HomeMy WebLinkAboutZMA201600003 Staff Report 2016-04-26 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Staff: Megan Yaniglos
Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission Public Hearing: April 26, Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: TBD
2016
Owner: Barracks Heights LLC Applicant: Vito Cetta
Acreage: Approximately 3.55 acres Rezone from: No change in zoning proposed.
Applicant proposes to reduce cash proffer amounts
approved with ZMA2015-005 and ZMA2012-003.
TMP: 06000000006500; 060L0000501900; By-right use: NMD with up to 56 dwelling units
060L0000502000; 060L0000502100;
060L0000502200; 060L0000502300;
060L0000502400; 060L0000502500;
060L0000502600; 060L0000502700;
060L0000502800; 060L0000502900;
060L0000503000; 060L0000503100;
060L0000503200; 060L0000503300;
060L0000503400; 060L0000503500;
060L0000503600; 060L0000503700;
060L0000503800; 060L0004A00400;
060L0004A00500; 060L0004A00600
Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proffers: Yes
Proposal: Request to reduce cash proffer amounts Requested#of Dwelling Units: no change;
as follows, single family detached: $4,918; single Maximum of 56 units allowed per previous ZMA.
family attached: $3,845
DA (Development Area): Southern and Western Comp. Plan Designation: Neighborhood Density
Neighborhoods. Residential- residential (3-6 units/acre); supporting
uses such as religious institutions, schools, and other
small-scale non-residential uses in Neighborhood 7 in
the Western Urban Neighborhood.
Character of Property: Contains an historic single Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential uses:
family residence and associated outbuildings. The single family, senior living, and multifamily. Canterbury
property is currently under construction in Hills, Hessian Hills, the Colonnades, Barracks West.
accordance with the approved site plan.
Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable:
1. The applicant's requested cash proffer 1. The Planning Commission has not completed
amounts would be consistent with the current its review of the Cash Proffer Policy, as
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) and requested by the Board of Supervisors;
Capital Needs Assessment(CNA) and would however, the applicant's proffered new
be consistent with the amounts amounts based on the current CIP and CNA
recommended by the Fiscal Impact Advisory are consistent with State law.
Committee (FIAC). 2. The cash proffered by the applicant and
2. Acceptance of the proffered amounts is accepted by the Board when the property was
consistent with the County's Cash Proffer originally rezoned was consistent with the cash
Policy which sets a maximum amount but no proffer policy and was a reasonable condition
minimum amount. intended to address the impacts from the
rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment, with the revised proffers
submitted by the applicant.
ZMA 2016-00003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission April 26, 2016
Page 1
STAFF PERSON: Megan Yaniglos
PLANNING COMMISSION: April 26, 2016
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TBD
ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
PETITION
PROJECT: ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 06000000006500; 060L0000501900; 060L0000502000; 060L0000502100;
060L0000502200; 060L0000502300; 060L0000502400; 060L0000502500; 060L0000502600;
060L0000502700; 060L0000502800; 060L0000502900; 060L0000503000; 060L0000503100;
060L0000503200; 060L0000503300; 060L0000503400; 060L0000503500; 060L0000503600;
060L0000503700; 060L0000503800; 060L0004A00400; 060L0004A00500; 060L0004A00600
LOCATION: Located on Barracks Road (Route 654) across from its intersection with
Georgetown Road (Route 656). 225 Out of Bounds Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901.
PROPOSAL: Reduce cash proffer amount from ZMA201500005.
PETITION: Request to amend proffers on property zoned NMD Neighborhood Model District -
residential (3— 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses.
OVERLAY DISTRICT: Entrance Corridor (EC); Airport Impact Area (AIA)
PROFFERS: YES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Neighborhood Density Residential- residential (3-6 units/acre);
supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, and other small-scale non-residential
uses in Neighborhood 7 of the Western Urban Neighborhood.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The site is located on Barracks Road, across from its intersection with Georgetown Road
(Attachment A). The property contains an historic single family residence, which will remain,
along with some outbuildings. The property has some trees in the area close to Barracks Road
along with a three board fence, but is mainly open grass field. The back portion of the property
is heavily wooded. The grade changes from Barracks Road up in elevation where the existing
house sits, and then slopes down in the back. Uses adjacent to the site include residential
single family (Canterbury Hills), multi-family (Hessian Hills), and senior living (The Colonnades).
