as Keene, New Hampshire,
there is a public investment of structured parking to spark downtown revitalization — and they are charging
for parking. He added that there are numerous configurations as options, ranging from small to large
public investments, and he anticipates that they would begin that discussion on February 14.
Mr. Randolph commented that there is a cultural expectation in the Charlottesville/Albemarle area
for paid parking, so any configuration — either through the Economic Development Authority, referendum
funding, etc. — could include paid parking. He stated that he is concerned with the Stantec report that it is
commercial -space intensive, and there was no discussion of multi -family units in this area. Mr. Randolph
said that unless people actually live in the area, they will only visit and recreate here, which means more
auto traffic. He stated that he also feels that what is missing from the Stantec report are ways to increase
the viability in this location for nonprofit organizations, which he feels would be a very important
component of potentially working and operating in this area. Mr. Randolph said that they should also look
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 8
FINAL MINUTES
at the synergy of a governmental center with adjacent properties and its impact on the rents that would be
demanded in the area. He also complimented staff and Mr. Gavrilovic for the presentation.
Ms. Falkenstein stated that Stantec had done research on the demand for multi -family residential,
using the term tertiary markets, and said that data was difficult to find in the tertiary market, but looked at
past trends to find that the absorption rate for the area was about 400 units per year. She said this was
not highlighted in the memo she said because they focused the cost -benefit analysis they did for the
Board in December and included discussion of that in this analysis.
Ms. Firehock commented that the plan illustrations include some large blocks with big chunky
structures, which are reminiscent to her of those at Fontaine Research Park, and she does not
understand how buildings over time would gradually transition into residential. Mr. Gast -Bray responded
that there would be many different options with phasing, and staff wanted to make sure they had
opportunities that may become available. He said the real development would allow that to more
organically happen, which would likely mean smaller chunks. He added that certain things they do right
now are in the way of the kind of development desired, so they are trying to address those things and
have a path to achieve them.
Mr. Gavrilovic stated that where this differs from Fontaine Research Park is that the park has
primarily surface parking in "super blocks," with the blocks proposed for the small area being 300 x 300 —
and downtown Charlottesville being 200 x 300, which are small, walkable blocks. He said that rather than
look at how big the building is, the experience for the user is what is seen from the street. Mr. Gavrilovic
noted that there is also much greener infrastructure built into the Rio/29 area than there is in downtown
Charlottesville.
Mr. Dill asked about the validity and depth of community feedback with this, as people latch onto
concepts such as green space because they miss having it in other places and want more of it. He stated
that in terms of the retail space, the type of retail needs to be stipulated, and green space would be an
amenity that attracts people to the area. Mr. Gast -Bray said that it is tempting to view the future through
the lens of today, and he would advise that they need to think about the changing nature of retail — with
Albemarle Square having been a successful retail model not that long ago. He stated that he is reluctant
to stipulate whether this would be high -end retail such as Stonefield, and if this evolves over time they
would not necessarily know what the target of the future would be. Mr. Gast -Bray emphasized that it is
incumbent on them to ensure there is enough flexibility to accommodate whatever future that is. He stated
he is hopeful that the future model would be much more diverse because with a single price point area, it
does not really cater to the complete neighborhood they hope to have in this area — and whatever it is, he
anticipates it would be much more diverse than they have today. He said they need to be flexible to
accommodate all potential markets because they are trying to give stakeholders an opportunity to create
this place in the future.
Ms. More commented that it seems the February 14 meeting on realizing the vision would be the
first of many meetings to talk about public -private partnerships, County investment, and how to incentivize
— and perhaps they would be thinking of some new creative ways to accomplish this. She said a
commitment to some level of that is essential, and she asked how staff sees that linking with a
Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that staff views it as an essential discussion, and part of the reason
they invited Mr. Katz to speak was because he has a lot of experience with success in the past. He stated
that each place is a bit different, and finding the right mix is key, so he imagines that it will take a number
of meetings for the process going forward. Mr. Gast -Bray noted that the plan would need to consider
everything from pad -ready sites to smaller businesses, and he does not want to over anticipate what is
coming. He emphasized that staff feels confident with Stantec and the consultants on board that they
could adapt to the needs and desires of the County, and it would not be a quick discussion.
