Loading...
ZMA202100008 Narrative 2021-07-19July 19, 2021 OLD IVY RESIDENCES Zoning Map Amendment Application Narrative Tax Map Parcels 60-51, 60-24C, 60-24C1, 60-24C3, 60-24C4 ZMA 2021 - 000 Introduction Greystar is the contract purchaser of 35.39 acres of real property and improvements northeast of the Route 250 Bypass and Old Ivy Road intersection, west of the University Village retirement community and Huntington Village (the 'Property"). The Property consists of five parcels, all zoned for residential use: Tax Map Parcel Short Name Acres 06000-00-00-024C 24C 11.58 06000-00-00-024C 1 24C 1 2.53 06000-00-00-024C3 24C3 13.29 06000-00-00-024C4 24C4 2.47 06000-00-00-05100 51 5.52 Total Acreage 35.39 Greystar proposes to develop a residential community on the Property, consisting of single-family homes (attached and detached) and multifamily buildings, to serve the need for housing in this part of Albemarle County, which is reflected in the Urban Density Residential land use designation for most of the subject property in the Comprehensive Plan. Greystar proposes a maximum of 525 units, which equates to an average density of approximately 15 dwelling units per acre (DUA) for the 35.39 acre Property. The residences planned for the Property are proposed to be entirely for -rent, at least initially, in response to a strong interest in rental properties in the area. Existing Zoning and Proffers The existing zoning and land use restrictions are not uniform across the parcels. The chart below summarizes the currently applicable land use regulations for the Property. Tax Map 60 Acres Zoning District Permitted Uses Parcel 24C1 Health Care Facility 2.53 1.561 R10 (per University Village A roved A lication Plan 0.969 R15 By Right Uses in R15 District upon satisfaction of Road Proffer (per ZMA 85-21) 24C3 13.29 R15 24C4 2.47 R15 24C 11.58 R15 51 5.52 R1 By Right Uses in R1 District In order to achieve R-15 zoning across the Property without the restrictive proffers or zoning plans associated with prior rezoning actions, the following actions are being requested: TMP 60-51: Rezone from R-1 to R- 15. This parcel, zoned R-1, is proposed to be rezoned to R-15. TMP 60-24C3, 60-24C4: Satisfy OVA° ` ° \\\\ 1985 Road Proffer, Rezone Steep Slope Overlay District. The largest parcel and the �abuttingsmall parcel to the north, which abut the Bypass, are 4 already zoned R-15 but are subject to a proffer associated with ZMA 85-211, i which states that these parcels may " only be developed at an R-1 level until 24 Old Ivy Road has been improved to znmw—i9sPooem i� the satisfaction of the Board of �29ii�► '' Supervisors (the "1985 Road Proffer"). Further, a zoning map ;;, Qrz4° 80 di`°' rrr°, / �9 ie�Cr a zo amendment to rezone preserved ,moo \/ ,'o ;z4 ���°; 9 4 steep slopes to managed steep 319 ��1 C(If 16� 3a 159 J slopes on these parcels is required to permit them to be disturbed in a manner described in more detail in the attached materials prepared by Timmons Group entitled "Old Ivy Residences Preserved Slopes Zoning Map Amendment." TMP 60-24C1: Satisfv 1985 Road Proffer: Rezone Steep Slope Overlav District: Rezone portion from R-10 (with Plan and Proffers) to R-15. This small interior parcel is split -zoned. A small portion is zoned R-15 and subject to the 1985 Road Proffer. The remaining portion is zoned R-10 and subject to ZMA 96-20. The parcel needs to be rezoned to R-15, and the master plan and proffers associated with ZMA 96-20 need to be superseded by the new zoning. The Zoning Map Amendment to reclassify preserved slopes as managed slopes applies to this parcel as well. TMP 60-24C: Satisfy 1985 Road Proffer (No Rezoning Required). The second largest parcel immediately east of TMP 60-24C3 is also subject to the Road Proffer. To explain both the varied zoning status of the parcels and the access easement over the University Village property to the east, a brief property history has been included in an Appendix for reference. 1 The image on this page was prepared using the County's GIS mapping system. Note that the GIS records are inaccurate, which results in a map that is not entirely correct, for TMP 60-24C3 and 60-24C4 are both also subject to the 1985 Road Proffer, but the map indicates otherwise. 2 Subject Property The Property is currently owned by three separate entities, as shown in the table below. Tax Map Parcel Owner 60-24C The Filthy Beast, LLC 60-24C1 60-24C4 60-24C3 Father Goose, LLC 60-51 Beyer Family Investment Partnership Description of Proposed Project The Project proposes a variety of housing types, including single family detached, single family attached, duplexes, and multi -family units. A maximum of 525 units is proposed. Of this amount, the following is a current projected conceptual breakdown of units by type, but is subject to change during the site plan process: Single family detached: 77 units Single family attached (townhouse): 43 Single family attached (duplex duets"): 58 Apartments: 312 This breakdown is approximate and is subject to change at the site plan stage. Notably, the Project likely will be comprised entirely of rental units, even the single-family units. This community would be the first of its kind in the area providing a unique residential community and expanding the range of housing options for this part of the County. Market research demonstrates a demand for single-family residences for young families, young professionals, graduate students and retirees who desire more space but are not interested in, or able to purchase a home at this stage of their lives. The cost of home ownership continues to rise across all price points throughout the area, and this rental offering will significantly increase the inventory and accommodate this strong market demand. Rental single-family dwellings are a growing trend in residential development. A recent news article reported that "built -to -rent homes make up just over 6% of new homes built in the U.S. every year, according to Hunter Housing Economics, a real estate consulting firm, which projects the number of these homes built annually will double by 2024.112 The Applicant has determined there is a significant market demand for detached rental units in this part of the County. While there are a few apartment communities nearby, most are designed and sized for singles or younger students. 