The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSP201000044 Legacy Document 2011-11-16 (9)A 46 �' � ! observatorp Hill I 9t �l�►a � I ' • f ell 'is, ubdis,l* ; j' j Ll d � 3 rr ity - 3 . 0 Ad Dept of Formtry - & Mineral Frj I� i � �4 AYE •� ; � i � ��ek � - •� +fir � +'• � -+; ti*F r_fi' ', +rt fool Club `� t * : • fi` s&bdlwirlpri `, i : i SOUTHERN URBAN AREA B FINAL REPORT _ ? 10 STEP 2004 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY - Interconnection and Interdependency For nearly twenty years the Southern Urban Area B has been a shared concern of the City of Charlottesville, the County of Albemarle, and the University of Virginia: the "Three Parties ". Work in this area dates back at least to an earlier Three Party consideration in 1988 entitled the "Jefferson Park Avenue /Fontaine Avenue Neighborhood Study ". The current Area B Study explores opportunities for collaboration within and beyond the study area to work toward a more integrated and interconnected community, qualities that have been elusive given the challenging topography, existing constraints, and history of decision - making by the three entities. The report contains alternatives and suggestions involving transportation and related policy matters including housing, transit, and parking. The three entities have recognized that Area B requires coordination and cooperation to resolve the serious challenges of creating a more integrated setting in this part of the community. Indeed, many of the most serious challenges in the area cannot be solved by any one of the three entities working on their own. Several key elements are presented in the Area B Framework Plan that suggest compelling alternatives to by- right development under current zoning and the associated absence of coordinated transportation strategies. Alternatives to the "status quo" in the area introduce: • Compact mixed -use development that supports integrated strategies for bicycle, pedestrian and transit approaches tied to land -use and open space strategies. This approach builds on the recent innovative planning work in the County, City and University Master Plan. • Retail /commercial services to support residential development in and around the area, helping to reduce trip generation beyond the study area. To accomplish the goal of an integrated and better functioning community, the Three Parties plan to consider the Framework Plan alternatives and opportunities. Together the Three Parties will be looking toward coordination of individual and shared priorities and staging in this area. Significant portions of the plan could be implemented by the private sector in association with development opportunities. The public value and advantages of these private investments will evolve from a clear understanding of shared assumptions by the three entities. There are several key elements and alternatives that would require regional commitment. Some of the possible approaches presented in this report include: • Infill development at Fry's Spring corner and along Jefferson Park Avenue, following the City's Corridor Study (and within the City's new "University Precinct" on JPA). • A new opportunity for selective "redevelopment" of Fontaine Research Park providing additional commercial space along with a possibility of limited mixed -use functions serving this area as a new "neighborhood center ". The mixed use alternatives could include functions such as small to medium -scale service retail, day care, structured parking, along with added commercial office space. • A neighborhood center opportunity for the Trinity Presbyterian Church precinct within the County's development area, including a possible emphasis on home ownership and faculty /staff housing. • A new neighborhood center on the Granger property, with small scale mixed -use, transit stops and connection to a new park and the open space system of Moore's Creek and beyond. • A newly defined open space and park system throughout Area B, building on the existing resources of Azalea Park, the Rivanna Trail system, Moore's Creek and the extraordinary rolling landscape in this area. • Although outside Area B, a new center south of Route 64 and northwest of Fifth Street Extended could be considered, bringing greater focus to the existing housing in that precinct, with small scale retail and a possible location for a new neighborhood elementary school. September 10, 2004 Preliminary feasibility of several new street alternatives are presented in this study - serving to connect the area south of 1 -64 to the JPA- Fontaine area. Alternatives and implications of the following scenarios are included: • Alternative #1: Fontaine/Sunset Connector West. Create a connection adjacent to the Virginia Department of Forestry and Minerals (VDFM), utilizing a portion of Ray Hunt Drive and Forestry Drive, connecting Sunset Avenue in the County to Fontaine Avenue. The existing entrance to Fontaine Research Park is utilized, allowing a connection to Fontaine Avenue (east /west) and the possibility of an alignment with a new Stadium Road Extended. • Alternative #2: Fontaine/Sunset Connector Central Boulevard. Create a connection through the central axis of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Avenue /Sunset Avenue connector, and a direct connection to the existing Fontaine Research Park entrance and the possibility of an alignment with a new Stadium Road Extended at this intersection. • Alternative #3: Fontaine/Sunset Connector with Shift. Create a connection through the eastern portion of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Avenue /Sunset Avenue connector through eastern parking lot, linked back to the existing Research Park entrance. • Alternative #4: Fontaine/Sunset Connector East. Create a connection through the eastern portion of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Avenue /Sunset Avenue connector, through the eastern parking lot and a direct connection to Fontaine Avenue at a new intersection. If Stadium Road Extended is constructed, it could be aligned at this new intersection. The existing entrance of Fontaine Research Park would remain, primarily handling local Research Park traffic. • Alternative #5: Rehabilitate /replace the Sunset Avenue Bridge and make improvements to Sunset Avenue, Sunset Road, Stribling Avenue and Piedmont Avenue with a new RR bridge and connection to Fontaine Avenue. • "By Right" Development. Accommodate traffic on existing roadways. This is the "status quo" alternative of by -right build -out with no new infrastructure improvements. Additional transportation connections within and outside Area B have been studied including: • Consideration of a possible extension of Stadium Road to connect with Fontaine Avenue at the existing entrance to Fontaine Research Park, providing connection with the possible Fontaine /Sunset connector. • Maywood Lane options from JPA and Shamrock Road to the University Hospital precinct. • New East/West connection south of Rt. 64 between Sunset Avenue Extended and Old Lynchburg Road. • New road north of Rt. 64 between Fifth Street Extended and Avon Street. • Southern Parkway (with a revised location linked to Sunset Avenue Extended). September 10, 2004 11 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i I. Introduction 2 Summary of Existing Conditions and Public Involvement 4 A. Existing Conditions and Demographics 4 Regional Connections 7 Built Environment 8 Natural Environment 9 Existing Comprehensive Plans 10 B. Public Involvement 11 III. Development Scenarios 13 A. Framework Plan Introduced 13 Framework Plan Alternatives Map 15 Alternative #1: Fontaine /Sunset Connector West 16 Alternative #1 Matrix 17 Alternative #1 Conceptual Alignments Map 18 Alternative #2: Fontaine /Sunset Connector Central Boulevard 19 Alternative #2 Matrix 19 Alternative #2 Conceptual Alignments Map 20 Alternative #3: Fontaine /Sunset Connector with shift 21 Alternative #3 Matrix 21 Alternative #3 Conceptual Alignments Map 22 Alternative #4: Fontaine /Sunset Connector East 23 Alternative #4 Matrix 24 Alternative #4 Conceptual Alignments Map 25 Alternative #5: Rehabilitate /replace the Sunset Avenue Bridge "B" 26 Alternative #5 Matrix 27 Alternative #5 Conceptual Alignments Map 28 B. "By Right" Development 29 "By Right" Development Matrix 30 Existing Zoning Map 31 C. Land Use and Transportation Analysis 32 Transit and Greenways: Alternatives #144 36 Transit and Greenways: Alternative #5 37 D. Traffic Modeling Results 38 Existing Traffic Counts 39 Alternatives #1 -#4 Traffic Counts 40 Alternative #5 Traffic Counts 41 "By Right" Development Traffic Counts 42 Comparitive Traffic Counts Table (with LOS) 43 IV. Appendix 44 September 10, 2004 I. INTRODUCTION The City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and the University of Virginia (the "Three Parties ") continue to evolve in many interdependent ways. The current Southern Urban Area B study was commissioned to consider coordinated planning, infrastructure, and policy, honoring sustainable land use principles, pedestrian- oriented neighborhoods, and supportive transportation strategies. Substantial changes and growth have occurred in the three jurisdictions since the last major consideration in 1988. This current study considers the growth of the area over the next twenty years, recognizing pressures on existing infrastructure and mobility. Growth is already occurring under existing zoning and master planning assumptions, yet the topography, existing neighborhoods, major impediments to interconnection such as Route 64, Route 29 Bypass, and the railroad represent serious constraints, in some cases channeling and accentuating the impacts of this growth. Additionally, by right development and growth within the three entities has tended to evolve without the benefit of truly coordinated planning among the three jurisdictions in Area B. This has resulted in current and accelerating problems, induced by population growth and limited transportation options. In contrast to the 1988 study, the current Area B study considers the serious challenge of transportation connections through and beyond these urbanized portions of the City, County and University. In fact this aspect and omission was one of the primary reasons behind the current Area B work. The Area B study has continued consensus -based planning conducted by the three entities over recent years. At times, the City, County, and University have been able to