Ms. More asked if the discussion would take place prior to a CPA. Mr. Gast -Bray responded that
it should start prior to it.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 9
FINAL MINUTES
Ms. More stated that there would be some indication of some level of interest or commitment on
the Board's behalf since it is so key to moving forward. Mr. Gast -Bray agreed.
Ms. Palmer noted that some members of the Board and Commission have not yet been through
the Comprehensive Plan process, and it would help her to have some examples as to what the CPAs
might look like — as it seems somewhat nebulous at this point. She asked for staff to point out which
sections would need to be changed, and asked if it is the case that the small area plan itself could be part
of the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Falkenstein explained that the small area plan would be part of Places 29, which is part of the
Comprehensive Plan, so it is sort of another level. She stated that the form -based code is the zoning, so
that could be a CPA implementation recommendation, but the code itself would be in the zoning
ordinance. She stated that the small area plan CPA would be a new small plan embedded into the Places
29 Master Plan, but they would not be going through all of the goals and objectives previously adopted.
Mr. Gast -Bray added that staff is hoping their question for this meeting would revolve around
whether the implementation visualization is consistent with the goals and strategies staff has already
designed. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan is vaguer, and the question is whether they are still on
board as the plan becomes more specific.
Ms. Palmer said that one of the questions would be how specific they want to get in the
Comprehensive Plan because that is always a bit of an argument when they are going through revisions.
Ms. Mallek noted that the public had provided some feedback regarding their concerns about the
plan showing streets in the middle of their properties, and those same concerns arose in 2004-2010 when
the County was working on Places 29. She stated that this is a hurdle, and she asked staff how they plan
to meet with stakeholders and build those bridges.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that there are several issues in Ms. Mallek's comments, including the
nature of planning for a given connection, and one of the reasons they chose larger road lines was
because they did not know exactly where it was going to go. He stated that they need to be more explicit
with an example of that, and in the particular examples showed they had to show that what was
demonstrated was not completely erratic, so they measured rights of way, etc. Mr. Gast -Bray said they
also had to see if it was possible within VDOT road standards and options, which meant they needed to
talk with a landowner. He stated that there was a question as to whether the County and/or VDOT would
be willing to take something on, but they had to start with some sort of connection here and have enough
specificity to show that it would be possible. Mr. Gast -Bray emphasized that this is really just the starting
point for the dialogue.
Mr. Gavrilovic added that this differs from Places 29 because it is a bit more specific and shows
potential for individual properties, and if Fashion Square or Albemarle Square were to redevelop with
these kinds of densities, without a plan like this they would be faced with managing that traffic onsite,
including showing connections to Rio and 29. He stated that the intersections would quite possibly fail
with these kinds of densities, so a plan like this offers the opportunity to distribute some of the traffic
because there are connections between parcels and across the quadrants, with a finer level of detail.
Ms. Spain stated that the report says there should be a differentiation among those, and she
asked whether one class generated higher tax returns than another class, with A being the highest. She
also asked if the goal was to get a mix of A, B, and C properties so there are some old buildings and
some new buildings in the redevelopment areas.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that he does not want to get down to that level of detail, but he thought
that Ms. Spain's assessment process is probably correct, and he came to a similar conclusion that the
highest ticket items would generate the most tax. He said this is not like the planning of the past where
there is a singular use, such as retail, and all the different classes are needed to reinforce one another
and add the value. Mr. Gast -Bray noted that if there is a retail component, it would need to be supported
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 10
FINAL MINUTES
by the residential in close proximity to sustain that in the future model. He stated that the plan did not
delve into what has to be in which particular place.
Ms. Spain asked whether the existing buildings would stay if there were new buildings in the
middle or on the pad sites in Albemarle Square, for example. Mr. Gast -Bray replied that they would have
the ability to stay, at least in the early phases, but all buildings have a life to them and some of those have
age. He stated that the goal would be working with those building owners in a strategic manner, and he
said they received good feedback from Albemarle Square and Fashion Square as to how that might
proceed, but the design team has to infer some aspects and provide them with more specific examples.
