Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCCP201400001 Other 2014-02-18 Nvh►z Vd SC u rw!c )olv9 &SO Va)cego © aC N'W Q N a myna) 7.19 `al oQ) /rv) Oa j- - c Pan u-1q Lucy-) cv!,,or) roo u --a: d n u-0) d dUW ci( YYDPIOW/DOD - vog, Lig,/ 1' Hof vtif )r) LC/ oc39 POPc)_,I z __ T")1 6t ,q cop j'© u )Uo jy0_1?- - r2urent19 Air g J - St io,q")-a c..taq u! ‘m_,+ b -) 'Jf / i'4 Sv„ra)tio) - undo tvzovi4 _ � � Z�' u j \`xg ups ,,-� tea, --vo f•JcLitymu� poau R CJn - sow Lag() - 1 \n -• ! -- -Av1,v► . ulj.kaq UG) !SAP) - . A vi .-PN'uy i-9)cj 4 a crud) f N1 wira-. 1l oY , ib COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Places29: A Master Plan AGENDA DATE: for the Northern Development Areas August 4, 2010 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: ACTION: INFORMATION: X Review information on Proposed Expansion Areas and Transportation CONSENT AGENDA: Improvements. ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Cilimberg, Benish, Echols, Wiegand ATTACHMENTS: YES LEGAL REVIEW: NO REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: On January 13, and May 5, 2010, the Board held work sessions on the Places29 Master Plan. On June 9, 2010, the Board held its first public hearing on the Plan. This work session is to provide additional information requested by the Board on the expansion areas and transportation improvements. DISCUSSION: At its public hearing on June 9, the Board requested information on the recommended transportation improvements and on the proposed expansion areas. Staff has attached the following to this executive summary: 1. A memo outlining modifications to the recommended transportation improvements, primarily to address the status/timing and planning approach to the grade-separated intersections. 2. A memo discussing funds available for improvements over the next five years. 3. The List of Improvements Projects located at the end of Chapter 8 of the Master Plan showing modifications (as described in #1). 4. Descriptions of selected projects from Appendix 2, Implementation Project Descriptions showing modifications to those projects (as described in #1). 5. Excerpts from Chapter 4 with changes to the section, "Cross Sections for Key Network Roads." 6. Two excerpts from Chapter 8 showing: 1) changes in the section "The Five Essential Transportation Projects", and 2) changes in the section "Small Area Plans." 7. Memo on the proposed expansion areas with answers to a number of the Board's questions. 8. A memo prepared by the Places29 consultants on the proposed Piney Mountain expansion area. 9. A memo outlining information received from Ronald Maxwell at Fort Belvoir on the military's response to the proposed land uses around the Rivanna Station Military Base. CPA 2005-00010 BOS September 1, 2010 Executive Summary Page 1 a 10. Excerpts from the minutes of four Planning Commission meetings where the expansion areas were discussed. These excerpts record some of the public responses to the proposed expansion areas. 11. A copy of the original proposal for the South Hollymead Expansion Area, as submitted by Wendell Wood. 12. The original memo on the proposed expansion areas, with attachments, prepared for the Planning Commission and distributed to the public (and to the Board previously). The South Hollymead expansion area shown and described in this memo does not represent exactly what the applicant requested (in #10), but does include some of the same land uses, in particular a location for a large-format retail store. The Planning Commission did not recommend these expansion areas as part of the Master Plan, but directed staff to prepare the proposal for public review and comment. Should the Board decide to include the South Hollymead Expansion Area, staff recommends using the language included as an attachment to this memo. Staff would also like to note that we are working on a number of nonsubstantive changes to the Plan; these changes are to increase consistency with other master plans and to clarify certain parts of the text and illustrations. A memo listing these changes will be included with the Board's packet for the September public hearing and will be made available to the public at the same time. RECOMMENDATIONS: Transportation Summary. Staff has presented, in Attachments I, II, III, IV, and V, a series of changes to the recommended transportation network. These changes include: • A revised schedule for some of the improvements to reflect the lack of funding. • Changes to the description of the five essential transportation improvements to reflect the Board's preferred priority. • Additional information about the Small Area Planning process to address business and community concerns. Expansion Area Summary. The Places29 consultant team considered all four of the possible expansion areas shown on the map in Attachment XIV. After review and analysis, the consultants: • Recommended inclusion of the expansion area south of Hollymead in order to encourage more development to support construction of Berkmar Drive Extended and the bridge over the South Fork of the Rivanna River. • Recommended against inclusion of the expansion area adjacent to NGIC (south of Piney Mountain). • Recommended against including either of the other two expansion areas (Areas 3 and 4) adjacent to the Piney Mountain Development Area. • Noted that, since there was no need for additional residential, retail, or office uses in the Places29 area, a lower density form of development would be appropriate in the expansion area south of Hollymead: Neighborhood Density Residential with two Neighborhood Service Centers. Staff supported these recommendations when they were made to the Planning Commission. The Planning Commission reviewed the Plan, held several worksessions, and heard comment from the public before deciding that, since no additional residential, retail, or office space was needed in the Development Areas, it would be more appropriate to follow County policy and protect the Rural Areas by not expanding into them. The Commission's vote was 4:2 to recommend approval of the Master Plan to the Board, but without the expansion areas. The two Commissioners who voted nay CPA 2005-00010 BOS September 1, 2010 Executive Summary Page 2 indicated that, while they agreed with the Plan, they wished to include one or more of the expansion areas (See minutes of the Commission's public hearing, October 27, 2009—Attachment XII). Staff requests direction from the Board on the recommended transportation improvements and on the proposed expansion areas. ATTACHMENTS: Attachment I Memo: Places29 Recommended Transportation Network: Grade Separations Attachment II Funding Memo Attachment III List of Implementation Projects (from Chapter 8), showing changes Attachment IV Excerpts from Appendix 2 showing changes to several of the recommended transportation improvements Attachment V Excerpts from Chapter 4 showing changes to the "Cross Sections for Key Network Roads" sections Attachment VI Excerpts from Chapter 8 showing changes to "The Five Essential Transportation Projects" section and a new"Small Area Plans" section. Attachment VII Memo: Information on Proposed Places29 Expansion Areas, dated August 23, 2010 Attachment VIII CD+A (Places29 consultants) Memo: "Potential Piney Mountain Development Area Boundary Changes," dated August 24, 2007 Attachment IX Memo: Information from Ronald Maxwell (Fort Belvoir) re Expansion Areas Attachment X Minutes (excerpt)from Planning Commission meeting on February 10, 2009, with Staff Report Attachment XI Minutes (excerpt)from Planning Commission meeting on August 11, 2009 Attachment XII Minutes (excerpt)from Planning Commission meeting on September 15, 2009 Attachment XIII Minutes from Planning Commission Public Hearing on Places29, October 27, 2009 Attachment XIV Original Proposal for Hollymead Expansion Area, Wendell Wood (two drawings) Attachment XV Memo, with attachments, on Places29 Expansion Areas, dated August 18, 2009 (original memo prepared for the Planning Commission) Return to regular agenda CPA 2005-00010 BOS September 1, 2010 Executive Summary Page 3 • Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Project Reference Project Title: NO rated-Intersection Improvements at Rio Road & US 10 29 A HIGH PRIORITY IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT Project Description: This Master Plan recognizes the need ultimate need for a grade separated intersection due to the significant level of traffic moving through this intersection, intersection. No specific design for the grade separation has been assumed or established in the Plan, j although possible concepts are identified. Concepts/designs for the grade separations will be established through a small area planning process in which adjacent and nearby property owners and key stakeholders are expected to participate. The following principles will guide the evaluation process for the ultimate improvements to these intersections: • Improvements should provide adequate levels of service on the roads and access to adjacent properties. • Improvements to the road network should be phased in a manner that prolongs the life of the existing at-grade intersections. • A variety of concepts/forms of intersection improvements/grade separations shall be considered. • Pursue design concepts that_provide,to the extent feasible and practical, at-grade relationships of roads to businesses to facilitate visibility and access. • In developing design concepts, minimize the need for additional right-of-way acquisition. • Short-term issues related to the construction of intersection improvements/grade separations should be addressed through strategic construction phasing, development of the parallel local road network to provide alternate access prior to construction of intersection improvements, and other strategies. • Preparation of a Business Impact Plan should be considered during the Small Area Plan process. • Pedestrian, bicycle, and transit users shall be accommodated in all road improvements to the greatest extent possible. intersection is at the crest of a vertical curve on US 29. By depressing US 29, US 29 becomes a flatter The general concept for improvements in this area relies on the construction of a parallel local road network, access management improvements, and interparcel connections to prolong the life of the existing at-grade intersection and to provide part of the ultimate long-term solution to travel and access needs in this area. project also includesThis includes the concept of four Ring Roads-tto provide connections to US 29 and adjacent properties. The Ring Roads-w#i would serve the local uses and redevelopment of the four quadrants better. Appendix 2. Implementation Project Descriptions [068 2010] • Page A2-13 • Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas ■ BOS DRAFT REV ,�- Four Seasons ci _!r ` A.nor-Hurt chool ' / KI),/,el...t0i- ? . , ....% . _ . . /......... eley#/, • /�� = r; ;�, io Hill opping Call - -rkmar Center 11 U ♦ Lower . - _ -nChlands �gl� �, illirmr � NS;I I. eissmirsuellis. r _ • J � / j '` � / Albemarle Sq� O ai )IWo o dbr'k � CDC� hoc it YHs ` .. yj/ \�fi lSetnawti000h - ,; I- AllailAillic 1_ 10. This portion of the Future Land Use Map shows the intersection of Rio Road and US 29. The area inside the white dashed line will be included in the Small Area Plan. US 29 runs from left to right in the center of the map (north is to the right). The following projects will be part of the improvements at this intersection (items b—h show the projects as recommended by the Places29 consultants that may be modified after completion of the Small Area Plan) a. Prepare a Small Area Plan for the area around Rio Road and US 29, coordinated with the preliminary design by VDOT. The Small Area Plan will help determine more specific land uses and local street network, including the location of the Ring Roads and the conceptual design of the grade separation. Follow the principles for intersection/interchange improvements lissted on page A2-13. Establish the next steps for implementing the Small Area Plan once it is completed. Construct northbound auxiliary lanes for Rio Road intersection to create a parallel roadway adjacent to the part of US 29 that will be most disrupted by construction of the grade separation at Rio Road. Must be completed prior to the grade separation at Rio Road. o.c..Construct southbound auxiliary lane at Berkmar Drive. Construct in conjunction with interchange redesign at US 29 and Rio Road. c.d.Construct Northwest Rio Ring Road—all four ring roads will serve as an at-grade connection between US 29 and the grade separation at Rio Road. The Ring Road concept will support redevelopment of the Midtown area and allow the intersection of US 29 at Albemarle Square to remain full access Vie.Construct Southeast Rio Ring Road e-f_US 29 at Rio Road: replace at-grade intersection with grade separation. NOTE: construction of the grade separation is not expected until the second ten years of Plan implementation. Appendix 2. Implementation Project Descriptions [068 2010] • Page A2-14 ♦ Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • f3OS DRAFT REV f,g_Construct southwest Rio Ring Road as a three-lane cross section from Berkmar Drive to Rio Road. Provides opportunities for redevelopment of adjacent parcels in Midtown area. g,h. Construct northeast Rio Ring Road; use existing Albemarle Square Drive and Garden Drive. Will need to address existing connections internal to the existing shopping center. Timing: Estimated Cost: Responsible Parties: Places29 UnJAM Plan Primary Secondary Consultant To begin Plan (a): Plan (a): UnJAM Plan (a): County; Plan (a): None during the first $100,000 does not include Preliminary Design- ten years, after Small Area Plan VDOT completion of Implement the planning for Plan's access Consistent with County in the six lane management intent of UnJAM development plan widening of US recommendations review; VDOT 29 and location of the Plan funding for and design of Berkmar Drive construction Bridge and Ring/parallel Ring Roads (d, e, g, & extension . Roads (d, e, g, & c g ? h): Local—private : N/A h): $17,138,400 g,& h) : VDOT sources, including ($10,711,500 is-for-a-typical participation in developer land donation, Const + urban interchange Small Area construction and cash $6,426,000 w4444aut_F+ng-roads-) Planning process proffers, and/or County utilities & ROW:) and funding of sources, including construction of property taxes and other improvementsVDOT tax sources that may in the future be enabled (such as gas sales tax) or created (such as special tax districts) Grade Grade Grade Separation Grade Separation or Construction Separation or Separation (b% p or ultimate ultimate improvement not expected ultimate c, & f): improvements (b, (b, c, &f): Local— until the improvement $50,620,000 c, &f): VDOT rivate sources, second ten (b, c, &f): p years of Plan (2025 $s) including cash proffers, implementation $40,520,000 and/or County sources, or later; (Does not include including property taxes ROW as existing and other tax sources ROW may be that may in the future be sufficient) enabled (such as gas sales tax) or created (such as special tax districts) Issues to Be Addressed: • Coordinate preparation of Small Area Plan with VDOT's design &engineering study for grade- separation at Rio & US 29; develop Memorandum of Agreement between VDOT and County to conduct joint public planning process. Design of the grade separation and location of ring roads will be determined during Small Area Plan process. Identification of the ring road alignments should be completed as soon as possible to inform property owners. • The potential impact of the construction of the- Meadow Creek Parkway r. Appendix 2. Implementation Project Descriptions [068 2010] • Page A2-15 A Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Separations are not under construction at the same time. • The design/alignment of the needed parallel roads and NW-and-SE Ring Roads will be determined during preparation of the Small Area Plan and will have an impact on and provide access to adjacent property. These two Ring Roads should be complete prior to construction of the grade separation because they are needed to provide for construction of the grade separation. • The County may have to construct some or all of the Ring Roads if property does not redevelop prior to construction of grade separation at Rio Road and US 29. • The construction of the SW and NE Ring Roads is not essential prior to grade separation at Rio Road and US 29. Milestones: • Begin preparation of the Small Area Plan as soon as funding is identified. • Auxiliary northbound lanes must be completed prior to construction of the grade separation. • Construct southbound auxiliary lane in conjunction with intersection redesign. Comments/Notes: ROW costs could be significantly less for two reasons: 1) the Rio/US 29 intersection is so wide that ROW needs may be less, and 2) property owners may donate ROW, especially for the Ring Roads. Included in Planning/Budget Document: UnJAM 2035 Constrained Long Range Plan, 1-8. Appendix 2. Implementation Project Descriptions [068 2010] ■ Page A2-16 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Project Project Title: Reference No. US 29 at Shopper's World and Mall Drive 11 Project Description: Add a third lane to the Shopper's World approach; reconfigure the Fashion Square Mall Drive approach, including the channelized right turn lane on Mall Drive. This recommended configuration retains direct access to existing retail areas on both sides of US 29. Timing: First ten years Estimated Cost: Responsible Parties: VDOT, $637,000 property owners Issues to Be Addressed: Milestones: • Complete as improvements become necessary to the functioning of US 29 or as property redevelops, whichever comes first. Comments/Notes: Included in Planning/Budget Document: No. 4-fig, a/ ►.,(1 N 1411 4„ffs!', Shopper's . - World III ' US 29 —. _ 4 Albemarle Square _ 1" Fashion Square 0 Mall -r�•' , A ' 11. This schematic diagram from the US 29 North Transportation Study shows the road improvements at the entrances to Shopper's World and the Fashion Square Mall.These improvements will retain direct access to these existing retail areas. North is to the right and US 29 runs horizontally in the center of the diagram. Appendix 2. Implementation Project Descriptions [068 2010] • Page A2-17 • COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern October 6, 2010 Development Areas ACTION: INFORMATION: X SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review of Revised Future Land Use Map for CONSENT AGENDA: proposed roadway network and inter-parcel ACTION: INFORMATION: connections STAFF CONTACT(S): ATTACHMENTS: Yes Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Cilimberg, Benish, and Ms. Wiegand. REVIEWED BY: LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: At its September 1st work session, the Board discussed with staff modifying the Future Land Use Map to eliminate some of the interconnecting roads identified on the map. The Board requested a review of the revised Map prior to the scheduled public hearing in November. Attachment A is a draft of the revised Future Land Use Map with these changes. DISCUSSION: The Future Land Use Map has been revised to reflect a proposed roadway network that includes: • All roads modeled as necessary improvements to the transportation network (Hillsdale Drive, Berkmar Drive, etc.). • All roads approved as part of development approvals (ZMAs, SPs, site plans/plats), such as roads in the North Pointe development in the Hollymead Town Center area. • Roads that have been identified in the previous Comprehensive Plan, MPO Regional Transportation Plan (e.g., east west connecting road from Hollymead Drive to Earlysville Road) In addition, staff is in the process of modifying the Places 29 Master Plan to explain that although interchanges are ultimately necessary based on the traffic modeling, due to budget constraints and other more immediate improvement needs, the interchange concepts will be revisited as part of the small area planning process with the next five-year update of the Master Plan. The priority projects for the next five years are: • Additional lanes on Emmet Street (US 29) and the ramp from Hydraulic to the US 29/250 Bypass west and construction of Hillsdale Drive (both in the City) • Widening of US 29 from the South Fork of the Rivanna River to Hollymead Town Center. • Planning and design of Berkmar Drive extended, including a bridge over the South Fork of the Rivanna River. • Maintenance and strategic enhancement of transit service RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board, after reviewing the draft revision to the Future Land Use Map, provide any additional comments or direction to staff. ATTACHMENTS: A—Map: Revised Future Land Use, South B—Map: Revised Future Land Use Map, North Return to regular agenda le vin tit is! ,.. _• vtlirOWeliratiL: '.'