HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201300015 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2013-11-01COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4176
November 1, 2013
Justin Shimp
201 East Main Street, Suite M
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ZMA 2013 -15- Northfield Green
Dear Justin:
Staff has reviewed your initial submittal for a zoning map amendment (ZMA). We have a
number of questions and comments which we believe should be considered before your ZMA
moves forward to the Planning Commission. We would be glad to meet with you to discuss
these issues. Our comments are provided below:
General Application Comments:
1. Although the proposed density is consistent with the Places 29 Master Plan, it does not
meet the guiding principle to preserve the character of the existing neighborhoods, which
include single family detached homes at a lower density. There is an expectation that a
site can support the density. It is recommended that the density be decreased for
consistency with the surrounding neighborhoods and due to the small size of the parcel.
2. Given the nature of the Plan recommendation and the character of the existing
neighborhoods, you might consider bringing this matter before the Planning Commission
as a worksession.
3. The architecture standards of this proposal should take into account the surrounding
neighborhoods. It is recommended that standards be provided with the rezoning.
Application Plan:
1. More grading information is needed (see engineering comments, attached).
2. As referenced above, the density should be reduced to be more in line with the
surrounding neighborhoods.
Code of Development:
1. The COD incorrectly notes that this parcel is in Neighborhood 7 of Places 29, it is
located in Neighborhood 2.
2. The Architecture Standards should take into consideration the surrounding
neighborhoods and it is recommended that standards be addressed with the rezoning.
Proffers
1. No proffers were submitted for review. Proffers should be submitted to mitigate any
impacts and to address the proffer policy.
Planning
Planning staff's comments are organized as follows:
• How the proposal relates to the Comprehensive Plan
• The Neighborhood Model analysis
• Additional Planning Comments
• Additional comments from reviewers (See attached)
Comprehensive Plan. Comments on how your project conforms to the Comprehensive Plan
will be provided to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors as part of the staff report
that will be prepared for the work session or public hearing. The comments below are in
preparation for the public meetings and may change based on direction from the Commission
and /or with subsequent submittals.
The Places 29 Master Plan Neighborhood Density Residential recommends 3 -6 dwelling units
per acre. This proposal suggests a density of 4.9 dwelling units per acre on a 2.62 acre parcel.
However, the surrounding neighborhoods are at a much lower density. Places 29 recommends
preserving the character of the existing neighborhoods. The proposed density is not consistent
with the existing area and the density should be decreased.
Neighborhood Model
General comments on how well the proposed development meets the principles of the
Neighborhood Model are provided here. More detailed comments may be provided at a later
date if changes are made and /or after more detailed plans are provided.
Pedestrian
The application plan shows sidewalk on the street and the COD states
Orientation
that a crosswalk will be provided across Old Brook Rd to connect to
the existin sidewalk. This principle is met.
Neighborhood
The street section shows a sidewalk with planting strips. A crosswalk
Friendly Streets
will be provided across Old Brook Road to connect to the existing
and Paths
sidewalk. This principle is met.
Interconnected
It appears that there is no viable option to provide interconnected
Streets and
streets since this is an infill development. This principle cannot be
Transportation
met.
Networks
Parks and Open
The plan shows a community lawn and tree conservation area.
Space
Additionally open space from surrounding neighborhoods exists
behind many of the proposed units. This principle is met.
Neighborhood
The proposal includes a community lawn area in the center of the
Centers
plan. This principle is met.
Buildings and
The proposed neighborhood includes single family attached and
Spaces of Human
detached residential. The maximum building height would be 30 feet
Scale
for residential. The garages on the homes should be deemphasized
by putting them either behind the homes facing alleys and /or pulling
them back so they are not closer to the street than the front of the
homes. The fronts of the homes adjacent to Old Brook Road should
Additional Comments
1. Additional reviewer comments received as of this date are attached. It is possible that
more comments will be forthcoming.
Action after Receipt of Comments
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified in the attachment "Action
After Receipt of Comment Letter."
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal.
The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience.
