Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 26 2017 PC MinutesAlbemarle County Planning Commission September 26, 2017 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, September 26, 2017, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Room #241, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Members attending were Tim Keller, Chair; Pam Riley; Jennie More; Bruce Dotson; Daphne Spain and Bill Palmer, University of Virginia Representative. Absent was Karen Firehock, Vice - Chair and Mac Lafferty. Other officials present were Elaine Echols, Chief of Planning - Long Range; Andrew Gast -Bray, Assistant Director of CDD/Director of Planning; Stephanie Banton, Community Development Assistant II and John Blair, Deputy County Attorney. Call to Order and Establish Quorum Mr. Keller, Chair, called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda Mr. Keller invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda. There being none, the meeting moved to the next agenda item. Consent Agenda Approval of Minutes: July 25, 2017 Mr. Keller asked if a Commissioner would like to pull an item from the consent agenda for discussion. Hearing none, he asked for a motion. Mr. Dotson moved, Ms. More seconded to approve the consent agenda as presented. The motion passed by a vote of 5:0 (Firehock, Lafferty Absent), The meeting moved to the next item. Public Hearing Item ZMA-2016-00022 2511 Avinty Drive (Moss) MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville TAX MAP/PARCEL: 090000000035LO LOCATION: 2511 Avinity Dr., approx. 70 feet south of the intersection with Avon St. Ext. PROPOSAL: Rezone property to allow for apartments PETITION: Request for 0.9 acres to be rezoned from R1 Residential zoning district, which allows residential uses at a density of 1 unit per acre to PRD Planned Residential District which allows residential use (3 — 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses. A maximum of 24 multifamily units is proposed for a density of 26 units/acre. OVERLAY DISTRICT(S): ENTRANCE CORRIDOR ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES PROFFERS: No COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Urban Density Residential — residential (6.01-34 units/acre); supporting uses such as places of worship, schools, public and institutional uses, neighborhood scale commercial, office, and service uses in Neighborhood 4 of the Southern and Western Urban Neighborhoods. POTENTIALLY IN MONTICELLO VIEWSHED: Yes (Elaine Echols) Ms. Echols presented a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the staff report for ZMA-2016- 00022 2511 Avinity. This is a request for 24 units in a potentially new development along Avon Street Extended, but access is proposed from Avinity Drive. The property is located south of Cale Elementary School and south of the Avinity Development. The property is zoned R-1 and the Comprehensive Plan recommends it for Urban Density Residential Development. Currently there is a single-family house on the property, which is adjacent to Avinity. She noted the application plan is in the packet and the first page shows the context of the proposed development in relation to the property surrounding it. The proposal is for two-1 2-unit apartment buildings and a courtyard area for access from the parking lot. There is an emergency access way that the Fire Department has said is adequate from the end of the parking lot over the (southwest) corner of the development. Ms. Echols said staff spent a lot of time with the applicant on this particular project and identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request: 1. Proposed density is in keeping with the recommended density for Urban Density Residential as shown on the Master Plan. 2. Relegated parking is provided, in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. 3. Affordable housing may be provided with the development. Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this request: 1. Feasibility to accomplish the rezoning has not been established: the applicant has not demonstrated permission to use Avinity Drive for access to the development. 2. Offsite easements will be required in order to accomplish the development. The ability to obtain these easements has not been demonstrated. 3. It appears that ARB requirements for landscaping and street trees cannot be met with the proposed development. Buildings, parking, and a courtyard are shown to cover almost the entire site and there is little flexibility to modify the plan and retain the courtyard should site changes be needed. 4. Insufficient information has been provided to justify why a PRD of less than 3 acres should be approved, given the fact that it does riot share any features, other than potential access, with the adjoining PRD. 5. No information other than setbacks and building height has been provided to ensure architectural compatibility with the adjoining development. 6. Affordable housing information is not sufficiently detailed to ensure that the project will truly provide 20% affordable units. 7. No provision is made for connecting to the property to the south of this parcel. RECOMMENDATION Due to the number of outstanding issues, staff cannot recommend approval of this rezoning or the requested special exception to reduce the minimum acreage for a PRD. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES Ms. Echols said to do a development of this type, the only other zoning district that might be available would be a Neighborhood Model District, which has some more requirements than the PRD has. She said therefore, technically a special exception could be approved by the Board of Supervisors to allow for less than 3 acres and staff thinks it is hard to justify that right now given the lack of a relationship to this other property. She said if there were not a relationship we would want to know that everything could actually be done as it is shown on this particular plan. However, that is not to say that you could not recommend that a special exception be approved in this particular case only to say there are a lot of things that are going on at this site that make it difficult to make recommendation for approval for the reduction of less than 3 acres. Ms. Echols said staff does not have any information other than these setbacks and the building height of three stories that tell us whether there is going to be compatibility with this adjoining development. There is the piece of this which is that the Architectural Review Board will be reviewing it and if the Planning Commission and Board think that is sufficient that they will ensure compatibility on the Entrance Corridor then that could be a factor that the Planning Commission decides is not an outstanding issue. However, because we have had a lot of concerns by the adjoining property owners in Avinity to understand what this is going to look and feel like we felt it was important to ask for some kind of elevations or better information on architectural features, massing and scale that could ensure that it would be compatible with the adjoining property. Ms. Echols said in the staff report it says that affordable housing information had not been provided; however, since that time we have provided some information to the applicant on how affordability could be addressed on this application plan. She said that would be through the provision of a rental rate agreement, which occurs with density bonuses. In our standard residential districts using conventional zoning you can get a bonus for providing affordable housing and there is specific language that helps make that happen. Therefore, staff does not think this is an outstanding issue if the applicant is willing to provide that language on the plan. Ms. Echols said there is another outstanding issue that is there is no vehicular connection to the south so when this property redevelops we don't know how it might relate to this property. However, it might be possible that a connection extends down here (east) and the situation might be easily remedied. There is no pedestrian connection right now and it is something that could be resolved, and she would be happy to answer any questions. She said if the Planning Commission choses to recommend approval of this zoning map amendment you could move to recommend approval of this or you might choose to recommend approval with changes. Then the applicant would be on the hook to decide whether he wanted to make those changes before it went to the Board of Supervisors and you would need to articulate what those changes are. If you should choose to recommend denial of the zoning map amendment we have given you the seven factors that are unfavorable to the request although it would only be six if the applicant is willing to provide the statement about rental rate agreements on his application plan. Mr. Keller invited questions from Commissioners. Ms. Spain asked has there been any update from the applicant about access to Avinity Drive, and Ms. Echols replied that she had not received any. Ms. Spain questioned why there were so many unfavorable factors unresolved, and Ms. Echols replied that the applicant had requested the hearing. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Dotson asked what the density is of the adjacent Avinity development; the staff report indicates that this would be 26 units to the acre. Ms. Echols replied that she thinks it is 13 or 14 units. Mr. Dotson said the land that is along Avinity Drive that is not. a part of this property he takes it is reserved open space within the Avinity Development and landscaping area, and Ms. Echols replied yes. Mr. Keller opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission. Justin Shimp said he was the engineer for this project and representative for the owner tonight. He said there was a question about the unfavorable and the access is an issue that we have been working through steadily trying to resolve and are close. He said the reason for the problem ties back to things that were done with the original rezoning of Avinity so he thought that was worthwhile to bring up so we can understand why it is an issue and so it won't happen again. Mr. Shimp presented a PowerPoint presentation to give a context of the scale of this development. He said we had a neighborhood meeting early on in the process and we heard that the parking was a big concern. Originally, we had a plan that was under parked with 40 parking spaces but given the neighbors experience with the lack of parking here and there is not a lot of other off -site parking opportunities we increased that and decreased our units from all two -bedroom to eight one -bedrooms. He said we have a reduced demand for parking and an increased parking supply from where we started with, and he feels like we have addressed that issue. Mr. Shimp said the other factor that was identified as unfavorable in the staff report is why a PRD, and as you all know there has been changes to proffer regulations and things like this. He said one of the fundamental things he looks for in opportunities