HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA200400024 Special Exception 2014-09-10.i U dtd
�'IRGI�IP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
September 10, 2014
Scott Collins
800 East Jefferson Street
Charlottesvile, Va. 22932
RE: ZMA- 2004 -00024 Old Trail — Special Exception to Authorize Variations from the Code of
Development
Dear Mr. Collins: , .
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on, August 6, 2014, approved by a
vote of 6:0, the special exceptions.
VARIATION REQUEST #15: Change the minimum build -to line from eight (8) feet to 30 feet in Lots 2 -4 of
Block 3D.
VARIATION REQUEST #16: Allow roof overhangs and eaves to encroach the five (5) foot building
setback in Block 14. This approval was based on the following condition:
1. Roof overhangs and eaves shall not be permitted to project further than one foot into the
building setback.
VARIATION REQUEST #17: Allow Lots 7 -9 to be below the minimum lot size requirement for single -
family units in Block 15.
VARIATION REQUEST #18: To reduce front, side and rear setbacks to five (5) feet for single - family units
in Block 15. 1
VARIATION REQUEST #19: To reduce front, side and rear setbacks to five (5) feet for single - family units
in Blocks 28 and 29B.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not
hesitate to contact me at (434) 296 -5832.
Sincerely,
David Benish
Chief of Planning
Planning Division
*Attachment*
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZMA200400024 Old Trail = Special Exception to Authorize
Variations from the Code bf Development
SUBJECT /PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Special exception to authorize variations from area and
setback requirements in Blocks 3D, 14, 15 and 28/298.
AGENDA DATE:
August 6, 2014
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACT(S): ' ATTACHMENTS: Yes
Foley, Walker, Kamptner,,Cilimberg, Benish and Newberry
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes ,
Lam! l-.
BACKGROUND:
Old Trail Village was rezoned to Neighborhood Model District with an associated Application Plan and Code of
Development (COD) on September 14, 2005. Fourteen (14) variations to the Plan and /or Code have previously been
granted. The developer is currently proposing development within five different blocks that require five (5) additional
variations from the COD before the final site plan and /or building permits can be approved by staff.
STRATEGIC PLAN: !
Goal 5: Ensure the health and safety of the community.
DISCUSSION:
The following summarizes findings for each variation request. The attached staff report (Attachment A) provides details
for each request.
Block 3D:
Variation #15: To change the minimum build -to line from 8 feet to 30 feet. Change will better accommodate the
landscaping necessary to transition from the urban center to the future County park on the other side of these lots.
Block 14:
Variation #16: To allow roof overhangs and eaves to encroach. the 5 foot building setback. Change will enable larger
buildable area for each: lot and more flexibility in the design of each unit without impacting health, safety and welfare.
Block 15:
Variation #17: To allow Lots 7 -9 to be below the minimum lot size requirement for single - family units. Change will
have a de minimis impact on the development in this block.
Variation #18: To reduce front, side and rear setbacks to 5 feet for single - family units. Change will enable larger
buildable area for each lot and more flexibility in the design of each unit.
Blocks 28/29B:
Variation #19: To reduce front, side and rear setbacks to 5 feet for single - family units. Change will enable larger
buildable area for each lot and more flexibility in the design of each unit.
BUDGET: No impact will result from this special exception authorizing multiple variations.
a
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this special exception authorizing multiple variations with the
conditions outlined in the staff report. The basis for staff's recommendations is included in the staff report.
i
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Staff report t
B. Letter from Dave Brockman to Megan Yaniglos dated 6 -19 -14
C. Area Map for Variation #15
D. Block 15 Site Plan showing lot sizes for Lots 7 -9
STAFF PERSON:' J.T. Newberry
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: August 6, 2014
Staff Report for Variations #15 -19 from ZMA200400024, Old Trail Village
VARIATIONS FROM APPROVED PLANS CODES AND STANDARDS OF DEVELOPMENT
Each variation request has been reviewed for Zoning and Planning aspects of the regulations. Variations
are considered by the Board of Supervisors as a Special Exception under Chapter 18 Sections 33.5 and
33.9. Staff analysis of each variation request under County Code § 18- 8.5.5.3(c) is provided below.
VARIATION REQUEST #15: Change the minimum build -to line from eight (8) feet to 30 feet in Lots
2 -4 of Block 3D.