2 Parker, Wll.'Built-to-Rent Suburbs are Poised to Spread Across the U.S." The Wall Street Journal, June 21, 2021. https://www.wsj.com/articles/built-to-rent-suburbs-are-poised-to-spread-across-the-u-s- 11623075610) 3 The community is laid out and oriented around the existing pond, which will be integrated into the Project and serve as a recreational area. The pond will provide open space and stormwater management functions, while being enhanced to improve the ecological and environmental benefits that the pond naturally provides. Additionally, while steep slopes will be impacted, they will be treated in a sensitive manner, ensuring downstream waters are not impacted. The proposed development has been designed to maximize conservation of forested areas, particularly those adjacent to the Rivanna Trail, by using space already cleared for farmland. By impacting the slopes (to a limited degree), the neighborhood layout can better preserve existing natural forest, which provides an invaluable amenity, prevents environmental concerns associated with deforestation (erosion, stormwater quality, habitat, etc.), and provides a greater degree of conservation. Given the history of these slopes, which were previously disturbed and are man-made, Greystar and the design team agree that the forested areas are more valuable environmentally than the slopes. Further, reducing the grade of these slopes will reduce stormwater drainage across the area while capturing runoff in a stormwater conveyance system. Reducing overland flow and the total amount of runoff will reduce erosion to the remaining slopes. Satisfaction of 1985 Road Proffer: As described herein, parcels 60-24C3, 60-24C4, 60-24C, and the approximately 0.73 acres of parcel 60-24C1 that is zoned R-15 are all subject to the 1985 Road Proffer. The 1985 Road Proffer was accepted in 1985 as part of ZMA 1985-21, which rezoned these parcels from R-1 Residential to R-15 Residential subject to the following proffer: "The proffer is that the property's development under proposed R-15 zoning be limited to the number of units currently allowable under the present R-1 zoning until Old Ivy Road is improved to the satisfaction of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County." While the proffer allows developing this portion of the Property with the setbacks, dwelling -unit type, and other characteristics permitted by the R-15 zoning district regulations, the proffer limits the number of units to the amount that would be allowed if the land were zoned R-1 until Old Ivy Road is improved to the satisfaction of the County Board of Supervisors. The proffer provides that when the Board of Supervisors is satisfied that Old Ivy Road has been improved, then this portion of the Property may be developed consistent with R-15 zoning without restriction on the number of units. Since the 1985 Road Proffer was accepted and these parcels were rezoned to R-15, a significant number of improvements have been made to Old Ivy Road and to the surrounding road network that significantly improved safety and traffic conditions around the Property. Included with this application package is a multi -page exhibit prepared by Mitchell Matthews Architects that includes historical aerial images of the Property and the surrounding road network from 1990, 1996, and 2021, and which documents the 27 identified improvements that have been made to Old Ivy Road and the surrounding road network in the intervening 36 years (the "Old Ivy Road Improvements Exhibit"). Among the highlights are the following road improvements: 4 • Leonard Sandridge Drive has been constructed, which provides a direct connection from the University of Virginia north grounds area to the Route 29/250 bypass. Prior to construction, a large portion of vehicles driving to and from that area used both Old Ivy Road and Ivy Road to access the Route 29/250 Bypass and Route 250. Construction of this road dramatically reduced trips along Old Ivy Road. • As numerous by -right developments were constructed on Old Ivy Road, they were required to construct various entrance improvements and related improvements, such as turn lanes, deceleration lanes, and sidewalks, each as detailed on pages 4-7 of the Old Ivy Road Improvements Exhibit. These numerous improvements significantly improved the safety and function of Old Ivy Road. • Installation of a traffic signal at Ivy Road and Old Ivy Road (across from St. Anne's Belfield School) (#2 on the Exhibit). This signal dramatically improved the safety of this intersection, including for those proceeding east on Old Ivy to Ivy Road as they now had a safer turning movement. In addition, by providing a safe turning opportunity, queue lengths and delays at this location were reduced, which further improved Old Ivy Road. • Installation of a traffic signal, and re -alignment of Canterbury Road (entrance to the Bellair Subdivision) at the Canterbury Road/Route 250/Ivy Road/Old Ivy Road Intersection across from the Bellair Market (#5 and #25 on the Exhibit). These two improvements, long -sought by the Bellair residents, among others, were significant safety improvements by aligning the intersection and providing a signal to allow safe turning movements. They also reduced congestion in the area, and thus reduced back- ups and other delays that often extended well onto Old Ivy Road. • Intentional efforts by VDOT to discourage use of the northern exit and off -ramp from the Route 29/250 bypass (at #26 on the Exhibit) in favor of the southern exit off -ramp from the bypass (leading to #27 on the Exhibit). These efforts included modifications to signage to direct travelers to the southern exit, which allows traffic to more easily disperse along Route 250/Ivy Road instead of along Old Ivy Road. This dramatically reduced trips along Old Ivy Road. The addition of a traffic signal at #27 on the Exhibit also increased the safety and reduced delays at that location, removing a long-time disincentive to using this southern exit. By increasing the safety, convenience, and comfort in using the southern exit from the bypass, the number of vehicles using the northern exit reduced, which resulted in a reduction of vehicle trips along Old Ivy Road, and thus improvements to its function and reduction in congestion. A recent development involves the existing bridge over the Route 29/250 Bypass. This bridge is scheduled for replacement by VDOT in 2023, and the project has been funded. The replacement bridge will add a lane for pedestrians that does not currently exist, which will allow pedestrians to use the bridge. This improvement will logically result in some level of reduction in vehicle trips for those who want to walk from