for development is working to provide some extra density in some affordable housing opportunities since he thinks it is lacking around here and it is difficult to do and actually implement. He said this site made sense for that and we had some email correspondence with staff and what we were told is that if we wanted to create this Planned District with an affordable housing opportunity the PRD was the only way to really do that. He said that is the reason that we did it since he would just assume not to have an additional hoop to jump through but to achieve that goal we needed a way to tie ourselves down to it and that seemed to be the best way to do it. He said that was the origin of the PRD. He said our adjacent property is zoned PRD and the zoning map would look consistent, but that is really why is to provide that opportunity. Mr. Shimp said the street tree requirement may be stemming from an older plan and was not as clear so he has done some surveys as shown on the slide and we have 23 feet from the power line to the face of our building. He said that was plenty for landscaping and he thinks at the time the ARB reviewed this we had different survey information and it was not as clear. He said it was an important question to ask and he came to the ARB back in March and was told to make sure it was addressed and so we have researched it and adjusted it from there. Mr. Shimp said similarly the question about scale of development, again, we went to the ARB and staff recommended that we present elevations and things like that at this time. He said we asked the ARB if you need to see this and they said no. He said if you look at their approval ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 4 FINAL MINUTES from their meeting they said we have jurisdiction over this area and whatever you do is going to have to meet our guidelines so bring that forward when you are ready. He said that is why we proceeded with this. He said for comparison our building is 82' long and the first block of townhouses across the street is 88' long; they are four -stories with a rooftop deck on three that sites 10' to 12' above the road. He said our building is three -stories and a roof and is really a very similar scale. So again, we felt like with a restriction of three -stories that we met the scale and why you don't have other details. Mr. Shimp said the easement one is an interesting one and apologized that you can't read it well. He said the plat from 2000 shows a 50' right-of-way for a 50' private road that was directly to the north of the site. He said the 1963 language granted us a 50' road for all purposes to serve our site. He said during the public hearing there was some discussion about a private road request as part of the rezoning for Avinity because it has private roads; there was discussion of maintaining ingress/egress to adjacent properties and then a maintenance agreement to do so, which was what the typical practice would be. He said where this got sideways in the approved application plan you can see the existing conditions that text there says "access easement to be provided to adjoining property." He said when we did our research about how we shall connect this to anything it made sense to go where there was supposed to be an access easement. However, what happened if you go out there you see a driveway that comes off Avinity Drive to this house, which apparently has no easement to use the road has an address of 2511 Avinity Drive so we are on it. He said when you establish a requirement for a shared easement when the plat is recorded there should have been a deed describing who can use it with conditions of that maybe maintenance agreements and things like that and somehow that slipped through the cracks here. He said the developer came in and developed 20 or 10 acres adjacent to a guy that owns 1 acre and even though a shared access road was shown, and they overlooked this easement issue. He said our former 50' road for all purposes is kind of gone and he feels the county has endorsed it, but he was sure it was not an intentional item. He said now here we are they are approved and have their construction, then we come back now and try to develop our property and we are fighting an issue that should have been settled the first time around. He said it was much more difficult to settle now and why this needs to be done upfront so to me it is a legal issue that the Planning Commission could say we should defer action on this or if it was to move forward recommend to the Board that it not be finally approved until it is resolved. He said that we are doing this because we are trying to illegally take someone's property and all of the zoning and planning information said you need to go this way with your road except those T's were not crossed and we don't actually have a recorded easement saying how. He said that was very frustrating to us that good planning dictates that connection be made, there were discussions of it, easements shown and a proffered plan showing it that does not exist. He said so that is the hold up on that. Mr. Shimp said that this site can handle the density and as far as the amenities go not every apartment complex needs to have a swimming pool and there are lots of choices in this neighborhood if those are things that are important to you. He said but if you are looking for a place that is near the school that is more affordable here is an opportunity for you. He said the only issue that he sees that needs to be resolved is the access and he would ask the Commission to weigh in on this and he thinks this project can move forward with a condition that before the Board votes on this it should be resolved. Mr. Keller invited public comment. Paul McArtor, resident of 2012 Avinity Loop, said there are a number of concerns with this ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES project and staff did a great job of expressing most of there. So rather than rehash those he would like to touch on the ones that my neighbors and me feel most concerned with that is too much is trying to be put on .9 acres. He said when we look at that there is not enough common space, green space and they mentioned there is Cale Elementary but realistically what is going to happen are the tenants of this facility are going to use the common area and amenities of Avinity. He said that is going to add extra liability to us as residents having people coming over and using our amenities. He said going along with that is a private road that we are responsible for paying for, which is going to be extra wear and tear on that. He said at the neighborhood meeting this was brought up as a concern and to magnify that concern is that there is no track record of development by this owner who is planning to develop or doing any kind of property management on this scale which they are claiming to do. He said there is no reason to believe that tenants are going to be properly policed to keep them from using our amenities and again adding the extra stress on our neighborhood. He said because it is a small area and proper screening from the townhouses on the side would be needed since the plan is to put a dumpster and parking lot right next to this house. He said we still have a concern with parking that would impact the entire neighborhood. Amory Mellen, resident of 2309 Avinity Court, said he just wanted to state concerns and was for proper and responsible development, but agreed with Ms. Spain that there are numerous unfavorable and more than what you would see pending a request from the Commission. He said the density was not in keeping with the adjacent development, double what you would find in Avinity and the acreage is less than a third of what is typically required. He said they are trying to squeeze this development into a spot where it does not fit. He agreed with Paul that he can't see how there would not be spill over from this into the Avinity community. He said the lack of common space for 24 units and if one-half of those units have dog owners they have to be walked somewhere. He said that there are also parking concerns and thinks that some of the unfavorable should be resolved including an agreement in place for the road maintenance that will be shared. Travis Pietila, with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said although we appreciate the applicant's plan to build affordable units on site we can see a number of areas in which this project could be improved. He said we share many of staff's concerns with this PRD as currently proposed. He said first we share the concern that the applicant has provided few details on a number of key aspects — this includes how the affordable housing commitment will be achieved, - how storm water will be moved off the site, -how required street trees and landscaping will be accommodated and how the PRD open space commitment will be met. He said this level of information is more appropriate for a work session rather than a public hearing and it is far from clear the concept we see today will resemble the project that is eventually built if this rezoning is approved at this early stage. It could also set a bad precedent when it comes to the expectations of future applicants to recommend approval now with so many key features yet to be nailed down. Mr. Pietila said we also have concerns with granting a special exception for the PRD concept being proposed. He said as staff has noted PRD's typically must be at least 3 acres in size and the minimum size is important since it gives room to accommodate the 25% open space requird of PRD's and allows more flexibility in design to protect the natural features of a site. He said there is not much room for that here and it is far from clear that the open spaces shown meet the criteria for these areas, which are primarily supposed to be maintained in a natural state. He said that PRD's are intended mainly for recreation, protection of sensitive areas or to provide a buffer between uses. He said understanding the neighbor's concerns, we also can't help but ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - September 26, 2017 6 FINAL MINUTES note how much of this site is devoted to parking because if this PRD moves forward there may be an opportunity to address some of the issues noted. He said the applicant is proposing 48 parking spaces with 2 for each residential unit and as the applicant noted that is above the standards set in the ordinance for these multi -family units. In addition, the Board can waive or modify the standards in establishing a PRD. He said reduced parking here could allow greater room to accommodate open space, trees, landscaping and adequate stormwater facilities and enable this project to better meet the county's intent for PRD's. These components are particularly important as it appears that much of this site would drain towards Biscuit Run. Overall, we don't think this PRD should be recommended for approval tonight, but if this project does move forward we urge the applicant and the county to consider ways