The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZMA202300012 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2023-11-22County of Albemarle c na�r COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579 November 22, 2023 Steven W. Blaine Collins Engineering 123 E. Main St., 5th Floor Charlottesville, VA 22902 434-220-6831 steven. blaine(a)wrvblaw.com ZMA2023-00012 Holly Hills Dear Mr. Blaine, phone:434-296-5832 www.albemarle.org Review comments are provided below, organized by Department, Division, or agency. Planning comments are provided first, followed by the other departments. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss these issues. Planning — ZMA Comments (ZMA2023-00012) General Comments 1) Update the project narrative and the application plan with the assigned project number, ZMA2023- 00012. 2) Revise the project narrative (under "Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan") to state that the Places29 master plan also designates this property for "Private Open Space." The first paragraph of this section currently only identifies Urban Density Residential. 3) Identify in the project narrative the zoning overlay districts that apply to this property. 4) The project narrative states that only the multi -family units will be designated under the 15% affordable housing recommendation. This proposal is not in conformance with the comprehensive plan's recommendations. The comprehensive plan recommends that 15% of all housing developed within a project be designated as affordable. This 15% includes any single-family detached, single- family detached, or townhouse units proposed, as well as the multi -family units. 5) Revise the frontage conditions section of the project narrative. The master plan recommends that this frontage be "forested buffer," not landscaped development. 6) It does not appear that Rubin Lane is a public street. Is there an existing easement or some other dedicated legal access over that travelway that would permit this development to use it for connections? 7) Identify the acreage of the central open space area along the stream. I am assuming it is 8.1 acres, which is the acreage of the common open space stated in the table; however, it is not clear on the plan that this common open space is the same as that central open/green space area. 8) Disturbance of preserved steep slopes is not recommended by the comprehensive plan. Are there any proposed mitigation measures for those areas that are to be disturbed for the construction of the roadways? 9) Identify the acreage/square footage of the preserved steep slopes that is proposed to be disturbed. This information should be included in both the application plan and the project narrative. 10) Has there been consideration of making the interparcel connection between building envelopes 4 and 5 public right-of-way, or reserved for future dedication as public right-of-way, rather than as an easement? Public streets are preferred in the development areas. 11) Are any proffers proposed with this rezoning application? If so, a separate proffer statement will need to be provided. Proffer statements must be signed by the property owner prior to the public hearing with the Board of Supervisors. 12) It appears that the proposed height of the buildings is 48 feet, whereas the recommended height for UDR is 45 feet. It is recommended that justification be provided for why the proposed height is slightly higher than what is recommended. 13) Are any retaining walls proposed? It does not appear that any are depicted on the application plan. If so, how tall are the proposed retaining walls? 14) Where is the proposed dumpster/trash collection site for this development? 15) It would be helpful to provide a description (such as in the form of a chart) of the recreational amenities, identifying those required by the ordinance and what is being proposed in place of the required tot lots, basketball courts, etc. Such information would also be helpful for staff to review to ensure that the minimum required recreational amenities can be accommodated. 16) Are any landscaping standards proposed for the perimeter buffer, including the forested buffer along Route 29 and the proposed 10' landscaping buffer near the existing subdivisions? 17) The 10' landscaping buffer is placed adjacent (to the south) to the proposed connection to Rubin Lane at the extreme northeast portion of this development. Since an interconnection is proposed, there would be no buffer in the area where the travelway is located. Remove the buffer in that area for the width of the proposed travelway (similar to how it is shown for the 20' undisturbed buffer). 18) This project, with 500 dwelling units proposed, will likely generate significant impacts on the surrounding area, including on facilities such as transportation infrastructure and schools. This project is not in a priority area of the Places29 Master Plan and is evaluated using the criteria identified on page 8-8 of the Master Plan (in Chapter 8). 19) The building height stated on the application plan is proposed to be four stories. For four stories, a stepback is required unless a special exception is granted by the Board of Supervisors. It is recommended that a special exception application be submitted for concurrent review with the rezoning if a maximum of four stories, with no stepback, is desired. 