employ innovative strategies to address the positive potential of pedestrian- oriented neighborhoods with attention to the form and scale of compact development. Building on and connecting the work of the City's Corridor Studies and new Zoning Code, the County's Neighborhood Model, and the University's Master Plan, this study offers alternatives to disconnected development among the three parties. In other words, the challenges of the Area B can be addressed most effectively by the three entities working together. The alternatives that follow are in clear contrast to the current pattern of growth in this study area — disconnected and absent necessary infrastructure investments to accommodate the added demands induced by growth under current zoning and by -right development. The Framework Plan alternatives emerge from community input and the desire for more livable neighborhoods. The Area B study provides guidelines for developing a stronger sense of place and distinct identity for this region. Within the Framework Plan, urban design, housing, and transportation policy considerations are integrated to address the challenges and opportunities for Area B. September 10, 2004 I 2 Relationship to Prior Studies Jefferson Park Avenue /Fontaine Avenue Neighborhood Study (1988) Our current study builds upon the work begun with the 1988 Jefferson Park Avenue /Fontaine Avenue Neighborhood Study as one of the initial attempts at cooperative planning between the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and the University of Virginia. It recommended joint planning efforts for development projects in the area covered by this report. The development of the University's Fontaine Research Park, street and sidewalk improvement plans, as well as subsequent comprehensive plans emerged from the strategies laid out by the 1988 Neighborhood Study. Many of the broader issues regarding student housing and transportation laid out in the original Neighborhood Study are still relevant today. Increased development pressure in this part of the region adds to the need for the current joint effort among the City, County, and University to integrate plans and policies for the mutual benefit of the Three Parties and area residents. It did not address transportation interconnection in any serious way. Charlottesville Corridor Study (2000) The Commercial Corridor Study (by Torti Gallas CHK) was conducted as an effort to enhance the economic benefits and ensure the best mix of property uses for the commercial corridors within the city. It was projected that the University's growth in research with high tech and biotech industries would bring many newcomers to the area. Combined with these economic development trends is a renewed interest in urban living, where a sense of "community" is perceived as a tangible asset. The City's "smart growth" approach as developed in the Corridor Study takes advantage of the numerous underutilized areas and targets them for redevelopment and infill. Fontaine Avenue was one of the many sites considered in the Corridor Study. The recommendations included the creation of higher density, mixed -use buildings and the addition of multifamily buildings including apartments. It also recommended that future development should create a safe walking environment for pedestrians in the neighborhood. These elements are essential in creating a viable commercial area and community. Development Areas Initiatives Study Committee — Neighborhood Model (2001) The Neighborhood Model, developed by Albemarle County in collaboration with Torti Gallis & Partners calls for a change in the development pattern in both greenfield and infill sites. The Model recommends new growth in the Development Areas, locations identified by the County as appropriate for higher density growth to maintain a clear boundary between the Rural Areas and those being developed. Among the twelve Neighborhood Model principles is the maintenance of a clear boundary. In addition, neighborhoods should have designated centers that incorporate varying densities and mixed -use activities. Interconnected streets are emphasized among and between neighborhoods to accommodate pedestrians, bicyclists, and public transportation, and to link open space. University Master Plan (On going) The University Master Plan provides a physical framework for reaching the University's evolving goals as an institution. These goals include creating a pedestrian environment, improving access through connecting corridors and multi -modal transportation. Ongoing challenges include providing adequate and appropriate levels of housing and amenities for students, faculty, and staff. Piedmont Faculty Housing on Fontaine Avenue, for example, is the only faculty housing available through UVA at this time. The plan considers the projected growth in the number of new incoming students (approximately 100 /year). Their housing needs (especially as they move off Grounds following first or second year), transportation, and parking constraintss call for dense, infill development, with bicycle, pedestrian and transit access to central Grounds. The current plan calls for improving circulation along Jefferson Park Avenue and the Medical Sciences area through the proposal for a "Maywood Connector ". In considering the larger area, the Master Plan also recognizes the need for improving the water quality and storm water management within the Rivanna watershed. September 10, 2004 I 3 II. SUMMARY OF EXISTING CONDITIONS AND PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT ILA Existing Conditions and Demographics The full Existing Conditions Report is included in the Appendix. The following is a summary of key elements contained in the body of this report. Maps The existing conditions maps illustrate the relationship within the study area between significant natural features, such as critical slopes, streams and rivers, and floodplains, and the built environment. The natural features of the area create significant constraints for the expanding built environment. Roadways, greenway trails, and transit connections are also represented. Existing Conditions Maps, including the following, are provided for orientation and reference: 1. Regional Connections - Overlays roads, greenways, and CTS and UTS transit routes. 2. Area B Built Environment - Illustrates existing neighborhood centers, selective building uses, and roads. 3. Area B Natural Environment - Illustrates important natural features including rivers and streams, floodplains, and critical slopes. 4. Area B Existing Comprehensive Plans - Compiles data from City's and County's respective Comprehensive Plans. 5. Area B Existing Zoning (shown elsewhere under "By Right Development" section) — Shows current Zoning information for the entire study area, represented in aggregate with diminished emphasis on boundaries between jurisdictions, affording the opportunity to see potential relationships among the various neighborhoods within and around the study area. Study Area and Key Findings The study area includes segments of the southwestern quadrant of the University of Virginia, southwestern areas of the City of Charlottesville and designated portions of the surrounding development areas within Albemarle County. This report provides a baseline reference for alternative approaches involving physical planning and policy considerations (including housing policies, transit, bicycle /pedestrian infrastructure, parking, etc.). Several key issues that will require attention include: • Topography and natural systems are dramatic and important to this area. Moore's Creek and its tributaries interlace with a rolling topography. They frame several key amenities including park space, trails, and several short range and long vistas. • Limited interconnection inhibits mobility, channels traffic onto Old Lynchburg Road and encourages cut through traffic onto Harris Road and through other neighborhoods. • Few alternative routes within and around the study area may indicate a continuing pattern of increased traffic congestion. September 10, 2004 I 4 • Student housing trends within existing City neighborhoods in the study area are significant (especially in the vicinity of Jefferson Park Avenue - JPA). Recent apartment developments just outside the area are also notable and will add traffic pressures within the area (particularly along Old Lynchburg Road and JPA). Isolation and separation of students from the Grounds may affect the quality of their experience of university life. • More generally, pressures from current and ongoing growth in the surrounding areas of the County can be seen in the significant numbers of single family and multi - family housing units that have emerged over the past ten to fifteen years. • Fontaine Research Park is perceived to be remote from the University. Both entities could benefit from improved general access and a greater degree of interconnection. Demographics — Summary Observations Based on an examination of data from the 2000 Census for the tracts and block groups in Charlottesville and Albemarle County several trends emerge. Selected observations or "conclusions" can be drawn from the extensive demographic information that was analyzed are included below: • A large percentage of students are dependent upon walking, biking, or public transit. • Distinct sections of the study area have relatively high percentages of renters. The study area houses 60% of all students living off - grounds. Thirteen percent of all students live in the JPA/Fontaine community. • Approximately 12% of University employees live in the study area. • Relatively few people in the entire community have lived there for more than 10 years. The area grew largely in the 1950's & 1960's, suggesting an aging, overworked housing stock, especially in areas with high renter percentages. • The community enjoys higher than average educational levels. • The area reports a relatively high poverty rate, but this may due to the high student numbers. • A high percentage of JPA/Fontaine commuters use alternatives to cars. Walking and transit use are very high. timseholders05 and over One -third of the homeowners have one or no cars while two- Househalders45 to 64 Years '% thirds have two or more. One -half of the renters have one or 4% Householders 25 to 44 years 10 no cars. Householders 25 HOU"holder5 45 10 64 • Due to increased enrollment of roughly 100 additional to 44 years ia% students /year, the University will need to build additional 27% Householders 65 and student housing, especially for first year students. over 11% Population Growth - The number of people in the study area renter occupied :� is expected to increase by 40 percent from 11,340 in 1998 to 66% 15,927 by 2025, according to figures developed by Albemarle Householders 15 [o 24 34% County and Charlottesville planners for the regional traffic model. People, Households & Housing owner occupied: U% The predominant age groups suggest three distinct cultures within the study area.The community has a higher than average share of well- educated people throughout all the sections. Throughout the study area, the proportion of renters is highest in younger age groups, while homeownership is higher among people over 35. The area grew largely in the 1950's and 1960's and has not added much housing since then. Longevity varies among owners and renters living in various sections, but relatively few people overall have lived in the community longer than ten years. Among those in the labor force, the community enjoys a very low unemployment rate. However 38% of the residents of the study area (mostly students) are not in the labor force. Median household and family income compared to city and county -wide medians indicate a wide diversity in income ranges for all types of residents in the community but a high poverty rate compared to city /county as a whole. The 32% below poverty may also reflect the disproportionate number of students as well. September 10, 2004 I 5 Roughly 2,340 students (13% of all students) live in the study area. Sixty percent of all students living in off Grounds housing reside in this area. By 2007 University enrollment is expected to grow by 2 %, reaching 19,655. Twelve percent of the University's 11,608 staff members live within the study area. Transportation The study area is a crossroads of transportation routes including roads, highways, railroad tracks, existing and proposed greenway trails, and transit systems (CTS and UTS routes). Primary roads are highlighted and classified as Interstates (US 64), Arterials (US 29), and Major Roads (JPA, Fontaine). CTS and UTS routes serve high density residential development in the eastern part of $oKed al Nome the study area with stops along JPA and Maury Ave. Walked 19SL It is important to note that one third of homeowners in the study area have one or no cars, while almost twice as many of rental households (59 %) have one or no aloe cars. This is explained by the proximity of many residents to 3% the University Grounds and several existing transit routes, 7 is Transpvnal on providing access to the University and downtown for many homeowners and residents alike. ; '.`P ° °'� modes of &anepor flon September 10, 2004 I 6 11.13 Public Involvement Introduction The Project has been guided by regular input from all three entities through their representatives on the "Project Working Group ": Susan Thomas, AICP Project Manager from Albemarle County, Ron Higgins, AICP from the City of Charlottesville, and Mary Hughes, ASLA from the University of Virginia. In addition, the work has received input from a larger, citizen Project Advisory Group that has met periodically for feedback at key stages of the project's evolution. The Project Advisory Group members are appointed from each of the three entities and the composition of this group is shown in the Appendix along with a Community Stakeholders Group to involve area agencies and programs in the process. Community Open House On November 8, 2003 the project team conducted a day -long Open House to solicit input on existing conditions and several key questions: • What is needed to ensure this community grows and develops in a healthy and sustainable way that provides a high quality of life for residents? • What are the implications of new neighborhood centers in regards to transportation infrastructure (streets, sidewalks, trails, bike lanes, transit, etc.)? Attendees were also asked to highlight specific areas on an aerial photograph, with green dots denoting areas that they want to preserve or enhance, and red dots as areas of concern. Complete notes from the Community Open House are included in the Appendix. Several of the dominant issues include: • Plan for people, not cars • Pedestrian, bike and transit are priorities • Improve the efficiency, scope of public transportation • Promote more owner occupancy and a wider range of housing options • Encourage UVA staff & faculty to live in and own homes within walking distance of UVA • Control the UVA affiliated parking situation • Create a greenway network preserving contiguous swaths of open space • All centers should be connected, compact/urban • Identify and explore opportunities for interconnection: (Sunset, Stribling, Stadium, Harris) • Invest in existing neighborhood centers first • Utilize mixed -use functions for enhancing existing centers and new centers • Retail and services seriously limited in southern part of city and adjoining areas of county Infrastructure & Transit Improvements As a general consensus, the public preferred to use "streets" as connectors between neighborhoods and town centers, as opposed to large four lane roads, dead ends, or cul de sacs. Using streets as ways of connecting the different communities also helps to create the desired density of the neighborhood scale. In particular, there were concerns about the widening of Fontaine Avenue and the possibility of reconnecting Sunset Avenue. The public believes that there should be alternatives to the current parking situation. In general, it was suggested that parking could be concentrated into satellite areas outside the center from which people can use public transportation to commute to the city centers. There is an expressed need to expand the bus routes, especially September 10, 2004 I 1 the Trolley, in order to reach the neighborhoods and proposed areas for development. In creating pedestrian - scale neighborhoods with interconnecting streets, the public felt the need for adequate lighting and continuous sidewalks to ensure the safety of its users. Land Use & Urban Design A series of comments relating to land use and urban design emerged from the public. Homeownership was cited as an important goal. Respondents wanted to see pedestrian oriented development on a neighborhood scale, particularly as it relates to retail and mixed -use development. A desire was expressed for a public cultural amenity, such as a library, for this area of town. Several places received mention in particular for reuse /redesign. These included the Willoughby Shopping Center as well the intersection of Maury Ave. and JPA, which could be developed into a neighborhood oriented shopping activity area. Open Space, Historic Preservation & Planning Planning for open space and preserving historic settings are high priorities. Protecting historic neighborhoods, such as Oakhurst Circle, as well as historic amenities, like the Fry's Spring Beach Club, surfaced as important goals. The preservation of natural amenities in the face of development is important. In particular, Observatory Hill and the wetlands /open space along Moore's Creek were highlighted as community resources. University Student Housing Focus Group Extensive input was received from student housing representatives during a focus session. They spoke about the different cultures that emerge at the undergraduate level depending on where one lives, beginning with the first dormitory assignments. They recommended more dorm -style housing arrangements and on grounds upper class housing options. They also suggested that the limited exposure to diverse population groups established by certain dormitory floor plans (particularly the suites) may be contributing to friction, segregation, and racial tension as first year students move off Grounds. The current need for automobile transportation was highlighted along with parking difficulties. The students proposed more dense spatial patterns relating to the twenty -four hour student life style. A preference was voiced for housing closer to Grounds rather than in suburban areas, promoting a safe pedestrian environment. In addition, they recommended more efficient transit options at different areas and times, and an integration of small -scale retail in close proximity to their housing areas. September 10, 2004 I 12 III. DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS III.A Framework Plan Alternatives Introduced Several Framework Plan alternatives were examined or developed in the course of this study. Implications of these alternatives follow in abbreviated form. There are significant features in common among all alternatives: • With the exception of the "By Right" (status quo /buildout) alternative, each scenario envisions a pattern of land use consistent with the City, County, and University's commitment to pedestrian- oriented, transit - served, interconnected neighborhoods. • Each alternative is presented in map form with accompanying transportation modeling data. • Cost and feasibility of each alternative are assessed and included in a comparative matrix format. Immediately following this page, a map is included showing all of the various alignment options serving to connect the area south of 1 -64 to the JPA- Fontaine area that have been considered and analyzed. Following this overview, individual Alternatives are included with text and a "Framework Plan" map showing the integration of transportation, land -use and open space for each of the three geographic areas where transportation improvements may be introduced. The Framework Plan Alternatives have several specific features in common: Land Use and Urban Design Characteristics Mixed -Use development on JPA and Maury Ave. intersection 2. New neighborhood on Granger property 3. Old Lynchburg Rd. and 5th Street neighborhood center 4. Trinity Presbyterian Church neighborhood center 5. Additional infill development possibilities at Fontaine Research Park with limited mixed -uses (service & retail, not residential) 6. Possibility of attached Residential with mixed -use at Department of Forestry 7. Single- family detached Residential south of Railroad tracks across from Granger Property 8. Residential and mixed -use opportunities at 5th Street and 1 -64 interchange 9. Possible location of new county elementary school in this neighborhood center. Infrastructure and Transit Possibilities 1. Add a Fontaine /Sunset Connector Street and /or re -open the Sunset Avenue bridge. 