to reduce parking and preserve more natural areas on the site as well as to ensure that adequate commitments are put in place to make sure these and affordable housing measures are realized. Glen McCluskey said he lived in Avinity and again he was not anti -development, but it just seems like we are trying to put ten pounds of potatoes in a five -pound bag. He said in looking at it he can't see how you could get a moving van in and out of that parking lot as well as heavy equipment moving in and out of that area without a lot of damage. He said if it is toned down a little bit that it would be better for everybody involved since it is a lot of infrastructure in a very small space, which is his objection to the way it is right now. There being no further public comment, Mr. Keller invited applicant rebuttal. Justin Shimp asked for a moment to respond to these things since he agreed that there was too much parking, but we are trying to balance out some competing concerns here. He said he would be happy to lose a few parking spaces and create a little more planting area. He pointed out that there are not streams here or natural features to preserve since it is all mowed lawn. He said we can put the affordable housing on the plan and the only thing he sees as a problem here is the access. He said the other items are subjective of what do you think needs to be done now versus later and how much faith do you have in the Architectural Review Board to make sure these buildings look right and is it really true that you can't build a parking lot 5' off a property line. He said you can build a parking lot at 5' or less. Mr. Shimp noted that adjacent to the four blocks of townhouses is a wooden screening fence 6' to 8' high right on the property line and behind that is a 20' backyard somebody has. He said if that was good enough for them then is our 5' area not good enough for us. Again, perspectives here we do this all the time and if approve this plan he can build it and he asks the Commission to consider that in their deliberations. Mr. Keller invited questions for the applicant. Ms. Spain noted concerns about why the entrance did not come off Avon, the access easements and if he could reduce the number of units. Ms. Riley said she attended the March 22"d community meeting and all of these issues were raised at that time including both the staff's and community's issues and she finds it hard to understand why these issues haven't been really addressed and it is coming before us this evening. She said that if the easement you at least tonight are publicly acknowledging could be resolved and it is with relatives of the applicant she did not understand why we don't have documentation necessary to prove that easement. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Shimp replied that he discussed it with staff for a time and it is not something that struck him as an urgent matter; this needs to be done for the Board meeting and really it is a site plan issue. He said that nothing on this plan guarantees us the right to build it since we have to comply with all of the ordinance requirements and if he needs an extra 2' of space he has to adjust the plan and may have to lose some square footage of building and lose a unit or two. He said from the work he has done he did not think it was necessary, but that is what you would do in that situation. Ms. Riley said asking us for an exception to a PRD is a great concern to me and you can't show us that you will have 25% open space, so she was not seeing a justification for an exception especially since we have seen concerns from property owners at Avinity and you are not adding amenities on this site. She added that Cale Elementary School might be an available amenity after school but during school hours it is not going to be available. Ms. More questioned whether there was enough room for planting trees, and Mr. Shimp said that it was 23' from the power line to the face of the building that would be adequate space for the required landscaping since we can plant the trees behind the sidewalk that can grow out over the sidewalk. Ms. More said you are asking for a special exception for the PRD because it is less than 3 acres and asked do you believe that you are asking for a special exception for the 25% open space. Mr. Shimp replied that we have had some disagreement with staff as to how that space is counted; however, if this moves forward if the zoning folks feel that is appropriate we will do that at the Board meeting. He said again where is the 25% - is it off of the forest or is it part of your amenity space and that is why he thinks the justification is for this lesser space in this particular instance. He said that is the justification we put forward to the Board. Mr. Dotson asked have you talked to the Avinity Homeowner's Association about actually striking a deal where the residents here could use the open space pool and those facilities? Mr. Shimp replied that it is a little tricky because the HOA does not exist in an official format that is still declaring control, and he met with a neighbor here last week to discuss some of these things. He said we are willing to do that, but he was not sure there is a willingness on their part to accept. He said he talked to the developer today and his position is to direct it to the HOA but they are not officially formed yet so he did not know if they can make a decision. He said we are open to those discussions. Mr. Dotson said if that were to happen he would assume there would be an initial payment to buy into the capital facilities and then some monthly payment as a usage fee. He asked would that be his assumption if you could come to such a deal. Mr. Shimp replied probably so, yes, but those numbers would have to be worked out for a user fee just like everybody else pays. Mr. Dotson asked where the building would face, and Mr. Shimp replied there will be double- faced buildings with a door that basically fronts on all sides with doors on each side. Mr. Keller closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Planning Commission for discussion and action. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - September 26, 2017 8 FINAL MINUTES Mr. Dotson said when we have an Urban Density Residential that goes from a low density to a high density if somebody was looking for a bigger site 26 units to the acre is there a district other than PRD or Neighborhood Model that would allow that. Ms. Echols replied no, it has to be a Planned District in order to do that because R-15 is the most dense district and with the density bonus you could get 20 units per acres. Mr. Dotson said that is a consideration going PRD because there is no other way to go. He commented this is a miscellaneous problem parcel and is only .9 acre and all has all kinds of issues with some flexibility in order to encourage its infill or redevelopment is going to be necessary. He said we are going to find more and more of those in the future so we don't have much of a track record on that. The Planning Commission discussed the following issues: - Verification of the access (need something in writing) - Improvements on the property line. - Emergency access (need verification) - Storm water management under the parking lot and where is it going to drain to. - ARB requirements for landscaping and street trees. (Ms. Echols said if they have 23' it might not be an issue, but staff has not received anything in writing.) - Approval of the PRD less than 3 acres. (Mr. Keller asked to discuss this further under new business and separate that out from this discussion.) - Lack of information on setbacks and building height for the architectural compatibility. Mr. Shimp asked for a deferral. Ms. Riley moved to accept the applicant's request to defer ZMA-2016-00022 2511 Avinty Church for 90 days. Ms. More seconded the motion. Mr. Keller invited further discussion. There being none, Mr. Keller asked for a roll call. The motion passed by a vote of 5:0. (Firehock and Lafferty absent) for deferral of ZMA-2016- 00026 for 90 days. Mr. Keller thanked the members of the community who came to speak, the applicant for a thoughtful presentation and hoped we can have a general dialogue beyond this in the future. The Commission took a break at 7:18 p.m. and reconvened at 7:23 p.m. Informational 2016 PC Annual Report Presentation from staff of PC Annual Report. (Elaine Echols) Ms. Echols and Andrew Knuppel, the newest planner and summer intern, presented the 2016 PC Annual Report in a PowerPoint presentation. (See Presentation). Ms. Echols said staff ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 FINAL MINUTES wanted to give this information to the Commission and then we will come back for a discussion later. The Planning Commission received the report and congratulated staff for a great job. No action was taken. Committee Reports Mr. Keller invited committee reports. The following committee reports were given: Daphne Spain reported: - Places29 North CAC met last Thursday evening and Rebecca Ragsdale and David Fox gave a presentation of the actions revolving around the transient lodging regulations. Two major things emerged from the CAC: 1. Change from transient to short term, short-term tourist or temporary lodging. 2. Why is this coming up now and what the goals are — are they to enhance safety and the units to generate further tax revenue. - The Pantops CAC met last night with a report given by Ms. Echols. - The Rivanna River Corridor Committee met last night. The: conference on water quality will be held Friday with the River Fest Event on Saturday. Pam Riley reported: - On September 18 the Village of Rivanna CAC met with a presentation and discussion on: Transient lodging and community input. Short update on improvements for restoration to a short section of the Rivanna trail as their NIFI project. In terms of leadership, Lynda White agreed to be the chair for the CAC until next November when her term expires at which point she might extend her leadership role. -On September 20 Long Range Transportation Plan Work Session. The committee discussed feedback received from the public open house on the 2045 LRTP. Received staff updates on the 1-64 Corridor Plan and the Regional Bike -Pedestrian Plan update. -On September 21 the 5th and Avon Street CAC met with a presentation on the Cale Elementary School by Kevin McDermott; transient lodging briefing/discussion; and two community meetings on two potential applications — Charlottesville Music Institute Community Meeting — 1740 Broadway and the Calliber Collision (Auto Body Repair) Community Meeting — 1540 Avon Street Extended, adjacent to Avon Motors. Jennie More reported: - Crozet CAC met last week and discussed transient lodging. Joel DeNunzio, with VDOT, discussed transportation issues. She encouraged other groups to invite him to their CAC meeting. - Historic Preservation Committee met yesterday. The majority of the meeting was spent talking about Rio Mills Road Bridge with a boat launch access underneath concerning a possible marker. Ms. Spain