HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201000011 Executive Summary Zoning Map Amendment 2012-03-06COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZMA 201000011, Estes Park
SUBJECT /PROPOSAL /REQUEST:
Applicant proposes to construct 68 single - family
attached units, in a pedestrian - friendly layout,
with a street network, with access to Worth
Crossing, and with 25% open space that
includes the stream on the property. The
property is located in the southwestern quadrant
of Proffit Road (Rt. 649) and Worth
Crossing /Leake Lane, approximately 800 feet
south of Proffit Road in the Community of
Hollymead. (TMP 032000000003300 and TMP
03200000003400)
STAFF CONTACT(S):
David Benish
AGENDA DATE:
March 6, 2012
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Planning Commission held a public hearing for this proposal on August 23, 2011. The August 23`d staff report is
provided as Attachment D. The previous proposal consisted of constructing 68 single - family detached units served by a
public road network which would have connected to Moubry Lane, in the Forest Ridge development, and Worth Crossing
through an adjacent parcel containing Bright Beginnings Day Care. The applicant requested deferral at the August meeting
in order to address the comments and concerns raised by the Commission, which were:
1. Inadequate commitment to affordable housing. There was general consensus from the Commission that the cash
proffer amount for affordable housing should be based on the total number of dwelling units consistent with the
County's cash proffer policy.
2. The applicant should insure that there is adequate protection of downstream properties, including Arbor Lake, from
erosion and sedimentation.
3. Provide for a tot lot or another recreational amenity in the 25% open space.
4. Improve temporary and long -term protection of the historic cemetery on -site.
5. Provide adequate road widths to accommodate parking on both sides of all roads.
6. Evaluate options for another point of vehicular access instead of the Moubry Lane interconnection. It was the
general consensus of the Commission not to make a vehicular connection to Moubry Lane. A second means of
access needs to be made.
The applicant has responded to the Commission's concerns through changes to both the proposed application plan
(Attachment A) and proffers (Attachment B). Major changes to the application plan since the version reviewed in August
are:
• The unit type has been changed from single - family detached homes to single - family attached homes.
• A pedestrian, bicycle and emergency access only connection has been provided to Moubry Lane.
• The sole access to the site is now through a proposed public road to Worth Crossing through adjacent parcels on
the north side of the site. No second means of access to the site is feasible at this time (except from Moubry
Lane). Three road stub -outs to adjacent properties have been provided for on the application plan as possible
future interconnections.
The applicant resubmitted a revised application plan with proffers in mid January, 2012 for review and requested to be
scheduled for review by the Planning Commission at the earliest possible date (March 6) in lieu of receiving staff comments
on the revised plan and providing revisions to the plan to address staff concerns.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has provided an overall assessment of the changes made to the plan and proffers to address the Commission's
concerns.
Inadequate commitment to affordable housing —a general consensus from the Commission that the cash
proffer amount for affordable housing should be based on the total number dwelling units.
The applicant has addressed the Commission's concern in concept. The affordable housing proffer is intended to
provide the option of providing 15 percent of the total units as affordable units or payments in lieu of units based on
the total number of units in the rezoning request (68). The applicant has previously based the proffer on the total
number of by right units (50). The status of the specific proffer language is discussed in the "Status of Proffers"
section of the Executive Summary.
2. The applicant should insure that there is adequate protection of downstream properties, including Arbor
Lake, from erosion and sedimentation.
The applicant is addressing impacts to downstream properties, including Arbor Lake, by proffering to provide a
higher level of erosion and sediment control measures than required under current regulations. The County
engineer believes this is the best approach for providing enhanced protection of downstream properties from
erosion and sedimentation. The applicant has submitted a memo identifying the additional measures which could
be provided with this development to implement this proffer (Attachment D). The County Engineer is reviewing the
memo and will work with the applicant to identify the appropriate implementation measures to be incorporated into
the proposed proffer.
3. Provide for a tot lot or another recreational amenity in the 25% open space.
The applicant has addressed the Commission's concern. A tot lot has been provided in a newly proposed pocket
park. Some technical changes to the notes on the Application Plan need to be made to clarify location of the tot lot
facility.
4. Improve temporary and long -term protection of the historic cemetery on -site.
The applicant has addressed the Commission's concern. Notes have been added to the application plan that
provide for an access easement to the cemetery and the installation of a black metal fencing around the cemetery
to be maintained by the HOA.
5. Provide adequate road widths to accommodate parking on both sides of all roads.
This issue has been addressed. The proposed roads are now wide enough to accommodate parking on both
sides of the road.
6. Evaluate options for another point of vehicular access instead of the Moubry Lane. It was the consensus
of the Commission not to make the interconnection to Moubry Lane. A second means of access needs to
be made.
The road network has been changed to provide a pedestrian, bicycle and emergency access only to Moubry Lane
(no vehicular access). The only access to the site would now be from a proposed public road to Worth Crossing
through adjacent properties located on the north side of the site (the Bright Beginnings Day Care property and an
adjacent propertyjust east of Bright Beginnings). A similar connection was proposed on the previous plan as one
of two public road accesses to the site. There are no other options (besides Moubry Lane) to provide for a second
means of access to this site from an existing public road. Three other road stub -outs to adjacent properties have
also been shown on the revised application plan which could accommodate a connection to future development of
those properties
At this time, the applicant has not secured permission from the adjacent property owners to construct the public
access road to this development. The applicant is still in negotiations with the adjacent property owners of TMP
46134 -5 and TMP46B4 -5A to secure the right -of -way necessary to construct the proposed road connection to
Worth Crossing; however, no agreement has been reached as of the writing of this report.
