Press Alt + R to read the document text or Alt + P to download or print.

No preview available

The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSDP201600011 Correspondence 2016-04-27 Rachel Falkenstein From: Ron Higgins Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 11:35 AM To: Rachel Falkenstein Subject: RE: The Vue density question Rachel: This has come up in the past, so Amelia and I talked about it and we concluded that the definition of"Residential area (gross)" in our zoning ordinance is the key, especially when read with the other definition of"Residential density (gross)". Essentially this says the land area you base the gross density on is what you start with, so the applicant does not have to subtract the area of roadway dedication for an R-6 multi-family development. Note that the bulk table in the R-6 district calls out "gross density". Another way to think about this is when internal roadways are anticipated and made public. We would allow the area of these to be counted when calculating the gross density of a multi-family project. I hope this helps. Ron Higgins From: Rachel Falkenstein Sent:Wednesday,April 27, 2016 10:45 AM To: Ron Higgins<rhiggins@albemarle.org> Subject:The Vue density question Ron, I have told the applicant for the Vue that they must subtract the area of the roadway dedication on their property proposed for the West Glen project from their acreage when calculating density.They are questioning my comment so I would love it if zoning could weigh in on this. The question is this: when we know a road is planned by another private developer which will remove acreage available for development for The Vue, should this be subtracted from their acreage when calculating density? I found this section which may apply, but is unclear to me if this is meant to refer to land retroactively taken for a road, after a development is constructed. Does it apply when we know ahead of time that the road is coming, and the development in question is not yet approved or built? 2.1.4 REDUCTION OF LOTS BELOW MINIMUM PROHIBITED The size,frontage and width of any lot of record existing on the effective date of this chapter shall not be reduced below the minimum requirements of the zoning district in which the lot is located and section 4 of this chapter except as the result of the dedication of land to public use or the exercise of eminent domain by a public entity.Any lot created after the effective date of this chapter shall satisfy at least the minimum requirements of this chapter,except for lots created for use by a public entity to the extent that the public use may be justifiable under the powers of eminent domain. (Amended 9-9-92, 12-2-09) Rachel Falkenstein,AICP Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph:434.296.5832 ext. 3272 1 Rachel Falkenstein From: Ann Mallek Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 12:32 AM To: Rachel Falkenstein Cc: Jennie More; Greg Kamptner Subject: RE: The Vue Rachel, I heard this evening that the representatives of fire and vdot will not be present at the SRC tomorrow. If this is the case, please schedule another gathering at which the neighbors can hear the discussions of these individuals on the plans. We can meet after the SRC to address any of these questions which are not part of the review tomorrow.Some are more explanation of policy questions. I also learned from another project that there was no parking on interior roads of their project permitted. Consistency would require that the multitudes of right angled parking all backing out onto interior streets in this project would be unacceptable. Right angle parking was removed from Old Trail in recent plans, thus drastically reducing the available parking locations. I do hope changees will be required for this project. Also with well over fifty units, I understood that two entrances are required. I only see one and located at a horrible part of the hill on Blue ridge. Continuation of the existing grid system on the west side of Crozet ave would provide thru streets with side streets for the buildings.This would remove the right angle parking on the major connectors, where people from other neighborhoods will be traveling through to get to work, creating conflicts on the streets. From what I can understand on the plans, there is a deep, 10 foot cut down right the west side of Blue Ridge, perhaps to generate fill to be moved to create the road over the creek at West Glen. Why is this cut made? What are the rules of removal of soil when it is not needed? I am confused and concerned about the property line adjustment which seems to have transferred acres of unbuildable land onto the Vue property.This has further over-extended the density squashed onto this lot.This seems to be manipulation of the county intent and a detriment to the community. Infill is supposed to be