noted that the Places29 North CAC had been discussing the marker and should be in touch with the Historic Preservation Committee. Ms. Spain noted today something that came up with the Rivanna River Corridor group and that is the need for a cultural heritage trail as well and to include African Americans, Native ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 10 FINAL MINUTES Americans, and one of the ideas was to have one of the presentations about the project at the Jefferson Center. Therefore, we could get a variety of people to provide their knowledge about how the river was part of live. She asked to amend her Pantops CAC report that Andrew Gast - Bray was there along with Ms. Echols. Mr. Keller asked to make sure that the Central Virginia History Researchers are in the loop since they actually meet at the Jefferson School monthly and there is a significant interest in African American history that occurred. He said he had seen two presentations on the Hydraulic area there and this is a rich source of knowledge. There being no further new business, the meeting moved to the next item. Review of Board of Supervisors Meeting — September 13, 2017 Andrew Gast -Bray reviewed actions taken by Board on September 13, 2017. Old Business Mr. Keller invited old business. • Joint PC/School Board meeting on October 26 postponed. • October 17 Joint EDA/BOS/PC meeting begins at 4 p.m. in Room 241 with regular meeting starting at 6:15 p.m. The meeting moved to new business. New Business Mr. Keller invited new business. • No meeting on October 3, 2017. • The next Planning Commission Meeting on Tuesday, October 10, 2017. The meeting moved to adjournment. Adjournment With no further items, the meeting adjourned at 8:27 p.m. to the October 10, 2017 Planning Commission meeting at 6:00 p.m., Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Andrew Gast -Bray, Secretary (Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards) ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —September 26, 2017 11 FINAL MINUTES Approved by Planning Commission Date: 3.19.19 Initials: SLB in ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — September 26, 2017 12 FINAL MINUTES kr{` COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 MEMORANDUM To: Planning Commission From: Andrew Gast -Bray, Secretary to Planning Commission Elaine K. Echols, Chief of Planning — Long Range Date: September 26, 2017 Re: DRAFT 2016 Planning Commission Annual Report Section 15.2-2221 of the Code of Virginia says that, among its duties, the Planning Commission shall, "5. Make ... an annual report to the governing body concerning the operation of the commission and the err status of planning within its jurisdiction." Attached you will find a report summarizing the activities of the Commission in 2016 as well as indicators of progress based on the Comprehensive Plan. The Planning Commission identified selective indicators in July 2016. The baseline data came largely from the TJPDC 2013 Sustainability Report. Each indicator is tied to specific goals and strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. Finding these quantitative measures has proven more time intensive than originally expected. In some cases, information thought to be easily obtainable has proven not to be. In other cases, manipulating data to allow for comparative analysis has been very time consuming. During 2017-2018, 1 will ask the Commission to consider the benefits derived from this analysis and potentially suggest more representative and easily obtainable measures to assess progress. This report is provided for your information and acceptance before forwarding it to the Board of Supervisors as specified in the Code of Virginia. I am hopeful you will find this information of interest and I am more than happy to answer any particular questions you might have. DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report I Memo 1 0 IM September 26, 2017 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report I 1 2016 ANNUAL REPORT ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Section 15.2-2221 of the Code of Virginia stipulates that the local Planning Commission shall "make . .. an annual report to the governing body concerning the operation of the Commission and the status of planning within the jurisdiction". This report is a brief summary of the Albemarle County Planning Commission's membership and activity during 2012. COMMISSION MEMBERSHIP COMMISSIONER DISTRICT TERM Russell (Mac) Lafferty Jack Jouett 1 14 - 12 31 17 Tim Keller, Chair At -Large 3 1 3 - 1 2 31 17 Daphne Spain Rivanna 1114 - 12 31 19 Karen Firehock, Vice -Chair Samuel Miller 1 14 - 1 2 31 17 Pam Riley Scottsville 1 14 — 1 2 31 19 Jennie More White Hall 1114 — 12 31 19 Bruce Dotson Rio 1 14 - 1 2 31 17 Bill Palmer University of Va. (Non -voting) 1 1 4 - 1 2 31 17 2016 MEETING AGENDA SUMMARY # Meetings = 30 Recommended # PUBLIC HEARINGS/REGULAR # for Approval Recommended # ITEMS Considered or Approved for Denial Deferred Comp Plan Amendment (Includes 5 Year Review and Master Plans) i 1 0 0 (CPA) Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 8 0 0 Subdivision Text Amendment (STA) 0 0 0 0 Comp Plan Compliance Review 2 2 0 0 (CCP) Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) 22* 10 6 6 Special Use Permit (SP) 21 * 18 2 1 Special Exceptions 4 4 0 0 Subdivision Waiver (SUB)/Private 3 3 0 0 St RPD Agricultural Forestal District (AFD) 2 2 0 0 Other - Wireless 1 1 0 0 * This column represents multiple meetings for 17 different ZMA and 20 different SP requests low DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual 12 In addition, the following activities and considerations took place: WORK SESSIONS RESOLUTIONS OF INTENT Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Includes 5 Year Review and Master Plans) (CPA) 0 Comprehensive Plan Amendment (Includes 5 Year Review and Master Plans) (CPA) 2 Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 2 Zoning Text Amendment (ZTA) 3 Subdivision Text Amendment (STA) 0 Subdivision Text Amendment (STA) Comp Plan Compliance Review (CCP) 0 Zoning Map Amendment (ZMA) 3 Special Use Permit (SP) 0 Presentations 4 Other - CIP 2 2016 HIGHLIGHTS • Presentations and discussions on the Economic Development Strategic Plan • CPA recommendations to repeal Cash Proffer Policy; consideration of adoption of a new proffer policy; and presentation from the County Attorney on changes to State law for cash proffers • ZTA recommendations for adoption: changes to setback and yard requirements to implement the Neighborhood Model, by -right drive-thrus; expanding the list of eligible applicants for ZMAs and SPs; expediting review of proffers; changes to family day homes; changes for farm wineries, breweries, and distilleries; changes to flood hazard overlay district regulations; and modification §wr of special use allowances for historic inns and taverns • CCPs for a satellite County office in Crozet and the Region X women's treatment facility. • ZMA recommendations for approval: 5th St. Commercial amendment; Adelaide; Avon Park II amendment; Barnes Lumber for Perrone Robotics; Brookhill; Foothills Crossing; Lucas; Hollymead Town Center Area A2 amendments for affordable housing and other housing changes; and Oakleigh amendment • ZMA recommendations for denial: Hollymead Town Center Area Al amendment to modify transit proffer; and cash proffer reductions for Out of Bounds, Spring Hill Village, and Glenmore K2C • SP recommendations for approval: Wireless facilities at Albemarle High School and Southland; Boiangles drive-thru; floodplain crossing at Brookhill and West Glen; several Rural Area churches, a new location for the Field School and Generations Montessori School; body shops and outdoor storage and display for Malloy Ford and Salaam's Automotive; Springhill Suites; and a wrecker service • SP recommendations for denial: Kapp driveway and ReStoreN Station • Other matters including private roads, AFD additions and renewals, and the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 1 3 INDICATORS OF PROGRESS The July 2015 Comprehensive Plan update recommends that the Planning Commission's Annual Report include indicators of progress. This Annual Report includes selected indicators based in large part on indicators from the TJPDC 2013 Sustainability Report and items identified by the Planning Commission in 2016. Assessments of progress took place with data available at the time this report was created. More updated information may now exist to indicate a different picture. Indicators are tied to specific goals and strategies in the Comprehensive Plan. The pages following this table provide the linkage to the Comprehensive Plan, source of data, and conclusions. Finding these specific quantitative measures has proven more time intensive than originally thought. In some cases, information expected to be easily obtainable has proven not to be. In other cases, manipulating data to allow for comparative analysis has been time consuming. Over the course of 2017 and early 2018, different indicators will be explored to see if better representation of success can be found. CAPACITY ANALYSIS Strategy 4b, in the Development Areas Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan reads: Update the capacity analysis every two years to ensure adequate residential land exists to meet new housing needs. The last capacity analysis was completed in 2014. A two-year update is provided in the last section of this report. K DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 14 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Indicators of Progress Key: progress towards achieving the goal + lack of progress in achieving the goal — mixed progress Indicator Target Progress Wooded Stream Buffers Increase the area of forested stream buffers along streams -- regulated by the Water Protection Ordinance. Air Quality Decrease the number of days where the Air Quality Index (AQI) + is outside the good to moderate range (or above 100). Designation of Historic Increase the number and acreage of designated properties. -- Properties Demolition of Historic Decrease the number of demolitions of historically significant + Resources resources annually. Tourism Increase in employment in tourism and hospitality -related + industries Target Industry Growth Increase in employment in the County's "target sectors": Agribusiness, IT & Defense, Financial/Insurance, and Biotech. Unemployment Reduce unemployment in Albemarle County. + Average Annual Wage Increase average annual wages. + Timber Production Maintain or increase production of timber for pine and + hardwood types. Grape Production Increase in tonnage of grapes produced. + Rural Area Lots Continue decreasing number of new lots created in the Rural + Created Area relative to the Development Area New Dwellings Built in Decrease the ratio of new single family detached units in the + Rural Area Rural Area to new single family detached units in the Development Area Conservation Increase Rural Area acreage in Agricultural/Forestal Districts + and under