HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA200700013 Public Notification 2009-02-25Albemarle County Planning Commission
November 27, 2007
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting, work session and a public
hearing on Tuesday, November 27, 2007, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building,
Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Members attending were Jon Cannon, Bill Edgerton, Calvin Morris, Vice - Chairman;
Marcia Joseph, Chairman; Eric Strucko; Duane Zobrist and Pete Craddock. Mr.
Craddock arrived at 6:07 p.m. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use Planner for the
University of Virginia was present.
Other officials present were David Benish, Chief of Planning; Elaine Echols, Principal
Planner, Judy Wiegand, Senior Planner; Bill Fritz, Chief of Community Development;
Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner; Susan Stimart, Business Development Facilitator
and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Ms. Joseph called the meeting to order at 6:02 p.m. and established a quorum.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public:
Ms. Joseph invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda.
There being none, the meeting moved to the next item.
Consent Agenda:
Approval of Minutes: January 23, 2007, August 7, 2007 and August 21, 2007
Motion: Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Strucko seconded for approval of the consent agenda.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Craddock was absent.)
Work Sessions.
ZMA2007 -00013 Fontaine Research Park
PROPOSAL: Rezone approximately 54 acres from CO Commercial Office - offices,
supporting commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15
units/ acre) to CO Commercial Office - offices, supporting commercial and service uses;
and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre) to allow for an increase from
565,000 square feet to 1,290,000 square feet of office and supporting commercial
space permitted in the research park. Three parking garages are proposed. No
residential units are proposed.
PROFFERS: EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE /DENSITY: Office
Service - office uses, regional scale research, limited production and marketing
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007
activities, supporting commercial, lodging and conference facilities, and residential
(6.01 -34 units /acre).
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
LOCATION: Adjacent to the intersection of Ray C. Hunt Drive and Fontaine Avenue in
Neighborhood Six.
TAX MAP /PARCEL: TM 76, Parcels B, BW, BX, 131, 132, B3, B4, 135, 136, 137, and B8
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Samuel Miller
(Elaine Echols)
Mr. Strucko disclosed that he was the Chief Financial Officer of the Health Services
Foundation, which owns the building and the surrounding parcels and has a financial
involvement in this rezoning. Therefore, he disqualified himself and left the room. (See
Attached Disclosure Statement)
In summary, the Planning Commission held a work session on ZMA- 2007 - 00013,
Fontaine Research Park to familiarize the Commission with the current proposal for an
expansion of the Fontaine Research Park and also for the Commission to weigh in on
some important issues that relate to this. Staff noted that a recently adopted
Comprehensive Plan Amendment has some bearing on this particular project. Staff and
the applicant desired Commission "weigh -in" before the applicant proceeds and before
staff provides any more advice on this project. Staff presented a power point
presentation and discussed the specifics of the proposal. Fred Missel, representative
for the applicant, made a presentation, answered questions and explained the proposal.
The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposal with staff and the applicant,
offered to take public comment, and then responded to the preliminary questions posed
by the staff report as follows:
The Planning Commission expressed concerns on the following items:
• The Comprehensive Plan language references the preferred Sunset - Fontaine
Avenue Connector alternative from the Area B Study but does not spell out the
recommendation as Alternative 4.
• Natural resource conservation,
• The small amount of supporting commercial uses,
• The Sunset Fontaine Avenue Connector Road which is minimally shown
• The off -ramp under consideration and how it relates to the Sunset - Fontaine
Avenue Connector Road,
• The need for the Stadium Road Extension and how it relates to the proposal,
• The level of information expected at the rezoning in relation to the amount of
information provided with this rezoning
• The need for a comprehensive traffic study for the Commission to review,
• The need for discussions with the Rivanna and Albemarle County Service
Authority about capacities for the water and sewer need to occur.
• Widening of Fontaine Avenue
• Input from the City of Charlottesville and VDOT.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 2
• Should the area currently protected continue to be preserved through this
rezoning?
The Planning Commission agreed that the applicant needs to identify the area that will
be disturbed or protected. The applicant needs more information before they can
designate it on the plan, but they were willing to do that.
What level of Commercial support use is expected? The current proposal is for
20,000 square feet of supporting commercial use — to be constructed at
applicant's option.
The Commission said that support commercial uses are appropriate and asked the
applicant to propose a level of commercial use that the Foundation believes can be
supported and mechanisms for ensuring that the commercial support uses are actually
provided in the park. The Planning Commission generally wanted more commercial
space available than is currently being offered by the applicant as support use for the
future, but agreed that the applicant would bring back options.
What level of resource protection is expected with the expansion of the Research
Park?
The Commission said that the applicant should continue to map the resources on the
site and show them in relation to the proposed development and conceptual grading.
The Commission said that resource protection should be provided unless the applicant
can provide a sufficient reason for the resources to be disturbed. This issue would be
revisited after identification of the resources.
