Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201200003 Staff Report 2013-07-25COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA2012 -003 Out of Bounds Staff: Megan Yaniglos Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: July 30, 2013 To be Determined Owner(s): Barrack Heights, LLC Applicant: Vito Cetta; Justin Shimp, P.E. of Shimp Engineering, P.C. Acreage: 9.42 acres Rezone from: R -1, residential to NMD, Neighborhood Model District with proffers. TMP: 06000000006500 By -right use: R1 Residential- The R -1 district allows Location: Located on Barracks Road (Route 654) residential uses up to 13 dwelling units with bonus across from its intersection with Georgetown Road density /clustering provisions for the entire parcel. (Route 656). 225 Out of Bounds Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. (Attachment A) Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proffers: Yes Proposal: Rezone a 9.42 acre property from R -1 Requested # of Dwelling Units: Maximum 56 Residential (1unit /acre) to NMD Neighborhood Model District which allows residential (3 -34 units /acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. Maximum of 56 residential units with the preservation of an existing residence on 0.68 acres, and 25% open space, for a proposed density of 6 units /gross acre. No commercial or industrial uses are proposed. Attachment B DA (Development Area): Neighborhood Density Comprehensive Plan Designation: Neighborhood Residential in Neighborhood 7. Density Residential — residential (3 -6 units /acre); supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools and other small -scale non - residential uses; and EC Entrance Corridor — Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access. Character of Property: Contains an historic single Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential uses: family residence and associated outbuildings. The single family, senior living, and multifamily. Canterbury front of the property is mostly open field, and the Hills, Hessian Hills, the Colonnades, Barracks West. rear is wooded. Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1.The form of development of the property is 1. The proffers are in need of technical revisions. consistent with the land use 2. Off- site drainage analysis has not been provided. recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan, Neighborhood Model, and the goals for development in the County. 2. Will provide tax revenues to the County. 3.A future interconnection is shown to the adjacent property. RECOMMENDATION: 1. Staff recommends approval of ZMA201200003, Out of Bounds, with changes to address the unfavorable factors. 2. Staff also recommends approval of the private street, sidewalk and planting strip waivers as presented in the staff report below. 3. Staff recommends denial of the curb and gutter waiver as presented in the staff report below. STAFF PERSON: Megan Yaniglos ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 1 PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds July 30, 2013 To Be Determined PETITION PROJECT: ZMA201200003- Out of Bounds PROPOSAL: Rezone a 9.42 acre property from R -1 Residential (1 unit/acre) to NMD Neighborhood Model District which allows residential (3 -34 units /acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. Maximum of 56 residential units with the preservation of an existing residence on 0.68 acres for a proposed density of 6 units /gross acre. No commercial or industrial uses are proposed. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes PROFFERS: NO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Neighborhood Density Residential- residential (3 -6 units /acre); supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, and other small -scale non - residential uses in Neighborhood 7. LOCATION: Located on Barracks Road (Route 654) across from its intersection with Georgetown Road (Route 656). 225 Out of Bounds Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. TAX MAP /PARCEL: 06000000006500 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett CHARACTER OF THE AREA The site is located on Barracks Road, across from its intersection with Georgetown Road (Attachment A). The property contains an historic single family residence, which will remain, along with some outbuildings. The property has some trees in the area close to Barracks Road along with a three board fence, but is mainly open grass field. The back portion of the property is heavily wooded. The grade changes from Barracks Road up in elevation where the existing house sits, and then slopes down in the back. Uses adjacent to the site include residential single family (Canterbury Hills), multi - family (Hessian Hills), and senior living (The Colonnades). The Huntwood (Townhouses) development is located across from this site on Barracks Road. Barracks West Apartments are 0.2 miles west of the property. SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL The applicant proposed to rezone 9.42 acres from R -1 to Neighborhood Model District to allow up to 56 single family attached, townhouses, and multifamily residential units, with the existing single family house to remain. Access to the property would be from two entrances. One would be directly across from the existing Georgetown Road intersection with Barracks Road creating a four way intersection. Georgetown Road would then be extended into the property. The second entrance will be located within an existing 50 foot public right of way that would extend Bennington Road on the east side of the property and would connect the proposed development to Canterbury Hills. Both roads are proposed to be public streets. The applicant is also proposing two private streets that would serve townhouse and multifamily lots. (See Attachment B: Application Plan). Approximately 2.35 acres (25 %) of open space is proposed between rows of units, with a sidewalk connecting the spaces throughout the site. A playground /amenity area is also proposed in the southeast corner of the property. Along with the rezoning, the applicant is also requesting a number of waivers; Chapter 18 Section 4.3 Critical Slopes, Chapter 14 