Conservation Easements Development Area Increase population density in the Development Areas. + Density Mixed Use Increase the number of new mixed -use developments approved -- Developments by rezoning. Redevelopment Increase the number of site development plans approved for + redevelopment, including adding new buildings on existing developed sites. DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 15 Mixture of Housing Continue construction of a mixture of housing types each year in + Types the Development Areas. Senior Housing Increase in the number of beds in assisted living and long-term baseline care facilities. established Proffered and Built Increase the number of built units because of past housing baseline Affordable Units proffers. established Deficient Bridges Decrease in the number and surface area of structurally deficient bridges as listed by the Federal Highway + Administration's National Bridge Inventory. Multimodal Increase the modal share (percentage of commuters using these Transportation modes) of public transit, walking, or cycling to work. Decrease the modal share of commuters driving to work alone. Sidewalk Construction Increase linear feet of sidewalk construction as part of the -- County's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Bicycle Lanes; Increase the linear footage of multi -use paths, bike lanes, and baseline Pedestrian and Bicycle shared roadways in the Development Areas. established Paths Parks and Open Space Increase in the acreage of private parkland in new residential and baseline in Development Areas mixed use developments established Greenway Trail Increase in the length of greenway trails constructed. baseline Construction established County Building Improve energy performance in County buildings (Court Square, COB + Energy Usage — McIntire, COB — 5th Street). Recycling Rate Increase the rate of recycling solid waste materials. + School Facilities Decrease school overcapacity. -- Public Water Usage Maintain or decrease the consumption of water on a per -connection + basis. Police Response Times Achieve a response time of five minutes or less to all emergency calls 85 % of the time in the designated Development Areas. Achieve a response time of ten minutes or less to all emergency calls 85 % of the time in the Rural Areas. Fire and Rescue Achieve an average response time to fire emergency calls of 5:00 or Response Times less in the Development Areas and 1 3:00 or less in the Rural Areas. .✓ DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 16 Natural Resources Wooded Stream Buffers Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 1: Ensure clean and abundant water resources for Increase the area of forested stream buffers public health, business, healthy ecosystems, and personal along streams regulated by the Water enjoyment by preventing shortages and contamination. Protection Ordinance. Indicator 2009 2013 % of all required stream buffers that are wooded in the DA 66.2% 52.3% % of all required stream buffers that are wooded in the RA 65.9% 64.0% Comment: Progress: No Forested buffers in both the Development Area and the Rural Area are decreasing. Greater efforts are needed to Note: The figures provided are from two land cover restore buffers throughout the County, especially in the Rural datasets (2009 and 2013) that were developed Area where stream buffer restoration is almost entirely with somewhat different methodologies. The small voluntary. Water resource staff are currently identifying change between'09 and `013 in Rural Area percent locations for possible stream restoration projects. forested is within the margin of error, soothe decrease may not be significant. The 14 /o decrease in stream buffers in the Development Areas is more concerning. The measurement tool will be reevaluated during 2018 to see if alternative and more reliable methodologies can be created that either affirm a 14% decrease in stream buffers in the Development Areas or otherwise provide a more accurate result. Source: Albemarle County GDS, 2017, using 2009 and 2073 Virginia DEG 303(d) data Air Quality Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 1: Objective 4.2. Protect Air Quality Decrease the number of days where the Air Quality Index (AQI) is outside the good to moderate ran a (or above 100). Indicator 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Days per year that air quality falls outside of the "good" 1 2 0 0 0 1 or "moderate" range Median AQI per year that air quality is in the "good" 40 38 35.5 35 36 36 range (0-50 — the lower the score, the better the score 901h percentile AQI per year that air quality is in the 61 61 54 52 51 52 moderate range (50-100 — the lower the number, the better the score) Comment: Progress: Yes Although air quality appears to be worsening based on the number of days air quality fails to meet Good or Moderate standards (> 100), such events are relatively rare (4 over a 6-year period). Evaluation of each year's median and 90'h percentile AQI suggests modest progress in improving air quality. Source: Outdoor Air Quality Data from Air Quality Index Report, EPA, 2017; Air Quality Index is an index of 0-500 that is used to rate air quality, calculated by levels of pollutants. The monitoring station of Albemarle High School tracks ground -level ozone DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 17 M Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Designation of Historic Properties Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 5.2.A. Encourage landowners to pursue voluntary methods of Increase the number and acreage of preservation and conservation, including requesting landmark and designated properties. district designations, offering conservation easements, and providing tax and other financial incentive programs, as outlined in the adopted 2000 Historic Preservation Plan and its updates. Pursue historic district designations in cooperation with the surrounding neighborhoods and in partnership with the City of Charlottesville, where applicable. Indicator 2015 2016 Number of Individually Designated Properties on National Register of 82 82 Historic Places Number of Individual Properties on Virginia Landmarks Register 84 84 Number of Historic Districts on National Register of Historic Places 12 1 Comment: No change has taken place over the last two years. Progress: No Sources: National Register of Historic Places and Virginia Department of Historic Resources 2017 Demolition of Historic Resources Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 5.2: Pursue additional protection measures and incentives to Decrease the number of demolitions of preserve Albemarle's historic and archaeological resources in order to historically significant resources foster pride in the County and maintain the County's character. annually. Indicator 2015 2016 Number of resources demolished 5 1 2015: 3 contributing buildings located within historic districts and 2 garden sheds associated with Shack Mountain 2016: 1 contributing building located within a historic district Comment: The Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) is developing Progress: Yes criteria for identifying and documenting demolitions on other historically significant properties. 2015 currently serves as a base year for demolitions of historic properties. After the HPC finishes its work, a different baseline may be needed. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 19 n Economic Development Tourism Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 1 c: Promote tourism that helps Increase in employment in tourism and hospitality -related preserve scenic, historic, and natural industries, e.g. Accommodation & Food Services (NAICS 72). resources. Indicator Accommodation & Food Services Employment, 2010-2015 Average number of people employed in the Accommodation & Food Services industry. 3,600 3,550 3,500 3,450 3,400 3,350 3,300 3,250 3,200 3,150 3,100 3,050 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Comment: Progress: Yes Since 2010, over 300 new jobs were created in this area. Note: This indicator is monitored by the Albemarle County Department of Economic Development Source: Virginia Labor Market Information, QCE W (Annual), 2017. Target Industry Growth Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 3: Provide diversified economic opportunities that benefit Increase in employment in the County citizens and existing businesses by basing policy decisions on County's "target sectors": efforts that support and enhance the strengths of the County. Agribusiness, IT & Defense, Financial Insurance, and Biotech. Indicator. 2010 2015 Agribusiness 348 454 IT & Defense 1,318 864 Financial Insurance 894 856 Biotech 266 328 Total Target Industries 2,826 2,502 All Sectors 52,379 57,317 Comment: Progress: No Multiple target sectors saw a decline in employment over this period despite overall employment gains in the County. Overall target sector Note: This indicator is monitored by employment declined. The Economic Development Strategic Plan is Albemarle County Department of currently being developed. Economic Development Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2077 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 111 Unemployment Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 1: Promote economic development Reduce unemployment in Albemarle County. activities that help build on the County's assets while recognizing distinctions between expectations for the Development Areas and the Rural Area Indicator: Year Albemarle Co. Virginia United States Rate of unemployment 2012 4.90% 5.90% 8.10% 2013 4.60% 5.50% 7.70% 2014 4.50% 5.20% 6.16% 2015 3.90% 4.50% 5.25% 2016 3.50% 4.00% 4.85% Comment: Progress: Yes Unemployment has steadily declined since 2012. It remains lower than the state and country's Note: This indicator is monitored by Albemarle County unemployment rates. Economic Development Department Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2017 Average Annual Wages Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 7: Increase workforce Increase average annual wages. development to further career -ladder opportunities and higher wages. Indicator 7: Increase in average wages. indicator Avg. Annual Wages for Albemarle Co and VA, 2011-2016 Average annual wage $56,000 $54,288 $54,000 $52,936 $51,636 $51,948 $52,000 $50,648 $49,660 $50,000 $51,740 $48,000 48,932 $49,296 $50,076 $ $46,000 $46,592 $46,852 $44,000 $42,000 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 16Albemarle County 6 Virginia Comment: Progress: Yes Annual wages increased; however, average annual wages continue to be less than Note: This indicator is monitored by the Albemarle County Economic Virginia as a whole. Development Department Source: Virginia Labor Market Information, QCEW (Annual), 2017. DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 112 M Rural Areas Timber Production Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 7.1.8. Continue to Maintain or increase production of timber for pine and hardwood types. promote farming and