The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutZMA201700005 Correspondence Zoning Map Amendment 2018-01-12 5 ®,e11 Dominion 172 South Pantops Drive " ?`,�� \ Engineering Charlottesville, VA 22911 434.979.8121 (p) �� Ji off 434.979.1681 (f) $$ems pa DominionEng.com January 12,2018 Ms. Elaine Echols, FAICP Chief of Planning Albemarle County Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville,VA 22902 RE: ZMA 2017-00006-Hollymead Town Center—Block Cl—Lot C(TM 32-41D6) Dear Elaine, Please consider this letter of clarification for your re-consideration of our ZMA request for the above-referenced property,originally submitted for review on June 19,2017. 1) The applicant would like for this application to be considered as a stand-alone application,rather than to be included in the consideration of ZMA 2017-00005,which concerns the entire Hollymead Town Center—Area C project area which is not controlled by the applicant. 2) Consistent with#1 above,the ZMA 2017-00006 request is being made per the original pre-application meeting held on Tuesday,October 15, 2015,where County staff stated they could support the request for additional square footage for the Hollymead Corner, LLC parcel. 3) As a housekeeping item,the limits of the ZMA 2017-00006 request should be revised to include only the Hollymead Corner, LLC parcel consisting of 1.92 acres(TM 32-41D6). 4) The actual available square footage for the Hollymead Corner, LLC parcel is at most 4,000-sf. We are in general agreement with the allocation of square footage for Block I as indicated in your January 5,2018 power-point presentation with the notable exception that the 12,000-sf noted to be re-allocated to Block I from Block II is not available to the applicant per the terms of their purchase agreement with the previous landowner. In other words, the 12,000-sf is not available for use by the applicant. To clarify,the request from this applicant is for a total of 40,000-sf on TM 32-41D6,which would translate to an additional 36,000 square feet. Also, please consider the following responses to your comment letter dated September 1, 2017: Planning The"project summary"section of the application narrative states that Block I currently"has 100 gross square feet of buildable area remaining,which renders the property incapable of being developed in accordance with the Hollymead Town Center NMD or the Comprehensive Plan." Staff researched this information by reviewing the existing approved development in Block I.Staff found the Bojangles on Lot A utilizes approximately 3,516 square feet and that 0 square feet of non-residential square footage has been approved in Lot B.Staff determined the preliminary approval for the proposed Comfort Suites in Lot B had expired. However,a new initial site plan for a hotel on Lot B has been submitted and is currently under review. It is proposed to occupy 46,680 square feet. As a result of this analysis,staff determined there is approximately 16,804 non-residential square footage remaining in Block I under the existing Code of Development.Therefore, it appears the actual scope of the request to construct the 2 Cs 172 South Pantops Drive �a�� " Dominion Charlottesville, VA 22911 °'b r�� ► Engineering j 434.979.8121 (p) 1,0•' j 11/V 434.979.1681 (f) ® e,a DominionEng.com °,.a office building as shown on the Application Plan is approximately 23,000 non-residential square feet(as opposed to 40,000 square feet described in the project narrative). RESPONSE: See Item#4 above. Understanding the exact scope of your request is particularly important because of an Official Letter of Determination made by Ron Higgins, Deputy Zoning Administrator,on August 18,2017.This determination found that the existing Rosewood Village facility in Block III of Area C does not count towards the 50,000 square foot limit of non-residential square footage(see attached).This interpretation of the Code means there is currently an opportunity to transfer non- residential square footage from Block III to Block I as was done between Block II and Block I in 2010. RESPONSE: We hope that items#1 through#4 above serve to clarify our request. Zoning—Ron Higgins No objection at this time. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Proffers— Rebecca Ragsdale/J.T. Newberry Please confirm that you are not requesting to modify the existing proffers approved under ZMA200100020. RESPONSE: Confirmed. Engineering and Water Resources — Frank Pohl No objection at this time. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Entrance Corridor— Margaret Maliszewski It is anticipated that any impacts on physical form resulting from the proposal can be addressed with ARB review of the site and building plans. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. ACSA—Alex Morrison I hereby recommend approval of both ZMA's with the following comments: • All site development plans proposing the extension of public water and/or sewer infrastructure will require a construction plan review by the ACSA. • RWSA Wastewater Capacity Certification will be required at the final site plan stage. • Prior to final site plan approval the applicant will be required to enter into a wastewater capacity agreement with the ACSA. RESPONSE: Acknowledged. Transportation Planner—Kevin McDermott • A scoping meeting to determine the assumptions and methodology used in the traffic analysis wasn't held making this memorandum difficult to review. In the future please coordinate with the County and VDOT on the development of the scope for these traffic studies. • The traffic analysis states in assumption#5 that a 25%reduction was applied to all trips to account for the Berkmar Extension and then in assumption#6 a 25%reduction was also applied to background traffic was for 2 • �'�° 172 South Pantos Drive i Dominion Pantops ► Engineering Charlottesville, VA 22911 434.979.8121 (p) 0. 1,�� I,�,I 434.979.1681 (f) goer�a DominionEng.com a two movements to account for the Berkmar Extension. Please explain the difference in these two reductions and how the second one was applied. I see the first in the reduction in overall reduction in trips generated. • Trip distribution describes 10%of the trips as coming from the west.Are those all coming in on Timberwood Boulevard or does that include Lockwood Drive as well? • I would like to have a better explanation as to how the capacity thresholds were developed and set.The analysis says total inbound or outbound peak hour should not exceed 320 but I don't see how that number was arrived at.Were the number of trips just increased in the model until a movement went to failing or if it was already failing until it decreased to a certain level? • I calculated a much higher trip generation by approximately 1000 daily trips under both the by right and the proposed.This is likely partially due to your use of LU code 932 High Turnover Sit Down Restaurant for Bojangles when it should be a Fast Food LU code 934 or 933 but it is difficult to tell without the breakdown of trips by block. Please provide a display or table showing the breakdown of trips by block to assist in the identification of impacts. • The analysis states that the roundabouts were reviewed from a cursory level to ensure adequate capacity is available.There are no statements regarding the results of that review. Please provide these. • Please provide a general evaluation of internal left turn movements and the effect of the increase trips on those to insure adequate capacity in the turn lanes or the need for turn lanes if they do not exist. • There is no trip distribution to the right in right out from Block 1 directly to US 29. Please explain if and how that movement might impact other movements in the corridor. VDOT Comments—Adam Moore 1. This study does not appear to account for the North Pointe development which will increase the traffic on the Route 29 corridor and is under the site plan development stage. This development along with the opening of Berkmar Extended will change traffic patterns in the area. This should be included in the analysis. 2. The study does not include the currently proposed connection of Berkmar Drive (Meeting Street) through to Airport Road. This connection is a significant priority for the county and should be included in the analysis. 3. VDOT currently has safety concerns at the intersection of Town Center Drive and the two opposing shopping center entrances(near Harris Teeter). These concerns are informed by a concentration of crash incidents and citizen feedback. At this time alternative intersection designs should be analyzed as there is insufficient spacing between the signal at Route 29 and the roundabout for an additional traffic signal. Any changes may necessitate changes in trip distribution assumptions. RESPONSE:Please note that the County Transportation and VDOT Comments on the traffic study were based on the study submitted with ZMA 2017-00005 for the entire Block C. The scope of the request made by ZMA 2017- 00006 has no impact on the overall traffic study for Area C. 2 issok ops �Nclei° . Dominion 4. f? Engineering 172 South Pantops Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 it' 434.979.8121 (p) oil tt a AP o ` d, '.� 434. 979.1681 (f) 4o DominionEng.com ect a We thank you for taking the time to review this letter. Please let me know if you have any questions or require additional information,or would like to set up a meeting to discuss. Very truly yours, f j r�.`► Michael Myers, PE,CFM Cc: Simon Stapleton Pedar Little 4 of 4