Agenda PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR DOCKET TUESDAY, November 13, 2018 at 5:30 P.M. CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS I. Commission Pre-Meeting (Agenda discussion(s)) Beginning: 4:30 p.m. Location: City Hall, 2nd Floor, NDS Conference II. Commission Regular Meeting Beginning: 5:30 p.m. Location: City Hall, 2nd Floor, Council Chambers A. COMMISSIONERS' REPORTS B. UNIVERSITY REPORT C. CHAIR'S REPORT D. DEPARTMENT OF NDS E. MATTERS TO BE PRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC NOT ON THE FORMAL AGENDA F. CONSENT AGENDA (Items removed from the consent agenda will be considered at the end of the regular agenda) 1. Zoning Text Initiation – Amusement Center location 2. Zoning Text Initiation – Site Plan Requirements 3. Zoning Text Initiation – Mixed Use code descriptions III. JOINT MEETING OF COMMISSION/ COUNCIL Beginning: 6:00 p.m. Continuing: until all public hearings are completed Format: (i) Staff Report, (ii) Applicant, (iii) Hearing 1. CP18 - 00001 – East High Street Streetscape Concept - Pursuant to Virginia Code section 15.2-2232 and City Code sec. 34-28, the Planning Commission will review the proposed East High Street Streetscape concept, located on Market Street from 7th Street to 9th Street; north on 9th Street to E. High Street; and from E. High Street to 10th Street, to determine if the general location, character and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. Following the joint public hearing, the Planning Commission shall communicate its findings to the Charlottesville City Council, with written reasons for its approval or disapproval. The conceptual design of the proposed improvements may be examined at the Department of Neighborhood Development Services, 610 East Market Street, Charlottesville, Virginia, Monday – Friday between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. 2. ZM18-00002- 1335, 1337 Carlton Avenue (Carlton Views PUD)- Hydro Falls, LLC, Carlton Views I, LLC, Carlton Views II, LLC, and ADC IV C’ville, LLC (landowners) have submitted an application pursuant to City Code 34-490 et seq., seeking a zoning map amendment to change the zoning district classifications of the following four (4) parcels of land: 1335 Carlton Avenue (Tax Map 56 Parcel 430), 1337 Carlton Avenue (Tax Map 56 Parcel 431), Tax Map 56 Parcel 432, and Tax Map 56 Parcel 433 (together, the “Subject Property”). The Subject Property has frontage on Carlton Avenue and apparent frontage on Franklin Street and are further identified on City Real Property Tax Map 56 Parcels 430, 431, 432, and 433. The entire development contains approximately 4.855 acres or 211,483 square feet. The application proposes to change the zoning classification of the Subject Property from “M-I” (Industrial) to “PUD” (Planned Unit Development) subject to proffered development conditions. The proffered development conditions include: (i) affordable housing: providing affordable and accessible housing units for no less than 20 years in the following ratios: at least 30% of all dwelling units within the PUD will be affordable units for residents earning under 60% AMI, at least 15% of all affordable units will be affordable units for residents earning under 40% AMI, ("required affordable units") and, for all other dwelling units within the development, the landowners will offer them for occupancy as affordable dwellings, but if no grant funds, financing, or subsidy is available to support occupancy as an affordable unit, the unit may be rented at market rates. The landowner s shall provide documentation that they actively sought to establish each dwelling unit as an affordable unit, prior to offering it for occupancy at a market rate unit, (ii) building design elements: minimum 15% of all required affordable units will be designed to meet UFAS guidelines for accessibility, and minimum 30% of all required affordable units designed to meet VHDA guidelines for universal design; entrance feature on all building facades fronting on Carlton Avenue; (iii) maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 65 feet; (iv) parking: no additional parking over required City minimums will be constructed onsite, unless required to obtain grants or financing to establish affordable dwellings; (v) outdoor lighting: full cut-off lighting; (vi) bus stop or shelter if requested by CAT; (vii) environmental/ site design: retaining tree canopy on east side of property adjacent to Franklin Street; and pedestrian linkages between buildings, open space and the neighborhood. The PUD Development Plan for this proposed development includes the following key components: approximate location of existing buildings and building envelope for future buildings, a phasing sequence of the development (phase 1 the PACE Center, completed, Phase 2 Carlton Views Apartments, completed, Phase 3 Carlton Views II Apartments, , Phase 4 Carlton Views III Apartments). According to the PUD Development Plan, the total proposed density of the project (all phases) will not exceed 32 DUA, for a total of 154 dwelling units. The PUD Development Plan contains details required by City Code, including: a use matrix for each phase, setback/ yard requirements for each phase, parking calculations for residential uses, open space, landscaping, architectural elements, and signage. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map calls for the area to be used and developed for Business and Technology uses. The Comprehensive Plan contains no residential density range for the Subject Property. Information pertaining to this request may be viewed online five days prior to the Public Hearing at http://www.charlottesville.org/departments-and-services/departments-h-z/neighborhood-development-services IV. COMMISSION’S ACTION ITEMS Continuing: until all action items are concluded 1. Entrance Corridor Review Board a. Dairy Central Phase 2 2. Comprehensive Plan - reserved time for continued discussions V. FUTURE MEETING SCHEDULE/ADJOURN Tuesday, November 20, 2018 - 5:00 Work Comprehensive Plan PM Session Tuesday, December 11, 2018 – 4:30 Pre- Meeting PM Tuesday, December 11, 2018 – 5:30 Regular Minutes – September 11, 2018 – Pre­ PM Meeting meeting and Regular meeting Minutes – October 9, 2018 – Pre­ meeting and Regular meeting Anticipated Items on Future Agendas Zoning Text Amendments –Off-street parking facilities requirements along streets designated as “framework streets” (initiated May 8, 2018) SUP –MACAA (1021 Park Street), 513 Rugby Road, 167 Chancellor, 901 River Road CIP – Work Session December 18, 2018, Public Hearing – Jan 8, 2019 Persons with Disabilities may request reasonable accommodations by contacting ada@charlottesville.org or (434)970-3182 PLEASE NOTE: THIS AGENDA IS SUBJECT TO CHANGE PRIOR TO THE MEETING. PLEASE NOTE: We are including suggested time frames on Agenda items. These times are subject to change at any time during the meeting. LIST OF SITE PLANS AND SUBDIVISIONS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY 10/1/2018 TO 10/31/2018 1. Preliminary Site Plans 2. Final Site Plans a. Main Street Arena Utility Improvements – September 25, 2018 b. Monticello Area Partners Building D – October 11, 2018 c. 323 2nd Street SE – October 19, 2018 3. Site Plan Amendments a. Cedars Health Care Center Addition (TM 40B P4) – October 31, 2018 b. Main Street Utility Plan – October 26, 2018 c. Charlottesville Technology Center – October 26, 2018 4. Subdivision a. BLA – 1413 Ridge Street – October 5, 2018 b. BLA - 1112 Park Street & 606 North Avenue – October 23, 2018 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: November 13, 2018 Author of Staff Report: Brian Haluska, Principal Planner Date of Staff Report: October 26, 2018 Origin of Request: City Staff Applicable City Code Provisions: 34- 41 Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Initiation Process Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice require, the City Council may, by ordinance, amend, supplement, or change the city’s zoning district regulations, district boundaries, or zoning district classifications of property. Any such amendments may be initiated by: (1) Resolution of the City Council; or (2) Motion of the Planning Commission. (See City Code §34-41(a), which is based on Virginia Code §15.2­ 2286(a) (7)). (A rezoning of a particular piece of property can be initiated by Council, Planning Commission, the property owner, owner’s agent, or contract purchaser.) If a person or group seeks to effectuate such a change, the amendment can be initiated by Council or Commission, as required by Code. In such an instance, an applicant will be given the opportunity at a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to present their request, seeking a vote in favor of initiating the amendment. Initiating, in this context, is the action by which the Commission decides whether to begin a formal study on the proposal, or to decline the request. Discussion Staff has been approached periodically over the last two years about the difficulty in opening billiards facilities within the City. The difficulty stems from the definition of the use “Amusement Center” in the City Code. The definition of an amusement center in Section 34-1200 of the City Code is as follows: Amusement center means any establishment, business or location in which there are more than three (3) mechanical, electrical or electronic devices used, or designed to be used, for entertainment or as games, by the insertion of currency, coins or tokens, or by the payment of money to have 1 them activated, and any place of business, or portion thereof, containing more than one (1) billiard table for use by patrons of the business. Jukeboxes, rides and regulation size ten-pin or duck pin bowling alleys shall not, alone, form the basis of a determination that an establishment is an amusement center. Amusement centers are currently allowed by-right in the Highway Corridor. Amusement centers area allowed by special use permit in the B-2, B-3, Manufacturing-Industrial, Industrial Corridor, Downtown Corridor, Downtown Extended Corridor, Downtown North Corridor, West Main West Corridor, West Main East Corridor, Water Street Corridor, Urban Corridor, South Street Corridor, and the Corner District. Staff is of the opinion that the regulation of these facilities is based on an outdated perception, and proposes a revision of the definition and where the use is permitted based on the current state of these types of operations. Standard of Review If initiated, the Planning Commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the Commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. City Code § 34-42 Appropriate Motions Staff supports the initiation of this zoning text amendment. The Planning Commission has the following options for moving forward: (1) Initiate the process by making a motion such as: “I move to initiate a proposed amendment to the city’s zoning ordinance, to wit: amending Article IV, Division 4, Use Matrix-Commercial districts; Article VI, Division 16, Use Matrix – Mixed Use districts, and Article X, Definitions,” or (2) Decline to initiate the process, by voting against such a motion. 2 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: November 13, 2018 Author of Staff Report: Brian Haluska, Principal Planner Date of Staff Report: November 1, 2018 Origin of Request: City Staff Applicable City Code Provisions: 34- 41 Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Initiation Process Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice require, the City Council may, by ordinance, amend, supplement, or change the city’s zoning district regulations, district boundaries, or zoning district classifications of property. Any such amendments may be initiated by: (1) Resolution of the City Council; or (2) Motion of the Planning Commission. (See City Code §34-41(a), which is based on Virginia Code §15.2­ 2286(a) (7)). (A rezoning of a particular piece of property can be initiated by Council, Planning Commission, the property owner, owner’s agent, or contract purchaser.) If a person or group seeks to effectuate such a change, the amendment can be initiated by Council or Commission, as required by Code. In such an instance, an applicant will be given the opportunity at a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to present their request, seeking a vote in favor of initiating the amendment. Initiating, in this context, is the action by which the Commission decides whether to begin a formal study on the proposal, or to decline the request. Discussion Staff has recently discussed changes to the site plan process as prescribed in the City Code to address several issues that have arisen regarding the review of site plans. Several specific concerns are: 1. Ensuring the review process outlined in the code is compliant with state enabling legislation. 2. Increasing the number of signatories on a site plan to guarantee that the reviewing departments agree on the final plan set. 3. Increasing the number of copies of plans required to be submitted by an applicant to accommodate a larger group of site plan reviewers. 