No preview available
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA202000013 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2021-05-07COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone(434) 296-5832 Fax (434)972-4176 May 7, 2021 Ms. Kelsey Schlein Shimp Engineering, PC 912 E. High Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 kelsgy@shimp-en ing eering com / 434-227-5140 RE: ZMA202000013 Pantops Overlook Hotel; 2°d Submittal Dear Ms. Schlein: Staff has reviewed your second submittal for the zoning map amendment, ZMA202000013, Pantops Overlook Hotel. We have a number of questions and comments which we believe should be addressed before we can recommend favorably on your ZMA request. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Review comments are provided below, organized by Department, Division, or agency. Our comments are provided below: Plannin¢ — General ZMA Application Comments 1. Revise the narrative and application plan with the assigned application number for this project, ZMA2020-00013. In the heading of the project narrative, the SP proposed to be amended is SP2002-00013. Revise this reference to state the correct SP number. 2. The acreage of the subject parcel is slightly different between the first paragraph of the project narrative and the table of information at the beginning of the narrative. Clarify this discrepancy, and ensure the correct acreage is also reflected on the application plan. 3. Include the zoning overlay districts of the subject parcel in the narrative's table of information — Entrance Corridor and Steep Slopes — Managed. 4. It appears that this property is actually zoned only PD-MC — the R-15 and HC zoning designations shown on GIS were in error. Revise the application plan and project narrative to reflect this situation. 5. Revise the footer of the project narrative to identify the correct project. It currently references a different rezoning application. 6. In the section titled "Consistency with the Zoning District," it appears there is a typo in the first sentence, as it references the intent of the "PD-SC" district, instead of PD-MC, which is what the property is currently and proposed to be zoned. 7. In the narrative, include a section on the impact of this development on police and fire -rescue services. 8. Provide information in the project narrative on the landscape easements that are proposed to be removed. This proposal is indicated with labels on the application plan. However, it doesn't appear that there is any information or explanation for this action in the narrative. Also, provide the deed book and page number on the application plan for these easements. The landscaping easement in the southeast corner of the property has improvements located within it, including proposed new landscaping and retaining walls. It appears the easement holder (the Suntrust bank on the parcel to the east) is responsible for installation and maintenance of improvements and landscaping within this easement. Provide documentation from the easement holder with their acknowledgment of these proposed improvements within their easement. 9. In order to remove the landscape easements from the property, the Special Use Permit SP2002-00013 will also need to be amended. Submit an SP application to amend this special use permit. Review of this SP and its public hearings can occur simultaneously with this rezoning application. See the attached email from Francis MacCall, Chief of Zoning, regarding SP2021-00010. Signatures from the adjacent property owners, who are also affected by the landscape easement proposed for removal, must be provided prior to acceptance of the application for review. 10. Provide a legend or additional labels on sheets 5 and 6 to identify the features that are depicted, including the building, the parking areas, and the retaining walls and their proposed heights. 11. Overlay the tree conservation area and the landscape easements over all the sheets so that staff has a better understanding of where they currently are located and how the proposed construction on the site will affect those areas. 12. There is a retaining wall shown on sheet 6 near the landscape easement proposed to remain; however, this wall is not depicted on sheet 5. Ensure all features are depicted across all applicable sheets. 13. Are there any connections (vehicular or pedestrian) that are proposed with the adjacent parcels, either to the southeast or the northwest? As an extension of Rolkin Road along the rear of the subject property is identified as a possible future road improvement in the 2019 Pantops Master Plan, have any potential connections (vehicular or pedestrian) been considered toward the rear of the property? Or was this discussed with the final sentences of the first paragraph of the response letter? Due to the shape of the parcel, it is unclear what is being considered as the southeast portion of the parcel versus the northeast. 