the Property to nearby stores, offices, and destinations, such as the Market at Bellair, the proposed destinations at the former Virginia Tractor Company site, medical offices, and the numerous offices located in the "triangle" between the Bypass, the railroad tracks, and the northern off -ramp from the Bypass (Faulconer Construction, real estate offices, etc.) 5 In addition to the number of completed improvements documented on the Old Ivy Road Improvements Exhibit, and the imminent replacement of the bridge over the Bypass, included with this application package is a Transportation Impact Analysis prepared by Timmons Group (the "Traffic Study"). The Traffic Study was researched and developed in consultation with VDOT, the County's Transportation Planner, and the City's Traffic Engineer as to scope and extent of the study, assumptions based on estimates such as for projected increases in background traffic, and related criteria. The Traffic Study recommends several improvements be included as part of the Project to avoid creating any impacts on Old Ivy Road. The application plans incorporate those recommended improvements, including the following: Installation of an eastbound left turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the proposed site entrance, with a minimum of 100 feet of storage and 100-foot taper. Installation of a westbound right turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the proposed site entrance, with a minimum of 100 feet of storage and 100-foot taper. • Installation of a westbound right turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the US Route 29/250 on - ramp The Traffic Study determines that Old Ivy Road will function at acceptable levels of service and safety with the full build -out of the Project, provided that the recommended improvements are constructed as part of the Project. Specifically, the Traffic Study notes that at the main entrance the levels of service ("LOS") would be a LOS B in the AM peak and LOS C in the PM peak, and that "the mainline movements along Old Ivy Road at the proposed site entrance are not adversely impacted by the introduction of the site traffic and the queues will not impact through traffic." Similarly, regarding the signalized intersection at Ivy Road and Old Ivy Road, the Traffic Study confirms that with the full build out of the Project, that this intersection will operate at an overall LOS B in both the AM and PM peak hours, and that all movements and approaches operate at LOS C or better during peak hours. Regarding the unsignalized intersection of Old Ivy Road at the US Route 29/250 On -Ramp, the Traffic Study concludes that the mainline eastbound and westbound approaches will operate at LOS A during both peak hours. The northbound approach operates at LOS A during the AM peak hour and at LOS F during the PM peak hour. However, the maximum queue on the northbound approach during either peak hour is 16 feet, or approximately 1 vehicle. There are no queuing issues at this intersection. Given the conclusions of the Traffic Study with regard to the functionality of Old Ivy Road at the entrance of the site, and the acceptable LOS that will result at either end of Old Ivy (between the by-pass ramps and the signalized intersection at Ivy Road), combined with the numerous impactful improvements that have been completed along Old Ivy Road and the surrounding road network in the past 36 years, we contend that the concerns of the 1985 Road Proffer have been addressed. As such, we ask the Board of Supervisors to confirm that coupled with the 11 improvements proposed as part of this application, that Old Ivy Road has been satisfactorily improved, and that the 1985 Road Proffer has been satisfied. Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan The Southern and Western Urban Neighborhoods Master Plan (the "Master Plan"), a component of the County's Comprehensive Plan, designates the Property for Urban Density Residential use, which recommends 6.01 — 34 DUA, and Parks and Green Systems use, which recommends public and privately owned open space areas and the protection of environmental features. The Property is within one of two Priority Areas identified in the Master Plan. Priority Areas are defined as areas "where significant development is underway, future development is to be directed, and investment in public improvements is programmed or recommended" (S+W. 47). The Priority Area for Western Urban Neighborhood is the Ivy Road area, and Ivy Road Shopping Center is the existing Center for such area. As an infill project within a Priority Area identified on the Comprehensive Plan, and given the existing R-15 zoning on the majority of the Property, this application has particular merit. Urban Density Residential The primary uses within the Urban Density Residential designation are "multifamily and single- family residential, including two or more housing types." The Project meets and exceeds this description. The Urban Density Residential designation "represents residential areas with supporting uses and non-residential uses [with density ranges of] 6.01 - 34 dwellings per acre." Master Plan, page 33. The Ivy Road Shopping Center area is in the immediate vicinity of the Property, and the Project would contribute to its existing mix of uses. 7 At a proposed density of approximately 15 DUA, the Project's density will be well within the range contemplated by the Urban Density Residential designation, and thus consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan's gross density range allows the Property's 35.39 acres to be developed with up to 525 residential units. The existing zoning of parcel 60-51, R-1 Residential, is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan because it permits a gross density range of only 0.97 (Standard Level) and 1.45 (Bonus Level) dwelling units per acre, well below the desired and designated density for this location. See Zoning Ordinance § 13.3. The Project proposes a density that would achieve the County's desired density in this location. As noted on the cover sheet to the plan set, the Project proposes a maximum of 525 units, which over the total acreage translates to a density of 14.9 dwelling units per acre. The Project's density also supports Objective 4 of Chapter 8 (Development Areas) of the Comprehensive Plan, recommending the "[u]se [of] Development Areas land efficiently to prevent premature expansion of the Development Areas." The Project clusters units together on the site, and includes