HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA202100011 Correspondence 2022-06-06WILLIAMS MULLEN
MEMORANDUM
TO: Andy Reitelbach, Senior Planner II
Rebecca Ragsdale, Planning Manager
FROM: Megan Nedostup, Senior Land Planner
DATE: June 6, 2022
RE: ZMA 2021-011 Heritage on Rio
SE 2021-041 Heritage on Rio- Stepback Special Exception
Based upon the feedback we received regarding the Heritage on Rio application, we have revised our
materials to address the concerns raised in our meeting on April 291h as well as those outlined in the draft
Planning Commission staff report. Below is a summary of the materials we are submitting and how and where
the concerns have been addressed.
Revised and Resubmitted Materials:
1. Narrative for ZMA, revision date of June 6, 2022
2. Application Plan, revision date of June 6, 2022
3. Illustrative Plan and Renderings, dated June 6, 2022
4. Narrative for Special Exception, revision date of June 6, 2022
Concerns and Factors Unfavorable from draft staff report:
1. Concern that the amenity areas are not sufficiently sized or provide usable area for the development,
particularly the space behind Building #5.
Please see the Illustrative Plan and Renderings demonstrating how these areas could be programmed and
designed providing quality amenities. For example, the pocket park behind Building #5 is shown with a
small dog run area, several picnic tables for outdoor dining and gathering, and an open grass play area
with seating. The amenity area near the pool also includes a tot lot, outdoor grilling area, firepit gathering
area, and bocce ball court. We hope you will agree these renderings demonstrate that the amenity areas
are sufficiently sized to accommodate appropriate amenities to provide for a high -quality residential
community.
General concerns with the design of the development as it relates to the entrance corridor and
neighborhood model principles.
Please see the Illustrative Plan and Renderings demonstrating how the building massing, pedestrian
orientation, amenity spaces, and landscaping all create a quality design consistent with the neighborhood
model principles.
3. The rezoning request does not provide the amount of affordable housing recommended in the
comprehensive plan, at 15% of the total number of units developed.
The Application Plan on sheet 2 has been updated to provide that 15% of all units within the project will be
affordable for 10 years, per the current Housing Policy.
4. A setback has not been established along "Travelway B," as required by the Zoning Ordinance.
The Application Plan on sheet 1 has been updated to show a 5' setback from the travelway, and building
envelopes have been adjusted accordingly.
5. There are outstanding comments from VDOT on the Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA).
We will continue to work with VDOT to address their comments and hope to have resolution by the
Planning Commission meeting. We believe the revisions are minor and the proposal will not have a
material impact on the transportation in this area.
6. It is not clear at this time that there is sufficient space along the Rio Road frontage to allow for the ARB
guidelines to be successfully met.
The retaining walls along Rio Road have been removed to allow for additional planting, see sheets 1 and 5
of the Application Plan. While there are still utility constraints, as demonstrated by the cross sections and
illustrative plan and renderings, there is sufficient area for landscaping along Rio Road to meet ARB
design guidelines and provide adequate screening for the parking located at the sides of the buildings.
The proposed development would result in additional student enrollment at area schools, including
Albemarle High, which is already over -capacity.
Pages 9 and 10 of the narrative have been updated to include detailed information regarding the School's
Long Range Planning Advisory Committee's recent recommendation report dated September 9, 2021.
The report states that High School Centers will address capacity issues at Albemarle High School. In
addition, the narrative has been updated to also include reference to the Board of Supervisor's recent
budget approval that includes funding for High School Center /I construction.
Recommendation for denial regarding the stepback special exception request. This denial was due to the
interpretation that a front setback is required along Travelway B.
As stated above, the Application Plan on sheet 1 has been updated to show a 5' setback from the
travelway and building envelopes have been adjusted accordingly. In addition, the Narrative has been
updated to accurately reflect the building numbers included in the request.
As always, please reach out with any questions regarding any of the information provided.
(100352888.2)
Page 2