Status of Proffers:
The proffers have been amended by the applicant to reflect the changes made to the proposal and the
Commission's concerns. The revised proffers are generally acceptable in concept and overall intent; however,
there are still a number of changes needed to before they are acceptable for signature (Attachment C). Staff has
provided the following comments regarding the draft proffers:
• For Proffer 1, the Cash Proffer for Capital Improvements Projects, the proposed cash proffer amount
($754,000) is based on the total number of proposed units (68) minus the ten (10) affordable housing
units potentially provided on -site (58 units * $13,000 per SFA unit = $754,000). The County's Cash Proffer
Policy allows for a credit for the affordable units constructed as part of a development. However, the
proposed Affordable Housing Proffer (Proffer 2, discussed in more detail below) is providing the option for
the developer to either construct affordable housing units or provide cash in lieu construction. As a result,
the total number of affordable units to be built is not known, so the amount of credit for the construction of
affordable units cannot be determined at this time. To be fully consistent with the Cash Proffer Policy, the
total cash proffer amount should be based on the total number of market rate units built. Staff believes
that this proffer can be, and should be, reworded to provide the cash proffer amount consistent with total
number of market rate units constructed on the site. The language of this proffer will need to be revised
and consistent with the Affordable Housing Proffer and finalized prior to review of the proposal by the
Board of Supervisors.
The previous Proffer 1 stated that the owner shall not submit a final subdivision plat or site plan for the
project unless it includes the Worth Crossing Road connection. This proffer was to ensure that this
connection, originally proposed as a second point of access to the site, would be constructed. This
connection is now the only access for the site and the project is not developable unless this connection is
made; therefore, this proffer is no longer needed and is being deleted. Deletion of this proffer is
acceptable to staff. Other proffers related to the construction of the road connection to Moubry Lane have
also been deleted consistent with the Commission's direction.
Proffer 2, the Affordable Housing Proffer, has been modified to provide the developer the option of either
constructing affordable housing units or providing cash lieu of units in order to meet the Affordable
Housing Policy. The proposed total number of affordable units or cash amount (in lieu of construction) is
consistent with the Affordable Housing Policy (15 percent of all units). This "flexible" approach to
providing affordable units and /or cash is acceptable to staff in concept; however, the language for this
proffer will need to be modified to the satisfaction of the Housing Director and Planning staff to insure
successful implementation and management of the proffer.
• The applicant has also modified the Proffer 5 to provide a higher level of erosion and sediment control,
above the standard regulatory requirements, in order to provide a higher level of protection for
downstream areas, including Arbor Lake. The language for this proffer will need to be modified the
satisfaction of the satisfaction of the County Engineer to insure successful implementation and
management of proffer. The County Engineer is reviewing the memo and will work with the applicant to
identify the appropriate implementation measures to be incorporated into the proposed proffer.
Other Site Development Issues:
There are several site development issues which have been identified as part of the review of the application plan for the
rezoning. These issues will need to be addressed at the site plan and /or subdivision plat review stage to the satisfaction of
the County Engineer. Any approval of this rezoning request and associated application plan does not imply that the
following issues have been addressed with this action:
• This plan appears to involve significant lot -to -lot drainage, which is not recommended as it can create
significant problems for future homeowners. A typical rule -of -thumb is drainage through 3 lots maximum
before being physically diverted and picked up in a pipe system. "Lot -to -lot grading" for the development will
need to be addressed, particularly for lots along road D and E.
• The size and location of stormwater management facilities will be subject to review and approval by the County
Engineer.
• Lot 68 is located close to the stream and grading for the lot will likely impact the stream. Lot 68 should either
be eliminated or relocated further away from the stream.
• All road stub -outs will need to be built to the property line.
SUMMARY:
This proposal is generally consistent with the goals, objectives and strategies of the Comprehensive Plan. However, the
primary inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan is with the lack of inter - connectivity of the road network to existing
public roads, specifically Moubry Lane. Staff believes the most desirable road network to serve this development and the
surrounding area would include public road connections to both Moubry Lane and Worth Crossing, which would be
consistent with the interconnectivity strategies of the Plan. However, the Commission has previously recommended that
the road connection not be made to Moubry Lane to limit impacts to the Forest Ridge neighborhood. The applicant has
followed the Commission's direction.
In summary, this proposal is generally consistent with Comprehensive Plan and is considered a good design for the site;
however, staff cannot recommend approval of the rezoning at this time until the following outstanding issues are
addressed:
• Assurance that the public road connection to Worth Crossing can be constructed on adjacent properties not under
the control of the applicant. Without assurance that this road can be built, the development as proposed will not
have access to a public road and will not be developable.
• The proffers are not yet in an acceptable form. Revisions need to be made to the Cash Proffer for Capital Projects
(# 1), the Affordable Housing Proffer ( #2), and the Erosion and Sediment Control Proffer ( #5) as noted in this
Executive Summary. Other technical, non - substantive corrections also need to be made to the document.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff cannot recommend approval of ZMA 2010 -11, Estes Park at this time due to the outstanding issues noted above.
Should the Commission decide to recommend approval of this proposal, staff recommends that the Commission's action
be conditioned on the following items being addressed prior to approval by the Board of Supervisors:
1. Right of access has been secured from the adjacent parcels TMP 4684 -5 and TMP46B4 -5A for the
construction (and right of way dedication) of a public road on these properties to serve the proposed Estes
Park development.
2. The Cash Proffer for Capital Improvements ( #1) is changed so that the total cash proffer amount is based on the
total number of market value units built.
3. Revision to the Affordable Housing Proffer ( #2) is to the satisfaction of the Housing Director, and the Erosion and
Sediment Control Proffer ( #5) to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. .