apartments, attached townhouses, and duets (duplexes). The Project's residential layout thus makes efficient use of Development Areas land. Parks and Green Systems The portion of the Property designed for Parks and Green Systems is land that was previously acquired by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for development of the Western Bypass. After VDOT eliminated plans for the Western Bypass, the Commonwealth of Virginia (through the Commissioner of Highways) transferred the property to the current owner (deed of November 17, 2016). Before VDOT's acquisition, all of the Property was designated Urban Residential Development. See the prior Comprehensive Plan, 1996-2016, Land Use Plan Map E, attached to this Narrative. In 2015, the Comprehensive Plan was updated to designate the portion of the Property then owned by VDOT for Parks and Green Systems. This designation acknowledged not just the desirability of buffers to mitigate visual and noise impacts from the Bypass, but also the existing steep slopes and water features. Now that the Property has returned to its prior private owners, it is appropriate to evaluate it as Urban Density Residential designation, with the Parks and Green systems designation in those areas with sensitive environmental features. Consistency with the Neighborhood Model Principles The proposed project is consistent with the applicable Neighborhood Model Principles as follows: Pedestrian Orientation. Interior sidewalks will be provided throughout the community in the building envelope areas, and as generally shown on the illustrative conceptual plan included in the plan set. The existing Rivanna Trail will be retained, although a small segment of it will be relocated to accommodate the proposed units. The plans show a conceptual relocation of that segment, but the final location will be determined at the site plan stage following consultation with the Rivanna Trails Foundation. Mixture of Uses. Given the Project's proximity to a variety of other non-residential uses, only residential uses are proposed. Other adjacent or nearby uses include the following: H • University of Virginia Offices (copying and printing services, Ivy Stacks, Human Resources, Fontana Food Center) • Old Ivy Medical Offices • The Ivy Inn Restaurant • McLean Faulconer Real Estate offices • Care Hospice, Inc. (formerly Legacy Hospice) • Retail and Service uses at Townside Shopping Center (deli, photography studio, coffee shop, insurance office, medical offices, Pour La Masion housewares, hair salon, dry cleaners, florist, Pilates studio, wine shop, among others) • Vivace Restaurant • Bel -Air Gas Station and The Market Deli • Proposed restaurant, coffee shop, and other uses at former Virginia Tractor Property • Pediatric Associates Pediatricians Group • Center for the Arts Dance Studio • Pure Barre Pilates Studio • UVA Darden School of Business • UVA Law School • UVA North Grounds Recreation Center • Faulconer Construction • Weldon Cooper Center Neighborhood Center. The variety of non-residential uses immediately adjacent to and nearby the Property constitute a neighborhood center when considered in the context with the Project, especially given the variety of housing types proposed for the Project. In addition, as noted previously, the nearby Ivy Road Shopping Center is the existing Center for the Western Urban Neighborhoods Priority Area. Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability. The Project proposes a variety of housing types, including single family detached, single family attached (both townhouses and duplexes), and apartments. In addition, at least 15 percent of the units representing the difference between the number that could be developed on the Property under current zoning and the number that could be developed following the rezoning to R-15 of TMP 60-51 and that portion of TMP 60- 24C1 zoned R-10, will be affordable to households making up to 80% of the Area Median Income for a period of ten years. Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks. The proposed project would increase the existing interconnected street network and system of non -street connections. Pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers will have more options when the Project is completed. Multi -Modal Transportation Opportunities. Residents of the community will have access to multi -model transportation opportunities by vehicle, on foot, or by bicycle. While the Property is not yet accessible via public transit, the Applicant is willing to work with the County, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, public transit providers, and other stakeholders to N evaluate the Project for a transit stop. The Applicant welcomes the opportunity for transit options to serve the Project when these opportunities are presented. Parks. Recreational Amenities and Open Space. A large area of open space will be preserved within the Project, including around the existing pond, which will be enhanced, and all of which will provide a variety of opportunities for passive and active recreation. The existing Rivanna Trail will be maintained, which provides access to a footpath that encircles the entire City. The community is also envisioned to include two outdoor swimming pools, a tot lot, grilling areas, other gathering areas, and an indoor fitness center. While the precise details will be determined at the site plan stage, the Project will satisfy the recreational amenity requirements of the zoning ordinance. Buildings and Spaces of Human Scale. All buildings within the Project will be four stories or less to break up massing and support the principle of buildings of human scale. The single family residences will likely not exceed two stories. The vast majority of the units within the Project will be located a reasonable distance from adjacent property lines and roads. Particularly when compared to the scale of the six -story University Village building, the buildings on site will be an appropriate height and scale. The taller four story buildings are appropriately located along Old Ivy Road, away from the University Village buildings, to avoid creating any significant adverse impact on the views from University Village units. Relegated Parking. The Project proposes only minimal parking areas that front public roads, including Old Ivy Road and the Entrance Corridor. While some parking in these areas is proposed, the vast majority of the parking proposed is relegated behind or to the side of buildings, open space, or