forestry activities in the County by retaining Rural Area zoning on Rural Area designated land. Indicator 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Pine Value $1,285,857 $965,059 $2,218,432 $3,119,778 $4,088,943 Hardwood Value $1,148,680 $862,034 $1,001,924 $1,085,211 $1,604,094 Total Value $2,434,537 $1,827,093 $3,220,356 $4,204,988 $5,693,037 Comment: Progress: Yes Timber production increased in volume and value between 2010 and 2014. Source: Virginia Department of Forestry, 2077 Grape Production Comprehensive Plan Linkage Tar et: Strategy 7.1.E. Continue to provide support to Increase in tonnage of grapes produced. wineries, cideries, and farm breweries as part of the Count 's agricultural support activities. Indicator 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Tons of Grapes Produced, 2011-2015 971 1223 1013 1316 1519 Comment: Progress: Yes Tonnage of grapes produced increased, as did overall share of the state's production. Source: Commercial Grape Report, Virginia Wine Board Marketing Office, 2077 New Lots Created Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 7.2. Protect and preserve natural Continue decreasing number of new lots created in the resources, which include mountains, hills, valleys, Rural Area. rivers, streams, groundwater, and retain continuous and unfragmented land for agriculture, forestry, biodiversit , and natural resource protection. Indicator 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Family Divisions 12 6 10 6 3 8 5 Rural Subdivisions and Final Plats 28 23 14 30 12 47 24 Total 40 1 29 24 36 15 55 1 29 Comment: Progress: Yes Overall, fewer lots were created in 2016 than in 2010. The average annual number of lots over the past 7 years was 32. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 113 New Dwellings Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Decrease the ratio of new single family detached units in the Rural Area to new Strategy 7.2.A. Direct residential development to single family detached units in the Development Area and continue to make the Development Areas more livable, attractive places. Indicator 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 SFD units built in the Rural 194 157 77 95 101 89 107 128 128 149 Area SFD units built in the 103 93 82 125 123 135 159 181 184 271 Development Areas Percentage of SFD units built 65% 63% 48% 43% 45% 40% 40% 41 % 41 % 36% in the Rural Area Comment: Progress: Yes Over the last 10 years, the percentage of newly constructed single-family detached units located in the Rural Area has decreased. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 Agricultural/Forestal Districts and Conservation Easements Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Strategy 7.2.C. Continue rural conservation programs such as Increase Rural Area acreage in Agricultural/Forestal (Ag/For) Districts and use value taxation as Agricultural/Forestal Districts and under incentives for owners to avoid subdividing for residential uses. Conservation Easements Indicator 2014 2016 Acres in Agricultural/Forestal Districts 70,712 72,592 Acreage in Conservation Easements 86,448 101,589 (2014 serves as baseline year) Comment: Progress: Yes Land area in Ag/For districts and under conservation easements increased between 2014 and 2016 Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 114 Development Areas Overall Population Density Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Objective 8.5. Promote density within the Development Areas to help Increase population density in the create new compact urban places. Development Areas. Indicator 2010 2016 Residents per gross acre in the Albemarle County Development Areas 2.33 2.73 2010 serves as baseline ear) Residents per gross acre in City of Charlottesville 6.53 7.37 Comment: Progress: Yes Overall, po ulation density increased in the past 6 years. Source: TJPDC Performance Measurement System Report 2013, Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, 2017 and Albemarle County Community Development 2017 Mixed Use Development Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Strategy 8.2.E. Continue to approve mixed -use Increase the number of new mixed -use developments developments that are in keeping with the approved by rezoning. Neighborhood Model and Master Plans. Indicator 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total ZMAs approved in Development Areas 6 9 8 11 6 5 6 Approved ZMAs with mixed use that were modified 3 2 2 3 3 3 2 Approved new ZMAs with mixed use component 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 Comment: Progress: No Most mixed -use developments approved by ZMA predate 2010. Several developments were modified over the past 7 years; however, only 1 new mixed - use developments was approved by ZMA in 2016. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2077 Redevelopment Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Strategy 8.2.0. Promote redevelopment as a way to Increase the number of site development plans approved improve and take advantage of existing investment in for redevelopment, including adding new buildings on the Development Areas. existin developed sites. Indicator 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Total major amendments or initial site plans approved 27 11 9 14 21 25 21 in Development Areas Total major amendments or initial site plans approved 10 3 5 8 7 11 11 in Development Areas for redevelopment Percentage of major amendments or initial site plans 37% 27% 55% 57% 33% 44% 52% for redevelopment Comment: Progress: Yes Major amendments and initial site plans are approved each year. The mean average of the past 7 years is 42%. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2077 DRAFT 2017.Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 115 05 Housing Variety of Housing Types in Development Areas Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 9.4. Provide for a variety of housing types for Continue construction of a mixture of housing types all income levels and help provide for increased density each year in the Development Areas. in the Development Areas. Indicator 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Percentage of SFD constructed 22% 29% 49% 57% 51 % 40% Percentage of SFA/TH constructed 28% 20% 51 % 46% 31 % 19% Percentage of MF/Condo units constructed 50% 51 % 0% 0% 18% 41 % Comment: Progress: Yes A variety of housing types is constructed each year; however, the mix changes annually. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 Senior Housing Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target Strategy 9.5.A. Encourage developers to include housing for Increase in the number of beds in assisted seniors and individuals with disabilities in new residential and living and long-term care facilities. mixed -use developments. Approve these proposals when they are in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. Indicator 2016 Number of assisted living facility beds 989 Number of nursing home/longhome/long term care beds 586 Comment: Progress: N/A Information on annual completion of new assisted living and long- term care facilities is not readily available on an annual basis. 2016 establishes the new baseline figure. Source: Virginia Department of Social Services, U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services Proffered and Built Affordable Units Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 9.5. Support provision of housing which meets the needs of various ages Increase the number of and levels of mobility. built units as a result of Strategy 9.5.A. Encourage developers to include housing for seniors and individuals past housing proffers. with disabilities in new residential and mixed -use developments. Approve these proposals when they are in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. Indicator 2016 Built proffered affordable housing units since 2004 118 (awaiting update) Comment: Progress: N/A Information on built proffered units is not readily available on an annual basis. 2016 establishes the new baseline figure. Source: Albemarle County Department of Housing and Department of Community Development DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 117 N Transportation Deficient Bridges Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Strategy 10.2.C. Continue to work closely with State, regional Decrease in the number and surface area of and local partners to ensure that roadway structures (bridges and structurally deficient bridges as listed by the culverts) with low sufficiency ratings are annually prioritized in the Federal Highway Administration's National SSYP for funding, repair and/or replacement. Bridge Inventory. Indicator 2012 2016 Number of deficient bridges in Albemarle County 32 25 Area in square meters of deficient bridges in Albemarle County 4,206 3,987 Comment: Progress: Yes The number of structurally deficient bridges as well as surface area that qualified as being deficient decreased. VDOT and FHA monitor this indicator. Source: National Bridge Inventory: Deficient Bridges by County, Federal Highway Administration Multimodal Transportation Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Objective 10.3. Continue to improve, promote, and provide re Increase the modal share (percentage of Strategy 10.9.13. Continue to contribute to and participate in ride commuters using these modes) of public transit, sharing services. walking, or cycling to work. Decrease the Strategy 10.9.C. Continue to work with area employers through modal share of commuters driving to work the MPO to encourage development of ridesharing and alone. vanpooling programs and transportation demand reduction programs. Encourage development of ridesharing and transportation demand reduction programs as part of rezonings and parking lot requests for major industrial, office, and commercial development projects. Indicator 2010 2015 % of commuters who walked, cycled, or used public 4.85% 6.58% transportation % of commuters who drove to work alone 82.9% 84.1 % Comment: Progress: Mixed Overall, modal share increased, largely due to growth in walking and cycling. Despite an accompanying increase in walking and biking modes, single car occupancy has increased. Source: American Community Survey 5 Year Estimate 2016 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 119 Sidewalk Construction Comprehensive Plan Linkage: Target: Strategy 10.4.B. Improve funding for an ongoing Increase linear feet of sidewalk construction as part of walkway, bicycle, and greenway construction fund in the County's Capital Improvement Program (CIP). the Capital Improvements Program (CIP). Use all possible funding sources for the construction of walkways and bicycle facilities. Indicator Linear feet of sidewalk 2015 2016 2 projects for 2,560 linear feet of sidewalk & 2 projects forl,260 linear feet of sidewalk & streetscape improvements: streetscape improvements : Crozet Streetscape Phase II: approx. 2,000 linear feet Crozet Avenue North: approx. 