The Huntwood (Townhouses) development is located across from this site on Barracks Road.
Barracks West Apartments are 0.2 miles west of the property.
SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL
In 2013 these parcels were rezoned from R-1 to NMD (ZMA2012-003) allowing for a maximum
of 56 attached and detached residential units. In 2015 (ZMA2015-005) the proffers were
amended to allow an additional housing type to be offered for the affordable units. At the time
original rezoning and during the subsequent amendment the applicant proffered cash proffers
for the residential units in the following amounts:
$20,460.51 for each single family detached unit
$13,913.18 for each single family attached or townhouse unit
The applicant requests a change in the cash proffer amounts as follows:
$4,918.00 for each single family detached unit
$3,845.00 for each single family attached or townhouse unit
ZMA 2016-00003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission April 26, 2016
Page 2
Because the only requested change to the zoning at this time is a reduction of the cash proffer,
analysis in this report is limited to that topic only. A link to the original and amended zoning can
be found in Attachments B and C.
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST
The applicant has stated he believes it is not financially feasible to pay the higher cash proffer
amounts for this development. The applicant also said the State has declared that the higher
cash proffer amounts are no longer lawful.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY
• ZMA2012-003 Out of Bounds- On December 11, 2013, the Board of Supervisors
approved the rezoning from Residential — R-1 to Neighborhood Model District— NMD in
accordance with the Application Plan, Code of Development, and proffers.
• ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds- On September 2, 2015, the Board of Supervisors
approved an amendment to the proffers to allow an additional unit type to be offered for
the affordable housing proffer.
• SDP2014-036 Out of Bounds- Final Site Plan- approved October 6, 2014.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The property is designated Neighborhood Density Residential within the Southern and Western
Neighborhoods Master Plan, which allows residential uses at a density of up to 6 units/acre,
with supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, and other small-scale non-
residential uses. The applicant is not proposing any changes to the land use with this request.
Strategy 1 c of the Growth Management Chapter recommends that the County continue to
recognize the shared responsibility between the County and new development to pay for
infrastructure and improvements to the Development Areas to address the impacts of new
development.
Strategy 5d of the Development Areas Chapter of the Comprehensive Plan calls for a review of
the Cash Proffer Policy to address its effects on density.
In September 2014, the Board of Supervisors directed the Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee
(FIAC) to provide advice and recommendations to the Planning Commission and the Board of
Supervisors on revisions to the credit provisions and the per unit cash proffer amounts of the
Cash Proffer Policy. FIAC made its recommendation to the Board and Commission in July 2015
including a reduction in cash proffers to the following amounts:
$4,918.00 for each single family detached unit and
$3,845.00 for each sing family attached or townhouse.
The recommended reductions were based on the FY 2015-2016 County capital improvements
program (CIP, which covers future years 1-5) and capital needs assessment (CNA, which
covers future years 6-10)). The CIP and CNA considered have a reduced number of projects
proposing new capital improvements or projects that would expand the capacity of existing
facilities; projects that would merely maintain existing facilities without expanding capacity were
not considered. The change in scope is based on a change in State law that became effective
July 1, 2013. Virginia Code § 15.2-2303.2(D) provides:
ZMA 2016-00003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission April 26, 2016
Page 3
Notwithstanding any provision of this section or any other provision of law,
general or special, no cash payment proffered pursuant to § 15.2-2298, 15.2-
2303, 04 15.2-2303.1 shall be used for any capital improvement to an existing
facility, such as a renovation or technology upgrade, that does not expand the
capacity of such facility or for any operating expense of any existing facility such
as ordinary maintenance or repair.