2. Extend Stadium Road from the existing road to Fontaine Avenue, connecting at the existing Fontaine Research Park entrance with the new Fontaine /Sunset Connector September 10, 2004 I 13 3 Add Maywood Lane from JPA and /or Shamrock Road to the University Hospital precinct 4. Add a new connector road north of Rt. 64 between Fifth Street Extended and Avon Street in conjunction with private sector development of the surrouding property. 5. Build the projected Southern Parkway (with a revised location linked to Sunset Avenue Extended) 6. Add a new East/West connection south of Rt. 64 between Sunset Ave Extended and Old Lynchburg Road Open Space, Historic Preservation, and Planning 1. Complete interconnected greenway network along Moore's Creek, including bike trails 2. Consider park opportunities on Old Lynchburg Road, Sunset Avenue near Granger Property, and 5th Street Neighborhood Park 3. Park at Department of Forestry 5. Park/greenway link at south end of Fontaine Research Park 6. Park along Duck Pond, West of Buckingham Circle 7. County conservation easement September 10, 2004 I 14 Alternative #1: Fontaine /Sunset Connector West This Alternative envisions additional development at the Fontaine Research Park (FRP), although the specific nature and intensity of new development would differ from Alternative #2. In this alternative, the location of the Fontaine /Sunset Connector passes to the west of the existing FRP. It is still necessary to bridge Moore's Creek and the railroad, but it does so further to the south, connecting with Forestry Drive and Ray C. Hunt Drive as it traverses the hill leading to the Department of Forestry. Hunt/Forestry Drive would need to be improved (with sidewalks and bike lanes), and it would be extended toward the north connecting to the current intersection of Fontaine Research Park and Fontaine Avenue. The existing Research Park entrance would remain, serving the regional traffic and FRP local traffic as it does today. The principal advantage of this alternative is the way it accommodates the need for transportation interconnection without interrupting the current configuration of FRP. In other words, the road could be built with no additional development associated at the Research Park. This "advantage" is also a disadvantage because it is less likely that such a new connector road could be developed and designed in conjunction with a newly evolving neighborhood center of mixed -uses, and costs associated with the improvements to Ray Hunt Drive might not be absorbed within the development dynamics as they could with Alternative #3 or #4. This alternative does not accommodate ideally or encourage pedestrian and bicycle use since it is more hilly and less direct than Alternative #2. Although the costs associated with this alternative are lower than Alternative 4, they are still considerable. September 10, 2004 I 16 Description Alternative 1 - Fontaine /Sunset Connector West Create a new alignment adjacent to the Virginia Dept. of Forestry & Minerals (VDFM), utilizing a portion of Ray Hunt Drive and Forestry Drive, connecting Susnet Avenue in the County to Fontaine Avenue. The existing entrance to Fontaine Research Park is utilized, allowing a connection to Fontaine Avenue (east /west) and the possibility of an alignment with a new Stadium Road Extended. Engineering Issues Length (feet) - Total 6,400 feet Existing Alignment 6,400 feet New Location 3,700 feet Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics/ Alignment Horizontal alignment issues are minimal and primarily deal with avoiding developed areas. The vertical alignment presents challenges due to the steep topography in the area. Intersections and Driveways — Reconfigurations /Conflicts From the south, Sunset Avenue will be reconfigured to connect into the proposed extension and form a continuous through movement. Sunset Avenue to the north will "T" into this new alignment. A new "T intersection will be constructed directly north of the railroad tracks to access Natural Resources Drive to the Virginia Dept. of Forestry & Minerals buildings. At northern end the Fontaine Research Park entrance driveway and Ray Hunt Drive intersection will require some reconfiguration to handle the additional traffic load. Local Street Improvements n/a Number of New Bridges /Culverts 2 bridges Right -of -Way (acres) 4.3 acres Retaining Walls At railroad crossing, at floodplain crossing. Aesthetics Issues None anticipated. Environmental Issues Acres of Wetlands Existing bridge across wetland and there may be undelineated wetlands in floodplains. Number of Wetland Crossings 1 + 1 (existing) Acres of Floodplains 0.35 acres for new location section, 0.25 acres for existing alignment section Number of Floodplain Crossings 1 Number of Stream Crossings 1 for new location, 1 for existing alignment Noise Impact of roadway noise will be minimal with both options. Built Environmental Impacts Number of Homes Impacted n/a Number of Businesses Impacted Alignment through part of the Fontaine Office Park, but no relocations required Development/ Redevelopment Potential Presents new development and redevelopment opportunities to the south. Provides redevelopment opportunities on property directly south of the railroad tracks. Public Acceptability Minimal issues with single family owners, highest impact with Fontaine Research Park. Potentially perceived as helping improve system and access to the south. May gain support from those to the south of I -64 and those north of Fontaine Avenue (i.e. Stadium Drive). Parking Local Street Connectivity None anticipated. There is no connectivity. Intersection Operations Fontaine Avenue /Ray C. Hunt Drive will be a critical intersection requiring improvements. Intersections internal to the Fontaine Research Park will require improvements. Intersection Spacing Spacing between Fontaine Avenue and Natural Resources Drive continues to be short. Emergency Response Longer route to Sunset Avenue /I -64 area Traffic Calming n/a Bike /Pedestrian Accommodation 5 -foot striped bike lanes on new location sections and shared lanes on existing sections, unless widening is permissible Transit Accommodation Opportunities for bus pull outs. Route Attractiveness Fairly attractive. Posted speed - 35 MPH. Other EL Constructability Severe slopes and grades south of Natural Resources Drive. Will impact existing operations in Fontaine Research Park, creating some disruption. Planning Level Costs, based on 2 -lane typical section CONSTRUCTION COSTS ONLY $6,890,000 September 10, 2004 I 17 h a r o t t o av; I I ia , Vi r g i n a a end A r e a B - A I t e r n a t i 1l e 1 P&,. "Cmffwar ., TnpO"Php qqpppp Mm— ar-wav 0 PrflF" une wedbM September 10, 2004 I 18 Description Alternative 2 - Fontaine /Sunset Connector Central Boulevard Create a connection through the central axis of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Avenue/ Sunset Avenue connector, and a direct connection to the existing Fontaine Research Park entrance and the possiblity of an alignment with a new Stadium Road Extended at this intersection. Engineering Issues Length (feet) - Total 5,300 feet Existing Alignment 400 feet New Location 4,900 feet Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics /Alignment Horizontal alignment issues are minimal and primarily deal with avoiding developed areas. The vertical alignment presents challenges due to the steep topography in the area, particularly along the east side of the Fontaine Research Park. Intersections and Driveways — Reconfigurations /Conflicts From the south, Sunset Avenue will be reconfigured to connect into the proposed extension and form a continuous through movement. Sunset Avenue to the north will "T" into this new alignment. Reconfigure intersection at southern connection /terminus of Sunset Avenue. The intersection will include a right - angle "T" intersection and widening of Sunset Avenue to accommodate turn lanes. The northern end the Fontaine Research Park entrance driveway and Ray Hunt Drive intersection will require some reconfiguration to handle the additional traffic load. Requires connections to parking lot along east side of Fontaine Office Park and reconfiguration of internal intersections. Local Street Improvements Requires construction of a new boulevard style street through the central axis of the Research Park. Number of New Bridges /Culverts 2 bridges Right -of -Way (acres) 6.2 acres Retaining Walls All options will require approximately 500 -1000' of retaining walls at the southern part of the Fontaine Office Park. Retaining walls are also anticipated at the at floodplain crossing and railroad crossing. Aesthetics Issues Presents the opportunity and need for extensive streetscaping through the Fontaine Office Park central green. Environmental Issues Acres of Wetlands None mapped, but may be wetlands in floodplains Number of Wetland Crossings 1 Acres of Floodplains 0.25 acres Number of Floodplain Crossings 1 Number of Stream Crossings 1 Noise Will place roadway noise directly between two established multi -story building developments. Built Environmental Impact Number of Homes Impacted n/a Number of Businesses Impacted Alignment through part of the Fontaine Office Park, but no relocations required Development/ Redevelopment Potential Presents new development and redevelopment opportunities to the south. Public Acceptability Minimal issues with single family owners, highest impact with Fontaine Research Park. Potentially perceived as helping improve system and access to the south. May gain support from those south of I -64. Parking 15 to 20 spaces lost in Fontaine Office Park. Transportation System Imp s Local Street Connectivity Provides the opportunity to connect the new alignment to existing streets: Stribling Avenue, and new residential development along Sunset Road and Stribling Avenue. Intersection Operations Fontaine Avenue /Ray C. Hunt Drive will be a critical intersection requiring improvements. Intersections internal to the Fontaine Research Park will require improvements. The Ray Hunt Drive /Entrance Driveway will perform better than Alternative #1. Intersection Spacing Spacing between Fontaine Avenue and Natural Resources Drive continues to be short. Emergency Response More direct route to Sunset Avenue /I -64 area. Traffic Calming Possibly required in the Fontaine Research Park. Bike /Pedestrian Accommodation 