Charlottesville Tomorrow Blog

Clifton Lake development depends on road access from Clifton Inn

Behind the Shadwell Estates neighborhood on Route 250 E are 62 undeveloped acres of lake front property.  Dr. Charles W. Hurt received approval from the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to develop Clifton Lake in 1978.  Thirty years later, the County Planning Commission has reluctantly approved a preliminary subdivision plat for applicant Greg Baldwin to build Phase I, 30 single-family homes.  

There remains one major obstacle to this new development--The 1978 rezoning requires a “road across the dam” to establish a second entrance to the neighborhood via North Milton Road, Route 729.  Even in 1978, Supervisors were concerned about traffic on Route 250 and the safety of the Shadwell Road entrance used by Shadwell Estates.  Today Route 250 carries significantly more traffic and there is a traffic signal where North Milton Road meets Route 250.  To the neighbors in Shadwell Estates, it makes even more sense today to encourage traffic to go around the lake to the signalized intersection that services Stone Robinson Elementary School.

Lee Ewing, General Manager, Clifton Inn

However, the dam and surrounding land are the property of Mitchell Willey and the historic Clifton Inn, portions of which were intended to be Phase II of Clifton Lake.  Despite a letter of agreement between Hurt and Willey circa 1990, the Clifton Inn’s General Manager, Lee Ewing, told the Albemarle County Planning Commission that the Inn’s owners today had no intention of granting an easement over their property.

“There are safety concerns, there are environmental concerns.  We have children of guests [and] guests going down to the lake. It opens up all type of safety and environmental issues for the Willey’s operation, i.e. the Clifton Inn,” said Ewing.

Kelly Strickland with Dominion Development Resources spoke on behalf of Mr. Baldwin.  “We have never proposed to anything other than the by-right development of the property,” said Strickland.  He apologized for the past confusion about the road access requirements which had led to the Commission’s denial in February 2008.  

“We went back and listened to the [Board of Supervisors meeting] from 1978 and it was clear that the Board intended for the private road across the dam to be an open thru access road serving the community to access Route 729.”  Having made that adjustment to their plan, Strickland was back before the Commission seeking approval.

Steve Houchens lives on Shadwell Road and he spoke to the Commission about his neighborhood’s traffic concerns.  “Our road cannot handle that traffic,” said Houchens.  “If they can come in the other way, more power to them.”

The Planning Commission was very uneasy being asked to approve anything related to a thirty-year old development proposal that was outside of the County’s designated growth areas (to the East it borders Glenmore and the Village of Rivanna growth area).  When Commissioner Marcia Joseph (At-Large) moved approval, recognizing she could articulate no legal reason to deny the plan, there was silence.  No commissioner seconded the motion.

Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) asked the County’s Deputy Attorney Greg Kamptner what would happen if they just sat there silently and didn’t take action.   Kamptner said that three days later the deadline for action would pass and the applicant would have the right to go to court to compel action.  Kamptner reminded the Commission that if they wanted to deny the plan, they would have to cite the exact part of the County ordinance that was not being satisfied.  Stale zoning and off-site concerns about traffic safety could not be used as justification.
 
So the Commission zeroed in on the disagreement between the landowners that made a road easement look like an impossibility.  The development is in Commissioner Linda Porterfield’s Scottsville District.  “It would be really nice if you deferred and came back with signed agreements with the property owners…showing that you have the easement.  It would make it easier on everybody,” said Porterfield.

Greg Baldwin came to the podium and told the Commission that he needed the preliminary plat approved so he could take care of those requirements.  Staff made it clear that the easement and actual road construction would be a condition for final plat approval.  The development could not start without the second entrance.

The second time Joseph made the motion to approve the preliminary plat for Clifton Lake, she got a second.  The vote was 4-2 in favor with Tom Loach (White Hall) and Porterfield voting against (Cannon absent).

With preliminary plat approval, Greg Baldwin will have a year to get the necessary easement to build a connector road behind the Clifton Inn.  Let the negotiations begin.

Brian Wheeler

County Planning Commission denies Berkmar Business Park; cites connector road concerns

The Albemarle County Planning Commission has voted 6 to 1 to recommend denial of a rezoning of 5.67 acres on Berkmar Drive, citing a concern that the developer is not proffering enough to mitigate the impacts on traffic that will be caused by the mixed-use development.

Stonehaus Development wants the County to rezone the property from R-6 to Neighborhood Model District, which would allow for the construction of up to 275,000 square feet on the site of the former Planet Fun entertainment complex, as well as an adjoining forested area. County Senior Planner Elaine Echols said the development fits with the land use proposed in the proposed Places 29 Master Plan, which calls for a Neighborhood Center in that location. By right, only 39 residential units can be built on the site.

The scope of the project has increased since Stonehaus last brought the Berkmar Business Park project before the Commission in October 2006. Originally, residential use was not proposed, and the Planet Fun site would not have been part of the project.  Now both are part of the project.  Stonehaus is also responsible for the Belvedere mixed use development off of Rio Road East.

During the two and a half hour discussion, Commission and the developer ironed out several smaller issues, but could not agree on whether a connector road that would link Berkmar Drive to Route 29 was necessary to alleviate traffic issues. Stonehaus has offered to pay for the road, but not improvements to the existing signalized intersection to accommodate the additional traffic generated by the project.  Echols said that staff felt that Stonehaus had not fully addressed the requirements for a connector road, and had not shown that it was unnecessary.  VDOT, County Engineer Glenn Brooks and County Transportation Planner Juandiego Wade all recommend that Stonehaus should be responsible for paying for the intersection improvements, and for building the road straight through to Route 29.

However, actually building the road will be problematic for Stonehaus, given that an access road for the Better Living home improvement store is in the way, and the store’s owners would have to give permission to do so. VDOT is currently coordinating plans to reduce the number of entrances onto Route 29 as part of its Access Management Plan. A site plan for another nearby development, Rivanna Plaza, proposes moving the entrance for Kegler’s bowling alley to a new location that will also serve Schewel’s furniture. However, access to Better Living would have to be resolved, as they would lose access under this plan. Currently customers and employees use a frontage road, and there are currently no plans to redesign their commercial entrance.