Section 233 Private Streets, Chapter 14 Section 410 Curb and Gutter, and Chapter 14 Section 422 Sidewalks and Planting Strips. APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 2 The applicant has provided a justification that states the following in part (See Attachment D for the full justification): The Out of Bounds property is 9.42 acres, located in Neighborhood 7 on the south side of Barracks Road at the intersection of Georgetown Road. This site lies within the Neighborhood Density designation of the Comprehensive Plan, which recommends 3 -6 units per acre of residential density. In addition, the Comprehensive Plan recommends that "New developments adjacent to existing subdivisions or developments shall be developed at higher densities and a form in keeping with the Neighborhood Model to support infill development efforts. The Out of Bounds property lies between The Colonnades (PRD zoning) and Canterbury Hills (R2 zoning). The focal point of the development plan is the integration of the existing home site in a new Neighborhood Model development that extends Bennington Road, extends Georgetown Road, and creates a new streetscape at the intersection of Georgetown Road and Barracks Road. The existing two -story Federal style home dates to the early 20th century and sits on a site with impressive landscaping and shade trees. The Georgetown Road extension is designed to preserve this home site on a large parcel (0.5 Ac min.) and to provide an urban street connection to Bennington Road behind it. Three locations for amenities are anticipated as shown on sheet 4: approximately 4,000 square feet is provided for a playground in the southeast corner of the property, and two areas of approximately 9,000 square feet are provided in Block 6A. It is anticipated that the large open space amenity areas will be developed as a Community Park /Garden space with features to be proffered by the Applicant. Additional public recreation facilities, Charlotte Humphries Park, McIntire Park, and Ivy Creek Natural Area are located nearby. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY There are no prior approvals for development on this property. CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Land Use Plan: Neighborhood 7 The land use designations on this property are Neighborhood Density, Airport Impact Area, and Entrance Corridor Overlay. The descriptions of these land use designations and insets of the Land Use Map are below. Neighborhood Density Residential — 3 — 6 residential units per acre with residential support uses and limited non - residential uses. Neighborhood Density Residential areas will primarily accommodate single family dwelling unit 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. Neighborhood Density Residential areas accommodate small areas of non - residential land uses on the scale of Neighborhood Service, to serve residential uses. This may include corner stores of less than 4,000 square feet; live /work units above office and /or retail; small office buildings with less than 20,000 square feet; and studios /cottage occupations. Entrance Corridor (EC) — Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along routes of tourist access. Airport Impact Area (AIA)- Overlay to minimize adverse impacts to both the airport and the surrounding land. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 3 The proposal is consistent with the recommended land use and density (5.9 units per acre) and has addressed EC issues identified by Architectural Review Board Staff. SALEM Land Use Map Open Space Plan: The Open Space Plan identifies some critical slopes as significant environmental resources located on this site. Protection of these environmental resources is an important element of the Comprehensive Plan. There is proposed grading on these significant critical slopes. The applicant has submitted a critical slopes waiver request with this rezoning (Attachment E). However, engineering staff has found that these slopes were created when the existing dry pond at the rear of the site was built (See critical slopes waiver analysis below on page 10). Based on the analysis provided in this report, Staff can support the disturbance of these critical slopes. Neighborhood Model -The Neighborhood Model describes the more "urban" form of development desired for the Development Areas. It establishes the 12 Principles for Development that should be adhered to in new development proposals. Pedestrian The applicant is providing sidewalks along Barracks Road, and Orientation along all the internal roads proposed on the property. They are also providing internal sidewalks in the open space, to create pedestrian access to all portions of the development. All of these improvements will allow access to other existing or proposed sidewalks and existing transit stops. The applicant is also providing a cash proffer that is consistent with the cash proffer policy. This principle is met. Neighborhood There is parking located on one side of the street along Friendly Streets Georgetown Road extended. There are pathways and sidewalks and Paths throughout the development as well as a sidewalk along Bennington Road extension. This principle is met. Interconnected The application plan shows a connection of Bennington Road and Streets and Georgetown Road with provides a connection into Canterbury Hills Transportation with a light. Right of way is shown to the property line at the end of Networks South Bennington Road to provide a future connection to the Colonnades property. This principle is met. Parks and Open Multiple open space areas have been provided, including a ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 4 Space playground. Also, there is a path system the runs throughout the development. This principle is met. Neighborhood The development is within walking distance to Barracks Road Centers Shopping Center and also has access to bus stops along Georgetown and Barracks Road. This principle is met. Buildings and The proposed neighborhood includes a mixture of residential Spaces of Human uses. The maximum building height would be 45 feet for Scale multifamily and townhomes, and 35 feet for