What level of support commercial use is expected with the expansion of the
Research Park?
The Commission said that greater opportunities for support commercial uses should be
made with the rezoning. There was not a consensus on how provision for commercial
uses should occur. The Commission asked the applicant to propose a level of
commercial use that the Foundation believes can be supported and mechanisms for
how those commercial support uses would actually be provided in the park.
When should the Sunset - Fontaine connector be built through this property and
what characteristics should it have? How should a possible off -ramp from 1 -64
affect commitments for the Sunset - Fontaine connector? Should Stadium Road be
expanded as a part of this rezoning?
The Commission said that, until the traffic study was done, they could not provide
answers to these questions. They acknowledged that, if an off -ramp from 1 -64 to
substitute for the Sunset - Fontaine connector is viewed by the MPO PACC as most
advantageous, the Land Use Plan would need to be amended. At present, the off -ramp
proposal has no standing, so decisions would need to be made on the Comprehensive
Plan recommendations in place at the time of the rezoning.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 3
What level of information is expected at the rezoning vs. the site planning stage?
The Commission indicated that more detailed information was necessary at the
rezoning stage than had been provided. The Commission acknowledged the
applicant's willingness to provide more information; however, it was agreed that
providing information on scale and massing of the structures for preliminary Entrance
Corridor review was premature.
The Planning Commission took a 5 minute break at 7:03 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 7:10 p.m.
Mr. Strucko returned to the meeting at 7:10 p.m.
ZTA- 2007 -00005 Crozet Downtown
A fourth work session to continue review and discussion of the Crozet Downtown
Zoning project, with a focus on regulations for a single Downtown Crozet Zoning
District. This included a discussion of regulations the Commission recommended be
modified in their last work session (10/30/07): requirement for mixed use, further
reduction in parking requirements, and the requirement for an average residential
maximum residential unit size. This work session will also focus on implementation of
the zoning district and recommendations for boundaries, should the County
comprehensively rezone portions of Downtown. (Rebecca Ragsdale)
In summary,
Staff presented a power point presentation including an overview of the suggested
modifications to the Downtown district regulations and implementation
recommendations for a County initiated comprehensive rezoning of a portion of
Downtown to the proposed zoning district. Staff made the following comments:
Regarding the revised table of zoning district regulations, the changes included:
• Further reduction of the minimum number of parking spaces and
recommendation that current Zoning Ordinance language (Section 4.12.8.e) be
used to regulate parking agreements, rather than the informal arrangement
suggested in the consultant's recommendations.
• Additional flexibility, exemptions, and allowances for special use permits in the
regulations for mixed use buildings.
• Staff recommended that the 1,000 square feet maximum average residential unit
size is the appropriate size requirement to meet the affordability goals of the
regulation and provide for a range of unit sizes in Crozet. This is supported by
research of multifamily residential unit sizes in the Crozet /Charlottesville area
and in consultation are organizations that provide for affordable housing.
Regarding implementation and proposed boundaries of a rezoning to the new zoning
district:
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 4
• Staff recommended revised boundaries, should the County initiate a
comprehensive rezoning in Downtown, for the Commission to begin discussing.
The boundaries were reflected on a map, and unlike boundaries put forth by the
consultant and Crozet community, did not include the J. Bruce Barnes
lumberyard property or half of the block west of Carter Street. This boundary was
based on information provided by the consultant, input from the Crozet
Community, and the master plan and concentrated around areas of public
investment by the County, including the Phase I and II Streetscape projects,
library, and stormwater master plan for Downtown. In addition, the boundaries
had taken into consideration the underlying zoning of parcels and impacts to
adjoining residential areas, some of which are not yet ready to transition to
commercial uses. Staff expressed concern's regarding provision of infrastructure,
primarily New Main Street and Carter Street, as the reason for not
recommending the other areas be included in the possible rezoning boundaries.
• Staff noted that the Fiscal Impact Planner, Steven Allshouse, had just recently
done a preliminary assessment of fiscal impacts using the County's CRIM mode
on the modified boundaries recommended by staff. That preliminary assessment
found that under the proposed new zoning district, there was not a negative fiscal
impact over a 20 year period to the County. This assessment was based on
several assumptions about potential build -out under the new proposed zoning,
including that about 25 percent of the total square footage in downtown would be
for residential use and the potential proffers be factored into the model.
• Commission Discussion & Recommendations
The Commission discussed the zoning district modifications and boundaries, made
comments, and provided feedback and answered the questions posed by staff. Public
comment was taken. No formal action was taken with the Planning Commission
recommending the following:
Parking -The Planning Commission continued to recommend that the minimum number
of parking spaces should be further reduced from the recommendations of the
consultant. The Commission indicated that they needed more information behind the
recommendation of 1 space /1,000 square feet of net floor area for non - residential uses.