1 Staff is requesting that the Planning Commission initiate a review of the entire Site Plan section, with the intent to bring forward a revision of the site plan ordinance in 2019. Standard of Review If initiated, the Planning Commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the Commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. City Code § 34-42 Appropriate Motions Staff supports the initiation of this zoning text amendment. The Planning Commission has the following options for moving forward: (1) Initiate the process by making a motion such as: “I move to initiate a proposed amendment to the city’s zoning ordinance, to wit: amending Chapter 34, Article VII” or (2) Decline to initiate the process, by voting against such a motion. 2 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT REQUEST FOR INITIATION OF ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS PLANNING COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING DATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: November 13, 2018 Author of Staff Report: Brian Haluska, Principal Planner Date of Staff Report: November 1, 2018 Origin of Request: City Staff Applicable City Code Provisions: 34- 41 Amendments to the Zoning Ordinance Initiation Process Whenever the public necessity, convenience, general welfare or good zoning practice require, the City Council may, by ordinance, amend, supplement, or change the city’s zoning district regulations, district boundaries, or zoning district classifications of property. Any such amendments may be initiated by: (1) Resolution of the City Council; or (2) Motion of the Planning Commission. (See City Code §34-41(a), which is based on Virginia Code §15.2­ 2286(a) (7)). (A rezoning of a particular piece of property can be initiated by Council, Planning Commission, the property owner, owner’s agent, or contract purchaser.) If a person or group seeks to effectuate such a change, the amendment can be initiated by Council or Commission, as required by Code. In such an instance, an applicant will be given the opportunity at a regularly scheduled Planning Commission meeting to present their request, seeking a vote in favor of initiating the amendment. Initiating, in this context, is the action by which the Commission decides whether to begin a formal study on the proposal, or to decline the request. Discussion Staff has made note of several errors in the description of the mixed use zones of the City, specifically the primary and linking street designations. Staff proposes a complete review of this section to place any undesignated streets into the designated streets listing, correct any misspelling of street names, and standardize the street nomenclature. Standard of Review If initiated, the Planning Commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: 1 (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the Commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. City Code § 34-42 Appropriate Motions Staff supports the initiation of this zoning text amendment. The Planning Commission has the following options for moving forward: (1) Initiate the process by making a motion such as: “I move to initiate a proposed amendment to the city’s zoning ordinance, to wit: amending Chapter 34, Article VI, Division 1” or (2) Decline to initiate the process, by voting against such a motion. 2 City of Charlottesville Department of Neighborhood Development Services Staff Report CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION JOINT PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF HEARING: November 13, 2018 RE: EAST HIGH STREETSCAPE PROJECT Project Manager: Timothy Motsch Date of Staff Report: October 26, 2018 Action Required: Pursuant to Virginia Code section 15.2-2232, the Planning Commission will review the proposed East High Streetscape concept, located on Market Street from 7th Street to 9th Street; north on 9the Street to E. High St.; and from East High Street to 10th Street in the City of Charlottesville, to determine if the general character, approximate location and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. Background: The E. High Street corridor and Market Street are vital urban streets and an important connection between the Martha Jefferson Neighborhood and the Downtown Pedestrian Mall. The City of Charlottesville has been engaged in a process to enhance this corridor and the adjoining neighborhoods with urban amenities and safe, interconnected streets that promote walking, biking, and efficient public transit while maintaining levels of service (LOS) for vehicular traffic. This corridor was highlighted for improvements in the Strategic Investment Area (SIA) Plan that was previously adopted by City Council. The project intent as listed in the RFP includes: • The East High Street corridor is an entrance corridor into Downtown Charlottesville • The East High Street corridor should be an enjoyable pedestrian experience • Elicit meaningful public input • Create a schematic design of streetscape improvements in the Market Street / 9th St. / East High Street Corridor. • Create an appropriate and functioning streetscape consistent with City goals, the SIA Plan, and the Streets that Work Plan • Provide pedestrian and bicycle-safe infrastructure, including appropriate lighting throughout the corridor, especially at intersections. • It will also be coordinated with and a service as continuation of the improvements included with Belmont Bridge Replacement project south of the E. Market Street intersection. • Maintain and/or improve existing bus stops • Integrate green infrastructure to enhance the City’s stormwater management and urban forestry goals. • Develop the schematic design and provide detailed construction documents that illustrate significant streetscape improvements in keeping with the planning and urban design objectives listed above. A Request for Proposals was advertised that included these design parameters as well as an extensive public participation process and in December 2017, the City of Charlottesville contracted with Kimley-Horn, an engineering consulting firm, to develop plans for the East High Streetscape Improvements. In addition to the design parameters established by the RFP, Kimley-Horn also researched a variety of initiatives within the City of Charlottesville that are focused on enhancing the vibrancy and quality of life, including the City of Charlottesville Comprehensive Plan, the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, Streets That Work, and the Strategic Investment Area. With a firm grasp of background information, the project team began the public involvement process to ensure agreement with the project’s purpose and need before beginning development of a conceptual design. Community Engagement: To help guide the project, the City appointed a project Steering Committee. The process also involves coordination with the following City Council appointed stakeholder groups: • ADA Advisory Committee • Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee • Downtown Business Association/Chamber of Commerce • PLACE Design Task Force • Planning Commission • Tree Commission The City of Charlottesville has provided multiple opportunities for the public to provide input into the plan development process. A project website, an on-line survey, two community events (Streetscape Summit and Open House) as well as steering committee meetings occurred between March 8th and August 15th. The steering committee meetings were open to the public. Information presented and gathered at the meetings can be found at www.easthighstreetscape.org, however a summary of each event is below: Project Website: The Project website (www.easthighstreetscape.org) contains information that has been presented to date as part of the process. Information presented includes: • Project background • Project schedule • A “resource” page that provides access to information presented and gathered from community events, and information presented at the stakeholder meetings • A contact form • A “get involved” page • An “FAQ” page As of October 15, 2018, the project website has logged over 1,900 unique page views, and approximately 800 unique users. Community Event 1: Streetscape Summit, April 21, 2018 A Streetscape Summit was held on Saturday, April 21 at CitySpace from 9:00 AM to 12:00 PM. The event was set up as an interactive workshop designed to gather input on the East High Streetscape project. The event was organized in a variety of stations to help inform the understanding of existing conditions as well as potential concepts that would be incorporated into the streetscape design. The stations focused on community values, issues and needs, and design elements. In addition to the activity stations, participants were invited to participate in one of two walkabouts of the study area. The MetroQuest survey was featured at the workshop and remained open until May 31, 2018. Attendees received a passport at sign-in to encourage participation at each station. A summary document provided on www. easthighstreetscape.org briefly summarizes the community input data collected at the event and offers stakeholders and community members the opportunity to see the thoughts of others in the community. In addition to data collected in person, the event served as the launch for the MetroQuest survey. On-Line MetroQuest Survey: The MetroQuest survey was active from April 18, 2018 to May 31, 2018. A total of 530 participants provided 13,495 data points and 380 written comments. The goal of the survey was to educate the public about the project and collect feedback on project priorities, tradeoffs to help direct design, and design preferences related to function and aesthetics. The survey was design to mirror the activities of the in-person activities at the Streetscape Summit, and included: • Priority Ranking • Design strategies, which included categories such as bicycle facilities, bus stops and amenities, landscaping, lighting, pedestrian facilities, public art and branding, signage and wayfinding, and traffic and travel times, • Streetscape Investments, which allowed for the user to prioritize improvements by utilizing a monetary value. • Wrap Up, which included another forum for additional comments, and allowed for users to sign up for project updates The results comments for each category can be found on www.easthighstreetscape.org, on the resources page. Additionally, the 380 written comments can be found on the project website as well. The amount of participation captured in the MetroQuest survey is summarized in the below graphic: Community Event 2: Open House, August 15, 2018 Project team members held an open house on August 15, 2018, at City Space from 5:00 PM to 7:00 PM. The open house allowed the public and stakeholders to view the streetscape concept that was developed based on previous engagement events, including the Streetscape Summit, MetroQuest Survey, and Steering Committee meetings. The event was designed as an informal meeting with large plots of the concept, illustrative cross sections, traffic exhibits, and a summary of engagement results. In addition to collecting general comments, the Open House collected specific feedback on priority considerations (as identified in earlier engagement efforts) and access control at two locations along the corridor. Attendees were given a worksheet once they signed in to make it easier for them to weigh in on the elements noted above. An overview of the Open House is available on the project website www.easthighstreetscape.org. The overview points out common themes and takeaways from the feedback received during the event, as well as noting the written comments received on the worksheets. Steering Committee and Stakeholder Meetings Throughout the process, the design team collaborated with the Steering Committee and various other boards, committees and agencies to receive input and feedback during the design process. Steering committee meetings were open to the public. The following groups were met with on the following dates: • Steering Committee: March 8, 2018, and June 28, 2018 • Joint meeting with Tree Commission and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee: September 27, 2018 • Planning Commission: October 2, 2018 Meeting agendas and summaries can be found under the resources tab on the project website www. easthighstreetscape.org. Additionally, a Technical committee was formed which is comprised of representatives from appropriate City departments. The technical committee held meetings on the project on March 7, 2018 and June 28, 2018. The technical committee meetings confirmed input received from the public and stakeholder groups could be technically attained and then maintained. Standard of Review Pursuant to Virginia Code section 15.2-2232, the Planning Commission will review the proposed East High Streetscape concept, located on E. Market Street between 7th Street and 9th Street and along 9th Street from E. Market Street to Locust Avenue/10th Street in the City of Charlottesville, to determine if the general character and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. The Planning Commission shall communicate its findings to the Charlottesville City Council, with written reasons for its approval or disapproval. Comprehensive Plan Alignment: The following denotes alignment with the City of Charlottesville adopted 2013 Comprehensive Plan. Transportation: o Goal 1: Increase safe, convenient and pleasant accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with disabilities that improve the quality of life within the community and within individual Neighborhoods. o This project provides