HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA202200004 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2022-08-0800UNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4176
August 8, 2022
Ms. Rachel Moon
Shimp Engineering, PC
912 E. High Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
rachelkshimp-en ing eering com / 434-227-5140
RE: ZMA202200004 1906 Avon Street Extended
Dear Ms. Moon:
Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for the zoning map amendment, ZMA202200004, 1906 Avon Street Extended.
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:
Planning — General Application Comments
1. This application proposes a density that is significantly higher than what is recommended by the Southern and
Western Urban Neighborhoods Master Plan, for these properties, at nearly twice as dense (10.43 units / acre
proposed vs. a maximum of 6 units / acre recommended). It proposes a density that is more appropriate for the
Urban Density Residential land use designation, whereas these parcels are designated at Neighborhood Density
Residential. The proposal is not in conformance with the recommendations of the comprehensive plan.
2. Multi -family residential uses, as proposed for some of the units within this development, are not identified as a
primary use within the Neighborhood Density Residential land use designation.
3. Revise the application materials with the assigned application number, ZMA202200004.
4. On sheet 2 of the concept plan, in the zoning note, it may be helpful to clarify the proposed zoning as "R-15
Residential with Proffers."
5. The Open Space section on sheet 2 of the concept plan references a cluster development. However, there does not
appear to be any commitment in the application that this project would be developed using the cluster regulations.
6. Sheets 2 and 4 of the concept plan identify separate densities for Blocks 1 and 2. However, the acreage of each
proposed block is not provided, so staff is not able to analyze the exact size and and determine the density of these
blocks.
7. On sheet 4, is there a proposed maximum number or range of units in each of the two blocks?
8. What are the proposed numbers or ranges of each unit type in this development? Densities are provided; however,
staff is unable to analzye how many of these are proposed to be townhouses or multi -family.
9. Is there a proposed maximum number of residential units in each of the multi -family buildings?
10. How many stories are the multi -family buildings expected to be?
11. A lack of a direct vehicular connection with Avon Street does not promote the policy of interconnectivity, with
potential conflicts regarding access with the existing Avon Park subdivision. It is recommended that a direct
connection is provided to Avon Street.
There also does not appear to be any pedestrian connections between the proposed residential units and Avon
Street.
12. What is the proposed amount/percentage of green and/or open space being provided with this development? There
appears to be a minimal amount of open space proposed for the requested density.
13. Provide more information on the green space and proposed recreational facilities, so that staff can analyze
whether there is sufficient area provided to accommodate the minimum rec facilities required by the ordinance,
such as the rough size of the central open space area. (Staff recognizes that final size and facilities would be
determined at the site planning stage.) If any substitutions to the required rec facilities are requested, a substitution
request will be required at the site planning stage for review by the Planning Director.
14. Is sidewalk proposed to be constructed along the Avon Street frontage of this property? See also comments from
the Transportation Planning division below.
15. There do not appear to be any pedestrian connections to the central open space area. It is important to provide
some connections for safe access from the residential units to the open space area and any rec facilities that would
be located there.
16. Although ARB guideslines are not currently being applied to this corridor, it is recommended that the 10-ft.
retaining wall be terraced. This wall would be very visible to pedestrians along Avon Street and does not conform
with the neighborhood model principles.
17. In the narrative, include a section on the impact of this development on police and fire -rescue services.
18. Is it proposed that this development will be subdivided? Or will the entire project remain under common
ownership?
If subdivision occurs, then the applicable regulations in Chapter 14 of the County Code would have to be met,
such as frontage requirements, sidewalks, and planting strips. An entity would also need to be created or
designated for ownership and maintenance of common features of the development.
If the development is subdivided as a condominium, then the Code requirements for condos will need to be met
(see 18-4.5).
19. The subdivision ordinance requires sidewalks and planting strips to be provided on both sides of a street, unless
waived by the Planning Commission. Staff notes that waiver requests have been submitted with the rezoning
application.
20. Public streets in residential developments are preferred over private streets in the development areas of the
County. Staff notes that a private street request has been submitted with the rezoning application.
21. Student generation numbers and school capacity have been closely considered by the Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors recently. Mountain View Elementary School and Monticello High School are both currently
over capacity, and this development would generate additional students for these schools.