20) This proposed development is directly north of another proposed development, for which a rezoning was also recently submitted (ZMA2023-00014 Archer North Development — formerly known as RST Residences). It is highly recommended that the applicants for both projects work together throughout the review process to ensure that features (such as interparcel connections) are consistent across property lines for both projects. 21) A community meeting is required for this application before it goes to the Planning Commission for a public hearing. A community meeting is tentatively scheduled for Thursday, January 11th, at a regular meeting of the Places29-North CAC. Additional comments may be provided after this meeting has been held. 22) If this rezoning application is approved by the Board of Supervisors, additional site development plans will be required, which include initial and final site plans, VSMP plans, WPO plans, subdivision plats (if applicable), etc. All zoning ordinance requirements will need to be met during the review of these plans. Planning Division —Transportation, Community Development Department Please see the attached memo that has been provided by Transportation Planning reviewer Jessica Hersh-Ballering, ihballering(a))albemarle.org. rianning urvisivn - mrcnitecturai moview avaru Please see the comments below that have been prc (Planning Manager), mmaliszewski(cilalbemarle.oro: Page 2 of the narrative says that most of the Rt. 29 frontage is designated "landscaped development," but the Places 29 plan shows it as "forested buffer." Revise note 1 under "Buffers and Landscaping" to clarify that the 30' portion of the buffer that may be disturbed is located on the development side of the buffer. The buildings closest to the EC are very long. It is anticipated that neither the fagade articulation shown in the building footprints on the Illustrative Plan, nor the notes included under "General Notes - Building Architecture" on Sheet 2 of 4 of the Application Plan won't be enough to ensure that the scale of the buildings will be sufficiently modulated. Multiple smaller buildings and/or greater assurance of more significantly pronounced modulation is recommended. Several buildings would be demolished to accommodate the proposed development. Demolition permits will be required. The buildings have not been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Nevertheless, it is Historic Preservation Committee (HPC) policy to document buildings prior to demolition. It is recommended that photographs and diagrams of the buildings be submitted, or that access be granted to HPC members who can accomplish the documentation prior to demolition. Improved landscaping at the VDOT stormwater facility is recommended, as is replacement of the chain link fencing with a material that has less negative visual impact. Zoning Division, Community Development Department Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planning staff. Zoning reviewer Francis MacCall, Deputy Zoning Administrator, fmaccall(a)albemarle.oro. Engineering & Water Resources Division, Community Development Department Please see the attached memo with comments from the Engineering Division. The current contact for engineering is County Engineer Frank Pohl, fpohl(a)albemarle.oro. Building Inspections Division, Community Development Department Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planning staff. Betty Slough, Building Plans Reviewer, bslouoh d)albemarle.oro. Albemarle County Fire -Rescue Please see the comments below that have been provided by Howard Lagomarsino, Fire & Rescue plans reviewer, hlaclomarsino o.albemarle.oro: Fire Rescue does not per se oppose the zoning map amendment, but fire rescue does have a concern that the project narrative has limited discussion of the impact of the development on public safety. While the fire rescue impact statement of conforming to emergency vehicle access and other fire rescue standards is appreciated, there is no discussion of an increase in calls for service impact, capacity of current stations to handle the increased call volume generated, or traffic impact increasing response times, raising the potential for additional stations to maintain current response times. There is also no discussion of impacts on law enforcement service needs. Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) Please see the attached memo with comments from ACSA plans reviewer, Richard Nelson, rnelson(o)serviceauthoritv.org. Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) Please see the comments below that have been provided by RWSA plans reviewer, Dyon Vega, dvega(a)rivanna.org: To be filled out by RWSA for ZMA's and SP's Capacity issues for sewer that may affect this proposal None Known Requires Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Capacity Certification X- Yes No Water flow or pressure issues that may affect this proposal Potential "Red Flags" regarding service provision (Use attachments if necessary) Potential I have indicated a Red flag since there is a lot of development going on in the northern area and we are currently working on a masterplan. While this is below the northern area pressure zone, it exists on the suction side of the line. So we will need a flow acceptance and will continue to plan for all the build outs. Albemarle County Office of Housing Review pending; comments will be forwarded to applicant upon receipt by Planning staff. Stacy Pethia, Housing Manager, spethia(a)albemarle.org. Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Please see the attached memorandum with comments from the VDOT contact — Danny Martinez, danny.martinez(a)vdot.virginia.gov. Virginia Department of Health (VDH) Blue Ridge Health District Please see the attached memorandum with comments from the VDH contact — Alan Mazurowski, alan.mazurowski(a)vdh.viroinia.00v. Resubmittal If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal. Notification and Advertisement Fees It appears that the Public Notice Requirement fees have already been paid for this application. Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place in which adjoining owners need to be notified of a new date. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is areitelbach(a)albemarle.org, and my phone number is 434-296-5832 ext. 3261. Sincerely, Andy Reitelbach Senior Planner II Planning Division, Department of Community Development enc: Memorandum from Albemarle County Transportation Planning Memorandum from Albemarle County Engineering Division Memorandum from Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) Memorandum from Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Memorandum from Virginia Department of Health (VDH) Zoning Map Amendment Resubmittal Form County of Albemarle COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579 MEMORANDUM Phone: 434.296.5832 www.albemarle.org To: Applicant From: Jessica Hersh-Ballering; Principal Planner - Transportation Date: November 3, 2023 Re: ZMA202300012 - Holly Hills The Albemarle County Community Development Department, Planning Division, Transportation Planning has reviewed the above referenced plan and associated traffic impact analysis as submitted by Gorove Slade (September 2023) and offers the following comments: Traffic Impact Analysis • The proposed Holly Hills development relies heavily on a vehicular connection to the proposed RST development south of Holly Hills. Figure 10 shows 65% of trips exiting Holly Hills heading south to Ashwood Boulevard; Figure 11 estimates a total of 254 trips attributed to Holly Hills using the Ashwood Boulevard connection daily during peak am and pm travel. Can the applicant please clarify the schedule for the construction of this connection given unknowns regarding the approval and schedule of construction for the RST development? o Without the connection between Holly Hills and RST, Holly Hills residents would likely need to rely heavily on u-turns at both Hollymead Drive and Ashwood Blvd to access the proposed right-in/right-out only Holly Hills driveway. These movements (NBU at Hollymead and SBU at Ashwood) are described in Tables 3 and 4 as having an LOS F in the Build condition, despite very few trips being assigned to these movements in the current TIA. Should trips be redistributed due to a lack of a connection to Ashwood Blvd, the LOS and queueing for these u-turn movements would be unacceptable. o Given the currently low quantity of trips assigned to the SBU-turn movement at Ashwood Blvd, the existing turn lane length (200') is very close to the max queue lengths (199' in the AM peak and 200' in the PM peak) described for the build condition. • Can the applicant please clarify the distance from the intersection of the connector road to Ashwood Blvd and the intersection of 29 and Ashwood Boulevard? Figure 3 indicates that the westbound turn lanes on Ashwood Boulevard are 350', but those turn lanes are broken up by a large median break into two separate segments, with the westernmost segment being approximately 150'. Further, Table 4 indicates that the max queue length for the westbound left and right turns during peak hour may range from 105to 329'. Can the applicant confirm that the queuing for westbound travel along Ashwood will not block vehicles coming from Holly Hills - especially any vehicles that may need to cross all west bound traffic to head east towards Hollymead Elementary School? • Can the applicant please describe the roadway that will connect from Holly Hills to Ashwood Blvd, specifically the intersection of the connector road and Ashwood? Will the intersection be stop -controlled? If so, 2-way or 4-way? Will the connector road have both right- and left -turn lanes onto Ashwood Blvd? • Can the applicant please describe any proposed improvements to Rubin Lane. The roadway's current configuration does not seem adequate to handle the proposed vehicle volumes. Narrative • On page 6, the section labeled "Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks" states, "The proposed connection to the RST property promotes interconnected streets by extending the proposed Archer Avenue roadway through to 29." Without any detail in the application plan showing this connection, this reviewer has assumed that the connection to 29 would be made via Ashwood Boulevard. Is