recreational areas. Parallel parking provided along the travelways promotes an efficient use of paved area and contributes to an urban, walkable environment. Parking areas are expected to have limited visibility from the Entrance Corridor, especially given the distance involved, and the forested area along the Route 29/250 Bypass. In addition, the elevation of Old Ivy Road is lower than that of the parking lots that will serve the proposed apartment units, and with the required landscaping, will help to mitigate any views of the parking areas from that Road or from Ivy Road. Redevelopment. This principal is only applicable to the Beyer Parcel since the other parcels are vacant. Regarding the Beyer parcel, which current contains a single family residence, this application involves a redevelopment of the Property of a type that is expressly recommended by and consistent with the Comprehensive Plan designation of Urban Density Residential. Respecting Terrain and Careful Grading and Re -grading. Some grading will need to occur on the Property during construction. The Concept Plan accounts for managed and preserved slopes on the Property. The Applicant will obtain all required permits and approvals that may be needed to conduct grading on the Property. This application includes a ZMA request to re -designate all preserved steep slopes to managed steep slopes to allow for certain improvements that, from an environmental perspective, will improve current conditions. As described in the Preserved Steep Slopes Zoning Map Amendment materials, existing preserved slopes are believed to be man-made, and impacting those slopes will allow the Project to conserve as much forest as possible. Further, reducing the grade of these slopes will reduce stormwater 10 drainage across the area while capturing runoff in a stormwater conveyance system. Reducing overland flow and the total amount of runoff will reduce erosion to the remaining slopes. Clear Boundaries with the Rural Area. Not applicable. The Property is not adjacent to the Rural Area. Impacts on Public Facilities & Public Infrastructure The Project does not create any negative impact on public facilities and public infrastructure. Included with this application is a Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by Timmons Group. The study recommends several improvements be included as part of the project to avoid creating any impacts on Old Ivy Road. The application plans incorporate those recommended improvements, including the following: • Installation of an eastbound left turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the proposed site entrance, with a minimum of 100 feet of storage and 100 foot taper. • Installation of a westbound right turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the proposed site entrance, with a minimum of 100 feet of storage and 100 foot taper. • Installation of a westbound right turn lane on Old Ivy Road at the US Route 29/250 on - ramp The Project will also include a robust pedestrian network, including internal sidewalks, a connection to the Rivanna Trail, and the continuance of the Rivanna Trail on site. Please refer to the section of this narrative about the 1985 Road Proffer for additional information about the Traffic Study's conclusions about the future conditions of Old Ivy Road with the build out of the Project. Impacts on Environmental Features The proposed Project has no negative impacts on environmental features. As noted in detail in the materials prepared by Timmons Group regarding the proposed rezoning of the preserved steep slopes on site, the outcome of the proposed modifications to those slope areas will be an improvement from an environmental perspective, over existing conditions. The Water Protection Ordinance stream buffers on site will be preserved, as shown on the plans. They have been updated, based on a jurisdictional determination for waters of the U.S., through the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, dated August 27, 2020 (copies enclosed). Pursuant to the Water Protection Ordinance, the 100-foot buffer is only applicable to streams that are perennial within the development areas, and thus the plans reflect the location consistent with the jurisdictional determination, which are different than as shown on the County's GIS mapping system. Except as otherwise described above, the Project is carefully designed to avoid encroachment or other impacts to the preserved slopes on the Property and nearby. The Project includes extensive open space areas that will provide space for additional vegetation. In addition, by providing a variety of housing types in walking distance to the University of Virginia Law and Business Schools, and to a variety of other retail shops, offices, and other destinations, the Project will 11 enable residents to walk to these areas and minimize the use of vehicles, which will reduce carbon emissions. Impacts of the Proposed Development Parks: The Project will contain a variety of recreational and other amenities for the use and benefit of the residents of the Project, several of which are shown on the Conceptual Plan. While the specific details of the amenities have not yet been decided, amenities such as swimming pools, tot lots, grilling areas, other gathering areas, and an indoor fitness center are likely. A large area of open space will be preserved within the Project, including around the existing pond, which will be enhanced, and all of which will provide a variety of opportunities for passive and active recreation. The existing Rivanna Trail will be maintained, which provides access to a footpath that encircles the entire City. Residents will also have easy access to other nearby parks and recreational areas such as the UVA Track, Birdwood Resort (including its golf, tennis, fitness and other recreational amenities), UVA's The Park by the law school, the UVA North Grounds Recreation Center. Notably, with the Rivanna Trail right on site, it provides immediate and direct pedestrian access and connections to other parks and recreational areas throughout the area. The existing Rivanna Trail will be slightly relocated internally to accommodate the Project, but will remain as an important amenity of the Project and for the entire community. Fire & Rescue: The Project will include a secondary emergency access for vehicles in a location still to be determined. Schools: Old Ivy Residences will provide a variety of new housing options and inventory in the designated Development Area to