14. Section 18-25A.4.1 discourages direct access of PD-MC development from existing public streets, instead encouraging internal connections with the rest of the PD-MC. The proposed development does not appear to provide these internal connections, instead providing direct access to a major public highway, Route 250. See the comment above about the proposed roadway extension of Rolkin Road identified in the Pantops Master Plan. 15. Furthermore, Section 18-25A.5 encourages pedestrian access and connections among the different parts of the PD-MC. Such connections do not appear to be provided, other than a sidewalk along the frontage of the property. See the comment above about the proposed roadway extension of Rolkin Road identified in the Pantops Master Plan. 16. Provide more information on the proposed locations for parking, including underneath the building. With 125 rooms proposed in the hotel, at a minimum, 125 parking spaces will be required, plus any additional spaces required of the accessory uses such as restaurants. It is unclear to staff where all of these spaces will be situated on the site, especially with other required elements, such as parking lot landscaping and a dumpster pad. There does not appear to be sufficient area identified on the plan for all the minimum improvements required by the Zoning Ordinance. Although final design is addressed at the site planning stage if the application is approved by the Board, these elements are important to consider during the conceptual phase. 17. Is the underground/under-building parking being considered as one of the hotel's four stories? Or would this be an additional level of the building? Provide height calculations for the hotel use alone, and for all uses, including the parking to help staff better understand what is proposed. 18. The application plan indicates that the building will be a maximum of four stories. The renderings of the site that were provided also depict the hotel as being four stories, but with no stepback, as required by 18-21.4. If a hotel of four stories is proposed with no stepback, a special exception approved by the Board will be required. Submit a separate application for a special exception, including a narrative explaining the justification for this request. See also the table in 18-4.20(a). See below for a section with comments regarding the Special Exception application that was submitted. 19. Depict on the application plan the buffer area that is required for commercial areas adjacent to residential districts. See 18-21.7(c). Such a buffer area will be required adjacent to the R-15 zoned property to the southwest of the subject parcel. Additional screening in this area also is likely required. Also see the table in 18-4.20(a) for setback and buffer requirements when adjacent to residential districts. A response to or acknowledgment of this comment was not included in the response letter. However, the addition of "Green Space" identified on sheet 6 of the application plan appears to provide the information discussed in this comment. 20. Clarify the cross-section exhibit that was provided. The red dotted line appears to be labelled as 500 at the left of the hotel building, and 480 along the same line to the right of the building, above a label that says 492. Also, there appears to be a single retaining wall that is roughly 35 feet tall to the right of the hotel building, whereas the application plan depicts at least two stepped retaining walls in this location. Also, see comments from the ARB below for more comments regarding the retaining walls. 21. Advisory Comment: A community meeting is scheduled for Monday, January 25, 2021, at the Pantops Community Advisory Committee (CAC) meeting. Additional comments may be provided once this meeting has taken place. 22. Advisory Comment: If this rezoning application is approved by the Board of Supervisors, additional site development plans will be required, which include initial and final site plans, ARB plans, VSMP plans, WPO plans, etc. Plannin¢— Special Exception Request 202100016 Comments 1. In the first paragraph of the special exception request, Section 20.7.1 is referenced regarding the request to waive the stepback requirement. However, Section 20.7.1 of the Zoning Ordinance is the minimum area required for the establishment of a PUT) district. Revise this reference or clarify what is being requested. Plannin¢ — Comprehensive Plan Comments Initial comments on how your proposal generally relates to the Comprehensive Plan and Pantops Master Plan are provided below. Comments on conformity with the Comprehensive Plan are provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report. The Pantops Master Plan identifies Tax Map Parcel (TMP) 07800-00-00-073A7 as Community Mixed Use and Parks & Green Systems land uses. The Community Mixed Use classification (page 31) calls for mixed use development with a mix of residential, commercial, retail, office and other uses in walkable development pattern. Primary uses in this designation include hotels, as is proposed with this rezoning. It is recommended that single -use buildings, such as this hotel, be constructed to allow for future conversion of the first floor to ground -level retail or similar uses. The height of buildings is recommended to be 2-4 stories, which is the maximum identified for this proposal on sheet 2 of the application plan. The Parks and Green Systems designation (page 32) calls for open space and green systems, with few buildings. It appears this proposal meets those green systems recommendations by proposing green space for the rear of the parcel. The Community Mixed Use design guidance (page 33) suggests interconnected streets and human scaled development. There do not appear to be any interconnections proposed with this plan. In addition, the proposed project appears to be nearly surrounded by retaining walls on all sides, which does not lend it to being a human scaled development. Considerate