this correct? Can the narrative County of Albemarle COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579 Phone: 434.296.5832 www.albemarle.org and/or the application plan provide further detail on this vehicular connection that is proposed to handle much of the traffic from Holly Hills? Application Plan • Can the applicant provide a key for page 1? Is it correct to assume that the thick brown line is the proposed shared use path and the thin brown lines are proposed sidewalks? • As stated in the previous section, please provide greater detail on the roadway connection between Holly Hills and Ashwood Boulevard. If you have any questions regarding these comments, please feel free to contact me. Jessica Hersh-Ballering Principal Planner - Transportation Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 296-5832 Ext. 3313 ih ballerine@al bemarle.org �$ County of Albemarle m COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Memorandum To: Andy Reitelbach From: Frank Pohl, PE Date: 11/10/2023 Subject: Holly Hills (ZMA202300012) Engineering Review Comments 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, VA 22902-4579 Telephone: 434-296-5832 WWW.ALBEMARLE.ORG I have reviewed the Holly Hills rezoning request and offer the following comments: 1. Clearly label all proposed public and private streets and travelways on all sheets. For instance, streets within Envelope #7 (are these proposed to be private?) and the travelway connection through Envelope # 1 are not shown. Some travelways are shown while others are not. 2. Show location of stream buffer on Sheet 1 of 1.Or show concept plan from sheet 1 on sheet 4. 3. [17-600] Stream buffers must be measured 100-11 from the top of stream bank. Field verify the top of bank location along the streams and revise buffers accordingly to ensure lots, parking areas, etc. are not proposed within the buffer. 4. [17-604.C.1.a] For crossings of perennial streams, bridges, arch culverts, or box culverts shall be used. Please provide a note identifying what is being proposed at the stream crossings. 5. [17-604.C.3] Disturbance of streams must be minimized at crossings to no more than 60-ft for public roads. If additional disturbance is needed, provide request and justification. 6. [18-30.7.4.b.1.C/F] Disturbances to preserved slopes must be avoided or minimized. Show why the public sanitary and storm sewers in envelope #7 cannot be removed from preserved slopes or moved upslope to minimize impacts (Sheet 4). 7. [17-602.B.2] Disturbances to stream buffers must be avoided or minimized. Private stormwater piping is not listed as a use warranting buffer impacts. Remove proposed storm sewer piping in envelope #7 from stream buffer, including the west side of the public street (Sheet 4). These impacts do not fall within the justification of reasonable use for this development. 8. Sheet 4 shows proposed preserved slope impacts as a red hatch. Show all proposed impacts to steep slopes, including for sewer/storm utilities. ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT— Information from Service Providers To be filled out by ACSA for ZMA's and SP's 1) Is this site in the jurisdictional area for water and/or sewer? Yes 2) What is the distance to the closest water and sewer line, if in the jurisdictional area? RWSA water main located along Rt 29 and Derby Lane. Sanitary sewer located along Forest Lakes. 3) Are there water pressure issues which may affect the proposed use as shown on plan? Water pressures may be above 80 psi. Pressure reducing valves may be required for each building. 4) Are there major upgrades needed to the water distribution or sewer collection system of which the applicant and staff should be aware? Downstream sanitary sewer upgrades to a larger diameter will likely be required. ACSA is currently working with the developer's design consultant on this item. 5) Are there other service provision issues such as the need for grinder pumps? 6) Which issues should be resolved at the SP/ZMA stage and which issues can be resolved at the site plan/plat stage? 7) If the project is a large water user, what long term impacts or implications do you forsee? 8) Additional comments? RWSA sewer capacity certification will be required prior to final site plan approval. RWSA to approve water connection along Rt 29. ACSA will require water main connections to Derby Lane and the neighboring development. COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION Stephen C. Brich, P.E 1401 East Broad Street Counnissioner Richmond, Virginia 23219 October 23, 2023 County of Albemarle Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Attn.: Andrew Reitelbach Re: Holly Hills — Rezoning request ZMA2023-00012 Mr. Reitelbach: (804) 786-2701 Fax: (804) 786-2940 The Department of Transportation, Charlottesville Residency Transportation and Land Use Section, has reviewed the above referenced Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) as prepared by Gorove Slade Associates, Inc., dated September 18, 2023, and received October 4, 2023, and offer the following comments. 1. Table 3, Page 15: Many of the movement delay and LOS show improvement from existing traffic volumes to the future no -build and future build traffic volumes. This is counterintuitive; the overall intersection LOS shows improvement with more volumes. Please explain. 