The Planning Commission studied the FIAC recommendation in September and October 2015
and asked for additional information. The additional information was provided and the Planning
Commission conducted a public hearing January 26, 2015 (Attachment E) The Commission
deferred action on the CPA request, asking FIAC for some additional analysis on impacts to
public facilities specific to a proposed plan of development. The proposed plan of development
used for the analysis was Spring Hill Village (ZMA201300017), a rezoning which was approved
October 8, 2014. The additional analysis using the CRIM model, provided with this staff report
as Attachment F, did not show a significant difference in the per unit fiscal impact or the total
amount of funds potentially contributed to address impacts of the development. On February
23, 2016, the Planning Commission reviewed a request for a proffer reduction for Spring Hill
Village, without the benefit of information provided as Attachment F. The Commission did not
recommend approval of the applicant's request to reduce proffers.
While the Board has not adopted a lower cash proffer amount, cash proffers requested by the
applicant for Out of Bounds are consistent with the amounts recommended by FIAC. Though it
has been past practice in the County for applicants to proffer the maximum amounts, staff finds
the new amounts also would be reasonable in light of the State Code change and the current
CIP and CNA.
DISCUSSION
This request for Out of Bounds is essentially the same as the Spring Hill Village proffer
reduction request. Based on the results of the CRIM Model run for Spring Hill Village, staff does
not believe that a CRIM Model run of this proposal will result in significantly different amounts
than the revised FIAC cash proffer amounts.
The cash proffer amounts recommended by FIAC provide a reasonable benchmark for a
maximum cash proffer per residential unit under the current CIP and CNA. However, that does
not mean that the per unit amount proffered by the applicant and accepted by the Board when
the property was originally rezoned was inconsistent with the cash proffer policy or was anything
other than a reasonable condition intended to address the impacts from the rezoning.
Staff will be bringing a comprehensive plan amendment recommendation to the Planning
Commission in May and to the Board of Supervisors in June to repeal the cash proffer policy in
light of the most recent State Code changes that will be in effect on July 1, 2016. If approved,
staff will be evaluating and establishing a new approach to calculating the impacts of
development for Planning Commission and Board consideration.
SUMMARY
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request:
1. The applicant's requested cash proffer amounts would be consistent with the current
Capital Improvements Program (CIP) and Capital Needs Assessment (CNA) and would
be consistent with the amounts recommended by the Fiscal Impact Advisory Committee
(FIAC).
ZMA 2016-00003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission April 26, 2016
Page 4
2. Acceptance of the proffered amounts is consistent with the County's Cash Proffer Policy
which sets a maximum amount but no minimum amount.
Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request:
1. The Planning Commission has not completed its review of the Cash Proffer Policy, as
requested by the Board of Supervisors; however, the applicant's proffered new amounts
based on the current CIP and CNA are consistent with State law.
2. The cash proffered by the applicant and accepted by the Board when the property was
originally rezoned was consistent with the cash proffer policy and was a reasonable
condition intended to address the impacts from the rezoning.
RECOMMENDATIONS
In light of the re-evaluation of the maximum cash proffer amount by FIAC, which is based on the
current CIP and CNA, staff must recommend approval of this rezoning amendment
ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment, with the revised proffers submitted by the
applicant.