The Commission agreed with staff's recommendation that they preferred to use the
current Zoning Ordinance regulations of Section 4.12.8.e for parking trading
agreements.
Requirement for Mixed Use- The Planning Commission asked staff to pursue other
exemptions or incentives for mixed use, such as the tiered approach as suggested by
staff but did not recommend that district regulations include requirements that buildings
be mixed use, which is defined as two of three uses: office, retail /services, or
residential.
Maximum average residential unit size -The Commission recommended that the
regulation of a 1,000 sq ft maximum average for residential units not be included in the
new zoning district regulations. The Commission requested that staff work on this issue
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 5
to provide additional incentives /provisions to assure affordable housing in Downtown
Crozet.
Boundaries of Possible Rezoning- The Commission recommended that the
Downtown Crozet area should be as large as possible to help ensure the economic
viability of Downtown Crozet and indicated a preference for including the additional
properties studied and shown on previous consultant and Downtown Crozet Association
maps for rezoning.
Other discussion items:
• Buffer and screening regulations for parking areas and against residential uses
on the edges of the District should be reviewed to ensure they are adequate,
given that no Transition Zoning District is included and that the expanded
boundaries were recommended by the Commission.
• It was questioned whether the proposed 10' setback, which was measured from
the back of the curb, would present problems particularly if there were road
improvements.
• It was questioned if ARB feedback has been solicited. - Staff has met with the
design planner, but not the ARB. This would be something that would allow
closer setback and would require modifications to ARB guidelines. As suggested
by staff, the Commission will set the vision for the area before taking it to the
ARB.
The following public comment was taken:
• Ross Stevens, resident of White Hall, said that he had not had the opportunity to
look at the packets that were available. He made the following comments:
• He was concerned with the boundaries since they were trying to create
Downtown Crozet so that it could compete with other commercial areas.
• Regarding the frontage on Carter Street, it is important to have
commercial on both sides. He did anticipate Downtown Crozet becoming
smaller. There needs to be more space to accomplish the flexibility of
developing downtown in a larger space.
• He did not see the need to change the boundaries of our Comprehensive
Land Plan. It appears to be a smaller area with the new recommendations
of staff. He did not agree on a transition zone, but a larger Downtown
zone. In order for Carter Street to provide for Downtown it is important to
keep the Comprehensive Plan. It is important to work with the setbacks,
the water drainage, the landscaping and buffers, but not necessarily the
boundaries.
• The Downtown Crozet Association comprises of 75 percent of property
owners and business people in Downtown who live, breath and work
Downtown and know it very well. He asked that the Commission put more
consideration into their recommendations.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 6
• Sandy Wilcox, President of the Downtown Crozet Association (DCA), addressed
the following concerns of his group:
• He was upset with the process tonight. They have been working for
months with the consultants in order to understand the proposal. He sees
this as a third proposal. None of these items were discussed.
• The Downtown Association and others do not know where the
recommendation regarding Carter Street came from. It is not consistent
with anything including the consultant's recommendation.
• Regarding the lumber yard, the idea was to have everything the same so
that there would not be a wildcard out there that they don't know what is
going to happen.
• The regulations were made so to be friendly with employment everywhere
in Downtown Crozet. He did not know why that should be eliminated from
the process. Since no one had a chance to review tonight's
recommendations, it is a blind sided process. It is a heart of distrust
because they had been working great together through months of this. It
is a third opinion and not consistent with the people who live there.
• Mac Lackerty, a member of the Crozet Community Advisory Committee, said that
he was upset with the process. In every meeting he has gone to they have seen
a different iteration of the plan. It is imperative that they do something for Crozet.
They have already lost two businesses. As a member of the Advisory
Committee, he feels that whatever they do has been totally ignored. If they
endorse a plan he would expect to at least be given consideration as that plan
was endorsed. He felt that they have been blind sided and the process is wrong.
It is imperative that they do something now to sustain Downtown Crozet. He is
pushed with the desire to get something done to make it easier for people to start
a business in Crozet.
• Mike Marshall, Chairman of the Crozet Advisory Council, said that he was
surprised to see a new recommendation. He echoed Mr. Lackerty's comments.
He did not accept the 1,000 square foot limit on the unit size. The Downtown
Crozet Association supported by the Advisory Council saw that there was no
need to establish a unit size for downtown. The rational for that limitation was to
create affordable housing, which he did not think was the appropriate tool to use
to create affordable housing. On the exclusion of the lumber, this is now the 26th
meeting that he has attended on downtown zoning and this is the first time that
he has heard that there is a conflict about including the lumber yard in the
downtown. The owner of the lumber yard has been at many of these meetings
and so far that he knows he has never expressed the idea that he saw a conflict
with this idea. The recommendation to remove Carter Street taken with the
exclusion of the lumber yard shows that what the County is doing is not putting
the survivability of Downtown Crozet as the cultural and commercial center of
town as the Master Plan envisions it. That is not first. What is first is maintaining
the opportunity to extract proffers from future developers. They are not going to
get those proffers on the area that is currently zoned commercial. So if they take
the areas like west Carter Street and the lumber yard that are not zoned
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 7
commercial and pull them out, then that means in the future those properties
would have to be rezoned and at that time they would be asked for a proffer. So
this is really about generating future income for the County. The more obstacles
created for Downtown Crozet the more businesses will be drawn to Route 250.