single family. This principle is met. Relegated Parking The parking is located at the back of the townhouse units, and the garage on the single family attached units is set back from the front porch. This principle is met. Mixture of Uses There a number of different housing types proposed to be allowed uses within this development with Barracks Rd Shopping Center within walking distance, and the Colonnades to the north. The need for a non - residential component is met by the property being in close proximity to Barracks Road, and other commercial areas within the City and County that can be accessed via the bus route, or within walking distance. This principle is met. Mixture of Housing The plan allows for a number of different types of housing, Types and including multi - family, townhomes, and single family residential. A Affordability proffer has been offered for Affordable Housing, however the amounts are not correct. With modification to the proffers for affordable housing, this principle will be met. Redevelopment There is an existing historic residence on the property that will remain. The applicant has allowed members of the Historic Preservation Committee to document the house and outbuildings. This property is within the development areas and will not require any additional utilities, however it will require transportation improvements. While this is an open, undeveloped lot, it is minimizing development in the rural areas. This principle is met. Site Planning that There is only a small area in the back of the property where there Respects Terrain are critical slopes being disturbed. Engineering and Planning have no objection to this disturbance. This principle is met. Clear Boundaries This project is directly across from the rural areas. There is an with the Rural existing black three -board fence along Barracks Road that is a Areas character - defining feature and should be maintained. Meeting the Architectural Review Board landscape requirements, and retaining the fence, this principle will be met. Economic Vitality Action Plan The primary goal of the County's Economic Vitality Action Plan is to: Increase the County's economic vitality and future revenues through economic development by expanding the commercial tax base and supporting the creation of quality jobs for local residents. This Plan is developed for the benefit and economic well being, first, of current local residents and existing local businesses. The proposed Out of Bounds development would support the Plan by providing housing for employees of existing and potential businesses in the County. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 5 Staff believes that this proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Economic Vitality Action Plan. STAFF COMMENT Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district: The following section is an excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance: Neighborhood Model Districts are intended to provide for compact, mixed -use development with an urban scale, massing, density, and an infrastructure configuration that integrates diversified uses within close proximity to each other. The NMD is intended to be a flexible zoning district to allow development consistent with the goals of the land use plan /master plan and the neighborhood model principles. The general form of this proposal is consistent with the intent of the NMD district. The proposed Out of Bounds development complies with the requirements the Neighborhood Model District; it will include an application plan, a code of development, proffers, and will provide, operate, and maintain open space as well as a playground for the residents of the development and the adjacent neighborhoods. Out of Bounds is proposed for an area designated Neighborhood Density Residential (3.01 -6 units per acre) in the Comprehensive Plan. While the proposed density in Out of Bounds is 5.9 units per acre, slightly less than the maximum, the development will be single - family attached homes on smaller lots, townhouse lots, and multifamily which will add to the alternatives for potential residences to the condos and single family detached homes nearby. The applicant has worked with the neighbors and County staff to minimize impacts on surrounding developments and neighborhoods. As an example to address neighbors concerns, the applicant has adjusted the townhouse units in the back of the property to be 75 feet away from the property line, taking away some of the amenity area for the development, while maintaining the required 25% open space. Also, the applicant has adjusted Georgetown Road extended so that it is farther away from the back of the houses along Westminster Road and has provided a buffer in this area. The proposed 56 units represent a significantly more efficient and economical use of the land than the 9 units (13 with density bonus) that would be possible under the current R -1, Residential zoning Staff believes that the proposal meets the intent of the Neighborhood Residential Development (NMD) district. Public need and justification for the change: The County's Comprehensive Plan supports development in the designated development areas that is consistent with the use, density, and form recommended in the Plan. An addition of a development with a mix of unit types in this portion of the County could be beneficial for County residents who wish to live and work in this portion of the County. Impact on Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Resources: There are minimal environmental resources located on this site, such as critical slopes. These critical slopes have been found to be not significant, and created when the dry pond was built. Both engineering and planning staff believe that the disturbance of these slopes are not significant or detrimental to the area, and are recommending approval of the waiver for disturbance of the critical slopes. The analysis for the waiver is provided later in the report. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 6 There are no impacts on cultural and historic resources. The applicant is preserving the existing historic house on site and the applicant has allowed members of the Historic Preservation Committee to document the house and outbuildings. Anticipated impact on public facilities and services: StrPPta- A traffic study was provided and reviewed by the County Engineer and VDOT. A left turn lane is provided into the site from Barracks Road. There is sufficient right of way currently for this to be added in order for residents to turn into the development. The applicant has proffered to provide these improvements. Also, Bennington Road has been extended into the site from an existing right of way that was anticipated. VDOT has stated that this connection must be made, as it has been anticipated to extend Bennington Road since the plat and deed which dedicated this occurred in 1963. (Attachment 1). The residents of Canterbury Hills have stated that they do not want this connection to be made. Staff recognizes this concern, however, believes that this connection is important to maintain to provide interconnectivity between the neighborhoods. This connection also provides Canterbury Hills residents a way to safely get to Georgetown Road via a signalized intersection. VDOT has stated that a roundabout at the intersection of Georgetown Road and Barracks Road may be looked at in the future and has requested right of way to be dedicated with this rezoning. However, staff believes that this is premature, and the traffic engineer has found that the roundabout would not address traffic at this intersection any better than a traffic signal. Also, VDOT has yet to study this option, and does not know how much right of way is needed. If a future dedication is provided, it may impact the proposed units along Barracks Road, and therefore, Staff is not recommending that this dedication happen at this point in time. = I G Students living in this area would attend Greer Elementary School, Jack Jouett Middle School, and Albemarle High School. Fire and Rescue: This site will be covered by Station 8 Seminole Trail Fire Department. Utilities: The Albemarle County Service Authority has indicated that they do not have comments at this stage of review. This project is in the water and sewer service jurisdictional area and both services are available. Cash Proffer Policy: The county cash Proffer Policy states that: It is the policy of the County to require that the owner of property that is rezoned for residential uses to provide cash proffers equivalent to the proportional value of the public facilities deemed necessary to serve the proposed development on the property. Accordingly, the Board will accept cash proffers for rezoning requests that permit residential uses in accordance with this policy. However, the Board may also accept cash, land or in- kind improvements in accordance with County and State law to address the impacts of the rezoning. The current cash proffer amounts offered is not correct. Staff has recommended that they update the amounts within the proffer to the current amounts. Staff has also recommended that the language for the proffer include an inflation adjuster provision per the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index. These adjustments to the proffer are technical in nature, and can be made prior to the ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 7 Board of Supervisors meeting. It is the applicant's intent to meet the expectations of the cash proffer policy. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties: The Canterbury Hills neighborhood has expressed concerns with this development. Traffic is a large concern of theirs, as discussed above, the connection from Bennington Road into the Canterbury Hills neighborhood is of particular concern. Staff and VDOT have the position that this connection is necessary and will provide good interconnectivity for the County, and the residents not only of the new development, but for the Canterbury Hill residents as well. The connection will allow the Canterbury Hills residents to be able to get to a light, where they can safely access Georgetown Road, and Barracks Road west. Density of the development. The proposed development is within the density allowed per the Comprehensive Plan and is located within the development areas where the County has stated they want development to occur. Drainage from the site into Canterbury Hills neighborhood. This is of a concern of staff's as well. Thus far, the applicant has not addressed this particular concern in detail. The applicant is currently working with Engineering staff to provide an off -site drainage analysis, but has not provided that analysis to date. The applicant is required to provide onsite treatment and dissipate the runoff produced on site at the same level as what is currently being produced pre - development per the County's water protection ordinance. Other concerns expressed from Canterbury Hills are height of the units, buffering and setbacks, commercial uses, and the affordable housing location. A summary of the concerns and how the applicant has addressed these concerns is provided below: 1. The residents would like building heights to be consistent within the heights of homes located in Canterbury Hills (a maximum height of 3 stories or approximately 35 feet) The applicant has proposed that the heights remain at 45 feet for townhouse units, multi - family, and mixed use buildings, and 35 feet for all other units, however the applicant as adjusted the townhouse units that are closest to the adjacent properties in the rear of the site to have a 75 foot setback from the property line. Also, along the east property line there will be a 75 building setback, however Georgetown Road Extended is within this setback. This is shown on the application plan. 2. The residents would like a more extensive buffer and setbacks (a minimum of 75 feet that would not include the road) The applicant has provided a 75 foot building setback on the back and sides of the property immediate adjacent to the Canterbury Hills neighborhood as stated in #1. This is shown on the application plan. 3. The residents opposed any commercial uses on site. The applicant revised the proposal so that no commercial uses are proposed with this rezoning. 