Notification and Advertisement Fees
Recently, the Board of Supervisors amended the zoning ordinance to require that applicants
pay for the notification costs for public hearings. Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the
Planning Commission, these fees must be paid:
$ 144.85 Cost for newspaper advertisement
$ 200.00 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage /$1 per
owner after 50 adjoining owners)
$ 344.85 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing
face Old Brook Road. This principle is not met.
Relegated Parking
Most dwellings /lots appear to be designed with front loaded parking
(garages /driveway in front of unit). The Code of Development and
Illustrative Plan should be revised to include a section concerning
relegated parking, including language that states that where garages
are fronting on a street, that they shall be recessed from the front of
the house This principle is not met.
Mixture of Uses
There are two different housing types suggested; yet no non-
residential uses are proposed. This principle is not met.
Mixture of Housing
Affordable housing has not been addressed with the plan and /or
Types and
proffers. Also, the plan does allow for a number of different types of
Affordability
housing, including single family attached and detached, boarding
homes and accessory apartments This principle is partially met.
Redevelopment
This development is located within the development areas and the
density and uses proposed meet those recommendations as shown in
the Comprehensive Plan. However it is not compatible with the
density of the existing surrounding neighborhoods. This principle is
partially met.
Site Planning that
This principle is met.
Respects Terrain
Clear Boundaries
This project is within Neighborhood 2 of the Places 29 Master Plan.
with the Rural
This principle is met.
Areas
Additional Comments
1. Additional reviewer comments received as of this date are attached. It is possible that
more comments will be forthcoming.
Action after Receipt of Comments
After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions identified in the attachment "Action
After Receipt of Comment Letter."
Resubmittal
If you choose to resubmit, please use the attached form. There is no fee for the first resubmittal.
The resubmittal date schedule is provided for your convenience.
Notification and Advertisement Fees
Recently, the Board of Supervisors amended the zoning ordinance to require that applicants
pay for the notification costs for public hearings. Prior to scheduling a public hearing with the
Planning Commission, these fees must be paid:
$ 144.85 Cost for newspaper advertisement
$ 200.00 Cost for notification of adjoining owners (minimum $200 + actual postage /$1 per
owner after 50 adjoining owners)
$ 344.85 Total amount due prior to Planning Commission public hearing
Prior to the Board of Supervisor's public hearing, payment of the newspaper advertisement for
the Board hearing needed.
$ 144.85 Additional amount due prior to Board of Supervisors public hearing
$ 489.70 Total amount for all notifications Fees may be paid in advance. Payment for both
the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors public hearings may be paid at the same
time.
Additional notification fees will not be required unless a deferral takes place and adjoining
owners need to be notified of a new date.
Feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My phone number is
(434) 296 -5832, x. 3313 or email: sbaldwin @albemarle.org.
Sincerely,
Sara in
Senior Planner
Planning Services
Attachment A — Comments from VDOT October 23, 2013
Attachment B — Comments from Fire and Rescue, October 16, 2013
Attachment C- Comments from Engineering, October 10, 2013
Attachment D- Comments from Zoning, October 25, 2013.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
U
GINI�
ACTION AFTER RECEIPT OF COMMENT LETTER
Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following:
(1) Resubmit in response to review comments
(2) Request indefinite deferral
(3) Request that your Planning Commission public hearing date be set
(4) Withdraw your application
(1) Resubmittal in Response to Review Comments
If you plan to resubmit within 30 days, make sure that the resubmittal is on or before a
resubmittal date as published in the project review schedule. The full resubmittal schedule may
be found at www.albemarle.org in the "forms" section at the Community Development page.
Be sure to include the resubmittal form on the last page of your comment letter with your
submittal.
The application fee which you paid covers staff review of the initial submittal and one
resubmittal. Each subsequent resubmittal requires an additional fee. (See attached Fee
Schedule.)
(2) Request Indefinite Deferral
If you plan to resubmit after 30 days from the date of the comment letter, you need to request
an indefinite deferral. Please provide a written request and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. (Indefinite deferral means that you intend to resubmit /request a
public hearing be set with the Planning Commission after the 30 day period.)