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Zoning Map Amendment:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this zoning map amendment:
Move to recommend approval of ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park based on the condition that the issues
identified by staff are addressed prior to approval by the Board of Supervisors.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this zoning map amendment:
Move to recommend denial of ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial,
he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Critical Slopes Waiver:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of the critical slopes waiver:
Move to recommend approval of the Critical Slopes Waiver for ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park, as recommended
by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of the critical slopes waiver:
Move to recommend denial of the Critical Slopes Waiver for ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park. Should a
commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
ATTACHMENTS
A – Estes Park Rezoning Application Plan
B – Revised Proffers dated February 8, 2012
C – Memo from Collins Engineering— Additional Erosion and Sedimentation Control Measures (dated 2/8/12)
D – August 23, 2011 Planning Commission Public Hearing Staff Report
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park
Staff: Judith C. Wiegand, AICP
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
August 23, 2011
Not scheduled
Owner(s): Clifford H. Fox, Jr. and Ruth Johnson
Applicant: Scott Collins, PE, Collins Engineering,
Estes Estate
representing the owners.
Acreage: 12.75 acres
Rezone from: R -1, Residential, which allows 1 unit
per acre to Planned Residential Development (PRD),
which allows residential uses (3 — 34 units /acre) with
limited commercial uses.
TMP: TMPs 032000000003300 and
By -right use: 12 residential units and up to 18 units
03200000003400
with density bonus.
Location: in the southwestern quadrant of Proffit
Road (Rt 649) and Worth Crossing /Leake Lane,
approximately 800 feet south of Proffit Road in the
Community of Hollymead. (Attachment A)
Magisterial District: Rivanna
Proffers: Yes
Proposal: Applicant proposes to construct 68
Requested # of Dwelling Units: 68
single - family detached units, in a pedestrian - friendly
layout, with a street network, with an interparcel
connection to Moubry Lane, and with 25% open
space that includes the stream on the property.
(Attachment B)
DA (Development Area): Hollymead Community
Places29 Master Plan Designation: Urban Density
Residential (6.01 -34 units /acre) in the Hollymead
Development Area.
Character of Property: The property currently has
Use of Surrounding Properties: The property to the
one older residence and outbuildings on it. The
north is residential with two churches and a daycare
gently rolling terrain includes a stream with steep
facility, property to the east is the Forest Ridge duplex
slopes running from the northwest to the southeast
residential neighborhood, property to the west is the
across both parcels.
Worth Crossing townhouses, and the property to the
south is the Dominion Power substation.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
1. The project would result in a neighborhood of 68
1. The method used by the applicant to calculate the
residences close to major employers expected
number of units on which the number of affordable
to add jobs in the future and within walking
housing units will be provided and the number of
distance of retail and services.
units on which the cash proffer for capital
2. The new development will be single - family
improvements will be paid does not follow the
detached homes at a density and scale
method stipulated in the Affordable Housing Policy
compatible with surrounding residential
or the Cash Proffer Policy of the Comprehensive
neighborhoods that adds another type of
Plan.
housing to the mix of duplexes and townhouses
2. The width of the streets in the proposed
now available in the immediate area.
development will allow parking on only one side of
3. The project's road network has been designed
the street; VDOT will require that the other side be
to interconnect with roads on other nearby
posted with "No Parking" signs, which may lead to
properties as they develop, as well as to create
parking conflicts when the site is fully developed.
a road network that will serve the larger Proffit
3. A tot lot or other type of recreational amenity has
Road /Worth Crossing area.
not been provided within the 25% open space.
4. The applicant proposes to create a second
4. Additional minor changes need to be made in the
entrance by completing the interparcel
wording of the proffers and on the application plan,
connection set up when the Forest Ridge
as listed under Recommendation at the end of this
neighborhood was developed in the 1990s. The
report.
existing cul -de -sac at the end of Moubry Lane
will be removed, the grade will be improved, and
affected driveways along Moubry Lane extended
to meet the reconstructed road.
5. The applicant has proffered to construct a
sidewalk and planting strip on one side of
Moubry Lane to provide a safer place for Forest
Ridge residents to walk once Moubry Lane
becomes a through street. By narrowing the
street, the sidewalk /parking strip will also serve
as a form of traffic calming for the Forest Ridge
neighborhood.
6. The project's design preserves the main section
of the stream, an environmental feature that
flows diagonally through the center of the two
parcels. The stream will become an amenity in
the open space area.
7. Approval of the Critical Slopes Waiver will
enable the developer to make the most efficient
use of the property while preserving the main
section of the stream.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this rezoning provided certain changes are made in
the application plan and proffers, as listed under Recommendation at the end of this report.
Staff recommends aaaroval of the Critical Slopes Waiver.
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
ZMA 2010- 00011, Estes Park
Critical Slopes Waiver
Judith C. Wiegand, AICP
August 23, 2011
PETITION
PROJECT: ZMA 201000011, Estes Park
PROPOSAL: Rezone 12.75 acres from R -1, Residential zoning district which allows 1 unit /acre to PRD, Planned
Residential Development zoning district which allows residential (3 — 34 units /acre) with limited commercial uses.
Proposed number of units is 68 for a density of 5.33 units /acre.
PROFFERS: Yes
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE /DENSITY: Urban Density Residential — residential (6.01 — 34
units/ acre); supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No
LOCATION: in the southeast quadrant of the intersection of Proffit Road (Rt 649) and Worth Crossing,
approximately 800 feet south of Proffit Road in the Community of Hollymead.
TAX MAP /PARCEL: TMP 03200000003300 and TMP 03200000003400
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna
CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The two subject parcels are located in the southeastern quadrant of Proffit Road and Worth Crossing/ Leake Lane.
The property does not have frontage on any of the major streets in the area (i.e., Worth Crossing, Proffit Road).
The property currently has a residence and several outbuildings on TMP 33 -34. The property is bounded to the
north by several parcels zoned R -1, Residential and occupied by a single residence (TMP 32 -35), two churches
(TMP 32- 36G/32 -36E and TMP 32 -29D), a daycare facility (TMP 46134 -5), and a metal storage building (TMP
46134 -5A). The property to the west is zoned R -15, Residential and is the location of the Worth Crossing
townhouses. The property to the south is owned by Dominion Virginia Power and is the site of a substation. The
neighborhood to the east, Forest Ridge, is zoned R -10, Residential and consists of 44 duplex residential units.