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION —ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this zoning map
amendment:
Move to recommend approval of ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment, with
the revised proffers submitted by the applicant.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this zoning map
amendment:
Move to recommend denial of ZMA201600003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment with
reasons for denial. Should a commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should
state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
Attachments
A— Location Map
B —ZMA201200003 staff report and attachments
C—ZMA201500005 staff report and attachments
D— Revised proffers
E —CPA2015-02 FIAC executive summary 1/26/16
F— Memo from Steven Allshouse, Manager of Economic Analysis and Forecasting dated March
31, 2016
ZMA 2016-00003 Out of Bounds Proffer Amendment
Planning Commission April 26, 2016
Page 5
Attachment A
14411ppt ,, „:„.,,
4(116 '' 'B ' '
,it
lik' 0,4 0
E C bate
m W .2 x'�til, t
apo o.4„,®OpMC 4
)''''>''
rr.y
LL
ON
\D/
N
p oT,ar .0 a a ohq o
,
mm6�0 o o \to f0 1'NNoD0E1
to
40 O O \\NM 6 ,0pW O'
0/
c o0 0 AQ 0 �WOC�, rd o09 0t0 co 9
c0 t�❑ I
Lu 0
co co
,c.)(3',7\. 0
/11
to
o
OM OW ^ O�� O TO 0 N r S�44...„., N cr ' "rs" M/O r
to
t
` N
�y
cc 0
OJ ❑ \O0 p O O9-7
. NN ,D NQY ,p Y v Q p N
��t0N / N
0LLN .
ti oA NM cm O m� Oo 0 t0JNMQ 07 & M' �� d NA
to
U.
et o Np J
' y
MIOCj' ` ° N.OL• LS� O OO�.N
O- { 1 O /''M* N S+ fJ‘JC,A N fpE5OOI r O _ „ t0O r O. $. ,C NN N t
4.
•
, �6, ^ , I vYL
mm \' riiS QOI , i J N >u7
ID
LL E
0.1
uo
44 N
n
< /
•
'♦ ) UN fir . ,, 0, $ LLco ,� �y )� < , o,,
/
•
40
CD,
>o
LLco / a'
e.,/,/ N N O
.L,„
..yo..
;009 71 to m
N 8 g
Attachment C
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: ZMA 201500005 Out of Bounds Staff: Megan Yaniglos, Principal Planner
Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: To Be
July 14, 2015 Determined
Owners: Barrack Heights, LLC Applicant: Vito Cetta; Justin Shimp, P.E. of Shimp
Engineering, P.C.
Acreage: 9.42 acres Rezone from: NMD, Neighborhood Model District
with proffers to NMD with amended proffers
TMP: 06000000006500 By-right use: NMD, Neighborhood Model District
Location: Located on Barracks Road (Route 654)
across from its intersection with Georgetown Road
(Route 656). 225 Out of Bounds Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. (Attachment A)
Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proffers: Yes
Proposal:Amend the proffers, application plan, and Requested#of Dwelling Units: 56
code of development for approved ZMA201200003
Out of Bounds. Additionally, a sidewalk and planting
strip modification is requested. No change to
maximum allowed density is proposed.
DA(Development Area): Western Urban Comprehensive Plan Designation: Neighborhood
Neighborhoods Density Residential—Residential (3-6 units/acre);
supporting uses such as places of worship, schools,
public and institutional uses and small-scale
neighborhood serving retail and commercial.
Character of Property: Contains an historic single Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential uses:
family residence and associated outbuildings. The single family, senior living, and multifamily.
property is currently under construction in Canterbury Hills, Hessian Hills, the Colonnades,
accordance with the approved site plan. Barracks West.
Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable:
1. This rezoning request will not change the 1. None identified.
intent of the original rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA201200008 inclusive of revised proffers. If the
Planning Commission recommends approval of the rezoning request, Staff can recommend approval of the
following modifications:
1. Variation or Exception of the planting strip requirement under§ 14-422 (F)with conditions
1 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
STAFF PERSON: Megan Yaniglos
PLANNING COMMISSION: July 14, 2015
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: To Be Determined
ZMA 201500005 Out of Bounds
PETITION
PROJECT: ZMA201500005 Out of Bounds
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 06000000006500
LOCATION: Located on Barracks Road (Route 654) across from its intersection with Georgetown Road
(Route 656). 225 Out of Bounds Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901.
PROPOSAL: To amend the proffers, application plan, and code of development for approved
ZMA201200003 Out of Bounds. Additionally, a sidewalk and planting strip modification is requested.
No change to maximum allowed density is proposed.