(3) Request Planning Commission Public Hearing Date be Set
At this time, you may schedule a public hearing with the Planning Commission. However, we
do not advise that you go directly to public hearing if staff has identified issues in need of
resolution that can be addressed with a resubmittal.
After outstanding issues have been resolved and /or when you are ready to request a public
hearing, staff will set your public hearing date for the Planning Commission in accordance with
the Planning Commission's published schedule and as mutually agreed by you and the County.
The staff report and recommendation will be based on the latest information provided by you
with your initial submittal or resubmittal. Please remember that all resubmittals must be made
on or before a resubmittal date.
By no later than twenty -one (21) days before the Planning Commission's public hearing, a
newspaper advertisement fee and an adjoining owner notification fee must be paid. (See
attached Fee Schedule) Your comment letter will contain the actual fees you need to pay.
Payment for an additional newspaper advertisement is also required twenty -two (22) days prior
to the Board of Supervisors public hearing. These dates are provided on the attached Legal Ad
Payments for Public Hearings form.
Please be advised that, once a public hearing has been advertised, only one deferral prior to the
Planning Commission's public hearing will be allowed during the life of the application. The
only exception to this rule will be extraordinary circumstances, such as a major change in the
project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not previously
been brought to the applicant's attention. As always, an applicant may request deferral at the
Planning Commission meeting.
(4) Withdraw Your Application
If at any time you wish to withdraw your application, please provide your request in writing.
Failure to Respond
If we have not received a response from you within 30 days, we will contact you again. At that
time, you will be given 10 days to do one of the following: a) request withdrawal of your
application, b) request deferral of your application to a specific Planning Commission date as
mutually agreed to with staff, or c) request indefinite deferral and state your justification for
requesting the deferral. If none of these choices is made within 10 days, staff will schedule
your application for a public hearing based on the information provided with your original
submittal or the latest submittal staff received on a resubmittal date.
Fee Payment
Fees may be paid in cash or by check and must be paid at the Community Development Intake
Counter. Make checks payable to the County of Albemarle. Do not send checks directly to the
Review Coordinator.
FEE SCHEDULE FOR ZONING APPLICATIONS
A. For a special use permit:
1.
Additional lots under section 10.5.2.1; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ....................................... ............................... ........................$500.00
2.
Public utilities; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ....................................... ............................... ........................$500.00
3.
Day care center; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
................... 500.00
Each additional resubmittal ............................................ ............................... $
4.
Home occupation Class B; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ....................................... ............................... ........................$500.00
5.
5. Amend existing special use permit; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ....................................... ............................... ........................$500.00
6.
Extend existing special use permit; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ....................................... ............................... ........................$500.00
7.
All other special use permits; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$2,000.00
Each additional resubmittal ...................................... ............................... .....................
1 000.00
$ ,
8.
Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request
Fee............................................................................. ............................... ........................$180.00
B. For
amendment to text of zoning ordinance:
Fee................................................................................... ............................... .......................$1000.00
C. Amendment to the zoning map:
1.
Less than 50 acres; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$2,500.00
2.
Less than 50 acres; each additional resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,250.00
3.
50 acres or greater; application and first resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$3,500.00
4.
50 acres or greater; each additional resubmission
Fee............................................................................ ............................... ......................$1,750.00
5.
Deferral of scheduled public hearing at applicant's request
Fee............................................................................. ............................... ........................$180.00
D. Board
of Zoning Appeals:
1.
Request for a variance or sign special use permit
Fee............................................................................. ............................... ........................$500.00
2.
For other appeals to the board of zoning appeals (including appeals of zoning administrator's
decision) —
Fee (to be refunded if the decision of the zoning administrator is overturned) .......$240.00
N. Required notice:
1.
Preparing and mailing or delivering up to fifty (50) notices:
Fee............................................................................. ............................... ........................$200.00
plus the
actual cost of fast class postage
2.
Preparing and mailing or delivering, per notice more than fifty (50):
Fee............................................................................... ............................... ..........................$1.00
plus the
actual cost of fast class postage
3.