for bicycle facilities on Market St., 9th St., and E. High St. In addition, the sidewalks will be a consistent, accessible width of a minimum of 5’ o Goal 1.2: Provide convenient and safe pedestrian connections within ¼ miles of all commercial and employment centers, transit routes, schools and parks o This project provides sidewalks to enable multi-modal connections to transit routes and employment centers o Goal 1.3 Provide design features on roadways, such as street trees within buffers, street furniture and sidewalk widths that improve the safety and comfort level of all users and contribute to the City’s environmental goals. o This project includes street tree plantings within buffers where appropriate as well as 5’-6’ wide sidewalks. o Goal 1.4: Explore and implement safe, convenient and visually attractive crossing alternatives to enable pedestrians and bicycles to cross major thoroughfares o The project provides for visible, safe pedestrian crossings at intersections. o Goal 1.5: Continue to include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations in conjunction with the planning and design of all major road projects, all new development and road paving projects o The project provides for consistent 5’ wide buffered bike lanes between Market and High St., then 5’ wide bike lanes from High St. to 10th St. Additionally, the bicycle facilities on Market St. are to remain. o o Goal 1.6 Consistently apply ADA standards to facility design and ensure that accessible curb ramps exist at all pedestrian crossings where conditions allow. o Curb ramps will be provided at all crossings. Urban Design: o Goal 1: Continue Charlottesville’s history of architectural and design excellence by maintaining existing traditional design features while encouraging creative, context- sensitive, contemporary planning and design. o Per the public comment received, design focus is on seeking to provide and enhance multimodal connections between the surrounding neighborhoods and the Pedestrian Mall. o Goal 1.1: Emphasize the importance of public buildings, public spaces, and other public improvements as opportunities to promote a sense of place and a welcoming environment for residents and visitors. o The project will encourage pedestrian use through accessible design concepts. Enhanced landscape strips will be incorporated into the final design. o Goal 1.2: Promote Charlottesville’s diverse architectural and cultural heritage by recognizing, respecting, and enhancing the distinct characteristics of each neighborhood. o This project will receive a Certificate of Appropriateness from the City’s Board of Architectural Review. o Goal 1.3: Facilitate development of nodes of density and vitality in the City’s Mixed Use Corridors, and encourage vitality, pedestrian movement, and visual interest throughout the city o The project provides for upgraded pedestrian and bicycle facilities will enhance the neighborhood and corridor o Goal 1.4: Develop pedestrian-friendly environments in Charlottesville that connect neighborhoods to community facilities, to commercial areas and employment centers, and that connect neighborhoods to each other, to promote a healthier community. o The project provides for an upgraded multi-modal connection from the pedestrian mall in downtown Charlottesville to the surrounding neighborhoods. o 1.5: Encourage community vitality and interaction through the incorporation of art in public spaces, neighborhoods, signage, and gateways. o Opportunities for art will be considered in appropriate areas o 1.6: Encourage the incorporation of meaningful public spaces, defined as being available to the general public, into urban design efforts. o The creation of consistent pedestrian space will encourage public space use o 1.7: Promote design excellence for public projects and installations at all scales. o The request for proposals created a project development process centered around design. The extensive public participation process is ensuring design excellence ­ is sought in meeting the community’s present and future needs. Suggested Motions for Amendment of Comprehensive Plan Text and Map 1. I move that the proposed E. High Streetscape Project concept’s, located on E. Market Street between 7th Street and 9th Street and on 9th Street/E. High Street between E. Market Street and Locust Avenue/10th Street in the City of Charlottesville, general character, location and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted 2013 Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. 2. I move to deny that the proposed E. High Streetscape Project concept’s, located on E. Market Street between 7th Street and 9th Street and on 9th Street/E. High Street between E. Market Street and Locust Avenue/10th Street in the City of Charlottesville, general character, location and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof for the following reasons: Attachments Resolution RESOLUTION OF THE CHARLOTTESVILLE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THE EAST HIGH STREETSCAPE PROJECT IS IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Whereas, this Planning Commission and City Council jointly held a public hearing on the proposed E. High Streetscape Project concept, after notice given as required by law, NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that this Planning Commission confirms that the general character, location and extent of the proposed improvements are substantially in accord with the City’s adopted Comprehensive Plan or part thereof. Adopted by the Charlottesville Planning Commission, the 13th day of November 2018. Attest: _________________________ Secretary, Charlottesville Planning Commission City of Charlottesville Planning Commission November 13, 2018 Tonight’s !genda Agenda Process/Schedule Public Engagement Overview Conceptual Design Review Review for Comprehensive Plan Consistency Next Steps Process/Schedule Project Overview Total Budget: $5.59 Million  Funded in 2016 through (Not including potential underground utility betterment)  Multimodal improvements including:  Wider sidewalks, bike lanes, landscaping, ADA and pedestrian improvements, wayfinding and signal upgrades.  Evaluate undergrounding overhead utilities  E. Market Street  From 7th Street to 9th Street  9th Street  From E. Market Street to E. High Street  E. High Street  From 9th Street to 10th Street  City hires Kimley-Horn for design. https://smartportal.virginiahb2.org/#/public/applications/2017/hb2/view/F1-0000000187-R01 Connection to Belmont Bridge Replacement Connection to Belmont Bridge Replacement Strategic Investment Area (SIA Plan)  Purpose of the SIA Plan “To initiate a transformational process to engage stakeholders, city staff, and members of the greater community in the future of the Strategic Investment !rea.”  To provide guidance for future redevelopment and investment in the area  To provide guidance for improvements to affordable housing, including existing public and assisted housing  To provide guidance for improved connections throughout the area  To provide recommend strategies for expanding employment opportunities within the SIA Process/Schedule We are here! Public Engagement Overview Steering Committee • David Katz Belmont Carlton Neighborhood Association • Lena Seville Bike and Pedestrian Advisory Committee • Rosamond Casey Little High Neighborhood Association • Greg Jackson Little High Neighborhood Association • Eberhard Jehle Martha Jefferson Neighborhood Association • Michael Wheelwright North Downtown Neighborhood Association • Lisa Green Planning Commission and Entrance Corridor • Brian Menard Tree Commission • Carl Schwarz Board or Architectural Review • Chris Henry PLACE Committee Website - https://www.easthighstreetscape.org/ Outreach & Engagement Since March 2018 1,000+ touch points 17,500+ individual data points 500+ written comments Steering Committee Meeting #1 Key Takeaways Streetscape Summit o Overall, pedestrian facilities and multimodal MetroQuest Survey mobility is a priority Future Steering Committee Meetings o Desire to provide a safe and walkable street that Open House enhances neighborhood connections Presentations to Boards & Commissions o Utilize design features and proposed amenities to enhance the overall environment for all users Public Hearing EastHighStreetscape.org Steering Committee Meeting #1 Common Themes and Key Takeaways • Key Words | safety, gateway, walkable Expectations • Strengths | location, connections travel options, connectivity, land use/design • Challenges | traffic, balancing modes How would you rank the topics? How important is the topic? • Priorities 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 1. Pedestrian Facilities Pedestrian Facilities 1 4.8 Landscaping 3 4.5 2. Landscaping Bicycle Facilities 2 4.3 3. Bicycle Facilities Signage & Wayfinding 6 4.0 4. Traffic and Traffic & Travel Speeds 4 4.0 Travel Speeds Other (utilities/stormwater) 8 4.0 Bus Stops & Amenities 7 3.8 Lighting 5 3.8 Public Art & Branding 9 2.9 Streetscape Summit Information Wall One Word Priority Pyramid Thought Wall Strong Places/Weak Places Visual Preference Street Builder Walkabouts Streetscape Summit Common Themes and Key Takeaways • Key Words | safe, pedestrian-friendly, welcoming • Priorities 1. Pedestrian Facilities Same priorities as the Steering Committee 2. Landscaping MQ participants had these in the top 5 3. Bicycle Facilities with Lighting also included 4. Traffic and Travel Speeds • Preferred Features | buffered bike lanes, high-visibility crosswalks, trees • Other | Lexington / High intersection frequently mentioned as an issue MetroQuest Survey 530 participants Common Themes and Key Takeaways 13,495 individual data points 380 written comments • Many comments used words such as simple, 4/18 to 5/31 survey period functional, aesthetic, and accessible to describe the ideal streetscape. How they use Relationship with • Most people prioritize design features that the corridor. Drive the corridor. 337 directly relate to the movement of people 300 Walk (regardless of mode). Ancillary investments 268 265 240 such as branding, public art, and wayfinding 200 typically rated lower. Bike 100 • Enhanced design requests typically focused 106 on buffering bicyclists and pedestrians from 0 traffic. Live Work Nearby Downtown Open House Common Themes and Key Takeaways • Opinions differed on whether to allocate space to bicyclists (bike lane and bike lane buffer) or landscaping (planting strip). • Pedestrian crossings are important, particularly at East Jefferson Street. • Support given to limiting access at Lexington Avenue (left-in/right-in/right-out). • Support given to limiting access at the CFA Institute, however several comments expressed a lack of opinion. Conceptual Design Review Conceptual Design o:?} ~ I_'.'.'.'.'""""'~"' Kimley~H~;~ ..., Conceptual Design ~ EAST HIGH , STREETSCAPE " SECTION ;\ · Wt;\RKET ST BETVJEEN !:ffH ST. i\ND 7fH ST. SECTION C • 9TH ST. BETV11'EEN MARKET ST. ;\ND E. JEFFERSON ST. ll ~.""'" "'';,\ ( u1l 1ho,:A lo, ,,. ,, :'4' SECTION 6 • MARKET ST BETWEEN STH ST. AND 9TH ST. ,,_.A•n.."' "'·"" SECTION D - EA.ST HIGH ST. 6 ETVl/£EN 91/2 ST. AND O A i,';;"'i' "- ""'',;, '··i·-~-------------------------'lt' ' . ·m·"'1 fl'l'rA' ~tr:n::r• · •K·1;m"'1'•1·~Ho",",', Jnr.~~ "'-;.-•;, .'fn ..... .. Review for Comprehensive Plan Consistency Meets Transportation Goals - Summary Existing Conditions • Inconsistent sidewalk widths • No designated on-street bicycle facility • Inconsistent intersection crossing • Multiple driveway cuts cause for multiple distances and pedestrian facilities vehicular conflict points • Roadway widths are not consistent with • Roadway widths are not consistent with urban conditions urban conditions • Unorganized landscape when present • Right hand turn lane onto High St. Proposed Conditions • Minimum 6’ sidewalk width throughout • Implemented access management to the corridor improve vehicular travel • Consistent bicycle facility, transitioning to • Appropriate ADA improvements throughout the proposed Belmont Bridge project the corridor • Consistent landscape • Realigned Lexington Ave. • Removed dedicated right turn lane onto • Reduced crossing distances at Locust/10th High St. Meets Transportation Goals - Summary  Meets - Transportation Goals  Goal 1: Increase safe, convenient and pleasant accommodations for pedestrians, bicyclists, and people with disabilities that improve the quality of life within the community and within individual neighborhoods.  1.2: Provide convenient and safe pedestrian connections within ¼ miles of all commercial and employment centers, transit routes, schools and parks.  