families who already live in the County and whose children already attend the County public schools. So, while Old Ivy Residences will be new to Albemarle County, these students and their families are not. The Project also increases the existing inventory of residences in close proximity to existing transportation networks, places of employment, educational facilities, and nearby services, all as consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Most importantly, by providing residential units in the designated Development Area at a density that is well within the range recommended by the Comprehensive Plan for the Property, the Project helps to reduce pressure to subdivide Rural Area land for by -right lots, the latter of are directly and fundamentally inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. And as noted previously, it is critical to evaluate this issue in consideration of the fact that the majority of the Property is already zoned R-15 Residential, such that the actual increase in permitted residential units is relatively small. Only approximately seven (7) acres of the Property is being upzoned from R-1 and R-10 to R-15. Students living in the Project would be within the current school districts for Greer Elementary School, Jack Jouett Middle School, and Albemarle High School. Based on the Albemarle County Schools Capacity vs. Enrollment Projections', both Greer and Jouett are under capacity, while Albemarle High School is over capacity. The Official Calculator estimates the Project would serve approximately 115-120 students. However, the Official Calculator provides countywide averages 'Albemarle County Public Schools K-12 Enrollment Projections FY 2020121 to FT 2029130, dated November 2019; Capacity vs. Enrollment Projections, dated November 19, 2019. 12 that do not take into account the age of buildings, number of bedrooms, or value of the property. When evaluating multi -family and townhome communities, we have found that actual student enrollment at comparable developments is much lower than the numbers based on the Official Calculator. For reference, the Official calculator estimates the following student counts: Type of Dwelling Unit Elementary Middle High Total Single Family Detached (77) 0.15 (12)' 0.08(6) 0.12(9) 0.35 (27) Single -Family Attached (58) 0.13(6) 0.05(3) 0.08(5) 0.26 (15) Townhome (43) 0.15(6) 0.06(3) 0.08(3) 0.29 (12) Multi -Family (312) 0.12 (37) 0.03(9) 0.05 (16) 0.21 (66) =61 =21 =33 115-120 total 'number of school children However, based on actual 2020-21 public -school student registration numbers provided by Albemarle County Schools°, the number of students actually living in comparable apartment and townhome communities is 50-75% lower than this estimate. Actual School Enrollment in Existing Townhome Communities For the current 2020-21 school year, the following table indicate the actual number of registered students in each of four northern development area townhome communities: Pre-K/Elem Middle High Total Forest Lakes South Townhomes (45) (Ashland Drive off Ashwood Blvd) 0 0 0 0 Forest Lakes Townhomes (62) (Arbor Trace/Arbor Lake Drive/Arbor Court/Arbor Terrace) 1 1 3 5 Gardencourt Townhouses (Hydraulic Road) (51) 2 1 0 3 Hollymead Square Townhouses (64) 6 7 10 23 TOTAL UNITS: (222) 9 9 13 31 Total Based on the average of the actual number of school children living in these representative townhome communities (31 / 222), the multiplier is 0.14, not .29, resulting in 6, not 12 children in the 43 townhomes. Similarly, when we analyze the actual number of registered students in four County multifamily developments, we find a significantly lower likely student number than the Official Calculator would indicate: 4 Provided by Renee DeVall, Routing and Planning Manager for Albemarle County Pupil Transportation. 13 Actual School Enrollment in Existing Multifamily Communities Pre-K/Elem Middle High Total Reserve at Belvedere (294 Units) 8 2 6 = 16 Arden Place (212 Units) 3 0 5 = 8 Stone Creek Village (264) 5 5 7 = 17 Stonefield Commons (251) 8 1 2 = 11 TOTAL UNITS: (1,021) 24 8 20 = 52 The actual student numbers for these four multi -family communities indicate an average multiplier of .051, not 0.21, for the total number of students. Based on the 2019-20 data above for these four existing multi -family developments, we would expect 16, not 66, students from the 312 multi -family units, which is a 75% decrease in number. School Capacity Based on the Capacity vs. Enrollment Projections through 2030, Greer and Jouett are projected to have capacity, while AHS will remain over capacity. School projections are as follows: School K - 1 2 Capacity 2022- 23 2023- 24 2024- 25 2025- 26 2026- 27 2027- 28 2028- 29 2029- 30 G r e e r 548 466 457 469 474 477 472 473 474 J o u e t t 717 727 714 728 707 681 696 706 711 Albemarle 1,775 1972 2097 2116 2122 2169 2134 2164 2168 For Greer, the ten-year enrollment projections indicate a decrease in student enrollment of 1.5% from 2020-21 school year to the 2029-30 school year. For Jack Jouett, enrollment of 10.2% for the same time period is projected. For Albemarle High School, enrollment increase of 12.2% for the same time period is projected. The Albemarle County Public Schools Long Range Planning Advisory Committee Recommendations, July 11, 2019 (the "Report") states that the middle schools have combined adequate capacity, and a comprehensive planning study will evaluate needs and options to consider new facilities, additions and renovations, boundary changes, grade level configurations, and other solutions to meet schools' needs. The school division "has embarked upon a 'center' based strategy to address capacity issues at its three comprehensive high schools, in particular Albemarle High School." The two "centers" that have been approved and funded by the County will serve 650 students. Center I, which opened in 2018 and is located approximately three and a half miles from the Project, will serve up to 250 students. Center II will serve up to 400 students, with the goal to be open for instruction in Spring 2023. Staff Report for CCP201900004, High School Center II, Planning Commission Meeting (June 23, 2020). Affordable Housing: The Project will provide that 15% of the units representing the difference between the number that could be developed on the Property under current zoning and the number that could be developed following the rezoning to R-15 of TMP 60-51 and that portion of TMP 60-24C1 zoned R-10, will be affordable to households making up to 80% of the Area Median Income for a period of ten years. 