terracing and landscaping of the wall areas are potential ways to mitigate such concerns. However, the number of retaining walls provided on the site do contribute to a lack of pedestrian orientation, especially for some of the sidewalks directly adjacent to them or between the walls and the building, which could create a tunneling effect for pedestrians. The slope areas and the retaining walls will also require further review by the Engineering Division and the Architectural Review Board if this application is approved by the Board of Supervisors. The Rivanna Ridge shopping center is a designated urban center in the Pantops Master Plan (page 35). The subject property is located on the outskirts of this center's core, but within the % mile walkshed of the urban center. Rolkin Road is proposed as one of the main streets through this center, connecting it with the surrounding areas. Rolkin Road is also proposed to be extended along the rear of the subject parcel, which could potentially allow for such a connection. The Master Plan recommends (page 39) that parcels along "Dealership Row," such as the subject parcel, have buildings brought closer to the street, with relegated parking and a sense of appropriate scale. The recommendation for relegated parking appears to be partially met. The subject property is located within the Monticello Viewshed (page 53), and it is recommended that the applicant connect with the staff at Monticello to discuss this issue and determine whether there are any ways to mitigate the impacts of the proposed development on the Viewshed. (It is staff s understanding that the applicant has already contacted Monticello to inform this of this application.) View corridors along Route 250 have also been identified as important components of the Pantops community (page 54), and it is recommended that design of new buildings along this corridor take this community resource into account. In addition, projects located within the Development Areas are typically reviewed for consistency with each of the twelve Neighborhood Model Principles found in the Comprehensive Plan. Analysis of a project's conformance with these principles is provided in the staff report to the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors. Plannin¢ - Transportation The following comments regarding this proposal have been provided by Daniel Butch, Transportation Senior Planner, dbutchgalbemarle.org: An avenue street typology is proposed for the Rolkin Rd. Extension on the southwestern segment of TMP 78-73A7, as called out in the Pantops Master Plan in the Future Street Network section (pages 17 and 20). See also Project R on pages 63, 64, and 72 of the Master Plan. This proposed road extension would support greater interconnectivity for the surrounding parcels and the larger Pantops community. Zonina Division, Community Development Department Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planinng staff. Francis MacCall, Zoning Chief of Planning, finaccall@albemarle.org. Engineerina & Water Resources Division, Community Development Department Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planinng staff. County Engineer, Frank Pohl, fbohla,albemarle.ors. Architectural Review Board, Community Development Department Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planinng staff. Margaret Maliszewski, ARB Chief of Planning, mmaliszewski@albemarle.org. Albemarle County Fire -Rescue Please see the following comments from the Fire & Rescue plans reviewer, Howard Lagomarsino, hlaeomarsino@albemarle.org: No Objection to Zoning Map Amendment, however, though not necessary to directly address at this stage but to help in planning future steps of this project here are some points of concern for ACFR and apply as appropriate in reviewing projects: 1) To accommodate emergency/fire vehicle access, emergency vehicle access road(s)/route(s) are required 2) Emergency/fire vehicle access road(s)/route(s) need to provide access to all buildings/structures with access of all sides of the ground level within 150 feet from the emergency apparatus 3) An emergency/fire vehicle access road/route needs to provide a suitable surface to sustain the weight of emergency apparatus weighing up to 85,000 lbs. 4) An emergency/fire vehicle access road/route needs to provide an unobstructed travel way width of 20 ft. if buildings/structures are under 30 feet tall and 26 ft. if buildings/structures are over 30 feet tall 5) Emergency/fire vehicle access roads need to be clear of overhead obstructions at 13 ft 6 in. and below 6) To ensure that parking does not obstruct the emergency apparatus travel way as described above, no parking signs are required in appropriate areas 7) Any dead-end longer than 150 ft requires an approved turn around for emergency apparatus 8) Need to provide a note of the required ISO fire calculation for the buildings 9) If within the ACSW service area, need to indicate the latest ACSW flow test to ensure adequate fire flow per calculation in comment # 6 10) If within the ACSW service area, need to provide the required fire hydrants as determined by calculations in # 6 11) If fire suppression systems or standpipes are installed the FDC must face the road, on address side and there needs to be hydrant within 100 ft. of the FDC, arranged so that when hydrant and FDC are in use for emergency operations, hose does not obstruct travel way. 12) If not within the ACSW service area, may need to provide a note identifying location of closest water source suitable for emergency apparatus operations 13) A Knox Box is required. May need to place a note indicating this on the site plan. The location of this can be coordinated with the Fire Marshal's Office. 