considerate of the character of the surrounding neighborhood. Homes along Blue Ridge Ave are over 100 years old.The total destruction of all the trees and the obliteration of any topography seems egregious. You are entrusted to be the neighbor's advocate and protector of the rules. I appreciate the effort to keep utilities out of the greenways and stream buffers. I request that it be required. Doing otherwise obliterates the buffer if all the vegetation is destroyed by trenching, and ignores the intent and requirement of the ordinance. The community is paying high costs for stormwater control and cannot at the same time be allowing or encouraging damage to natural stormwater control features. I do not expect these rambling questions to be answered Thursday at SRC. I may need to discuss several with Greg Kamptner. Thank you for your diligence.The high density and the multiple projects all within a mile of each other has raised the concerns of the community to fever pitch. More than 400 units on the table right now. 1 From: Rachel Falkenstein<rfalkens ein@albemarle.org> Date: 4/5/2016 9:36 AM (GMT-05:00) To: Jennie More<jmoregalbemarle.org>, Ann Mallek<amallek a,albemarle.org> Subject: The Vue Jennie and Ann, I have completed my review on The Vue and am writing up comments to send out today. I will share these when they are complete. I wanted to follow up to see if you still want to meet to discuss this project in more detail?We have SRC on Thursday as well, but if you are interested in sitting down to look at the project aside from SRC, I am happy to do so. Jennie, I also wanted to check in to see if you had any comments to share from neighbors or if you just plan on sharing these Thursday at the meeting. Thanks, Rachel Rachel Falkenstein,AICP Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph:434.296.5832 ext. 3272 3 Rachel Falkenstein From: Rachel Falkenstein Sent: Wednesday, April 27, 2016 12:14 PM To: 'Danny Shea' Cc: 'angelagshea@gmail.com'; Ann Mallek Subject: RE: The Vue Attachments: SDP2016-11 The Vue- Initial Approval Ltr 4-22-2016.pdf Hi Danny, Yes the approval letter did go out on Friday. I have attached a copy and it is also available at this link.The link provides access to all of the review comments and other documents associated with this project. Everything is public information. Our Zoning Ordinance requires that, "The agent shall act on the initial site plan within sixty(60) days after the date the plan was officially submitted." Since I have received written comments from VDOT and Fire/Rescue, I was obligated to take an action on the plan.The way our process for site plan review works is that an applicant will submit an initial site plan and reviewers provide comments of items that will need to be addressed on the final site plan. Unless there are any major red flags on the initial, such as a use being proposed that is not allowed, or something that will cause a significant redesign of the site, then our policy is to grant approval with conditions. Review comments on the initial become conditions that need to be addressed prior to final site plan approval. The applicant still has a number of approvals that need to happen before he can begin construction. As I mentioned above,they will need approval of a final site plan,which unlike an initial plan, is not limited to a 60 day review timeline. Reviewers will have 60 days to provide a first round of comments but the applicant will not get final approval until all conditions/requirements are met. Sometimes this takes multiple resubmittals until all the reviewers can sign off on the final plan.The applicant will also need an approved Water Protection Ordinance (WPO) plan which includes the stormwater management and erosion sediment control plans. And once he has WPO approval and final site plan approval he will also need approved building permits before construction can begin. So as you can see, our review of this project is just beginning, and the initial site plan is just our first look at what is being proposed.The applicant has a lot of work to do to address the dozens of comments provided by reviewers with the initial plans. Since VDOT/Fire Rescue were not at the SRC meeting,today's meeting will provide an opportunity for the applicant and citizens to ask questions of these reviewers about their requirements for the project.Just because initial approval already has been granted, does not imply that reviewers are done reviewing the plans or that they can't provide additional comments with the final site plan. This property has been zoned R-6 since at least 1980.As to the exact date and origins of R-6 zoning on this property, I am not sure. Our history files before 1980 are not as thorough. R-6 allows up to 6 units per acre, either spread out or clustered in a smaller area,with the rest of the site used as open space. While I