22. Is the open and amenity space proposed to be privately owned (such as by an HOA) or dedicated to public use? If
an HOA is proposed, will this HOA be a separate entity, or will it merge with the existing Avon Park HOA?
23. Advisory Comment: Be sure that sufficient guest parking is accommodated in the design of the project. The
townhouses and the multi -family units will all require guest parking, and there does not appear to be space for
common parking spaces along the private streets where the townhouses are located.
24. 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, subdivision plats (if applicable), etc.
25. Advisory Comment: See the attached compilation of community correspondence received by staff regarding this
proposed development.
Private Street Request
1. In the development areas of the County, public streets are preferred in new developments.
Sidewalk and Planting Strip Waiver Requests
1. Provide an exhibit specifically identifying those areas where sidewalks and planting strips are proposed to be
waived.
2. Pedestrian connections need to be provided from the residences to the central open space to provide safe and easy
access.
Comprehensive Plan
Additional comments on how your proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan and the Southern and Western Urban
Neighborhoods (SAWUN) Plan are provided below. Comments on conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and
associated master plan are provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report.
(Comments regarding the SAWUN master plan can also be found in # 1 and #2 above.)
The SAWUN Master Plan identifies the three subject parcels as Neighborhood Density Residential land use. The NDR
classification calls for a mix of residential uses as the primary use pattern, with limited neighborhood -serving commercial
and institutional uses permitted as secondary uses. The requested maximum number of units and density of the site is
nearly twice the density recommended by the master plan, which is 3-6 units per acre. The height of buildings is
recommended to be 1-3 stories. The proffered concept plan limits the height of buildings to 40 feet.
The master plan recommends a greenway trail, such as a sidewalk or multi -use path, be provided along Avon Street Ext.
(page 23), which is the public road that the subject property has frontage on.
The subject property is located within the vicinity of another area of importance within this master plan's jurisdiction (see
#2 on page 45 of the master plan). Additional information should be provided in the project narrative regarding this
proposal's relationship to that area and elements identified in that section, such as pedestrian orientation, relegated
parking, and buildings and spaces of human scale.
Neighborhood Model
Projects located within the Development Areas are typically reviewed for consistency with each of the Neighborhood
Model Principles found in the Comprehensive Plan. Comments are provided below on relevant aspects of the
Neighborhood Model. More detailed comments may be provided after more detailed plans are provided.
Pedestrian Orientation
This principle could be strengthened, as there are no pedestrian connections provided to
the central open space area, along the Avon Street frontage, or connecting from the
residential units to Avon Street. The SAWUN master plan recommends a sidewalk or
multi -use path along Avon St. Ext. (See also comments from Transportation Planning.)
A ten-ft. retaining wall along sidewalks is not conducive to pedestrian orientation,
especially where the proposed retaining wall nears the Avon Street frontage. Retaining
walls near or along sidewalks could create unfriendly environments for pedestrians and
could act like barriers for pedestrians.
Mixture of Uses
Although only residential uses are proposed for this property, a mixture of different
housing types are proposed, including multi -family and single-family attached units.
There are not similar multi -family units in the surrounding area.
Neighborhood Centers
The central green space area could act as a center for this development. However, it is
unclear how large this space is proposed to be. There are no recreational facilities
identified or provided. There are also no proposed pedestrian connections to this area.
With more information to analyze, these areas could fulfill being a neighborhood center,
depending on the amenities and recreational facilities proposed to be located there.
Mixture of Housing Types
A mixture of housing types is being provided, including single-family attached units
and Affordability
and multi -family units, which also adds to the larger mix of housing types in the
surrounding area. There may be a mixture of affordability provided because of the
housing types mixture. The applicant also proposed affordable housing in conformance
with the recommendations of the comp plan and the County's housing policy.
Relegated Parking
The main parking area for the multi -family units is relegated from Public Road A;
however, it would be visible from Avon Street, on a hillside overlooking that road. The
large retaining wall to hold up this parking area would also be very visible from the
Avon Street frontage. Are there any plans to screen this area from Avon Street?
Significant landscaping would be important. Terracing the retaining wall would also
help to reduce the impact of the parking area's visibility from the Avon Street frontage.
Interconnected Streets and
The proposed interconnections with Hathaway Street to the south and the vacant parcel
Transportation Networks
to the north are important for creating a more well-connected street network in the
southern Avon St. corridor. However, staff has significant concerns about the lack of a
direct interconnection with Avon Street.