A major issue in the area has been the creation of a street network sufficient to serve both existing and proposed
developments on all of the parcels in this area.
SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL
The applicant would like to develop a pedestrian - friendly, single - family detached neighborhood of 68 homes, with a
street network, an interconnection to Moubry Lane, and 25% open space. The proposed density is 5.3 units per
acre. A Project Narrative prepared by the applicant is included as Attachment C.
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST
The applicant explained in the Project Narrative that the Estes Park rezoning would create a new single family
housing option in a pedestrian - friendly design within walking distance of commercial uses and other amenities.
Rezoning the property from R -1, Residential to Planned Residential Development (PRD) would allow construction
of 68 single family homes at a density of 5.3 units per acre, which would be complimentary to the surrounding area
and more in agreement with the Places29 Master Plan land use designation of Urban Density Residential (the
current R -1 zoning would permit a maximum of 18 units with a density bonus). The applicant also indicates that
Neighborhood Model principles were considered in the design of the project, including pedestrian orientation,
interconnected streets, provision of open space, walkability, human -scale development, and coordination with
surrounding development. (Attachment C)
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY
The property has been zoned R -1, Residential since the County's comprehensive rezoning was adopted in
December 1980. Prior to 1980, the property was zoned agricultural.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Places29 Master Plan: The Master Plan recommends Urban Density Residential land uses for the two parcels
subject to this rezoning, as well as for much of the surrounding area. The two parcels subject to this rezoning
are within the red circle on the excerpt from the Master Plan shown below. The orange color denotes Urban
Density Residential. The primary land uses expected in this designation are multifamily and single - family
residential, including two or more housing types. Since the proposed Estes Park development of single - family
detached homes would be surrounded by townhouses and duplexes, this proposal meets the
recommendations of the Master Plan. (Note: North is at the top of this illustration and the one below it.)
Parks and Green Systems Map:
As shown in the excerpt from the Places29 Parks & Green Systems Map below, there are only a few, small
areas of critical slopes on the two parcels subject to this rezoning (circled in red). The lower portion of the
stream through the center of the two parcels is also shown.
The dashed purple line running along Worth Crossing denotes a proposed bike lane. The dashed orange line
running along Proffit Road denotes a proposed multi -use path. Neither of these lanes /paths will affect the Estes
Park property directly, although they will, when built, provide amenities for the residents of the proposed
development.
The Neighborhood M US 29 f's analysis below indicates how well the proposed development meets the 12
principles of the Neigh odel.
Pedestrian The application plan shows sidewalks on both sides of all streets in the
Orientation proposed development. There is a short segment of asphalt sidewalk on
Worth Crossing directly in front of the Worth Crossing townhouses, but
there is no sidewalk on Worth Crossing north of the proposed entrance
to Estes Park. The sidewalk shown on the south side of Road B could
be connected to the asphalt path, while the sidewalk on the north side of
Road B could be connected to a future sidewalk on Worth Crossing
north of the entrance. If the sidewalk on the north side of Road C is
shown all the way to the corner of Moubry Lane, this principle will
be met.
Neighborhood
Sidewalks and paths have been provided for adequately. The streets
Friendly Streets
are generally neighborhood - friendly, except that they are too narrow to
and Paths
accommodate onstreet parking on both sides of the street. Staff is
concerned that, with the small lot size, conflicts may occur if parking is
limited to one side of the street. If onstreet parking was available on
both sides of the street, this principle would be met. (for further
discussion, see "Streets" in the Staff Comments section below
Interconnected
The Plan shows a main entrance from Worth Crossing and a secondary
Streets and
one through Moubry Lane. There is also a stubout to the south that
Transportation
could be connected if the adjacent property ever develops. The road
Networks
network is excellent; it provides the connection between Worth Crossing
and Moubry Lane without creating a road that could be used as a
"speedway." This principle is met.
Parks and Open
The applicant has maintained 25% open space and incorporated the
Space
longest stretch of the existing stream into the open space. Staff
believes that if a recreational amenity, such as a tot lot or picnic
area is included, this principle will be met.
Neighborhood
The proposed development and the area around it are intended to be
Centers
residential to support nearby centers. The nearest center is on the west
side of Worth Crossing; residents of the proposed development will be
able to walk to a major grocery store and several other shops and
businesses. This principle is met.
Buildings and
The proposed neighborhood would include 68 single - family homes that
Spaces of Human
are arranged in a compact block pattern. The maximum building height
Scale
would be 35 feet. When the homes are designed, staff would like to see
the garages deemphasized by placing them so they are no closer to the
street than the front of the homes. This principle is met.
Relegated Parking
Two offstreet parking spaces have been provided for each residence;
one is in the garage and other is in the driveway in front of the garage.
County regulations require two offstreet spaces for single - family
detached dwellings (Section 4.22 definition of Single Family Dwelling,
and Section 19.10). So, the proposed development meets County
parking requirements. However, the parking will not be relegated unless
the front of the garages are either flush with the front of the house or,
preferably, recessed so the emphasis is on the front of the house rather
than the garage. Until the designs for the houses have been
develo ed, staff cannot determine if this principle is met.
Mixture of Uses
The proposed single - family neighborhood has a duplex neighborhood
and a townhouse development adjacent to it. Two churches and a
daycare are also nearby. With the shopping center on the west side of
Worth Crossing, the mixture of uses in this area is excellent; this
rinci le is met.
Mixture of Housing
When considered together with the adjacent townhomes and duplexes,
Types and
there is a good mixture of housing types in this area. No information has
Affordability
been provided on eventual sales prices for the homes in the
development, although they have been described to staff as "mid -
priced." The applicant proposes, with the agreement of the Office of
Housing, to provide cash in lieu of affordable housing units. As noted in
the discussion of proffers below, the method used to calculate the
number of affordable units does not comply with the requirements of the
Economic Vitality Action Plan
The primary goal of the County's Economic Vitality Action Plan is to:
Increase the County's economic vitality and future revenues through economic development by expanding the
commercial tax base and supporting the creation of quality jobs for local residents. This Plan is developed for
the benefit and economic well being, first, of current local residents and existing local businesses.