The rationale for mixed use was never explained by the consultant regarding the
7,500 square foot building. The Town wants a single district with a unified set of
rules that are relatively simple. They oppose pulling the 28 acre lumber yard site.
The County needs to provide an incentive for businesses to locate in Downtown
Crozet. It is all about proffers and not about what is good for Downtown Crozet.
They support mixed uses, but don't want every property owner to be required to
have a mixed use.
• Cliff Fox voiced concerns about the mixed use requirement. There are a lot
easier and more general ways to handle the 1,000 square foot requirement.
They could put a percentage of affordable housing within the developed
residential element of it. If someone was developing four units, then one of them
would be affordable. It needs to create flexibility and not strict regulations to allow
the area to change organically and more simply. They are getting a lot of little
regulations that are going to impede a more flexible form of development. They
should try to relax the restrictions in a constructive way so that this is a viable
thing that can occur over time. There is a need to allow flexibility and not more
restrictions.
• Mary Rice, a member of the Crozet Advisory Committee, encouraged everyone
to go out and walk the boundaries of Crozet, particularly on Carter Street. The
points being made about Carter's Street are really valid. It is really important that
the County create a level playing field for Downtown Crozet. When Old Trail was
approved at 250,000 square feet of commercial it really knocked Crozet
Downtown area back. They need to do everything that they can to promote
flexibility for business owners in Downtown Crozet and property owners. She
was not in favor of the mixed use requirement for all of the reasons the people
have already indicated here. She was not in favor of the 1,000 square foot
minimum for residences. They need a mix of incomes in Downtown Crozet. It is
important to create some diversity in Downtown Crozet. If someone wants a
2,000 square foot apartment, she felt that they should have them.
Staff will follow up on how to approach the next steps. Follow up work sessions at
which further details will be further discussed will be scheduled in the future. Ultimately,
text language will be developed and a public hearing scheduled.
The Planning Commission took a 5 minute break at 8:49 p.m.
The meeting reconvened at 8:58 p.m.
Places 29, Chapter 5
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 8
Staff will lead a discussion of the Places29 Future Land Use Framework Map,
Neighborhoods 1 and 2. Staff will explain several needed changes and ask for the
Commission's advice on other possible changes. (Judy Wiegand)
In summary, a work session was held on Places29 Draft Master Plan — Future Land
Use Framework Map, Neighborhoods 1 and 2. In a power point presentation, staff
reviewed the following:
1. Reviewed the changes staff proposes for this map since the Commission's first
review of it, including a discussion of land use designation definitions.
2. Go over the map in detail with the Commission to give members the opportunity
to suggest other revisions.
3. Address any additional comments and questions from the Commission.
Ms. Wiegand and Mr. Benish reviewed numbers 1 and 2, which was an introduction.
1. Purpose: to discuss staff's thoughts about the Future Land Use map before staff
sends all the changes back to the consultants. This is the same map that staff
presented during the workshops and no changes have been made yet. Staff will
go through the same process for Hollymead and Piney Mountain on December
18.
2. Orientation: as always, north is to the right, the South Fork of the Rivanna River
is..., City of Charlottesville.... US 29...., Rio Road....
The Commission agreed to spend 15 minutes on this item. After the introduction by
staff, the Commission reviewed and agreed with staff on numbers 3, 4, 5, and 14. The
others will be reviewed on December 18.
The Planning Commission will pick up the remaining items on December 18 at a work
session. Starting the work session earlier at 4:00 p.m. was discussed by the
Commission. The Commission asked staff to discuss this issue with Mr. Cilimberg due
to potential conflicts.
Old Business
Ms. Joseph asked if there was any old business
proceeded.
New Business
Ms Joseph asked if there was any new business.
There being none, the meeting
• The staff report for the Six Year Secondary Road Plan for next week was passed
out tonight and was on top of their packets.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 9
• Ms. Joseph asked staff to provide maps so they know where these roads are
located.
With no further items, the meeting adjourned at 9:23 p.m. to the Tuesday, October 23,
2007 meeting at 6:00 p.m. at the County Office Building, Second Floor, Auditorium, 401
McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
V. Wayne Cilimberg, Secretary
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission &
Planning Boards)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - NOVEMBER 27, 2007 10