Multimodal Transportation
There do not appear to be multimodal transportation opportunities with this project. No
Opportunities
bus stop is provided for this development. Is there a nearby bus stop? In addition, no
sidewalk or multi -use path is provided along Avon Street, as recommended by the
SAWUN master plan. There are no sidewalks provided connecting the residences with
the Avon Street frontage. Providing opportunities for multi -modal transportation is
important to create a more livable community.
Parks, Recreational
Staff is unable to provide much analysis on parks and open space at this time, as the
Amenities, and Open Space
amount of open space proposed to be included in the development was not provided. It
is recommended that the size of the proposed central open space is labelled. In addition,
staff is unable to determine if there is sufficient open space area provided to
accommodate the minimum number of recreational facilities required by the ordinance.
There also do not appear to be sidewalks or crosswalks provided to the open space area,
allowing easy and safe access from the residences to the open space.
Buildings and Spaces of
The proposed ten-ft. retaining wall does not contribute to a sense of human scale in the
Human Scale
development. Terracing this wall into separate shorter walls would help to reduce its
impact and create a more welcoming space of human scale.
The transition from the townhouses of the existing Avon Park subdivision to the multi-
family units in this proposal may also create a space that is not accommodating of huma
scale, depending on the size and massing of the multi -family buildings. Has it been
considered to flip the northernmost short row of townhouses with the southernmost
multi -family structure? This may create a better transition.
Redevelopment
This principle is met, as these three subject parcels are proposed to be redeveloped with
a higher density of residential units than what currently exists on the property.
Respecting Terrain and
There are areas of managed steep slopes on this property. These areas can be disturbed;
Careful Grading and Re-
however, careful grading of these areas will be important, and any retaining walls
grading of Terrain
proposed for these areas must meet the requirements identified in the zoning ordinance.
A ten-ft. retaining wall, as is proposed, can be a concern for pedestrian orientation,
however. It is recommended that the retaining wall be terraced. In addition, such a
retaining wall could present a safety hazard and would require a railing at the to .
Clear Boundaries Between
This principle is not applicable to the request.
the Development Areas and
the Rural Area
Plannin¢ - Transportation
The following comments regarding this proposal have been provided by Jessica Hersh-Ballering, Transportation Principal
Planner, jhballering@n,albemarle.org:
Albemarle County is in the process of constructing a sidewalk on the west side of Avon Extended from Stoney Creek
Drive to Arden Drive; the applicant should show this sidewalk on the project sketch, especially pages 7 and 9. Per
Albemarle County Code Sec. 32.7.2.3.c, the applicant should add sidewalk or a shared use path from the intersection of
Hathaway Street and Private Road "A" (or from the north end of Hathaway Street) to connect pedestrians to sidewalk
currently being constructed on this section of Avon Street Extended. The applicant might also consider adding sidewalk
from Hathaway Street (at the southern end of the parcel) to the new sidewalk along Avon Street Extended. The applicant
can reach out Michael Stumbaugh (mstumbaugh@albemarle.org) in Facilities & Environmental Services for details on the
new Avon Street Extended sidewalk.
Zonina Division, Community Development Department
Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by County staff, Francis MacCall, Zoning Chief
of Planning/Deputy Zoning Administrator, ftnaccall n&albemarle.org.
En¢ineerina & Water Resources Division, Community Development Department
The following comments regarding this proposal have been provided by the Deputy County Engineer, Emily Cox,
ecox2 n@albemarle.org:
-Please provide a cross section for the "parking envelope" travelway.
-Please provide dimensions on all street cross sections.
-Please note that there can be no parking spaces in sight distance lines.
-Will the existing driveways be closed? If so, please depict or note on the plan.
-It appears that a signed and sealed engineering retaining wall design will be necessary for WPO VSMP Plan approval.
Buildina Inspections Division, Community Development Department
Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by County staff, Betty Slough, Building Plans
Reviewer, bslough@albemarle.org.
albemarle.org.
Architectural Review Board, Community Development Department
The following comments regarding this proposal have been provided by Margaret Maliszewski, ARB Chief of Planning,
mmal iszewski@albemarle.org:
Currently, the County is not applying Entrance Corridor regulations to properties on Avon Street Extended.
