The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCPA200800003 Legacy Document 2008-09-16COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE AGENDA TITLE: Village of Rivanna Master Plan SU BJ ECTIP RO POSALIRE QU EST: Village of Rivanna Master Plan Update STAFF CONTACT(S): Benish, Echols, Catlin LEGAL REVIEW: NO STAFF REPORT AGENDA DATE: September 23, 2008 ACTION: INFORMATION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: YES BACKGROUND: On June 17, 2008, the Planning Commission reviewed several land use map options for the Village of Rivanna draft land use plan. After hearing public input, The Commission said that only Option 1 (Attachment A-1) should be further considered. Gross density should not be less than 3 — 6 units per acre overall; however, options should be brought to the Commission on distribution of density so that less density occurs at the edge of Running Deer. The development area boundary should not extend across Route 250 to Route 64. Because the community desires a master plan which conflicts with several Village development goals and guidelines in the Comprehensive Plan, the Commission said that a revised version of Option 1 should be brought to the Planning Commission for their review and direction before going back out to the stakeholders group or the community. After the June 17 meeting, staff began working on options for the "form" of the remaining parts of the development area. Staff was asked to wait until the end of September to bring revised concepts to the Commission for their input. The Commission said that it would like to hold the next public meeting for this master plan. The full set of draft minutes will be provided to the Commission by email before the meeting. PLAN OPTIONS Attachment B-1, C-2, and D-1 contain three different designs for which input from the Commission is sought, prior to taking the options to a public meeting. All options keep development within the existing development area boundary. Densities on the plans reflect the mid-range of density expected on the current Land Use Plan. All scenarios protect the existing neighborhoods of Glenmore and Running Deer by limiting density to no more than 2 dwellings per acre. All options show interconnections to adjoining parcels with two of them being optional rather than mandatory. Design 1 has two new civic green centers on either side of Carroll Creek. It shows a range of density on both sides of the Creek, surrounding the civic green. It puts the next -to -the lowest density adjacent to the existing Running Deer neighborhood but allows for a mixture of unit types which would include attached housing {duplexes, triplexes, and townhouses} in addition to single family detached houses. Design 2 shows Only one new civic green center in addition to the Rivanna Village at Glenmore Village Center. It concentrates the highest density of housing around that civic green center radiating out into lower density development. It puts the next -to -the lowest density on the entire east side of Carroll Creek outside of Glenmore and the Running Deer neighborhood. Design 3 shows only one center — the Rivanna Village at Glenmore Village Center. Additional density radiates out from the Village Center with the highest density closest to the Village Center. The next -to -the lowest density is on the entire east side of Carroll Creek outside of Glenmore and the Running Deer neighborhood. The three designs generally permit the same number of units as permitted under the existing Land Use Plan designation at 3 — 6 dwelling units per acre. The legend shown on the designs shows a low to high range from lightest yellow to darkest brown with a range of density. Staff would like to focus the Commission's discussion on the form for future development for the master plan, concentrating on the gradations of density and not specific numbers. The densities could change depending on whether the Commission has a preference for the low, middle, or high end of the density currently shown on the Land Use Plan. Once the form has been decided, the density discussion can follow. Attachment E-1 provides a summary of the information shown on three design options. It also describes typical housing types in each of the density categories. Attachment F-1 shows an illustration of different housing types. As indicated in the paragraph above, the density categories will need to discussed in detail after the form has been decided. At that time, the Commission can also consider whether the higher density categories should include any service uses, such as child care or doctors offices or institutional uses such as assisted living facilities. If the Commission decides that the designs are ready for the public meeting, staff would like to discuss the format for that meeting with the Commission. Staff proposes that the Planning Commission "sponsor" the public meeting/master plan workshop to help the community understand the context for input into the designs. As part of the workshop, the consultant team will present the three different options and then have a small group exercise to provide a response on all three maps. The purpose of the group session would be to gain input on the pros and cons of each of the designs. At the end, an exercise would take place that would allow the public as a whole to express their preferred design. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Commission review each of the designs with the consultant and staff and decide whether all options should be presented to the public or if any option should be dropped. Staff asks that the Commission provide direction on any changes needed to any of the recommendations or options prior to finalization and presentation to the public. Staff also requests that the Commission decide how it wishes to participate in the next public meeting and discuss staff s proposal for process. Once the Commission is satisfied with the content of the maps and process to be used, staff can schedule the public meeting. ATTACHMENTS: ATTACHMENT A-1: Option 1 6-17-08 ATTACHMENT B-1: Village of Rivanna Areas of Development Design 1 ATTACHMENT C-1: Village of Rivanna Areas of Development Design 2 ATTACHMENT D-1: Village of Rivanna Areas of Development Design 3 ATTACHMENT E-1: Village of Rivanna -- Consultants Notes 9-15-08 ATTACHMENT F-1 Density and Building Types Images in Albemarle County 9-16-08 ""ft".7"Wom Imemeft. 'aft'zqm%l 64 ADO age o fvanna Ariaso f ' '.eve l oment' r'f W r Ott - ^�� ° a • + • L', • t :.4Sig Zt Leave Available For Potemial Road or Trail ❑ Leave Available For Potential '�' �'C' . �• •; . ❑ Road [wish gate] or Trail ❑ d';Ib 6 '`'F 4 CS'r49 �r • a •p . 4 KC). f EARNS b� Q �III1 �7 .Q. �3 q �N RP Pm l � r r �• 76 't3 0iq a Ar' �w d a o�►�'�¢. a Legend ■------ Proposed Access Point 3; ,' o� Water Feature fi a 0��. 4;�, 4 9. Floodplains a Q w� ��` oa o a.d Roads (3 4 Parcels •e; • �' Critical Slope Density a • : .I.4;6 open Space �• < 2 d. u.lacre J, q a - ' : • �R;, ' 0 3-6 d.u./acre u 4-8 d.u.lacre 6-10 d.u./acre t7.X ;�• ;'4 • D.; : • f�:d• `.d fi?.� 8-16 d.u.lacre Mild ::� .• :of anna •�'•' Areas�o Biel en44t . D. p m Azv� W3 ;off. r •' - IF •^Leave Available For Potertial D i Road od Trail AlC� - Leave Avadable For Potential- ',�p Rood (with gale) or Trail a\NX cn � Pry o �. o ,E t EWSLN ' aac> far vim.' 0 Legend I - - -� �• f------ Proposed Access Points Rip R Q ®2� �a D 2 0�. '. - Water Feature q ''ELI : Roads e d _:_ -- p r '� : • :� Parcels := •• Floodplains t Q Critical Slope o o a A :. • •;� ��; • Density o . ��;' : "�.a. • - Open space i vi \� J• ;•,:'• < 2 d -u -/acre VO W � . ye 1 �. �� • �� t f � � � � to . . r '. �J .�i�s•.� �' � 4 y IyY� i AV AV Aw age _''_ _ om• Legend • • 7 i r. y �I • Proposed AccessPoint * X� 11y �• ; s wIWater Roadsr Parcels Floodplains 'Critical Slope Development Density _ ,. Vii/- '' , •�'/ �- ► open space �i rr�. i��,i .I ♦ by ► • V •� - • % ■ I. I i ■ ■ �i. •ILLLl7ILLLLL/LL/L/ _ VILLAGE OF RIVANNA — Consultants Notes 9-15-08 Since the Planning Commission meeting on June 17, TJPDC and County Staff have worked together to identify possible scenarios showing various forms that development could take. Common elements between all three options are: ■ No change in the boundary of the development area • The neighborhood of Running Deer is shown with a density not to exceed 2 dwelling units per acre. ■ The potential for connectivity across Carroll Creek and from the Village Center to Livengood has been retained, but no connections are indicated at this time. ■ The development potential is the same for each scenario, calculated as 3 to 6 dwelling units per acre on the gross area of areas A, B and C, with one acre subtracted for each existing dwelling unit in Running Deer. This gives a total of 266 developable acres. This would result in 800 units at 3 du/acre, 1,200 at 4.5 du/acre, and 1,600 at 6 du/acre. This corresponds to the 3 to 6 units per acre identified in the current Comprehensive Plan. Distinct elements of the three design scenarios are: • Design 1: Two new centers around civic greens in areas A and B. • Design 2 One new center around civic green in Area A ■ Design 3: The Village Center as the only center Developable Acreage Calculation: Developable Acreage in Areas A, B, C and Running Deer Acreage No. of units at 3 dula No. of units at 4.5 dula No. of units at 6 dula Area acres Single Family Attached; Duplex units 6-10 du/acre Duplex units; Townhomes Area A 94 Area B (excluding Running Deer) 89 Area C 24 Total Areas A, B and C 207 Running Deer (excludes one acre for each existing house) 59 TOTAL Developable Acres 265 800 1200 1600 Types of housing: Density HousingType 2 dulacre Single Family Detached 3-6 du/acre Single Family Detached; Patio Homes 4-8 du/acre Single Family Attached; Duplex units 6-10 du/acre Duplex units; Townhomes 8-16 du/acre Townhomes; Apartments ATTACHMENT E-1 Density and Building Types Images in Albemarle County September 16, 2008 Q;. 3 — 6 units/acre Parkside Village single family homes in Crozet 4 — 8 units/acre Parkside Village townhouses I n C rozet 6 — 10 units/acre White Gables Owned Multi -family buildings (condominiums) 8 - 16 unitslacre Abington Place townhouses In Hollymead Towncenter ATTACHMENT F-1