•.4-.1141111101 ilitfr4441110r ri "4:11° arra, AP1111.4 Nituur—alAritikir at,111W611fatr‘fP#11,111 WPINEIT1115 School 7 111 4 pee IrtosfAtil---;',cii;;;•"7-003 mom"•1107.••ftegif Ana, do. ///mil/ rt. 1:1,0, "W- 611111MitiNg4110/VO r,NI,p;WOW,ihilop000001/000101110700 a gla il•--V. wilaw,1,1r.,. 4.je,.Alto go NI., gm vast , a.010,.. AT \48.1,44.400004.00,7 .....1....„.4.: . , m, • 14ggrg, Ir '11 /to.Ike' ,110/11‘ . V4--Ifiiii"e141104•1211 2011-IP' 70.' •Amil Neraitt84.40:41inliert°,04 Vbck)' Ifni ftrAb..•• r-- rie4 11§.7 itillaWi -, _ • i Oil\ dighim, --'-'1•V__Afr_. low. 1111101101 -‘\10,41111111 illik**.. 4 .' ' t,,*„ • cts. mg )41.1mphris Park ..., , r Aliti M! .11.6000. 64..0' -•• .1,-,.,,,•• ,,, ..,.. , • Qt, • '-ii. pll • 77 i P) --.• - / 4,.."• .„,„„ri, . . 'INS 7 CO'...f.:•• all .t.r• ..' ,.-., / ' :, , , '400- . 4W, re,,Z sharlottes4:Albemarle Airpo \ --1 , • 11/141 \* .... , ..i. Ritirse..; ' / `• .Cj - • .. di . ., 044, 44 .., ii. IMP ... .. L4.a 440- 11116 Agnor-Hurt rght School / Agirp.'iliVIII114111111.21016.. \f"-- * o4" ' • , Rs .'...; ' a ' ILitik,,, .41111440,. ""a"".4>,..";,. VIIIINtilAppop-11111i • I .4,44.4siork‘. v. lio\ _..,..._ „,. . ny Marina 6 _• . ,, • , ,.,•,.,,: , $ „op ii 4.40, ,..... /iffir, . j s IMM 111011tb, N, illbata, ....... /If _ ., 41.." ....4..0.40 I 10110, • ,„ ..... i . '-- „,I a IMMO . tik "."... ii I i • -.-- ---8._ •..• - . /;NS/ Rd. 011 . . ---• age AN 1r /4 \ It.,...... ; 1 n a ft. ft. 11 -, •1 ft 4.1** ..%. NisS/ii gitimillit4 ///404.144•74,04 44, yip, 8,,,, .*— . , . ....—..... ......,... . • , 77/ ...„:41 .4"...., .) ,c,, ,\,,b ,,,;.„,,. ii......, .. . .....,110%*0•Alrar • .• .... A • , ' 1111, ,,,,. . i Lk ' 7...n. .._ •......L. .... • \„ IPII. 1/111;,//0_,L,i;1111114/;14111 .111111 .1C2 -. ii . ../ /1 ''•ilyi VIMIEMPAWIMMIL- . 4=1, OMNINI"nohr....__' .-1111111111111111110 -",1101-44, :e1Wilp lliftli',////, //NI.S_... - :411 "elir "•1111111P-1//////.4.' ' .-4e411,-tlIa;4414 .1- / -- - . ilr'4'; hi C/7/ -.1 1,1411111 111 Alid111101111b.11/4/ US-2.9, IL. Illibi .'°°'Mil i 7 ,, „,,,m7 4. 7,///„, City of Tiellir- r----. (---::-_, -I____/ M.:Aiiiiiiiiiiiiiii# gm 1014 4.1101111111PAIIIIIIVAIP101 ::..,: .4!Irina"- .,%Iv, \ iri- ' 3--- $ •AR, ar-Asiants•N Charlottesville A ,ie ....i. allP Albemarle'''. ' - l•ak• 4* odbroOkfrof—•-•- - itiatio•W° s'AINbi ' A Or - i t4 t,r4111011.11ItriAlt my& 1114r --..,..r-,;,el:r.,?'". —44.77- --C' ,..--"•6----c= o , . arllati. LAW ZAsatSg:111116114:4441, V.IL'Ve;W 'RAP cio ......, in Lis,School tts-.41. vArri:406 ,11 4,,or o m , , 77-7.,..i..- , ,,,,, ......,1 ....... .... ,_- /k. '1,) fli,a. fr .3,0; as • . . •,', \ \-- - 4r"'" ----4" • AO" . ' 435rnit 411111,411rWifills 147 .. . ad 4 ........ 0• •...Pit-- NS, 0 --•,0 WV . •S, jrn; diri 6, A4412"raViSti& es 011111404 Z t,••.\VI, -...drill ilk 4 ti•o• ib' .........A‘ -\ 4 ,-, 41.60•601,...n.p6t:X• Art /....,.•'.,1/0,... • Iiii: •440"....iiiiiV '1/41.............., '..i.inot-it Vaillie;,I 411 ..4, ...,:kr...,. .._„„,mol, yabL261. nt,„,.____e,...:.,. .....4 %... .... ... ,......2 ;:v ...;4 vi 11.•.p. illabWkitjay At 4,4111w70.441111k V 7# .6,...._._/ vo or,. o•ii,. AZ° . OBWOZ4 If •••to..7r.—asiffeaii ,,,,,,, ,,,p.,--.444 - - , 44"I'• 14 j.tr. '''' -Are Av.-L.441,4 ,7, 44 rim m imi b'Var I I 114100' 411611A4 1 .11.111a 4"1" WI #r en. ;41.Seivityllinipl ol,I gv. 0,40)."eygaidi 4, 1Iat mimmillh`ik. 421t.• - -1 .4ailto r 1 ft ofs,' \IS'le Ili I 17q411111111111110. 41116., *11411 , ' %1* 4 4A. iik, School 4t, rJ,s 4.4; iii( 1., v: 4 _ , At/ litellt I I y m ea d Sisrl htlet.11,1. /1111thipii ii IMIDL- ' ,- ' a.... . ,---,,cl li NO <, .• • leirak, , - , -4 j. VIA 4111 011 • . utherland ile ig., VOW . ,;q'lir ii, iropTo , • *`...It A v4rf tait-/, "'rig 'W,1"14.**4.4.'S•44*#11Fil#181:111 Schooi ',, 4111$1:11,t11 Fdi, — •• •.,„ r t N r•Zsea- .--. - --,,,i .41.-dm& yr VP • •6, I g isomitik% --• ink stsputovi'lliFiNflb ' 0..., .. .. • l' .. .. ........ i .01,14. •-,:o%, A 41 • • Northfield5 \•rA' 7411:0117•19 , / Willow r!tits -. cenengi - ni, 4 04. 40,• 1:1: ' 4 4pty„, , 4/_,Atv.• 40 iv" •• 411011//, . SO air--...-- .11, Illitit At 00 Irpt, *,.1-1 ' 'SI:i-i-r. *AtAittleri*ule 411. 4 elisiiS 41111ftt* ill', , •A gr*.rr MI'S OP ...1111M.,# Ve ""ftat.'• 4' .1..41 . , %. 44,01 ,.. •oviTir t. la 04fir• 114**,4' ,...."*.411,1.:kwalooye" Oa [Airy ipts _.,-4.....' AS211 4 All • 0,1'MAI 6'" ciAirtg.'d Ii"'" 0 113 .14 .I:-... r / V%"14 011171/11711170111114:74117"410111* a of ohstAlloo lit - -,-..-, ........... _-----.. ..........:40, Apt ... ...,,,,, R Its. ii 0 4( La, / 1111111 It Illk .40014 V443. ViliP Villigkall a 4iiip.' • ,..- , .i. f1/11110,03111ft V.ifal•V•iii ie • ,. 1.1r1 , fitiroli ',I, 1111"///r, iii *ftztebbt___.111111t* '4'10 )411:4"3141? valifluit A. limb ,1411110111,TrTquir-mnipimp,----"419 ., .iiiii01 •IN.,. 1 ... , 44 ilk fir i iiilliwir„pf4j4& Aiwa %k, etvir .7/01ANoror Mimi.- AI Source 011Ice of Geographic Data Service.,Dept of Commonly 0 rAww,4, 41. 41P.va A Development,Albemarle County,Thomas Jefferson Planning Distnd Commission bfallaillirANktWil , ......,, AtilwAtKvx 4 Tiat Community Design•L Architecture .--- TRANSPORTATION STUDY Legend ri] Small Area Plan Recommended(2) FUTURE LAND USE Consulting Team Potential Connections(Pedestrian,Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission Proposed Roadway Network(1) Neighborhood Density Residential Virginia Department of Transportation Possible Additions to Roadway Network(beyond 2025) = Development Area Boundary 1.11 Office/R&D/Flex/Light Industrial PLACES Creating and SOUTH Bicycle,or Vehicular) Connecting Meyer Mohaddes Associates,IncAirport District DP Neighborhood Service Center k...,Al Light Industrial Communities Community Design a Architecture,Inc Urban Advantage q Community Center Urban Mixed Use(in Centers) Heavy Industrial 2 9 in Northern Albemarle Albemarle County Parcels Y2008 P Destination Center ., Mil MASTER PLAN Uptown = Urban Mixed Use(in areas around Centers) Ell Institutional Date: 9/3/2010 Consulting Team. Mill Commercial Mixed Use Community Design-i-Architecture,Inc NOTE:Users of the Places29 Future Land Use Map must also consult 1. Public Open Space in. Meyer Mohaddes Associates,Inc. the Places29 Parks&Green Systems Map to see if additional 111. Urban Density Residential in iono Feet ZHA,Inc open space should be preserved and/or trails preserved 11111 Privately owned Open Space; Environmental Features Timmons Group VVN o 500 1,000 2,000 3,000 Kathleen M.Galvin,Architect (1)FOR BREAKDO OF PROPOSED ROADS INTO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES SEE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK DIAGRAM [_____ __ Miles Urban Advantage 0 0 125 0 25 0 375 0 5 0 625 0 75 (2)BOUNDARIES ARE FLEXIBLE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE • ter. ; =lglipl I I I IVI I IT li L .1` 'ram lilI 1,1% WA1I04 Till ii 11 pr gi I I I I I I 511,1Wt ,,'WV Viiiiionic Ir 4,,,karts*0 advirgriiiiiij g-iima -70-04-4-eoi 11," t I immill ros2M1111/blasm4A AV ler.ril,tiiir of .41164*-1 ki Ivo),Adi \ i '!1!11111Ir 7 I, -Sirithlriiti "W/40.!... til 114 .44 ,.. $"regiiittit siitio .. , . IL.- ..•. Ara I I illrightir 11010 _ ,1111111 4111.1111 _, / ,Ill'HillA Niir-W irrio,..._Lp� I _ Dickerson Rd. i� � •.A . .[NS 1 aI1MAN �,,,��..'.'�( � N S A 71�I�V . ,L AAN16, 4 • ."1„ Ntrif ' 4",:.4 ;$ ,004 (.44 II th.q,I I i . . - / . AResprch Park ' '. ` �I�� t 'in" IIIMINIL P v•A'f 0 " • r --A -♦--• 11 1 ! Ill h ,D . �'.r. ♦ _,�, ••�- �/.414 *MO 0 I o p , 111.6 29Ilk ---.......... ' . le `�41 - , �/1.%/r .�r>,�/ill//�/1,1� '"�� / : --,31, - O ,� ,•• , �` rip , km/ / ///4//////c • .1 Ilt Ili A IP I. . cp 71.0-Ark,•. • • Win 411111. Air jivoi,!,4--• fos it.,"._ lelf vi #1, ...... I_____ 0 i/U �a./� �� 1��+ �..2...1... - "WAY MertanalG-dsn` I / IIIill'///,N S13 tot`"� ,•:ritvi , 1��4��4 F g\ �•' ///�� ,1a _,� �•� 9 e• AvA c' / Itl//�/CP /D 7/ D/��/////, s, „ iii,_ �I �I� OQ.i v1 ►I Q�. Ij vie in �. �'•�'+7„ �3sr. f/l/l /; �''�` `� iim ■ lifr ,-,.., �� 4'�44 ii �\�I j�Q I��QOI��11tt ♦ ina11U1►-�•.. , � � `I � r- 114i'��' ►wA�%%.# ��,�iinii►I,ii .° / .`�w\�� `, lll�lll�l�i/t 47 4. t' 'ice I 4 1 Off. �� 11►♦ I:rt.tViAt' �/�► :-.. . � � ,�I �i � pp �. �I/II vf�► _ � � it I �If♦��` / Holl mead ��IIi I „��►I �� 1u� �� y � ��, �� I aspnngfietl -� �� 4 ��d „� ■ I 1 . ow" � ■i School ��< , 1►/` ►`IG`�Itl NS)/ •'" ��_,1�1`, �i��- Sutherland =� �� ' 1� ��1�� t----T;� I � �If'�/ druillillit*, � - ////i.....►•��1�r�� /Alla 114 ,.,� ; � ,..,.,,, r .. � INIIIIrk,I 1 County-Owned Owned //1► Q.Q O�1 III /►�■11111II .I =p„� if4t ..,� ,' °1 li ' 41111111110.1 �� w . ilikihmt.---- iiiiProperty,- :►1� �: I�►�� _1:a �� p •yam�O �ph� _xAl.r� 111,.��11ilr. A��%, `I'`` veknionitita 611,.„„. yt ,,, ►ice41k.* *1.4ktrO.I. MU biz Alm 4 ‘AvOW Al*,11111%01, , vivit ir_..... , 4.!,„1,8106...plliatle, saw Zs 40 4 4110 14"*.ta 7111611.1046-. VliAlt"Ilk‘ jaillik lik 110110F/MBI ift„ . nk-s.lik iiiiiiiii‘ Valin114.111118..... .,'' fil .Am wrairaiL"f41 Iv /4 1 ili l 1 fil I 114;14 I I I I I Ika 644 6''114 ,A,,,,,,,t1/4 ._„.,,, .._... .41111% . .. Al ' /r_.,11",...,47„111, 1, / j 1 c��' Source.Office of Geographic Data Services,Dept.of Community h 14* �� '/I • Development,AlOemarle Coun ,Thomas JeRerson ��`e,�,• rah, ■ �� , ft - `' n ' — _•''� Planning Disai 9nommissionI 1.'.Isa 1. i i„/111, & _ A ` ` Community Design Architecture .. TRANSPORTATION STUDY Legend FUTURE LAND U S E Thomas Jefferson PlanningDistrict Commission g �� Small Area Plan Recommended(2) � Proposed Roadway Network(1) o Neighborhood Density Residential Virginia Department of Transportation ......Possible Additions to Roadway Network(beyond 2025) n MINORTH Consulting ream. Development Area Boundary Office/R&D/Flex/Light Industrial LA PCES Creating and Potential Connections(Pedestrian,Bicycle,or Vehicular) Meyer Mohaddes Associates,Inc. Connecting Community Design+Architecture,Inc. MB Neighborhood Service Center Airport District Light Industrial Urban Advantage a Community Center Communities MASTER PLAN CD Destination Center 1 Urban Mixed Use(in Centers) Heavy Industrial \� In Northern Albemarle Uptown v/ Albemarle County Parcels Y2008 Urban Mixed Use(in areas around Centers) Institutional Consulting Team. Date: 9/3/2010 Community Design+Architecture,Inc. NOTE:Users of the Places29 Future Land Use Map must also consult — Commercial Mixed Use El Public Open Space Meyer Mohaddes Associates,Inc. the Places29 Parks&Green Systems Map to see it additional ZHA,Inc open space should be preserved and/or trails preserved allUrban Density Residential — Private/ owned Open Space;Environmental FeaturesCli) reef Kathleen M.Galvin,Architect y p p 0 500 1.000 2,000 3.000 Timmons Group (1)FOR BREAKDOWN OF PROPOSED ROADS INTO DIFFERENT CATEGORIES SEE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK DIAGRAM Urban Advantage (2)BOUNDARIES ARE FLEXIBLE AND SUBJECT TO CHANGE tt 75 s 0 0.125 0.25 0 375 0 5 0 625 0 0 75 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development February 2, 2011 Areas ACTION: X INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review changes made at Board's direction and provide CONSENT AGENDA: further direction on the Hollymead Development Area; ACTION: INFORMATION: Approval of Master Plan STAFF CONTACT(S): ATTACHMENTS: Yes Messrs. Foley, Elliott, Davis, Cilimberg, and Benish; and Ms. Echols and Ms. Wiegand REVIEWED BY: LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: On November 10, 2010, the Board held a public hearing on the Places29 Master Plan and directed staff to make changes to the Master Plan, mostly related to transportation recommendations. On January 12, 2011, the Board reviewed several Master Plan text and map amendments that staff prepared in response to the Board's earlier direction and generally accepted those changes, then directed staff to make several additional changes. At that meeting, the Board also agreed to include an expansion to the Piney Mountain Development Area, generally located just west of the Rivanna Station military base. To date, the Board has not given final direction on a potential expansion to the Hollymead Development Area. DISCUSSION: Staff has revised the draft Master Plan to incorporate the expansion of the Piney Mountain Development Area. As noted above, the Board has not provided final direction on the possible expansion of the Hollymead Development Area. A proposed text and map amendment for an expansion of the Hollymead Development Area is attached (Attachments A and B)for the Board's review. Direction is needed from the Board regarding this potential expansion area. The full revised Master Plan document with appendices is available in the Clerk's office in "track changes format." It is also available online at: http://www.albemarle.orq/department.asp?department=cdd&relpage=3735 At the January work session, staff was directed to add language to the Master Plan that would explain the relationship between the transportation study recommendations and the ultimate Places29 transportation recommendations found in the Places29 Master Plan. This language is found in red type in these sections of Chapters 4 (page 4-28)and 8 (Page 8-2)along with several other corrections to the text provided by the Board at the meeting. Staff has made several other non-substantive changes to the Master Plan to improve the format of the document, clarify confusing text, or otherwise addressing typographical errors: 1. Chapter 1, Introduction, has been revised to include a section on "How to Use This Plan." 2. Chapter 7, Design Guidelines, has been revised to clarify which roadway cross sections will apply to which roads. 3. Appendix 3, Roadway Cross Sections, has been revised to clarify which roadway cross sections will apply to which roads. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no direct budget impact with this action. AGENDA TITLE: Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas February 2, 2011 Page 2 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests direction from the Board as to whether these changes meet the Board's expectations and final direction on the Hollymead Development Area. If the proposed changes are acceptable, staff recommends approval of the Place29 Master Plan. Should the Board choose to expand the Hollymead Development Area as described in Attachments A and B, the Board's action should reference inclusion of this text in Chapter 4, the section "Key Subareas of the Future Land Use Plan" on page 4-19 and amend Future Land Use Map—North at the end of Chapter 4. ATTACHMENTS: A: Hollymead Expansion Area Text Amendment B: Hollymead Expansion Area Map Amendment, Future Land Use Map. North Return to agenda ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of February 2, 2011 February 8, 2011 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT 1. Call to Order. • Meeting was called to order at 9:02 a.m. by the Chair,Ann Mallek. All BOS members were present. Also present were Tom Foley, Larry Davis, Ella Jordan and Meagan Hoy. 5. From the Board: Matters not listed on the Agenda. Lindsay Dorrier: • Reported on the recent meeting of the Biscuit Run Advisory Committee. Rodney Thomas: • Last evening he attended a community meeting in Stonehenge.A property owner who owns part of the land that wraps from Stonehenge down to Brookway got the neighborhood together to seek input on what he can do with the property. Ken Boyd: • In terms of economic development, had good meeting with Mark Crowell from UVA. • Last week at RWSA,they decided to move forward with the permitting process for a 42 foot earthen dam with a 30 foot pool. Ann Mallek: • Provided Board members with a copy of an email from Barbara Hutchinson regarding a proposal by the Governor to remove funds that have supported the operation of Commonwealth airports and putting the funds into a general economic development fund. • Met with a professor from JMU who is studying wind and is involved in projects funded through Clerk: Coordinate date for presentation to State government for wind energy. She would Board. like for him to come to a Board meeting and provide an update and discuss the possibility of the County allowing test stations. • Provided update on several bills currently proposed in General Assembly. Dennis Rooker: • Mentioned an email between Board members regarding a possible Constitutional Amendment, re: Eminent Domain(HJ 647). Suggested raising the issues that should be County Attorney: Prepare letter for Chair's carefully considered before any action taken on signature to be sent to Delegates and the legislation. CONSENSUS that staff draft Senators. letter. 6. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda. • Charles Battiq provided Board members with a packet of information entitled"Defund ICLEI/Cool Counties". • Greg Quinn expressed concerns about the concept of"sustainability". Suggested the County take care of its'own business and not depend on state and federal legislators to tell them what to do. • Kirk Bowers expressed opposition to the expansion of the Hollymead growth area in the Places29 Master Plan. • Meredith Richards invited Board members to a forum on Friday, February 4th, 10:00 a.m., at the Omni Hotel,where information on passenger rail service will be presented and discussed. • John Martin provided Board members with a copy of the latest U.S. Drought Monitor for Virginia.Asked Board members to not support the 30 foot pool for the dam. • Morgan Butler, Southern Environmental Law Center, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the Hollymead growth area in the Places29 Master Plan. • Jack Marshall,Advocates for a Sustainable Albemarle Population, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the Hollymead growth area in the Places29 Master Plan. • Jeff Werner,Piedmont Environmental Council, spoke in opposition to the expansion of the Hollymead growth area in the Places29 Master Plan. • Mary Barrick expressed support to improvements to the proposed animal welfare codes including shelter amendments, increasing restrictions on tethering and breeding, and the formation of an advisory committee to discuss these topics. • Neil Williamson,Free Enterprise Forum, suggested that it would be interesting to see, through GIS mapping, how large or small the County's development areas are based on new regulations with regard to stream buffers, critical slopes and other restrictions for development in the development areas. • Audrey Wellborn said she has concerns about Agenda2l/ICLEI.She is also concerned about the impact of a number of bills that are currently before the current General Assembly, and especially the impact on private property rights. • CONSENSUS that the Board be updated on the pros and cons,and the meaning of the County's involvement, of ICLEI during its budget work sessions. 