Block 3D contains three residential lots and lies on the northeast edge of the CT5 area of Old Trail. This
area permits the most intensive forms of development and is considered to be the "village center."
Accordingly, the COD uses a zero foot setback with an eight foot build -to line to keep buildings close to
the front property line. This combination ensures that the location of buildings will maintain an
appropriate relationship to the street and other nearby uses. The applicant notes this request will not
alter this relationship within the area (see Attachment A), Additionally, as Ashlar Avenue becomes the
focus of Block 3, a.30 foot build -to line will better accommodate the landscaping necessary to transition
from the urban center to the future County park on the other side of these lots. Staff analysis of this
variation request is; provided below:
1. The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
Staff carefully considered the impact of this request and finds that it is consistent with the
goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan in this circumstance.
2. The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3. The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of any development in this district is unaffected.
4. The vailation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5. The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application.
Staff recommends approval of changing the requirement of an eight foot build -to line to a 30 foot build -to
line for Lots 2 -4 in Block 3D.
roof overhanas and
setback in Block,14.
The applicant is requesting roof overhangs and eaves be allowed to project up to one foot into the five
foot building setback within Block 14. The justification for this request is that the encroachment will
enable a larger buildable area for each lot and therefore allow more flexibility in the design of each unit.
Staff confirmed with the Building Official, Fire /Rescue Division and the Zoning Division that public health,
safety and welfare. would not be impacted by this request with the use of the appropriate building
materials (enforcd through building permit review). Further staff analysis of this request is provided
below: i
1. The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
This request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density'is not increased.
3. The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other-development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of any development in this district is unaffected.
4. The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5. The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application.
Staff recommends approval of allowing roof overhangs and eaves to encroach the five foot building
setback in Block 14, subject to the following condition:
1. Roof overhangs and eaves shall not be permitted to project further than one foot into the
building setback.
VARIATION REQUEST #17: Allow Lots 7 -9 to be below the minimum lot size requirement for
single - family units in Block 15.
The applicant notes that an existing sewer line runs through the middle of Block 15 and cannot be
relocated. As a result, Lots 7 -9 are slightly smaller than the required 4,000 sq. foot lot size (as shown in
Attachment B). For each lot, staff found the deficit from the minimum lot size to be less than 75 square
feet.. Staff finds that granting approval of this request would have a de minimis impact on the
development in this block. Additional staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1. The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
This request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density'is not increased.
3. The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of any development in this district is unaffected.
4. The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5. The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application.
Staff recommends approval of allowing Lots 7 -9 to be below the minimum lot size required for single -
family units in Block 15.
front, side and rear setbacks to five i
The COD requires "a front setback of ten feet, a side setback of seven and one -half feet and a rear
setback of 15 feet for single - family homes in Block 15. The applicant notes that mixed -use and
multifamily units would be permitted five foot front and rear setbacks and a zero foot side setback. The
justification to allow similar setbacks for single - family uses is that reduced setbacks will allow a larger
buildable area for each lot and therefore allow more flexibility in the design of each unit. Such flexibility
would allow a variety of architecture, better streetscape and more functional private yards. Staff agrees
with the applicant that five foot front, side and rear setbacks are appropriate in Block 15. Additional staff
analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1. The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive
plan.
This request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3. The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of
any other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of any development in this district is unaffected.
4. The variation does not require a special use permit.
A'Special use permit is not required.
5. The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved
rezoning application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application.
Staff recommends approval of five foot front, side and rear setbacks for single - family units in Block 15.
VARIATION REQUEST #19: To reduce front. side and rear setbacks to five (5) feet for sinqle - family
Similar to Block 15, the COD requires a front setback of 10 feet, a side setback of seven and one -half feet
and a rear setback of 15 feet for single - family homes in Blocks 28 and 29B. Again, the applicant would
like to use reduced setbacks to allow a larger buildable area for each lot. The result would be a greater
variety of architecture, an overall better streetscape and more functional private yards. Staff agrees with
the applicant that five foot front, side and rear setbacks are appropriate in Blocks 28 and 29B. Additional
staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1. The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive
plan.
This request is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
2. Th'e variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3. The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of
any other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of any development in this district is unaffected.
4. The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5. The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved
rezoning application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application.
S
Staff recommends approval of five foot front, side and rear setbacks for single - family units in Blocks 28
and 29B.
{