14 Open Space: The Project will include large areas of open space, as shown on the plan set. The building envelope areas are roughly clustered together to maximize the amount of open space within the Project while also accommodating the necessary infrastructure (roads, parking, utilities) and appropriate amenity areas. Historic Resources: There are no known historic resources on the Property. Zoning Ordinance Requirements The Project is designed to comply with the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance that apply to the R-15 Residential district. Section 18.1 of the Zoning Ordinance explains that the intent of the R-15 district is to provide for "compact, high -density residential development," a "variety of housing types," and "clustering of development and provision of locational, environmental and developmental amenities." Further, R-15 zoning is appropriate in the Western Urban Neighborhoods designated as Urban Density Residential: "R-15 districts may be permitted within the community and urban area locations designated on the comprehensive plan." The residential uses the Project proposes are all permitted by right in the R-15 district, which includes the following residential uses, among other by -right uses: By Right Uses 1. Detached single-family dwellings 2. Semi-detached and attached single-family dwellings 3. Multiple -family dwellings 4. Cluster development of permitted residential uses 5. Rental of permitted residential uses 15 APPENDIX TO NARRATIVE Access to Old Ivy Road; Property Zoning History L Access to Old Ivy Road Each of the parcels, except Parcel 51, has deeded rights of access to Old Ivy Road through the existing access road on the adjacent University Village parcels. Parcel 51 fronts Old Ivy Road and has its own driveway. Therefore, each parcel has the right to access Old Ivy Road by road frontage with existing driveways, by the University Villages access road, or both. A. Parcels with Road Frontage Parcels 24C3 and 51 have road frontage with driveways that access Old Ivy Road. The driveway for Parcel 51 is shown in the County GIS maps as located on the adjacent Huntington Village parcel to the east. However, a plat of record shows that Parcel 51 includes the existing driveway.5 Parcel 24C3 also has an existing driveway providing access to Old Ivy Road. This driveway extends on to Parcel 24C. While Parcel 24C does not have direct road frontage with Old Ivy Road, the existing driveway provides access. To the extent that Parcel 24C does not benefit from a recorded right of access over Parcel 24C3, an access easement could be recorded once the parcels are under common ownership. B. Parcels with Access Through University Villages Parcels 24C, 24C1, 24C3, and 24C4 all benefit from deeded rights of ingress and egress over the access road that runs from Old Ivy Road through the University Villages parcels to the east of the Site. In several deeds of record, this access road is called "Tufnell Road." A brief history of these parcels is necessary to show how each parcel obtained the right to use Tufnell Road. 1. History Parcels 24C, 24C3, and 24C4 derive from a predecessor parcel of 28.29 acres referred to in this narrative as "Old Parcel 24C".6 Before it was subdivided, Old Parcel 24C was comprised of what is now Parcels 24C, 24C3, and 24C4, and a 0.969 acre portion of what is now Parcel 24C1.' Parcels 24C1 and 24C4 previously comprised a single 5.0 acre parcel referred to as "Parcel X" in the deeds and plats of record. Parcel X was created from a 3.439 acre portion of Old Parcel 24C and a 1.561 acre portion of the parcel to the east of the Site that was eventually developed for University Villages (referred to as "Old Parcel 53").1 5 Survey dated May 12, 1994, Deed Book 1407, Page 380. 6 Survey dated July 28, 1982, Deed Book 862, Page 408. This area corresponds to the portion the Site with R15 zoning. In 1985, Old Parcel 24C was rezoned to R15. All the land that was once part of Old Parcel 24C is still zoned R15 today. 9 Survey dated May 5, 1989, revised June 23, 1989, Deed Book 1054, Page 573. At the time Parcel X was created, Old Parcels 24C and 53 did not have identical zoning. The portion of Parcel X that was part of Old Parcel 24 was zoned R15, while the portion that was part of Old Parcel 53 was zoned R10. Parcel X was not ever rezoned. Asa result, Parcel X had split zoning, which is still evident in Parcel 24C1 today. The 16 After Parcel X was created, the Virginia Department of Transportation ("VDOT") condemned 15.76 acres on the western portion of the Site for construction of the Route 29 Western Bypass. VDOT condemned 13.29 acres of Old Parcel 24C and 2.47 acres of Parcel X, corresponding to what is now Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 respectively. After the condemnation, Parcel 24C was reduced to 11.583 acres, as it is today, and Parcel X was reduced to 2.53 acres and designated on the County Tax Map as Parcel 24C1. The Western Bypass project was rescinded in 2014 before the planned road construction began. VDOT then conveyed what is now Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 to the successors in interest of the prior owners of that land. As a result of these separate conveyances by VDOT, Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 are now separate parcels of land on the County Tax Map. 2. Parcels 24C and 24C1 On March 7, 1995, the owner of Old Parcel 53 granted an access easement for the benefit of Old Parcel 24C.9 The easement area is fifty feet wide (which includes the Tufnell Road area) and provides access along the eastern boundary of Old Parcel 53. The land underlying a portion of this access easement was subsequently made part of Parcel X. Immediately after this easement was granted, Parcel X was created.10 In the deed creating Parcel X, the owner of Old Parcel 24C reserved an access easement across the land that it contributed to Parcel X. This additional easement was reserved for the purpose of reaching the Tufnell Road easement area on Old Parcel 53. Therefore, Parcel 24C currently has a deeded right of access to Old Ivy Road via Tufnell Road, through Parcels 24C1 and the University Villages parcels." 1.561 acre portion of Parel 24C1 that was formerly part of Old Parcel 53 is zoned R10. The remainder of Parcel 24C1 is zoned R15, as is the rest of the land that was formerly part of Old Parcel 24C. s Deed Book 1458, Page 154. 