7.1 Cancel February 9, 2011, Regular Night Meeting. Clerk: Notify appropriate individuals. • Meeting cancelled. 7.2 Resolution to Accept Innovation Drive in UVA Clerk: Forward copy of signed resolution to Research Park at North Fork into the State Glenn Brooks, County Engineer Secondary System of Highways. (Attachment 1) • ADOPTED Resolution. • 7.3 FY 2011 Budget Amendment and Appropriations. Clerk: Forward copy of signed appropriation • APPROVED the budget amendment in the forms to Finance, OMB and appropriate amount of$953,807.29 and APPROVED individuals. Appropriations#2011049,#2011060, #2011061,#2011063 and#2011064. 7.4 Resolution supporting the temporary closure of Clerk: Forward copy of signed resolution to Jarmans Gap Road(Route 691)during David Benish and County Attorney's office. construction of improvements. (Attachment 2) • ADOPTED Resolution supporting the closure of Jarmans Gap Road(Route 691)for approximately sixty(60)days for box culvert installation during the months of June 2011 through August 2011 so as only to close the road for school bus access on Jarmans Gap Road during the summer session of the Albemarle County School year. 7.5 Resolution to Designate Byrom Park Entrance as Clerk: Forward copy of signed resolution to Open-Space Land and a Public Park. Bob Crickenberger, Ches Goodall, Scott Clark • ADOPTED Resolution to designate the Byrom and County Attorney's office. (Attachment 3) Park Entrance(Tract Z)as open space land pursuant to the Open Space Land Act and to designate this parcel as a public park. 7.6. Memorandum of Understanding Between Foothills County Attorney's office: Provide Clerk with Child Advocacy Center, Inc., Charlottesville/ copy of agreement. Albemarle Commission on Children and Families and the County of Albemarle, Virginia. • AUTHORIZED the County Executive to sign a Memorandum of Understanding with the Foothills Child Advocacy Center Board of Directors and the Charlottesville/Albemarle Commission on Children and Families that establishes the roles and responsibilities of the parties regarding the funding and employment of the Foothills Program Coordinator. 7.7 ACE; Virginia Department of Agriculture and County Attorney's office: Provide Clerk with Consumer Services grant for easement acquisition. copy of agreement. • AUTHORIZED the County Executive to execute the Agreement on behalf of the County, provided that it is first approved as to form and content by the County Attorney 7.8 Report on the Jefferson Madison Regional Library System(JMRL). • Work session SCHEDULED with Director and Albemarle representatives on JMRL Board on February 9, 2011,9:00 a.m. 8. Public Hearing: To consider an ordinance to Clerk: Forward copy of adopted ordinance to amend section 4-100, Definitions, of Chapter 4, Police Department and County Attorney's Animals and Fowl, of the County Code. office.(Attachment 4) • ADOPTED, by a vote of 6:0,the attached Ordinance. 9. Public Hearing: To consider an ordinance to Clerk: Forward copy of adopted ordinance to amend County Code Chapter 12, Regulated Police Department and County Attorney's Enterprises, Article Ill, Dealers in Precious Metals. office.(Attachment 5) • ADOPTED, by a vote of 6:0,the attached Ordinance. NonAgenda. Recessed at 11:08 a.m. and reconvened at 11:20 a.m. 10. Rural Health Initiative Program, Gary Pond, Lead Lee Catlin: Proceed as suggested. Health Educator. • Board members suggested that the County's website provide a link to the information. 11. FY 2008-2009 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report(CAFR). • APPROVED, by a vote of 6:0,the FY 2008- 2009 Comprehensive Financial Report. 12. ARB-2010-126. Entrance Corridor Design Margaret Maliszewski: Proceed as approved. Guidelines Update. (Attachment 6) • RATIFIED, the revised Guidelines and ENDORSED the phased approach to the Guideline revisions as outlined in the Executive Summary 13. CPA-2005-010. Places29 Master Plan. • APPROVED, by vote of 4:2(Snow/Dorrier),to not expand the Hollymead development area. • APPROVED, by vote of 6:0, Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas, dated February 2, 2011. 14. Closed Meeting. • At 12:26 p.m.,the Board went into closed meeting to consider appointments to boards, committees, and commissions, and an administrative position, and to discuss with legal counsel and staff specific matters requiring legal advice relating to the Community Water Supply Plan. 15. Certify Closed Meeting. • At 1:51 p.m.,the Board reconvened into open meeting and certified the closed meeting. 16. Boards and Commissions: Appointments. Clerk: Prepare appointment/reappointment • APPOINTED Amy Preddy to the Pantops letters, update Boards and Commissions book, Community Advisory Council. webpage, and notify appropriate persons. • REAPPOINTED Marylin Minrath to the Public Defender Office Citizens Advisory Committee with said term to expire December 31, 2013. • REAPPOINTED Jay Fennell to Public Recreational Facilities Authority with said term to expire December 13,2013. • REAPPOINTED Steve Murray to TJ Water Resource Foundation Board with said term to expire December 31, 2015. Non-Agenda. • APPOINTED, by a vote of 6:0, Ed Koonce as Acting Director of Finance, effective February 1, 2011. 17. Economic Vitality Action Plan, Quarterly Update. Clerk: Schedule on March agenda. • DIRECTED staff to bring back a discussion on the Target Industry Study in March. 18. Bright Stars Annual Report, Charity Haines. • RECEIVED. 19. Community Development Work Program. Mark Graham: Schedule on agenda when • DIRECTED staff to bring back information on ready. expediting Rural Area Churches, interstate interchanges and other issues as discussed. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: Places29 Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas January 5, 2011 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: ACTION: X INFORMATION: Work session to review the revised Places29 Master Plan CONSENT AGENDA: STAFF CONTACT(S): ACTION: INFORMATION: Messrs. Foley, Davis, Cilimberg, and Benish; and Ms. Wiegand ATTACHMENTS: Yes LEGAL REVIEW: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: On November 10, 2010, the Board held a public hearing on the Places29 Master Plan and directed staff to make further revisions to the text to address remaining references to certain road improvements, particularly related to grade separations and certain parallel road improvements, and to delete information related to taxing district funding concepts. DISCUSSION: Staff has made a number of changes in the Master Plan based on the Board's direction and other input, as follows: 1. Chapter 1 of the Master Plan has been revised to include the section on "How to Use this Plan" that was formerly at the end of Chapter 4. Having this section appear first will make it easier for users of the Plan to understand how it works without having to read the entire plan. This change was made based on public comments/suggestions received since the Board's public hearing. Because this is only a format change and not a substantive change to the text of the Master Plan, this revision is not provided in this packet. 2. Chapter 4 has been revised to reflect changes in the Small Area Plan process, to rephrase/remove references to the grade separations and ring roads, and to delete the "How to" section. Selected pages showing these revisions are attached. 3. Chapter 8 has been revised to remove the references to taxing districts, to rephrase/remove references to the grade separations and ring roads, and to clarify how much of the four essential transportation projects will be done during the first five years of Plan implementation. Selected pages showing these revisions are attached. 4. The List of Implementation Projects at the end of Chapter 8 has been revised to reflect the changes in Appendix 2, Implementation Project Descriptions. A revised List is attached. 5. Appendix 2, Implementation Project Descriptions has been revised to reflect changes in the Small Area Planning processes and short-and long-term details regarding the transportation projects. A revised Appendix is attached. Final direction is needed from the Board on whether the Board supports the inclusion of the Hollymead Southern Expansion Area or the Piney Mountain Expansion Area in land designated as Development Areas. As requested by the Board, staff has provided as attachments only those pages which have been modified as noted above. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no direct budget impact. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff requests direction from the Board as to whether these changes meet the Board's expectations. Staff also requests direction from the Board on whether to include the Hollymead Southern Expansion Area or the Piney Mountain Expansion Area in land designated as Development Areas. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT I: Chapter 4, Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network ATTACHMENT II: Chapter 8, Implementation ATTACHMENT III: List of Implementation Projects ATTACHMENT IV: Appendix 2, Implementation Project Descriptions Return to agenda Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV and Airport Acres,are the same as those in the 1996 Land Use Plan, and are more closely based on existing neighborhood/property boundaries. For areas with adopted zoning map amendments and/or approved site plans,the overall boundaries of these plans were taken into account. Land uses shown within these areas on the Future Land Use Map allow for the development of previously approved projects,but may suggest modifications to the distribution of uses on the site and/or a more intensive set of uses. Distribution of Mixed Use Centers The distribution of Centers on the Future Land Use Map follows Neighborhood Model principles and recommendations received from the public and stakeholders.This distribution is also consistent with two major recommendations in the US 29 North Corridor Transportation Study: first,to develop a road network that encourages local trips to occur on parallel and perpendicular routes rather than on US 29 and,second,to employ access management strategies that orient the access to properties along US 29 to those parallel and perpendicular roads.The extent and distribution of Centers is also supported by the market analysis performed as a part of Places29. Neighborhood Service Centers are spaced along major roadways to provide increased pedestrian and bicycle access to the everyday goods and services offered in these Centers.This spacing also coincides with potential transit stop locations.From a market perspective,these locations have a visual and physical relationship to major roads that makes them accessible to additional customers from outside the immediate neighborhood.Neighborhood Service Center locations recognize the availability of vacant or underutilized sites and the desire to distribute these Centers throughout the area to maximize their accessibility. Some of these Centers wouldill serve residents who live in the areas around them.Other Centers wouldill serve employees whose workplaces are within walking distance. For example,the Centers wouldill not only provide restaurants that cater to employees at lunchtime,but wouldill also provide opportunities to shop for daily needs.This combination wouldill help reduce the need for additional car trips. There are two concentrations of Community and Destination Centers on the Future Land Use Map.First,the concentration of Community and Destination centers around the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 reflects the area's existing retail function and the potential for major redevelopment.The second concentration is in the large area that includes the Hollymead Town Center,the proposed North Pointe development,the proposed Uptown,and around the intersection of Airport Road and US 29.The Center designations for both areas are consistent I with already approved plans.Designating these areas as mixed use centers wouldill help integrate Centers with the surrounding residential and employment neighborhoods. All of the Centers are designated Urban Mixed Use to allow development of a range of uses that wouldill serve the surrounding neighborhood(Neighborhood Service Centers),the Places29 community(Community Centers),and the region beyond the Places29 area(Destination Centers and the Uptown). Streets and Roads Shown on the Future Land Use Map The transportation network shown on the Future Land Use Map includes existing roads and new roads recommended in this Master Plan. It also shows recommended improvements to many I existing roads.Where an existing road is shown as a dashed black line,the existing road wouldill be improved,but not necessarily shifted from its existing alignment. The precise location of I recommended new roads shown with dashed black lines is flexible and wouldill be determined at the time the road is designed. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-14 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Key Subareas of the Future Land Use Plan There are several key subareas identified in this Master Plan that are particularly important to the community's vision for the Places29 area. Some of these subareas have existing master plans or I concept plans that have been incorporated into this Master Plan. Other subareas wouldi41 need further study and more detailed plans in order to implement the land use patterns described in this I Plan. In addition,it maywi4l be necessary to make changes and adjustments to current policies and the administration of development activities in order to achieve some of the Master Plan's goals in these subareas.These subareas are: • The Rio Road/US 29 area • The Meadow Creek Parkway • • The Albemarle Place development • The Hollymead Town Center area • The Airport Road Corridor and the Uptown area • The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport • The University of Virginia Research Park • The Rivanna Station Military Base(NGIC facility) Rio Road/US 29.Over the life of this Plan,the area around the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 is expected to redevelop into a vibrant mixed-use area.The southwestern quadrant of the intersection wouldi1l include a cluster of Community and Destination Centers and a larger Mixed Use Neighborhood. The potential for the economic revitalization of this area will depend on the development of is supported by a set of recommended transportation improvements in and around the Rio Road/US 29 intersection.,whi l ; .ludo Awe gfade so ration of Rio Road and US 29 ., well . of of A pedestrian-bicycle bridge between the end of Berkmar Drive and the western edge of the Fashion Square Mall property wouldill increase connectivity between the southeastern and southwestern portions of the intersection area(see a photo simulation of the recommended bridge in Figure 4.1 and a concept plan in Figure 4.2). Mt Figure 4.1. A photosimulation of a bicycle/pedestrian bridge over US 29 at Berkmar Drive. The view is from Berkmar Drive looking east toward Fashion Square Mall. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-15 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV ; � . Potential Future 2-Story Structured I Parking i 1,11 US 29 Brie Yee aru?x rst St re Cr.th.g Pedestrian and Bicycle Overpass at m..■�. Fashion Square Mail/Berkmar Drive Yr.ry.r.11.rei MASTER PLAN TRANSPORTATION STUDY ® " Fe0n3 iy 13,2007 IM:..0 014 OIRc.TaauvUSwrw II 1 uc u+aC Pa tmg Figure 4.2. A concept plan of a pedestrian bridge over US 29 at Berkmar Drive. The photo simulation in Figures 4.3 through 4.5 illustrates one possible transformation of the southwestern quadrant of this intersection along Berkmar Drive. This transformation might occur incrementally and be driven by individual decisions made by various property owners. The I specific character of the new development wouldill be guided by the design guidelines and by the Small Area Plan recommended for the area. This area is also expected to be connected to Downtown Charlottesville and the University of Virginia with an enhanced bus or Bus Rapid Transit(BRT) service, once a certain level of redevelopment and land use intensification is reached. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-16 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV 3�4 I , „ - 1• Figure 4.3. A photosimulation of a mixed-use neighborhood along Berkmar Drive near US 29—existing conditions. Ireitgootezkoo ##. . s * �j , ., ' s.. Figure 4.4. A photosimulation showing a mixed-use neighborhood along Berkmar Drive near US 29 initial development. The recommended pedestrian bridge is visible just above the center. = .� " " i AO x,d014 M1 - x6;4 ""*""— Figure 4.5. A photosimulation of a mixed-use neighborhood along Berkmar Drive near US 29—development showing new streetscape, parking, bicycle lanes, and pedestrian amenities. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-17 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas . BOS DRAFT REV The Meadow Creek Parkway.This road is the subject of the Meadow Creek Parkway Final Report,May 2001,prepared by the consultants,Jones&Jones.Funding for the intersection of the Parkway and the 250 Bypass and for the County's portion of the Parkway has been identified and construction of the County's portion of the Parkway is nearly complete.The Parkway will have a linear park area along each side. Land uses shown on the Future Land Use Map in the immediate vicinity of the Parkway are derived from the Jones&Jones study,which still provides guidance for development in the area immediately adjacent to the Parkway and Rio Road corridor.The study recommendations should be considered during review of land use decisions. Albemarle Place. The rezoning for this development in the northwest corner of Hydraulic Road and US 29 has been approved.The project is mixed use and will include retail,a hotel,offices, and residences.The northern portion of the development(north of Sperry Marine)has been designed as a more conventional retail development.The land use pattern approved during the rezoning has been incorporated into the Future Land Use Map. The Hollymead Town Center area.This area,south of Airport Road and west of US 29,has been the subject of five separate rezonings,all now approved. Some of the proposed buildings, streets,and infrastructure have been constructed and are occupied.Others are still at the site plan stage.When built out,the area will include retail,restaurants,offices,an assisted living facility, and residences. The Airport Road Corridor&the Uptown.As the Hollymead/Piney Mountain area continues to grow,this area,along with the Airport,has the potential to become a major destination with a broad mix of commercial,residential,and employment uses.The Centers and residential areas in or near the Airport Road corridor will act as major transit hubs to support the future transit network proposed for the Places29 area.The Uptown would be a vibrant new urban center similar to a traditional downtown and intended to serve the needs of many people in a relatively small area.People can walk throughout the area,patronizing various businesses and amenities.The I Uptown wouldill take advantage of regional attractions,such as the Airport,the University of Virginia Research Park,and the new regional retail activities in the Destination Centers at North Pointe and Hollymead Town Center.This area may include a hotel and other uses that support living,working,and entertainment in the Uptown area.The ability to walk to urban services and entertainment from the campus-like setting of the Research Park should make it an even more attractive location for knowledge-based businesses. The Uptown is a long-term concept—it may take many years for the market to support such a concept in this area.The properties in the area now designated Uptown are currently zoned for industrial uses and it is recognized that these properties can,and may,develop as permitted under the existing zoning designations.The size,location,and orientation of the buildings and infrastructure should be constructed to allow for the ultimate evolution of the area to a more mixed use form.Any portion of the future Uptown owned by the University Foundation is intended to serve as an employment area,which may include supporting commercial uses,to be consistent with the opportunities and constraints of the Foundation's mission. A more detailed assessment of the Uptown concept is recommended as part of the Small Area Plan process in order to define the purpose,location,and use/design expectations more completely,as well as its market feasibility and timing. The Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport will develop according to its own master plan.The plan should be used as a guide in the review of land use/development decisions related to airport development and expansion.However,integrating the airport into the Places29 area is critical, Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-18 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV both with regard to the quality of the transportation infrastructure and the synergy with surrounding land uses—particularly the Uptown. Airport operations have impacts that require the Airport to be physically buffered from the surrounding areas.For this reason,the Airport has been designated as a single-use district on the Future Land Use Map,which is not required to follow the Neighborhood Model principles. I However,it is no 1COG important that the Airport be well-connected to and integrated into the transportation network,the City of Charlottesville,and the larger region.The Airport's continued growth will play an important role in the development of the Uptown,Hollymead,and the County. I Over the longer term,the combination of the Uptown,the Airport,the University of Virginia Research Park,and other activities in the area is expected to support the provision of transit service between this northern node of activity and the southern parts of the County and the City I of Charlottesville.This service wouldill be available once the necessary ridership levels in the larger Hollymead area have been reached. The University of Virginia Research Park will continue to develop as a major employment center.This Plan offers the University of Virginia Research Park the opportunity to include a more integrated amount of residential and commercial uses. The land uses in the Research Park that are shown on the Future Land Use Map are consistent with the University of Virginia Foundation's long-term,conceptual site plan.Future development within the Research Park may continue to develop in a campus-style form and with building footprints that are consistent with the existing zoning. The Rivanna Station Military Base will be home to some of the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA)operations and will be co-located with the National Ground Intelligence Center(NGIC). Over the next few years,several hundred employees are expected to join those now working at NGIC.With the addition of contractors expected to locate in the area to support NGIC and DIA projects,the base will become a major employment center.Those at the base will conduct intelligence,security,and information operations for military commanders and national decisionmakers. (Environmental Assessment:Expansion of Rivanna Station, Charlottesville, Virginia,December 2007) Areas Recommended for Small Area Plans Small Area Plans are a planning tool used to guide land use,zoning,transportation improvements,open space,and other capital improvements at a higher level of detail than is possible in a master plan.Due to this greater level of detail,a Small Area Plan can identify and address specific local conditions and opportunities for commercial revitalization and mixed-use development. Small Area Plans are a recommended implementation tool for subareas where significant redevelopment activity and transportation improvements are anticipatedreoommcaded in the Master Plan.The Small Area Plan wouldill allow land uses and the design of road improvements to be coordinated and for the business owners and residents of the planning area to participate in the planning process. Prior to the preparation of a Small Area Plan,any development proposals that come before the County for review and approval will be evaluated according to the Future Land Use Map in the current Master Plan. Small Area Plans are recommended for two areas: 1. The Rio Road and US 29 Intersection Study Area Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-19 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV The four quadrants around the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 are expected to experience a-great-affteunt-ePredevelopment. In particular,the southwestern quadrant with its multitude of properties would be well-served by the level of planning and coordination that a Small Area Plan can provide.In addition to encouraging and supporting redevelopment,the recommended road improvements for the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 can be designed during the same small area planning process.More information about the coordination of a small area plan prepared by the County with VDOT's support is given in Appendix 2,Implementation Project Descriptions in the description of Project Nos. 15 and 42,the intersection improvements at US 29 and Rio Road. 2. The Airport Road Corridor and Uptown Study Area The Airport Road Corridor and the Uptown include properties that wouldi11 be redeveloped,as well as properties where substantial new development is expected. Some portions of the area show a pattern of small property ownership,similar to the pattern in the US 29/Rio Road area,while other large areas are under single ownership. Coordination of land uses,interim road improvements to prolong the life of the at-grade intersections, and the ultimate improvements in and aroundfef the intersections of US 29/Timberwood Blvd.and Airport Road/US 2 , wouldil1 be the major goal of this Small Area Plan. Easy access from US 29 to the Airport and the University of Virginia Research Park is essential. Land Use Tables This section of the Master Plan describes the two tables that provide information about land uses and development standards required for specific land uses.The tables are intended to encourage mixed-use development and an urban form that supports the development character, transportation network,and environmental goals outlined in the Vision and Guiding Principles. The Land Use Tables LU 1 and LU2(at the end of the chapter)address the following key areas: • Mix of uses within Land Use designations • Building size,heights,and footprint recommendations • Retail and commercial size and specific use recommendations • Recommended limitations of some key uses The following discussion of the intent of these development guidelines provides a framework for evaluating uses according to the recommendations made in Tables LU1 and LU2. Mix of Uses within Land Use Designations The Master Plan defines a range of land use types,intensities,and sizes for each land use designation.These recommendations attempt to ensure that uses within each designation complement each other and achieve the purpose of the designation. For example,lower intensity employment uses and auto commercial service uses are not allowed in the urban mixed use portions of the Uptown,because these uses do not support the more active and urban character that is desired for the Uptown.At the same time,these uses are allowed relatively close to the Uptown in nearby Centers and Light Industrial and Office/R&D/Flex/Light Industrial designated areas. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-20 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV both with regard to the quality of the transportation infrastructure and the synergy with surrounding land uses—particularly the Uptown. Airport operations have impacts that require the Airport to be physically buffered from the surrounding areas. For this reason,the Airport has been designated as a single-use district on the Future Land Use Map,which is not required to follow the Neighborhood Model principles. I However,it is ne-less-important that the Airport be well-connected to and integrated into the transportation network,the City of Charlottesville,and the larger region.The Airport's continued growth will play an important role in the development of the Uptown,Hollymead,and the County. I Over the longer term,the combination of the Uptown,the Airport,the University of Virginia Research Park;and other activities in the area is expected to support the provision of transit service between this northern node of activity and the southern parts of the County and the City I of Charlottesville.This service wouldill be available once the necessary ridership levels in the larger Hollymead area have been reached. The University of Virginia Research Park will continue to develop as a major employment center.This Plan offers the University of Virginia Research Park the opportunity to include a more integrated amount of residential and commercial uses. The land uses in the Research Park that are shown on the Future Land Use Map are consistent with the University of Virginia Foundation's long-term,conceptual site plan. Future development within the Research Park may continue to develop in a campus-style form and with building footprints that are consistent with the existing zoning. The Rivanna Station Military Base will be home to some of the Defense Intelligence Agency's (DIA)operations and will be co-located with the National Ground Intelligence Center(NGIC). Over the next few years,several hundred employees are expected to join those now working at NGIC.With the addition of contractors expected to locate in the area to support NGIC and DIA projects,the base will become a major employment center.Those at the base will conduct intelligence,security,and information operations for military commanders and national decisionmakers.(Environmental Assessment:Expansion of Rivanna Station, Charlottesville, Virginia,December 2007) Areas Recommended for Small Area Plans Small Area Plans are a planning tool used to guide land use,zoning,transportation improvements,open space,and other capital improvements at a higher level of detail than is possible in a master plan. Due to this greater level of detail,a Small Area Plan can identify and address specific local conditions and opportunities for commercial revitalization and mixed-use development. Small Area Plans are a recommended implementation tool for subareas where significant redevelopment activity and transportation improvements are anticipatedreeeended in the Master Plan.The Small Area Plan wouldill allow land uses and the design of road improvements to be coordinated and for the business owners and residents of the planning area to participate in the planning process.Prior to the preparation of a Small Area Plan.any development proposals that come before the County for review and approval will be evaluated according to the Future Land Use Map in the current Master Plan. Small Area Plans are recommended for two areas: 1. The Rio Road and US 29 Intersection Study Area Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-19 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV The four quadrants around the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 are expected to experience a great amount of redevelopment. In particular,the southwestern quadrant with its multitude of properties would be well-served by the level of planning and coordination that a Small Area Plan can provide. In addition to encouraging and supporting redevelopment,the recommended road improvements for the intersection of Rio Road and US 29 can be designed during the same small area planning process. More information about the coordination of a small area plan prepared by the County with VDOT's supportdc3ign for the grade 3cparation is given in Appendix 2,Implementation Project Descriptions in the description of Project Nos. 15 and 42,the intersection improvements at US 29 and Rio Road. 2. The Airport Road Corridor and Uptown Study Area The Airport Road Corridor and the Uptown include properties that wouldill be redeveloped,as well as properties where substantial new development is expected. Some portions of the area show a pattern of small property ownership,similar to the pattern in the US 29/Rio Road area,while other large areas are under single ownership. Coordination of land uses,interim road improvements to prolong the life of the at-grade intersections, and the ultimate improvements in and around€ef the intersections of US 29/Timberwood Blvd. and Airport Road/US 29, wouldill be the major goal of this Small Area Plan. Easy access from US 29 to the Airport and the University of Virginia Research Park is essential. Land Use Tables This section of the Master Plan describes the two tables that provide information about land uses and development standards required for specific land uses.The tables are intended to encourage mixed-use development and an urban form that supports the development character, transportation network, and environmental goals outlined in the Vision and Guiding Principles. The Land Use Tables LU1 and LU2 (at the end of the chapter)address the following key areas: • Mix of uses within Land Use designations • Building size,heights,and footprint recommendations • Retail and commercial size and specific use recommendations • Recommended limitations of some key uses The following discussion of the intent of these development guidelines provides a framework for evaluating uses according to the recommendations made in Tables LU 1 and LU2. Mix of Uses within Land Use Designations The Master Plan defines a range of land use types,intensities,and sizes for each land use designation.These recommendations attempt to ensure that uses within each designation complement each other and achieve the purpose of the designation. For example,lower intensity employment uses and auto commercial service uses are not allowed in the urban mixed use portions of the Uptown,because these uses do not support the more active and urban character that is desired for the Uptown. At the same time,these uses are allowed relatively close to the Uptown in nearby Centers and Light Industrial and Office/R&D/Flex/Light Industrial designated areas. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-20 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Building Size and Footprint Recommendations The land use tables define a maximum building footprint for primary and secondary uses in certain land use designations.These limitations support the desired circulation network and block size in the Places29 area. Single buildings should not be so large that they become a barrier to pedestrian circulation,particularly within Centers.The building size recommendations are generally smallest in the Neighborhood Service Centers,which complements the character of the residential neighborhoods that surround most of these Centers.The tables allow larger building sizes in Community and Destination Centers. In the Uptown,the most intensive part of the Places29 area,the desired building footprint sizes are somewhat smaller to encourage the smaller block sizes that support pedestrian circulation—a very high priority in the Uptown. Retail Commercial Size and Specific Use Recommendations One reason to limit the size of retail/commercial building footprints is to support the development of a more pedestrian-friendly circulation network.There are additional reasons for defming a desirable maximum size for retail/commercial buildings or uses in some land use designations. These are related to the desired function and urban design quality of particular places within the Places29 area. For example,under community and regional retail land uses,grocery stores of up to 15,000 sq.ft.are allowed in Neighborhood Service Centers.This recommendation wouldi1l encourage grocery stores of the usual size(50,000-60,000 sq.ft.)to locate in Community or Destination Centers,but allow smaller scale stores that are compatible with a Neighborhood Service Center to locate there.A small grocery store would not dominate the Center or result in undesirable levels of traffic. Similarly,the size of single-building footprints in Community and Destination Centers is also restricted.Larger buildings may be permitted by exception if they support the desired urban form of these centers.A smaller building footprint also encourages the construction of multi-level retail buildings for larger retailers. There are other uses that require special guidance.For example,auto commercial sales and service businesses are required to serve the needs of Albemarle County residents and workers. The US 29 corridor has areas where these uses are provided for today,and,given the high level of regional access to the Places29 area,this is a logical location for auto sales and service activities. However,these uses often conflict with the desired pedestrian environment,and they can be disruptive to the neighborhood character,because they take up so much space.For these reasons, the land use tables limit the maximum size of single auto commercial service uses in the Centers, in addition to limitations on activities that could be a nuisance to adjacent uses. Limitations Regarding Some Key Uses There are some uses listed in Tables LU 1 and LU2 that have criteria related to business practices and site configuration.These are due to potential conflicts with surrounding uses and the potential for negative impacts on the pedestrian and urban character of Centers and Neighborhoods.An example is the recommendation that,in Centers,all auto commercial sales and service businesses be located within a building(except for employee/customer parking and gas pumps). Protection from Nuisance Effects: Some designations include a criterion intended to ensure that noise,odor,vibrations,and other potential nuisances will not adversely affect the primary or I surrounding uses.Examples of this include some auto commercial service uses and light manufacturing/storage/distribution uses.Typical operating requirements would require that potential nuisance activities occur within buildings and that hours of operation be restricted. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-21 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Protection from Potential Visual Effects: Some uses rely on storage yards or parking lots that are used for storage of vehicles(e.g.,auto sales and service uses). In some designations where the urban character is pedestrian-oriented and creates value for adjacent development,these uses are confined or not allowed. Parks & Green Systems Open Space Defined The County's Comprehensive Plan recognizes the important role of public open spaces in urban development and their pivotal role in establishing the kind of urban environment envisioned for the Development Areas.For Places29,parks and green systems are synonymous with the term "open space."The term open space has multiple applications.Open spaces may be environmentally sensitive areas which need to be protected,such as floodplain,steep slopes, wetlands,and streams. Created open spaces that are part of Neighborhoods, such as parks, squares,pocket parks,and tot lots,provide an important contrast between built and natural forms within the Places29 area.These open spaces also provide opportunities for social and recreational activities in close proximity to residential,commercial,and employment uses.In addition,if these open spaces are designed to provide a sense of arrival and place,open spaces can become community focal points with a strong civic character.As civic areas,open space may be: • Landscaped parks,sometimes called village greens or village commons • Active recreational areas,such as tot lots or playing fields • Paved plazas with seating areas • Large parks with a combination of these features • Grassy lawns or play areas that adjoin institutional uses such as schools or libraries Most importantly,a civic area is a feature of a Center or Neighborhood that is accessible to the public and/or nearby residents,visitors,or clients(See Figures 4.6 and 4.7). Ei s .yr Figure 4.6. An example of a smaller urban open space. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-22 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV The Places29 area consists of places that people y want to go throughrbut and want to go to.Two elements of urban form exacerbate this supply/demand interaction.One is the length of the Places29 corridor and the other is the dispersed pattern of commercial land uses throughout the Places29 area.The US 29 North Corridor is over 10 miles long,so trips to and from land uses in the southern portion of the Places29 area look like"through"trips in the northern portion. Similarly,trips to and from land uses in the northern portion of the Places29 area look like "through"trips in the southern portion. The dispersed,low-density,single-use form of development that has occurred in the past along the US 29 Corridor increases travel times and the number of trips for travelers,residents,and employees in the corridor.It also limits the potential effectiveness of transit service. Both of these conditions exacerbate the"demand"portion of the transportation problem by reducing the effectiveness of alternate modes of travel and increasing reliance on travel by autos. The supply and demand issues are also complicated because US 29 is a National Highway of Significance—the only continuous north-south roadway in the Places29 area;nearly all traffic in the Northern Development Areas winds up on US 29,regardless of the length or destination of the trip.Additionally,US 29 serves a relatively small number of trips that are passing through Albemarle County,and,even though their proportion is small,they are important trips from a regional and statewide perspective. Both supply and demand issues must be addressed by the transportation network for the Places29 area.This future transportation network has to consider a more robust network of roadways that wouldill support multimodal travel together with an urban form that encourages transit,walking, and bicycling. So,while people in the Places29 area will continue to drive,the transportation network needs to expand the choices for movement within and through the area,while the pattern of development takes advantage of and facilitates those expanded choices. The process used to develop the recommended transportation network for Places29 reflects: • The urban structure(land use patterns and built form)of the corridor • The potential for the corridor to accommodate future growth • How the current traffic operations on US 29 influence travel patterns • Potential roadway improvements on US 29 and parallel to it • Potential future roadway connections in and to the Places29 area The Future Transportation Network,as illustrated in Figure 4.8,includes the following layers: • Improvements to US 29 and associated improvements tor parallel and connecting roads that are necessary to support the changes on US 29 (primarily in the areas where major intersection improvements, eeparatieffs,are recommended) • Improvements to a eere-network of parallel roads(primarily Hillsdale and Berkmar Drives,and Meadow Creek Parkway)that are needed independent of private development projects • Roadways neeeseauy-te-supporting private development that should be integrated into the corridor network to provide for continuity of movement(Shown in green) • Potential Roadways projected 4 d beyond the 2025 planning horizon(Shown in blue) Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-27 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV The potential for transit,bike,and walk trips in the corridor was estimated using a series of factors that were applied within the travel forecasting model.The model estimates that about 7,000 trips could occur on transit and that about 9,000 trips could be sufficiently short that they could be accomplished with non-auto modes. In the aggregate,this level of transit use would represent about 2 percent of the overall travel demand and the non-auto potential would be a similar amount.The combined amounts would reduce the auto trip making by about 5 percent, which could defer the timing of some of the improvements proposed for the corridor,but would not ultimately preclude the need for the proposed improvements. The Places29 transit evaluation is based on a forecasting methodology that focused more on the three D's(design,density,and diversity of uses in the urban form)than on ridership forecasting techniques;it is important to note that the"transit"numbers are not a ridership forecast—they are an indication of the potential for transit use related to development patterns.The factors used in the transportation model to estimate the number of transit and bicycle/pedestrian trips were very conservative so that the results of the modeling would be valid for the roadway network in the event that transit was not extended beyond the current CTS service and that little additional provision was made for cyclists and pedestrians.It is very likely that transit ridership would be significantly higher once the area builds out in a transit-supportive urban form,and a useful, attractive transit system is put in place. Similarly,as more walkable areas develop and are connected with paths and trails,it is likely that more people will walk and bicycle to transit and/or to their final destinations. So,in addition to the roadways shown in the Transportation Network,the network includes the following provisions for multimodal travel: • Three types of transit service: first,an express bus or Bus Rapid Transit(BRT)service on US 29 that initially connects the City to the Rio Road/US 29 intersection area and later extends to the Uptown near Airport Road,with route extensions that serve the airport and the employment concentrations near Boulders Road.The BRT service would be supplemented with a second type of transit,a circulator service that connects to centers on the parallel road system.The circulator service would integrate with the third type of transit service,the local CTS bus routes in the southern portion of the Places29 area. • Sidewalks and paths for pedestrians: a network of conventional sidewalks and shared paths that are integrated into the roadway network.Provisions for crossing US 29 are included as signalized crosswalks and at least one pedestrian overcrossing(see Figures 4.1 and 4.2 • Bicycle lanes,paths,and trails: onstreet bicycle lanes are linked with a system of green corridors that is integrated with the recommended land uses,a network of multi-use paths and trails to provide for a connected system of bicycle routes. Roadway Elements Neighborhoods 1 and 2.For Ithe transportation network between the 250 Bypass and the South Fork of the Rivanna River,feeeffaneeds4liet efforts should be made to preserve at-grade intersections at Hydraulic Road,Rio Road,and Hilton Heights Road. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-28 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Parallel roadways in this area are Berkmar Drive and Hillsdale Drive,portions of which currently exist.These roadways would be extended to provide a more complete road network parallel to US 29.A Small Area Planning process wouldill be used to develop the ultimate land use and transportation recommendations for this area. Hollymead and Piney Mountain. US 29 from the South Fork of the Rivanna to Towncenter Drive would be widened to three lanes in each direction,but would preserve the rural cross section(from the South Fork to Ashwood Blvd.).A parallel road would be added on the west side of US 29 as an extension of Berkmar Drive with a bridge across the South Fork of the Rivanna River to connect to the existing segment of Berkmar Drive. Streets connecting US 29 to Earlysville Road would ill also be constructed. From Hollymead Town Center to Lewis and Clark Drive,efforts should be made to preserve two existing signalized at-grade intersections on US 29—Airport Road/Proffit Road and Timberwood Blvd. Plan timcframc.The small area planning process wouldifl be used to develop the ultimate land use and transportation recommendations.A signal would be added on US 29 at the intersection with Airport Acres North.North Pointe Boulevard would provide a new parallel road on the east side of US 29.The roadway network in the Uptown would be expanded to increase connectivity on the west side of US 29.A signal would be added on US 29 at the intersection of Northside Drive.The six-lane cross section on US 29 would be extended through Lewis and Clark Drive, but would transition back to the existing four-lane cross section at the North Fork of the Rivanna river crossing. North of Lewis and Clark Drive,signals are recommended at the intersections of US 29 with Austin Drive and Dickerson Road.The cross section of US 29 would remain a four-lane rural divided,except near the signalized intersections where turn lanes would be necessary. Transit Elements The goal of the transit improvements recommended for the Places29 area is to provide an alternative form of transportation for those who prefer transit,as well as those who cannot or choose not to drive.The transportation modeling conducted as part of the US 29 North Corridor Transportation Study showed that,at a minimum,two percent of the total daily trips would be by transit.This is a relatively small number when compared to the levels of transit use found in other parts of the country that have extensive transit networks with attractive service and amenities for riders. The current transit system in the Charlottesville metropolitan area is a"hub and spoke"system, where most of the looped and overlapping routes serve the City itself.One primary spoke serves the southern portion of the US 29 North corridor,requiring that all potential transit riders use that single route. Such a linear system is much less efficient than one that offers multiple routes, permits riders to walk to the bus stop,and provides amenities,such as benches and signs with route/time information.The current service in the Places29 area is based on a more suburban form of development,rather than the more compact urban form that is proposed in this Plan. So, the current service does not serve as a good basis for projecting the ridership of a new system; any model built on current,observed data would not be an appropriate representation of what could be achieved by a high quality transit system.The transit system recommended for the Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-29 • Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Places29 area,when combined with the City's network,is intended to be attractive to a larger percentage of potential users.The recommended service plan outlined in the Regional Transit Authority Final Report would increase the attractiveness of transit by significantly improving the reliability of service,reducing travel time,and improving transfers to other routes. An example of the type of transit system recommended for the Places29 area is shown in Figure 4.9.Two types of service are included in the recommended network.One service type would be express bus service or bus rapid transit(BRT)that would operate on US 29 and would provide a rapid connection from Charlottesville and UVA to Airport Road,the proposed Uptown,and the concentrations of employment at the UVA Research Park,the Rivanna Station Military Base,and the GE facility.Widely spaced stops would be provided at Hydraulic Road,Greenbrier Road,and on either side of Rio Road.This rapid service would be supplemented with local circulator routes that would operate either as bus or streetcar.Transit service will need to be frequent and consistent. Stops will need to be developed with facilities adequate to encourage and support frequent use. Shelters,benches,and route information should be provided at each stop. Service routes and stops need to be well-connected to the community with sidewalks,bicycle facilities, and park and ride lots where appropriate. Bicycle and Pedestrian Elements A strong pedestrian-and bicycle-oriented infrastructure that connects Neighborhoods and Centers is a critical component of a healthy and livable community.Providing multi-use paths,trails,and bikeways encourages Places29 area residents to complete more of their trips without getting into I their cars,which wouldill provide health benefits,reduce the vehicular miles traveled(VMT),and result in a cleaner environment for the community.The bicycle and trails network illustrated on the Parks&Green Systems Map builds upon the existing and proposed trails in the County's Greenways Plan,as well as existing on and offstreet bicycle lanes,multi-use paths,and trails. Bicycle Lanes.The existing and proposed onstreet bike lanes are closely integrated with the greater network of bicycle facilities formed by a combination of low-speed streets,multi-use paths,and trails.Within this overall network,bicycle lanes provide onstreet facilities for bicyclists throughout a number of the neighborhoods along US 29.The proposed bicycle lanes shown on the Parks&Green Systems Map wouldill enhance the limited network of existing bicycle lanes and accommodate anticipated future increases in bicycle traffic as redevelopment and new development take place in the area. Multi-Use Paths.Multi-use paths are an essential component of the Places29 bicycle and pedestrian network. Multi-use paths are included in the Places29 network primarily along major thoroughfares(e.g.,US 29 and portions of Berkmar Drive Extended)where the safe accommodation of pedestrians and bicyclists requires a greater separation from moving traffic and/or where development along the street is dominated by deeper landscaped setbacks and a lower intensity of development.Multi-use paths are also included along major greenways and natural areas.Because of the destinations they serve and the natural character of landscapes they I traverse,multi-use paths wouldill be used by bicycle commuters,recreational bikers,and pedestrians.While they typically follow road alignments,in some cases they diverge and provide improved access along natural features. Trails.The network of trails shown on the Parks&Green Systems Map provides access to natural areas and features,as well as recreational amenities throughout the Places29 area.Routed along streams and through preserved areas,they provide residents with opportunities for passive Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-30 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV recreation and for escape from the faster pace of urban life.The trails also function as scenic route segments along pedestrian and bicycle trips to shopping and employment destinations. I Grade-Separated and At-Grade Crossings of US 29 for Pedestrians and Bicyclists.The ability to cross US 29 safely is essential to the success of the bicycle and trails network.The Parks&Green Systems Map identifies locations where adjacent grades support the construction of grade-separated bicycle-pedestrian bridges or undercrossings and where at-grade crossings could be located.An additional overcrossing is illustrated on pages 4-15 and 4-16.gieyele-and the two river crossings,opportunities exist to route multi-use paths or trails underneath US 29.Where pedestrians and bicyclists cross US 29 at at-grade crossings,additional pedestrian refuges will be incorporated into the standard US 29 cross section. Cross Sections for Key Network Roads To support the creation of a multimodal transportation network,this section of the Plan provides guidance on how to integrate all the transportation modes—walking,bicycling,transit,autos,and freight—into the design of the roadway.This guidance is in the form of typical cross sections that illustrate the relationships among modes and the overall lane requirements for key network roads. The cross sections illustrate recommended dimensions for traffic,parking,bike lanes,sidewalks, and paths.Landscape strips,setbacks,and frontage types are also shown on the diagrams. It is important to note that the dimensions shown on each of the cross section diagrams are intended to reflect average conditions and may vary depending upon the right-of-way available for a specific roadway or segment of a roadway.Turn lanes and parking bays are shown on the diagrams to I illustrate how these roadway elements fit into the cross section.Not all locations wouldill have the same elements as shown on the sample cross sections. The responsibility for ongoing maintenance of these roadways is also a consideration.Typically, the Virginia Dept. of Transportation(VDOT)maintains roadways in the County,including most sidewalks.The County has accepted maintenance responsibility for the trees in landscaped strips and medians. The cross sections recommended in this Master Plan are grouped according to the type of road: US 29,boulevards and other four-lane roads,and avenues and other two-lane roads.The four cross sections for US 29 are repeated and additional cross sections for two-lane and four-lane roadways are provided in Appendix 3.The caption for each cross section contains either a letter in a box or a number in parentheses.These show,on the map at the end of Appendix 3,the roadway segments to which each cross section applies. US 29. For US 29,there are three general cross sections:four-lane,six-lane,and eight-lane.US 29 will continue to be a multi-lane principal arterial with a modified boulevard design that alternates between urban and rural cross sections as it travels through the Places29 area.Table 4.1 lists the cross sections that occur along US 29.Each cross section is illustrated after the table. The letters or numbers in squares beside the captions correspond to the sections shown on the map at the end of Appendix 3.Roadway Cross Sections. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network [12 2010] • Page 4-31 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV Table 4.1. Overview of US 29 Cross Sections Segment Basic Cross Section Hydraulic Road to Polo Eight through lanes with median,no onstreet parking or bike lanes, Grounds Road urban drainage; sidewalk on one side of the roadway,multi-use (pedestrian and bicycle)path on the other. (See Figure 4.10) Polo Grounds Road to Six lanes with wide median,no onstreet parking or bike lanes,rural Hollymead Town Center and drainage;pedestrians and bicycles on paths adjacent to the Airport Drive to the North roadway. (See Figure 4.11) Fork of the Rivanna River Hollymead Town Center to Six lanes with median and right turn lanes,no onstreet parking or Airport Road bike lanes,urban drainage; sidewalk/path on one side of the roadway,multi-use path on the other. (See Figure 4.12) North of the North Fork of the Four lanes with wide median,no onstreet parking or bike lanes, Rivanna River rural drainage;multi-use path on one side of the roadway. (See Figure 4.13) 1 "*.avr..........ar"."...% 0%.1".7...,.......„,....."' ::' Figure 4.10. US 29, a typical eight-lane section,as used from Hydraulic Road A to Polo Grounds Road. Right turn lanes may be added, as necessary. Left turn lanes will be incorporated into the median.The multi-use path may be placed on the other side of the street than shown. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-32 Places29: A Master Plan for the Northern Development Areas • BOS DRAFT REV ------ -.---,,,,sw.#00,,, e , , j444t,169.4.,..'*--' 1 j I 11 1 it 1 ' i .. _ , ,, „, , ...____,:k _ i ,,w k 4:— -\"7"---1---: _ B E Figure 4.11. US 29, six-lane rural section from Polo Grounds Road to Towncenter Drive and from Airport Road to the North Fork of the Rivanna River. r t v 1. 1 l "1 +1 1 $ 1 I J N h I I . t i " 1 1 1 i { I c Figure 4.12. US 29 Six-Lane Section with Urban Frontage,from Hollymead Town Center to Airport Road. Building setbacks will be 30 feet from the back of the curb.This section shows noncontinuous right turn lanes. Chapter 4. Future Land Use Plan and Transportation Network[12 2010] • Page 4-33 4 cf o$�C f 11r ,.tvert,4, �IRGII�IP COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: CCP 2012-00001 Staff: Andy Sorrell, Senior Planner Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: April 3, 2012 N/A Owner/s: Albemarle County Applicant: Office of Facilities Development/ Albemarle County Police Department Tax Map Parcels: 129-2A Acreage: 169.12 acres Location: end of Rt. 704 Fortune Lane, approximately 1.4 miles south of intersection of Fortune Lane and Riding Club Rd Zoning District: RA, Rural Areas Magisterial District: Samuel Miller Conditions or Proffers: No Proposal: Compliance with the Comprehensive Comprehensive Plan Designation: Plan review for a potential law enforcement Rural Area training facility, consisting of an outdoor firing range, at the end of Fortune Lane in Keene. Use& Character of Property: Use of Surrounding Properties: wooded, open Location of the closed Keene landfill, open space, agricultural space, wooded Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The site will utilize an under-used county- 1. The proposed use on the site will owned property. 2. The site's size and remote nature isolates produce noise at property lines that are it from more densely populated areas. above the noise ordinance provisions of 3. The location of the firing range on site will the zoning ordinance. further limit adverse impact on adjacent agricultural properties. 4. The site's location limits impacts to natural, scenic, historic and cultural resources. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Commission find that the location, character and extent of the proposed Law Enforcement Firing Range facility is in substantial accord with the County's Comprehensive Plan for the reasons identified as the favorable factors of the staff report as outlined in said report. CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 1 4- STAFF PERSON: Andrew V. Sorrell PLANNING COMMISSION: April 3, 2012 CCP 201200001 LAW ENFORCEMENT FIRING RANGE Review for Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan (Va. Code 15.2- 2232) BACKGROUND This is a proposal to establish a County owned and operated firearms training facility consisting of a 100 yard outdoor fenced firing range, classroom building, toilet facilities, access road and parking area. The facility is proposed on county-owned property which is the site of the closed Keene landfill (Attachment A). The Albemarle Police Department currently utilizes a private firearms range to maintain the necessary firearms training certifications for the County's Police Officers. The current site is inadequate for police training because of limitations on when training can be scheduled and restrictions that prevent realistic, scenario—based training. In addition, the County Police Department does not have a say in how the range is operated, maintained or monitored. In order to reduce liability concerns and increase officer proficiency and safety the Police Department needs a facility that will permit more frequent training (at least three times a year). A dedicated law enforcement firing range owned, operated and managed by the County will permit more frequent personnel training and has been identified as a high priority in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). The proposed firearms training facility is part of a larger, long-term CIP request for a public safety training center (PSTC). The PSTC was proposed in a 2008 study prepared by TENG & Associates, Inc. The TENG study conducted a site analysis of several county-owned properties for a PSTC that could meet the current and future training needs of the Albemarle Police Department and Fire/Rescue Department. Because of the sensitive nature of a firing range, the County has limited options for finding a site to operate the facility upon. The 2008 TENG Study evaluated three county-owned properties: the Preddy Creek site (northeast part of the County, east of Rt. 29), the Byrom site (far northwest part of the County) and the Keene Landfill site (southern part of County near Rt. 6). The Preddy site was not preferred because of its proximity to adjacent localities and poor soils. The Byrom site was not preferred because it is under a conservation easement, it is close to the Shenandoah National Park and the property has a significant amount of critical slope. The Keene landfill site was the preferred site and the 2008 study included an overall conceptual master plan for the PSTC on the property. The conceptual master plan proposed a centralized public safety training center include a firing range, a burn building, a vehicle extrication area, a hazard materials training area, an emergency vehicles course, and classroom space together with associated support structures (Attachment C). CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 2 Due in part to the increasing difficulty in utilizing the current private firearms range, the County Police Department revised the PSTC CIP request to break out as a separate request the infrastructure necessary to complete only the firearms training facility. The Police Department therefore has requested only the proposed firearms training facility (firing range) to be reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan at this time. Other phases of the PSTC which have not been submitted as part of this review request have not been reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and will need such a review if and when they are proposed to be constructed in the future. PURPOSE OF REVIEW A Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan Review (or "2232 Review") considers whether the general location, character and extent of a proposed public facility are in substantial accord with the adopted Comprehensive Plan. It is reviewed by the Planning Commission and the Commission's findings are forwarded to the Board of Supervisors for their information. No additional action is required of the Board. The Commission's action is only related to the appropriateness of the site for this public use, and is not an action or recommendation on whether the station should be funded and/or constructed. CHARACTER OF THE SITE /AREA The firing range is proposed to be located on a 169.12 acre parcel that contains the closed Keene Landfill. The firing range would be located south of the landfill disposal boundaries or disposal "cells" (Attachment C). The site is bounded by rural agricultural land on the east, west and south sides with one adjacent property to the east within the Totier Creek Agricultural — Forestal District (parcel 129-3). Parcel 129-3 is 145 acres in area; approximately 95 acres are wooded (including the portion adjacent to the proposed firing range site) with the remaining 50 acres in open field and pasture with livestock (cattle). Staff reviewed the proposed firing range with the Agricultural-Forestal District Committee at their meeting on March 19, 2012. The consensus of the Committee was that the proposed firing range was not a use that complemented or was otherwise conducive to agricultural or forestal uses. The Committee also felt that if such a use was to be approved, that every measure be taken to mitigate the noise and safety impacts to adjacent property within the District. Measures such as retaining and enhancing the wooded buffer adjacent to the proposed range and orienting the range north facing rather than south facing to reduce the likelihood of rounds leaving the property were specifically addressed by the Committee. The property is within the Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District. Within a one mile radius, there are approximately four historic structures that contribute to the District. None of these structures will be impacted by this proposal. On the north, along Fortune Lane, smaller rural residential parcels exist. Within a one mile radius of the proposed range location, there are approximately 19 homes. Four homes are located on Fortune Lane the closest being approximately 2/3 of a mile to the north of the firing range site. Approximately fifteen homes front on Irish Road within a one mile radius, the closest being approximately IA mile to the south of the firing range site. The property is designated as Rural Area in the Comprehensive Plan; and this area drains into the Totier Creek Water Supply Watershed. It has been designated as Rural Area since adoption of the 1971 (first) Comprehensive Plan. The Keene Sanitary Landfill was permitted on the site in approximately 1974 and the property was utilized as CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 3 a municipal landfill until its closure in May 1991. The site is zoned for rural area uses and is outside of the jurisdictional boundaries for water and sewer. SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL -11 The primary component of this project is the proposed 350' by 150' outdoor firing 20 foot tall side and range surrounded by rear berms. The firing range is proposed to be a 100 yard range with twelve firing lanes, expandable to 24 lanes. The firing line would be covered (roofed) and paved in asphalt. The range floor and berms would be grassed. The range is proposed Figure 1: Perspective View - Firing Range to accommodate handguns and rifles. Other components of the project would include road improvements onsite to include a gravel access road and parking area, toilet facilities, perimeter fencing around the range, and a learning cottage (classroom). The project will require the submittal and approval of a site plan and an erosion control plan. Ideally, the County desires to begin construction on the facility in the spring of 2013 with the facility opening in the summer of 2013. This timeframe for opening the firing range is considered critical for providing the necessary training and qualifying for the Police Department. If the County Police Department's current arrangement was terminated and the County had no firing range, then county personnel would need to travel outside of the County to receive necessary training. Types of Activity Activity onsite will involve firearms and special weapons training and qualification for members of the County Police Department. Other in-service activities could include simmunition (force-on-force) training, less-than lethal training, and any other outdoor law enforcement training where a controlled environment is necessary. In addition to in- service training, schools and special events are proposed to be held from time-to-time. Examples of a training school could include a five-day school to teach new officers during a basic training academy class or training veteran officers on a new weapon system or training officers on law enforcement tactics. Examples of special events could include a law enforcement shooting competition or a firearms safety class offered to the public. Site Access The site would be accessed from the terminus of Fortune Lane, Route 704 which is currently a gravel public road. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has indicated that Fortune Lane will be hard-surfaced in 2012 as part of the Rural Rustic Road program. VDOT has stated that due to the low amount of additional traffic generated by the proposed firing range that Fortune Lane remains eligible for the rural rustic program and the hard-surfacing of the road scheduled to occur. Frequency of Use The County Police Department anticipated using the site three to four days per week which may include 10-20 police vehicles and up to 20 people per use. In addition to in- service training for police officers, schools and special events are proposed to be held from time-to-time. Except for special cases or events, it is not anticipated that the site will be used on weekends. Hours of operation would vary by the season, but would CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 4 • conclude no later than 10:00 PM. Periodic night training is required by the Police Department's training standards. Such night training would occur no more than four times per quarter. Facility Users It is anticipated that the facility will primarily serve the Albemarle County Police Department and the Albemarle County Sheriffs Department. The Charlottesville Police Department has committed to providing funding for the project so they will be users as well. It is anticipated that there will be up to 20 people on site per use. The firing range would be staffed by the County Police Department when training is being conducted. The possibility exists to partner with other local governments, federal agencies and private corporations for use of the facility. A public-private partnership with a corporation would be based on regional law enforcement needs first and then if available, the range could be available for lease by corporations that require firearms training. If the County was to enter into such a lease agreement, county personnel would be present to monitor the training activity and such expense would be built into the lease agreement. Noise Measures Noise abatement has been addressed through facility location and design features. The 2008 TENG Study concluded that placement of � the firing range at the rear of • the property where the site elevation is low would aid in keeping generated noise levels low. The 2008 TENG study proposed to orient the range facing south with earthen • berms on three sides 20 feet in height (Attachment C). Taking Figure 2: Perspective View— Existing Tree Buffer Size from the firing line, preliminary noise calculations for four rifles and twelve handguns firing simultaneously produced a decibel level of 90 for a 320 foot radius from the firing line at the range site. The 90 decibel radius was contained within the property boundaries. The noise level calculations take into account a grass-surfaced firing range with 20 foot tall side and rear earthen berms with a wooded buffer behind them. At the site of the proposed range, planted loblolly pines are approximately 15 feet tall and are 6-8 years old (Figure 2). Attachment D provides the estimates noise levels for the proposed firing range. At the property line. noise levels range 71 to 86 decibels on the western property line closest to the facility and 69 to 82 decibels on the eastern property line closest to the facility. The northern property line at Fortune Lane furthest from the facility would be approximately 52 dB. Figure 2 below illustrates real-world examples of noise levels. CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 5 Fi ure 3: Exam les of Noise Levels a roximate Lawn mower (96 dB); motorcycle at 25 ft (90 dB) 90-100 dB Food blender (88 dB); garbage disposal (80 dB). 80-89 dB Passenger car at 65 mph at 25 ft (77 dB); radio or TV-audio, 70-79 dB vacuum cleaner (70 dB) Conversation in restaurant, office, Air conditioning unit at 100 ft 60-69 dB Quiet suburb, conversation at home. 50-59 dB Source: http://www.industrialnoisecontrol.com/comparative-noise-examples.htm Staff has determined that as a public use, the proposed firing range is exempt from noise ordinance provisions of the zoning ordinance. However, the noise ordinance can serve as general benchmark of what noise levels are appropriate. For uses located in the Rural Areas, noise levels are permitted to be 55 dB at night and 60 dB during the day. Therefore, using the noise ordinance provisions as a benchmark, the facility would be over the desired limits of the noise ordinance at the property lines closest to the proposed range site but not significantly so, given the nature of the use/facility. Within the portion identified as "general location of proposed firing range" on Attachment E, the County is researching the best location and orientation for the firing range. The 2008 TENG study recommended the firing range face south. This recommendation included supporting noise level documentation. A general area has been identified for the location of the firing range so that if additional research and noise data indicate that noise and other concerns can be mitigated more effectively by adjusting the range's location and/or orientation within the identified area, that the County have the flexibility to do so. In addition to the design measures on the range itself, other noise mitigation measures may include retaining and cultivating the wooded buffer of planted loblolly pine (currently 15 feet tall) as well as using engineered baffles or barriers. Other Safety and Security Measures The facility will be secured with perimeter fencing which will include signage warning of the firing range. The fencing will be secured when the facility is not in use. The access road will include a gate which will remain locked when the facility is not in use. As proposed in this request, ammunition and weapons are not proposed to be stored onsite. A storage building would be used for keeping maintenance, cleaning and targeting supplies onsite. Outdoor lighting will be minimal and just include, several outdoor light fixtures affixed to the classroom, bathroom and cover over the firing line. While the potential exists for an errant bullet to leave any outdoor firing range, the County is taking several precautions to minimize this risk. First, the location of the range has been carefully selected on the property to buffer the firing range from adjacent properties. Secondly, the design of the firing range contributes to keeping all bullets within the berm perimeter. The range will be contained on three sides by earthen structures whose dimensions are 40'-45' thick at the base, 5' thick at the top, and are approximately 20' high. Thirdly. State certified instructors will always be present to ensure that range rules are followed and unsafe practices prohibited. In addition, targets are placed at a 3'-5' height to ensure that there is ample backstop on all sides of the CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 6 target, especially above the target area. If research and data support that noise and safety measures can be better mitigated by orienting the range to the north rather than south-facing as proposed in the 2008 study, then the range would be oriented away from adjacent properties further reducing the chance of an errant bullet leaving the property. Lead Abatement Lead abatement will occur once the fired round count exceeds one million lead bullets. Bullet containment and berm design will follow recommendations in an Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) manual entitled. "Best Management Practices for Lead at Outdoor Shooting Ranges." Once the identified volume of lead bullets have been fired, a lead-reclamation company will be hired to conduct removal work. The Police Department will also follow an Environmental Stewardship Plan that outlines a site assessment, action plan, and how to measure success for lead abatement. To enhance the lead-abating design elements outlined in the EPA manual, the Police Department is conducting a cost comparison analysis between using lead-free ammunition, a bullet reclamation system, or a combination of the two. The Police Department has stated that they plan to use 80% lead-free rounds and use lime to neutralize the lead that is onsite. STAFF COMMENT The purpose of this review is to determine if the proposed location for the firearms training facility is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. This proposal has been reviewed based on Comprehensive Plan policy, including the Community Facilities Plan (part of the Land Use Plan) and the Rural Areas Plan. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Community Facilities Plan The Community Facilities Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan, provides the following guidance regarding the development and location of community facilities: Objective: Give priority to facilities which address emergency needs, health and safety concerns, and provide the greatest ratio of benefit to the population served. Staff Comment: This is a firearms training facility which is needed to meet service standards for training as established in the Community Facilities Plan. Objective: The location of new public facilities should be within the County's Development Areas so as to support County land use policies. Development Areas such as Communities and Villages will serve as service center locations for the Rural Areas. Only in cases where it is not possible to locate a new facility in the Development Area due to physical constraints, or the nature of the facility, and/or service(s) provided, will public facilities be allowed in the Rural Area. The location of community facilities can be an important factor in determining where development can and will be accommodated. Therefore, the provision of community facilities must be carefully coordinated with the land use plan to ensure the adequate provision of facilities and services to accommodate existing and anticipated development. The primary focus of the land use plan is to encourage development in the Development Areas; the necessary facilities CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 7 should be provided to support this pattern of growth. In certain cases it may not be appropriate, or possible, to provide facilities solely in the Development Areas due to the nature of the service or other unique circumstances. However, the priority is to provide the highest level of service to the Development Areas 'emphasis addedl. Staff Comment: This objective provides some flexibility to locate public facilities in the Rural Area to due to the "nature of the service" or "unique circumstances." This flexibility was specifically contemplated for public facilities like a firing range which has unique location needs due to the nature of the service the facility provides. Due to the noise impacts of an outdoor firing range more land area is often needed to buffer and reduce such impact to an area. In addition, while every precaution shall be taken to prevent rounds from leaving the site (such as a 20 foot tall berm), locating a firing range outside of a Development Area (where residential density is greater) reduces potential impacts if rounds were to leave the property. Objective: Priority shall be given to the maintenance and expansion of existing facilities to meet service needs. Maintenance of existing facilities is of primary importance. No benefit is gained if new facilities are provided while existing facilities deteriorate and become substandard. Also, in meeting new service needs, consideration should be given to whether the existing facilities can provide an adequate level of service through modification of them. Staff Comment: The County does not own or operate the current location where firearm training occurs; therefore there is no opportunity to expand the existing facility that is used for firearms training. Objective: All sites should be able to accommodate existing and future service needs. All buildings, structures and other facilities shall be designed to permit expansion as necessary. Staff Comment: The 2008 TENG study found that the proposed site is large enough to accommodate future service needs, however at this time such future needs have not been evaluated. Objective: Schedule funding of community facilities through the Capital Improvement Program (CIP), based on the adopted Community Facilities Plan. Staff Comment: The proposed firing range has been scheduled for funding through the CIP and is based upon the adopted Community Facilities Plan. Objective: All community facilities shall be in conformance with County regulations, site development standards, and policies to the greatest extent feasible. County projects are expected to meet all County development regulations and procedures, consistent with any other like type of development project. County projects should further strive to achieve or meet all other appropriate development standards and policies established/encouraged by the County MCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 8 (stormwater/water quality. critical slope management, building form/orientation, amount/location of parking, pedestrian/bike accessibility. others). Public projects should be examples of good development and should be models to demonstrate the type of development the County wants to see. Staff Comment: As an outdoor firing range, the facility will have difficulty in meeting the noise standards desired in the zoning ordinance. While this facility is a public use and therefore exempt from the noise ordinance, the County is committed to locating the proposed firing range on the property in a manner that best mitigates the noise and safety concerns associated with facility use. This is why only generalized area for the proposed firing range has been shown for the location of the range (Attachment E). While the 2008 TENG study provided data for one particular site on the property, if further analysis finds noise and other concerns can be better addressed by adjusting the range location and/or orientation, the County wanted the design flexibility to do so. Objective: Determine the value of maintaining existing but obsolete facilities and sites for the potential re-use for other services/facilities prior to their disposal. Consideration should be given to the re-use of public facilities/sites for other public uses, if no longer viable for its original service/facility. It is costly and often difficult to purchase property and site public facilities in new locations. Prior to disposing of public properties, a review of the site/facilities potential for other public uses or reservation of the property for future use should be considered. Staff Comment: The proposed firing range site utilizes and re-uses county owned property that has been unused since the Keene Landfill closed in 1991. The proposed firing range will be located south of the closed landfill disposal cells and will not disturb the earthen cap that seals the landfill. Police Department Service Objectives and Standards The following provides specific service objectives and standards for the Police Department (as found in the Community Facilities Plan) that relate to the development and location of new training facilities: Service Objective: Provide new facilities in a manner that accommodates anticipated service demands and the needs of the current and future staff. Service/ Facility Standards: Training Facilities. Provide, or insure availability of, training facilities including firing range academic facilities classroom/training rooms. Staff Comment: The service/facility standards for the County Police Department, specifically address the need for training facilities such as a firing range. A firing range that is owned, operated and managed by the County will insure the availability of a county-controlled firing range. The firing range shall meet the service demands of the current and future law enforcement personnel. Space for other aspects of a public safety training center has the ability to accommodate anticipated service demands in the future. CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 9 Staff opinion is that the proposed firing range site is generally consistent with the Community Facility Plan recommendations. Rural Areas Plan Because the firing range is proposed in the County's designated Rural Areas, it is necessary to weigh the impact that the proposed firing range site could have on key components of the Rural Areas. The Rural Areas Plan provides the following guidance: 1. Agriculture - - Protect Albemarle County's agricultural lands as a resource base for its agricultural industries and for related benefits they contribute towards the County's rural character, scenic quality, natural environment, and fiscal health. 2. Forestry resources - Protect Albemarle County's forests as a resource base for its forestry industries and watershed protection. Staff Comment 1-2: The proposed site of the firing range is on property adjacent to a parcel within the Totier Creek Agricultural-Forestal District. Staff solicited input from the Agricultural-Forestal District Committee at their meeting on March 19, 2012. As started earlier in the staff report, the Committee felt that the proposed firing range was not a use that complemented or was otherwise conducive to agricultural or forestal uses. The Committee also felt that if such a use was to be approved, that every measure be taken to mitigate the noise and safety impacts to adjacent property within the District. Measures such as retaining and enhancing the wooded buffer adjacent to the proposed range and orienting the range north facing rather than south facing to reduce the likelihood of rounds leaving the property were specifically addressed by the Committee. 3. Land Preservation — Permanently preserve and protect Albemarle County's rural land as an essential and finite resource through public ownership or through conservation easements. 4. Land Conservation — Protect Albemarle County's rural land through planned management of open spaces to prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect. 5. Water supply resources - Protect the quality and supply of surface water and groundwater resources. Staff Comment 3-5: The proposed site of the firing range is not adjacent to land within a conservation easement. The site is located within the Totier Creek Water Supply Reservoir Watershed. The County is committed protecting the quality and supply of surface water and groundwater and particularly water supply watersheds. To this end, at the proposed site of the firing range, the Police Department plans to utilize best management practices (BMPs) to ensure lead from fired rounds does not contaminate water supplies. Bullet containment and design of the 20 ft. tall berms will follow Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) BMP guidelines specifically created for outdoor firing ranges. In addition, the Police Department is considering using lead-free rounds for certain types of ammunition. 6. Natural resources - Preserve and manage the Rural Areas' natural resources in order to protect the environment and conserve resources for future use. 7. Scenic resources - Preserve the County's rural scenic resources as being essential to the County's character, economic vitality, and quality of life. 8. Historical, archeological and cultural resources - Protect the Rural Areas' historic, archeological and cultural resources. CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 413;12 Staff Report Page 10 Staff Comment 6-8: The proposed site of the firing range does not impact rural scenic resources because the proposed site is not within an entrance corridor nor is it in a location that would be visible from a public roadway. The proposed site is within the Southern Albemarle Rural Historic District. The proposed site limits possible impacts on historic resources by its isolated and remote location. Staff opinion is that the proposed firing range site is consistent with the Rural Area Plan recommendations. SUMMARY Factors Favorable: 1. The site will utilize an under-used county-owned property. 2. The site's size and remote nature isolates it from more densely populated areas. 3. The location of the firing range on site will further limit adverse impact on adjacent agricultural properties. 4. The site's location limits impacts to natural, scenic, historic and cultural resources. Factors Unfavorable: 1. The proposed use on the site will produce noise at property lines that are above the noise ordinance provisions of the zoning ordinance. Staff finds the proposed site and scale of activity for the proposed Law Enforcement Firing Range in substantial accord with the County's Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Commission find the location, character and extent of the proposed Law Enforcement Firing Range facility is in substantial accord with the County's Comprehensive Plan for the reasons identified as the favorable factors of the staff report as outlined above. ATTACHMENTS: A. Location Map B. Aerial Photo of Site C. Conceptual Master Plan (from the 2008 TENG Study) D. Estimated Firing Range Noise Levels ( 2 pages, from the 2008 TENG Study) E. Map of General Location for Proposed Firing Range CCP 2012-00001 Law Enforcement Firing Range Planning Commission 4/3/12 Staff Report Page 11 �pF AL Per. IL).A/0.41 IRGIN.0' ALBEMARLE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT Project Name: CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Staff: Rebecca Ragsdale Overlook Planning Commission Work Session: Comp. Plan Designation: Urban Density May 4, 2010 Owners: Peter Jefferson Overlook LLC (c/o Applicant: Southern Development (Keith David Witmer) Lancaster) Acreage: 2.088 acres By-right use: 14 residential units Proposal: Request to determine if commercial Proffers: Yes, associated with by-right office and bank with drive-thru lanes are residential zoning of the property appropriate at this location. DA (Development Area): Pantops TMP: 78-55A7 Magisterial District: Rivanna Character of Property: undeveloped Use of Surrounding Properties: Senior living, assisted living, residential, office, retail and hotel in an office park, and open space/undeveloped RECOMMENDATION: Based on the information provided for review, staff does not find the proposal in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan; however, the Commission is asked to provide guidance on the appropriateness of the proposed land uses. If the Commission finds the uses appropriate at this site, staff believes the applicant should address impacts to adjoining residential properties and neighborhood model design issues with the rezoning and special use permit application. CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook l PC Work Session May 4, 2010 STAFF PERSON: REBECCA RAGSDALE PLANNING COMMISSION: May 4, 2010 CCP 2010-01 PETER JEFFERSON OVERLOOK Petition: PROJECT: CCP 10-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook PROPOSAL: Request to determine conformity with the Comprehensive Plan to remove 2.088 acres from a 13 acre Planned Residential District which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses and rezone to Commercial Office which allows offices, supporting commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre). The potential rezoning would allow a bank (approx. 3,000 sq. ft.) and a two -story office building (approx 10,000-13,000 sq. ft.). PROFFERS: Yes, with existing zoning COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential - residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses in the Pantops Master Plan. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: NE Corner of Route 250/Pantops Mountain Road TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78-55A7 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna Work Session Discussion Items for the Commission: o Are the proposed uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan? o If the proposed uses are in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, are there recommendations to address impacts? Characteristics of the Site & Area The property is vacant and consists of 2.088 acres which comprises the frontage of the Pantops Place PRD on Route 250 East. There is an existing hedgerow and remains of a stone wall along the eastern property line. The property is approved for 14 single family attached units, which would be phases II and III of the Cottages of Jefferson Heights development. To the north is the Westminster Canterbury retirement community zoned PRD Planned Residential Development. Located to the west of the site are office uses also zoned PRD. Properties across Route 250 from the site are PDMC Planned Development Mixed Commercial as part of the Peter Jefferson Place office and business park with uses that include offices, restaurant, hotel, and open space. (Attachment A-Aerial Map, Attachment B-Zoning Map) Planning and Zoning History: • The 2.088 acre parcel was zoned from RA to R1, Residential in 1980 with the County's adoption of the new zoning ordinance and comprehensive map revisions. • 1.33 acres of the 2.088 acre parcel was rezoned from R1 to PRD (Planned Residential Development) with proffers on January 12, 2000 (ZMA 99-01, CCP 2 i "ii-v: Peter = eror, . iooh PC Work Session May 4, 2010 Pantops Place-Attachment C). This rezoning allowed 30 independent living cottages, independent living apartments, and an assisting living center. When this rezoning was submitted, office use was proposed for the portion of the property parallel to Route 250. Office use was not recommended for approval by the Planning Commission for the following reasons: o The Neighborhood Three Study stated: "Limit strip development of Route 250 East by preventing commercial development along the north side of the road from 1-64 to the Regional Service designated area" o Westminster Canterbury offices were approved based on their direct relationship to the Westminster Canterbury development and desire to provide community outreach to the elderly population. o It was believed that office space approved with Westminster and in Peter Jefferson Place was sufficient to serve most of the professional office needs for this immediate area. • ZMA 01-11, Pantops Place PRD was approved on October 3, 2001 and was an amendment to remove a commitment for access to an adjacent parcel. The owner could not proffer use of a private road owned by Westminster Canterbury and had to remove this proffer. • SDP 2002-101 (Pantops Place Phase II) was approved to allow 10 single family attached cottages on the 1.33 acres of the PRD that fronted on Route 250 which was rezoned with ZMA 99-01. • ZMA 2004-09 was approved on April 20, 2005 to add 0.757 acres zoned R1 Residential to the PRD to allow for a 4-unit condominium building. The approved application plan and proffers for this rezoning are provided as Attachment D. Proffers associated with this rezoning provided for a maximum number of units, sidewalks, grading in the Route 250 right-of-way to allow for future sidewalks, a 15' buffer along the eastern property line, making the property subject to the Pantops Place covenants and restrictions, and proffering architectural building elevations. • SDP 2005-075 (Cottages at Jefferson Heights Phase III) was approved on February 9, 2006 for the portion of PRD rezoned with ZMA 2004-009 and allowed 4 units. This 0.757 acre parcel was later combined with the 1.33 acres of the Pantops Place PRD fronting Route 250, which is now under consideration for potential rezoning to Commercial Office. Specifics of Proposal This is a compliance with the comprehensive plan review for a potential rezoning proposal from PRD Planned Residential Zoning to Commercial Office. The applicant has submitted a narrative letter describing the proposal and justification along with two concepts for layout of the site, labeled as SB1-B and SP-2, as provided in Attachment E. The applicant is proposing a one-story 3,000 square foot bank and two story office building of approximately 10,000-13,000 square feet. Drive through window(s) and lanes are proposed with the bank and would also require special use permit approval. Prior to submitting a rezoning and committing to the rezoning process, the applicant would like feedback from the Commission on the likelihood of approval. The Commercial Office district (Attachment F) is intended as a transition between residential districts and other CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook 3 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 more intensive commercial or industrial districts. Administrative offices, medical/dental offices, financial institutions, and limited retail/services uses are permitted in the CO zoning district; drive-in windows are permitted by special use permit. Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan The first step in the process is to asses the proposal for conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, in this case with the Pantops Master Plan. Pantops Master Plan The Pantops Master Plan references the previous Neighborhood Three Study and recommends that the master plan adhere to recommendations of that study, including limiting strip development along Route 250 East. The site is designated Urban Density in the Pantops Master Plan which calls for primarily residential uses, especially at this location in Pantops, where the site is at the edge of a neighborhood not located near the mixed-use center area identified in the master plan. (See inset of Pantops Master Plan below) The Urban Density Residential land use designation recommends 6.01 — 34 residential units per acre with support uses and some non-residential uses. Urban Density Residential areas can accommodate all dwelling types as well as institutional uses such as places of worship, public and private schools, and early childhood education centers including day care centers and preschools. Urban Density Residential areas accommodate small areas of non-residential land uses on the scale of Neighborhood Service, to , serve residential uses. ..•. '_� Neighborhood Service area4.4 s ,,,. ► "`• '� 4 a are intended to provide r *- "` 44* neighborhood retail uses ''� # - 1 +4 • such as a newsstand, small 4 A 1. restaurant, bakery, "' 4. i convenience store without gas pumps, pharmacy, e as r ., r 1 florist, small professional - ',-,' • ` office, daycare, other - ' r `` . ,t services, or live/work units. . . _ \ ' r This mayinclude retail of {, • F ' ' - . ��ems',,k '''4'° . 4 *4 less than 4,000 square feet; �,� '. " ` .,= .,a"� 4: live/work units above office .%7� � - � L` * ' , 111�` and/or retail; small office �, ... ' ,. buildings less than 20,000 �y 4� � r '� '" r square feet and no building % ` . . ,.. / footprint over 10,000 square .. "r �; r ' feet; and studios/cottage occupations. The site is within the Luxor/Westminster Canterbury CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Overtook 4 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 neighborhood as designated in the Pantops Master Plan and is located on the north side of Route 250 between Glenorchy to the east and office/commercial development to the west with Luxor, Rite Aid Pharmacy, Westminster Canterbury offices. The edge of this neighborhood is formed by natural features, with a stream to the east and the power line to the north. The property proposed for rezoning is located near the edge of the neighborhood. (See inset above) The Pantops Master Plan recommends the following for this neighborhood in Pantops: • The Luxor commercial development and Rite Aid pharmacy area represent an emerging Community Center. • New residential development should respect existing residential developments and the school use adjacent to the Community Center. • The American Legion Hall and Montessori Community School provide a transition to the commercial corridor on the north side of Route 250. They should be retained as supporting uses to the residential uses nearby. • Create and preserve a vegetated buffer along Route 250 from Glenorchy Drive to Pantops Mountain Road to help retain the rural/residential character of this part of Pantops. From Pantops Mountain Road heading west, create an urban character with building orientation to Route 250. • Connections for bikes and pedestrians from the north side of Route 250 to Rivanna Ridge are identified as critical in the master plan • Limit "strip development" of Route 250 East • Redevelopment, infill, and new development within Pantops are expected to occur in a manner that is wholly consistent with the Neighborhood Model and the Pantops Master Plan design principles. Suburban land use patterns should not be continued and innovative sustainable design practices and mixed use approaches are encouraged. Priority Areas The master plan establishes Priority Areas to focus public efforts/resources over the next 5 to 10 years on the Implementation Map. The site proposed for rezoning falls outside of the established priority areas. Areas that are not with a priority area will not be the primary focus of public capital investment or resource allocation during in next 10 years. While decisions regarding private development proposals/investments should not be based solely on these priority areas, decisions on development proposals should be made with an understanding of where public investments are being focused. Land use decisions should be consistent with the priority areas established in the Plan. New proposals outside of the priority areas may not be approved if planned facilities are not in place to support the project and the existing neighborhood. These projects will need to provide more significant level of improvements to ensure adequate infrastructure and services are available to the area. The applicant's proposal is on a site that already has a development plan approved so staff believes that this section of the master plan is not applicable because it was intended to apply to new development proposals. Staff believes that if a rezoning is submitted the applicant should address improvements to provide pedestrian connections to the site. CCP 2O10-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook 5 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION: Are the proposed uses in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan? The Pantops Master Plan emphasizes that commercial uses be located in the nearby neighborhood centers of Luxor and Rivanna Ridge. The area of Pantops under consideration for rezoning should retain its residential character. The master plan also supports improving connections from the residential areas to the east to the commercial centers. Any new development should address these recommendations of the master plan: • Limit "strip development" of Route 250 • Create and preserve a vegetated buffer along Route 250 from Glenorchy Drive to Pantops Mountain Road to help retain the rural/residential character of this part of Pantops. From Pantops Mountain Road heading west, create an urban character with building orientation to Route 250. • Connections for bikes and pedestrians from the north side of Route 250 to Rivanna Ridge are identified as critical in the master plan The Urban Density land use designation suggests that some areas with that designation may be appropriate for non-residential uses of a scale of up to 4,000 for retail and 20,000 square feet for office in some instances. The applicant's proposal falls within those building square footage guidelines of the land use plan. Typically, non-residential uses that have been allowed in Urban Density areas have been limited to office uses that would be compatible with surrounding residential uses and serve nearby residents. While the applicant's assertion that the bank will serve residents of the two senior living developments, the use represents more of a community service level use than neighborhood service. On Route 250, the bank would be expected to capture significant traffic along Route 250, not just within the neighborhood. Higher traffic generating retail uses or uses with drive-thru facilities have not been approved in these areas. Previous proposals for office use were not supported at this site because of concerns that the office uses should have a relationship to and be supportive of nearby residential uses. In addition, commercial use of the front of the PRD was viewed as creating strip development on Route 250. Staff believes that this site was intended for residential uses and not commercial use in the master plan and the current zoning is in conformity with the master plan. However, if the Commission finds that non-residential uses are appropriate at this location, consideration should be given to the intensity of use and the form of development. IMPACTS The attached plans show two options for the location of a bank and office building on the site. The impacts of these uses primarily deal with the relationship to the rest of the PRD, other nearby properties, and Rt. 250 East. Adjacent Residential Uses As stated previously, the property is adjacent to residential neighborhoods. The proposed bank use is one which has a larger service area than just the nearby Westminster LLP 2 U1 Petei JCFferso( C.)vervuoK 6 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 Canterbury and Jefferson Heights (Pantops Place) development. It has very little relationship to the rest of the surrounding residential within the PRD. Traffic impacts are different and would be greater than what would be expected with the approved residential development. Offices would potentially generate more traffic than the approved residential uses. The relationship to the nearby residential uses for offices has not been established, but could, perhaps be established by the applicant with more information. It may be possible to retain the PRD designation and approve office by special use permit if a bank is not proposed. Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Although critical slopes are present on the site, there are no environmental features identified for protection on the Pantops Master Plan or County Open Space Plan. A cultural and historic resource, a mature hedgerow and stone wall line the eastern side to the property and create a buffer between Pantops Place and the Glenorchy subdivision. Staff believes that if this property is rezoned, preservation of the wall and hedgerow should occur, as is proffered with the existing zoning. Impacts to Monticello could exist if the property is in the Monticello viewshed. The applicant should work with Monticello to determine if any impacts to the viewshed exist and should be mitigated. Streets The applicant is proposing to access the property from an existing private road (Pantops Mountain Road) and share access with office uses to the west. This road is owned by Westminster Canterbury and it is not known whether the ability to add traffic from the development exists. If a rezoning moves forward, the applicant will have to provide necessary documentation to demonstrate there are no issues with use of the private street for a bank and commercial use. VDOT provided comments on this proposal via e-mail on April 7, 2010: 1. The total traffic generated for the bank and office is 926 trips per day. This is below the threshold for a Chapter 527 Study. 2. The proposed uses connect to an existing private road and a Land Use Permit will not be needed from VDOT. Neighborhood Model If the use and scale are approvable, then any rezoning proposal should conform with the Neighborhood Model. Conformity with the Neighborhood Model is assessed below: Pedestrian Sidewalks exist along the east side of Pantops Mountain Road to the Orientation entrance of this site. Any development of the site should include the internal sidewalks that were previously approved on the residential rezoning application plan. Neighborhood The previous development proposal proffered to grade in the Route Friendly Streets 250 right-of-way to provide for a future sidewalk. The applicant has and Paths offered to build the sidewalk along the Route 250 frontage and provide landscaping which is advantageous to this proposal. Interconnected There are no streets proposed with this rezoning. Only a driveway Streets and ; into the site is shown. Locations of interconnections have already CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook 7 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 Transportation been considered. Connecting to Glenorchy subdivision is not Networks practical and would disturb the hedgerow and fieldstone wall previously proffered to be preserved and recommended for preservation if this property is rezoned to commercial. Parks and Open This property is not expected to provide for parks or open space. If Space this property is rezoned, analysis of how removal of the property from the Pantops Place PRD affects the PRD will be needed. Neighborhood The property is located close to the Rivanna Ridge shopping center, Centers the proposed Luxor mixed-use development, and the Martha Jefferson campus The Pantops Master Plan does not recommend that this site serve as a center or focal point. Buildings and Although the narrative submitted with this project describes it as Spaces of Human pedestrian friendly, staff is concerned that these concepts do not Scale provide for buildings and spaces of human scale. The bank building appears to be car-oriented with the layout and number of drive through lanes proposed. If a rezoning is submitted, this issue must be addressed. Staff also believes that a two-story building would be more appropriate. The ARB would also need to review the plan for conformity with the Entrance Corridor guidelines. Relegated Relegating parking has not been provided on either concept design. Parking If a rezoning is submitted, the concept plan should provide for relegated parking, which was achieved under the approved residential development of the site. Mixture of Uses This rezoning is proposing a development that would include commercial office uses only but is adjacent to nearby residential. So far, the relationship of the bank to the residential use does not appear appropriate. Mixture of The proposed rezoning does not include residential uses. If the Housing Types Commission finds that the proposed land use is appropriate, then and Affordability this principle is not applicable. Redevelopment The proposed project would be built on an undeveloped site. Protection of a mature hedgerow and fieldstone wall along the east side of parcel, preserving the historic character of this feature and providing screening from the Entrance Corridor and Glenorchy, will be needed. Site Planning that The site rises to 20 feet above Route 250 and contains critical Respects Terrain slopes, some of which were manmade with construction of Route 250 and Pantops Mountain Road. The prior development proposal worked more closely with the terrain than this proposal. The applicant would need to address this issue and may also need a critical slopes waiver. Clear Boundaries This property is located within the Pantops Development Area. This with the Rural principle does not apply. Areas 2Ur.v-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook 8 PC Work Session May 4, 2010 QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION: If the proposed uses are in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, are there recommendations to address impacts? Staff believes that the impacts of the bank are greater than what is appropriate for the Urban Density designation in this area and recommendations of the master plan. If a relationship can be established between the offices and the adjacent residential neighborhoods, then the following issues, along with the detailed reviewer comments noted in Attachment H, should be addressed: • Provide screening and buffering where needed • Provide relegated parking • Provide a sidewalk on Route 250 • Provide landscaping on Route 250 consistent with the Pantops Master Plan • Preserve the hedgerow and wall on the property • Preserve Monticello viewshed • Provide a two-story building • Work more closely with the terrain • Demonstrate ability to use Pantops Mountain Road RECOMMENDATION Based on the information provided for review, staff does not find the proposal in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan; however, the Commission is asked to provide guidance on the appropriateness of the proposed land uses. If the Commission finds the uses appropriate at this site, staff believes the applicant should address impacts to adjoining residential properties and neighborhood model design issues with the rezoning and special use permit application. ATTACHMENTS A. Aerial Map B. Zoning Map C. ZMA 99-01 Pantops Place PRD proffers and application plan approved January 12, 2000 D. ZMA 04-009 Cottages at Jefferson Heights-Phase III proffers and application plan approved April 20, 2005 E. Request narrative and two concept plans F. Commercial Office Zoning District G. Memo from Margaret Maliszewski, Principal Planner regarding Architectural Review Board review and comments H. Detailed County review comments CCP 2010-01 Peter Jefferson Overlook 9 PC Work Session May 4, 2010