understand your concerns, I am only able to enforce the County's ordinances on by-right developments. I have no leverage to require additional design features or changes to the proposed development beyond what is authorized by the ordinance. The County does not compensate neighbors of by-right developments. See you this afternoon. Thanks, Rachel 1 From: Danny Shea [mailto:danny@redlightmanagement.com] Sent:Wednesday,April 27, 2016 10:37 AM To: Rachel Falkenstein<rfalkenstein@albemarle.org>;Ann Mallek<amallek@albemarle.org> Cc:Angela Shea <angelagshea@gmail.com> Subject: Re:The Vue Hi Rachel, Here we are. I'm not really looking forward to this meeting today. You mentioned an approval letter going out last Friday. Did it go out? Is it publicly available? If so, It really seems premature without current residents being able to voice concerns to and get explanation from VDOT and Fire/rescue. I've attached a couple photos that might help demonstrate how dangerous Blue Ridge Ave is currently with the morning school bus or folks working on the property. Try driving around either of them safely. I do not think the county has scrutinized this plan nearly enough and cannot believe there isn't more that can be done to vet it with common sense, not to mention the legality and adherence to code. If this clears, does it at the expense of the glen? Is the "unbuildable" property they exploit to over develop this site forever locked? Or can the glen still work out a way to utilize it once more(for another radically ill conceived project)? I would still appreciate being walked through the math that allows for 126 units in such a small area. Is the entire connected property 21 acres? (21x6). How/why is this area zoned R6 anyway? How long has that been the case? How does "by right" benefit Crozet anywhere? It completely undermines the master plan and thoughtful grounded development. It is my hope that we are still in a place where there can be dialog that can actually advise on the scope of this project. My fear is we are just going to be sat down and told to take our medicine by disingenuous greedy developers... Without any consideration for our concerns. Can we as property owners be compensated for the diminished financial value we can expect with an approved plan? We are counting on you as stewards of the The town and county to at the very least be impartial, reasonable and thorough here. For better or worse, I suppose we will find out this afternoon. Thanks Danny ® Danny Shea Event Promotions and Booking Starr Hill Presents 455 2nd Street SE / Suite 400/Charlottesville,VA 22902 danny@redlightmanagement.com 2 434 245-4948 n Apr 20, 2016, at 11:05 AM, Danny Shea<danny@redlightmanagement.com>wrote: Hi Rachel, Thanks for getting back to me, however I am getting the sense no one is advocating for the community or common sense here. We get a 1 week notice for a meeting intended for us to get clarity on Vdot & Fire? The initial meeting really should have been rescheduled till these important representatives were available. Sounds like this is "divide and conquer" in reverse, already getting ramrodded through with conditional approval set. This process seems awfully rushed considering the scope and impact it presents. What good is this volume of market rate apartments bringing to push this through so quickly? Not to mention the conflated interests with the Glen over reaching zoning density loopholes. The concerns are not minor or exclusively micro to residents like myself. Are you saying this current plan does not require a traffic study(!) adding 126 units on this little road on a steep pitch? How is this possible and when would a study expire? Have you ever been to the site? When we met with you, it sounded like you thought Blue Ridge Ave. dead ended at the railroad tracks. Will they have a "no left turn" sign at their entrance? The impact will be greater than what has been presented. Referring to approval with a "when" instead of an "if' is very discouraging. If the plan is basically able to move forward as is, the requirements are insufficient. This is clearly inappropriate use of this property. It would negatively impact reasonable development in areas like the lumber mill, crucial to the future of Crozet. The zoning laws are clearly upside down and no one seems to be doing anything about it. By right will be the downfall any good intention or effectiveness of a "master plan." The board is being sold a false bill of goods with what appears to be a rubber stamp here. So I will do what I can to be there next Wednesday but I'm struggling to understand what point it there is. Really getting the feeling the board, like the developer would prefer we simply stand down. I would certainly love to be proven otherwise. Thanks again for your reply and correspondence. Danny Shea On Apr 19, 2016, at 11:09 AM, Rachel