The proposed Estes Park development would support the Plan by providing housing for employees of existing and
potential businesses in the County, particularly in an area of the county where employment growth is expect to
occur.
Staff believes that this proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Economic Vitality Action Plan.
STAFF COMMENT
Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district: The
following section is an excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance:
PRD districts may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map in accordance with the provisions
set forth generally for PD districts in sections 8.0 and 33.0, and with densities and in locations in accordance
with the comprehensive plan.
The PRD is intended to encourage sensitivity toward the natural characteristics of the site and toward impact
on the surrounding area in land development. More specifically, the PRD is intended to promote economical
and efficient land use, an improved level of amenities, appropriate and harmonious physical development, and
creative design consistent with the best interest of the county and the area in which it is located.
To these ends, the PRD provides for flexibility and variety of development for residential purposes and uses
ancillary thereto. Open space may serve such varied uses as recreation, protection of areas sensitive to
development, buffering between dissimilar uses and preservation of agricultural activity.
While a PRD approach is recommended for developments of any density, it is recommended but not required
that the PRD be employed in areas where the comprehensive plan recommends densities in excess of fifteen
(15) dwelling units per acre, in recognition that development at such densities generally requires careful
planning with respect to impact. (Amended 8- 14 -85)
The proposed Estes Park development complies with the requirements of section 8 of the zoning code; it will be
under unified control, will include an application plan, and will provide, operate, and maintain common areas for the
residents of the development. Estes Park is proposed for an area designated Urban Density Residential (6.01 -34
units per acre) in the Places29 Master Plan. While the proposed density in Estes Park is 5.33 units per acre,
slightly less than the minimum, the development will be single - family detached homes on smaller lots, an
Affordable Housing Policy of the Comprehensive Plan; this principle is
not met.
Redevelopment
There is one residence and several outbuildings on one of the parcels.
These structures will be demolished in order to construct the
development. The applicant has documented the buildings in advance
of demolition, as requested by staff. This principle is met.
Site Planning that
The open space has been configured to include the stream and protect
Respects Terrain
the wetlands. There is only one small area of 2:1 slopes on the site and
the applicant has applied for a critical slopes waiver (See below). No
retaining walls are proposed. This principle is met.
Clear Boundaries
This project is not located adjacent to the boundary with the Rural Areas
with the Rural
so this principle is not relevant.
Areas
Economic Vitality Action Plan
The primary goal of the County's Economic Vitality Action Plan is to:
Increase the County's economic vitality and future revenues through economic development by expanding the
commercial tax base and supporting the creation of quality jobs for local residents. This Plan is developed for
the benefit and economic well being, first, of current local residents and existing local businesses.
The proposed Estes Park development would support the Plan by providing housing for employees of existing and
potential businesses in the County, particularly in an area of the county where employment growth is expect to
occur.
Staff believes that this proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Economic Vitality Action Plan.
STAFF COMMENT
Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district: The
following section is an excerpt from the Zoning Ordinance:
PRD districts may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map in accordance with the provisions
set forth generally for PD districts in sections 8.0 and 33.0, and with densities and in locations in accordance
with the comprehensive plan.
The PRD is intended to encourage sensitivity toward the natural characteristics of the site and toward impact
on the surrounding area in land development. More specifically, the PRD is intended to promote economical
and efficient land use, an improved level of amenities, appropriate and harmonious physical development, and
creative design consistent with the best interest of the county and the area in which it is located.
To these ends, the PRD provides for flexibility and variety of development for residential purposes and uses
ancillary thereto. Open space may serve such varied uses as recreation, protection of areas sensitive to
development, buffering between dissimilar uses and preservation of agricultural activity.
While a PRD approach is recommended for developments of any density, it is recommended but not required
that the PRD be employed in areas where the comprehensive plan recommends densities in excess of fifteen
(15) dwelling units per acre, in recognition that development at such densities generally requires careful
planning with respect to impact. (Amended 8- 14 -85)
The proposed Estes Park development complies with the requirements of section 8 of the zoning code; it will be
under unified control, will include an application plan, and will provide, operate, and maintain common areas for the
residents of the development. Estes Park is proposed for an area designated Urban Density Residential (6.01 -34
units per acre) in the Places29 Master Plan. While the proposed density in Estes Park is 5.33 units per acre,
slightly less than the minimum, the development will be single - family detached homes on smaller lots, an
appropriate residential alternative to the townhomes and duplexes nearby.
The applicant has incorporated the stream into the 25% open space required for a PRD development and has
used it as an amenity on the site. The applicant has worked with the neighbors and County staff to minimize
impacts on surrounding developments and neighborhoods. As an example, the applicant has proffered
construction of a sidewalk and planting strip on one side of Moubry Lane as a means of traffic calming and to
provide safer walking places for all residents of the area. Also, the cul -de -sac will be removed in a way that is
sensitive to the grades of that part of Forest Ridge and the close proximity of homes in that development.
The proposed 68 units represent a significantly more efficient and economical use of the land than the 12 units (18
with density bonus) that would be possible under the current R -1, Residential zoning. The applicants are proposing
a road network that will not only serve the Estes Park development, but will also tie into the surrounding
developments and create the foundation of a street network that will ultimately serve the entire southeastern
quadrant of the Proffit Road and Worth Crossing /Leake Lane area.
Staff believes that the proposal meets the intent of the Planned Residential Development (PRD) district.
Public need and justification for the change:
The County is experiencing additional employment growth in the Places29 area as the Rivanna Station Military
Base expands and the University of Virginia Research Park continues to add businesses. Providing housing for
employees and their families in reasonable proximity to these jobs is an important County goal. Rezoning the
property so that additional units can be constructed in a design that follows the principles of the Neighborhood
Model will help ensure that additional homes in a housing type not yet found in this immediate area will be built.