Mr. Randolph commented that a project like this provides outdated or suffering retail operations
with an opportunity to downsize, which is what some retailers are doing nationally because they have too
much square footage. He said they may want to keep the existing building at first, but by Phase 2 or 3
they would look at the transformation process and say this is a great opportunity to downsize and move
from 40,000 square feet to 15,000 square feet because it would provide efficiency. Mr. Randolph stated
that it is difficult to predict what each business would do, but the effects would likely be transformative and
there would probably not be a lot of continually operating retail businesses in the same location.
Mr. Dotson stated that it seems to him that in terms of reaching their objectives, the plan
presented and the work leading up to it does a pretty good job of addressing the desired outcome and is
consistent with the principles the County has been working on for a number of years. He said that most of
the questions will be related to how to get there, and timing could take 40 years or so — with Stantec's
scenario describing 7 to 10-year buildouts. Mr. Dotson emphasized that the focus of future discussions
would likely relate to implementation, but the objective seems acceptable to him. He said they have seen
a sample of one of the four quadrants, but he assumes they are changing the plan for all four quadrants
and the whole area, and perhaps there has been a misperception about it being one quadrant. Mr.
Dotson stated that the economic analysis pertains to 15 acres, which is just that one quadrant, and he
asked what the analysis might say about the possibility of four times that activity and whether there is a
market for that.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that he could not address all details of that question given its
complexity, but at this point they are discussing and ensuring that the "there" is correct. He said the
"getting" is challenging, and there is a diminishing rate of return on their visualization. Mr. Gast -Bray
stated that the early parts of the process are easier, but there are many factors that affect the outcome.
He pointed out that the design team and staff have been communicating with all four quadrants and had
good input once they understood what was possible. Mr. Gast -Bray commented that Stantec is going to
come before the Board to continue on and explore some of those details more carefully, but the 15-acre
model tried to come up with a representation of what the growth in the area might be. He said that is for
the entire 15 acres, and Phase 1 is a subset of that. Mr. Gast -Bray stated that he did not know for sure
what the particulars were, but the area had positive growth compared to other localities in the state and
around the nation, but not enough growth that it would be comparable to something like Arlington's work
along Columbia Pike. He mentioned that what they do here will impact other places like Pantops and
Crozet, so they need to be cognizant of not putting all the efforts into one area over this timeframe, as
everyone wants a quality place.
Ms. Riley stated that regarding a form -based code, the Stantec report put a very high emphasis
on the need for zoning flexibility, and she is curious as to how a form -based code would be adopted or
whether it is just being recommended in a Comprehensive Plan. She said they are talking about one
small area plan, but she would be interested to know the implications for the entire County.
Ms. Gast -Bray said that a form -based code is often viewed as being "done," but when the
concept was presented to the City of Charlottesville, they showed 10 different levels of a form -based code
— ranging from the lowest, with buildings fronting the street and parking behind, down to the details such
as how much fenestration was around a window. He emphasized that this was particularly well -suited to
historic places that were trying to preserve a distinctive character, and there is a bit of flexibility in
Albemarle County because there is not a need in this specific area to preserve a lot of historic elements in
great detail. Mr. Gast -Bray commented that a form -based code is a tool, but there is no guarantee that
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 11
FINAL MINUTES
just that tool would be sufficient. He said that Peter Katz would address how the tool would be effective,
knowing that it is not enough in and of itself.
Mr. Gallaway asked if that could be achieved with what the County has in place now. Mr. Gast -
Bray responded that currently as it is, Albemarle Square could not get residential, for example.
Mr. Gallaway asked if a form -based code would allow them to do that without having to go
through a significant amount of process. Mr. Gast -Bray responded that it is a possibility, depending on
how the County sets it up, but there are also some things they could do now with their commercial
buildings — although the market has not driven that, and they have not chosen to do them. He stated that
part of the dialogue is identifying the obstacles that prevents the kind of buildings desired.
