The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZMA201000018 Review Comments Zoning Map Amendment 2011-08-03COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 August 3, 2011 Katurah Roell Piedmont Development Group 2811 Hydraulic Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: ZMA201000018 Crozet Square Third Submittal Dated 6-6-11(Suspended) Dear Katurah: Staff has reviewed your third submittal for a rezoning from HI Heavy Industrial to DCD Downtown Crozet District. This submittal was suspended from a formal review on June 14, 2011 until the traffic and stream study were submitted for review. The stream and traffic studies were submitted approximately July 7, 2011. Planning 1. Staff suggests you provide a table of allowable uses within the proposed development with notation that uses not included in the table are not allowed in the Code of Development (COD). This will be easier for applicant and the County to track once implementation occurs. 2. A table or chart describing the allowable heights per building/block will also be helpful. On page 5 of the COD, in the Block #7 uses section, what is the proposed height of the buildings in this block? How many stories are proposed? There seems to be some inconsistency with the amount of floors and the description in this section. Please clarify. 3. Each building seems to be described in the COD, but not necessarily on the plan. Staff suggests the buildings as shown on the plan be labeled with a brief description, and then if someone wants more detail they can refer to the COD for additional information. 4. In the COD on page 2, the first bullet under the uses section describes a 6-story hotel/inn that will enclose the west end of the pedestrian mall. Should this say the east end? Please clarify. 5. Pages 2 and 3 of the COD, the last sentences in the Block #3 and Block #4 descriptions could use some additional explanation. What is the intent of these sentences? Perhaps these sentences need to be expanded? 6. Page 5 of the COD in the Block #6 description describes an indoor/outdoor "community space". It would be helpful if this space were labeled on the application plan. Should this last sentence in this paragraph say conveniently located to the "existing and proposed" residential development? 7. Is Main Street a public street like Library Avenue? If yes, it should be labeled on the plan. 8. The roads need to be labeled private or public. This could be a chart in the COD. It might also be helpful if a description and intent of Library Avenue were provided in the COD. 9. Buildings on the edges/periphery of this development need to have a front and rear fagade that relates to both sides of the building in order to connect to the interior of the development and the existing community located on the exterior of the site. Proffers As previously mentioned in the March 23, 2011 staff comment letter, other commitments that would be expected with any rezoning are: 1. Proffer for 15% affordable housing, which I believe you are proposing more, but this needs to be described. 2. Cash proffer for residential uses. Affordable units would not be subject to the cash proffer. 3. Proffers related to any off site transportation improvements needed after the 527 study is done. Commitments will likely be needed for development in relation to the timing of off -site transportation improvements. 4. The need for architecture to reflect vernacular architecture in Crozet exists. This was noted with the original comments and we understand this may be a commitment you are not willing to make. 5. Please consider a commitment to honor the history of the lumberyard use at this sight. Suggestions, as indicated in the first set of comments are a local historic marker in a prominent place in the development or a display for the library. 6. As you know, we are not aware of contamination issues at this site; however, consideration should be given to having a Level 1 Environmental Impact Study done due to the use and adjacent railroad use. 7. In addition to the above previously mentioned comments, the proffers should be in the legal proffer format. 8. As mentioned in the zoning comments, there needs to be clarification regarding the allowed and non -allowed uses. It may be useful to meet with both planning and zoning staff to work through this. Current Development The following comments related to site plan issues have been provided by Bill Fritz: 1. Access to TMP56A2-1-25 should be provided near buildings 7, 9 and 10. If building 1 intends to have a drive thru this should be made clear. It appears that insufficient stacking exists with the current design to support a drive thru. 2. The porte-cochere for Building 2 makes use of an entrance with a very severe angled intersection. Limiting stacking is available. Vehicles could block the area causing backup onto the public street. Entrance Corridor The following comments related to the Entrance Corridor Guidelines have been provided by Margaret Maliszewski: 1. A row of trees is shown with the landscape buffer along the north side of Blocks 1 and 2. It is recommended that the details of the planting in the buffers along the railroad be reviewed and approved by the ARB at the site plan review stage. Planting other than the row of trees illustrated on the application plan will likely be required. A mixed, staggered planting of trees and shrubs will likely be recommended. A 15-20' planting area (rather than the 10' shown) would provide for a more effective buffer. 2. The buffer should continue along the north side of Block 3, the west side of Block 4, and the full length of the north side of Block 2. 3. The proposed development appears to be inward oriented. The elevations of buildings visible from the Three Notch'd Road and Crozet Avenue Entrance Corridors should not have a "back of building" appearance. The proposed 6-story buildings will have visibility from greater distances along the Corridors, with the potential of all sides of the buildings having visibility from some vantage point on the Corridors. Careful attention to materials, colors, details, and proportions will be required, as well as the relative scale of the buildings to each other. Zoning The following comments related to zoning issues have been provided by Francis MacCall: 1. The cover letter says that the Design Proffers and the COD refer to the Block "Bubble" Plan but it appears that they also refer to the application plan even though they say that the application plan is for information only. Clarification is needed. 2. In the COD on pages 1 and 2, staff suggests you provide a range denoting the proposed size of the pedestrian mall. The range should provide flexibility and perhaps the elimination of a variation, should the size of the pedestrian mall need to change. 3. In the COD on page 3, Block 4 references the intent of Block 3. Please clarify. 4. Page 6 of the COD, in the Design proffers section the language for the second reference to the landscape buffer adjacent to the Hilltop Road residences does not appear to match what is on the conceptual plan. 5. Also on page 6 of the COD, in the Design proffers, the uses need clarification (Not sure why the by right uses listed need to be further excluded with this proposal, the exclusions do not appear to have any explained reason. They state in block 2 that a hotel/inn will be in the block but it is crossed out in the list of by right uses. The same question stands for the special use permit uses.) 6. The Application Plan should show the points of connection to adjacent tracts to the north for future development. 7. Clarify the status of the Crozet Square connection out to Crozet Avenue. It is staffs understanding that the County now owns the property adjacent to Crozet Square and Crozet Avenue. This needs to be confirmed with the County Attorney's office since there is a need to retain this property for the "road easement". Engineering and Water Resources Please see the comments provided by Glenn Brooks on the following page. Fire/Rescue The following comment related to fire rescue issues were provided by James Barber, who recently retired: 1. Must comply with the Virginia Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Final approval is subject to field inspection and verification. VDOT We will forward comments from VDOT once we receive them. Once staff review is completed, we will forward comments to you regarding the traffic and stream study. Action after Receipt of Comment Letter After you have read this letter, please take one of the actions below: (1) Resubmit in response to review comments on a Resubmittal Monday -- Schedule can be found at this address: http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/forms center/departments/Community Development/forms/schedules/SDecial Use Permit & Zonina MaD Amendmen t Schedule.pdf (2) Request indefinite deferral (3) Request that a Planning Commission public hearing date be set (4) Withdraw your application If you choose to resubmit, please use the form provided with this letter. Please feel free to contact me if you wish to meet or need additional information. My email address is cgrantcj�albemarle.org Sincerely, Claudette Grant Senior Planner, Community Development