14) Fire suppression, fire alerting systems and other building design features, such as exits, interior finishes, building access etc., are the purview of the building official and required as directed by that office. Virginia Department of Transportation Please see the attached memo provided by the VDOT contact — Adam Moore, adam.moorekvdot.vir ig nia.gov. Resubmittal If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is a fee for the next resubmittal. The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience online at: https://www.albemarle.orwhome/shownublisheddocument?id=358 Notification and Advertisement Fees It appears that the Public Notice Requirement fees have already been paid for this application. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is areitelbachgalbemarle.org, and my phone number is 434-296-5832 ext. 3261. Sincerely, Andy Reitelbach Senior Planner Planning Division, Department of Community Development enc: Email from Francis MacCall, Chief of Zoning, dated April 26, 2021 Memorandum from the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Zoning Map Amendment Resubmittal Form Andy Reitelbach From: Francis MacCall Sent: Monday, April 26, 2021 11:30 AM To: Kelsey Schlein Cc: Kevin McDermott; Margaret Maliszewski; Vivian Groeschel; Marsha Alley; Andy Reitelbach Subject: Special Use Permit SP2021-00010 Auto Superstore Amendment - Amendment of conditions for SP2002-00013 Ms. Schlein, The Special Use Permit application received in the Community Development Department on 04/19/2021 has been deemed incomplete by County staff. The following item is required for the application to be deemed complete • Please provide the following; a. A signed SP application page (Page 3 of linked application) for the property owners of TMP 07800-00-00- 073A6 (Owner - VIRGINIA SCHOOL BOARDS ASSOCIATION) and TMP 07800-00-00-073A8 (Owner - LEGACY FOUNDATION). The proposed removal of the landscape easement related to the amendment of SP2002- 00013 affects what is now TMP 07800-00-00-073A6 and TMP 07800-00-00-073A8. b. SP Application Link Please correct and provide evidence that this item has been completed no later than Thursday, April 291, 2021. If these items are corrected after Thursday, April 29th, then your application will be processed with the next applicable round of application submittals. Submittal Schedule If this item is corrected by Thursday, April 29"', and the application is deemed complete, you will receive an additional e- mail instructing you on when the fee for the application must be paid. When providing the corrections/evidence that these items are complete, please provide a copy of this e-mail with the particular evidence. Thank you, Francis H. MacCall, CZA Chief of Zoning, Deputy Zoning Administrator Albemarle County —Community Development fmaccall(o)albemarle.org 434.296.5832 x3418 401 McIntire Road, North Wing, Charlottesville VA 22902-4596 This e-mail is not intended to be and shall not be deemed an official order, requirement, decision, or determination made on behalf of the Zoning Administrator. COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Stephen C. Brich, P.E. 1401 East Broad Street (804) 7862701 Commissioner Richmond, Virginia 23219 Fax: (804) 7862940 April 28, 2021 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn: Andy Reitelbach Re: Overlook Hotel: Pantops PDMC Amendment ZMA-2020-00013 Review #2 Dear Mr. Reitelbach: The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as submitted by Shimp Engineering, dated 5 April 2021, and finds them generally acceptable. If further information is desired, please contact Doug McAvoy Jr. at (540) 718-6113. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right-of-way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. Sincerely, Adam J. Moore, P.E. Area Land Use Engineer Charlottesville Residency VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING FOR OFFICE USE ONLY SP # Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Cldl By: Resubmittal of information for Zoning Mau Amendmentx"` PROJECT NUMBER THAT IIAS BEEN ASSIGNED: ZMA2020-00013 Pantops Overlook Hotel Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign I hereby certify that the information provided with this resubmittal is what has been requested from staff Signature of Owner, Contract Purchaser Print Name FEES that may apply: Date Daytime phone number of Signatory ❑ Deferral of scheduled blchearin at applicant's request $194u Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,688 ❑ First resubmission FREE ® Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF) $1,344 Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $3,763 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF) $1,881 To be Daid after staff review for Dublic notice: Most applications for a Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body. ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices $215 + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50) $1.08 for each additional notice + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing) Actual cost (averages between $150 and $250) County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126 Revised 11/02/2015 Page 1 of 1