COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

 

AGENDA TITLE:

ZMA 2005-015 Hollymead Town Center, Area A-1

SP2005 – 027 Drive up Window for a Bank

 

SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:

Request to rezone 31 acres from RA (Rural Areas) to PDMC (Planned Development Mixed Commercial) with proffers for an area in the southern portion of the Hollymead Town Center area along Route 29 north.

 

STAFF CONTACT(S):

Cilimberg, Dougherty

 

LEGAL REVIEW:   YES

 

 

AGENDA DATE:

June 13, 2007

 

ACTION:     X          INFORMATION: 

 

CONSENT AGENDA:

  ACTION:             INFORMATION: 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:   YES


 

BACKGROUND: 

On April 3, 2007 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this rezoning and special use permit request. Staff recommended approval provided that the following items were addressed before the Board’s public hearing:

 

  1. Accommodate a widening of Meeting Street south of Town Center Drive.
  2. Amend the proffer language related to a maximum area to be disturbed at any time as part of Proffer 4, erosion and sediment control and other necessary minor proffer revisions.
  3. Correct street sections.

 

The Planning Commission recommended approval with the expectation that these items would be addressed. The Commission recommended approval of SP-2005-027, a Drive Up Window for Bank, with the following conditions:

 

  1. Drive-through windows will be limited to three (3); including any to be used for an ATM.
  2. Architectural Review Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
  3. Applicant is responsible for installation and maintenance of control devices such as signage, and pavement markings as indicated on the application plan.

 

On June 4, 2007, the ARB reviewed the applicant’s revisions to the vegetative buffer proposed along Route 29 between the roadway and the proposed development. The location of a stormwater line affects the ability to implement the planting plan originally approved for the entire Town Center frontage when Area B (Target and Harris Teeter) was approved.  The expectation at that time was that the buffer along Route 29 would be consistent across the different properties contained in the Town Center. The ARB reviewed the applicant’s proposed solution to providing what was anticipated for the landscape buffer, but could not support the proposal because the overhead utility line that affects the buffer was not shown on the plan provided for the ARB to review.

 

DISCUSSION:

Staff has determined that the applicant has satisfactorily addressed the items that remained after the Planning Commission’s public hearing (noted above):

  1. The applicant has widened Meeting Street south of Town Center Drive and is showing the correct dimension of street edge amenities such as sidewalks and tree planning strips. The wider street will accommodate on-street parking that could be removed in the future, as a last resort, to provide additional vehicular capacity along the road.
  2. The applicant has proffered to disturb no more than 70% of the site at any time during development of the property. This reduces the amount of denuded soil that may be unstable and subject to being washed out during rainstorms.
  3. The applicant has made requested revisions to street sections. These street sections will guide the development of streets within this area of the Town Center.

 

Architectural Review Board

 

Although the ARB did not have sufficient information needed to support the rezoning, they provided a list of revisions necessary for the project to meet ARB guidelines should the Board decide to approve this re-zoning.  (Exhibit C, ARB Action Memo – revisions 1-9 on page 2)  These revisions include those recommended by staff (number 1-5 in Exhibit C) and additional revisions noted by the ARB (numbers 6-9 in Exhibit C).

 

Timing does not allow an opportunity for these revisions to be submitted and reviewed by the ARB prior to the applicant’s advertised Board hearing date. However, the items raised by the ARB and included in the Action Memo can be addressed at the site plan stage and the applicant has expressed a willingness to do so. All other ARB recommendations are sufficiently addressed or will be reviewed and subject to ARB certificate of appropriateness at the site plan stage.

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Based on the applicant’s response to the issues that remained at the Planning Commissions public hearing and with recommended revisions detailed in the ARB action memo to be addressed by the ARB at the site plan stage, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2005-015 with the proffers in Exhibit A and the amended application plan (Exhibit B), and SP 2005 – 027 with the following conditions:

 

    1. Drive-through windows will be limited to three (3); including any to be used for an ATM.
    2. Architectural Review Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness.
    3. Applicant is responsible for installation and maintenance of control devices such as signage, and pavement markings as indicated on the application plan.

 

ATTACHMENTS:

EXHIBIT A:      Signed Proffers dated June 13, 2007

EXHIBIT B:      Application Plan dated March 16, 2006

EXHIBIT C:      June 4, 2007 ARB Action Memo

PC actions letter

PC staff report and attachments

PC minutes

 Return to regular agenda