Mr. Gallaway said that when they talk about the potential of people's property, the question is
when they begin a more intensive dialogue with those property owners to see what potential they have
identified as a form -based code could help them achieve, beyond the theoretical level seen thus far. He
commented that when stakeholders are interested in getting something done, they pursue the County,
and this does not seem like a "silver bullet" to help owners accomplish their business objectives. Mr.
Gallaway stated that he wants to understand how what he can do as a policymaker to help them achieve
their vision.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that they do not yet have an agreement on "there," in terms of whether
this visualization meets the criteria within the framework discussed, whether it achieves the kind of
performance wanted, and whether it is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. He said staff feels that it
does, having worked with the stakeholders, but they need to validate that first — and assuming it is
endorsed, they could proceed. Mr. Gast -Bray emphasized that staff has been in discussions with both
Albemarle Square and Fashion Square, which have provided constructive feedback, but they have not
been 100% behind what staff presented. He stated that those businesses have their needs and the
County has its own needs, and the dialogue would be a continuing process. He also noted that the plan
would be 30 or 40 years and would evolve over time, so no one thing would make it all work; they must
work on a series of things that have to work for everybody. Mr. Gast -Bray mentioned that there are
examples around the country where a city or county invests a great deal in something and it does not
succeed. He stated that they have also seen examples of private investment where the corresponding
localities did not invest, and that also shows a failure. Mr. Gast -Bray stated that this is a partnership, and
the Board and Commission have indicated they are looking for the partnership potential, but the
discussion of roles is the next step and would begin with their February 14 meeting. He emphasized that
this is a very complex discussion and he does not have an answer but could show how it might be done,
and Mr. Katz could also provide examples of what has been done.
Mr. Randolph stated that Ms. Mallek and Mr. Gallaway seem to be asking about the public
engagement prior to the CPA, and when it would come to the Commission and the Board, because when
the CPA is developed in whatever configuration, there needs to be public engagement so that people in
the affected area have a very clear concept. He said that people need to know the possibilities and have
a dialogue with the County about it. Mr. Randolph stated that if a CPA is developed with commercial
stakeholders in the area, he could envision a high public turnout at the Planning Commission with
constituents who are concerned about what might happen. He said this is a new concept, and terms like
"form -based code" are now familiar to the Board and Commission — but 99% of the population does not
know what that means or implies. Mr. Randolph emphasized that they need to think carefully about a
public engagement strategy, although he would hate to see more delay in the process. He stated that
they do not want to invite a stormy reception when the topic finally goes public at a Board or Commission
meeting.
Ms. Mallek commented that even though it is more burdensome, this calls for more of a face-to-
face approach rather than big meetings, because it would not be likely for a landowner to express
individual concerns in a room full of 150 people. She stated that they need to be sitting at the table with
the engineering drawings, that their engineers have had a chance to look at and respond to, and they
need to be able to get their people to ask relevant questions. Ms. Mallek added that when there are
questions, people can often imagine something a lot worse than the truth, and they need the opportunity
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 12
FINAL MINUTES
to have that discussion in the proper time frame so they feel they are part of the process. She stated that
this is also happening with storm water, and once things are written in stone, people's concerns are not
'''UW going to be heard. Ms. Mallek said it may be a useful example and may be completely off base, but the
downtown Crozet district is a small example of what they called form -based code in 2010, which was
reduced setbacks that brought buildings to the street, with a minimum of three stories. She commented
that this was pretty small requirements, and people could run with the by right from that point on. Ms.
Mallek said the prior owner of the J.B. Barnes property did not put his property into the downtown Crozet
district because he was worried that it would impact his ability to continue as a lumber yard and affect the
60 employees that had worked with him for decades. She noted that the economy ultimately eradicated
the business and the jobs, but if the property had been included in the district, there would have been no
rezoning required and it would have moved forward. Ms. Mallek said that with the form -based code
already in place, the impact area could just require a building permit and site plan, rather than constant
special use permits and rezonings, and this would likely shorten the process by at least a year.