VDOT has new regulations that require developers of large projects to perform a traffic study to analyze the potential impacts. Stonehaus performed such a study, and concluded they were not responsible for making those improvements, because according to their numbers the Berkmar Business Park would not generate enough vehicles to affect the existing traffic system.

Echols said staff had not had time to analyze the Stonehaus study before the Commission’s public hearing, and that VDOT was still in the process of conducting their review.

“But the indications we’ve gotten from them is that this particular development, according to the traffic study, generates the need for this connector road, because the connector road is being offered as the mitigating measure for the impacts, and so at the level of 275,000 square feet and 190 [housing] units, we believe that this road is necessary,” Echols said.

Frank Stoner, vice president of Stonehaus, said he did not suggest a connector to Route 29 as a way to mitigate the traffic.  Instead, he thought it was a way to assist the County’s goals. He showed the Commission a letter from Commonwealth Transportation Board member Butch Davies which he claimed showed that VDOT was responsible for the intersection improvements.

Joel DeNunzio, a VDOT engineer, said his agency is not responsible for the intersection improvements at Better Living, because VDOT did not build the original commercial entrance. He disagreed with Butch Davies. “I don’t believe it’s VDOT’s responsibility to upgrade this to road standard, and I think if you look back through the plans it was ever the intention of VDOT to do that,” DeNunzio said.

Nate Cunningham of Stonehaus said the firm is committed to building the connector road from Berkmar right down to Schewel’s entrance. Cunningham also presented the Commission with the results of their traffic study, which he said assumed a full build-out of 275,000 square feet.  He said the second study was done to correct errors made in the first one.

“What [the traffic study data] shows is that we have little if any negative traffic impacts and so our commitment to build the connector road was more out of wanting to support the County’s goals,” Cunningham said. “To date it has not been possible in large part because it is outside our control to force the [owners of Better Living] to move their access road.”

But County Engineer Glenn Brooks said he was bothered that the Stonehaus traffic study was presented to the Commission before being vetted by staff.

“The traffic study I saw was completely different,” Brooks said. He pointed out what he saw as several errors in the study, including what VDOT considers a failing level of service. He said VDOT also had not reviewed the newer traffic study, and would likely not be able to for at least four weeks.

Wayne Cilimberg, the County’s Director of Planning and Development, reminded the Commission that they have spent much of the last year discussing ways to ensure that necessary infrastructure is in place before  a new development is approved.

“With further information, it may be that this project can find that right place in terms of what is reasonable to have occur with the infrastructure that is possible to be built, and then future infrastructure is probably going to be in the hands of the County and maybe VDOT to get done or some future developer of the Schewel’s or Better Living site,” Cilimberg said.
Commissioner Jon Cannon (Rio) suggested the developer consider contributing cash to the intersection improvements at such time that they are required. Cilimberg asked a question which explained some of the logistical issues with that approach.

“How much development are you comfortable letting occur understanding that you have cash towards an improvement that’s not specified in terms of its timeframe to be accomplished?” Cilimberg said.

The yet-to-be adopted Places29 Master Plan shows a diagonal dotted line where the proposed connector road should go

Cannon acknowledged the potential danger in rezoning without considering the impacts on infrastructure. “There’s a tension here between getting the density of development we’re asking for in the growth area under our Comprehensive Plan… and the concerns about stressing already stressed  infrastructure which won’t accommodate that development,” Cannon said.

Edgerton said he thought the plan was a good one, but that staff needed the ability to study the traffic study. He said Stonehaus could come up with a phased development plan, but acknowledged that time was running out on the application.

Commissioner Tom Loach (White Hall) said he thought the issues should have been resolved before the public hearing, and that he would be taking a strict stance on requiring infrastructure before development.

Stoner said the rezoning needed to occur by June or the project will be dead.  He said he would be open to phasing, possibly limiting construction at the site to 120,000 square feet over the next five years.  “We’re not going to build 275,000 square feet in my life time,” Stoner said.

Cannon said he would support that, but did not see how the Commission could write those conditions during a meeting.  Commissioner Marcia Joseph (At-Large) said she didn’t have enough information to make a decision. “I want [Stoner] to be able to have the full amount that he wants, but I just want to have some sort of a phasing plan,” Joseph said.

Recently appointed Commissioner Linda Porterfield (Scottsville) said she thought the Commission should go ahead and recommend the rezoning given that the County wanted density in the area. While Strucko said he could agree with that, he also wanted staff’s full opinion on the second Stonehaus traffic study.

“This development is going to have an off-site impact on the infrastructure, and I want to know what the infrastructure’s current capacity is, what the margin of change on that capacity will be as a result of this development, and what those numbers are. I’d like to see those numbers as part of this proposal, but I don’t see that tonight,” Strucko said.

Cunningham said that he would be hesitant to proffer the full cost of connecting the road to US 29, in part because of the complex access management issues  involved. “Part of the reason we’re concerned about [the intersection] is that there’s potentially a lot of money to correct the existing conditions there,” Cunningham. He said Stonehaus would be willing to pay for a portion, but without a firm cost estimate he could not feel comfortable even proffering a percentage.

The discussion went back and forth for nearly two hours before Commissioner Porterfield made a motion to recommend approval of the site, with several conditions. No one seconded the motion, and it died. 

Cannon said he could support a motion to recommend approval if Stonehaus agreed to pay for the entire connector road. “Traffic studies at the level of development at full build out indicate that the connector road will be necessary to avoid unacceptable traffic impacts,” Cannon said. “Seems to me the logic is, if they go back and reduce the size of this thing and are able to demonstrate to the staff and to VDOT that there won’t be impacts that necessitate a connector road that [it] will no longer be a requirement.” 

Cunningham said he agreed that developers should cover costs, but that there was no guidance from the state or local government about how the mitigation should be calculated. “I would much prefer for us to have this be a science, much like the proffer policy has become for [residential] units, in which its very clear once you drop below a certain [level of service], you provide money in order to offset those impacts,” Cunningham said.

“I know everyone on this Commission is struggling on this because this is exactly the kind of project we want to see there,” Edgerton said. “You have done exactly what we want to do. We want to finish it up but we want to do it responsibly and we cannot do it without more time and more study.”