Impact on Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Resources:
The applicant has designed the development so that the main portion of the stream that runs through the center of
the parcels remains in the open space area; it will be a natural amenity.
The house and outbuildings currently on one of the parcels (TMP 32 -34) will be demolished. They have been
documented by the Historic Preservation Committee prior to their demolition.
The Estes Family cemetery is located in the southwest corner of the site. It is currently very overgrown and most of
the graves are unmarked. The Historic Preservation Committee has viewed the site and an expert in old
cemeteries has indicated that the boundaries shown on the application plan reflect the edges of the cemetery. Staff
has requested that the applicant charge the proposed homeowners association with fencing and maintaining the
cemetery.
Anticipated impact on public facilities and services:
Streets: VDOT has indicated that:
• While two offstreet parking spaces per unit meet VDOT requirements so that the proposed development
could be designed with parking on only one side of the street, VDOT would prefer that the streets be
designed for parking on both sides. Otherwise, one side of each street will need to be posted with "No
Parking" signs. VDOT has expressed concern that, since the two offstreet spaces are one behind the other
(one is in the garage), some residents may choose not to use one or the other of their offstreet spaces. This
might mean more cars parked onstreet, might lead to parking in restricted areas, and could result in
residents' complaints or parking conflicts if a resident's home was located on the "wrong" side of the street.
Onstreet parking by residents would also cut down on the number of spaces for guest parking or for the
third (or subsequent) car belonging to a household.
• According to the traffic analysis provided by the applicant, a left turn lane from Proffit Road into Moubry
Lane is not warranted at this time, but it is very close. Future background traffic growth on Proffit Road
could warrant a left turn lane into Moubry Lane. The construction of a left turn lane appears to require
acquisition of right -of -way from adjacent parcels to accommodate the widening necessary for the left turn
lane. (See Attachment D)
Staff agrees with VDOT's recommendation that the streets be widened enough to allow parking on both sides of
the street.
Schools: Students living in the proposed Estes Park development will attend Baker - Butler Elementary, Sutherland
Middle, and Albemarle High schools.
Fire and Rescue: The Hollymead Fire /Rescue Station on Airport Road is the nearest station.
Utilities: RWSA and ACSA have provided comments on the proposed Estes Park development. Water and sewer
are available at the site and no problems with provision of them are known. (See Attachments F and G)
The County's Cash Proffer Policy states that:
It is the policy of the County to require that the owner of property that is rezoned for residential uses to provide
cash proffers equivalent to the proportional value of the public facilities deemed necessary to serve the
proposed development on the property. Accordingly, the Board will accept cash proffers for rezoning requests
that permit residential uses in accordance with this policy. However, the Board may also accept cash, land or
in -kind improvements in accordance with County and State law to address the impacts of the rezoning.
This would mean that 68 single - family detached homes at $19,100 per unit would result in a total of $1,298,800
minus the credit for the Sidewalk Expense.
Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties:
The primary impact anticipated on surrounding properties is an increase in traffic. The proposed 68 units are
expected to generate approximately 729 trips per day, according to the traffic impact assessment prepared by the
applicant. These trips are not expected to cause adverse impacts on traffic operations at the site entrance along
Worth Crossing or at the Moubry Lane / Proffit Road intersection.
The traffic study also evaluated whether a turn lane from Proffit Road into Moubry Lane was warranted by the
additional traffic from Estes Park. Construction of a left turn lane is not warranted. VDOT has indicated, though,
that the left turn lane may be necessary as background traffic increases and /or additional development takes place
in the area.
The design of the interconnection from Estes Park to Moubry Lane, as shown on the application plan, meets both
VDOT and County requirements. The design includes lowering the surface of the road at the cul -de -sac, removing
those parts of the cul -de -sac that will no longer be part of the road, lengthening affected driveways, and returning
the "surplus" portions of the cul -de -sac to adjacent property owners.
Residents of the Forest Ridge neighborhood have expressed concern from the beginning of the Estes Park
rezoning that they would no longer be able to walk along Moubry Lane once it became a through street. Forest
Ridge was built before the County began requiring sidewalks and street trees in Development Area neighborhoods.
Forest Ridge residents also expressed concern about the potential for speeding along Moubry Lane since the
street is a wide one. Staff measured the width as 38 feet from curb to curb. Staff suggested that a sidewalk built in
the right -of -way on one side of Moubry Lane would help reduce the width. VDOT noted that a planting strip
(minimum 2.5 feet in width) would need to be provided between the new sidewalk and the street. The total
reduction in street width will be approximately 8 feet. When cars are parked onstreet, that will further reduce the
"speedway" appearance of Moubry Lane. The applicant has responded to staff and VDOT requests in Proffer 3
below, which provides for the requested improvements.
Phasing:
The applicant has indicated on the cover sheet and application plan that three phases are contemplated. In a letter
dated June 20, 2011, the applicant states that:
The Estes Park Project includes three construction phases. All phases are shown on the site plan sheet of the
application plan. Phase 1 includes lots 1 -20, 26 & 27, and 38 -47 and associated infrastructure. Temporary turn-
arounds will be provided as necessary with Phase 1. Phase 2 covers the remaining of the lots and
infrastructure on site. Phase 3 covers off -site improvements to the Forest Ridge Neighborhood along Moubry
Lane.
Staff has requested that the phasing information now included on the cover sheet of the application plan be
expanded to include the information in the paragraph above. Since the letter of June 20 will not be adopted as part
of the rezoning, the information needs to be on the approved plan.
PROFFERS
Attachment D contains the current draft proffers. Some changes in the wording relating to the form of the proffer
have been requested and others are expected prior to the Board of Supervisors' public hearing. Individual proffers
are described below:
Proffer 1: Worth Crossing Connection.