1,110 linear feet of streetscape improvements along Crozet Avenue constructed between St. George Ave. & Crozet from The Square to Tabor St. Elementary School. Crozet Elementary School Safe Routes to School: Fontaine Avenue: approx. 160 linear feet constructed approx. 560 linear feet constructed along the west between the end of the paved path at Fontaine side of Crozet Avenue from Ballard Drive to Crozet Research Park and the end of the existing sidewalk at Elementary School. the City line. Comment: Progress: No This improvement is difficult to assess because sidewalk building in the CIP is completed by project. Multi -year projects will not be captured until the end of the project. In addition, it does not capture sidewalk built with new developments. A baseline of linear feet of sidewalk in the County will be established in 2018. Sources: Albemarle County Community Development, 2077 Bicycle lanes; Bicycle and Pedestrian Paths Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 10.4. Strengthen efforts to Increase the linear footage of multi -use paths, bike lanes, and shared complete a local transportation system roadways in the Development Areas. that includes access to pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Indicator Multiuse Bike Shared Total Total Bike Path Lane Roadway Bike Lane/ Lane/ Shared Shared Roadway and Roadway Paths Linear feet of built lanes/paths 180,092 85,031 110,748 195,779 375,872 Comment: Progress: N/A Consistent data is not available for prior years. 2016 sets the baseline for future evaluations. Source: Calculated using Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission GIs data 19 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 120 M x' k Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems Parks and Open Space in the Development Areas Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 1 1.2. Develop parks for active Increase in the acreage of private parkland in new mixed use and recreation. residential developments in the Development Areas. Indicator Acres of privately owned parkland 1,518 acres of land in the Development Areas exists in privately owned parkland, open space, and green systems. 2016 sets the baseline for future evaluations because consistent data is not available for prior years. Comment: Progress: N/A Of the A787 acres of public parkland in the County, 2A1 are in the Development Note: Two strategies exist for increasing public parkland in the Development Area. Most of the parkland in the Areas: Development Areas is owned by private Strategy 2c: Study the parks and recreational needs of residents of existing entities such as homeowners associations. neighborhoods in the Development Areas to determine whether parkland for public neighborhood parks should be acquired and developed. Strategy 2d: Acquire the sites for and develop public parks shown for active recreation on Development Area Master Plans. Until these actions are accomplished, new parks and recreational amenities will likely be privately owned and maintained. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2017 Greenway Trails Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 11.3.13. Continue to develop the Increase in the length of greenway trails constructed. County's greenway system as shown in the Development Area Master Plans and on the Greenway Plan. Indicator Miles of improved trail. 30.5 miles of improved trails exist in the County. 2016 sets the baseline for future evaluations because consistent data is not available for prior years. Comment: Progress: N/A Within public parks, there are an additional 60 miles of continuous trails. Source: Albemarle County Community Development, 2077 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 121 09 Community Facilities County Building Energy Usage Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 12.1. Continue to provide public Improve energy performance in County buildings (Court Square, facilities and services in a fiscally COB — McIntire, COB — 5th Street). responsible and equitable manner. Strategy 12.1.1. Continue to design and construct public facilities that are energy efficient and environmentally responsible. Indicator Energy Consumption (in BTUs) in County Buildings, 2005-2016 Energy consumption in BTUs; however, beginning in 2018, the County's Department of Facilities and Environmental Services will 35,000,000 begin to track energy consumption using 30,000,000 different metrics. 25,000,000 20,000,000 15,000,000 10,000,000 5,000,000 0 Oh Ob O'� % OA �O �N �1L �^b �P �h �b ,ti0 ry0 �O ry0 ry0 0 ,y0 �O ,ti0 �O ,ti0 ,ti0 Comment: Progress: Yes Energy consumption in County buildings has declined from 2005. Note: This indicator is monitored by Albemarle County Facilities and Environmental Services. Source: Albemarle County Department of Facilities and Environmental Services, 2077 Recycling Rate Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 12.7.A. Use the waste hierarchy Increase the rate of recycling solid waste materials. (reduce, reuse, recycle, dispose) to guide waste management policy. Indicator 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Tons Municipal Solid Waste 69,200 90,038 119,605 131,216 125,798 135,502 Tons Principal Recyclable Material 23,362 34,036 70,455 70,516 75,533 69,736 Recycling Rate 25% 27.4% 37% 35% 38% 1 34% Comment: Progress: Yes The recycling rate has improved from 25% in 2010 to 34% of solid waste Note: This indicator is monitored by the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority. recycled in 2015. Source: Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, 2077 School Facilities DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 123 Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 12.3. Provide physical Decrease school overcapacity. facilities that enable the School Division to provide a high quality educational system for students in Albemarle County. Indicator School Enrollment as Percentage of Capacity 2014-15 and 2016-17 12CM,, Enrollment in relation to capacity of schools 1109b 100°I 90°/u $ap0o - 701% ..._.. Goo %of Capodty n 2D142015 %of CaDacity in 2516-2017 Comment: Progress: No "Multiple schools are continuing to experience overcrowding and more are Note: This indicator is monitored by the Schools Division and Facilities and approaching capacity. The successful Environmental Management. Several different options exist for dealing with passing of the referendum and the overcrowding including building new schools, expanding capacity and completion of the Woodbrook Addition redistricting. will resolve some of these issues beginning in the 201 8/19 school year. The school division is currently reviewing options for the overcrowding at Albemarle High School and evaluating if a new high school is needed." Source: Albemarle County Schools, 2077 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 124 Public Water Usage Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Strategy 12.9.E. Continue to support and Maintain or decrease the consumption of water on a per - implement water demand management connection basis. strategies as outlined in the 2011 Water Supply Plan by maintaining efficient water use through ordinance, by reducing water use through conservation initiatives, and by reducing water loss through system operation and maintenance. Indicator ACSA Water Consumption, 2010-2016 ACSA Water Total Water Consumption and Consumption per connection 1700 0.094 i 1600 0.092 0 0 rn — 0 1500 0.09 £ N c ;O 1400 0.088 � co N c 0 1300 0.086 j 22 E 1200 0.084 m a c 0 0 v 1100 0.082 o E - 1000 0.08 0 U ryo�� ryo�� ryo�,� ryo�� �O�b ryo1h ryoNb —Total Consumption --$--Consumption per Connection Comment: Progress: Yes Although overall water consumption increased, mean consumption per connection decreased, Note: This indicator is monitored by the Albemarle County Service suggesting overall progress towards the goal of Authority - improving efficient water use. Source: Albemarle County Service Authority, Comprehensive Annual Financial Report Police Response Times Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 2: Provide high quality Achieve a response time of five minutes or less to all emergency calls police services in the County. 85 % of the time in the designated Development Areas. Indicator 3: Meet or exceed service Achieve a response time of ten minutes or less to all emergency calls delivery standards for police service. 85 % of the time in the Rural Areas. Indicator 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Percentage of calls meeting target times 67% 69% 62% 69% N/A 74% of <5 minutes in the Development Area Percentage of calls meeting target times 48% 47% 49% 66% N/A 51 of <10 minutes in the Rural Area Comment: Progress: Yes Although the response time to neither the Development Areas nor Rural Areas meets Note: This indicator is monitored by the County Executive's office. the 85% target, average response times improved between 2011 and 2016. Source: Albemarle County Police Department, 2077 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 125 Fire and Rescue Response Times Comprehensive Plan Linkage Target: Objective 4: Provide firefighting Achieve an average response time to fire emergency calls of 5:00 or less and rescue facilities and equipment in the Development Areas and 1 3:00 or less in the Rural Areas. as needed to meet the characteristics of particular service areas. Indicator 4: Meet or exceed service delivery standards for fire & rescue service. Indicator Fire and Rescue Response Times - DA, 2011-2016 Development Area response times 8 2011-2016 Target: 5:00 or less 7 The solid red lines indicate the target 6 -- response time for fires, and the goal is to be below the red line. 5 4 3 2 1 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Fire and Rescue Response Times - RA, 2011-2016 Rural Area response times 2011 - 14 2016 Target: 13:00 or less 12 The solid red lines indicate the target 10 response time for fires, and the goal is to be below the red line. 8 6 4 2 0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Comment: Progress: Mixed Response times remained fairly consistent between 201 1 and 2016. Note: This indicator is monitored by the County Executive's office. Response times for the Development Areas do not yet meet the desired standards; however, responses for the Rural Area meet the standard. Source: Albemarle County Performance, County Executive website 2077 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 126 Population and Capacity Analyses DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 127 Cm Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan 2016 Population and Capacity Analysis Albemarle County's growth management strategy is two -pronged: promote growth in the Development Areas and preserve the Rural Area for rural area uses. To understand whether the Development Areas have sufficient capacity for anticipated residential growth, the County performs and updates analyses that compare vacant land to projected population. The image shown below is taken from the Reference section of the Comprehensive Plan and describes the steps involved in such an analysis. EM figure I Comporasnts of a Residential Copooty Analysis ','� tAgtd Ustr 1"law " taw ft;t, Otiosity >Ranga ktsdrg+t+a' Ac•ragr f1w" t1wung Zoning and Comprehensive Plan iutsas' Nousl� Crtipactt�r (potential additional Jt i�t ttntt4 P*%%j i Vacant 6utidabft! Land ,jt untwdit L•1J•.7 pip@41ne Units F3 � r iulwv Howint N +d ` 'Nv+nb+`� alai Nt�w Untts t�a«ded bti ye>•+" (add+tionaldwrtlingsj " tNalectrd Proper population a prr Unit f4tutt Ali#r _.._........