But Porterfield said it was important to send a positive message to the developer, and so she again introduced a motion to recommend approval. And for a second time, there was no second and the motion failed.

Edgerton’s motion to deny was based on not having enough information on the connector road.  Commissioners voted 6- 1 to recommend denial, with Porterfield voting against.  The Board of Supervisors will consider the project on May 7, 2008.

Sean Tubbs

County Planners oppose Pantops sports and auto complex

At their meeting on March 25, 2008, the Albemarle County Planning Commission held a work session to consider a project proposing a major indoor/outdoor sports complex, a two-story retail and office building, and an auto dealership on Route 250 East near the Interstate 64 interchange at Shadwell.  The East Pantops Complex is on three parcels totaling 58.2 acres which includes the South Lego Farm.

The majority of the commissioners expressed strong concerns about the scale and location of the sporting complex and additional Highway Commercial activity. In the view of the Commission, the overall project was not seen as compatible with the County’s Comprehensive Plan.  All of the commissioners were opposed to the seven additional residential lots proposed for the property.  Chairman Cal Morris was not in attendance at the meeting.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080325-EastPantops.MP3

The staff report identified numerous challenges the proposal presents for the County’s consideration.

• Location: Project is in the rural area outside the Pantops Development Area.  In addition to the sports complex, the project proposes seven additional housing lots, an intensity of use not intended in the Rural Areas portion of the Comprehensive Plan.
• Scale of facility: The applicant stated this would be the largest indoor recreation facility of its type in Virginia.  The indoor sports facility is proposed to be 93,750 sq.ft. covering 2.15 acres.  In Albemarle’s rural area, only four other buildings exceed 90,000 sq.ft.  Three of them are County schools and the fourth is the Earlysville Industrial Park Building.
• Comparable projects: An indoor soccer facility less than half this size in the rural area off Polo Grounds Road was recently rejected by the Board of Supervisors.
• Historic resources: There are several historic resources near the property (Monticello, Shadwell Estate, and the archaeological site of the 19th century Shadwell canal lock and dam.
• Highway interchange policies: This property is on the rural area side of the I-64 interchange not designated for interchange-related development.
• Master plan: The Pantops Master Plan was approved in March 2008.  Staff note there were no requests for changes along this eastern boundary of the development area (e.g. to include this property in the plan).
• Natural resources: There would be grading and fill in the floodplain and in stream buffer areas to create outdoor playing fields.

The centerpiece of the proposed project is the 93,750 sq.ft. indoor sports complex.  The applicant, Mike Harding, said it would include three indoor soccer fields, four indoor basketball courts, a health club, and a restaurant.  Modeled after a smaller facility in Rockville, MD, the building would cover 2.15 acres.  Harding said it would be the biggest indoor sporting facility of its kind in Virginia.  The Commission was skeptical such a facility could be done in accordance with the goals of the County’s Comprehensive Plan.

Harding was encouraged to consider applying for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment (CPA) which would lay the foundation for the County to consider an appropriate application in the future.  However, given the tenor of the commissioners comments about the proposal and the concerns presented by staff, the likelihood of such a CPA being approved in the County’s rural area by the Planning Commission seems remote.

Harding described his request for the Highway Commercial rezoning along Route 250 as appropriate development that would be “linear infill.”  He questioned the County’s designation of that land as rural dating back to the great rezoning of 1980.  “To refer to any part of this project as rural in character, I’d have to say that our forefathers that did that were putting lipstick on a pig,” said Harding.  “There is nothing here that is rural in character where the rezoning is being asked for.”

The newest Commissioner, Linda Porterfield (Scottsville), told her colleagues that she could support additional Highway Commercial uses along Route 250 East given the numerous commercial properties between I-64 and Route 22 at Shadwell.  “What I am looking at on this side of [the Interstate] is that this is land that is very close in proximity to the other land that is being used commercially….I am also looking at land that…I don’t think has been used for rural [purposes] in a very long time.”

“What do we do to make this productive land for the County of Albemarle?” asked Porterfield.  In recent years, some of her fellow Commissioners have taken what they describe as a principled approach in opposition to the expansion of the county’s designated growth areas, whether through a master planning process or through rezonings like this for the proposed auto dealership.  Land left rural and undeveloped is a “productive” use of the land in their interpretation of the Comprehensive Plan’s goals.  Commissioner Eric Strucko (Samuel Miller) observed that the parcel was bordered by other non-commercial land with conservation easements and historic district designations.

Wayne Cilimberg, the County's Director of Planning, summarized the Commission’s discussion at the conclusion of the work session.  He told the commissioners he heard them saying they could not support the creation of new residential lots nor could it support a rezoning of rural land to Highway Commercial to support the proposed auto dealership.  He also said that the sporting complex was not ruled out if it could be done on a smaller scale, but that the Commission would need to see more detailed information in a revised plan.

Next, developer Mike Harding will have to make a determination as to what type of revised request he plans to bring back to the County for further consideration.

Brian Wheeler

Supervisors approve several new development projects

The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved four development requests at their meeting on March 19, 2008.  The projects included two small residential developments, a church expansion, and a commercial building. 

New Housing and the Interconnection Conundrum

The neighbors in attendance at the two residential public hearings raised similar concerns about the expansion of the Fontana neighborhood in the Pantops area (34 homes) and the Patterson subdivision in Crozet (10 homes)--Namely traffic impacts resulting from new developments being interconnected to neighborhoods that were approved before the County’s Neighborhood Model standards were in place. 

New residential developments must comply with the County’s standards for, among other things, sidewalks and street trees.  Allowing cars from these new “walkable” neighborhoods to connect through the pedestrian unfriendly streets in existing neighborhoods has been a point of concern of County residents from Crozet, to Biscuit Run, to Glenmore. 

Supervisors that find these conflicts in their district often side with the existing constituents and oppose interconnection or only allow it for emergency vehicles.  Other Supervisors point out that it is an important principle of the County’s Neighborhood Model.  Even the General Assembly is starting to suggest they will be less likely to pay for maintenance of roads in cul-de-sac developments and will instead create funding incentives for interconnected neighborhoods that better mitigate traffic congestion.