Published notice:
Fee.............................................................................. ............................... .........................Actual cost
2013 Submittal and Review Schedule
Special Use Permits and Zoning Map Amendments
Resubmittal Schedule
Written Comments and Earliest Planning
Commission Public Hearing*
Resubmittal Dates
Comments to
applicant for decision
on whether to
proceed to Public
Hearing *
Legal Ad Deadline
and Decision for
Public Hearing **
Planning
Commission Public
Hearing
No sooner than*
Monday
Wednesday
Monday
Tuesday
Nov 5 2012
Dec 5 2012-
Dec 17 2012
Jan 8
Nov 19 2012
Dec 19 2012
Jan 7
Jan 29
Dec3 2012
Jan 2
Jan 7
Jan 29
Dec 17 2012
Jan 16
Feb 4
Feb 26
°7Vlon Jan:y7 „,
Feb 5
Feb 11
Mar 5
°`Tue`Jan
Feb 20
Feb 25
Mar 19
Feb 4
Mar 6
Mar 18
Apr 9
Tue: Feb:1!'9
Mar 20
Apr 1
Apr 23
Mar 4
Apr 3
Apr 15
May 7
Mar 18
Apr 17
Apr 29
May 21
Apr 1
May 1
May 13
Jun 4
Apr 15
May 15
May 27
Jun 18
May 6
Jun 5
Jun 24
Jul 16
May 20
Jun 19
Jun 24
Jul 16
Jun 3
Jul -13
Jul 8
Jul 30
Jun 17
Jul 17
Jul 29
Aug 20
Jul 1
Jul 31
Aug 19
Sep 10
Jul 15
Aug 14
Aug 19
Sep 10
Aug 5
Sep 4
Sep 16
Oct 8
Aug 19
Sep 18
Sep 30
Oct 22
A _Tue Sep„ �
Oct 2
Oct 21
Nov 12
Sep 16
Oct 16
Oct 28
Nov 19
Oct 7
Nov 6
Nov 18
Dec 10
Oct 21
Nov 20
Nov 25
Dec 17
Nov 4
Dec 4
Dec 23
Jan 14 2014;
Nov 18
Dec 18
Jan 6 2014
Jan, 28 2014';
Dec 2
Jan 1'2014
Jan 6 2014
Jan 28 2014
Dec 16
Jan 15 2014
Feb 3 2014
Feb 25 2014
Dates shown in italics are changes due to a County holiday
* The reviewing planner will contact applicant to discuss comments of reviewers and advise that
changes that are needed are significant enough to warrant an additional submittal or advise that the
the project is ready for a public hearing. If changes needed are minor, the planner will advise that
the project go to public hearing.
** The legal ad deadline is the last date at which an applicant can decide whether to resubmit or go
to public hearing. If an applicant decides to go to public hearing against the advice of the reviewing
planner, a recommendation for denial will likely result. Generally, the applicant will will have only one
opportunity to defer the PC public hearing for the project once it has been advertised for public
hearing. Additional deferrals will not be allowed except in extraordinary circumstances such as a
major change in the project proposal by the applicant or more issues identified by staff that have not
previously been brought to the applicant's attention.
Phone 434 - 296 -5832
OF ALt�
Rut
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, VA, 22902
Memorandum
To: Justin Shimp
From: Michelle Roberge, Engineering Department
Division: Engineering
Date: October 10, 2013
Subject: ZMA 2013 -00015 Northfield Green
Fax 434 - 972 -4126
I have reviewed the concept plan for the application noted above and offer the following comments for the
applicant. The comments are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments may be added
or eliminated based on further review.
1. [Comment] The guest parking spaces are clustered in front of lot 6 to 9 only. It is also difficult to turn into
the first parking space. The parking layout can be spread out and improved by showing 8' wide parallel
parking on the north and south side of the community lawn.
2. [Comment] The one way road should be 20' wide, at a minimum, to allow for fire truck access. To keep the
20' wide road uniform throughout the site, the entrance needs to be revised. One recommendation is to
show a 45' wide entrance with a 6' median to separate the ingress and egress. See attached drawing.