Albemarle County Fire -Rescue
No objections at this time; Howard Lagomarsino, Fire & Rescue plans reviewer, hlaeomarsinogalbemarle.org.
Albemarle County Service Authority
See the attached comment memo; ACSA contact, Richard Nelson, melson@serviceauthority.org.
Virginia Department of Transportation
See the attached comment memo; VDOT contact, Douglas McAvoy, douglas.mcavo@vdot.virginia.gov.
Action after Receipt of Comments
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified on "Action After Receipt of Comment Letter,"
which is attached.
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal. Resubmittal dates are the
first and third Mondays of each month.
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
areitelbach&albemarle.org, and my phone number is 434-296-5832 east. 3261.
Sincerely,
Andy Reitelbach
Senior Planner II
Planning Division, Department of Community Development
enc: Comment Memorandum from ACSA
Comment Memorandum from VDOT
Community Correspondence
ZMA2022-00004 Action After Receipt of Comments
Zoning Map Amendment Resubmittal Form
ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT— Information from Service Providers
To be filled out by ACSA for ZMA's and SP's
1) Is this site in the jurisdictional area for water and/or sewer? Yes
2) What is the distance to the closest water and sewer line, if in the jurisdictional area? Water and
sewer located at the end of Hathaway Street.
3) Are there water pressure issues which may affect the proposed use as shown on plan? Water
pressures in the area are low. Booster pumps may be needed. A second water main connection
along Avon Street may be needed for fire flow requirements.
4) Are there major upgrades needed to the water distribution or sewer collection system of which the
applicant and staff should be aware? N/A
5) Are there other service provision issues such as the need for grinder pumps? Engineer consultant to
determine if booster pumps are needed.
6) Which issues should be resolved at the SP/ZMA stage and which issues can be resolved at the site
plan/plat stage? Items brought up can be addressed during site plan stage.
7) If the project is a large water user, what long term impacts or implications do you forsee?
8) Additional comments?
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Stephen C. Brich, P.E. 1401 East Broad Street
Commissioner Richmond, Virginia 23219
June 8, 2022
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Attn: Andy Reitelbach
Re: 1906 Avon St Ext — Rezoning Request
ZMA-2022-00004
Review # 1
Dear Mr. Reitelbach:
(804) 7862701
Fax: (804) 7862940
The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use
Section, has reviewed the above referenced plan as prepared by Shimp Engineering, dated 11
May 2022, and offers the following comments:
1. Note that the final plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual
Appendices 13(1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations or other
requirements.
These plans are 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,
Doug McAvoy Jr., P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Charlottesville Residency
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING
Andy Reitelbach
From: Avon Park <avonparkhoa@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 9:33 PM
To: Andy Reitelbach
Subject: Fwd: New subdivision
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Please share with the committee.
Thanks so much.
Robbi
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Teresa Olson <concieree2two@comcast.net>
Date: Sat, Jun 11, 2022 at 1:45 PM
Subject: New subdivision
To: <AvonParkHoa@amail.com>
To whom it may concern,
I am an employee at Mountain View elementary school. When I first started there, 17 years ago, the student population
was 276 - we are now approaching 800 students, with multiple trailers encroaching our soccer fields. I encourage
anyone who reads this letter to drive past the school at 1:30 to witness the traffic jam on Avon Street for the 2:20 pick
ups. This side of town, Southside, is suffocating and I honestly feel that the county doesn't care. Several new
developments have sprouted without any consideration to the already overcrowding of our schools, roads, and quality
of life. I'm not opposed to new development but I am opposed to reckless planning. Please consider building in a
different area of Charlottesville because our little area is already suffering with the four new subdivisions. That means;
no place for kids in our schools, no place for new roads for traffic, and no place for peace for the residents of Southside.
This suburban area is sadly being transformed into a city with concrete canyons and manmade alleyways. High density
tall structures right up on the road are an eyesore and not a plus for our quaint community.
Thank you for your consideration,
Teresa Olson
1445 Stoney Creek Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Contact Information: The Avon Park board uses this email to update community members on time -sensitive information
regarding Avon Park I and the proposed Avon Park II. All information sent on this email is for community members only
and is not to be distributed outside the community. Financial documents and meeting minutes will be posted by Real
Property on our secure website. If you have questions for the board, please email us back at this address. Please
continue contacting our property manager, Brian Gallagher, for daily concerns (assessment questions, common property
issues, towing, etc.). Brian can be reached at Real Property: 434-971-1600 or via email at: brian(d)reaIpro pertyinc.com
If you have recently moved and are no longer a part of Avon Park, or would simply like to be removed from this email
list, please reply to this email with REMOVE ME in the subject line and you will be deleted from our contact database.