First up was Fontana Phase 4C in the Pantops Development Area.  Two days after approving the Pantops Master Plan, the Supervisors unanimously approved the 34 home expansion of the Fontana neighborhood. 

Fontana resident Jeanne Anderson spoke during the public hearing sharing her concerns about Fontana’s road system.  She thanked the County for getting improved trails in the proffers, but noted “even with a fully functioning path system…it’s not a replacement for sidewalks [and] curb and gutter.  Keep that in mind…our roads are still sub-standard.”

Fontana resident Jeanne Anderson

Anderson also expressed concerns about the nearby Cascadia development which was approved in August 2006 for up to 330 homes.  There the developer limited his interconnection to Fontana to initially be for emergency and pedestrian use only.  Some Fontana residents are concerned that the roads envisioned in the Pantops Master Plan will eventually allow Cascadia residents, and their own expanding neighborhood, a quicker path cutting through their neighborhood to the stores at the top of Pantops along Route 250.

Supervisor Ken Boyd (Rivanna) shared his concerns about the additional traffic this project, and nearby projects, would bring to the Fontana neighborhood.

“It’s still a real concern of mine.  Those roads are what they are.  They are built very narrow.  They are built with no sidewalks.  I am just fearful we are going to create a tremendous amount of traffic through there when we interconnect that, when we open up Olympia Drive, which will take you all the way up to the light on [Route] 250, with the Giant [grocery store]...”

Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) observed the evolving perceptions of the County’s Neighborhood Model design principles expected in new development.

“I would point out that there were people on the Board [of Supervisors] who really didn’t support initially the imposition of the [Neighborhood Model] standards that we are now concerned are not in place there.  And a lot of the development community at one point said that we should not adopt these standards.  I think what we are seeing is that the community wants and demands these standards.  If you don’t put the standards in place, it creates problems when you start creating links.”

The Board unanimously approved the Fontana Phase 4C development.

On a smaller scale, similar resident concerns surfaced in the Board’s review of the Patterson subdivision in Crozet.  Cliff Fox came requesting approval of a 10 home development adjacent to Grayrock North.  Fox’s property is on the edge of the Crozet Growth Area along Lantetown Road.  However, VDOT recommend against allowing a new cul-de-sac to be connected to Lanetown Road.  Instead, they said it would be better to utilize Lanetown Way within the adjacent Grayrock development.

Not surprisingly, Grayrock North residents were looking for fewer homes and a different road alignment.  Mike Beno spoke during the public hearing.  “We do still fee that the project is a little more dense than is fitting for the parcel,” said Beno.  He also acknowledged that his neighborhood (like Fontana) was developed prior to the neighborhood model.  “What we are asking is that the applicant and the Board of Supervisors is to not compound the shortcomings of that by adding extra traffic onto Lanetown Way....It is where all the kids play, there are no sidewalks.”

Patterson developer Cliff Fox

Supervisor Ann Mallek (White Hall) was the lone vote against the new project.  She cited concerns about the density of housing and the connection to Grayrock North.  The other five members of the Board overruled the Planning Commission’s 4-2 vote from January 2008 recommending that the plan be denied.  Some Commission members took a strict interpretation of Crozet Master Plan’s map which showed a portion of this parcel as being lower density.  They argued the edge of the Crozet development area should be lower density throughout the Patterson parcel.

Supervisor David Slutzky (Rio) shared his perspective that the Patterson subdivision was consistent with the Crozet Master Plan.

“[W]e have got a commitment we have made through the master planning process to the broader principle of interconnectivity, of concentrating our development activities inside the growth areas, and upgrading the infrastructure on those sites as they develop.  And we are going to bump up against situations constantly where things that got developed [in the past] don’t have the sidewalks, they don’t have the other infrastructure.  But if those become the reason why we stop honoring the whole point of the growth areas and the master planning, I think we are shooting ourselves in the foot in a very big way…I am genuinely sympathetic to the real situation that the folks in Grayrock are articulating, but there was an opportunity during the master planning process to decide the boundaries of the growth area, decide the densities.  The community as a whole came up with a vision, and I think this proposal is consistent with that vision in many ways…”

The Supervisors approved the Patterson subdivision by a vote of 5-1.

Church expansion and new Office get approval

In other business, the Board of Supervisors quickly approved the request of the Emmanuel Episcopal Church for improvements to their property in Greenwood.  Church leaders were commended for being good stewards of their property and for planning their additional parking areas around the old oak trees the surround the historic church.

Supervisors also unanimously approved Keith Woodard’s plan for construction of a two-story office building at the southwest corner of the intersection of Hydraulic and Georgetown. The 20,000 sq. ft. commercial building will have two stories visible from the road and a third story visible from the parking area at a basement level behind the building.

Brian Wheeler

County approves major retail development between Fifth & Avon

The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has unanimously voted to approve a new retail development south of the City of Charlottesville. The Fifth and Avon Center will bring 470,000 square feet of retail space just south of the City of Charlottesville, in a configuration that will include at least two “big-box” retail stores, as well as a five-story parking structure to serve the site. The property is being developed by Hunter Craig in collaboration with investors who include Coran Capshaw.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 2008080312-BOS-5thAvon.mp3

In addition to the site, the County will get a new road called the Bent Creek Parkway that will connect Avon Street with Fifth Street on a route that runs the northern perimeter of the new development along Moores Creek. However, part of the road will traverse an old landfill site.

The approval came despite proffers that were dated March 10, two days before the advertised public hearing. According to its own policy, the Board is supposed to receive final proffers nine days before the public hearing to give both staff and the public the opportunity to review them. However, state law allows for proffers to be updated up until the time when a public hearing is called.