2. Table 3, Page 15. Build 2027 traffic conditions, PM Peak Hour (95th % queue): a) Explain what the values are doing to the traffic progression through this intersection and the other nearby intersections that are not part of the study. b) Explain what the hashtag sign means and how it relates to reality and queueing. c) Explain the huge difference between 951h% queue and Sim Traffic Max queue. 3. Table 4, Page 16. Build 2027 traffic conditions with PM modified timigs, PM Peak Hour (Sim Traffic Ave. Max queue.): a) Explain how this large increase (498 ft.) in the queue affect progression in other parts of the corridor. 4. Page 16. "With current signal timings, the westbound left -turn and southbound left -turn movements are projected to operate at LOS F in the PM peak hour. If the signal timings are modified to give the westbound left -turn movement two more seconds ofgreen time and the southbound left -turn movement six more seconds of VirginiaDOT.org WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING green time, both of those movements will operate at LOS E, and the average delay for the intersection will drop by 2.7 seconds. " a) Does this mean that time has been taking away time from the mainline movement? - which direction (NB or SB) will that come from? The timing is very tight and the ramifications to mainline could be more significant than analysis done. b) This is hardly doable under the current scenario. To give the SB LT 6 seconds means 6 seconds are taken away from the very heavy movement of the NBT during the PM. The results show that the queue for NBT would jump significantly with this timing change. Also, this will likely reduce the green band for the coordination. What does this green band reduction do to the rest of the corridor'? 5. Note that final plan must show conformance with the VDOT Road Design Manual Appendices B (1) and F, as well as any other applicable standards, regulations, or other requirements. A VDOT Land Use Permit will be required prior to any work within the right of way. The owner/developer must contact the Charlottesville Residency Land Use Section at (434) 422-9399 for information pertaining to this process. If you have further questions, please contact Danny Martinez at (434) 422-9782. Sincerely, Danny Martinez, P.F. Assistant Resident Engineer Land Use Charlottesville Residency pEENE Nt% Vti Blue Ridge Health District VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT Of HEALTH Andy Reitelbach, Senior Planner II Albemarle County Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Holly Hills ZMA202300012 Mr. Reitelbach: 1 138 Rose Hill Drive Charlottesville, VA 22903 office 434-972-6200 fox 434-972-4310 November 3, 2023 As requested, I've reviewed the subject site plan, dated 9/18/23, for the proposed rezoning. Since the proposed development will have access to public water and sewer, I have no comments or objections. If there are any questions or concerns, please give me a call, 434-972-4306. Sincerely, I Alan Mazurowski Environmental Health Supervisor Blue Ridge Health District alan.mazurowski(c�vdh.vir ig nia.gov Resubmittal of information for �$��°F"`8 Zoning Map Amendment t ��RG/NAP PROJECT NUMBER THAT HAS BEEN ASSIGNED: ZMA2023-00012 Holly Hills Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign I hereby certify that the information provided with this resubmittal is what has been requested from staff Signature of Owner, Contract Purchaser Print Name FEES that may apply: Date Daytime phone number of Signatory Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $2,958 ® First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF) $1,479 ❑ Technologv surcharge +4% Resubmittal fees for original Zoning Map Amendment fee of $4,141 ❑ First resubmission FREE ❑ Each additional resubmission (TO BE PAID WHEN THE RESUBMISSION IS MADE TO INTAKE STAFF) $2,070 ❑ Technology surcharge +4% To be Daid after staff review for Dublic notice: Most applications for a Zoning Map Amendment require at least one public hearing by the Planning Commission and one public hearing by the Board of Supervisors. Virginia State Code requires that notice for public hearings be made by publishing a legal advertisement in the newspaper and by mailing letters to adjacent property owners. Therefore, at least two fees for public notice are required before a Zoning Map Amendment may be heard by the Board of Supervisors. The total fee for public notice will be provided to the applicant after the final cost is determined and must be paid before the application is heard by a public body. ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices $237 + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Preparing and mailing or delivering each notice after fifty (50) $1.19 for each additional notice + actual cost of first-class postage ➢ Legal advertisement (published twice in the newspaper for each public hearing) Actual cost (averages between $150 and $250 FOR OFFICE USE ONLY Fee Amount $ Date Paid By who? Receipt # Ck# By: Community Development Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126 Revised 7/1/2021 Page 1 of 1