The applicant proposes to construct the entrance road into the proposed development, as shown on the application
plan. This proffer is necessary to ensure that the entrance is constructed as shown on the application plan because
much of the entrance road would be located on a parcel not included in this rezoning application.
Staff supports the inclusion of this proffer. It has been recently revised, so staff is awaiting comments from the
County Attorney on the precise wording.
Proffer 2: Moubry Lane Sidewalk.
The applicant has agreed to construct a sidewalk, planting strip, and associated drainage facilities within the
existing right -of -way along the east side of Moubry Lane. The cost of these improvements would be deducted from
the funds received from the cash proffer for capital improvements. These improvements will provide two important
benefits. First, Forest Ridge residents will have a safer place to walk once the cul -de -sac is removed and Moubry
Lane becomes a through street. The planting strip will also provide a small buffer between the sidewalk and the
street, as well as a location for residents' mailboxes.
The second benefit is that the resulting street will be narrower, thereby providing a form of traffic calming. When
residents and their guests park along the street, the parked cars will increase the traffic calming effect of the
narrower street.
Staff believes this is an excellent way to deal with the increase of traffic on the Moubry Lane once it becomes a
through street and also supports funding these improvements through the cash proffer for capital improvements
funds.
Proffer 3: Cash Proffer for Capital Improvements Projects.
At the beginning of this proffer, the applicant explains the method used to calculate the number of units on which
the applicant is willing to pay a cash proffer for capital improvements. The applicant subtracted the total number of
units, including bonus units, that could be built under the current R -1, Residential zoning (18) from the total number
of proposed units (68). The result is 50 units on which the applicant is proffering cash for capital improvements.
Staff notes that the County's Cash Proffer Policy states, "[a] rezoning's impact on public facilities will be evaluated
based on the gross number of proposed dwelling units." To determine the number of units, the policy does, "[n]ot
give credits for those dwelling units permitted under existing zoning regulations (except as provided in sections
C(6)(c) and (e))...."
Sections C(6)(c) and (e) refer to credits that may be applicable. Section (c) states:
c. No increase or small increase in density: In rezoning applications where there is a minimal increase in
density, a credit may be given for the number of residential units allowed under the existing zoning and the
cash proffer amount will be based only on the estimated density increase resulting from the rezoning. This
credit may be allowed only for those rezoning applications where the rezoning seeks the design flexibility
allowed by the Neighborhood Model zoning district or seeks to amend a prior rezoning with no increase in
density. The credit should not be allowed if the rezoning application seeks to increase density in a
conventional, rather than a planned, zoning district.
Staff does not consider an increase from 18 by -right units to 68 units to be a minimal increase, so this credit should
not apply.
Section (e) states:
e. Substantial upgrades to design /development standards: The Board may consider development proposals
that include substantial upgrades to current design /development standards and ordinance requirements as
justification for granting a credit to the pre- existing lot yield. Pre - existing lot yields will be calculated using
average actual recorded lot yields provided the applicant has not otherwise submitted documentation indicating
higher lot yields in conformance with existing ordinances and reflective of site specific physical features.
Staff notes that the proposed development incorporates many Neighborhood Model features, but the County
generally achieves this result with other residential developments. So the fact that the proposed Estes Park
development will fulfill most of the principles does not distinguish it from other residential rezonings. Staff believes
that Estes Park should pay the full single - family detached amount for all 68 units. This would mean that for 68
single - family detached homes at $19,100 per unit, the total would be: $1,298,800, minus the credit for the Sidewalk
Expense.
The Policy also includes a potential credit for affordable units constructed as part of a development. However,
since Estes Park is proffering cash -in -lieu of affordable units, this credit would not apply.
This proffer also includes language that the "Sidewalk Expense" should be credited against the total amount the
applicant would pay under this proffer. The "Sidewalk Expense" includes construction of the sidewalk, planting
strip, and related drainage facilities on Moubry Lane. Staff believes that these improvements are essential to
provide safer pedestrian facilities for the residents of Forest Ridge and that these improvements would have to be
made by the County, if not provided by the developer. So, staff supports the inclusion of the "Sidewalk Expense"
credit in the proffers. The amount will be included in this Proffer prior to the public hearing before the Board of
Supervisors.
Proffer 4: Affordable Housing.
It is staff's understanding that, with the agreement of the County's Chief of Housing, the applicant is proffering to
provide cash in lieu of affordable units, rather than the affordable units themselves. So, the first paragraph ( "a ") of
Proffer #4 applies. The applicant proffers cash in lieu of 15% or seven (7) affordable units. However, as with Proffer
#3, this proffer is based on 50 units rather than the 68 included in the rezoning. The Affordable Housing Policy asks
for a "minimum of 15%" of the units; no credits are offered that would apply to the Estes Park rezoning. Staff
believes that all 68 units should be included in the 15% calculation, which would result in 10.2 units of affordable
housing. The Chief of Housing has indicated that, where the 15% works out to include a fraction of a unit, the cash -
in -lieu payment may use the fractional number rather than rounding the number up to 11, as would be done for
provision of actual units. Thus, 10.2 units at $21,125 per unit, would result in a proffer amount of $215,475.
The County Attorney has indicated that the standard language used in this proffer relating to "for sale" units is
being revised. The applicant has been advised that further changes in this wording may be necessary and may be
made before the proffer is reviewed by the Board of Supervisors.
Proffer 5: Moubry Lane Interconnection.
The applicant has included this proffer to clarify for the residents of Forest Ridge that the " Moubry Lane
Interconnection" will be constructed with consideration for Forest Ridge residents. The proffer states that
construction of the interconnection will not begin until the rest of the Estes Park project is nearing completion, that
Moubry Lane and the interconnection will not be used as a construction entrance, and that the cul -de -sac will be
removed at the time the interconnection is made.
Staff supports this proffer as recognition of the need to mitigate the impacts of construction of the interconnection
as much as possible.