The staff report lists several changes that have been made to the proffers in response to the Board’s work session on January 16, as well as other information requested

• The developer has guaranteed the shopping center will be built as one phase, though the site plan would include creation of pad sites for later use
• Developer commits to using green roofing for at least 25% of project as well as rainfall harvesting
• To allay concerns about the County being liable for any ruptures from the old landfill, the property owner will retain ownership of the section of the Bent Creek Parkway that crosses over the landfill – a permanent easement will be granted
• The Department of Environmental Quality has approved the developer’s work plan for how to ensure the landfill does not rupture during construction or after
• Developer proffered that Bent Cark Parkway must be complete before certificate of occupancy can be granted
• County Transportation Planner Juandiego Wade issued a statement that the Bent Creek Parkway would not contribute to additional congestion at I-64 and Fifth Street, and would ease congestion at some intersections on Route 20. However, Wade’s report also mentions that VDOT will conduct a detailed study on the future capacity of the I-64/5th Street interchange “when their workload permits.”

However, staff recommended denial of the plan despite these changes, pending resolution of several issues. First, there were a series of technical errors that prevents the proffers from being legally acceptable. County Attorney Larry Davis said the March 10 revisions corrected those mistakes. Cilimberg said the revisions did not address staff’s outstanding concerns.

Those remaining concerns included:

• Whether the Architectural Review Board would retain control over certain aspects of the plan, including approval of any illuminated signs
• Because occupancy permits will depend on the completion of the Bent Creek Parkway, City engineering staff must sign off on road signals and transportation improvements, such as its intersection with Fifth Street. However, if for some reason the City misses certain deadlines for responding to developer correspondence on these improvements, proffers to fund their construction would not be guaranteed. Staff also questions who would be responsible for right of way acquisition
• If site plan needs to be changed to meet County’s stream ordinances, further rezoning may be needed

Before Chairman Ken Boyd (Rivanna) opened the public hearing, Supervisor Dennis Rooker (Jack Jouett) asked if the public hearing would need to be delayed if a new proffer was suggested by developer in response to staff concerns. That prompted some discussion of whether the people who had signed up to speak should be heard, if the Board was forced to delay the public hearing to satisfy its policy. Boyd invited Stephen Blaine of LeClair Ryan, counsel for the developer, up to the podium to discuss staff concerns before the public hearing was called.

Blaine waived the traditional presentation, and instead used his time to address the concerns. He told Slutzky that the proffers require the landfill mitigation work to be conducted according to the DEQ work plan. He added that the development would meet or exceed the requirements of the ARB, and that the ARB would have to approve each sign. 

Eight people spoke during the public hearing. The first six all reside in the southern end of the County, and welcome the chance to have a grocery store and home improvement store closer to their home.

Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center said his organization has been following the development closely, and could not recommend it unless the big box stores were required to be two-story. He added the development would increase traffic, and that the developer should be required to contribute to a fund to pay for improvements elsewhere in the road network. Butler also said he was troubled by the Board’s practice of allowing proffers to be altered up until the public hearing is called.

Jeff Werner of the Piedmont Environmental Council said the project would end up impacting the County due
to increased traffic, and could hurt the City as well.

“It’s frustrating as a City resident to watch Albemarle County just sort of slowly change the perimeter of the beautiful City of Charlottesville into a sort of Anywhere USA Big Box,” Werner said, lamenting what he perceives as the region’s transformation into Northern Virginia.

After the public hearing, Supervisor Lindsay Dorrier (Scottsville) said he supported the project because it would mean more money would be spent in Albemarle Country, rather than Augusta County. One speaker during the public hearing had mentioned her neighbor travels to Waynesboro rather than shopping along Route 29 in Albemarle.

Slutzky said he did not think the project would generate traffic, but instead would transfer traffic away from Route 29 by giving residents of southern Albemarle more choices. He praised the developer for proffering green roofing technologies, which was not required.  “a particularly high quality project,” he said.

Rooker said the project is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan, and took issue with Werner’s characterization of the project.

“If you drive around Route 3 in Fredericksburg, you’re not going to see anything like this project, which is surrounded by a significant green buffer, is very sensitive to the streams, incorporates trails, has a good pedestrian plan within the project,” Rooker said. He added that the site could allow multi-story buildings.

Thomas said she lost the battle with her fellow Supervisors when the County changed the Comprehensive Plan designation for the property in 2004 to allow for this use. “So, having lost it, I think I’m about to vote for my first big box, because I think the transit provisions, the pedestrian, the bike network, the other environmental  aspects. Have we pushed as hard as we could? Could we have gotten something even more special? We’ll never know, but this is certainly the best that we’ve seen and I’m excited that it’s going to set a good standard.”

TIMELINE FOR PODCAST

• 1:04 - Staff report from Wayne Cilimberg, detailing the changes in the plan since the January 16 work session
• 11:43 - Cilimberg reviews staff recommendation
• 13:01 - Supervisor Slutzky expresses concern that he has not seen a copy of the work plan to secure the landfill
• 15:09 - Supervisor Thomas asks questions about the "tree-islands" staff is recommending be placed between every ten spaces in the surface parking lot, as well as questions on pedestrian-friendliness of the development
• 16:41 - Supervisor Rooker asks how public hearing will be affected if a new proffer is suggested by developer in response to staff concerns
• 18:34 - Supervisor Rooker asks a question about an ARB requirement to have a 50 foot buffer zone between I-64 and the property to hide the development from view
• 20:04 - Supervisor Mallek asks about staff concern regarding stream buffer ordinance and the potential for required work outside the property
• 21:29 - Stephen Blaine of LeClair Ryan addresses staff concerns
• 28:36 - Thomas asks Blaine for clarification on issue of illuminated signs
• 34:16 - Thomas asks for definition of "extensive" roofing
• 35:25 - Slutzky asks his colleagues if they are satisfied with Blaine's responses
• 37:31 - Thomas asks how traffic at 5th Street and I-64 interchange will be affected
• 40:04 - County resident Hugh Underwood speaks at public hearing in favor
• 42:01 - County resident Lorraine Renella speaks at public hearing in favor
• 43:09 - County resident Rebecca White speaks at public hearing in favor
• 45:13 - Downtown Mall business owner and City resident Jacob Martin speaks at public hearing in favor
• 47:03 - County resident Sam Towler speaks at public hearing in favor
• 48:11 - Willoughby resident David Storm speaks at public hearing in favor
• 50:46 - Morgan Butler of the Southern Environmental Law Center speaks against the big box element of the development
• 53:46 - Jeff Werner of Piedmont Environmental Council cautions against traffic increases
• 56:08 - Public hearing closes and Supervisors discuss, followed by motions to approve

Sean Tubbs

The changing face of the UVA medical center

On March 4, 2008, the University of Virginia Medical Center hosted a community briefing to inform the public about the changing needs of medicine and the new hospital facilities being built at UVA.