Mr. Keller thanked staff and the consultants for their work to get them "there," and they have gone
from having no vision for 29 North to having something that is fleshed out. He stated that they know the
challenges from the state legislature in terms of proffers, and they know that in terms of parking and
placemaking and green infrastructure, the form -based code would help them define the circulation
systems as well as the individual placemaking pieces. Mr. Keller commented that this is a really important
improvement, and his understanding is that some of the adjacencies within individual properties could be
handled with that. He stated that there are also other pieces to this, with significant infrastructure and
associated costs, and he would be interested in hearing staff's thoughts on how those would be
addressed.
Ms. Mallek commented that there should be a service district discussion in the future.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that they are jumping ahead on the February 14 meeting content, and
stated that these are the complexities being faced, without question: how to invest, what kinds of
investments, the strategy for investment, etc. He said that one specific form -based code question to
resolve is whether it would be required or an optional district, whether it has form -based code elements,
like downtown Crozet, but keeping the core zoning the same, and how it would be integrated with existing
developments if the form -based code were optional. Mr. Gast -Bray stated that these are strategies that
have to be addressed, and it is a choice, not necessarily a guarantee, so this is a "strategy system." He
noted that Ms. Falkenstein had pointed out to him that Stantec had offered pre -marketing meetings that
might address some of that, but he does not want to delude them into thinking there is a magic silver
bullet. Mr. Gast -Bray emphasized that this is a dialogue and P3s are very complex entities that have been
studied with a mixed income for many years, but they are getting increasingly better. He commented that
they had talked about a community development authority as a potential mechanism to maintain dialogue
in the area, but the Board and Commission had not yet agreed to that. Mr. Gast -Bray said the team would
propose a series of recommendations of where they feel this would work best, but it would ultimately be
the Board and Commission's call as to how this unfolds. He pointed out that the County has two different
communities do the same thing, with different outcomes because they are complex systems. Mr. Gast -
Bray said the alternative would be to do nothing.
Mr. Gavrilovic said that the questions relate to how this is implemented, rather than the
fundamental vision, which he feels is a good sign. He stated that it is important not to confuse the
implementation with the vision, and the Comprehensive Plan does not have the force of law that zoning
does, and the adopting of the vision in a Comprehensive Plan is a key step and a key measure of the
policy intent going forward. Mr. Gavrilovic said they need to have public input for every implementation
step that would have the force of law, but that should not diminish the importance of adopting a policy
intent in the Comprehensive Plan.
Ms. Palmer stated that she said "yes" to all four questions.
Ms. Mallek said that from the meetings she has attended, number 1 seems to be the next step
"�r✓ and the details are things she had asked for. She asked if there was any feedback on number 2. Ms.
Mallek pointed out that the node concept had been in the County's strategic planning framework for the
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 13
FINAL MINUTES
last four or five years, with importance placed on the nodes along 29 as far back as Places 29. She stated
that number 4 is more challenging, and she is not sure how ready she is for it, so the meeting on
February 14 will help with that.
Mr. Gallaway agreed.
Ms. Palmer stated that her primary question relates to what this means to the Comprehensive
Plan, but Ms. Falkenstein had explained it adequately and she is okay with it at this point.
Mr. Gast -Bray said that they could have decided not to move forward to the next step, which
would have meant they do not meet on February 14.
Ms. Mallek stated there is great interest in ensuring they nail down the questions heard at this
point, and they would do their homework at the tutorial and go from there.
Ms. Spain asked if they could forward the Stantec report to the community advisory councils and
leave it up to them as to whether they want to distribute it to the group. She asked if these are all public
documents. Ms. Falkenstein confirmed that they are.
Mr. Gast -Bray stated that the chief manager of Stantec has extended an integrated view to the
County, so he wants to be sure they are permitted to do that.
Ms. Mallek said that she would defer to the County's legal experts, and they confirmed that it was
permitted.