0 Deed Book 1458, Page 157. " The precise location of the easement area on Parcel 24C1 is arguably unclear. The original access reserved across Parcel X was described as follows at Deed Book 1458, Page 158: The easement shall run along the existing roadway [i.e., Tufnell Road] as shown on the survey, with the addition of such land from Parcel X as is necessary to equal fifty feet (50') in width until it reaches the point shown on such survey as '14", thence shall curve in a southwesterly direction in such manner as the northwesterly edge of the fifty foot (50) easement will adjoin point "13", thence in a reasonable curve across Parcel X to the remainder parcel. This description likely places part of the access easement on a portion of Parcel X that was later taken by VDOT. However, the parties planned for this contingency, and provided that the easement would be moved in such case as follows: It is further agreed that in the event a portion of Parcel X and/or the adjoining right-of-way are acquired by the Virginia Department of Transportation or the County of Albemarle, Virginia for development of additional public roads, the easements hereby granted and reserved shall be relocated so as to immediately adjoin the land so acquired by the Department of Transportation or County of Albemarle, if such relocation does not interfere with improvements then existing on Parcel X. In such latter event, the easements will be relocated in an area mutually agreed to by the parties hereto, their successors or assigns. Note that this condition applies to the easements "granted and reserved," meaning that this condition applies to the easement across Parcel X reserved by the owner of Old Parcel 24C. 17 Additionally, Parcel X was created with an appurtenant access easement over Old Parcel 53 to Old Ivy Road. Therefore, Parcel 24C1 has a deeded right of access to Old Ivy Road via Tufnell Road, through the University Villages parcels. 3. Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 (Former VDOT Parcels) When VDOT condemned the land that is now Parcel 24C4, VDOT obtained an access easement across Parcel 24C1.12 Likewise, when VDOT condemned the land that is now Parcel 24C3, VDOT obtained an access easement across Parcel 24C.13 Accordingly, Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 have deeded rights of access to Old Ivy Road via Tufnell Road, which appear as access easements in the certificates of take filed in connection with the VDOT condemnation of this land from Old Parcel 24C and Parcel X. Even if such access easements did not exist, Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 retain their rights to the easements providing access via the Tufnell Road, which benefit Old Parcel 24C and Parcel X, respectively. The only question of access would be whether (i) Parcel 24C3 has deed rights to cross Parcel 24C, and (ii) Parcel 24C4 has deeded rights to cross Parcel 24C1, to reach the Tufnell Road access easement. When all of the parcels in the Site are under common control, there will be no issue in this regard. Parcels 24C3 and 24C4 will retain their access to the Tufnell Road and further access easements could be recorded to the extent necessary to clarify access rights. IL Property Zoning HistoN Other than Parcel 51 (which is zoned R-1 Residential and is not subject to proffers), the entire Site is governed by the zoning and proffers of either Old Parcel 24C or Old Parcel 53. Many of the proffers made when those legacy parcels were rezoned still apply to the applicable portions the Site.14 When land from both of these legacy parcels was combined to create Parcel X, the resulting parcel had split zoning. That split zoning is still evident in Parcel 24C1 today. The 28.309 acres of the Site zoned R15 are also subject to a proffer that limits the development of the property to the R-15 density level subject to improved conditions along Old Ivy Road. While the proffer allows developing this portion of the Site with the density, setbacks, dwelling -unit type, and other characteristics permitted by the R15 zoning district regulations, the proffer limits the number of units to the amount that would be allowed if the land were zoned R1 until Old Ivy Road is improved to the satisfaction of the County Board of Supervisors. The proffer provides that when the Board of Supervisors is satisfied that Old Ivy Road has been improved, then this portion of the Site may be developed consistent with R15 zoning without restriction on the number of units.11 12 Deed Book 1761, Page 614. 13 Deed Book 1767, Page 95 ('The said route have been designated, or declared to be, a Limited Access Highway ... the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner of Virginia declares it necessary to be taken any and all easements of access, light or air incident to the lands of the landowner abutting upon said Limited Access Highway."). The location of this easement is shown on a map in the State Highway Plat Book, which was not recorded with the Certificate of Take, and which we have not reviewed. 14 The County issued an official zoning determination letter regarding Parcel 24C1 on June 15, 2000. The analysis below is based on the June 15, 2000 official determination letter, and our research has not found any subsequent rezonings or proffers related to the Site since that date. 15 ZMA 85-21 Action Letter (October 11, 1985). iu The 1.561 acres of the Site zoned R10 are subject to a series of proffers related to the University Villages development, including ZMA 82-11, ZMA 87-08, and ZMA 96-20, and a legally binding master plan (collectively, the "University Villages Proffers"). The master plan, which was last amended in connection with ZMA 96-20, and shows a "health care facility" in this 1.561-acre portion of the Site.16 The master plan would need to be amended to allow a different use in this location. Furthermore, the University Villages Proffers provide that the uses on the property will be limited to "a maximum of 204 residential units; an assisted living facility; a nursing home/health care facility; and, service facilities, such as dining and recreational facilities, administrative offices, and banking within the limits of accessory uses, as provided in the zoning ordinance." If a use other than the foregoing, or if residential units exceeding the proffered limit, were proposed for the portion of the Site subject to the University Villages Proffers, then both the master plan and the University Villages Proffers would need to be amended. 45320055_5 16 ZMA 96-20 Action Letter (December 26, 1996). 19