Edward Howell, Vice President and CEO of the UVA Medical Center since 2002, described an existing hospital facility busting at the seams but eager to take on the challenges of 21st century medicine. 

“We need facilities for two reasons.  Facilities to deal with the increasing number of patients who come to us for care and facilities that recognize and have the capacity to adapt to this new 21st century molecular age of medicine,” said Howell.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080304-UVA-MedicalCenter.MP3

Howell described four major building projects intended to meet these challenges.  Three of the facilities will be completed during the next 3 ½ years (by 2010-11).  Several will transform the landscape in and around the “new hospital” which was opened for business in 1989 off Jefferson Park Avenue. 

The four major hospital building projects are:

• Emily Couric Clinical Cancer Center at JPA and Lee Street (site of the hospital’s West parking garage)
• Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH) at Northridge on Route 250 W
• A new 72-bed six-story tower to be added to the face of the “new hospital”
• Barry & Bill Battle Children’s Hospital (near the intersection of JPA and West Main Street)

Ground breaking begins on the Emily Couric Clinical Cancer Center on April 12, 2008.  Named in honor of former State Senator Emily Couric, this five story building across the street from the main hospital will replace the West parking garage which is closing on April 1st.  According to Howell, UVA has 41,000 cancer patient visits a year today, a number expected to double in the next few years.

“When Emily Couric was diagnosed with cancer [she] went from a transfusion and diagnostic room here…to San Antonio [for further treatment].  She was probably the most articulate spokesperson I can think of for having 21st century medicine in Charlottesville under one roof, and this facility will allow us to do that,” said Howell.  Couric died in 2001 of pancreatic cancer at the age of 54.

While the Couric facility begins the transformation of the main hospital grounds starting next month, UVA’s Northridge campus will see a ground breaking this summer for a new 50-bed Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH).  LTACH will serve patients with profound illnesses and often multiple organ failures who require hospitalizations of over 25 days.

“These patients are in our hospital today,” said Howell.  LTACH, he said, will free up beds in the main hospital and allow all patients to receive improved care.  The facility is expected to add 200 employees to the medical center workforce.

The most visually dramatic of the new buildings is the 72-bed six-story tower to be added to the face of the “new hospital.”  The addition will integrate with the three towers of the main hospital which opened in 1989. 

Howell guided the audience through a virtual “fly by” of the main hospital campus.  From some angles, it appeared as if the techies responsible for the proliferating “Hoo Vision” screens at the University’s athletic facilities had affixed a large flat screen on the front of the mammoth white hospital building.

Luis Carrazana, Senior Facility Planner in UVA Office of the Architect, said the design of the new buildings was about creating “a community for healing and a community for hope.”  Carrazana said lots of glass is being incorporated in the building designs.  “It’s not because of an architectural statement… it’s because of the nature of what is happening in the building and the people.”  Each patient room in the new main hospital tower will have floor to ceiling glass facing Lee Street.  The Clinical Cancer Center also includes a lot of glass, terrace courtyards, and landscaping.  “We are trying to make a connection to the outdoors.  We are trying to bring light into the building…to create a healing environment,” said Carrazana.

The fourth new facility is the Barry & Bill Battle Children’s Hospital (near the intersection of JPA and West Main Street)  Howell described this as largely an outpatient facility.  Its construction will not begin until 2011 after the other projects are complete.  Whether it will require the demolition of the Towers building is a decision that will not be made until later in 2008.

Taking it all in were about a dozen citizens from surrounding neighborhoods who raised concerns about issues such as traffic, parking, and the phasing of construction.

Fifeville resident and former Charlottesville Mayor Nancy O’Brien expressed concern about traffic to and from the hospital for patients, employees, and construction vehicles.  “While its very nice to have the [new West Main Street] parking garage with its 1,000 spaces, it’s getting the people to and from the parking garage that the neighborhood is concerned about.  From a [patient] care standpoint, this looks very nice.  From a neighborhood standpoint…it’s a sort of scary thing to envision because there is going to be more traffic,” said O’Brien. 

O’Brien encouraged UVA to increase its efforts to use satellite parking.  Thomas Harkins, the Medical Center’s Facilities Planning and Capital Development Administrator, said that over 2,000 employees already park remotely at Scott Stadium and University Hall and catch a bus to work.

Fry's Spring resident John Santoski asked if the Medical center was taking into account the fact that the JPA railroad bridge, near his City neighborhood, would be taken out of service for replacement during the construction of these buildings.  Santoski suggested traffic would be forced through other City neighborhoods and into the middle of the construction projects as vehicles navigate towards the University.  Harkins said he was unfamiliar with that project, but pledged to get information from City officials.

Highlights of Audio

• 1:20 - Introduction by Ida Lee Wooten, UVA's Director for Community Relations
• 9:00 - Presentation by Edward Howell, Vice President and CEO of the UVA Medical Center
• 15:25 - Howell describes Emily Couric Clinical Cancer Center
• 18:38 - Howell describes Long Term Acute Care Hospital (LTACH)
• 21:42 - Howell describes 72-bed six-story tower to be added to the face of the “new hospital”
• 25:43 - Howell describes Barry & Bill Battle Children’s Hospital
• 26:55 - Howell guides the audience through a virtual “fly by” of the main hospital campus.
• 35:22 - Presentation by Luis Carrazana, Senior Facility Planner in UVA Office of the Architect
• Podcast concludes with audiences questions answered by Howell, Carrazana, and Thomas Harkins, the Medical Center’s Facilities Planning and Capital Development Administrator

Brian Wheeler

Office building moves forward for busy intersection on Hydraulic Rd

The plan for construction of a two-story office building at the southwest corner of the intersection of Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads has received the support of the Albemarle County Planning Commission.  At their meeting on February 19, 2008, the Commission recommended approval of Keith Woodard’s rezoning request.