PETITION: Request to amend proffers, application plan, and Code of Development for ZMA201200003
on property zoned Neighborhood Model District (NMD)which allows residential mixed with commercial,
service and industrial uses at a density of 3-34 units/acre.
OVERLAY DISTRICT: Entrance Corridor(EC); Airport Impact Area (AIA)
PROFFERS: YES
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Neighborhood Density Residential—residential (3-6 units/acre); supporting
uses such as places of worship, schools, public and institutional uses and small-scale neighborhood
serving retail and commercial in Western Urban Neighborhoods.
CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The site is located on Barracks Road, across from its intersection with Georgetown Road (Attachment
A). The property contains an historic single family residence, which will remain, along with some
outbuildings. The property has some trees in the area close to Barracks Road along with a three board
fence, but is mainly open grass field. The back portion of the property is heavily wooded. The grade
changes from Barracks Road up in elevation where the existing house sits, and then slopes down in the
back. Uses adjacent to the site include residential single family (Canterbury Hills), multi-family(Hessian
Hills), and senior living (The Colonnades). The Huntwood (Townhouses) development is located across
from this site on Barracks Road. Barracks West Apartments are 0.2 miles west of the property.
SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL
The applicant is requesting the following changes:
1. A minor change to Proffer#1-Affordable Housing to allow for sale or rent affordable
townhouse units in lieu of for rent multi-family units.
2. A minor change to Proffer#2- Residential Units to allow townhouse units in lieu of multi-
family units.
3. Minor revisions to the application plan to include:
a) On sheet 5 of 8 (Block Plan), the block areas have been updated
b) On sheet 5 of 8 (Block Plan), the minimum residential lot size and width permitted in
Block 3 has been revised to accommodate the for sale affordable townhouses
c) On sheet 6 of 8 (Code of Development), the sixth paragraph in Section VI
(Development Narrative) has been updated to match the site plan and to be
consistent with Sheet 4 of the Application Plan
d) On Sheet 6 of 8 (Code of Development), Section VII, Block 3 has been revised to
accommodate the request for affordable townhouses
2 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
e) On Sheet 6 of 8 (Code of Development), Section VIII, Green Space and Amenities,
the Open Space area calculation has been revised to match the approved site plan
f) Additional minor changes in road/building/sidewalk alignments have been provided
to match the approved site plan.
4. A request for a modification of the planting strip and sidewalk location along the existing
residence lot (#56). Detail analysis of that modification is provided below.
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST
The applicant would like to offer for sale affordable townhouse units instead of for rent multi-family
affordable units. The prior multi-family affordable units were to be two "stacked" units within one
structure (four townhouses with basement/first floor apartments)for a total of eight units. The applicant
now prefers to construct eight conventional townhouse units, each on their own lot, in lieu of the
stacked product.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY
ZMA2012-003 Out of Bounds- On December 11, 2013, the Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning
from Residential— R-1 to Neighborhood Model District— NMD in accordance with the Application Plan,
Code of Development, and proffers.
SDP2014-036 Out of Bounds- Final Site Plan- approved October 6, 2014.
DISCUSSION
This proposal allows for affordable for sale townhouse units to be built in lieu of for rent multi-family
apartments. The for rent affordable housing language remains in the proffer, which allows for flexibility
for potential qualifying residents. The Director of Housing has reviewed this request and has no
objections. Also, the adjacent neighborhood, Canterbury Hills, has been notified of this change, and is
in favor of this change.
The minor changes requested to the application plan and the code of development are necessary if the
request for the affordable housing unit type is approved (Attachment C). The only change to the open
space calculation is the size of the playground/tot lot area. This was originally shown as 4000 square
feet, and has been reduced to 2,000 square feet in order to accommodate the townhouse lots. Staff has
no concerns with these proposed changes.
Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning
district
Neighborhood Model districts are intended to provide flexibility and variety of development for
residential purposes and uses ancillary thereto. This project continues to be consistent with the intent of
the NMD, allowing for flexibility of developing different types of units within the development. The
proposed proffer amendment does not violate the intent of the Neighborhood Model Districts.
