HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA202000012 Correspondence 2022-03-09 (2)SHIMP ENGINEERING, P.C.
Design Focused Engineering
March 7.2022
Cameron Langille
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia22902
RE: Response Letter #2 for ZMA2020-00012 Montclair
Dear Cameron,
Thank you for your review of the zoning map amendment request for Montclair (formerly White Gate
Village). This letter contains responses to County comments dated February 11, 2022.Our responses are
as follows:
General Application Comments:
1. At this time, page 45 of the adopted Crozet Master Plan states "Property east of Park Ridge Drive
(Tax Map 56 Parcel 91A) is intended to remain rural and undeveloped to help break up the
appearance of continuous development along Three Notch'd Road." The Future Land Use Plan
also designates TMP 56-91A as Greenspace. The project is entirely inconsistent with the adopter
Master Plan's future land use recommendations for that parcel. Unless the current Crozet Master
Plan update results in a revised future land use designation on TMP 56-91A, staff will not
recommend approval of the ZMA. Should a new Master Plan be adopted prior to this application
moving forth with public hearings, staff will be able to offer more guidance on the proposed land
uses. First revision: As acknowledged by the applicant, the 2021 Crozet Master Plan has
redesignated the future land use classifications of the properties. The future land use
classifications are Neighborhood Density Residential, Middle Density Residential, and
Green Systems. See comment #5 below for additional information.
RESPONSE: Comment received. The density calculations exhibit has been provided with this
submission.
2. The application must include a private street authorization request to allow the proposed internal
streets to be private. As currently designed, Private Alley A and B in Blocks 1 and 2 do not meet
Subdivision ordinance requirements for approval (see comment #5 under Application Plan below)
or the Neighborhood Model Design Guidance from the Appendix of the Comprehensive Plan.
First revision: Some of the sub -comments below have been addressed. but a private street
authorization request still needs to be submitted by the applicant. Action on the private
street authorization request will occur at time of Planning Commission public hearing for
the ZMA.
RESPONSE: Comment received. The private street authorization request has been provided with
this submission.
streets on the A....I:,...ttiti on Plain
ii. Per Section 14-403 of the Subdivision Ordinance, "each lot within a subdivision shall
have frontage on an existing or proposed public or private street." No public or private
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
streets are provided for frontage purposes in Blocks 1 and 2 and therefore the proposal
cannot be subdivided unless all lots have frontage on a public or private street. First
revision: Please provide evidence and information as specified under Section 14-234(A)
and explain how the request meets the findings under Section 14-234 (C) on a future
submittal. Please submit a private street authorization request for the private roads
proposed.
RESPONSE: Comment received. The private street authorization request has been
provided with this submission. The request includes the findings under Section 14-233(1)
and Section 14-234(C), for private street authorization in the development areas that
would allow for neighborhood model development principles to be more fully achieved.
iv. Public streets would better accomplish the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for
access management as stated in Chapter 10 (pages 10.19-10.21). First revision: Applicant
is still proposing some internal private streets. Please provide a private street
authorization request. Please provide evidence and information as specified under Section
14-234(A) and explain how the request meets the findings under Section 14-234 (C) on a
future submittal.
RESPONSE: A private street authorization has been provided with this submission for
review.
4. VDOT and County Transportation staff have requested that a turn lane warrant analysis be
conducted by the applicant for Park Ridge Drive and Three Notch'd Road. Please provide this
information on a future submittal. See comments from those reviewers below. Please be aware
that pending the review of the turn lane warrant analyses, staff may find that the application has
not mitigate all applicable transportation infrastructure impacts. Currently, the only transportation
improvement proposed with the application is an "approximate 30' wide ROW reservation" along
Three Notch'd Road that includes a 10' multi -use path. See below:
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
The Application Plan should provide more specificity regarding the ROW reservation.
Explain why the reservation is "approximate." When will the ROW reservation occur?
First revision: Comment not fully addressed. The ROW reservation has been revised so
that 500 sq.ft. at the intersection of Park Ridge Drive/Route 240 and 11,600 sq.ft. of
ROW reservation is shown along the property frontage on Sheet 4 of the Application
Plan. However, no notes are provided that indicate when/how the ROW reservation will
occur. Please provide additional information on the timing and mechanism for the ROW
dedication.