Intersection of Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads.  Photo: Albemarle County

While very close to Albemarle High School and a densely populated neighborhood area, Woodard's parcel is actually located in the County’s rural area and is currently zoned for commercial use.  Staff recommended approval of the rezoning to Neighborhood Model District in part because the proposed use is less intensive than what current zoning allows.

The 20,000 sq. ft. commercial building will have two stories visible from the road and a third story visible from the parking area at a basement level behind the building.

“We feel, as do many of our neighbors, that this use is more desirable than the convenience store and gas pumps [for which] the property is currently zoned,” said Woodard.  He informed the Commission that half of the 1 acre property would be left in conservation or preservation areas and that a vegetated buffer at the rear of the parking lot would be protected and enhanced with new plantings. Woodard has also committed to a “green building” and proffered to submit evidence of LEED certification. 

Woodward said his primary goal is to sell office space for law firms, insurance companies, and other similar professional users.  He said he could not rule out some small retail shops that would support the offices.

“I think this design is a great improvement over what would otherwise be there by-right,” said Commissioner Jon Cannon (Rio District).  “I drive by this corner every day.  I would much prefer to see this development than the other development, and frankly [I would] much prefer to see this to what is there now, which is a vacant lot and an eye sore and not used or useful to anybody.”

The Commission’s vote to recommend approval was unanimous (7-0) and the rezoning will come before the Board of Supervisors on March 19, 2008.

Brian Wheeler

Supervisors approve rural area ordinances... and more

PLUS: Crozet project moves ahead, a traffic signal for Glenmore, Advance Mills Bridge faces setback, sewers for Albemarle Place, and the rising water and sewer rates

Rural Areas Ordinances

At their meeting on February 6, 2008, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved three rural area ordinance changes related to holding periods on family sub-divisions, stream buffers, and driveways across steep slopes.  The approvals came in front of an audience of about 100 community members, thirty-four of whom spoke during the public hearing.  Identical 4-2 votes on each ordinance broke the stalemate in the Board’s work to support the goals in the rural areas portion of the County’s Comprehensive Plan.  Supervisors Ken Boyd (Rivanna) and Lindsay Dorrier (Scottsville) both voted against the ordinance changes.

Crozet Gateway

Adnan Yousef and his family lobby the Board to approve Crozet Gateway

In other business earlier in the day, the Board of Supervisors approved a site plan for a new development at a key intersection in Crozet.  The Crozet Gateway project will redevelop a 2 acre site at the corner of Route 240 and Route 250 near Brownsville Elementary School.  The existing convenience store will be replaced with two multi-story commercial buildings, a use allowed by-right on the property.  At issue was a request to lower the number of parking spaces provided in the development.  The developer was proposing 99 while the County was recommending 118.  County staff recommended that the Board uphold the prior decisions of the Planning Commission and the Zoning Administrator to keep the parking expectation at the higher figure.

Adnan Yousef shared his frustrations with the Board about how long it has taken him to get his development approved.  He first submitted his plans in July 2006.  Yousef said he was upset that the County's concerns about the parking matter were not raised earlier in the process when he could have made adjustments to his engineering plans.  He said the delays had resulted in potential tenants opting to locate in other new developments along Route 250 near Crozet which were able to be built more quickly.

Supervisors apologized for the delays that occurred and unanimously voted to approve the parking waiver and Yousef's final site plan.

Transportation Matters

In the Board's monthly transportation update, the Supervisors learned from VDOT’s Allan Sumpter that a traffic signal is moving forward for the Glenmore intersection on Route 250 East.  Sumpter said the “warrants” had been recently re-evaluated by VDOT and that this assessment indicated a signal was now justified.  Planning and engineering work will commence immediately.

The Board also heard a report on the Advance Mills Bridge situation.  The bridge in Northern Albemarle was closed for safety reasons in 2007 and the community had been working with VDOT to have a temporary bridge installed while a permanent bridge plan was completed.  Sumpter said a recent call from the Federal Highway Administration had put the brakes on the temporary bridge and that VDOT was going to have to focus only on the permanent solution, something that might not be complete until mid-2010 or early 2011. VDOT's Quintin Elliot said any other course of action could jeopardize Federal funding for the permanent bridge project.

Members of the Advance Mills Neighborhood Association and Supervisor Ann Mallek (White Hall) will be going to Richmond tomorrow to meet with Federal Highway officials to understand the reversal of their October 2007 endorsement of the two bridge plan just days before the temporary structure was supposed to go to bid.

Sewers for Albemarle Place

RWSA's Tom Frederick (Left) and ACSA's Gary Fern (Right) report to the Supervisors

The Supervisors also received updates from both the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) and the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA).  RWSA's Executive Director, Tom Frederick, started with some good news that the Sugar Hollow Reservoir had completely refilled and was spilling for the first time since the drought conditions worsened in late 2007.

ACSA Executive Director, Gary Fern, updated the Board on sewer capacity issues at the Albemarle Place development.  Fern said the new Albemarle Place developer, Edens & Avant, was meeting with his staff to plan for the site's sewer needs.  According to Fern, Albemarle Place will be connected to an upgraded Meadowcreek Interceptor by December 2009.

Water & Sewer Rates

Supervisors asked if the water and sewer rates being discussed would cover the costs of the Community Water Supply Plan and a growing list of sewer infrastructure needs.  Fern indicated he was still preparing his capital budget for FY 2009 and carefully reviewing the rate information from RWSA.  The RWSA provides water and sewer services to the City of Charlottesville and the Albemarle County Service Authority. 

Frederick said the RWSA was trying to find the right balance in its rate structure to be sensitive to ratepayer concerns.  The sewer needs will be better understood after the completion of a major sewer interceptor study later this year.  With respect to water rates, in January, the RWSA projected increases of 1.3% in the City and 2.5% in the County for each of next five years to support the construction of the new Ragged Mountain Dam. 

County Executive Bob Tucker told the Supervisors that if the community wanted to expedite the pipeline phase of the water supply plan, rates would go up more steeply.The pipeline will connect the expanded Ragged Mountain Reservoir to the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir.  To support both the dam and the pipeline being built at the same time, water rates would increase  7% for the the City and 11.7% for County for each of next five years.