Anticipated impact on public facilities and services
The change from for rent multifamily affordable units to for sale townhouse affordable units does not
add any additional impact to public facilities and services. The number of units is remaining the same
within the development.
Anticipated impact on cultural and historic resources
None anticipated with this proffer amendment. There is no change to the lot containing the historic
single family residence with the proposal.
3 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties
None anticipated with this proffer amendment.
Public need and justification for the change
The County's Comprehensive Plan supports development in the designated development areas that is
consistent with the use, density, and form recommended in the Plan. The addition of for sale affordable
townhouse units in this portion of the County could be beneficial for County residents that qualify for
affordable housing who wish to live and work in this portion of the County.
PROFFERS
See Attachment D for the complete proffer document with proposed revisions. The following is an
analysis of the proposed proffer amendments. The portion of the original proffer subject to change is in
italics and underlined below.
Analysis of Amended Proffers
Original Proffer[Attachment B] Requested Amendment
1. Affordable Housing. The Owner shall 1. Affordable Housing. The Owner shall
provide 8 affordable housing units, in provide 8 affordable housing units, in
accordance with guidelines established accordance with guidelines established
by the Albemarle County Department by the Albemarle County Department
of Housing and approved by the of Housing and approved by the
Albemarle County Board of Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors on February 4, 2004, Supervisors on February 4, 2004,
within the Project in the form of 2-unit within the Project in the form of 8
stacked multi-family buildings townhouses. The 8 affordable
constructed on four(4) attached lots. townhouses shall consist of units 7-14,
The multi-family buildings shall be as shown on the Application Plan.
comprised of upper and lower level Each affordable unit shall be located
residential units 7/8, 9/10, 11/12, and on a single lot. Before the Owner
13/14 as shown on the Application applies for a building permit for any
Plan. Each two- unit apartment building residential unit within Block 1 of the
shall be owned by the same owner and Project, as defined in the Application
each two-unit building-shall be located Plan, the Owner shall have offered for
on a single lot. Before the Owner sale or for rent, as provided herein,
applies for a building permit for any each Affordable Housing Unit within
residential unit within Block 1 of the the Project. The Owner shall convey
Project, as defined in the Application the responsibility of constructing the
Plan, the Owner shall have offered for affordable units to the subsequent
rent, as provided herein, each owners of lots designated affordable on
Affordable Housing Unit within the the site development plans or plats.
Project. The Owner shall convey the
responsibility of constructing the A. For-Sale Affordable Units. All
affordable units to the subsequent purchasers of the for-sale
owners of lots designated affordable on Affordable Housing Units shall
the site development plans or plats. be approved by the Albemarle
2. Residential Units. There will be a County Housing Office or its
maximum of 56 dwelling units-on 52 designee. The Affordable
lots within the development. The Housing Units will be designed
existing house and adjacent garage is for households with incomes
identified on the Application Plan as a less than eighty percent(80%)
4 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
single-family detached dwelling unit. of the area median income such
Forty-seven (47) of the 56 dwelling that housing costs consisting of
units are identified on the Application principal, interest, real estate
Plan as single-family attached dwelling taxes, and homeowners
units. The remaining four(4) lots are insurance (PITI) do not exceed
identified on the Application Plan as thirty percent(30%) of the gross
having two (2) dwelling units per lot:a household income. The Owner
2-unit stacked multi-family building. shall provide the County or its
The units on these four(4) lots shall be designee a period of ninety(90)
constructed and maintained as two- days to identify and prequalify
family dwelling units as defined in the an eligible purchaser for the
Virginia Uniform Statewide Building affordable units. The ninety
Code. The Declaration of Covenants (90) day period shall commence
for Out of Bounds shall contain the upon written notice from the
following language for the 8 units: "The Owner that the unit(s) will be
multi-family/ADU units on lots 7/8, 9/10, available for sale. This notice
11/12, and 13/14 within Out of Bounds shall not be given more than
are constructed and must be sixty(60) days prior to receipt of
maintained as two-family dwelling units the Certificate of Occupancy for
as defined in the Virginia Uniform the applicable Affordable
Statewide Building Code." Housing Unit;the County or its
designee may then have thirty
(30) days within which to
provide a qualified purchaser
for such Affordable Housing
Unit. If the County or its
designee does not provide a
qualified purchaser during the
ninety(90) day period, the
Owner shall have the right to
sell the unit(s) without any
restriction on sales price or
income of the purchaser(s).