_....»..............»....,.,.....»�..�....._._.. Can Capacity Meet Future Demand? " :, ►;#,« ,, 1� Can+#t 201 wit*P1*d try* cltr 04 Noft*4+++o, CA, (orw iftv*, 00 1 and gashiwwteal copo ity A *1Yk+ X*? Methodology used for the 2016 analysis is generally the same as that used in the 2014 study. Current population estimates for the County are shown on page 31. Population projections for the County were taken from the 2017 population projections issued by the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service. The people per unit multiplier was taken from an average of the Development Area people/unit by unit type. Buildable vacant acreage was measured using the County's GIS applications and comparing it to allowable densities from the Zoning Ordinance and recommended densities from the Comprehensive Plan Master Plans. Pages 31 and 32 provide analysis according to the Zoning and Comprehensive Plan. The comparison of capacity to future demand uses the assumption that all new residential development will occur in the County's Development Areas. It does not account for redevelopment potential, new units that will be built in the Rural Area, or new units built in the Town of Scottsville. While those actions will surely occur, the exercise is done to monitor whether or not all new development could take place in the County's designated Development Areas. The following conclusions are made from the analyses: e Sufficient capacity of vacant buildable land exists in the Development Areas to accommodate anticipated population growth through the year 2035. DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 129 • If all vacant properties are developed at the low end of recommended density based on the Comprehensive Plan, by 2040 there will be a deficit of 1 124 units. • If all vacant properties are developed at the high end of recommended density based on the Comprehensive Plan, by 2040 there will still be capacity for 8495 more units. • If all buildable vacant land is developed at the low end of allowable density based on the Zoning district, by 2040, there will be a deficit of 1935 units. • If all zoned vacant land is developed at the high end of allowable density based on the Zoning district, by 2040, there will be a deficit of 261 units. Calculations on pages 32 and 33 are based on the adopted Master Plans for the Development Areas. Data for each individual Development Areas is shown on pages 34 and 35. A multiplier of 2.54 people per unit was used for all Development Areas. This multiplier may not be representative of all Development Areas. However, using individual Development Area multipliers would require parsing census tract information, which was not possible with existing resources. Analyses for individual Development Areas will be shared with each Community Advisory Committee in the coming months. 9 DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan Annual Report 130 cm a N c ^ CT y m O M co - C � Q C O -6 -C m Q E O _ O V r £ 0- 0 o a > o 0 0 i Oi V d T O t ^ v 4 c•_ c = v •� y co E ` ° a 0 V Lo o, '« > N c O M ^ O OD7. M F ry •� CA w _ « ' c c O p£ a pLo oo 2 O v c .... cl � C p y O M > N N C C C OQ Q O — L O a Q c t p N O V 'O Q V u c c0 O O Y (OV oDoo P h N ri 4 N > N Cc Q -6 „- J Q « -p _Es cc� O O O 0 L N Q O O O c4 S S O N O O N lJ O N Q E� N d D O O a r H o L y V_ O N c O ry 4 ' 3 rn v a N E o Q E V c4 E o f v £O cOj DD 04 `n M M _ 'O O „ O _ cx� 0In IS _ {V .0 O o 6 c C O - Ou H 0 a o L N "O 41 a c T �O E N CV f+ E p 'o Q _p Q N 0' •O h V C •O O W c y o u W Oc 2 �« W o h o cl v o > N w p o E ° g o c c O O P ut O) N J N Q O >0 N (y v m cN Cr• C O J p_ O Q y c •: c _O = N 0 L -0 o o �. Cl fV _O J < J > E c O O' o Q 'O s« c o 0 0 W Ul N N O p> E c ^_ W Q c 0 C '_^ "r cr N Q -o N O N - v N —oE O O C d O � > ry T D c O„ u pj 0 O j > W N v V _a N 0 "O _6 o c E c J D y J „ � 6 o o t 'S a v O p o O_ h e O t 3 W u ry 0 d 1T X p £ ,p To; vm E o o c c < E OQ l.7 Q £� 4 N O J O d.F� « a J N N N O O W N c Q '« c V L O •- c Z Ta E Q Q o N 'E 'C 'C C .X Ul o p d p Oo o L ap Q o a n a a c ? o _o � c w a -O a o Q Q £ c O- c X o Ui O o N > > s •O N L_ p C ii N c N N -O O Q Q (A „ •O_ C O> N N £ v� 3 J Q d Q� N Q (N d N 0 o L V N L L S L E •o a O N r E c '- c c 0 0 E v 'o J c c -E O c N a — o .� Q V Q 7 r N N (V M 'O O V h V o •O I� O( ry O v 5 0 0 N N ,O N n P ° o w v U P ¢ 6 0-0 o a E N E m v y O f 30 > _ S Of (c 00 t Q O N O E> N O V M h O 0, O) N n _ `n _ N O_ N 01 O D) ,_ -0 _ 3 O « C U \ j O c O C O � o O Q c y CcL Sri 'O x H _T C .LM V M M uU ° O O N W h M O a S 0 ° d 00 .O (V LO O � N m •o m E c w 'y > ° o � N -0j N c N Q¢ Oc0 a N N T � '� Q y N 0 ol 0 Cl) C7 _ E T L E 0 0 ° d O N r 0 0 N j O > EO 0) u O d u O L CV <U In0 Q N 3 N E O ¢ c V Q In N M •j « « 4 0u ° 9 O N OD M O_ T 01 (N -0 m '" r o a > r d 3 oa y v a o.. > > Q 3 -° o c0 v c °- � W •y -00 ° c O O CO C N 3 � O M N ° 0 ° O N fl. Q N v 0 > in O c c L N 01 0 ° O CO L - N P h Q O h P (Y Lq N ° c •° E 0 > E «-0 0 N Q� -0 y ;�6 o ODa 0) E ° y v ¢ o 0 0) 5 y c o o� o Cc M .- '. f N O X W O 0 � d d f 'O N p> E > > E° 0) T c E C _° a a° E O O c N o N N T 6) 6 0 E u a) —Q o° o Ec� N� E U u _� 6E « y h O c O O O O- ° > O 'c N c E a~ -O O„° u c r N G R N h t N -EO p u `8 H 0) (D c c 0 wo o'v a �� •c O d E Q Q Q T h o —_ O y W W u u OQ _O ° EO w -0 N ° 9 N >. -0 yl 'c -0Q I T• O 4 ° N N 4 '6 't E E N N -0 0 O O c -° Q — E c O 0 E a° > c 0 a j N L C, c N N d N O 0 N -0 D W d -0 o d v c = — V L O O •- v c —0J 0 c c t N a)T E N a ° « C L p Q> > > H O N •. C 5 0= O o j 0 C E j C Ul L 3 d d ;-0CL c N a V °QE V ' n -0 O 4 'a -0 a o 0 Qa „ x E oc E E rnb ° E u w `c w 0 °'°_ 0> aac °mm L3� sNo ° a) s N`3 O 0 a V a N N > j 7 0 cN M -O O V (n E m O N v� Q? O C V CN N h a0 ^ CV 'o (V M OD OL > L P W h N aD M _ -a 2 (V c Q p• E h ,O 'o N V R C1 T O tVQ• Jp_ O L C a a O 3 a E "� o 10 v M 00 Lo 00-2 p 3 O O 'o co — of 00 0-7 N LoN 0,_ n w> P, P V V N V T v a 'E c 0 `c c ,O O m O •O P Lo O P V O -- h 0,00 04 n Q o w v = eo 0 C C' OP N o w ao 0 C, o a � � L •a J v a o rn 0 c O O v 00C h p V �n O m P h 00M (`! O M h ,p co — 0,I, 'O 00 a .t O h Lo •O OD V (V Q h h M O O o N E O J V a v a� °co ON > `- y c a O r V M h o (0 h o 0, v 0, ao P P o o a 'E c o 0 d = — — — .- — — ,n Cl J v rn v v E � a v J p C r � N 72 0 0 P CL O_ .41 N 3 O 00 CO LoV OD h M OD M O M OD Inr, O O co O 1, O ('7 (V V 00 M •O M (V CV 1] J � -0 ry > 0 T a C _ OD_ M M O 4) p¢ •Q ) h n (V M CN M V O ^ O P (N M O h h Q p j 0 oz (") 00 O a V o L N U n O-) O^ P h N Io n M P CN N a 'c P O O O V O 00 oD (V M E W c N _ 5 U o M h P R OLo m m n 10 •- Q (V E 0 w 0 a a d d Q a v o a 7 (V Z O c V Z h Z `O Z N Z N O , T N O > C m o. o as U a E = o C > 0 T � O L < a J 0 L > -o to > 0 T C J J O o U v v E N c .o v a (V rn c a, E E Q o v a-o 'c o ° > „ -vo „ 4 -o J a ~ £ p w u o rn o c O v Q o c o i C = u o a L C a F > a y 3 a' ova c D C _T N O E 0 O -0 -0 U u E og °a O c o F_ E o «_0 9 L 3 -vac J 0 h y E o o cN 04 v 0 Ou •C v y « ID o a y O E N c_ au ` `O c d v 0 � O E Q 6 0 J 0 O N w c O O v 3 -0 > > d o Eo 0 _ n L O CL = C -a O 'c a o w J v w c c v E O O W p « O — _ Q E N v _ O a a T a O OO O L 0- 0. E o E a a 0 O L y o « 0 > _ 3 0) > _� 64 a v » - car C 3 N C > > E p y a 3 c (v :Qac s n O ry 0 V u a a a o 6 > T v c .N O 9 O J c '. -a 2 -c N N O v w Q —Q o p E � :a a E o E D= o c 42 U » = o V J« a J O a O n O « Q a E v v Ea ETo vJ« � v > � O E w o o N W M v F V Q L Qm _a a v 0 « d N L N P M N P N h V o O ^ M o- a `O o` P ^! M P O Q `- Q°•3 -a O a1 Q CO N Cl) P P Q ^ V N N O 0 O V P n V O V h W> O N h C h °• N M P a) a � c J •_ 6 p, M 00 N V 0 °- O W C 2O V N u1 00 nl V 11 ay N O N ° -a `c Q c w p c ° h o o w a) ��- 0 `v o N 0, N o ° n V '0 h Cj o ° °- E J O Vn n a a, QL p C N Z c a ,_ N L P OD N O P OD 00 N P h N V O 00 N O O O aV N p a c 6 N 2 h h N h h 00 P Q N J N 0)O M ' E `o .� o 2 a a .� L j j O a 9 N n w o O- Q p -° OC� OD M N ^ N 10 M co 1) 00 V h O• N N O 'O Cof • 'tn Q T � d T C p >00 'o o O N Cl)M V O O P O u1 c v c c °' N � N V� O �O O V O OD CO o N; M a E W C4 C N _ C V V v2 M V u7 V On' P O h CO OD N OD V N V h V a Q 00 N M h a0 N C0 •O r, N 06 V o E p°, w 0 � 8 a Q a C Q o Q a Z Z c Z 7 7 Z ° o a V 0 £ y > T a a o m 0 m > 0 0 m o Oc > N N N 3 c ° O O O j O 'c a pp Q O J 0 _ a E ° w u O a N ° O a 0 s-0o ou ° no O O _b -d �'=a D°O= a m c T v v t N 0 9 J p o o c V E ° N a (D O a) o `a o — -0 -0't o E N -o ) ° c >° E ° w Q r > > s o v a L s p a ° O o rn O c o o O ° 3 w rna Q._a O a a ° J v m 30 O N _ a o mn v m o a ° d n _ 0 0 O c c O E y O O m E i°] — `E E ° c ° c N o c O m E O a a 0 aa) L E c X a 3 Q -0 6 > a ° 0 Q o f ��a Q)o` N p� c C C O .o o�a -0°o�� o E� -- .c` m � p al C J Q a N a) N m E a1 N In >O ML '0 c N O 9 'B a -0'O N 0 > _0 °� N -°aJ °- ° vYi 5 o 0 aL N p a O E E- C T vim- O c c w 'c � J J O V O O O N 0 t Q a ° o 0u o 0 0° 00- O E E T-0 E J E ar J N c c c> c U 4 L L -a N M L Q T Q 19 Albemarle County Development "Pipeline" of Projects Approved by Zoning Map Amendment or Special Permit since 2001. Development Units Units Unbuilt Area Project Name Application Approved' Built2 Units Blue Ridge Co -housing ZMA 07-1 2 26 0 26 Foothills Daily ZMA 16-05 180 0 180 Crozet Old Trail ZMA 04-24 2,200 459 1,741 Wickham Pond I ZMA 04-17 107 91 16 Wickham Pond II ZMA 05-18 106 56 50 Avinity II ZMA 13-16 102 0 102 Avon Park II ZMA 07-05 32 0 32 N4 Spring Hill Village ZMA 13-17 100 0 100 Woolen Mills ZMA 16-16 94 0 94 Remaining Portion of Biscuit Run ZMA 05-17 100 0 100 N5 Whittington 1 1 ZMA 06-96 51 45 Kenrid e SP 04-52 65 57 8 N7 Out of Bounds ZMA 12-03 56 40 16 White Gables SP 02-23 76 30 46 Cascadia ZMA 02-04 330 53 277 Pantops Fontana Phase 4C ZMA 04-18 34 0 34 Riverside Village ZMA 12-02 105 50 55 Brookhill ZMA 15-07 1,550 0 1,550 Cedar Hill Mobile Home Park SP 03-06 32 0 32 Estes Park ZMA 10-1 1 68 63 5 PL29 - HM Hollymead Town Center Area A2 ZMA 07-01 1,222 0 1,222 Holl mead Town Center Area C ZMA 01-20 120 71 49 North Pointe SP 02-72 893 0 893 Willow Glen ZMA 06-19 234 32 202 Oakleigh Farm ZMA 07-04 20 0 20 PL29 - N 1 Stonefield (Albemarle Place) ZMA 01 -07 800 262 538 Belvedere ZMA 04-07 775 504 271 PL29 - N2 ZMA13-01 The Lofts at Meadow Creek 65 65 0 Briarwood ZMA 95-20 661 453 208 PL29 - PM SP 07-31 NGIC Residential Expansion 120 0 120 Glenmore Livengood ZMA 06-15 43 25 18 VOR Glenmore Leake ZMA 06-16 110 24 86 Rivanna Village at Glenmore I ZMA 13-1 2 400 1 0 1 400 1 Maximum residential units allowed under approved final Zoning Map Amendment or Special Permit. 2 Units within approved project boundaries issued a valid address in the Albemarle County GIS system as of September 2017. DRAFT 2017 Albemarle County Cortiprehensive Plan Annual Report 135