Brian Wheeler

Albemarle County's 2007 Building Report

Albemarle County has released its year-end building report for 2007.  Building permits increased 44.5% over 2006 from 575 to 831.  While 2007 started strong with 324 building permits issued in the first quarter, only 97 permits were issued in the fourth quarter of 2007.  That fourth quarter total is the second lowest quarterly total during the past eleven years (1Q 2004 had 77 permits).

Albemarle County's Building Report tracks the location of these permits in the rural areas vs. the designated growth areas [see chart].  In 2007, 24.3% of all building permits were issued for homes in the County's rural areas.  The 202 rural area permits issued in 2007 represents the smallest total for the rural area in the past eleven years.

Albemarle County's designated growth areas comprise 5% of the land in the County. The Comprehensive Plan and other policies approved by the Board of Supervisors are intended to channel new development into the growth areas in order to protect Albemarle's rural fields, farms, and forests.

Brian Wheeler

County Planning Commission recommends denial of new Crozet subdivision

For the second time in three months, the Albemarle County Planning Commission has recommended denial of a rezoning to build a new single family subdivision near Crozet. Newly appointed Commissioner Tom Loach (White Hall) was the leading critic of the application.

Emile Bethanne and J. Daniel Patterson are seeking the rezoning of 3.5 acres so they can build a 12 home subdivision in the Crozet growth area.  In the Crozet Master Plan, the majority of the property is designated as “CT3 Urban Edge in a Hamlet.”This allows for a density between 3.5 and 6.5 housing units per acre. The subdivision is being proposed to be built between Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way. Access to the new units would be via Lanetown Way. Developer Clifford Fox is the applicant on behalf of the Pattersons.

Podcast produced by Charlottesville Tomorrow * Player by Odeo

Listen using player above or download the podcast: Download 20080122-Patterson.mp3

The Commission first recommended denial of the rezoning at a meeting in October 2007. First, the Commission had heard complaints from the Grayrock North subdivision that the project would not fit well with their neighborhood. Second, the Commission felt that the project was too dense for the area. Third, many Commissioners felt the project did not address impacts on the infrastructure.

The Patterson property is marked in red

The item was supposed to go to the Board of Supervisors in December, but the applicant requested deferral back to the Planning Commission. Since then, Fox has reduced the number of units, proffered cash contributions, and has agreed to build sidewalks on both sides of the street to meet “urban street” standards. In addition, Fox had offered to give land to the County for a park, but the land was not designated for that usage so the offer was withdrawn. On affordable housing, Fox is proffering the County-standard 15 percent of units, but it is unclear if we will build 2 affordable units, or contribute a cash proffer instead. Staff recommended approval of the revised plan as consistent with the Crozet Master Plan.

“To summarize, the rezoning is now consistent with the guidelines for density in the Crozet Master Plan which is that it not exceed a net density for this property of 4.5 dwelling units per acre,” said County Planner Rebecca Ragsdale while introducing the item during the January 23 public hearing.

After her report, Tom Loach was the first to pose a question to Ragsdale. Before being appointed to the White Hall seat on the Commission by newly-elected Supervisor Ann Mallek, Loach was an outspoken critic of the implementation of the Crozet Master Plan.

Loach said he could not support the rezoning because in his view it is not consistent with the Crozet Master Plan.

“I look at the Master Plan, I was part of the [committee] that wrote this, I know what the intent of the Master Plan was, and I don't think this meets the Master Plan as I know it,” Loach said.

Source: Crozet Master Plan, Albemarle County

Loach said because part of the Patterson property is located on the boundary of the Crozet Master Plan, it should instead be classified as either CT-1 or CT-2, which restricts growth. The summary for those place types reads: “Very Restricted. Development area open space preserve or reserve with very low residential density.”

Ragsdale said only a sliver of the property is marked CT1, prompting Loach to quote from the Crozet Master Plan: “Most of the periphery of the Crozet development area is recommended for the lowest density of development, consistent with the rural area designation in the comprehensive plan.”

Commissioner Jon Cannon (Rio) asked if the proposal was to build on the sliver of land marked as CT-2. Ragsdale said the applicant has depicted having a bio-filter on that section of property. Wayne Cilimberg, the County's Director of Planning, said that other recent re-zonings in Crozet have also met this issue, and they have dealt with it by focusing all of the development in the areas marked CT-3.

Commissioner Marcia Joseph (At-Large) said it was hard to ignore that the property does contain areas marked CT-3, allowing for greater density. Loach said that the colors did not necessarily reflect the reality of what could be built in all areas.

Cannon asked Loach if anything could be developed on the property, and Loach responded that he thought only a by-right development would be appropriate. That would allow about five units. He also said he would prefer to see Lanetown Way stay rural in character.

Fox said he was clear about the interpretation of the property type on the Master Plan.

“This is the second meeting where there's been confusion about it [from the Planning Commission]. From everything I can see, it's CT-3 in a hamlet, as the staff has currently interpreted it.” Fox said he has worked on other re-zonings in the Crozet area that were colored similarly with no trouble from the board.

Commissioners had other concerns as well. Joseph asked Fox why he was not proffering the detailed information in a site plan. Fox said he did not want to be strictly held to a plan at this time. Linda Porterfield raised the issue of how Fox was going to handle parking, and Fox said he assumed it would be done the same way as it is done in Grayrock North, with a mixture of drive-ways, on-street parking and garages.

During the public hearing, Grayrock North resident Mike Beno said his homeowner's association remains skeptical about the size of the development, and added that on-street parking is not allowed in his neighborhood. He said his neighbors were also concerned that the Patterson development would create too much traffic on Lanetown Way.

“In short we think R-6 is still too dense, and doesn't comply with the Crozet Master Plan in this transitional area, transitioning from what may not be technically called an edge, but obviously when you look at the overall picture, it is on the edge of Crozet.”  He said he could support the project if the applicant reduced the size and found a second way for vehicles to get in and out.

Fox said there was little he could do to address the request by the Grayrock North HOA to access Lanetown Road, because VDOT had indicated that would not be allowed.

Commissioner Joseph said s