Andy Reitelbach
From: Avon Park <avonparkhoa@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 9:25 PM
To: Andy Reitelbach
Subject: Fwd: New development
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mary Alice <mabond@comcast.net>
Date: Sun, Jun 12, 2022 at 8:19 PM
Subject: New development
To: <AvonParkHoa@gmail.com>
To the board of supervisors,
As a resident of Mill Creek South and the Avon Street community, I am concerned with the continued growth in the
Southern end of the county. This growth has been beneficial with 5th street station and the convenience it provides to
the community. However, the infrastructure including schools and roads are not keeping pace with the growth. As you
add another development with Avon Park III, please consider first where the new location for an elementary school and
when the ground will be broken for this. Mountain View is over crowded and needs immediate relief. Monticello High is
also overwhelmed. When is relief going to happen? It would be most helpful to have a timeline published for growth in
Southern feeder pattern. When will Biscuit Run park have entrances and parking so users no longer park in Mill Creek
South. The volume of traffic is only increasing with this new growth of developments.
Please closely consider priorities of infrastructure prior to your vote on yet another development.
Sincerely,
Mary Alice Bond
mabond@comcast.net
Sent from my iPhone
Contact Information: The Avon Park board uses this email to update community members on time -sensitive information
regarding Avon Park I and the proposed Avon Park II. All information sent on this email is for community members only
and is not to be distributed outside the community. Financial documents and meeting minutes will be posted by Real
Property on our secure website. If you have questions for the board, please email us back at this address. Please
continue contacting our property manager, Brian Gallagher, for daily concerns (assessment questions, common property
issues, towing, etc.). Brian can be reached at Real Property: 434-971-1600 or via email at: brian@realpropertyinc.com
If you have recently moved and are no longer a part of Avon Park, or would simply like to be removed from this email
list, please reply to this email with REMOVE ME in the subject line and you will be deleted from our contact database.
Andy Reitelbach
From: Avon Park <avonparkhoa@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, June 15, 2022 9:17 PM
To: Andy Reitelbach; Donna Price
Subject: Avon Park Home Owner's Association Statement re: Proposed New Development
Attachments: Statement of the Avon Park Home Owner's Association 6 16 2022x.docx
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Good evening Andy,
Please find our statement concerning the proposed Avon Park III development. Would you be kind enough to share with
the 5th Street/Avon Advisory Committee.
Thanks so much.
RobbiSavage
1952 Tudor Court
Charlottesville, VA 22902
202-297-3563
Statement of the Avon Park I Home Owner's Association
Thursday June 16, 2022
Good evening.
My name is Roberta (Robbi) Savage and I am the President of the Avon
Park Home Owner's Association (APHOA). I am joined this evening by a
number of residents of our community who, in addition to this statement,
will share their perspectives on the proposed new development off Avon
St. Extended across from the new Spring Hill development.
The Avon Park Home Owner's Association opposes the construction of this
new development because many of Avon Park I home owners purchased
their units because it was a small, quaint community, set apart from the
abundance of homes in new communities.
Avon Park II is adding more than 28 units and will likely add 150
plus/minus trips on Arden per day. Avon Park III will add 38 more units,
with an estimated 210 plus/minus trips on Arden.
1) Our HOA is very concerned that the County is considering having our
community serving as the major access road into and out of the new
development. We see no reason why the county/developer cannot
provide access off of Avon Park Extended or Mill Creek for this new
development.
Given the downward slope and blind spot on Arden Drive, we have
had numerous close call accidents between speeding cars and
children. On numerous occasions, our HOA has notified the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT) that this is an increasing
safety risk, yet this agency has yet to address these concerns.
The establishment of a new development will only exacerbate this
problem.
Requested Action: The county/developer needs to identify options
for creating its primary access road from either Avon Park Extended
or Mill Creek, to comply with fire access requirements and reduce the
potential for speeding along the existing Hathaway Street corridor.
