COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

 

AGENDA TITLE:

ZMA 2007 – 004 Oakleigh Farm

 

SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:

Request to rezone 8.82 acres from R-6, Residential to Neighborhood Model District, in order to provide 109 dwelling units and up to 28,800 square feet of commercial space.

 

STAFF CONTACT(S):

Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, and Cilimberg; Ms. Echols, and Ms. Grant

 

LEGAL REVIEW:   YES

 

 

AGENDA DATE:

January 16, 2008

 

     ACTION:    X           INFORMATION: 

 

CONSENT AGENDA:

     ACTION:                 INFORMATION: 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:   YES

 

REVIEWED BY:

 

OWNER/APPLICANT PURCHASER:

Oakleigh Albemarle, LLC with Terra Concepts, P.C. Steve Edwards as the contact.

 

BACKGROUND: 

On October 30, 2007, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Oakleigh Farm rezoning request. Staff and the Commission recommended denial of the rezoning request by a vote of 7:0 for the following reasons (See Attachment I):

 

        1.    Impacts on public facilities that would result from this proposal are not adequately addressed through the provision of the standard cash proffer or otherwise through cash, land or in-kind improvements.

        2.    A buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall has not been provided.

        3.    The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project.

 

Other Planning Commission issues:

4.   Timing of cash contribution in lieu of affordable units.

5.   Provision of an easement to the adjoining property.

6.   Correct wording problems in the proffers.

7.   The need for corrections to the Code of Development as requested by staff; and

8.   ARB comments, related to tree preservation which were not addressed.

 

On December 12, 2007, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on the Oakleigh Farm rezoning request. This public hearing was deferred because the outstanding issues listed above had not been resolved. The Board requested that the applicant work with staff to resolve the outstanding issues and that a subsequent public hearing not be scheduled until the applicant resolved all outstanding issues.

 

STRATEGIC PLAN:

GOAL 4:  Effectively Manage the County’s Growth and Development.

 

DISCUSSION:

Since the December 12th meeting the applicant has worked with staff to resolve the outstanding issues. The following describes the outstanding issues and their status:

 

1.                   Impacts on public facilities that would result from this proposal are not adequately addressed through the provision of the standard cash proffer.

The applicant has provided proffer 2: Cash for Capital Improvements Program, which has the owner contributing cash to the County in amounts consistent with the County’s proffer policy. 

 

2.                   The provision of a buffer along the common property line with Heritage Hall had not been provided.

            The applicant has provided staff a copy of a letter that has been sent to Heritage Hall administration requesting a buffer. (See Attachment II) Generally, the letter describes the applicant’s attempts to discuss the buffer issue with the adjacent property owner (Heritage Hall). The letter gives the Heritage Hall property owner the opportunity to discus/request a buffer if they would like one. To date, the Heritage Hall property owner has not responded to the applicant’s letter dated December 21, 2007. Staff is satisfied that the applicant has attempted communication with the adjacent property owner regarding the buffer and the lack of response from the adjacent property owner indicates the buffer may not be of concern to Heritage Hall.  Unless concerns are articulated by the adjacent property owner which justify a buffer requirement, staff does not recommend that a buffer be required.     

 

3.                   The lack of affordable units to be physically located in the project.

The applicant has agreed to provide 7.5% affordable units on site. In order to meet the 15% affordable housing requirement, the applicant has also agreed to provide cash in lieu of for 7.5% of the affordable units. The Housing Director finds this acceptable; however, the Planning Commission requested that 15% of the units be actually provided within the project.

 

4.                   Timing of cash contribution in lieu of affordable units.

The applicant has provided in proffer 1. A. that it will make cash contributions in lieu of affordable units prior to the issuance of a building permit for any building or block of townhouse units within the Project that contain market rate dwelling units.  The cash will be contributed for each market rate dwelling unit within such building or block of townhouse units, until the 15% Affordable Requirement has been satisfied. (See Attachment III) 

 

5.                   Provision of an easement to the adjoining property.

The applicant has submitted an executed agreement between the owners of Oakleigh and Berkmar Crossing regarding easements for access, landscaping and grading/construction. (See Attachment IV)  

 

6.                   Correct wording problems in the proffers.

Wording of the revised proffers has been reviewed and staff is satisfied that the proffers adequately address those concerns.

 

7.                   Correcting the Code of Development as requested by staff.

Revisions to the Code of Development have addressed staff’s concerns.

 

8.                   ARB comments need to be addressed.

           The applicant has revised proffer 4: Tree Preservation, to specifically address the ARB’s concern regarding protection of the bonded trees to start with the issuance of the last Certification of Occupancy. Page 43 of the Code of Development (top of page, letter “e”) now corresponds with the language mentioned above for proffer 4, as requested by staff.      

 

BUDGET IMPACT: 

Fiscal impacts of the project have been mitigated by cash proffers.  

 

RECOMMENDATIONS:

Staff believes the applicant has addressed all of the outstanding issues with the possible exception of all the affordable housing units being physically located in the project. As previously mentioned, the Housing Director finds the current proffer for 7.5% of the units provided on-site and cash in the amount of $19,100 per unit for the remaining 7.5% acceptable, but the Planning Commission recommended that 15% of the affordable units be physically provided within the project. If the Board finds that a minimum of 7.5% of affordable units provided on site is acceptable, staff recommends approval of the rezoning request ZMA 2007-04 with proffers.

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment I - Planning Commission Action Memo, dated October 30, 2007

Attachment II – Letter to Ted Leneave, dated December 21, 2007

Attachment III - Proffers, dated December 20, 2007

Attachment IV - Agreement

Attachment V - Code of Development, dated December 13, 2007 and Application Plan, dated April 30, 2007, revised December 13, 2007 (on file in Clerk's office)

View Planning Commission minutes of June 19 and October 30, 2007

Return to regular agenda