5 -foot striped bike lanes on new location sections and shared lanes on existing sections, unless widening is permissible Transit Accommodation Opportunities for bus pull outs. Route Attractiveness More attractive (less circuitous) than Alternative #1 and 3. Posted speed - 35 MPH, except through central axis which would be 25 MPH. Other Constructability Severe slopes and grades south of Fontaine Office Park. Will impact existing operations in Fontaine Research Park, creating some disruption. Planning Level Costs, based on 2 -lane typical section CONSTRUCTION COSTS ONLY $6,340,000 September 10, 2004 I 19 C h a r I o kf�Svifli�, Vi r g i n is } r} fiend A rryy E G�I p 5B* r� � I(�L yew Yr nary a i }v/�e L PQTL PUdCMiWO7 IH42M itrx: TowsphY E3 o u i e Y a n d C o 1 7 1+ V L o r F wUN �1 [� 6usuW T Abhwd W.c - sveh NORIN NCw kaC" ,We'd H Rwnftre GmCv of water 11 'On d r rr grub,Ntr 2ro+ =Q RWCUcwdj PttlhOW Prop" 1.nC YlUfd 000=300= _ k F;aA -rc Radpas September 10, 2004 I 20 September 10, 2004 I 2 Alternative 3 - Fontaine /Sunset Connector with shift Description Create a connection through the eastern portion of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Avenue/ Sunet Avenue connector through the eastern parking lot, linked back to the Fontaine Reserach Park. Engineering Issues Length (feet) - Total 5,400 feet Existing Alignment 400 feet New Location 5,000 feet Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics/ Horizontal alignment issues are minimal and primarily deal with avoiding developed areas. The vertical Alignment alignment presents challenges due to the steep topography in the area, particularly along the east side of the Fontaine Research Park. From the south, Sunset Avenue will be reconfigured to connect into the proposed extension and form a continuous through movement. Sunset Avenue to the north will "T" into this new alignment. Intersections and Driveways Reconfigure intersection at southern connection /terminus of Sunset Avenue. The intersection will "T" — Reconfigurations /Conflicts include a right -angle intersection and widening of Sunset Avenue to accommodate turn lanes. At the northern end, the Fontaine Research Park entrance driveway and Ray Hunt Drive intersection will require some reconfiguration to handle the additional traffic load. Requires connections to parking lot along east side of Fontaine Office Park and reconfiguration of internal intersections. Local Street Improvements None anticipcated. Number of New Bridges /Culverts 2 bridges Right -of -Way (acres) 6.5 acres Retaining Walls All options will require approximately 500 -1000' of retaining walls at the southern part of the Fontaine Office Park. Retaining walls are also anticipated at the at floodplain crossing and railroad crossing. Aesthetics Issues Using landscaping treatments to buffer the roadway will require additional right -of -way and a more costly roadway section. Environmental Issues Acres of Wetlands None mapped, but may be wetlands in floodplains Number of Wetland Crossings 1 Acres of Floodplains 0.25 acres Number of Floodplain Crossings 1 Number of Stream Crossings 1 Noise Impact of roadway noise will be minimal. Built Environmental Impacts EW Number of Homes Impacted n/a Number of Businesses Impacted Alignment through part of the Fontaine Office Park, but no relocations required Development/ Redevelopment Potential Presents new development and redevelopment opportunities to the south. Minimal issues with single family owners, highest impact with Fontaine Research Park. Potentially Public Acceptability perceived as helping improve system and access to the south. May gain support from those south of I -64. Parking 106 spaces lost in Fontaine Office Park Transportation System Im a s Local Street Connectivity Provides the opportunity to connect the new alignment to existing streets: Stribling Avenue, and new residential development along Sunset Road and Stribling Avenue. Intersection Operations Fontaine Avenue /Ray C. Hunt Drive will be a critical intersection requiring improvements. Intersections internal to the Fontaine Research Park will require improvements. Intersection Spacing Spacing between Fontaine Avenue and Natural Resources Drive continues to be short. Emergency Response More direct route to Sunset Avenue /I -64 area. Traffic Calming Possibly required in the Fontaine Research Park. Bike /Pedestrian Accommodation 5 -foot striped bike lanes on new location sections and shared lanes on existing sections, unless widening is permissible Transit Accommodation Opportunities for bus pull outs. Route Attractiveness Fairly attractive. Posted speed - 35 MPH. Other Constructability Severe slopes and grades south of Fontaine Office Park. Will impact existing operations in Fontaine Research Park, creating some disruption. Planning Level Costs, based on 2- lane typical section CONSTRUCTION $6,450,000 COSTS ONLY September 10, 2004 I 2 r ya� 29 - db Potonta: Par" x ; i � ff +�I t ' . Y AA kL. 4 f � : � � � w �i Of Charlottesville. Virginia L"ene r e a B - AIternative 3 ftup" corrWor RrWM — " Connector with S h i i A E)ft"° ' — '`INyje&" NORM new L i Aft b Bau�X Body or Water F�41rttiFwat' �ccerviWi Rgppgl�a wRSan] mot. .. 5epRd+IGe200+ 0 X04 1pp P413dd3e September 10, 2004 I 22 Alternative #4: Fontaine /Sunset Connector East This alternative considers an integrated land -use strategy based on neighborhood centers as the unit of growth, with several key connector roads introduced. One of these is called the "Fontaine /Sunset Connector ". In this alternative it spans Moore's Creek and the railroad tracks to the south of Fontaine Research Park, passing along the eastern edge of the Research Park with a direct connection to Fontaine Avenue and Stadium Road Extended. This Alternative envisions additional development at the Fontaine Research Park (FRP) with the possibility of structured parking. In addition to the potential for extensive new office development, limited mixed -uses (small scale service retail, or day -care, for example) could be introduced to provide more amenities and supportive activities for this area. Such a transition over time would begin to view the area in a way that is consistent with the County's Neighborhood Model of pedestrian - friendly, compact development. UTS and /or CTS bus service could extend to this new Fontaine Neighborhood Center. The new Fontaine /Sunset Connector East would be located toward the east of the property, providing safe and continuous access for traffic that could move toward the current intersection of Fontaine Research Park and Fontaine Avenue. The structured parking has the potential to serve special events crowds during evening and weekend functions. The principal advantage of this alternative is the way it integrates the need for transportation interconnection with the added development opportunity of FRP. While the FRP has been very successful in achieving its buildout (all but one of the approved buildings have been constructed), this mode of development might be enriched for employees and businesses alike through the introduction of a limited mixed -use and a neighborhood orientation. Through the added development potential, a share of the costs associated with the infrastructure investment might be absorbed where those costs directly benefit the development. The alignment allows for a direct connection to the possibility of a new Staidum Road Extended, improving flow. The existing entrance to the Fontaine Research Park would remain, and could be converted into a right turn in, right turn out configuration, with the new intersection accommodating the full functions of turns, possibly through a roundabout. The principal concerns involve implications of placing a significant transportation element within an existing business development and the investment associated with the bridges over Moore's Creek and the existing railroad tracks. The specific design and engineering strategy for the road within the FRP property would require additional study, particularly in the way that it could engage the Research Park (parking and drives), and at its intersection with the existing entrance to the Research Park at Fontaine Avenue. September 10, 2004 I 23 September 10, 2004 I 24 Alternative 4 - Fontaine /Sunset Connector East Create a connection through the eastern portion of Fontaine Research Park with a new Fontaine Description Avenue /Sunet Avenue connector, through the eastern parking lot and a direct connection to Fontaine Avenue at a new intersection. If Stadium Road Extended is constructed, it could be aligned at this new intersection. The existing entrance of Fontaine Research Park would remain, primarily handling local Research Park traffic. Engineering Issues Length (feet) - Total 5,300 feet Existing Alignment n/a New Location 5,300 feet Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics/ Horizontal alignment issues are minimal and primarily deal with avoiding developed areas. The Alignment vertical alignment presents challenges due to the steep topography in the area, particularly along the east side of the Fontaine Research Park. Intersections and Driveways — From the south, Sunset Avenue will be reconfigured to connect into the proposed extension and Reconfigurations /Conflicts form a continuous through movement. Sunset Avenue to the north will "T" into this new alignment. Reconfigure intersection at southern connection /terminus of Sunset Avenue. The intersection will include a right -angle "T" intersection and widening of Sunset Avenue to accommodate turn lanes. A new full movement intersection will be constructed at Fontaine Avenue. The existing intersection at Fontaine Avenue and the Research Park would become a secondary access driveway accomodating primarily traffic entering from the east and exiting to the west. Local Street Improvements There will likely be improvements required to Fontaine Avenue between the Research Park driveway and Westerly Aveune, including improvements to Stribling Aveune and Westerly Avenue. Number of New Bridges /Culverts 2 bridges Right -of -Way (acres) 7.5 acres Retaining Walls All options will require approximately 500 -1000' of retaining walls at the southern part of the Fontaine Office Park. Retaining walls are also anticipated at the at floodplain crossing and railroad crossing. Aesthetics Issues Presents the opportunity to create a new gateway into the City and University. Environmental Issues Acres of Wetlands None mapped, but