This proffer shall apply only to
the first sale of each of the for-
sale affordable units.
2. Residential Units. There will be a
maximum of 56 dwelling units the
development. The existing house and
adjacent garage is identified on the
Application Plan as a single-family
detached dwelling unit. The remaining
55 dwelling units shall be single-family
attached and/or townhouse units.
Analysis: The revisions update these proffers to allow for the townhouse unit type and eliminates the
multi-family unit type.
5 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
§ 14-422(F)VARIATION OF THE PLANTING STRIP
The applicant has requested that the sidewalks be located directly adjacent to the curb and that the
planting strips be eliminated for a 200 foot portion along the existing single family residential lot and
Georgetown Court. In modifying the requirement for planting strips, the Planning Commission is
required to consider the following:
(i) a waiver to allow a rural cross-section has been granted
An urban section has been requested.
(ii) a sidewalk waiver has been granted
A sidewalk waiver has not been requested.
(iii) reducing the size of or eliminating the planting strip promotes the goals of the
comprehensive plan, the Neighborhood Model, and the applicable neighborhood
master plan
Eliminating the planting strip, in and of itself, does not promote a goal of the
Comprehensive Plan or Neighborhood Model. During site construction it was found
that the anticipated grading in this area was inaccurate, and a 36" retaining wall is
needed even with the change of the planting strip. The planting strip and street trees
would be be provided within an easement on the backside of the sidewalk; therefore
substantially the same landscaping will be provided consistent with the
Neighborhood Model while addressing a significant site constraint.
(iv) waiving the requirement would enable a different principle of the Neighborhood
Model to be more fully achieved
This criterion is not met.
The agent or the commission may approve a request for a variation to substitute a
required improvement upon finding that because of an unusual situation, the
subdivider's substitution of a technique, design or materials of comparable quality from
that required by the applicable regulation results in an improvement that
substantially satisfies the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or
exceeding the desired effects of the requirement in the applicable regulation.
Staff Comment: Staff believes that by providing a landscape easement on the back of
the sidewalk is substantially the same as the planting strip for this short section of
Georgetown Court along the existing historic single family residential lot. Staff
recommends approval of this waiver with the condition that a six(6)foot landscape
easement be established on the back of the sidewalk.
SUMMARY
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request:
1. This rezoning request will not change the site layout or intent of the original rezoning.
Staff has identified no unfavorable factors for this request.
6 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds
Attachment C
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends approval of ZMA201500005 inclusive of revised proffers [Attachment D] and
application plan [Attachment C].
Staff recommends approval of the planting strip modification request.
ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A—Vicinity Map
ATTACHMENT B—Original Proffers dated November 18, 2013
ATTACHMENT C— Revised plan
ATTACHMENT D—Revised Proffers
ATTACHMENT E— Planting Strip Modification Request
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION—Zoning Map Amendment:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this ZMA:
Move to recommend approval of ZMA201500005 Out of Bounds subject to the proffers as
recommended by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this ZMA:
Move to recommend denial of ZMA201500005 Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner motion to
recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for recommending denial.
Planting Strip:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to approve the planting strip variation request:
Move to approve the planting strip variation request associated with ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds,with
the conditions and reasons listed by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to deny the planting strip variation:
Move to deny the planting strip variation request for ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds. Should a commissioner
motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s)for recommending denial
7 ZMA2015-005 Out of Bounds