RESPONSE: The ROW reservation is shown to demonstrate feasibility of the roadway
improvements of the 10' multi -use path along Route 240 and the future roundabout at the
intersection of Park Ridge Drive and Route 240. If the ZMA is approved, at the site plan
phase of the project, the ROW will be dedicated, to comply with the approved rezoning.
A note has been added to the Application Plan, that indicates the ROW must be dedicated
prior to final site plan approval of Block 1.
5. The Application Plan or Code of Development need to include a net density calculation so that
staff can verify that the total number of units complies with the Crozet Master Plan and
Comprehensive Plan recommendations. Net density is calculated by identifying the total acreage
of all future land use designations within the development, and then subtracting the acreage of
Greenspace. The remaining acreage figure is the net acreage. Divide the total number of units
proposed by the net acreage figure to obtain the proposed net density. First revision: The future
land use classifications are Neighborhood Density Residential, Middle Density Residential, and
Green Systems. The revised application did not contain an exhibit showing the acreages of these
classifications, and the resulting net acreage available to calculate the permitted density. Please
provide an exhibit showing each future land use classification with an acreage measurement for
each. This is needed to verify that the proposed number of units does not exceed the
recommendations of the Crozet Master Plan.
RESPONSE: Comment received. A density calculation exhibit has been provided with this
submission, showing how each future land use designation complies with the Crozet Master Plan.
A line should be added to Table C on page 4 of the COD stating the net density in each
block, and the overall net density through the entire project. First revision: Pending
review of the net density exhibit mentioned above, this comment may be addressed once
staff can verify that the gross and net density figures shown in Table C are accurate.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Please reference the provided density calculation
exhibit.
6. There are areas of Preserved Steep Slopes within the development that appear to be impacted by
new roads and lots in Blocks 1, 5, and 6. See Zoning Division comment #20.
i. More information is needed in order for staff to evaluate and verify whether these
impacts are permitted. Consult Section 18-30.7.5 (b)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance for
further information. First revision: Comment stands, applicant must provide justification
for the proposed redesignation of Preserved Steep Slopes. In order to remove land from
the Preserved Steep Slopes overlay, the applicant must submit field run topography
demonstrating that the slopes are less than 25%, and this will be evaluated by the County
Engineer (Section 18-30.7.4 b()(1)(h); Section 18-30.7.6). A written explanation of the
characteristics of the slopes should also be provided that identifies the characteristics of
the existing slopes and how they meet the definition of managed Slopes as opposed to
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
Preserved Slopes. Characteristics of Managed and Preserved Slopes can be found in
Section 18-30.7.3.
RESPONSE: The project narrative has been revised to include a section that provides
further justification for redesignation of slopes from preserved to managed. Field run
topography has not been provided at this time because we are not requesting to remove
these slopes from the Steep Slopes Overlay District; we are requesting to redesignate the
slopes from preserved to managed. Sec. 30.7.6 requires field run topography to be
provided in order to remove any lands from the district.
New Comment First Revision: Please see Historic Preservation comments regarding the White
Gate Farm house/structure. Per Chapter 5 of the Comprehensive Plan, it is recommended that
historic resources be preserved. As defined by the Albemarle County Historic Preservation
Committee and based on criteria of the National Register of Historic Places, "historic resource" is
defined as a place with architectural, engineering, archaeological, or cultural remains present in
districts, sites, buildings, or structures that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials,
workmanship, feeling, and association.
i. It is highly recommended that the White Gate Farm home be preserved and incorporated
into the development, as the date of construction (circa 1875) indicates that it may be
eligible for listing in the State and National Registers. Please work with Historic
Preservation staff to document the structures and property with the assistance of the
Historic Preservation Committee.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Please see our response to ARB below.
Section 18-33.18 (B) Application Plan Comments:
2.
�:.....e..:..:,.... �,..,...,e.....aa.e....sa
3. Regarding Sheet 2: at this time, TMP 56-91A only has "water to existing structures" ACSA
utility service. As stated above, an ACSA Jurisdictional Area Amendment Application will need
to be submitted with the next ZMA submittal, reviewed, and approved by the Board of
Supervisors in order to provide water and sewer to the development. First revision:
ACSA202100002 ACSA Jurisdictional Area Amendment Application has been submitted. David
Benish (dbenishgalbemarle.org is managing review of the application and will provide
comments directly to the applicant.