Mr. Gallaway commented that the last few meetings and the VDOT transportation report at the
MPO meeting talked about Hillsdale Drive being an extended throughway, and how transportation is
considered in coming up and connecting to Rio impacts the small area plan tremendously. He stated that
he always gets concerned when two different things are going along two different planning lines, and if
Hillsdale Drive's extension continues all the way up 29, it will impact the vision being endorsed here —
especially if it moves faster than the small area plan. Mr. Gallaway said they will need to evaluate whether
anything they are doing with form -based code has negative impacts on that plan, and asked how those
two project timelines have input from both places so that someone focused on a small area plan would be
surprised by a new road.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that it has been studied and is part of a traffic impact analysis that has
been done for the area, and VDOT is very aware of it. He stated that in terms of timeframes, the work on
Hillsdale will happen first. Mr. Gast -Bray noted that Phase 1 and its three smaller sub -phases was
intended to reinforce existing connections, and the bus goes down this kind of trajectory, so it would
basically be enhancing that existing network in the early phase — long before it becomes a throughway.
Mr. Gallaway said that the plan references traffic lights and intersections and roundabouts, etc.,
that would impact the development if all four quadrants started to develop out, and transportation projects
cannot just be erased and redone. He asked if conversations about the traffic plans are happening at the
planning level.
Mr. Gast -Bray responded that they definitely are and in fact has driven a lot of what was
presented, addressing the needs that have come from the studies. He noted that having two lights — one
at the inter -mall drive and at Hillsdale Extended — would not be supported by VDOT because of those
studies, which is why staff is looking at alternatives to that.
Mr. Gallaway said he would encourage the stakeholders in and around those quadrants to be
privy to those conversations as well. Mr. Gast -Bray confirmed that they are involved with those.
Ms. Mallek stated that the neighbors in the northern sweep once you cross Rio would come
forward to the County when they see this map, wondering where the road is going to go, as those
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 14
FINAL MINUTES
constituents have done since 2000 when other plans were presented. She emphasized that it is the
uncertainty that makes people anxious.
The Chair opened the floor to comments from the public.
Mr. Gast -Bray mentioned that Mr. Jim Plotkin from Albemarle Square is in attendance, and stated
that Mr. Plotkin has been a great partner in the process. He added that there are a number of other
partners in the audience who have been integral stakeholders in the dialogue.
Mr. Jim Plotkin addressed the Board and Commission on behalf of Albemarle Square. Mr. Plotkin
stated that he wants to mention a few things to them, including the communication and timing of the
outreach to the stakeholders. He said it is not a perfect process, and at the tail end they are a bit
marginalized in the way the plan is evolving at the end, prior to this meeting and the open house. Mr.
Plotkin stated that they were caught by surprise when the plans showed a section of Hillsdale Drive that
cut north and across Rio Road, then west across Arden Place and Putt -Putt, then continued west and
down and across Albemarle Square's entrance drive to the corner of the Fresh Market, then up and in
front of the storefront, out to the Gardens, then took a left turn toward Route 29. He said they were aware
of some other adjustments in the planning, but not that one. Mr. Plotkin stated that stakeholders wanted
to be part of the ongoing discussions to bring about the transitions for the small area plan, but wanted to
shape those plans before they came to the Board and Commission, and before they go public and are
ultimately adopted. He emphasized that stakeholders felt there was insufficient opportunity to engage
their own engineers and consultants to be able to make meaningful contributions and comments to the
plan that was developed while they were not at the table.
Mr. Plotkin stated that the plan before them is one the stakeholders have not been in a position to
endorse, the principle component of which was the transportation piece — which they had asked be
addressed first in transmittable detail, but that had never really happened. He commented that they were
behind the eight ball with that, and now the Board and Commission are ready to adopt a plan that the
stakeholders cannot endorse. Ms. Plotkin noted the comments made previously regarding the damage
done by the uncertainty that the discussion of the roadway changes especially will have, as they are
perceived in the minds of businesses, and any landlord would have the same problem as they go to
negotiate new lease agreements and attract new tenants. He emphasized that this puts a cloud over their
ability to attract new tenants and does damage to their ability to maintain the operation while the grand
plan is being developed by the County. Mr. Plotkin stated that this is why they asked that it not come
before the public, which it did, and the stakeholders understand and respect that the County has a
timeline. He commented that the damage is potentially being done as they speak. Mr. Plotkin stated that
they heard about the importance of the traffic signal, and without it their ability to implement elements of
the small area plan — particularly the vertical, mixed -use components — becomes almost moot. He said
that there had been comments suggesting they need more involvement from the developer and
stakeholder community to make the plans rooted more in reality than they currently might be, with the
reason being developer issues such as financing, designing and engineering — and if a developer were to
appear before the County with a set of plans, they would know exactly what they thought would work and
are taking the risk. Mr. Plotkin stated that they are entitled to know what the requirements are going to be
and what the County will allow before they take that risk. He said this makes those plans very grandiose,
but lacking somewhat in the rootedness of real experience. He emphasized that the stakeholders,
landowners, and developer community will really guide them as to what they are willing to take the risk of
doing to turn it into a successful venture.