The APHOA is concerned that the Hathaway Street might be
extended to an entrance from the end of road that is currently
conceptually shown?
2) Hathaway Street is likely not be wide enough to accommodate both
parked cars and emergency access vehicles. We ask that the Fire
Marshal conduct an assessment of whether emergency vehicles can
be successfully deployed to our community via Hathaway Street, both
accessing Avon Park II and the new development.
Requested Action: Direct access to the new community should be
provided off of Avon Street Extended or Mill Creek. To us, this is the
only viable option.
3) School overcrowding at Monticello High School and Mountain View
Elementary is already a serious concern for our community. We have
a number of teachers here in Avon Park I and they convinced that
this new development will be exacerbated with the completion of
Avon Park II and will increase overcrowding in area schools.
Requested Action: The Avon Park Homeowners Association
requests that it be provided with the recent study of school systems.
And, Albemarle County School assessment of student/teacher needs
(specifically for Mountain View Elementary (formerly Cale) and
Monticello High School), be a part of the county's review of this
project.
4) The proposed thruway between Avon Park I and the new
development is of grave concern because we have a number of
young children whose safety will be endangered by the added traffic
coming up Arden St. to Hathaway. This is particularly true because
both our playground and the dog park are adjacent to Hathaway.
And, with the Avon Park II community coming online shortly, the
traffic will increase and our children and our pets will be at risk.
Requested Action: The health and safety of our children, pets and
residents is our top priority, as we know it is for the County of
Albemarle. The current length of Hathaway Street is around 500',
which is the maximum tangent length VDOT recommends, without
considering traffic calming measures. We are concerned about
speeding along this straightaway if this is the only entrance to Avon
Park III.
5) The proposed plan does not appear to include amenities for the new
development. This suggests to us that the developer is expecting our
community to serve as the recreational area for children and dogs,
with no compensation (via HOA dues) to help maintain our amenities.
Requested Action: Amenities for the new development must be
incorporated into the plan. The implied dependence on our small
community to accommodate new residents, is unacceptable to our
residents.
6) Overflow parking for the proposed development is not indicated in
the plan. This is of concern to our community because the
expectation is that guest and overflow parking will bleed into our
community a further stress our overburdened parking areas.
A pseudo apartment complex going in, this will cause a burden on
our community.
Action Requested: If this development does proceed, additional
parking for the its residents needs to be incorporated in the plan.
7) Water pressure is already a problem in our community. Most
residents have had pressure pumps installed to ensure that sufficient
water is available to our homes. The added water usage from Avon
Park II and III, will further stress our systems. As is, the water
pressure throughout our community is quite low. More development
will exacerbate our existing water pressure issues.
Action Requested: The APHOA requests that, if this new
development moves forward, the Albemarle County Service Authority
(ACSA) be requested to conduct a survey to see whether our small
water tower can accommodate three developments. We also want to
have a very clear understanding of how the anticipated expanded use
will impact the necessary sizing of the internal pumps that were
installed in the townhouses in Avon Park I.
8) if this development is approved, we request language on proffers for
Avon Park I, which will include, but not limited to;
Requested Action: A robust landscaping barrier with dense privacy
trees along the Avon Park I, the immediate contribution of $750 a
month towards common area upkeep of Avon Park I, along with
other items that will be discussed at a later date.
In conclusion, we understand that the Board of Supervisors has made the
decision, based on the comprehensive plan, to allow for massive
development throughout the county. We therefore will stand firm in
expressing the concerns of the Avon Park I community. And, we look
forward to the county/developer successfully addressing these concerns,
with the inclusion of proffers to ensure that the Avon Park I will not be
disadvantaged by yet another development going into our neighborhood.
Finally, our community is disappointed that the letter from Shimp
Engineering, P.C., dated June 2, 2022 was not received by our home
owners until June 10 and June 11. We were caught off guard by this notice
and we hope, and expect, that the county and the developer will be more
transparent in the future.
Andy Reitelbach
From: Brenda Wilson <blw2c54@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 12:04 PM
To: Andy Reitelbach
Subject: ZMA202200004 1906 Avon St.
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
Hello, I live in the Spring Hill Village community directly below the intended 1906 Avon St project. Like everyone else, the
continued growth and development in Albemarle County is concerning to me. I realize any piece of grass left vacant for
long will be developed but I hate to see further development along this road. Like Sth st, Avon St Extended is becoming
more and more traffic dense and of course, SHV is a contributor too.