RESPONSE: Comment received. We are looking forward to receiving comments on the ACSA
Jurisdictional Area Amendment.
4. Private streets are proposed to serve new lots in Block 3. This requires Planning Commission
approval, per Section 14-233 (A)(1) of the Subdivision Ordinance. Please submit a private street
authorization request in accordance with Section 14-234 (A). Provide evidence and information
as specified under Section 14-234(B) and explain how the request meets the findings under
Section 14-234 (C). First revision: Comment not addressed. A private street authorization request
and supporting documentation has not been submitted. Please provide evidence and information
as soecified under Section 14-234(A) and explain how the reauest meets the findings under
Section 14-234 (C) on a future submittal.
RESPONSE: Comment received. A private street authorization request has been provided with
this submission.
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
8. Planting strips are required within the right-of-way along streets in the Development Areas, per
the Subdivision Ordinance and Zoning Ordinance. The Application Plan does not show planting
strips along the proposed private streets, per the cross-section on Sheet 11. First revision:
Comment not fully addressed. As indicated in the applicant comment response letter, Private
Roads A and B still do not show a planting strip. Unless the applicant requests a waiver to not
provide planting strips along these streets, staff will note the proposed cross-section as an
unfavorable factor. If the applicant does request a waiver, then this should be incorporated into
the private street authorization request materials mentioned in comment 44.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Included with the private street authorization request are
planting strip waiver/modification request and a sidewalk waiver/modification.
10. Sidewalks are not shown within Block 1 on Sheet 6 of the Application Plan. This is not
consistent with the Pedestrian Orientation or Multimodal Transportation Opportunities
Neighborhood Model Principles. First revision: Per comments #8 and #4 above, sidewalks are not
provided alone private roads A and B. Unless a waiver for providing sidewalks is requested, this
will be noted as an unfavorable factor.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Included with the private street authorization request are
planting strip waiver/modification request and a sidewalk waiver/modification.
Section 18-20A.5 Code of Development Comments
1. First revision: Comment addressed, see attached no objection from Housing attached to the letter.
2. First revision: Comment addressed.
3. Consider adding single-family detached as a permitted use in Table A. This will allow for
different residential uses within the development without having to go through a future rezoning
process. It will also make the application more consistent with the Neighborhood Model
Principles regarding a mix of housing types and affordability. See Zoning Division comments.
First revision: Comment partially addressed. The COD has been revised to allow several dwelling
unit types. However, the Application Plan seems to indicate that all of the units will still be
attached single-family. Please provide further clarification on how the developer will commit to
Constructing different types of dwelling units within the project.
RESPONSE: Comment received. The application plan has been revised to remove the lines
within the building envelope indicating individual building footprints; a larger general building
envelope is now represented in the application plan. To ensure that different types of dwelling
units are to be developed, please see the note # 1 of Table A, which requires that a minimum of
two housing types shall be provided for in the Montclair NMD.
8. A line should be added to Table C on page 4 of the COD stating the net density in each block, and
the overall net density through the entire project. First revision: Comment not fully addressed, see
comment #5 under "General Application Comments" above.
RESPONSE: A density calculation exhibit has been provided with this submission for review.
10. See Zoning and ARB comments regarding inconsistencies between architectural standard notes
and the renderings provided in the COD. Text under architectural standards should match the
images for purposes of clarity. Revise as recommended by Zoning and ARB staff. First revision:
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
Comment mostly addressed, but please see ARB comment #2 for wording revisions needed on
page 6 of the COD.
RESPONSE: Comment received. We have revised the language in the COD per ARB suggestion.
12. Add minimum and maximum setbacks for accessory structures. See Zoning Division comments.
First revision: Comment not fully addressed, see Zoning comments.
RESPONSE: Comment received. We have removed the note per Zoning recommendation.