Mr. Plotkin stated that intuitively, he would have asked to leave off of the plan the piece of
Hillsdale Extended that crosses Albemarle Square and runs north to the Gardens and out to Route 29
because other objectives of the plan could be realized only with the roundabout and picking up new
development at Arden Place and Putt -Putt and other new development in this quadrant to get access to
Rio Road without pushing it further than that. He said at some point in the future, if Albemarle Square
were to transition to be consistent with the small area plan, there would be plenty of time to introduce a
road at that point, when the developers taking the risk and doing the things the County is suggesting
would have input as to what road networks would truly support that property. He commented that VDOT
chose not to add a lane to Rio Road to resolve or relieve the heavier traffic coming from John Warner
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 15
FINAL MINUTES
Parkway and Hillsdale, which they anticipated when they built the tunnel. Mr. Plotkin said the question is
why they did not widen Rio to carry the additional traffic in a more conventional way without inflicting more
damage to a property that is still trying to recover from the implementation of the tunnel and the loss of a
crossover, which was critical to the ability of the center to thrive and grow. He applauded the work that
had been done to date and thanked the Board and Commission for allowing him to speak, adding that he
is looking forward to an improved level of communication and sharing of information so the stakeholders
can be a meaningful player in helping to shape the implementation of the vision.
Ms. Mallek stated that this was the end of the beginning — not the beginning of the end — and the
County has just begun with decisions, so she does not want anyone to think they have adopted
something that is finished. She added that this is an ongoing work in progress.
Ms. Sue Albrecht addressed the Board and Commission and stated that she owns several
properties in the north quadrant of Route 29. She stated that she has tried over the years, through the
Places 29 effort, to come up with a comprehensive solution to one of her sites — but it had been rejected.
Ms. Albrecht said that she has a site plan approved and ready to break ground — Albrecht Place — behind
29th Place. She said the property is 3.5 acres and her plan is a by -right plan with a simple flex building,
but it could be a much more comprehensive building like she had planned in 2006, which did not survive
the process. Ms. Albrecht expressed concern that she is ready to go forward with a simple plan and
wonders what the County wants to do and whether they will look at it with her before she breaks ground.
She said the meeting she had attended the previous Thursday showed two of her buildings completely
wiped out, with a Berkmar road change, and she is very concerned about those brush strokes on the plan
— and what happened to about $2.5 million of her buildings that are leased out for 20 and 25 years. Ms.
Albrecht stated that she is concerned about what the County will do to help her deal with the Berkmar
alignment change, adding that she also has four properties in the place between the Hydraulic and Rio
nodes and is wondering what will happen with those buildings. She noted that one of those is on the
corner of Greenbrier and Commonwealth that could be a very attractive mixed -use project, so she has a
lot of sites that need to be discussed with the decision makers in this room and looks forward to more
stakeholder involvement.
Ms. Palmer stated that she had also wondered about Ms. Albrecht's point regarding lease times,
as many of them were at least 10 years, if not substantially longer.
Adjournment:
With no further business, the Planning Commission meeting adjourned at 7:51 p.m. to the Monday,
February 5, 2018 Workshop on form -based code at 10:00 a.m. in Room 241, Second Floor, County Office
Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Gast-Bria- ,
(Submitted by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards)
Approved by Planning Commission
Date: 10-16-2018
Initials: sct
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JANUARY 30, 2018 16
FINAL MINUTES