4. The residents would like the affordable housing to be located on the property where shown on the application plan, and not adjacent to Canterbury Hills. The applicant has stated on the application plan and in the code of development as well as in the proffers which units will be affordable. This location, closest to the Colonnades, is where the Canterbury Hills neighborhood expressed they would like them to be located. PROFFERS ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 8 The applicant has provided proffers. (See Attachment C) The proffers are in need of and technical fixes. The following describes the proffers provided: Proffer 1- Application Plan This proffer is not needed and needs to be eliminated. Application plans should not be proffer; they are a requirement as part of the Neighborhood Model District zoning. Proffer 2- Affordable Housing The Owner will provide 15% of the total residential units constructed on the property at a specific location for affordable housing. Technical corrections are needed to clarify the unit type (for rent or for sale), and the timing of the units to be built. Proffer 3- Residential Units The proffer states that certain residential units will be provided as shown on the application plan. Technical corrections are needed to clarify language concerning the affordable units mentioned in Proffer 2. Proffer 4- Cash Proffers for Residential Units The Owner proposes to provide a cash proffer for each unit built in the development to offset the impacts of the development. Technical corrections are needed to further expand the language for the purpose of addressing the fiscal impacts of the development to include County's public facilities and infrastructure. Also, the contribution amount needs to be updated to reflect the current amounts, and standard inflation adjuster provision to be added. It is the intent of the applicant to provide an amount consistent with the cash proffer policy. Proffer 5- Public Road Improvements In general, this proffer needs technical corrections to add language to clarify when the improvements will be made, and what the definition of completion is. A. Bennington Drive Connection- Technical corrections need to be made to state that it is `Bennington Road' not `Drive', and to reference the correct sheet and the application plan rather than the master plan. B. Modification to signal at Barracks and Georgetown Road- Technical corrections need to be made to clarify what modifications are being made (to the existing signal or adding a signal). C. Modifications to Existing Turn Lane- Technical corrections need to be made for typographical changes, and to reference the application plan. D. Right of Way Dedication for Future Roundabout- As discussed previously in the report, this proffer should be removed, as VDOT has not explored this option in detail and it may impact the residential units proposed in the development. It is the intent of the applicant for this proffer to address all traffic improvements necessitated by the development and as recommended by VDOT and the County Engineer. SUMMARY Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request: 1. The development of the property is consistent with the land use recommendations in the Comprehensive Plan, Neighborhood Model, and the goals for development in the County. 2. Will provide tax revenues to the County. 3. A future interconnection is shown to the adjacent property. Staff has found the following factors unfavorable to this rezoning: ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 9 1. The proffers are in need of technical revisions. 2. Off- site drainage analysis has not been provided. RECOMMENDATION Staff can recommend approval of ZMA201200003, Out of Bounds, provided the unfavorable factors listed above in the summary are addressed prior to the Board of Supervisors meeting. WAIVERS 1. Critical Slopes- Chapter 18 Section 4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The applicant has applied for a Critical Slopes Waiver (Attachment E). The critical slopes waiver request has been reviewed (Attachment G). Staff's analysis follows: Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: The critical slopes proposed as being disturbed are man -made slopes that were created when the existing dry pond at the rear of site was constructed. The applicant is requesting to disturb these critical slopes for a subdivision development with a maximum of 56 residential units. Areas Acres Total site 9.42 acres approximately Critical slopes .09 0.1% Critical slopes disturbed .09 100% The disturbance of critical slopes shown is exempt from the critical slopes waivers under the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance Section 4.2.6. The existing topography has approximately 1/3 of site draining north and 2/3 of site draining south to a low spot, which is then bordered by the critical slopes. Engineering recommends approval of the critical slope waiver provided that adequate stormwater management is proposed at or near the critical slopes area. Engineering has also previously recommended a stormwater basin, but the applicant wishes to pursue providing underground detention facilities. Engineering has requested that the applicant provide an adequate channel analysis prior to the approval of ZMA201200003. Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2: "movement of soil and rock" Construction will consist of compacted fill and erosion control measures shall be installed in accordance with the water protection ordinance to prevent large scale erosion. Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil. "excessive stormwater runoff' The proposed stormwater facilities are three underground detention systems located north and south of site. Prior to the approval of ZMA201200003, Engineering has recommended for the applicant to determine if existing pipes downstream can handle existing runoff plus the additional runoff from the proposed development. "siltation" ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 10 Inspection and bonding by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability. Engineering staff will only approve a plan compliant with state standards. "loss of aesthetic resource" This proposal is to provide a high density subdivision within an area designated for such use. This application also proposes the preservation of a historic home on 0.68 acres, Block 2, along an Albemarle County entrance corridor. "septic effluent" The proposed site will not release any septic effluent to the surrounding environment. The site is serviced by public sewer. SUMMARY: It is Staff's opinion that the critical slopes being disturbed are minimal and not significant, and therefore recommends approval of the critical slopes request. 2. Authorization of Private Streets Private streets may be authorized by the Planning Commission as provided by any one of the provisions of Section 14 -233. The applicant has requested approval of the two private streets (Road 'A' and Road `B') using Neighborhood model development [Section 14- 233(A)(1)] as justification[Attachment F]. Ordinance language is provided in italics below: The proposed private street(s) would enable the principles of the neighborhood model to be more fully implemented than could be achieved with a public street, without diminishing other principles of the neighborhood model, in the following circumstances: (i) the subdivision would have a streetscape more consistent with the neighborhood model; (ii) the subdivision design would allow it to better achieve the density goals of the comprehensive plan; (iii) rear vehicular access to buildings would be provided so that the buildings may face a common amenity; (iv) a significant environmental resource would be protected; or (v) relegated parking would be provided to a greater extent than could otherwise be provided. Staff's opinion is that allowing Road 'A' and Road 'B' to be private streets will enable to the principles of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved without diminishing the other principles of the neighborhood model. Road `A' will contain street trees and sidewalks on both sides of the street, and also will have on street parking. The parking for the units facing Road `A' will have relegated parking that will be set back from the porch of the unit. Road 'B' will essentially serve as an alley. This will allow the units to have rear vehicular access, relegated parking, and front on either a community amenity or a buffer area. County Engineering staff has analyzed each street as required by Chapter 14, Section 233A.1 of the County Code [Attachment H]. Staff has found that the design of the subdivision meets the requirement for authorization for a private street under this section. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14 -234: Per Section 14- 234(c), the Commission may authorize one or more private roads to be ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 11 constructed in a subdivision if it finds that one or more of the circumstances described in section 14 -233 exists and that: (ordinance language presented in italics followed by staff comment) 1. The private road will be adequate to carry the traffic volume which may be reasonably expected to be generated by the subdivision. The amount of traffic expected on these private streets is minimal. The roads will provide access to the lots only, and not carry through traffic. The design is adequate for this type of traffic. 2. The comprehensive plan does not provide for a public street in the approximate location of the proposed private road; The Comprehensive Plan does not provide for a public street in the location of these private streets. 3. The fee of the private road will be owned by the owner of each lot abutting the right -of- way thereof or by an association composed of the owners of all lots in the subdivision, subject in either case to any easement for the benefit of all lots served by the road; Section 14 -317 of the Subdivision Ordinance requires that a maintenance agreement be submitted for review by Planning staff and the County Attorney in all situations where improvements are required to be maintained. The applicant will be required to submit this maintenance agreement during the subdivision process. 4. Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, the private road will not serve through traffic nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location; and The private streets will not serve through traffic, nor intersect the state highway system in more than one location. 5. If applicable, the private road has been approved in accordance with section 30.3, flood hazard overlay district, of the zoning ordinance and other applicable law. As proposed the private streets will not require any upgrades nor impact the flood plain. SUMMARY: It is Staff's opinion that the private street requests further enable the principles of the Neighborhood Model to be achieved. Staff recommends approval of the private street requests. 3. WAIVER OF SIDWALK, PLANTING STRIP, CURB AND GUTTER REQUIREMENTS In the development areas, streets shall be constructed with curb or curb and gutter, sidewalks and planting strips. The requirements for sidewalks and planting strips may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14- 225.1. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14 -422 (E) Waivers from sidewalk requirements: The applicant has requested a waiver from the sidewalk requirements for Road 'B', Georgetown Road Extended (reduced to one side of the street), and Bennington Road Extended from Georgetown Road to Westminster Road (reduced to one side of the street) as shown on the application plan and described in their justification (Attachment F). Per Section 14- 422(E)(2), in reviewing a request to waive the requirement for sidewalks, the commission shall consider whether: (ordinance language presented in italics followed by staff comment) i. A waiver to allow a rural cross section has been granted; ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 12 A waiver for a rural cross section for Road `B' has been submitted, and is recommended for denial. Analysis is provided in the Curb and Gutter Waiver Section below. No other request has been submitted. The private streets will be required to be designed in