may be wetlands in floodplains Number of Wetland Crossings 1 Acres of Floodplains 0.25 acres Number of Floodplain Crossings 1 Number of Stream Crossings 1 Noise Impact of roadway noise will be minimal. lin Number of Homes Impacted n/a Number of Businesses Impacted Alignment through part of the Fontaine Office Park, but no relocations required Development/ Redevelopment Potential Presents new development and redevelopment opportunities to the south. Public Acceptability Minimal issues with single family owners, highest impact with Fontaine Research Park. Potentially perceived as helping improve system and access to the south. May gain support from those south of I -64. Parking 160 spaces lost in Fontaine Office Park Local Street Connectivity These options provide the opportunity to connect the new alignment to existing streets: Stribling Avenue, and new residential development along Sunset Road and Stribling Avenue. Intersection Operations Traffic is dispersed along Fontiane Avenue and internally, thus improving operations. Coordination of traffic signals between Fontaine Aveneu /Reserach Park and Fontaine Avenue /New Alignment will be necessary, if two signals are required. Intersection Spacing Spacing between between Fontaine Aveneu /Reserach Park and Fontaine Avenue /New Alignment will be approximately 500' requiring coordination. Emergency Response More direct route to Sunset Avenue /I -64 area. Traffic Calming Possibly required in the Fontaine Research Park. Bike /Pedestrian Accommodation 5 -foot striped bike lanes on new location sections and shared lanes on existing sections, unless widening is permissible Transit Accommodation Opportunities for bus pull outs. Route Attractiveness Very attractive because motorists have the option to bypass the internal operations of the Fontaine Research Park if desired. Posted speed - 35 MPH. Constructability Severe slopes and grades south of Fontaine Office Park. Will impact existing operations in Fontaine Research Park, creating some disruption. Planning Level Costs, based on 2 -lane typical section CONSTRUCTION COSTS $7,050,000 ONLY September 10, 2004 I 24 C t i a r I r� "e s v i f- , AV ii r g i rr i� } �1 f.egend A r e a Bit }' I t e r n a L i v e `i Patrr"Cavrl"r Midges - Rrein T+�MMPhy o 11 11 c L o r E a l I& fnsrrq \ Bdiur RM,-cm MW 0-90 *w. N01l11 ww inmWn �i x*3 & Rwf ny M awy d WOW "Mw-w" P=r,.ual Ik#q}(XN Lint Wc#iffp . . t p1rgQ M+ Feet PA W{reln September 10, 2004 I 25 Alternative #5: Rehabilitate /replace the Sunset Avenue Bridge This alternative examines the implications of opening the Sunset Avenue Bridge, connecting to Fontaine Avenue via Sunset Road and a constructing a new bridge crossing the railroad tracks while joining Piedmont Street. This alternative would require improvements to Sunset Avenue, Sunset Road, Piedmont Street, Stribling Avenue, and an improved intersection at Piedmont and Fontaine Avenue. The re- opening would require significant upgrades to all three existing streets to accommodate increased traffic loads and to address impacts on the surrounding neighborhood. The intersections of Sunset Avenue /JPA and Stribling /JPA would also need to be redesigned and reconstructed to effectively serve the additional traffic demands. The rise in daily traffic loads might also require roadway improvements along JPA, especially at intersections with Fontaine Avenue and Stadium Road /Maurry Avenue. The principal advantage of this alternative is the re -use of a previous roadway connection. In comparison to the Fontaine /Sunset Connector, the Sunset Avenue link is somewhat less constrained by existing wetlands and topographic conditions. To meet the expected increase in demand however, the roadway must be upgraded at a considerable expense. The specific design and engineering strategy for the road would require additional study to determine the magnitude of necessary improvements and to measure the impacts on the surrounding residential neighborhood and environment. One other advantage involves easier and much more direct access to the UVA Grounds for the significant number of new residents to the south (Jefferson Ridge, Eagle's Landing, Pavilion, Redfields, etc.). Rather than relying exclusively on the improvements to the full length of Sunset Avenue from the re- opened bridge to JPA, this alternative envisions a direct connection to a newly improved intersection at Piedmont Road and Fontaine Avenue with a newly constructed bridge over the railroad tracks. Along with improvements to Stribling Avenue, this would create more of an interconnected grid, expanding out from the Fry's Spring corner. For example, Piedmont extends up to Stadium Road, allowing multiple and new options for moving north /south and east/west through this mixed -use activity area. This also presents a challenge in terms of additional traffic impacts on existing residential areas. Almost all of these improvements would be public efforts and publicly funded as there are limited opportunities for new or infill development associated in the immediate vicinity of these various streets and bridges. The one place where development could occur is at the intersection of Piedmont and Fontaine, particularly along the south side between Fontaine and the tracks. September 10, 2004 I 26 September 10, 2004 I 27 Alternative 5 - Rehabilitate/ replace the Sunset Avenue Bridge Description Open Sunset Avenue bridge to traffic w/ either rehabilitation or reconstruction. Make improvements to Sunset Avenue, Sunset Road, Stribling Avenue and Piedmont Avenue with a new RR bridge and connection to Fontaine Avenue. Engineering Issues Length (feet) - Total 7,500 feet Existing Alignment 4,900 feet New Location 2,600 feet Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics /Alignment Sunset Avenue is narrow, winding and has vertical challenges. Sunset Road is a wide street. There will be multiple driveway conflicts, and 5 -6 intersections. Reconfiguration of the Sunset Road /Sunset Intersections and Driveways Ave intersection will be necessary. Intersection improvements at each termini (either at IPA or Fontaine) will — Reconfigurations /Conflicts necessary such as turn lanes, signalization, etc. Intersections improvements to Sunset Road /Stribling Avenue will be required. A significant length of Sunset Avenue, between the pedestrian bridge and Sunset Road, will require Local Street Improvements reconstruction and realignment. The length of Sunset Avenue, between the pedestrian bridge and IPA, will require reconstruction and realignment. Improvements to Stribling Avenue and Piedmont Road are necessary. Number of New Bridges/ 2 bridges Culverts Right -of -Way (acres) 3.5 acres Retaining Walls Along floodplain, at railroad crossing Aesthetics Issues Under all options there will be a need for streetscaping. Environmental Issues Acres of Wetlands May be wetlands in floodplains. Need to avoid stream along northside of Sunset Avenue. Number of Wetland Crossings 1 or more Acres of Floodplains 1.35 acres Number of Floodplain Crossings 2 (one part of the road may run linearly in the floodplain) Number of Stream Crossings 4 (2 may not exist, will need field verification) Noise Number of Homes Impacted 15 homes Number of Businesses Impacted None noted. Development/ Redevelopment Redevelopment opportunity along south side of Sunset Avenue if homes are taken. Improves access to land Potential south of the railroad corridor in the east part of the study area. Public Acceptability Severe issues - may require residential property purchases /relocations, uses residential streets, connects to existing cul -de -sac roadway, traffic may be viewed as cut - through. Parking No impact. Local Street Connectivity Creates a connection between residential areas north and south of the railroad corridor. Intersection Operations Increased traffic volumes on Sunset Avenue, Sunset Road, Stribling Avenue and Piedmont Avenue. and Fontaine Avenue /Piedmont Avenue and Sunset Avenue /Jefferson Park Avenue intersections. Intersection Spacing No issues noted. Emergency Response Provides improved access to Sunset Avenue area south of the pedestrian bridge and south of I -64. Traffic Calming All options may suggest considerations of traffic calming measures. Bike /Pedestrian 5 -foot striped bike lanes on new location sections and shared lanes on existing sections, unless widening is Accommodation permissible Transit Accommodation Potential to serve several residential areas. Opportunities for bus pull outs. Route Attractiveness Moderately attractive, due to neighborhoods streets and multiple conflict points. Low speed - 25 MPH. Linear roadway alignment along the floodplain on Sunset Avenue and potentially severe neighborhood Constructability opposition to the connection of a through street and extension of it across the railroad corridor (to Piedmont Avenue). Significant disruption to neighborhoods. Planning Level Costs, based on 2 -lane typical section $7,040,000 CONSTRUCTION COSTS ONLY September 10, 2004 I 27 ChafIQttes w 1 1 ie. Vifg i nia Land Area B - Alternative FlabmtWC,ddar="V — t PlT NQlwl New Loubm Arm 8 Baurdary Way of watr ��, .qp Ihghl- r -way RW hte Line win � 0 F ''.B =� &aldrbs r4Kxaz-, September 10, 2004 I 28 111.6 "By Right" Development This alternative examines implications associated with existing zoning. This map is a compilation of current zoning in the City and County. Traffic would occur on existing roadways with no new infrastructure improvements This is the "status quo" alternative of by -right build -out. There are serious problems associated with this "alternative" including an absence of services (retail and public) in this part of the community and overloading of the limited roads available to accommodate the vehicular traffic. This scenario was modeled to gain an understanding of transportation impacts over the next twenty years absent any changes in current zoning and without the benefit of any additional connector roads. In other words, it is presumed to operate with the existing infrastructure alone. The modeling was conducted according to VDOT and nationally accepted standards of practice, utilizing relevant data at the regional and sub - regional scale. The impacts of "by right" or "trend" build -out are serious. Several roads clearly fail including Fontaine Avenue, JPA, and West Main Street in the City. Many other streets in the area become loaded with significant increases in Average Daily Trips (ADT's) including