Falkenstein<rfalkenstein@a,albemarle.org>wrote: Hi Danny, Sorry it has taken me a few days to get back to you. I have been waiting to hear back from VDOT on when we can schedule another time to meet. I have finally been able to 3 schedule a meeting four 4/27 at 1:00pm in Room 246 (this is around the corner and down the hallway from where we met last).The purpose of this meeting will be for the applicant and neighbors to hear from VDOT and Fire/Rescue about the requirements for this project. I know there were some unanswered questions last time from citizens,so the hope is that everyone has a clear understanding of the requirements after this meeting. Could you please help spread the word to your neighbors about the meeting on 4/27? We will not be mailing out notices for this meeting. I have also informed Jennie More and Ann Mallek about the meeting so they can help spread the word as well. Regarding your question about road names,this is for addressing purposes for E911. They are not considered actual roads, rather travelways within parking lots. Last Friday the applicant forwarded the traffic study they did in 2014.You can see a copy of it here, titled "study 2014-11-19." I have also shared this with VDOT and engineering staff; however, I should point out a traffic study was not required by VDOT or the county, so it is for informational purposes only. The next step on this project is for me to issue an action letter.The action letter is required within 60 days of the submittal date and due this Friday.The action letter will be approval with conditions, and the conditions will be similar to the comments we sent to the applicant prior to the SRC meeting. The applicant will have up to 1 year from the date of approval of the initial plan to submit a final site plan and staff will review it against the conditions of approval as well as the requirements for final site plans. Once the final site plan is approved the applicant can move forward with applying for building permits. Let me know if you have additional questions.Thanks. Rachel Falkenstein,AICP Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph:434.296.5832 ext. 3272 From: Danny Shea [mailto:danny@redlightmanagement.com] Sent:Tuesday,April 19, 2016 7:50 AM To: Rachel Falkenstein<rfalkenstein@albemarle.org> Subject: Re:The Vue Hi Rachel, I was wondering if you had an update here. Can you tell me what the next step is? Thanks Danny On Apr 13, 2016, at 12:09 AM, Danny Shea<danny@redlightmanagement.com> wrote: 4 Hi Rachel, The meeting did not bring a sense of good will or co operation from our potential new neighbors. It was not encouraging. Wondering what the next step is. Seems there were several significant issues raised that need to be addressed by VDOT &Fire & Rescue. If this project is anywhere near getting approval, I feel strongly that the surrounding residents deserve explanations in regard to public safety to property values, not to mention the impact on well conceived future development. There were comments about naming new roads, but there are no new roads, only elongated parking lots. How can this be allowed? Speaking of roads, I would really be interested in understanding the how road &traffic studies have been conducted &recorded. I would hope there was a traffic study including Blue Ridge Ave, McComb St. & Carter St in it's relation to the flow of Jarman's Gap as they will all be impacted greatly if this project moves forward. However if the result was acceptance of their plan (PHA's previous plan), maybe I hope these considerations were skipped & can be reconsidered. As William Park clouded the direct and indirect negative impact to our community,he lectured to us that infrastructure was necessary for placement of high density development as a justification. The irony is, Blue Ridge Ave is clearly lacking the infrastructure needed to support the population, traffic &impact The Vue would bring. Any required improvement to Blue Ridge Ave needs to be applied to the entire road (& likely all 3 roads), not just the area directly facing the proposed compound. Please let me know where we go next here&when we can meet with VDOT & Fire/rescue. I would would request & strongly recommend a meeting on site & walking around the neighborhood. I do believe an objective observer would clearly see how"The Vue" is not checking the boxes needed to make any sense here. Thanks Danny Shea On Apr 6, 2016, at 9:17 PM, Danny Shea <danny@a redlightmanagement.com>wrote: Hi Rachel, 5 Thanks for meeting with us today. it was nice to meet you as well. I am sure you deal with emotional folks wanting you to do things beyond your power or mission often. With development there will always be tension. I do appreciate your time &willingness to listen to me rant. We understand this property cant stay open & untouched this close to "downtown" I do hope this plan can be scrapped