3. [Comment] There appears to be a utility box near lot 13 which is visible from the road. Please address how
conceptual grading will be affected.
4. [Comment] It appears that the grading for lots 6 -9 drain west. To avoid any runoff to existing neigbors
located west of site, please revise grading to drain east towards Old Brook Rd. The conceptual grading also
results in steep driveways for lots 7 -8 which will need to be revised.
5. [Comment] Also, note that for final site plan, yard inlets behind lots 1 -6 and 9 -13 will work well for the site.
The conceptual grading should show positive drainage towards sag yard inlets and not away from site or
down steep slopes.
6. [Comment] It appears the illustrative plan does not match the conceptual grading plan (Sheet 6 of 7).
Please make conceptual grading consistent on all plans.
Please contact Michelle Roberge in the Engineering Dept at mroberge(cbalbemarle.orq or 434 - 296 -5832 ext.
3458 for further information.
Review Comments
Project Name: Northfield Green
Date Completed: 1wednesday, October 16, 2013
Reviewer: Robbie Gilmer
Department/Division /Agency: Fire Rescue
Reviews
Based on plans 9/16/13
1. Fire Rescue will need a more detailed drawing of the 20 ft emergency access clear zone. Details to show what
type of curb will be used, what type of driving surface will make up the other 6 ft of travel lane.
12. Fire Flow test required. Minimum of 1000 gpm @ 20 psi required.
Review Status: Requested Changes
pF AL ,
U 1
\ 1
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
Memorandum
To: Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner
From: Ron Higgins, AICP, Chief of Zoning /Zoning Administrator
Division: Zoning
Date: October 25, 2013
Subject: ZMA201300015- Northfield Green - TMP 61 -126 — R -2 to NMD
My Zoning comments on this ZMA Application Plan & Code of Development are:
-While the gross density (of potentially 4.9 units /acre) is within the Places29 Land Use Plan
Recommendation of 3 -6 units /acre, it is greater than the prevailing density in the immediate
neighborhood, which is less than 3 units /acre. This is somewhat out of character with the surrounding
neighborhood as called for in the Guiding Principles of the Places29 Master Plan.
- Mixture of attached and detached units is consistent with the NMD principles, but also raises the
neighborhood compatibility question, if most units in the area are detached.
-Most units in the area along Old Brook Road face that road, while this proposal has sides facing the
Road. This also raises neighborhood compatibility question.
- "Clear Zone" for emergency access includes non -paved area of Community Lawn, which may not be
sufficient for Fire & Safety needs. Paved area is only 14' wide when 20' is desired.
- "Landscape Buffer" proposed along Old Brook Road may interfere with sight distances.
- Sidewalk should be provided along the Old Brook Road frontage.
-There .should be a proffer statement included with the application.
�xa
��
MMONWE� LTH of VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1601 Orange Road
Culpeper, Virginia 22701 -3819
Gregory A. Whirley
Commissioner of Highways
October 23, 2013
Ms. Sarah Baldwin
Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: ZMA- 2013 -00015 Northfield Green
Dear Ms. Baldwin:
We have reviewed the Rezoning Application Plan for Northfield Green dated September 16,
2013 as submitted by Shimp Engineering, P.C. and offer the following comments:
1. Based on the current traffic counts for Old Brook Road and the proposed development of
the site, the new entrance can be considered a Moderate Volume Commercial Entrance
and will need to meet the standards for a Moderate Volume Commercial Entrance as
defined in Appendix F of the Road Design Manual at a minimum.
2. The new entrance will need to meet intersection sight distance as defined in Appendix F
of the Road Design Manual. For the posted speed limit of 30 mph for Old Brook Road,
the required sight distance is 335 feet. The ability to meet this requirement will need to
be confirmed by the design engineer.
3. The proposed sanitary sewer needs to be located outside of the paved surface of Old
Brook Road.
If you need additional information concerning this project, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
/P
Troy Austin, P.E.
Area Land Use Engineer
Culpeper District
VirginiaDOT.org
WE KEEP VIRGINIA MOVING