Harris Road, Shamrock Road, McCormick Road, Alderman Road, Cherry Avenue, Fifth Street Extended, Ridge Street, and Fontaine Avenue and Sunset Avenue Extended in the County. These findings confirm intuitive impressions. Several of these roads are already perceived to be over- taxed in their ability to accommodate the traffic as it has grown over the past ten years. Under "by right" development, significant additional residents will appear within the County's Development Area (within and in some instances beyond Area B), and additional population will derive from infill development in the intensified areas of the City, particularly along JPA in the "University Precinct ". Very little service retail exists for these current and new residents, and by -right development will be highly unlikely to accommodate local functions — thereby exacerbating traffic problems. Transit does not currently serve much of the area, so it is not available as a traffic reduction opportunity under "by right" development. Under this scenario, virtually all of the burden of accommodating the pressures of growth would fall to the localities and VDOT, as there is little likelihood that private sector development would cover substantial percentages of public improvements. These issues challenges associated with "by right" development in this area confirm the importance that the Three Parties attach to the coordinated resolution of issues within Area B. September 10, 2004 I 29 September 10, 2004 I 30 "'By Right" Development Description Accommodate traffic on existing roadways. This is the "status quo" alternative of by -right build -out with no new infrastructure improvements. Length (feet) - Total Existing Alignment New Location Horizontal & Vertical Geometrics/ Sections of Old Lynchburg Harris Road, Fontaine Avenue, Jefferson Park Avenue, does Alignment present some horizontal and vertical geometry issues. Intersections and Driveways Multiple driveway and intersection conflicts coupled with an anticipated increase in traffic — Reconfigurations /Conflicts volumes. Local Street Improvements Due to poor geometrics along Old Lynchburg Road, some improvements may be required. Number of New Bridges/ Culverts n/a Right -of -Way (acres) Depending on the level of improvements required, some right -of -way may be necessary. Retaining Walls n/a Aesthetics Issues n/a Enviro Acres of Wetlands n/a Number of Wetland Crossings n/a Acres of Floodplains n/a Number of Floodplain Crossings n/a Number of Stream Crossings n/a Noise Minimal change - attributable to increase in traffic volumes Built Environmental Impacts Number of Homes Impacted Improvements to Harris Road, Fontaine Avenue, Jefferson Park Avenue may require some right -of -way Number of Businesses Impacted n/a Development/ Redevelopment No change. Potential Public Acceptability Does not require acceptance, but does require tolerance of existing conditions to remain relatively the same. Parking n/a Transportation System Impacts Local Street Connectivity No change anticipated Intersection Operations Key intersections along Old Lynchburg Road will experience an increase in traffic volumes due to additional development Intersection Spacing n/a Emergency Response No change. Traffic Calming None applicable. Bike /Pedestrian Accommodation No change. Transit Accommodation No change. Route Attractiveness Marginally attractive. Other Constructability Should not be an issue. Planning Level Costs, based on 2- lane typical section CONSTRUCTION Lowest. COSTS ONLY September 10, 2004 I 30 III.0 Transportation and Land Use Analysis Traffic modeling has been conducted for the Area B Study Area and its immediate environs.The results and analysis are included below. The demand and feasibility of roads, sidewalks, bicycle facilities, and public transit varies with the density, design, mix, and location of land use. Methodology and Modeling The MINUTP travel demand model was used for the Area B Study to forecast traffic demand for the study area and related regional roads. Year 2025 forecasts were generated for the "By Right" Development scenario and three Framework Plan alternative scenarios. The "By Right" scenario reflects the build out of Area B as allowed by existing zoning. The alternative scenarios reflect the development of the area with the inclusion of the proposed roadways and land uses associated with each Framework Plan alternative. The MINUTP model was provided by VDOT for use in the travel demand modeling. The Charlottesville Area Regional Transportation (CHART) Study network, reflecting the Metropolitan Planning Organization's Long Range Transportation Plan (LRTP), was the base network for all scenarios. The Area B study area was detailed in the network by adding new roadway connections and socioeconomic data forecasts. MINUTP Model Calibration The Charlottesville MPO MINUTP model was used as the basis for forecasting travel demand in the study area. Prior to performing the analysis, however, the existing 1998 base year highway network was revised to ensure that the model is accurate and sensitive to changes in the study area. The resulting network can be considered a sub -area model for Area B. Several methods were used to refine and calibrate the sub -area model, including TAZ splits and centroid adjustments and changes to speed /capacity classifications. In addition, several locally - relevant roads were added that otherwise are not included in the regional model: • Stribling Avenue west of Jefferson Park Avenue; • Sunset Road from Stribling Avenue to Sunset Avenue; • Stadium Road from Alderman Road to Mimosa Drive; • Mimosa Drive from Stadium Road to Summit Drive, and • Summit Drive from Mimosa Drive to Fontaine Avenue. The end result of this effort was a refined and locally relevant sub -area model that more accurately replicates existing study area traffic flows compared to the regional model. Socioeconomic Data As part of the travel demand forecasts, new socioeconomic data was developed for the Framework Plan alternatives. Proposed land uses were aggregated to the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) level and converted to variables used in the model, including total dwelling units and employment by type (Industrial, Commercial Service). To make the translation, assumptions were made about gross densities and intensities associated with each land use type in the Framework Plan (see table below). Land Use Type Assumptions Dwelling Units per Acre Employees per Acre Mixed Use 20 10 High Density Residential 12 NA Medium Density Residential 2 NA Low Density Residential 1 NA Institutional NA 80 Commercial /retail NA 17 September 10, 2004 I 32 Bicycle and Pedestrian Facilities New streets should typically include two lanes for vehicular travel, bike lanes, sidewalks, and street trees where appropriate (both sides). Street sections should be developed to support traffic calming and pedestrian /bike safety. Work in Area B should coordinate with the City's recent Bike /Ped Master Plan and the University's priorities in this area. The existing topography in much of the Area B setting presents a challenge for bicycle and pedestrian use. However, several of the alternatives would change this setting. For example, a new connector between Sunset Avenue Extended and Fontaine Avenue would involve gradual grade change moving in the north -south direction. With this change, it is entirely plausible for travel to occur through non - vehicular alternatives. Additional resources can evolve in concert with the City, County, and University's open space system along Moore's Creek, its tributaries and Observatory Hill (with its many trails). The Rivanna Trail System is a community -wide resource that could expand through careful attention to opportunities within and beyond Area B. One such opportunity is along the current floodplain where Stribling Road travels up to Fontaine Avenue. As this area evolves, that could become a dedicated bike path tied into paths on University property at Observatory Hill and into the central Grounds. Transit Issues The central areas of the University are very well served by the University Transit System (UTS), while many areas of the City are well served by the Charlottesville Transit System (CTS). Most of Area B however is currently outside the area of service for both of these systems. As the Area evolves with a coordinated effort of transportation planning and land -use decisions, opportunities for transit expansion to service this area will emerge, especially to the north of Route 64 and east of Route 29 bypass. The possible new centers at Trinity Presbyterian Church and along Fifth Street Extended could also generate enough activity to merit CTS extension to service these. Coordination between CTS and UTS will continue to be important in providing as much seamless connection between the two systems as possible. There may be areas that are best served by one system or the other, and in the end the key issue will be the extent to which non - automobile options emerge to provide choice for students, employees and residents of the community. Creating convenient access to transit provides a viable alternative transportation option within the study area. With the expansion of CTS and UTS routes and the expected increase of transit as a preferred mode of transportation, car trip generation can be reduced. The framework plan is designed to promote walking and transit trips through an integrated network of pedestrian and bicycle connections, greenways, and transit routes. The plan's compact, neighborhood- oriented land use strategy maximizes the potential number of residences, businesses, and employers served by transit. Through the coordinated efforts of CTS and UTS, the expansion of transit service within the study area should focus on connecting locations of high demand. The Area B design and land use concept locates neighborhood centers and intense development along the major north /south road in the area. These areas will be well served by fixed route transit. A possible route is illustrated in this report (pages 38 & 39). Another transit issue involves "shuttles ". Currently, for example, private shuttles operate between two of the recent apartment developments on Sunset Avenue Extended and the central Grounds at UVA. Also, the University runs shuttle service to the Medical Center from several locations. It may be more efficient to examine "demand" in these various areas to see if