ZMA2006-00019 Willow Glen (Sign # 27, 29)

PROPOSAL:  Amend Comprehensive Plan from Industrial Service which allows warehousing, light industry, heavy industry, research, office uses, regional scale research, limited production and marketing activities, supporting commercial, lodging and conference facilities, and residential (6.01-34 units/acre) uses to Urban Density Residential which allows residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses. Rezone 23.681 acres from Rural Areas which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) to Planned Residential District which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses for a maximum of 234 units

PROFFERS:  Yes  

EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Industrial Service which allows for (see uses above) in the Hollymead Community.

ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No

LOCATION: property is east of Dickerson Road (Rt. 606) across from Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport and approximately 1500 feet south of intersection with Airport Road (Rt. 649) in Hollymead Community.

TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 32, Parcels 49F, 49G, 49I, 49J, 49K

MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio. (Judy Wiegand)

 

AND

 

CPA2006-00003 Willow Glen (Sign # 27, 29)

PROPOSAL:  Amend Comprehensive Plan from Industrial Service which allows warehousing, light industry, heavy industry, research, office uses, regional scale research, limited production and marketing activities, supporting commercial, lodging and conference facilities, and residential (6.01-34 units/acre) uses to Urban Density Residential which allows residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office and service uses. Rezone 23.681 acres from Rural Areas which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) to Planned Residential District which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) with limited commercial uses for a maximum of 234 units

PROFFERS:  Yes 

EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Industrial Service which allows for (see uses above) in the Hollymead Community.

ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No

LOCATION: property is east of Dickerson Road (Rt. 606) across from Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport and approximately 1500 feet south of intersection with Airport Road (Rt. 649) in Hollymead Community.

TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 32, Parcels 49F, 49G, 49I, 49J, 49K

MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio (Judy Wiegand)

 

Action on CPA-2006-00003 Willow Glen:

 

Motion:  Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Craddock seconded, to accept staff’s recommendation that the land use change from industrial to residential be made as part of Places29.

 

The motion passed by a vote of 4:0.  (Mr. Edgerton, Mr. Morris and Ms. Joseph were absent.)

 

Mr. Strucko stated that CPA-2006-00003, Willow Glen will go before the Board of Supervisors on September 5, 2007 for a work session and October 10, 2007 for a public hearing. 

 

Action on ZMA-2006-00019 Willow Glen:

 

Motion:  Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Craddock seconded for approval of ZMA-2006-00019, Willow Glen subject to the following conditions:

1.      The applicant shall work with staff on the regrading of the slopes so as to be sufficient to give a critical slope waiver.

2.      The front loading of residential units is approved subject to the driveways complying with the distance that was shown in applicant’s presentation tonight so that there will be no hang over of cars onto the sidewalks.

3.      There will be no on street parking except the onstreet parking shown on the curved part by the tot lots.

4.      The cash proffers shall be finalized to meet the Board’s policy.

5.      The proffer details shall be finalized in accordance with counsel for the County and staff.

 

Mr. Cannon assumed that by saying the cash proffers meet the Board’s policy that is alternative 2 as offered by the applicant.

 

Mr. Zobrist replied that was correct.

 

The motion passed by a vote of 4:0.

 

Ms. Long questioned Mr. Zobrist’s motion with regard to the limitation regarding onstreet parking.  There are some other places throughout the plan where there is onstreet parking.  She asked if his limitation intended to be regards to Road C only, which was the horseshoe-shaped road.

 

Mr. Zobrist replied it was meant on all of the public roads.

 

Ms. Long noted that there were other public roads there as well.  She pointed out that they would do it the way the plan shows.  She understands that he did not want any onstreet parking where the driveways are.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that he did not want the plan to change.

 

Ms. Long pointed out that there were a few other places where there is some onstreet parking.  But, he was saying on Road C he did not want it anywhere other than at the top of the curve.

 

Mr. Zobrist asked if there was on street parking in the cut-through.  If so, that was not shown to the Commission.

 

Ms. Long said that coming in the main entrance, there is some onstreet parking on either side of the T where the main entrance connects.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that his motion was intended to eliminate that.

 

Mr. Cilimberg noted that staff’s recommendation would be not to.  But, it was the Commission’s choice.    Where the applicant can get onstreet parking, staff would want to have that because it removes the need for more parking that would be pull in and  front loaded.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that when people start cutting through, if there was onstreet parking, that there would one lane rather than two.

 

Ms. Wiegand noted that there were two lanes with parking lanes on each side.

 

Mr. Cilimberg pointed out that it was designed to a public road standard.  VDOT has a standard for onstreet parking with two through lanes.  That is a concept of the Neighborhood Model that they are partially providing for in the project.

 

Mr. Zobrist said driving through some of the projects that have been approved with onstreet parking it is practically one lane. 

 

Mr. Cilimberg replied that the project that he was referring to, Old Trail, staff wanted to do something different, but the applicant went with the minimum design for that particular road type in that particular condition.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that Old Trail was just one of the projects he was referring to.  When people start cutting through there will be a bottle neck at the right turn. 

 

Mr. Craddock noted that, if Town Center Drive was ever built, the public would use that street.

 

Mr. Strucko questioned whether the language of the motion was clear.

 

Mr. Kamptner pointed out that the Commission could reconsider the motion.

 

Mr. Cannon understood the motion to indicate that there would be no onstreet parking except where contemplated by this plan.  That is, he wanted to commit the applicant to this plan   He questioned if the plan was subject to interpretation.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that his concept was it was only showing the onstreet parking on the U and not along the T.

 

Ms. Wiegand apologized if they were misled because onstreet parking is also shown in the area around the T.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that it was his fault that he missed it and not staff’s.  He suggested that the Commission discuss whether to reconsider the motion. He was operating under the assumption that there was no onstreet parking there.

 

Mr. Craddock replied that when he seconded the motion he basically thought that they were approving the plan.    He said that there were about 16 spots of onstreet parking with 8 on the left and 8 on the right. 

 

Mr. Cilimberg said that was what staff was assuming from the motion, that they were endorsing the plan.

 

Mr. Zobrist said that he completely missed those parking spaces.

 

Mr. Strucko asked if the Commission wanted to reconsider that motion.

 

Motion:  Mr. Zobrist made a motion that the Planning Commission reconsiders the onstreet parking on the portion of the T which extends to the right that will probably be the most used or just to move it to one side.

 

The motion failed for the lack of a second

 

Motion on Critical Slopes Waiver Request:

 

Motion:  Mr. Zobrist moved, Mr. Craddock seconded, to accept staff’s recommendation for approval of the critical slopes waiver request for ZMA-2006-00019, Willow Glen.

 

Mr. Cannon asked if they want to condition that on the site plan coming back or are they comfortable with it.

 

Mr. Zobrist replied that staff will tell the Commission when the site plan is in so that it can come back at that time if the Commission so desires.

 

The motion passed by a vote of 4:0.  (Mr. Edgerton, Mr. Morris and Ms. Joseph were absent.)

 

Mr. Strucko stated that ZMA-2006-00019, Willow Glen will go before the Board of Supervisors on October 10, 2007 with a recommendation for approval.  A work session will be held on September 5, 2007 by the Board of Supervisors.

 

Go to next attachment

Return to memo