14
15. Please explain why sidewalks and bike lanes are not provided along Park Ridge Drive. Although
Park Ridge Drive is an existing street, it does not contain sidewalks or bike lanes adjacent to the
project. Regarding pedestrian and bicycle networks in Crozet generally, the Master Plan (page
41) states "For existing neighborhoods, which have rural section roads, paths are needed to
connect neighborhoods to Downtown and to each other." It also states "Pedestrian and bike
linkages to Downtown are especially important, and the Master Plan makes recommendations for
specific improvements to enhance mobility." First revision: Per applicant comment response
letter, the Application Plan does not show sidewalks along Park Ridge Drive because the "Future
Bicycle + Pedestrian Network" map of the Crozet Master Plan does not identify future sidewalks
along the east side of Park Ridge Drive adjacent to the subject properties. Planning staff conferred
with Long Range Planning staff regarding the Master Plan map and this matter, and Long -Range
Planning staff verified that the future sidewalk connections shown were intended to represent
where public capital projects would be implemented to fill in missing gus in the pedestrian
network. Park Ridge Drive is designated as an Avenue street typology by the Master Plan. Per the
written description of Avenue on page 15 of the plan, "Avenues should have dedicated bicycle
and pedestrian infrastructure." The Application Plan should show sidewalks along Park Ridge
Drive, as this would be required at time of site plan anywa .
RESPONSE: Comment received. A sidewalk is now depicted on the application plan along Park
Ridge Drive.
a. When "Main Streef'is completed (see page 39 of the Crozet Master Plan), Park Ridge
Drive will be connected to downtown. Feasibly, downtown Crozet is within walking
distance of downtown. However, pedestrian and bike facilities are not currently available.
Please explain why the application does not propose bike or pedestrian facilities along
Park Ridge Drive. First revision: See comment response above.
RESPONSE: A sidewalk is now proposed along Park Ridge Drive, which provides a
crosswalk connection to the existing asphalt path on the western portion of Park Ridge
Drive. Bicycle facilities are not proposed on the roadway at this time as transportation
plans for Park Ridge Drive do not specify what type of bicycle infrastructure should be
installed in this location, such as a sharrow or climbing bike lane. A note on the
application plan indicates that, with the proposed Park Ridge Drive sidewalk, ROW is to
be dedicated to accommodate a curb/gutter street section or shoulder/ditch section. The
ROW dedication at site plan would allow for bicycle improvements, if a bicycle plan is
available at the site plan phase.
16. Provide more details on the width of the landscaping buffer and proposed landscaping materials
that will be provided in the buffer along Route 240. Be aware that the Neighborhood Model
Design Guidance states "A buffered boundary should consist of a heavily vegetated or landscaped
area of 30 — 50 feet alongside the roadway in the Development Area. This area should screen
development, especially if the area would otherwise expose the sides or rear views of buildings."
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
Details of proposed landscaping materials and/or other screening measures should be provided.
First revision: Comment partially addressed. See ARB comment # 1. Please clarify the contents of
the buffer and reference screening requirements from the Zoning Ordinance in the text/notes
related to the buffer landscaping in the COD.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Additional language describing the materials of the landscaping
has been added to the COD.
17. New Comment First Revision: Please see attached Engineering Division comments. The uses
permitted in Block 4 should comply with requirements of the Water Protection Ordinance
(WPO). Please make the revisions to Table A as requested by Engineering.
RESPONSE: Comment received. We have revised the table and provided the note as requested
by Engineering.
Comprehensive Plan
Anticipated impact on public facilities and services
First revision: Please see the student yield ratios for Brownsville Elementary, Henley Middle, and
Western Albemarle High school from the attached 2021 ACPS Subdivision Yield Analysis report:
https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v l631898706/k l2albemarleorg/nxhuwduvwi8718wuyugi/ACS_Subd
ivisionAnalysis_20210802.pdf
The table can be found on page 28 (page 30 of the online PDF). Staff suggests revising the ZMA narrative
to include a student yield calculation for each school level, and reference that the ratios were obtained
from the official 2021 report.
Please be aware that no information has been provided indicating how the applicant intends to offset
impacts to schools. This will be noted as an unfavorable factor in the staff report unless the applicant
provides more information on how school impacts will be offset.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Thank you for providing the updated report. The revised narrative
includes updated schools impact information based on the 2021 Subdivision Analysis. According to the
data provided in the 2021 Subdivision Analysis, there could be 25 school -aged children within the
Montclair NMD, with the construction of 135 attached units and 22 multi -family units. If attending public
school, these children would attend Brownsville Elementary School, Henley Middle School, and Western
Albemarle High School. According to the 2021 ACPS LRPAC Recommendations, the Crozet Elementary
expansion is currently ongoing and the creation of a high school center is ACPS' highest priority. To
determine capacity needs of the County's middle schools, a new study is required to be conducted for the
middle schools. While the development could bring in an additional 25 school -aged children to western
Albemarle, the 2021 Crozet Master Plan has designated this property as middle- and neighborhood -
density. These recommendations serve to guide density where appropriate, allow for the expansion of the
County housing stock, and provide opportunities for new families and households in Albemarle County.
