COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2004-024 Old Trail Village
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Beights Development Corporation has requested a rezoning for approximately 237 acres from Rural Area, and Residential - RA, R1, and R6 zoning districts, to Neighborhood Model District - NMD for a combination of residential and commercial uses located on the north side of Route 250 West, approximately 2,000+ feet east of the intersection of Miller School Rd. and Route 250. (See Attachment A)
STAFF: Claudette Grant
PLANNING COMMISSION DATE:
August 23, 2005
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE:
September 14, 2005
APPLICANT’S PROPOSAL: Beights Development Corporation has requested a rezoning of approximately 237 acres located between Route 250 West and Jarman’s Gap Road from Rural Area, - RA, R1, and R6 zoning districts, to Neighborhood Model District – NMD. The applicant’s Application Plan (revised August 9, 2005) and Code of Development, dated August 5, 2005 are attached as are the proffers. (See Attachments B for the Application Plan, Code of Development and Proffers)
The property is mainly undeveloped. With this rezoning, the applicant is requesting approval of approximately 1,600 – 2,200 residential units of varying types - single family, townhouse, and apartments. The applicant is also planning to include 100,000 - 250,000 square feet of commercial/office/recreational space in the village center. There is also a network of pedestrian/bike trails and sidewalks proposed throughout Old Trail Village. Approximately 28 acres is proposed as a park for the development of Old Trail Park (also known as Western Park in the Crozet Master Plan).
Proffers the applicant is providing include dedication of Old Trail Park with improvements such as fields, playground areas, basketball court, tennis courts, picnic shelters, restroom facilities, pedestrian and bike trails, parking and a fenced dog area. Proffers also include 15% affordable housing, cash contributions for capital improvements and a proposed plan for over lot grading of lots.
BACKGROUND: At the Planning Commission work session on August 2nd, a number of substantive issues were identified as outstanding.
The applicant has met with staff several times since the August 2 Planning Commission meeting, and
revised the Code of Development and Application Plan. As a result, several of these issues have been addressed on the plan and in the Code of Development and proffers. However, not all issues have been resolved. The resolved and unresolved issues are listed below in a more definitive manner.
DISCUSSION/FINDINGS: The following issues have been resolved. The bolded sections indicate how each issue has been resolved.
· The entrance from Route 250 showed commercial uses which were not recommended by the Crozet Master Plan.
The applicant has lowered the density of this area to CT3. The only commercial use shown in this area is a 20 guest room bed and breakfast that must be permanently occupied by a residential owner. There will not be a restaurant located at this bed and breakfast.
· The affordable housing proffer was less than the 15% targeted by policy.
The applicant has submitted additional information in the proffer, which provides for 15% affordable housing.
· Floodplain information was not current; parks improvements are shown in the floodplain and in wetlands.
The applicant has corrected the floodplain information. The only park improvements now shown in the flood plain are two multi-purpose fields, which are not located in the stream buffer.
· Grading shown lacked the necessary details to determine the impacts.
The applicant has submitted additional information, which shows the impacts.
· Maximum numbers of desired dwelling units were not known.
The applicant has confirmed and included in the Code of Development that the maximum number of desired dwelling units cannot exceed 2,200.
· ARB comments were not incorporated into the Code of Development and building heights at the entrance are still an issue.
The applicant has addressed all the ARB comments in the Code of Development including building heights at the entrance.
The following issues still need resolution and/or further review: The bolded areas indicate the current status.
· No commitment is made to providing the employment district shown on the Crozet Master Plan.
This is still generally true. The possible uses allowed in the employment center include residential uses and commercial uses. Table 5 in the Code of Development states that between 100,000 – 250,000 square feet of non-residential uses shall be constructed throughout Old Trail Village. Mechanisms for ensuring that non-residential uses are constructed are not provided. Phasing of the commercial uses concurrent with other Old Trail development is desirable to support that development, but also to avoid undue competition with a redeveloping downtown Crozet.
· The proposed park area is not consistent with the Crozet Master Plan.
