Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201400004 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2014-10-03�� OF ALg� County of Albemarle Department of Community Development The carriage house addendum and rezoning application indicate this amendment will only apply to undeveloped blocks within Old Trail. The proffers indicate that if approved, they will supersede the proffers previously approved with ZMA 2004 -24 and ZMA 2008 -05. Section 33.2.1 applies and this addendum /revised proffers can only apply to the parcels for this rezoning without the signatures of other parcel owner: Required signatures on owner - initiated application. Each owner - initiated application for a zoning map amendment shall be signed by the owner of each parcel that is the subject of the proposed zoning map amendment, provided that: a. Amendments to existing proffers. An owner whose parcel is subject to proffers may apply to amend the proffers applicable solely to the owner's parcel, provided that written notice of the application is provided to the owners of other parcels subject to the same proffers under Virginia Code §§ 15.2- 2204(H) and 15.2- 2302. However, the signatures of the owners of the other parcels subject to the same proffers shall not be required. b. Amendments to planned developments. An owner within an existing planned development may apply for a zoning map amendment, and the signatures of any other owners within the planned development is required only if the amendment could result in or require: (i) a change in use, density or intensity on that parcel; (ii) a change to any regulation in a code of development that would apply to that parcel; (iii) a change to an owner's express obligation under a regulation in a code of development; or (iv) a change to the application plan that would apply to that parcel. Code of Development addendum comments- • The first sentence of the addendum should be revised to say that it is added as a new use /paragraph to Table 4 -Land Uses Allowed of page 25 of the Code of development. Section II of page 5 is not the regulatory section of the code of development. • The addendum does not include setback regulations for carriage house units. The narrative on page 2 (second paragraph from the bottom) says the units will be in the rear of lots but this should be added as a regulation to the code addendum. • The addendum seems to incorporate regulations that are only applicable to accessory apartments with items a and f. Items a and f should be deleted. • Carriage houses, as defined in the code addendum are essentially detached single family dwellings and are counted as such for the purpose of calculating density. Item g addresses this. • It is confusing what is meant in the narrative and addendum (bottom of page 2 /top of page 3) perhaps referencing the specific tables in the code of development and providing an example would clarify. Carriage houses are a separate unit so if they could towards the total number of units allowed in Old Trial, I don't see how they wouldn't count towards block density. This is consistent carriage house provisions in Belvedere and Cascadia. Memorandum To: Megan Yaniglos, Senior Planner From: Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner Division: Zoning Date: 9/24/14 Subject: ZMA 2014 -04 Old Trail Village amendment The carriage house addendum and rezoning application indicate this amendment will only apply to undeveloped blocks within Old Trail. The proffers indicate that if approved, they will supersede the proffers previously approved with ZMA 2004 -24 and ZMA 2008 -05. Section 33.2.1 applies and this addendum /revised proffers can only apply to the parcels for this rezoning without the signatures of other parcel owner: Required signatures on owner - initiated application. Each owner - initiated application for a zoning map amendment shall be signed by the owner of each parcel that is the subject of the proposed zoning map amendment, provided that: a. Amendments to existing proffers. An owner whose parcel is subject to proffers may apply to amend the proffers applicable solely to the owner's parcel, provided that written notice of the application is provided to the owners of other parcels subject to the same proffers under Virginia Code §§ 15.2- 2204(H) and 15.2- 2302. However, the signatures of the owners of the other parcels subject to the same proffers shall not be required. b. Amendments to planned developments. An owner within an existing planned development may apply for a zoning map amendment, and the signatures of any other owners within the planned development is required only if the amendment could result in or require: (i) a change in use, density or intensity on that parcel; (ii) a change to any regulation in a code of development that would apply to that parcel; (iii) a change to an owner's express obligation under a regulation in a code of development; or (iv) a change to the application plan that would apply to that parcel. Code of Development addendum comments- • The first sentence of the addendum should be revised to say that it is added as a new use /paragraph to Table 4 -Land Uses Allowed of page 25 of the Code of development. Section II of page 5 is not the regulatory section of the code of development. • The addendum does not include setback regulations for carriage house units. The narrative on page 2 (second paragraph from the bottom) says the units will be in the rear of lots but this should be added as a regulation to the code addendum. • The addendum seems to incorporate regulations that are only applicable to accessory apartments with items a and f. Items a and f should be deleted. • Carriage houses, as defined in the code addendum are essentially detached single family dwellings and are counted as such for the purpose of calculating density. Item g addresses this. • It is confusing what is meant in the narrative and addendum (bottom of page 2 /top of page 3) perhaps referencing the specific tables in the code of development and providing an example would clarify. Carriage houses are a separate unit so if they could towards the total number of units allowed in Old Trial, I don't see how they wouldn't count towards block density. This is consistent carriage house provisions in Belvedere and Cascadia. Mumal.��a 14ELAL4RE RUIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES .. dAEAiAILi TAFJLE 1 MUIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITIES W STAJSH APARTFMENIIM CAARIAa NCiISE ImIT9 iOUii 6ENSITY 1 1.06 20 20 LS 2 26.83 7 18 294 319 11.9 8 i2A9 22 ii 33 2.G 4 1EL62 30 25 2G 81 1 4.4 5 us 31 24 55 2A G 932 A If 27 66 7.1 ] 5.72 m 32 62 7_1 a 73 27 9 2G 62 7-9 9 9AI 25 25 27 10 53.4 52 52 O.G TOTAL 206.62 254 61 318 146 775 3.7 BELVEOERE MIN iMuM RESIDENTIAL DENSMIES uoa 4_ A0LIP dAEAiAILi TAUG2 MINIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSfffS SPD SWTH APAR�E CAAAIAGE HOUSE UNITS TOTAY DENSITY 1 15.06 0 0.0 2 26.93 15 212 233 S.7 8 12.48 22 8 30 2A 4 16.68 28 15 20 63 3A 5 6.86 29 15 44 6.4 6 932 23 20 49 *xS 7 L72 34 20 50 S 7 8 7.9 24 20 44 5_G 9 5111 23 23 2A 10 53.4 54 50 0.5 TOTAL 206.Eh 238 30 318 103 586 2.9