1.3 : Provide design features on roadways, such as street trees within buffers, street furniture and sidewalk widths that improve the safety and comfort level of all users and contribute to the City’s environmental goals;  1.4: Explore and implement safe, convenient and visually attractive crossing alternatives to enable pedestrians and bicycles to cross major thoroughfares  1.5: Continue to include bicycle and pedestrian accommodations in conjunction with the planning and design of all major road projects, all new development and road paving projects  1.6 : Consistently apply ADA standards to facility design and ensure that accessible curb ramps exist at all pedestrian crossings where conditions allow. Meets Urban Design Goals - Summary • Based on public comment, streetscape elements are functional, being accessible to all modes and abilities • The project will be coordinated with AASHTO, VDOT, and City of Charlottesville design standards • Provides for upgraded pedestrian and bicycle facilities, including upgrading multi-modal connections from the pedestrian mall in downtown Charlottesville to the Martha Jefferson, Little High, and North Downtown neighborhoods • With the removal of the right turn lane onto High St., it provides for the opportunity to incorporate additional space into the pedestrian zone of the streetscape. • Consolidated driveway openings remove multiple conflict points with both pedestrians and bicycles • Extensive public involvement to arrive at the preferred design Meets Urban Design Goals - Summary  Meets - Urban Design Goals  Goal 1: Continue Charlottesville’s history of architectural and design excellence by maintaining existing traditional features while encouraging creative, context-sensitive, contemporary planning and design  1.1: Emphasize the importance of public buildings, public spaces, and other public improvements as opportunities to promote a sense of place and a welcoming environment for residents and visitors.  1;2: Promote Charlottesville’s diverse architectural and cultural heritage by recognizing, respecting, and enhancing the distinct characteristics of each neighborhood.  1;3: Facilitate development of nodes of density and vitality in the City’s Mixed Use Corridors, and encourage vitality, pedestrian movement, and visual interest throughout the City.  1;4: Develop pedestrian‐friendly environments in Charlottesville that connect neighborhoods to community facilities, to commercial areas and employment centers, and that connect neighborhoods to each other, to promote a healthier community.  1.5: Encourage community vitality and interaction through the incorporation of art in public spaces, neighborhoods, signage, and gateways.  1.6: Encourage the incorporation of meaningful public spaces, defined as being available to the general public, into urban design efforts.  1.7: Promote design excellence for public projects and installations at all scales. Thank You! Questions? October 2, 2018 CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT APPLICATION FOR A REZONING OF PROPERTY JOINT CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING DATE OF HEARING: November 13, 2018 APPLICATION NUMBER: ZM18-00002 Project Planner: Matt Alfele Date of Staff Report: November 6, 2018 Applicant: Scott Collins (Collins Engineering) Applicants Representative: Scott Collins (Collins Engineering) Current Property Owner: Carlton Views I LLC, Carlton Views II LLC, ADC IV C’ville LLC, & Hydro Halls LLC Application Information Property Street Address: 1335 and 1337 Carlton Avenue and two adjacent unaddressed lots Tax Map/Parcels #: Tax Map 56, Parcels 430, 431, 432, & 433 Total Square Footage/ Acreage Site: Approx. 4.855 acres (211,483 square feet) Comprehensive Plan (General Land Use Plan): Business and Technology Current Zoning Classification: M-I with an SUP Tax Status: Parcels are up to date on payment of taxes Completeness: The application generally contains all of the information required by Zoning Ordinance (Z.O.) Sec. 34-41 and (Z.O.) Sec. 34-490. Applicant’s Request (Summary) On May 8, 2018 the Planning Commission held a joint Public Hearing for a rezoning to Planned Unit Development (PUD) on the subject properties. During the discussions, Planning Commission voiced concerns with elements of the proposed development. The concerns included the following: Page 1 of 29 • Insignificant open space that is planned and unifying to the development. • Lacking innovation in building design and layout. Planning Commission would like to see a variety of building types that are clustered around open spaces. • Planning Commission would like to see more pedestrian connectivity within the development and to the surrounding neighborhood. • More amenities within the development, like a grocery store, would benefit the development and surrounding neighborhood. • Planning Commission would like to see a transit plan for getting people from the development to other areas of the City. The updated PUD plan is substantially the same as the one submitted for reviewing at the May 8, 2018 Public Hearing with the following changes: • Updated proffer statement. The proffer statement was reformatted to be better enforceable and provide the possibility for 100% affordable units on site. • Open Space calculation changed from 0.76 acres (15.7%) to 1.31 acres (27.0%). No new open space was added, but areas not calculated in the previous submittal are now shown on this submittal. • Accessible and pedestrian pathway is highlighted on the development plan sheet. Scott Collins (of Collins Engineering) on behalf of Hydro Falls, LLC, Carlton Views I, LLC, Carlton Views II, LLC, and ADC IV C’ville, LLC (landowners) have submitted an application pursuant to City Code 34-490 et seq., seeking a zoning map amendment to change the zoning district classifications of the following four (4) parcels of land: 1335 Carlton Avenue (Tax Map 56 Parcel 430), 1337 Carlton Avenue (Tax Map 56 Parcel 431), Tax Map 56 Parcel 432, and Tax Map 56 Parcel 433 (together, the “Subject Property”). The Subject Property has frontage on Carlton Avenue and apparent frontage on Franklin Street and are further identified on City Real Property Tax Map 56 Parcels 430, 431, 432, and 433. The entire development contains approximately 4.855 acres or 211,483 square feet. The application proposes to change the zoning classification of the Subject Property from “M-I” (Industrial) to “PUD” (Planned Unit Development) subject to proffered development conditions. The proffered development conditions include: (i) affordable housing: providing affordable and accessible housing units for no less than 20 years in the following ratios: minimum 30% affordable units for residents earning under 60% AMI, minimum 15% of all affordable units for residents earning under 40% AMI, an intent to provide 100% affordable units provided funding is obtained. The developer shall provide documentation that they actively sought to obtain funding to create affordable units for each dwelling unit, prior to developing the dwelling unit as a market rate unit, (ii) building design elements: minimum 15% of all affordable units designed to meet UFAS guidelines for accessibility, and minimum 30% of all affordable units designed to meet VHDA Page 2 of 29 guidelines for universal design; entrance feature on all buildings fronting Carlton Avenue; (iii) maximum height of buildings shall not exceed 65 feet; (iv) parking: no additional parking over required City minimums will be constructed onsite; (v) outdoor lighting: full cut-off lighting; (vi) bus stop or shelter if deemed feasible by CAT; (vii) environmental/ site design: retaining tree canopy on east side of property adjacent to Franklin Street; and pedestrian linkages between buildings, open space and the neighborhood. The PUD Development Plan for this proposed development includes the following key components: approximate location of existing buildings and building envelope for future buildings, a phasing sequence of the development (phase 1 the PACE Center, completed, Phase 2 Carlton Views Apartments, completed, Phase 3 Carlton Views II Apartments, , Phase 4 Carlton Views III Apartments). According to the PUD Development Plan, the total proposed density of the project (all phases) will not exceed 32 DUA, for a total of 154 dwelling units. The PUD Development Plan contains details required by City Code, including: a use matrix for each phase, setback/ yard requirements for each phase, parking calculations for residential uses, open space, landscaping, architectural elements, and signage. The City’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Use Map calls for the area to be used and developed for Business and Technology uses. The Comprehensive Plan contains no residential density range for the Subject Property Page 3 of 29 Vicinity Map Zoning Map Gray: (M-I) Industrial, Orange: (R-3) Residential Multifamily, Green: (PUD) Sunrise Page 4 of 29 2016 Aerial 2013 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map Yellow: Low Density Residential, Orange: High Density Residential: Red: Neighborhood Commercial, Red/Brown: Business and Technology Page 5 of 29 Rezoning Standard of Review City Council may grant an applicant a rezoning request, giving consideration to a number of factors set forth within Z.O. Sec. 34-41. The role of the Planning Commission is and make an advisory recommendation to the City Council, as to whether or not Council should approve a proposed rezoning based on the factors listed in Z.O. Sec. 34-41(a): (a) All proposed amendments shall be reviewed by the planning commission. The planning commission shall review and study each proposed amendment to determine: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change; and (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. Planned Unit Development Standard of Review Sec. 34-490. - In reviewing an application for approval of a planned unit development (PUD) or an application seeking amendment of an approved PUD, in addition to the general considerations applicable to any rezoning the city council and planning commission shall consider whether the application satisfies the following objectives of a PUD district: 1. To encourage developments of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of zoning district regulations that would otherwise govern; 2. To encourage innovative arrangements of buildings and open spaces to provide efficient, attractive, flexible and environmentally sensitive design. 3. To promote a variety of housing types, or, within a development containing only a single housing type, to promote the inclusion of houses of various sizes; 4. To encourage the clustering of single-family dwellings for more efficient use of land and preservation of open space; 5. To provide for developments designed to function as cohesive, unified projects; 6. To ensure that a development will be harmonious with the existing uses and character of adjacent property, and/or consistent with patterns of development noted with respect to such adjacent property; 7. To ensure preservation of cultural features, scenic assets and natural features such as trees, streams and topography; Page 6 of 29 8. To provide for coordination of architectural styles internally within the development as well as in relation to adjacent properties along the perimeter of the development; and 9. To provide for coordinated linkages among internal buildings and uses, and external connections, at a scale appropriate to the development and adjacent neighborhoods; 10. To facilitate access to the development by public transit services or other single­ vehicle-alternative services, including, without limitation, public pedestrian systems. Preliminary Analysis The applicant is proposing to rezone the four (4) parcels near the intersection of Carlton Avenue and Franklin Street from the existing M-I to Planned Unit Development. The rezoning request is part of larger development plan that started back in 2012. The first phase of the development was the completion of the by-right Blue Ridge PACE Center located at 1335 Carlton Avenue. Completed in the summer of 2014, the PACE Center (Program of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly) offers healthcare and health related services designed to keep individuals living in their own homes and communities for as long as possible. The center is run as a partnership between Riverside Health System, The University of Virginia Medical Center, and the Jefferson Area Board for Aging (JABA) serving seniors who live in Charlottesville and surrounding counties. Services offered by PACE include medical care, nursing, physical therapy, occupational therapy, nutritional services, medical social work services, and home health care. Over the last four (4) years the PACE Center has provided a much needed service to the community. In 2013 phase II was started in order to create the residential aspect of the development. In May 2013 City Council passed a Special Use Permit (SUP) resolution (Attachment E) allowing the maximum residential density of 21 DUA for M-I zoned parcels. This laid the groundwork for a fifty-four (54) unit apartment building at 1337 Carlton Avenue (Carlton Views I). In July 2015 the final site plan for Carlton Views I was approved and construction was completed in early 2017. At the time of this report all fifty-four (54) units are rented out to residents making under 60% AMI. Phase III of the development started in summer of 2017 and a preliminary site plan for a forty-eight (48) unit apartment building (Carlton Views II) was approved by the Planning Commission on January 10, 2018. In early 2018 City Council awarded the developer 1.44 million dollar for acquisition of the site for affordable units. Once completed all forty-eight (48) units will be rented out to residents making under 60% AMI. Currently the final site plan for Carlton Views II is awaiting approval. Page 7 of 29 At the completion of Phase III (Carlton Views II) the development will have exhausted all the allowable density under the SUP. As the zoning ordinance only allows 21 DUA in the M­ I district, the developer needs to rezone all four parcels to increase density if they want a residential building for phase IV. The developer does not have the option of only rezoning the last remaining parcel as that would remove acreage from the existing parcels, making them nonconforming. In order to fulfill Phase IV of the development, the applicant is pursuing a rezoning of all four (4) parcels to PUD. Year Description Prior to 2012 H.T. Ferron concrete plant May 2013 City Council approves SUP (Attachment E) August 2014 Phase I Blue Ridge PACE Center Completed (Attachment B) Page 8 of 29 January 2017 Phase II Carlton View Apartments Completed (Attachment B) January 2018 Phase III (Final Approval awaiting bonds) (Attachment B) Future Phase IV (Attachment B) Page 9 of 29 Zoning History of the Subject Property Year Zoning District 1949 C Industrial (only a portion of the Subject Properties were in the City) 1958 M-2 Industrial (only a portion of the Subject Properties were in the City) 1976 M-2 Industrial 1991 M-2 Industrial 2003 M-I Industrial 2013 Special Use Permit (Still M-I Industrial) Z.O. Sec. 34-42 1. Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan; a. Land Use The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the Background section of the proposed rezoning application (Attachment C). Staff Analysis The Subject Properties are currently zoned M-I with a SUP overlay. The M-I district was established to allow areas for light industrial uses that have a minimum of environmental pollution in the form of traffic, noise, odors, smoke and fumes, fire and explosion hazard, glare and heart and vibration. Uses allowed within this zoning district can be found in Z.O. Sec. 34-480 are commercial and industrial by nature with limited residential uses allowed. The 2013 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map indicates the Subject Properties remain Business and Technology. Business and Technology is described as properties that would permit small scale offices that cater to start-up businesses and technological development, as well as commercial activity that does not generate the amount of traffic that can be found in more consumer oriented commercial areas. Page 10 of 29 The applicant is requesting a rezoning of the Subject Properties to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to accommodate a higher density development than the current (21) DUA allowed by the SUP (Attachment E). The 2013 Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map does not designate areas that would neatly conform to PUD type developments as they are a special zoning designation with criteria found in Z.O. Sec. 34 Article V. The closest Land Use description from the 2013 Plan would be Mixed Use. Mixed Use in the 2013 Land Use Plan is described as areas intended to be zones where the City encourages development of a moderate or high intensity, and where a large variety of uses will be permitted, including many commercial uses, residential uses, and some limited research and manufacturing where appropriate. According the Development Plan Use Matrix (Attachment B) uses permitted within the PUD would be consistent with most of the current M-I uses, with some exclusions and additions. All of the Non-Residential Industrial uses have been removed as allowable uses. For a list of allowed uses within the PUD see attachment B. For a full comparison see attachment F. The main uses proposed in the Development Plan (Attachments B and C) are multifamily and non-residential. Table 1 (Attachment B page 20) indicates the total allowable unit count for the development to be (154) and a total non-residential buildout of (50,000) square feet. Currently the site is utilizing (20,000) square feet for the PACE Center and (102) residential units. This leaves a total of (30,000) square feet of non-residential and (52) residential units remaining for development. The table indicates residential units could be spread throughout the site, but the non-residential uses would be limited to; Phase I – (30,000) square feet maximum, Phase II – (7,500) square feet maximum, Phase III – (5,000) square feet maximum, and Phase IV – (7,500) square feet maximum. The use matrix provided in the Development Plan indicates non-residential uses as commercial, retail, and general. Should the rezoning be approved, the overall density for the site will increase from the SUP maximum of (21) DUA to a maximum of (32) DUA. Under the future land use map definition this density is considered High Density Residential. It should be noted that regardless of a rezoning, the subject properties are already “High Density Residential” based on the (21) DUA and the type of housing existing on site (apartments). Page 11 of 29 The Subject Property is bordered by: Direction Zoning District Current Use East Albemarle Rudy's Rug Cleaning and other industrial County buildings along Broadway Street South R-3 Manufactured Home Community West M-I Skyline Tent and other industrial buildings North No Zoning and The railroad ROW abuts the subject properties M-I and beyond that is Woolen Mills Self Storage Staff finds the proposed rezoning is not consistent with the City’s Comprehensive General Land Use Plan Map, but may contribute to other goals within the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject properties have been under development since 2012 through by-right and SUP regulations. Although not initiated as a cohesive development, the elements that are established or approved (the PACE Center, Carlton Views I, and II) are interdependent. Residents in Carlton Views I utilize the services of the PACE Center. Expanding on this model, as proposed in the Development Plan, would make sense though the establishment of a PUD. The establishment of a PUD as outlined in Z.O. Sec. 34-490 should contribute to 2.3 (Enhance pedestrian connections between residences, commercial centers, public facilities, amenities and green space.) in the Land Use chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. Prior to requesting a rezoning to a PUD, the SUP conditions of the site requires entrance features, preservation of trees over 6” caliper in open spaces, and pedestrian linkages between buildings, open space on site and the neighborhood. The Development Plan, and Proffer Statement (Attachments B, C, and D) proposes retaining the conditions from the SUP with a few modifications. The pedestrian linkages language remains the same between the SUP and Proffer Statement, but the language on tree preservation has changed. The SUP condition stated: “Existing trees greater than 6” caliper in the open space area on the east side of the site shall be retained.” The new language in the proffer states: “The Landowners shall retain the existing tree canopy on the east side of the Subject property, adjacent to Franklin Street, within an area designated as open space for the PUD. The final site plan for the PUD development shall depict how this requirement will be satisfied.” Page 12 of 29 As with any rezoning, staff is concerned with future development not anticipated on the subject properties. The Development Plan and proffer statement outlines the parameters needed to complete the current development program. This includes the increase in density from (21) DUA to a maximum of 154 dwelling within the PUD. Building envelopes, building heights, and preservation of many SUP conditions are also in line with the existing program for the site. What is more ambiguous, and harder to analyze, is a full understanding of any future development based on the PUD use matrix. Although the PUD use matrix and the M-I use matrix correspond in many areas (retaining a lot of the commercial and residential uses), they do differ in a few ways. The PUD use matrix removes all industrial uses currently allowed in the M-I district. With the residential aspect of the site this is a reasonable alteration to make, but one Planning Commission should focus on. The City has limited Industrial areas and a rezoning this size would remove close to five (5) acres of potential industrial development. Residential treatment facilities, bank/financial institutions, and private clubs are uses within the PUD use matrix that are not permitted in the M-I district. Planning Commission should give some thought to these uses to insure they are appropriate for this location. b. Community Facilities The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C, page 13). Staff Analysis The City’s Comprehensive Plan identifies community facilities as fire protection, police enforcement, and emergency response services; public utilities and infrastructure; and public parks and recreation opportunities. Each of these departments reviewed the Development Plan and found no impacts to community facilities. Per Z.O. Sec. 34-517(a)(7), the City’s Public Utilities Department has verified that water and sewer infrastructure has capacity for the proposed land uses. Per Z.O. Sec. 34-517(a)(8), the City’s Fire Marshal verified that adequate fire flow service exist for the proposed land uses. c. Economic Sustainability Page 13 of 29 The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C). Staff Analysis Staff finds no direct conflict with Chapter 3 (Economic Sustainability) of the Comprehensive Plan with a change of use from M-I to PUD. Staff is concerned with the removal of all industrial uses from the proposed use matrix. d. Environment The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C, page 15 and 16). Staff Analysis The Development Plan was reviewed by the City’s Environmental Department and provided the following analyses. The lighting plan is dark skies compliant, but does not specify high energy efficient fixtures (LED) lighting, as related to Chapter 4 goals 5 and 6. The Development Plan appears to support sustainable methods of transportation as outlined in Chapter 4 goal 6.3. The Development Plan does not commit to high performance green building standards, Chapter 4 goal 5, or indoor and/or outdoor energy efficient or water efficient features, Chapter 4, goals 6 and 7. Waste Reduction management practices, Chapter 4, goal 8, is also not supported. The Development Plan appears to protect the existing tree canopy and steep slope areas on the eastern side. Open space requirements are also achieved. e. Housing The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C, page 17 and Attachment D). Staff Analysis Staff finds the existing, approved and proposed uses for the subject properties could contribute to Goals 3.1, 3.4, 4.1, 7.1, 8.1, & 8.7 in the Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. According to Sec. 34-12 the applicant is not required to provide on or off site affordable housing or payment into the City’s Affordable Housing Fund. Page 14 of 29 In the application, narrative and proffer statement, affordable housing is discussed as an element of the development. The applicant indicates they will be providing a minimum of 46 units, affordable to households with incomes less than 60% Area Median Income ($35,880/year for a single person household and $40,980/year for a 2 person household), on site. Of those 46 units, 7 units will be set aside for residents with household incomes less than 40% AMI ($23,920/year for a single person household and $27,320/year for a family of two). All of the affordable units will be designed to meet VHDA universal design principles or Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards for accessibility. It should be noted that with the completion of the 54 affordable units in Phase II (Carlton Views I), the applicant met and exceeded the affordable housing conditions of their proffer statement dated November 13, 2018. The recently approved Phase III (Carlton Views II) development will add an additional 48 units of affordable housing on site. The success of Carlton Views I, which was fully leased within 45 days after project completion, demonstrates the high demand for affordable rental housing in the City. Because housing is open to all, there is a possibility that families with children could take residence here. Therefore, some impact could be created for school population and facilities. f. Transportation The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C, page 13 - 15). Staff Analysis The Development Plan was reviewed by the City’s Traffic Department and found no impact to transportation. Streets that Work Plan The Streets that Work Plan (approved September 2016 as an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan) labels Carlton Avenue as Industrial. The full plan can be viewed at: http://www.charlottesville.org/departments-and­ services/departments-h-z/neighborhood-development-services/streets­ that-work/streets-that-work-plan Page 15 of 29 Industrial Streets are characterized by one vehicular travel lane in each direction, sidewalks without buffers and some on-street parking. The streets provide access to commercial and industrial properties and must be able to accommodate larger truck traffic. Many of the buildings along these streets are significantly set back from the road. The Streets that Work Plan notes the highest priority design elements for Industrial Streets are sidewalks with a minimum of five (5) to six (6) feet of clear zone and curbside buffer zones of three (3) to six (6) feet with trees. Limited on-street parking, a design speed of 25mph, and limited bicycle facilities are priorities for Industrial Street. Independent of the rezoning application, improvements to the subject properties frontage has been completed along Carlton Avenue. Carlton Avenue currently has a five (5) foot sidewalk with a four (4) foot buffer zone. The buffer zone is not planted, but new trees do exist on the development side of the sidewalk. On-street parking is currently allowed on both sides of Carlton Avenue. Any development with frontage on Franklin Street will require upgrading the sidewalk and providing street trees. Due to the existing development and proposed future development, Industrial Street Typology might not be the appropriate designation for this location. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Vision Network indicates Carlton Avenue to be an on-road corridor local at this location. The plan also calls for Bike Lane/ Buffered Bike Lane at this location. The Franklin Street tunnel under the railroad tracks is indicated as needing intersection improvements according to the Master Plan. The proposed PUD will reduce parking by 35% for the residential portions of the development. As part of the review and approval of Carlton Views II (Phase III), the Director of NDS approved a cooperative parking arrangement per Z.O. Sec. 34-974. If the PUD is approved, the cooperative parking arrangement will be replace by the standards within the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 24 and 25). It should be noted the 35% reduction in parking only applies to residential use. Should other types of development happen on the subject properties (per the proposed use matrix), they will be required to meet City parking standards or amend the PUD. g. Historic Preservation & Urban Design The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, as required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(d)(2), is provided in the proposed rezoning application materials (Attachment C). Page 16 of 29 Staff Analysis Staff finds the uses which could occur as part of the PUD development on the subject properties could contribute to Goal 1.3 Historic Preservation & Urban Design chapter of the Comprehensive Plan. The subject properties are not in an Architect Controlled district, but the Woolen Mills Conservation District is in close proximity. 2. Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s furtherance of the general welfare of the entire community is provided in the Background section of the proposed rezoning application (Attachment C). Staff Analysis Staff finds that a land use change from M-I to PUD, with proffers, as described in the application materials, could benefit the surrounding community by providing additional residential housing options. An increase in density from (21) DUA to 154 units has the potential of added (52) affordable units to this area of the City. 3. Whether there is a need and justification for the change; The applicant has provided information on the factors that led to a request to rezone the subject properties from M-I to PUD in their Development Plan (Attachment C). Staff Analysis According to the City’s 2013 Future Land Use Map, this portion of the City should be Business and Technology and permit small scale offices and technological development. Recent development on the subject properties have already changed the development pattern from Industrial to Mixed-Use. The proposed PUD would not be consistent with the 2013 Future Land Use Map, but it would be consistent with the current pattern of development. Even without the rezoning, future development on the subject property would be more in line with the Comprehensive Plan’s definition for Mixed-Use then that of Business and Technology. Based on the M-I use matrix allowances and the PUD it is possible that future development on the site could be consistent with Business and Technology. It is the introduction of residential uses that shift the land use to Mixed-Use. Staff finds the only substantial and realistic change the rezoning to PUD will achieve is an increase in residential density. Page 17 of 29 4. When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. The location of the subject properties are currently served by existing public utilities and facilities. The applicant has provided a narrative statement on adverse effects and mitigation in their application materials (Attachments C and D). Staff Analysis Any development on the subject properties would be evaluated during site plan review and need to meet all current regulations related to public utilities and facilities. Due to the location of the subject properties, staff believes all public services and facilities would be adequate to support development. In relation to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification, see the analysis below based on Z.O. Sec. 34-490. Planned Unit Development Standard of Review Sec. 34-490. - In reviewing an application for approval of a planned unit development (PUD) or an application seeking amendment of an approved PUD, in addition to the general considerations applicable to any rezoning the city council and planning commission shall consider whether the application satisfies the following objectives of a PUD district: 1. To encourage developments of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of zoning district regulations that would otherwise govern; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 18). Staff Analysis Staff finds the development would be equal to the current regulations in place. Many of the requirements of the subject properties SUP would be preserved in the PUD development. The proffered affordable unit requirements are of a higher quality than that required by the strict application of the zoning regulations. Additional density could also not be achieved under the current district regulations. 2. To encourage innovative arrangements of buildings and open spaces to provide efficient, attractive, flexible and environmentally sensitive design. Page 18 of 29 The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 18). Staff Analysis Staff finds the arrangements of buildings as proposed is not that innovative, but they do engage the street frontage along Carlton Avenue. Open spaces with pedestrian connectivity are provided and environmentally stormwater features are included. Phase IV of the development still offers an opportunity for innovative design. 3. To promote a variety of housing types, or, within a development containing only a single housing type, to promote the inclusion of houses of various sizes; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 18). Staff Analysis Staff finds the PUD, as presented in the application materials, only provides one housing type (apartment). Within that housing type, one and two-bedroom units are available. The PUD use matrix does leave the possibility for future housing types within the development that include; single-family attached, single-family detached, townhouse, and two-family. 4. To encourage the clustering of single-family dwellings for more efficient use of land and preservation of open space; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 18). Staff Analysis Staff finds the PUD, as presented in the application materials, is intended to be a high density multifamily development. No single-family dwellings are proposed under the current building program, but the use matrix leaves open the possibility of future single-family homes clustered around 0.25 of required open space. 5. To provide for developments designed to function as cohesive, unified projects; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 18 and 19). Page 19 of 29 Staff Analysis Although the development did not start out as a cohesive project in 2012, Phase I, II, and III are all interconnected. When fully built out the PACE Center and residential units will functions as a cohesive unified project. 6. To ensure that a development will be harmonious with the existing uses and character of adjacent property, and/or consistent with patterns of development noted with respect to such adjacent property; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 19). Staff Analysis The development will be harmonious with existing uses on the subject properties. The development will also be harmonious with the existing residential uses south of Carlton Avenue. The development will be harmonious with the adjacent industrial uses to the east and west of the subject properties, but not the character. Due to the completion of the PACE Center and Carlton View I, the establishment of a PUD would be consistent with the most recent development patterns. 7. To ensure preservation of cultural features, scenic assets and natural features such as trees, streams and topography; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 19). Staff Analysis The proposed PUD will retain the steep slope and tree canopy on the eastern end of the development. It should be noted that even without a rezoning to PUD the SUP requires preservation of these features. 8. To provide for coordination of architectural styles internally within the development as well as in relation to adjacent properties along the perimeter of the development; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 19). Staff Analysis The application materials indicate an architectural style to match the existing buildings, but no detail drawings of future buildings were provided. The only architectural style adjacent to the subject properties is a large warehouse building that sits back from Carlton Avenue. Page 20 of 29 9. To provide for coordinated linkages among internal buildings and uses, and external connections, at a scale appropriate to the development and adjacent neighborhoods; The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 19). Staff Analysis Coordinated linkages among internal buildings and external connections to the adjacent neighborhood is provided. As noted under (7), even without a rezoning the existing SUP requires this linkage. 10.To facilitate access to the development by public transit services or other single-vehicle-alternative services, including, without limitation, public pedestrian systems. The applicant’s own analysis of the development’s consistency with the standard of review is found in the Development Plan (Attachment C, page 20). Staff Analysis Both CAT and Jaunt provide transit service to the site. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan Vision Network indicates Carlton Avenue to be an on-road corridor local at this location. The plan also calls for Bike Lane/ Buffered Bike Lane at this location. The Franklin Street tunnel under the railroad tracks is indicated as needing intersection improvements according to the Master Plan. Public Comments Received Community Meeting Required by Z.O. Sec. 34-41(c)(2) On March 15, 2018 the applicant held a community meeting at the Blue Ridge PACE Center. The applicant gave an overview of the project as it related to the need for a rezoning. Two members of the public attended the meeting and voiced the following concerns: • How will Phase IV (Carlton Views III) be screened from the adjacent Woolen Mills neighborhood? • What will the architectural style of the future buildings be? • Would any of the future phase include a small grocery store or other neighborhood amenity? • Lighting from the development is a big concern. • Retaining all the SUP conditions from the original development is a priority. Page 21 of 29 As of the date of this report, staff has received the following concerns through email, phone calls or in person conversations: • Parking for the development is not adequate. Employees of the PACE Center are often forced to park on the street or in the surrounding neighborhood. • The height from the SUP conditions was 50 feet and the new proffer statement is showing an allowed height of 65 feet. This change is concerning. On May 8, 2018 the Planning Commission held a joint Public Hearing where three (3) members of the public spoke. The following were concerns brought up during the Public Hearing by the public: • The open space provided is not significant for people to use. • Parking at PACE is a problem and more apartments will add to the problem. • The development is not providing enough housing types. • The development needs more than just 2 bedroom units. • Maintenance in Carlton View I is an ongoing problem. Staff Recommendation Staff finds the proposed development, as presented in the application materials could contribute to many goals of the City’s Comprehensive Plan. The uses presented in the proposed development are consistent with the M-I district, but do alter significantly with regards to industrial uses. As presented in the application, staff finds the PUD to be a cohesive development with integrated elements. Many of these elements will be a part of the development regardless of rezoning. In addition to the standard of review, Planning Commission should evaluate the following: Current Subject Properties with SUP Proposed Carlton Views PUD Density = a maximum of 21 DUA for a Density = a maximum buildout of 154 units buildout of 102 units within the PUD Uses = All uses allowed in the M-I Zoning Uses = See Use Matrix (Attachment C pages District per Z.O. Sec. 34-480 21 – 23) or (Attachment F) SUP Conditions Proffer Statement 1. The maximum height of buildings on the No building or structure within the PUD property shall not exceed 50 feet. shall exceed a height of 65 feet. Building elevations demonstrating compliance with this requirement shall be included within the final site plan for the PUD development. Page 22 of 29 The SUP Condition for height is calculated under the old regulation Z.O. Sec. 34-1200 Building height means the vertical distance measured from the level of the grade of the building footprint to the level of the highest point of the structure’s roof surface. This distance is calculated by measuring separately the average height of each building wall, then averaging them together. The height is measured to the level of a flat roof, to the deck line of a mansard roof, and to the average height level between the eaves and ridge for gable, hip, or gambrel roofs. The PUD height would be calculated under current regulations Z.O. Sec 34-1100 The term "height," when applied to a building or structure shall refer to the vertical distance measured perpendicularly from grade to the highest point on such building or structure. 