Additionally it seems that squeezing 38 residential units and a greenspace into 3.6 acres is asking a lot from the water,
drainage systems and power grid here. Already the power in SHV has been out 10+times in the past year.
I know development always wins but at least I've spoken up about my concerns.
Best regards,
Brenda Wilson
4199 Dauphin Dr.
Andy Reitelbach
From: David Storm <davidastorm@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2022 4:06 PM
To: Andy Reitelbach; Donna Price; Karen Firehock; Mary K. King; Frederick Missel; Jim
Andrews
Subject: Tonight's community meeting
CAUTION: This message originated outside the County of Albemarle email system. DO NOT CLICK on links or open
attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.
All:
Im on holiday at the beach with my family, but in advance of tonight's community meeting, I have a few thoughts
specific to this development, some to the engineering firm, and then two generally, but which concern this application
as well.
The idea of private roads, to be maintained by an HOA, are a danger for anyone buying or renting affordable housing.
Coats to maintain and plow can spiral and make those homes unaffordable through HOA dues and special assessments
and cause those individuals serious financial hardship. The proposal needs private roads to wedge in additional market -
rate housing, but adds the risk on the affordable housing and is a risk that is t adequately addressed in my opinion.
This development echoes others we have seen recently, primarily 1805 Avon from this engineering firm, which fails to
provide sufficient amenities and safe play spaces for children. Instead it relies on externalities like Biscuit Run, which is
not ready for the recreational activities the proposal suggests will be available. I'm not sure the "open space" proposed
is truly open, rather it is just non -developable space where they can't wedge additional housing, and this is a pattern.
Using the ingress and egress from adjacent parcels, while planned, is an inconvenience to those property owners
without benefit to them. The expectation should be an entrance along Avon that works for all involved and encourages
other neighborhoods to use the connectivity as well. There was hope that the 1805 property could connect to Avinity,
and there was concern from Avinity that the unspoken expectation was their amenities, paid for with their HOA dues,
would become amenities for the newer development. That seems to be a pattern here as well. The applicant should
provide amenities for its own development, and those amenities don't appear here. I'm not sure pandemic era traffic
studies without a pandemic multiplier are good for predicting traffic, particularly along Avon Extended.
Generally, the county needs to commit to a new elementary school in the Mountain View boundary in the near future.
Southwood phase 2 remains the best location for such a school and the county and Southwood's developer both would
be well served to announce an agreement for a school. For this applicant I believe the need to address schools is there,
and each little development adds just enough that it doesn't look like a problem, but the cumulative effect is a large
one.
Lastly, we are rezoning Avon St. Extended piecemeal when the last master plan for the area was 7 years ago. We're
already two years past due for a new master plan, and while the county is in the middle of a multi -year comprehensive
plan update, that just means it'll be around ten years between plans for this area. By the time the county gets to the
Southern & Western neighborhoods for their updated master plan, I'm not sure there will be much need for the plan
because we will have rezoned so much of it piecemeal that we won't have a comprehensive master plan and first
movers will have received unjust enrichment without providing amenities or fulfilling what the county will agree are
important requirements for the area. I ask the county to proceed carefully with an eye toward the future in rezonings in
this corridor.
As for this request, I think there are serious shortfalls regarding keeping it affordable for residents and purchasers, a lack
of usable green space, particularly for children, issues with safe sidewalks and traffic flow. The larger questions about
schools and piecemeal rezoning when we need an updated master plan should also guide any discussion here.
I hope someone brings up these points tonight during the meeting, MK, if no one does, would you mind?
Sincerely,
David Storm
Sent from my Whone
Resubmittal of information for �$��°F"`8
Zoning Map Amendment t
��RG/NAP
PROJECT NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED: ZMA2022-00004 1906 Avon Street Ext.
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
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,958
®
First resubmission
FREE
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$1,479
❑
Technologv surcharge
+4%
Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $4,141
❑
First resubmission
FREE
❑
Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF)
$2,070
❑
Technology surcharge
+4%
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
$237 + actual cost of first-class postage
➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50)
$1.19 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
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who?
Receipt # Ck# By:
Community Development Department
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
Revised 7/1/2021 Page 1 of 1