accordance with the requirements in Section 14 -412 during the subdivision process. ii. A surface other than concrete is more appropriate for the subdivision because of the character of the proposed subdivision and the surround neighborhood, An alternative surface is not proposed. iii. Sidewalks on one side of the street are appropriate due to environmental constraints such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, floodplain, or wetlands, or because lots are provided on only one side of the street; No environmental constraints exist. Georgetown Road Extended does contain lots on one side of the street, where the sidewalk is proposed. Sidewalk on one side of the street is appropriate for Bennington Road Extended since Canterbury Hills does not have sidewalks. This sidewalk will provide a safe place for the residents of Canterbury Hills to come into the development and cross Barracks Road safely at the light. Sidewalks are not being proposed on either side of Road `B'. iv. The sidewalks reasonably can connect to an existing or future pedestrian system in the area; All of the sidewalks connect internally as well as provide a connection to Barracks and Georgetown Roads. While Canterbury Hills does not have sidewalks, Staff felt it was important to have a pedestrian connection, as well as a vehicular connection to the neighborhood. v. The length of the street is so short and the density of the development is so low that it is unlikely that the sidewalk would be used to an extent that it would provide a public benefit; The length of Bennington Road Extended is a short segment, and having a sidewalk on both sides of the street connecting to a neighborhood with no sidewalks does not make sense. While Georgetown Road Extended is a longer stretch of road, there are no lots on one side and crosswalks are provided for the connection to Bennington Road Extended. Road `B' is providing access to the rear of the lots only. Sidewalks are provided in the front of the units and throughout the development, and it is unlikely that a sidewalk along this road would be used to any extent, since other pedestrian connections are provided. vi. An alternate pedestrian system including an alternative pavement could provide more appropriate access throughout the subdivision and to adjoining lands, based on a proposed alternative profile submitted by the subdivider; Alternate pedestrian systems are being proposed. There are a number of sidewalks throughout the development that connects all lots to public streets and sidewalks. A path system is proposed that would allow pedestrians safe access to all areas of the development and to adjacent properties. vii. The sidewalks would be publicly or privately maintained; Sidewalks for private streets would be privately maintained, and sidewalks within the public right of way will be maintained by VDOT. The sidewalks located in the open space and other areas in the development outside of the right of way will be maintained by the Home Owner's Association. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 13 viii. the waiver promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the applicable neighborhood master plan; and This waiver promotes the goals of the neighborhood model as discussed above in the chart. ix. waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. Waiving the requirement for Road 'B' will allow the lots to access the rear of the property, where the parking will be located. This will allow the relegated parking principle to be fully achieved. SUMMARY: Staff's opinion is that the proposed sidewalk layout for the whole development provides good pedestrian access to the adjacent neighborhood, Barracks Road, Georgetown Road, and within the development. Staff recommends approval of the request. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14 -422 (F) Waivers from planting strip requirements: The applicant has requested a waiver for this requirement for Bennington Road Extended from Georgetown Road to Westminster Road (to have the planting strip located on the back side of the sidewalk), and Road 'B'. (Per Section 14- 422(F)(2) (Attachment F), in reviewing a request to waive the requirement for planting strips, the commission shall consider whether: (ordinance language presented in italics followed by staff comment) i. A waiver to allow a rural cross section has been granted; A waiver for a rural cross section for Road `B' has been submitted, and is recommended for denial. Analysis is provided in the Curb and Gutter Waiver Section below. Bennington Road Extended will have planting strip on the back side of the proposed sidewalk, and the other side of the street will have planting. ii. A sidewalk waiver has been granted; A sidewalk waiver is included with this request and is being recommended for approval by staff. iii. Reducing the size of or eliminating the planting strip promotes the goals of the comprehensive plan, the neighborhood model, and the applicable neighborhood master plan; and The waiver for Road `B' will allow the lots to be accessed in the back of the lot, relegating the parking which is promoting the goals of the neighborhood model. For Bennington Road Extended, the planting strip is simply moving to the back of the sidewalk and will still be provided. iv. Waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully achieved. Waiving the requirement for Road 'B' will allow the lots to access the rear of the property, where the parking will be located. This will allow the relegated parking principle to be fully achieved. SUMMARY: Staff's opinion is that proposed Road 'B' is functioning like an alley in this particular design, and planting strips are not required for an alley. Planting strips are being provided along the proposed ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 14 public and private roads within the development. Staff recommends approval with the following conditions: CONDITIONS: 1. Street trees shall be provided on both sides of the street in accordance with Chapter 18 Section 32 of the Zoning Ordinance for Bennington Road Extended, Georgetown Road Extended, and Road `A'. ANALYSIS OF SECTION 14 -410 (1) Waivers