altogether&we can find a way to extend our neighborhood instead of anything as inappropriate as this mess. We are working on being 20 year residents in Crozet &yes this is on our doorstep. However, I see this would be a real shame for everyone in Crozet. It would hinder and undermine reasonable and necessary development downtown. Hopeful common sense will prevail or we might as well bulldoze the whole neighborhood. Thanks Danny From: Rachel Falkenstein <rfalkenstein©albemarle.org> Subject: RE: The Vue Date: April 6, 2016 at 12:39:15 PM EDT To: Danny Shea <danny©redlightmanagement.co m> Danny, Nice to meet you and your family today. Reviewer comments for The Vue are attached. Original Message From: Danny Shea [mailto:danny cgi,redlightmanagement. 6 Ecom] ,400- Sent: Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2016 10:43 AM To: Rachel Falkenstein <rfalkensteinAalbemarle.org> Subject: Re: The Vue Hi. I'm running a few minutes behind. Sorry. Can you tell me where your office is in the county building? Thanks On Apr 5, 2016, at 8:53 AM, Rachel Falkenstein <rfalkenstein@albem arle.org>wrote: Mr. Shea, Thank you for your comments. I would be happy to meet with you to discuss this project. I am available any time before 1pm on Wednesday. Would you like to meet at 11:00am? Thanks. Rachel Falkenstein, AICP Senior Planner Albemarle County Community Development ph: 434.296.5832 ext. 3272 Original Message From: Danny Shea [mailto:danny@redlig htmanagement.com] Sent: Monday, April 04, 2016 5:15 PM 7 To: Rachel Falkenstein <rfalkenstein@albem arle.org> Subject: The Vue Hello Ms. Falkenstein, I am a resident/homeowner of Crozet for 17 years with my Family. Although this town has seen pretty substantial changes. we love it here. We received your letter about the Vue development& although it will be difficult, I plan to be at the meeting Thursday morning. From what I am hearing around town, I am very concerned of the scope of this project in regards to the density, placement & impact to the immediate neighborhood as well as the common good of the broader community. I do hope there will be room for common sense as plans are up for approval. I appreciate your reaching out & offering to let us have a look at the plans ahead of time. Wondering if it would still be possible to set up an appointment tomorrow. Sometime between 11AM-3PM would be great. I would very much like to go into the meeting informed &have a better handle on the specifics. Please let me know what is possible &if you could remind me where I would go. Thank you Daniel Shea <SDP2016-11 The Vue Initial Site Plan Comments.pdf> <Fire Rescue comments.pdf> 9 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 Phone 434 296-5832 Fax 434 9724126 December 21, 2015 Crozet Development Solutions, LLC clo Mr. Mark Watson, Director of Project Development Piedmont Housing Alliance 1215 East Market Street, Suite B Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SP1 990-103 Orchard Acres (Crozet Crossing Subdivision) TMP055CO-03-00-OOOAO Condition #2 Interpretation (Clarification of "development") Dear Mr. Watson: The Board of Supervisors approved SP1 990-103 with conditions on June 19, 1991. Condition #2 states, in part, "No development of residue property or access to adjacent properties is allowed until second access is provided to Orchard Drive." You have asked for a clarification of the meaning of Condition #2, relative to a Boundary Line Adjustment (BLA). I have consulted with zoning staff and the Deputy County Attorney, the minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and the June 19, 1991 Board of Supervisors' meeting held on this application, and reviewed the approval letter for SPI 990-103 of July 1, 1991. The condition is not triggered since the residue is not being developed or providing access to adjacent properties with the BLA. While a BLA is a type of "subdivision", it is not necessarily "development". The special permit condition runs with the land, so the sale of that portion of the residue of TMP55C-03-A to the adjacent property owners of TMP56-115 does not release it from the conditions of SP1 990-103. Any actual physical development of the residue resulting in the generation of any traffic using the stream crossing would require the second access. In addition, any plan that allows the new development on "adjacent property" TMP56-115 to use the stream crossing that was the subject of SP 1990-103 would require the second access. This does not prevent the acreage from the residue that was the subject of the BLA from being counted for density purposes without triggering the SPI 990-103 second access condition #2. Please cont you h questions. Sinc ely, R L. iggms, Alii Chief of Zoning/Deputy Zoning Administrator Cc: Mr. Maynard Sipe, Attorney at Law Mr. Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney, Albemarle County