For impacts, we are uncertain of quantifiable metrics to determine the impacts of pupils on the school
system. There may be additional students that will reside in this development but it is uncertain as to what
the exact cost of those students to the school system will be; homes in this development will contribute to
real estate taxes which will fund both school operating costs and CIP funding and residents in this
development will contribute to generating local sales and meals tax. If a measurable impact on the school
system can be deduced, and a reasonable mitigation can be provided, we will work with the County to
address the identified impact.
Department of Community Development — Zoning Division
Page 7 — Table E — No max setbacks are proposed so Note 2 is unnecessary.
RESPONSE: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. This note has been removed.
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
Preserved slopes/Managed slopes — The applicant must provide a justification for reclassification of the
slopes from Preserved to Managed that includes an analysis of the slopes characteristics according to
Section 30.7.3
RESPONSE: Comment received. Please see the revised narrative, which includes an added analysis of the
slopes rezoning.
Department of Community Development — Planning Division — Architectural Review Board
1. Clarify the code and plan to show that the landscape buffer along Route 240 will be a substantial
screening buffer with planting exceeding the requirements of 32.7.9.7 and subject to ARB
approval. The buffer will include a mix of trees and shrubs, evergreen and deciduous, in an
informal arrangement.
RESPONSE: Comment received. Additional language has been provided in the COD to describe
a mixture of trees and shrubs of evergreen and deciduous varieties. At site plan, the landscaping
will be subject to ARB approval.
2. With a substantial screening buffer, the revisions made regarding building facade change in plane
are sufficient. However, the use of the term "building fagade" at the end of the paragraph under
"Form, Massing, and Proportion of Structures" on page 6 of the code should be clarified. Is
"townhouse block" a more accurate term?
RESPONSE: Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have added `townhome block' for
clarification.
Department of Community Development - Engineering Division
Allowed uses and activities within the stream buffer are indicated in Chapter 17, Article VI, Stream
Buffers. Storage buildings are not allowed within stream buffers according to Article VI. I recommend
eliminating the Block 4 column from the table and adding a note stating that Block 4 uses and activities
are listed in Chapter 17 Article VI and such uses and activities are also by -right zoning uses. Or
something to that effect.
RESPONSE: Comment received. A note describing that all uses and activities that may be permitted in
the stream buffer is described in Chapter 17 Article VI of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance has
been added to the table.
Department of Community Development — Plannine Division— Historic Preservation
The property contains White Gate Farm, a house circa 1875 and remodeled and enlarged in
the 1930s, and a number of outbuildings dating to ca. 1866-1916. The Virginia Department of Historic
Resources has not yet evaluated this property in terms of eligibility for listing in the State and National
Registers, but the dates of construction and the survey notes (attached) suggest that the buildings may
have significance. Retaining the historic resources and making them an integral part of the new
development would align with the Comprehensive Plan goal of preserving Albemarle's historic resources.
Aerial views suggest that the structures have been allowed to deteriorate. The structures and the property
should be fully documented (a comp plan strategy), by or with the assistance of the Historic Preservation
Committee, as soon as possible.
RESPONSE: Comment received. The developer has been coordinating with County Staff to set up a site
visit to document the structure prior to its demolition. The structure is largely in a state of disrepair as
evidenced by the photos sent to County Staff. Due to the existing alignment of Wickham Pond Way and
the proposed extension of Wickham Pond Way to Park Ridge Drive, as well as the grading needed to
make that connection, the structure cannot remain as part of the development as it is directly within the
path of the proposed road extension of Wickham Way.
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com
If you have any questions or concerns about these revisions, please feel free to contact me at
Rachel@shimp-en ing eering com or by phone at 434-227-5140.
Regards,
Rachel Moon
912 E. High St. Charlottesville, VA 22902 1434.227.5140 1 shimp-engineering.com