2. A minimum of 30% affordable housing, • “60% Affordable Units” shall mean defined as residents earning up to 60% of residential dwelling units within the area median income, shall be included on PUD occupied by, or reserved for the site. occupancy by, households having income of not more than sixty-percent (60%) of the area median income (“AMI”) for the area including the City of Charlottesville published annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), as adjusted for family size. • 40% Affordable Units’ shall mean residential dwelling units within the PUD occupied by, or reserved for occupancy by, households having income of not more than forty-percent (40%) of AMI. • “UFAS Units” shall mean dwelling unit meeting Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (“UFAS”) standards for accessibility. • “Universal Design Units” shall mean dwelling units meeting Virginia Housing Development Authority (“VHDA”) standards for universal design. Except as otherwise described here, during the Income Limit Period (as defined below) Page 23 of 29 where the Development Plan indicates residential uses, the portion(s) of the Subject Property that will contain residential dwelling units shall incorporate handicapped- accessible dwelling units and affordable dwelling units, as set forth following below. a. Affordable dwelling units will be provided within the PUD, as follows: i. At least thirty percent (30%) of the residential dwelling units within the PUD shall be 60% Affordable Units (“Required ADUs”) and at least fifteen percent (15%) of the Required ADUs shall be 40% Affordable Units. ii. At least fifteen percent (15%) of the Required ADUs shall be UFAS Units and at least thirty percent (30%) of the Required ADUs will be Universal Design Units. b. The Owners shall record within the land records of the Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville one or more instruments containing covenants or restrictions assuring that the Subject Property will provide the Required ADUs referenced in Paragraph 2(a), above, for a period of not less than twenty (20) years from the date the first Required ADU is occupied by a household of persons meeting the applicable AMI requirements (“Income Limit Period”). The Owners shall notify the City’s zoning administrator promptly of the date on which the first Required ADU is occupied by a household of persons meeting the applicable AMI requirements. Page 24 of 29 c. Administration of the Required ADUs shall be conducted in a manner such that books and records will be kept to document the following: i. Section 8 voucher holders will have first priority for occupancy of any available Required ADU within the PUD. ii. Each Owner of a residential dwelling unit within the PUD shall maintain records documenting the household income of the occupants of the dwelling unit, and of the Owner’s efforts to obtain funding or financing to facilitate the occupancy of the dwelling unit as an ADU in accordance with the AMI levels referenced in paragraph 2(a), above. iii. Upon request by the City, the Owners shall provide a written report to the zoning administrator, accompanied by evidence verifying the Owner’s efforts and results in satisfying the requirements of paragraphs 2(a)(i) and (ii). d. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if, on or before December 31, 2019, both of the following conditions have been satisfied (“Funding Conditions”), then paragraph 2(a), above shall be replaced with the following: Page 25 of 29 a. Affordable dwelling units will be provided within the PUD, as follows: i. one hundred percent (100%) of the residential dwellings within the PUD will be 60% Affordable Units (“Maximum ADUs) and at least fifteen percent (15%) of the Maximum ADUs shall be 40% Affordable Units. ii. At least fifteen percent (15%) of the Maximum ADUs shall be UFAS Units and at least thirty percent (30%) of the Maximum ADUs will be Universal Design Units. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “Funding Conditions” shall mean: i. an allocation of federal low income housing tax credits and syndication thereof, and ii. permanent and construction financing from VHDA. 3. The number of bedrooms in any No Proffer dwelling unit on the site shall not exceed 3 bedrooms. 4. An entrance feature shall be Each building façade that fronts on Carlton incorporated into all buildings that front Avenue shall be designed to include a door on Carlton Avenue. or other entrance feature. Building elevations depicting how this requirement will be satisfied shall be included within Page 26 of 29 the final site plan for the PUD development. 5. Parking provided shall not exceed the Within the PUD, the number of on-site minimum required by City Code. The parking spaces shall not exceed the excess number of spaces shown on the minimum required by the City’s zoning plan submitted to the Planning ordinance; however, if additional parking Commission on May, 14 2013 shall be spaces are required as a condition of converted to the same amount of open receiving grant funding, or other financing, space. to support the provision of the Required ADUs or other permitted use outlined in the PUD rezoning application, then upon presentation of documentation of such requirement to the City’s zoning administrator, a landowner may include the additional number of on-site parking spaces necessary for receipt of such funding. 6. Full cutoff luminaires shall be used and All outdoor light fixtures shall be equipped shall be equipped with devices for with full-cutoff luminaires, and with redirecting light such as shields, visors, or devices for redirecting light (e.g., shields, hoods to eliminate the luminaire glare and visors, hoods, etc.) to eliminate light glare block direct illumination from neighboring and block direct light spillover onto properties. The fixture shall completely neighboring properties. Each light fixture conceal and recess the light source from all shall be recessed to conceal the light viewing positions except those positions source from all viewing positions except permitted to receive illumination. those positions permitted to receive Directional luminaires such as floodlights, illumination. Directional task lighting (e.g., spotlights, and sign lights shall illuminate floodlights, spotlights, sign lights, etc.) only the task and do not shine directly onto shall illuminate only the intended task, and neighboring properties, roadways, or no light from any fixture(s) used in such distribute excessive light skyward. task lighting shall shine directly onto neighboring properties or roadways, nor shall any task lighting have the effect of causing an excessive amount of light to be released skyward. 7. Applicant shall work with Upon written request from a public official Charlottesville Area Transit to facilitate of the City of Charlottesville, a landowner appropriate transit connections for shall provide a location within the Subject residents. Property at which Charlottesville Area Transit can, without charge, establish a bus stop/ shelter. The City shall bear the cost Page 27 of 29 of providing, installing and maintaining the bus stop/ shelter. 8. Existing trees greater than 6” in caliper The Landowners shall retain the existing in the open space area on the east side of tree canopy on the east side of the Subject the site shall be retained. property, adjacent to Franklin Street, within an area designated as open space for the PUD. The final site plan for the PUD development shall depict how this requirement will be satisfied. 9. Pedestrian linkages shall be provided Site design shall provide pedestrian between buildings, open space on site, and linkages connecting on-site buildings, the neighborhood. buildings on-site open space, and neighborhoods adjacent to the PUD. These pedestrian linkages shall be depicted within the final site plan proposed for the PUD development. Summarizing the Standard of Review, staff finds: (1) Whether the proposed amendment conforms to the general guidelines and policies contained in the comprehensive plan. Staff finds the proposed rezoning (as presented in the application materials) would not comply with the City’s Comprehensive General Land Use Plan Map, but would contribute to other chapters of the City’s 2013 Comprehensive Plan. (2) Whether the proposed amendment will further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community. Staff finds the proposed rezoning (as presented in the application materials) would further the purposes of this chapter and the general welfare of the entire community. (3) Whether there is a need and justification for the change. Staff finds a justification for the change should Planning Commission determine additional density is suitable for this location. (4) When pertaining to a change in the zoning district classification of property, the effect of the proposed change, if any, on the property itself, on surrounding property, and on public services and facilities. In addition, the commission shall consider the appropriateness of the property for inclusion within the proposed zoning district, relating to the purposes set forth at the beginning of the proposed district classification. Staff finds the proposed rezoning (as presented in the application materials) would have no impact on public services or facilities, and would meet the objectives of the PUD zoned districts. Page 28 of 29 Suggested Motions 1. I move to recommend approval of this application to rezone the subject properties from M-I, to PUD, on the basis that the proposal would service the interests of the general public and good zoning practice. OR, 2. I move to recommend denial of this application to rezone the subject properties from M-I to PUD, on the basis that the proposal would not service the interests of the general public and good zoning practice. Attachments A. Rezoning Application Dated March 27, 2018 B. Development Application Plan Dated September 12, 2018 C. Development Plan Document Dated September 12, 2018 D. Proffer Statement Dated November 13, 2018 E. May 20, 2013 SUP Resolution for 1335 Carlton Avenue F. Use Matrix Comparison Page 29 of 29 Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A Attachment A ~ JEFFERSON • I .. / ' Charl:Ottesville !• ' ( GREEN ...,,,...., ~ ~. .. -­ -11...,~ ~ ED BUFFER Meade I' ark ' ' ..,. Rivo!rvi~w ?ark / EXIST. SIDEWALK THISPROJE~ ' ll ,,. '1... '~. . 1 ....... cJ> ~.1 " ' "'~.r .;{'~ EXIST. GROUND ~ ., E!ELMONT ·~ ~~ >;,,, ~ rJ' 2..5' J' • ' PROPOSED BUILDING ENVELOPE L=76.365, R=1186.260 .:1=3.68 3 CARLTON Ill 1 '---­ (CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT) 1 I I I I I .. ·. ~ .. ....·.' ,.·· ."' .......... •• r.-----------------:1.. :­ . · ; ......... ·_.• ... _ ........ ~--··· ~ ... ~·······- ... , . " ' " -~ !', :•. 11:··=" =··=· ======i =· ·. . ~· .· ..... . ,• . '• . ·. "\ :·.­ : ...... I I I .· ... . ...... •' ·~ .-~-..... . ' ' . EXISTING BLUE RIDGE . ·. ·. PACE CENTER COMPLETED: 2014 20,000 + SQ. FT. EXISTING CARLTON I TMP: 560043200 54 UNIT APARTMENT ADC IV C'VILLE, LLC • BUILDING ZONING: M-1 COMPLETED: 2017 TMP: 560043300 CARLTON VIEWS I, LLC . ... ZONING: M-1 f r.i i i' • "· · \ \ \ \ •, -:~~-~-·~;.!~·-. \ TMP 05-44 REED E\.-SE\llER, INC. ... 1f _·.' D.B. 64~ P. 727 O.B. 515 -P.----1 04 LAT ISTING AN. SWR I TMP: 560043100 AU HYDRO FALLS, LLC ZONil\IG: M-1 \.. . :· ... •·. . CARLTON II (CONCEPTUAL LAYOUT) ,..,..-=-_)l~\~\- -r -;-7'.=----! PROPOSED BUILDING I ENVELOPE L.DCATION OF' PROJECT: 13M CMLTQN A\EMJE. CJWILMTESVll.LE. VA 229D2 rorAL ACR£AGE OF srm 10TAL ACR£AOO 4.8151! ACRES EXISTING USE. BWE RIDGE FW:E CEN1ER, APARlllENIS, AND CONCREIE MANUFACT\JRl>IG PIANT \ PUD USES' SEE -LICATION NARRAll'IE FllR PROPOSED USES PROPOSED DENSllYl INCREASE IN RESIDENM. UNns 10 A MAXIMUM Of 1M UNns (32 DUA) ACROSS 11£ ENT1'E SllE. STORllWAlER MANAGEMENT EXISTING SllE IS PRIMARLY IMPERYIOUS. IWI GARDENS. UNDERGROUND DEIENTION, YARD SWALES. AND BIO-FILlERS ARE PROPOSED FOR STCRllWA1ER QUAUIY NI> DEIEMTION FllR lHE SllE 10 PROVIDE Wl.lER QUALITY ON lHE SllE NI> TO REDUCE 11£ PllSI' DE'IEl.OPllENT RUNOFF RAlES, VOLUMES, AND VELDCITIES FROM lHE SITE FRONr' 20' MINIMUM ' ...... -----=--­ --­ ROADS SIDE. NONE REWIRED (,tDJH:ENT 10 EXISTING M-1 PROPERIY) ­ EXISTING CULVERT RE* NONE REQUIRED (ADJACENT 10 EXISTING M-1 PROPERIY) MAICllUM HEIGlm SEE -LICATION NARRAll'IE FllR MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHTS. CULVERT DROP INLET & STRUCTURE NO. 10TAL ACR£AOO GROSS FLOOR AREA: SEE -LICATION NARRAll'IE FllR MAXIMUM SQUNIE FOOTNlE Of COMMERCW. NI> NON-RESIDENTIAl r- CURB USES. PROJECT TO BE DEVELOPED IN FOUR PHASES 1 i'l /"\~EA OF CRlT1¢ AL CURB & GUTTER AfFORD'BLE NID ACCESSIBLE HOUSING SHM.L BE PRCNIDED SET FOR IN 1t£ PROFFERS NCJ PUD SCALE APPLICATION. t:·:·:·: ::;,·.