for curb and gutter: The applicant has request that this waiver be granted for Road 'B' only (Attachment F). Per Section 14 -410 (1)(2) in reviewing a request to waive the requirement for curb and gutter, the commission shall consider whether: (ordinance language presented in italics below) (i) the number of lots in the subdivision and the types of lots to be served; There are 26 townhouse lots being served by this road. (ii) the length of the street; The road is approximately 330 feet long. (iii) whether the proposed street(s) or street extension connects into an existing system of streets constructed to a rural cross - section; Road `B' will be connected to Georgetown Road Extended, a proposed public street with curb and gutter. (iv) the proximity of the subdivision and the street to the boundaries of the development and rural areas; Road `B' is adjacent to other development area boundaries. However, the adjacent neighborhood, Canterbury Hills, does have rural section roads without curb and gutter. (v) whether the street terminates in the neighborhood or at the edge of the development area or is otherwise expected to provide interconnections to abutting lands; Road `B' will terminate within the neighborhood and will not be connected to abutting property. (vi) whether a rural cross - section in the development areas furthers the goals of the comprehensive plan, with particular emphasis on the neighborhood model and the applicable neighborhood master plan; A rural cross- section would not further the goals of the comprehensive plan or the neighborhood model. (vii) whether the use of a rural crosssection would enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully implemented; and The use of a rural cross section for Road `B' will not enable a different principle of the neighborhood model to be more fully implemented. (viii) whether the proposed density of the subdivision is consistent with the density recommended in the land use plan section of the comprehensive plan. The proposed density is consistent with the density recommended in the comprehensive plan. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`", 2013 Staff Report, Page 15 In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring curb or curb and gutter would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. While Road `B' is functioning like an alley, Engineering Staff has recommended that this road have curb and gutter. This area is considered to be the low point of the site. It appears that an inverted crown may be proposed if curb and gutter is waived, however Engineering has found it does not work well in subdivision and is difficult to construct. SUMMARY: For engineering reasons stated above, Staff recommends denial of the curb and gutter waiver. RECOMMENDED ACTION The Planning Commission will need to make five separate motions: 1. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Zoning Map Amendment: A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this zoning map amendment: Move to recommend approval of ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds with the changes stated as unfavorable factors as recommended by staff. B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this zoning map amendment: Move to recommend denial of ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial. 2. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Critical Slopes Modification: A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of the critical slopes, strip modification: Move to recommend approval of the critical slopes modification for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds as recommended by staff. B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of the critical slopes modification: Move to recommend denial of the critical slopes modification for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial. 3. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Private Street Requests: A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to approve the private streets request: Move to approve the private streets for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds as recommended by staff and stated in the staff report. ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`h, 2013 Staff Report, Page 16 B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to deny the private streets request: Move for denial of the private streets for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial. 4. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Sidewalk and Planting Strips: A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to approve the sidewalk and planting strip modification: Move to approve the sidewalk and planting strip modification with conditions for ZMA 2012- 00003, Out of Bounds as recommended by staff and stated in the staff report. B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to deny the sidewalk and planting strip modifications: Move for denial of the sidewalk and planting strip modification for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial. 5. PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION —Curb and Gutter Modifications: A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to approve the curb and gutter modification Move to approve the curb and gutter modification for ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to recommend approval, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending approval. B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to deny the curb and gutter modification: Move for denial of the curb and gutter modification for ZMA 2012- 00003, Out of Bounds for the reasons stated by Staff. ATTACHMENT A: Vicinity, Comprehensive Plan, and Zoning Maps ATTACHMENT B: Application Plan and Code of Development ATTACHMENT C: Proffers ATTACHMENT D: Applicant Narrative ATTACHMENT E: Applicant Critical Slopes Request ATTACHMENT F: Applicant Waiver Requests ATTACHMENT G: Engineering Critical Slopes Analysis ATTACHMENT H: Engineering Waiver Requests Analysis ATTACHMENT I: VDOT Bennington Road Extension Email ZMA 2012 - 00003, Out of Bounds Planning Commission Public Hearing, July 30`h, 2013 Staff Report, Page 17