Over the last two weeks, staff including engineering, water resources, and planning have evaluated the area proffered for the park and discussed the issues, problems, and needs with the applicant. Because of the streams and high water table in the floodplain there are concerns that the proposed improvements cannot be located in this area and that this may not be the best location for the park. Only two playing fields can reasonably be accommodated in the floodplain. The applicant responded to staff’s concerns by offering an additional 3 acres of upland area for the proffered improvements. Parks and Recreation staff has evaluated the applicant’s proposal and concluded that the upland area will be too crowded to provide the type of park envisioned by the Crozet Master Plan (See Attachment D and E). Parks and Recreation believes that land area to be devoted to Western Park needs to include more upland area to allow for future (if not present) improvements and contemplative or passive areas with views of Crozet.
Staff and the applicant have not yet had an opportunity to fully discuss and see if there are ways to resolve concerns of Parks and Recreation with the application plan and proffers. If the applicant decides to dedicate more parkland, a revised application plan and modified proffers will be needed. Staff hopes to have an update on the progress of these discussions at the public hearing.
· The applicant has now agreed to provide 15% affordable housing with the development. Mechanisms for ensuring provision of the units have not been worked out at this time. Staff hopes to have an update on the progress of these discussions at the public hearing.
· Other environmental information has not been shown adequately to assess other impacts on steep slopes and stream buffers.
The applicant has shown additional information regarding environmental features on the site. A critical slope waiver request has been submitted. However, staff has not had adequate time to complete review and provide a recommendation. Staff plans to have a recommendation at the public hearing. The applicant has included in the proffers a provision for overlot grading. The applicant has agreed to take all lots out of the stream buffer, and this has been completed with the exception of one lot located in block 12 and another located in block 23, which also need to be removed.
· Wooded areas and wooded areas to be retained need to be clearly identified.
Staff requested preservation and conservation areas be shown on a map. The applicant submitted this information on August 11th. Staff has not had sufficient time to review this. Staff hopes to have an update on this at the public hearing.
· The Code of Development/Application Plan is not complete and cannot be approved in its current form.
There are some remaining unresolved issues that will need to be incorporated in the Code of Development/Application Plan; generally, these are minor issues that can be resolved quickly.
· The proffers need major revision relative to affordable housing.
Staff and the applicant continue to work on the proffers.
RECOMMENDATION: The applicant has made significant changes to the plan and proffers in order to address several prior comments of the Commission and staff. The Architectural Review Board has recommended favorably with conditions, which the applicant has addressed. While staff believes the project is appropriate at this location and demonstrates many of the characteristics desired by the Neighborhood Model and the Crozet Master Plan, staff believes that there remain several unresolved issues that should be resolved before the project can be recommended for approval.
Staff believes that the major issue in need of resolution is Western Park. How the park issue is resolved affects design of the development and potentially the improvements proffered. Two other issues which staff believes are important to resolve are the mechanisms for providing affordable housing and phasing of the non-residential uses. Staff believes that the applicant has addressed some of the concerns of the Commission relative to commercial use of the entrance to the development; however, the intensity of the proposed use does not appear to be in conformity with the Master Plan. The remaining issues relate to ensuring the proper Code of Development and are more corrections than omissions.
If the Commission wishes to take favorable action at the public hearing, staff recommends that the action include direction on the following before the Board of Supervisor’s public hearing:
- Changes, if any, needed for the park on both the plan and in the proffers.
- Phasing of the non-residential area.
- Action on the critical slope waiver request.
- Removal of lots in the stream buffer.
- Review and verification of conservation and preservation areas.
- Revisions to Code of Development and application plan.
- Revisions of proffers relative to affordable housing.
Attachment A – Location Map
Attachment B – Application Plan revised 8-9-05, Code of Development and Proffers dated 8-5-05
Attachment C – Tax Map
Attachment D – August 10 Memo from Pat Mullaney
Attachment E – August 11 Electronic mail from Pat Mullaney
General Development Plan
Return to PC actions letter