full CTS or UTS service could be justified in these or other areas. September 10, 2004 I 33 Parking In some development areas, on street parking could supplement the local parking resources while helping to "calm" traffic. Posted speeds on these roads should not exceed 35 miles per hour, making on- street parking feasible. The major parking opportunity in the area is at the existing Fontaine Research Park. Currently, extensive on grade parking exists in conjunction with the office, medical and research functions. Structured parking could be introduced to increase the parking capacity on the site. Additionally, this parking could serve multiple duties, changing during different times of the day, week, and throughout the year. For example, additional event parking for UVA facilities (including Scott Stadium) could occur on this site with shuttle bus connections. Depending on the University's strategies with regard to satellite parking, this area could accommodate some parking for the Medical Center with transit connections back to the central medical "campus ". Any new structured parking could include "mixed -use" where appropriate, with some ground level retail or service functions. Housing Issues County The County has committed to neighborhood- oriented, pedestrian - friendly development within its designated growth areas. Within the County's portion of Area B, there are at least two settings where compact, interconnected "neighborhoods" could emerge. One is at the "Granger property ", currently undeveloped land to the south of Fontaine Research Park and north of Route 64 and Sunset Avenue Extended. Housing numbers in this area could be significant (500 -750 units for the Granger property alone and perhaps another 1,000 units in the development area). If one of the Fontaine /Sunset Connectors is built, the Granger property development along with existing housing at Redfields, Jefferson Ridge, and Eagle's Landing would have more direct access to the University area as well as the Route 29 bypass on -ramp. Small scale service and mixed -use would be possible on the Granger property, and the density could justify transit connections either through CTS or UTS. With the County's provision of 15% units in an affordable range, a mixture of sale price levels could be provided in this development along with the potential of this development helping to fund infrastructure investments for portions or road and bridges that benefit this property. Many residents in this area would bike or walk to Fontaine Research Park or bike to the Grounds or Medical Center from this location. The other area is within a 1/4 mile radius of Trinity Presbyterian Church. Over time, this setting could evolve into a more traditional neighborhood quality with housing surrounding the major presence of the church. With added critical mass in this area, there may be sufficient justification for transit connection, which could benefit members of the congregation, including UVA students, as well as new residents. Several people in the nearby neighborhoods have suggested that the most appropriate use would be for UVA faculty housing (as opposed to student housing). Bicycle commuting from this area would certainly be an option since it is less than two miles to the Rotunda or Medical Center. A third area exists outside the designated Area B — in the vicinity of Fifth Street Extended and Old Lynchburg Road. This is more of an infill development opportunity, where housing and limited mixed -uses could be introduced. The county's anticipated new elementary school could be the focal point of this neighborhood center, with additional housing developing around it. City The City's portion of Area B includes a "University Precinct" as defined in its new zoning code. This represents a significant infill redevelopment opportunity that could result in substantial additions of rental housing units over time. In fact, current market forces have resulted in attached housing units on tight infill sites within close proximity to the Grounds. Student preferences for off Grounds housing start with the 14th Street area and other neighborhoods north of University Avenue. Additional housing will emerge between Jefferson Park Avenue and the railroad tracks, a process that could be accelerated if limited mixed -use emerges in concert with the housing (small scale service retail functions). The JPA area has the advantage of proximity to the Grounds and excellent access through pedestrian and bicycle provisions and transit service. Most students prefer to live in close proximity to the Grounds, and there appears to be substantial opportunity for the private sector to develop in these areas to meet the demand. Overall, the City has seen nearly 600 units of new residential construction between 2000 -2003, more than 50% of which are attached or multi - family complexes. There are many more units under construction within the City at this time. September 10, 2004 I 34 University There are several opportunities that the University could consider to strengthen housing opportunities for students, faculty and staff. With regard to first year students, additional housing will be produced to accommodate the modest anticipated growth of approximately 100 students /year. Over a ten -year period, if the University continues to provide student housing for approximately 37% of its students, this would result in demand for 370 additional on Grounds beds and 630 beds off Grounds. As noted earlier, infill development in designated areas of the City can accommodate this growth in ways that do not require each resident to own a car. In fact, as in other urbanized areas surrounding campuses in the U.S., the convenience of pedestrian and bicycle access to classes and supporting retail services can result in a drop in the percentage of upper year students who bring cars to Charlottesville (examples of this include Princeton, Stanford, and other campuses with close town /gown relations). Faculty housing has several dimensions. The cost of home purchases and rentals in the Charlottesville area can be prohibitively expensive for new faculty. At the same time, there would be advantages in stabilizing neighborhoods if more faculty were choosing to live in existing neighborhoods. The University could consider some form of location -based mortgage support that would provide incentives for faculty to purchase "starter" homes in existing neighborhoods surrounding Grounds — within a defined radius from the Lawn. In past years, the University had a mortgage support program that was helpful to new faculty, and many faculty used the program to purchase their first home within existing residential neighborhoods. A new location -based program could be used to support house staff, interns, and nurses at the Medical Center who might purchase condominiums or apartments in walking distance to the hospital. Another housing issue is the direct provision of faculty housing by the University. Piedmont Housing is the only such facility at this time, although another faculty /staff apartment building used to be available on Rugby Road at Beta Bridge. Redevelopment of the Piedmont Housing site could include replacement housing for faculty or the University could study other options such as faculty housing in conjunction with new residential colleges elsewhere (such as Ivy Road south of the new parking structure). The Faculty Senate survey of concerns indicated strong interest among faculty in the University addressing faculty housing. Clearly all of these housing issues speak to larger policy questions that the University would need to consider in a coordinated manner. Stanford University undertook one such study through the "Provost's Committee on Faculty Housing Policy" (March, 2000). A similar consideration of issues and options could yield significant strategies and collaborative opportunities for the benefit of faculty, staff and the surrounding City and County neighborhoods. September 10, 2004 I 35 III.D Traffic Modeling Results Forecast Results A comparative traffic counts table with CHART 2025 data is included following this section. All traffic model runs are organized by roadway segment. The following information is included in the matrix: Road Segment; Existing Traffic Counts (data provided by others); CHART 2025 data and Level of Service are included for reference. Level of Service was calculated using the Department of Transportation's chart for urbanized areas (typical of national standards and methodology). LOS ratings of A and B are not achievable within the Area B roadway network. The short road segments used for analysis preclude the "free flow" necessary for ratings A and B. September 10, 2004 I 38 IV. APPENDIX 1 Project Advisory Group • Advisory Committee Memorandum (May 16, 2003) • Project Advisory and Stakeholders Group Composition • Advisory Group Welcome 2 Existing Conditions Report 3 Housing • Notes from Student Focus Group • City of Charlottesville Housing Policy Task Force: Chapter Four - Data Collection • City of Charlottesville Five Year Housing Plan 4 Faculty Housing • Faculty Comments on Faculty Housing • Report of The Provost's Committee on Faculty Housing Policy (Stanford) 5 Area B Open House Comments 6 Project Advisory Group Comments (January 22, 2004) 7 Kimley -Horn Proposed Typical Cross - Sections 8 Transportation Modeling Memorandum 9 Southern Urban Area B Alternatives Ratings September 10, 2004 I 44 APPENDIX 9 Southern Urban Area B Alternatives Ratings by Renaissance Planning Group and Kimley Horn and Associates August 23, 2004 The following tables are organized with ratings ranging from 1 to 5. These ratings are provided in response to a request from the PACC Advisory Council on August 19, 2004. They have been developed with consideration for the engineering and feasibility assessment issues in mind and with consideration for land -use implications. Alt 1 Alt 2 Alt 3 Alt 4 Alt 5 By Right Issue Fontaine Fontaine Fontaine Fontaine Sunset "No Build" West Central Shift East Avenue "Impact" ratings 1(highest) - 5 (lowest) Environmental Impacts 4 3 3 3 2 3 Transportation Impacts on 5 4 4 4 1 4 Existing Residences Transportation Impacts on 4 2 3 4 4 4 Existing Businesses Other Issues 1(worst) - 5 (best) Transportation Network 3 4 3 5 4 1 Connectivity Positive Development 4 4 4 5 2 1 Potential Public /Private Collaborative 4 2 4 5 1 1 Funding Potential Constructability 3 2 2 4 1 2 TOTALS 27 21 23 30 15 16