Proffer 6: Erosion and Sediment Control.
The applicant proffers additional erosion and sediment control. Staff is comfortable with this part of the proffer.
Section b covers revegetation. The County Engineer has noted that the timeline for establishment of permanent
vegetation is now required by County ordinance, so it does not need to be proffered. Staff recommends removing
section b.
Staff also notes that the signature line for "Ruth Johnson Estes" will need to be revised to reflect that her heirs will
be signing these proffers.
WAIVERS
The applicant has applied for a Critical Slopes Waiver. The critical slopes waiver request has been reviewed.
Staff's analysis follows:
Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance:
The majority of critical slopes which need a waiver are along the stream banks on the property. (See Attachment B,
Grading Plan sheet)
Areas
Acres
Total site
12.75 acres
Critical slopes
0.27
2% of site
Critical slopes disturbed
0.1
3% of critical slopes
Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable
alternative locations:
The portion of critical slopes off the Moubry Lane cul -de -sac is exempt, and will be disturbed to make the road
connection. The other road crossings are arguably exempt, because they involve the layout of the development,
which is being reviewed with the rezoning.
Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18 -4.2:
"movement of soil and rock"
Proper slope construction, control of drainage, and vegetative stabilization will help prevent any movement of
soil. Some movement may occur over time due to natural stream bank erosion.
"excessive stormwater runoff"
Some subdivision road and rooftops will drain through this stream to a stormwater pond.
"siltation"
Inspection and bonding by the County will try to minimize siltation during construction. Proper stabilization and
maintenance will help to achieve long term stability.
"loss of aesthetic resource"
This area will be visible from the roads and houses in the neighborhood. It is not currently visible from off -site.
"septic effluent"
This neighborhood is serviced by public sewer.
Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns. These critical slopes are almost inconsequential,
and most of the disturbances are for roads and access, which could be considered exempt.
SUMMARY
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request:
1. The project would result in a neighborhood of 68 residences close to major employers expected to
add jobs in the future and within walking distance of retail and services.
2. The new development will be single - family detached homes at a density and scale compatible with
surrounding residential neighborhoods that adds another type of housing to the mix of duplexes and
townhouses now available in the immediate area.
3. The project's road network has been designed to interconnect with roads on other nearby properties
as they develop, as well as to create a road network that will serve the larger Proffit Road /Worth Crossing area.
The applicant proposes to create a second entrance by completing the interparcel connection set up
when the Forest Ridge neighborhood was developed in the 1990s. The existing cul -de -sac at the end of
Moubry Lane will be removed, the grade will be improved, and affected driveways along Moubry Lane extended
to meet the reconstructed road.
The applicant has proffered to construct a sidewalk and planting strip on one side of Moubry Lane to
provide a safer place for Forest Ridge residents to walk once Moubry Lane becomes a through street. By
narrowing the street, the sidewalk /parking strip will also serve as a form of traffic calming for the Forest Ridge
neighborhood.
The project's design preserves the main section of the stream, an environmental feature that flows
diagonally through the center of the two parcels. The stream will become an amenity in the open space area.
Approval of the Critical Slopes Waiver will enable the developer to make the most efficient use of
the property while preserving the main section of the stream.
Staff has found the following factors unfavorable to this rezoning:
1. The method used by the applicant to calculate the number of units on which the number of affordable housing
units will be provided and the number of units on which the cash proffer for capital improvements will be paid
does not follow the method stipulated in the Affordable Housing Policy or the Cash Proffer Policy of the
Comprehensive Plan.
2. The width of the streets in the proposed development will allow parking on only one side of the street; VDOT
will require that the other side be posted with "No Parking" signs, which may lead to parking conflicts when the
site is fully developed.
3. A tot lot or other type of recreational amenity has not been provided within the 25% open space.
4. Additional minor changes need to be made in the wording of the proffers and on the application plan, as listed
under Recommendation at the end of this report.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of this rezoning provided certain changes are made in the application plan and
proffers, as listed below:
1. The applicant meets the policies for affordable housing and cash proffers:
a. Affordable Housing Policy: 68 units * 15% = 10.2 units. !0.2 units * $21,125/unit = $215,475.
b. Cash Proffer Policy: 68 units * $19,100 per unit = $1,298,800, minus the Sidewalk Expense.
2. The applicant increases the width of the streets to permit parking on both sides of the streets in the
neighborhood.
3. A tot lot or other recreational amenity is added within the open space shown on the application plan.
4. The following technical changes need to be made on the application plan:
a. Lot -to -lot drainage along roads D and A will need to be addressed, per the County Engineer.
b. The sidewalk on the north side of Road C needs to be extended to intersect with Road A.
c. The Phasing information now included in Scott Collins' letter dated June 20, 2011 needs to be
added to the phasing information now included on the cover sheet of the application plan.
Staff recommends approval of the Critical Slopes Waiver.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Zoning Map Amendment:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this zoning map amendment:
Move to recommend approval of ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park with the changes in the application plan and
proffers as recommended by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this zoning map amendment:
Move to recommend denial of ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park. Should a commissioner motion to recommend
denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION — Critical Slopes Waiver:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of the critical slopes waiver:
Move to recommend approval of the Critical Slopes Waiver for ZMA 2010 - 00011, Estes Park, as
recommended by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of the critical slopes waiver:
Move to recommend denial of the Critical Slopes Waiver for ZMA 2010- 00011, Estes Park. Should a
commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
ATTACHMENT A:
ATTACHMENT B:
ATTACHMENT C:
ATTACHMENT D:
ATTACHMENT E:
ATTACHMENT F:
ATTACHMENT G:
Location Map
Application Plan, dated June 20, 2011 (five sheets)
Applicant's Project Narrative, dated February 7, 2011
VDOT Comments, dated July 15, 2011
Draft Proffers, dated August 5, 2011
ACSA Comments, dated February 11, 2011
RWSA Comments, dated February 23, 2011