·,·.·:.·,·;::;:;.·,·:.·,·.·.·:;:;:::.·,·.·.·.·.·:;::;J PROPOSED ASPHALT 15 30 60 120 FLOODPl.AIN: THERE ARE NO Fl...C:XX>PLAIN LIMITS WmllN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY PER FEMA MAPfStDOlC0281D. PANEL ...-'... j PROPOSED CONCRETE f0289D DATED FEBRUARY 4, 2005. P \ TO BE/ RESERVED PROPOSED VEGETATIVE COVER lHE oo.nC>PMENT OF lHIS PROPERTY DOES Nl1J' NPACJ' A SIREAM BUFFER, Wl.TERCOURSE, DR ( IN FEET ) FUXICPl-'lN ON lHE PROPERTY. lHERE ARE NO WEllNtDS LOCATED ON THE PRCPERJY. THIS SllE ' .' ~ PROPOSED B/OFIL TER VEGETATION DRAINS TO lHE EXISTING MOORES CREEK SIREAM AND WAlERSHED. 1 inch = 30 ft. E~DITCH !lllM'I: UTIUTIE!k su-. BOUNIWll' OF 11£ SllE WAS PRIMllED Ill' UNCOlH NCMllJER 2015. lHE SOE WJU. BE SERllED Ill' PUBLIC WAlER AND SEWER. WA'JER AND SANJr- SEWER WERE EXTENDED EXl{)TIN'G .. LEGEND: DEPTH OF E~ DITCH 10 THE PROPERIY WITH 11£ PHASE I llE'IEJ..O!'MEN (BLUE RIDGE PACE CEN'JER). , WAf 'ERl;t'.JE '· ~ COMMERCIAL BUILDING EC-2DITCH ARrAS PUBLIC U5£: WAlER DEIWIDS/FIRE FLOW: caTICAl SLOPES. LDCA1ED .II.ONG lHE E'ASJERN PROPERIY LINE. SHALL BE PRESERVED IS SHOWN. ~RENTLY. THERE IS NO LJflD ON THIS PROPERTY THAT IS PROPOSED FOR PUii.iC USE. DURING 11£ PHASE I DE.'IEl.OPllENf OF lHE PRDPERIY, 11£ DEVEl.DPERS WORKED WITH 11£ CITY OF ',,::-407 A11'P DEPTH OF EC-2 DITCH I ( ctMDTI'ESYILLE TO EXTEND A 12• WAlERLINE UNDER THE RAll.RO'iD 'TRACKS AL.ONG FRANICLll SJREET TO RESIDENTIAL BUILDING/ MIXED-USE PR--­ PROPOSED CONTOUR MIN. REQUIRED GREENSPACE =0.73 ACRES{15%} BUILDING AND PARKING DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION EXISTING VEGETATD' PARKWG LOT. LANDSCAPING PROPOSED -~ - ~ ENVELOPES TBC DENOTES TOP/BACK OF CURB INCLUDES SIREEr 1REES, LANDSCAPED BUFFERS, ANl 11'EE PRESERVATION ARrAS. '\\ PARKl«J REQUIREMENTS: SEE APPLICATION FOR PARKING ANALYSIS NOTE: ADDITIONAL 0.35 ACRES WITHIN THE TfB DENOTES TOP OFBOX / BUFFER AREAS AND TREE PRESERVATION ACCESSIBLE PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY BURIALS NI> GRAVEYARD& HISTORICAL BUILDINGS' lHERE ARE NO - CEllEIERIES. GRAVES, OR BURIAL AREAS ON lHE PRDPERJY. lHERE ARE NO HISJ'ORJCAL BULDINGS ON lHJS PROPERIY. / I DATE REVISION DESCRIPTION SCALE 3/27/18 INITllll. SUBMITTAL OF THE APPl.lCATTOfY PLAN - COLLINS ENGINEERING CARLTON VIEWS DEVELOPMENT PUD APPLICATION PLAN l" = 30' 4/19/18 R£VISION #1 TO ADDRESS STAFF COMMENTS 9/12/18 REVISION #2 ro ADDRESS PLANNING COMMISSION COMMEIYTS 200 GARRETT STREET, SUITE K, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA22902 OFFICE:434-293-3729 SHEET 1 OF 1 CARLTON VIEWS DEVELOPMENT PUD Application Plan City of Charlottesville, Virginia March 27, 2018 Revision #1: April 19, 2018 Revision #2: September 12, 2018 CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 1 Table of Contents 1. Purpose and Intent 2. Project History 3. Land Use a. Existing Conditions b. Adjacent Properties and Uses c. Comprehensive Plan 4. Public Facilities and Infrastructure a. Water and Sanitary Sewer b. Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements c. Transportation Improvements d. Stormwater Management Improvements 5. Environmental Features and Impacts 6. Affordable Housing 7. PUD Objectives 8. General Development Plan a. Development Plan b. Parking c. Open Space d. Landscaping e. Architectural Elements f. Signage g. Lighting List of Figures 1. Existing Subdivision Plat 2. Existing Zoning Map 3. Existing Conditions – Carlton Views Property 4. Existing Comprehensive Plan 5. Conceptual Updates to the Comprehensive Plan 6. City of Charlottesville GIS Map 7. Previous Use – Concrete Manufacturing Plant List of Tables 1. Overall Allowable Density 2. Land Use Matrix 3. Setbacks & Maximum Building Heights CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 2 Purpose and Intent Carlton Views Development is an existing mixed‐use development located adjacent to the CSX railroad at the eastern terminus of Carlton Avenue in downtown Charlottesville, Virginia. The owner/applicants, Fountainhead Properties and its affiliates, ADC IV Charlottesville, Carlton Views I LLC, Carlton Views II LLC and Hydro Falls LLC, are requesting approval for a PUD rezoning of the parcels making up the Carlton Views/PACE Center project. This project, on 4.855 acres at 1335 Carlton Avenue, was initially approved for a Special Use Permit dated May 20, 2013 to allow up to 21 dwelling units an acre on the property, which is currently zoned M‐1. The proposed PUD request would increase the allowable density on the property from 21 DUA to a maximum of 154 units (32 DUA) and increase the affordable housing requirements, while keeping similar allowable uses on the property for the M‐1 zoning and maintaining the Special Use Permit conditions on the property. The Carlton Views development is a mixed‐use project that has successfully blended the commercial and medical uses of the Blue Ridge Pace Center with affordable and accessible housing for the frail elderly and disabled residents in Charlottesville. With a Housing + Services approach, supportive services for the elderly and disabled are partnered with affordable and accessible housing options located in close proximity to these services. Building on the success of the current 54‐unit apartment building that is currently providing accessible and universally designed units for low‐income elderly and disabled residents, the developers for the Carlton Views property is seeking to allow additional density on the property through the PUD process to construct more affordable units. The additional density will meet the objectives set by the Charlottesville Housing Policy and Comprehensive plan by growing the affordable housing stock in Charlottesville, providing a minimum of 30% affordability for the residential units for a minimum of 20 years, accommodating the housing needs for low‐income seniors and those with disabilities, and increasing density in the areas near employment and transit services. Project History Beginning in 2012, Fountainhead Properties and its affiliates began purchasing and developing parcels along Carlton Avenue at the site of the old H.T. Ferron concrete plant. Fountainhead had plans to develop a mixed‐use project incorporating commercial and residential uses centered on the development of a PACE facility on the site. In November 2012, ADC IV Charlottesville purchased 2.032 acres at 1335 Carlton Avenue (TM 56‐43.2) and began the by‐right development of the Blue Ridge PACE Center. The project was successfully completed in the summer of 2014 and is now in its third year of operation. In May 2013, the City of Charlottesville approved a Special Use Permit permitting residential uses in the M‐1 zoning district and approved residential density of 21 DUA for the 4.855 acres CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 3 site. This set the stage for the phased development of multifamily buildings on the sites around the PACE Center. In August 2014, upon completion of the PACE facility and approval of the SUP, Hydro Falls LLC exercised its purchase option on the remaining acreage and began developing the first residential phase of the project at 1337 Carlton Avenue (TM 56‐43.3). This fifty‐four (54) unit apartment building, known as Carlton Views I, was completed and successfully leased‐up in early 2017. The second residential phase, including a forty‐eight unit building, is set to receive final site plan approval from the City and break ground in April 2018. This building, known as Carlton Views II, is expected to be completed in late 2019. Prior to development of Carlton Views I, Parcel C (TM 56‐43) was subdivided into two parcels. Carlton Views I was built on a new 1.262 acre parcel C (TM 56‐43.3). The subdivision left a 1.034 acre residual parcel D (the new TM 56–43) remaining and undeveloped. With this subdivision, Fountainhead Properties or its affiliates own and operate four contiguous properties along Carlton Avenue as follows: Tax Map Parcel Acres Project Building 56‐43.1 A 0.627 Carlton Views II 48 units 56‐43.2 B 1.925 PACE Commercial 56‐43.3 C 1.262 Carlton Views I 54 units 56‐43 D 1.034 Undeveloped None Figure 1 on sheet 5 shows the boundary line subdivision plats for a layout of the parcels as currently configured. Existing Blue Ridge Pace Center CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 4 Figure 1: Existing Subdivision Plats CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 5 Land Use Existing Conditions The existing Carlton Views property consists of four (4) parcels comprising 4.855 acres of land. The project is bordered by the CSX Railroad to the north, commercial properties fronting Carlton Avenue to the west, and residential properties to the south and east. The four (4) properties are currently zoned M‐1 (as shown below in Figure 2) and received a Special Use Permit for residential development in 2013. The Blue Ridge Pace Center was constructed in 2013 on Parcel B, and a 54‐unit apartment building was completed in 2017 on parcel C. Parcel A and Parcel D are currently vacant, and the buildings and structures previously used by Allied Concrete remain on these parcels. Road improvements along Carlton Avenue, including road widening, sidewalks, planting strips, and street trees are being constructed in conjunction with each phase of the development. Figure 2: Existing Zoning Map Adjacent Properties and Uses The Carlton Views property is located in the Belmont‐Carlton neighborhood, a residential community with some industrial and commercial uses between Carlton Avenue and the Railroad tracks, see Figure 3. Across from this site is a trailer park. The Blue Ridge PACE Center, a joint venture owned by Riverside Health Systems; UVA Medical System); and JABA, Inc. located on Parcel B, is the mixed‐use component of the project. The PACE center employs over 50 people in the area. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 6 Commercial businesses are located to the west of the development, as shown in Figure 3. Storage facilities and an existing junkyard are located to the north of the development, on the other side of the railroad tracks. To the east of the development are existing residential neighborhoods and commercial and industrial properties (along Broadway Street). Figure 6, on page 8, identifies all the properties within 500 feet of the Carlton Views property, identifying the owners and uses of the property. Figure 3: Existing Conditions – Carlton Views Property Comprehensive Plan The Comprehensive plan, see Figure 4 on page 8, shows the Carlton Views property as Business and Technology, a continuation of uses and services from the properties to the west and north. The trailer park property is shown as high density residential, acting as a transition from the Business and Technology properties to the low density residential neighborhoods to the south and east of the property. Currently, the City of Charlottesville is working on updating the Comprehensive Plan. Preliminary discussions and mapping for the Carlton Views property illustrate this area as potentially Neighborhood Commercial, adjacent to High Density Residential properties to the south. The proposed mixed‐use development on the Carlton Views properties ties in well with the Comprehensive plan for this area. The commercial aspects of the property allow uses that will work on a neighborhood scale, and the proposed residential uses on the property are consistent with the residential development and density in the adjacent parcels. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 7 Figure 4: Existing Comprehensive Plan Existing Carlton Views Apartment Building CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 8 Figure 6: City of Charlottesville GIS map Parcel Id: Tax Parcel # Owner: Address Zoning A 5600404A0 Woolen Mills Self 131 Franklin St MLTP Storage, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 B 560029200 Wright Brothers 1308 E Market St M‐I Holdings, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 C 560028000 Wright Brothers 1308 E Market St MLTP Holdings, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 D 560027000 Wright Brothers 1308 E Market St M‐I Holdings, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 E 560044000 One Carlton, LLC 12704 Crimson Ct, Ste 101 M‐I Henrico, VA 23233 F 560044A00 STC, LLC 1327 Carlton Ave, #A M‐I Charlottesville, VA 22902 G 560086000 My Properties, LLC 411 2nd St NE B‐2H Charlottesville, VA 22902 H 560085100 Sunrise Park, LLC 919 W Main St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22903 I 560085W00 Sunrise Park, LLC 919 W Main St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22903 J 560087100 Bolton, Constance, 1500 Carlton Ave, Box 67 R‐3 TR & Shirley W, TR Charlottesville, VA 22902 K 07700‐00‐00‐ Elemental Ecotech, 809 Bolling Ave, Unit C Light 040B0 LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 Industry CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 9 L 07700‐00‐00‐ Jackrabbit Partners, 605 Cami Lane Light 040C2 LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 Industry M 07700‐00‐00‐ 615 Cami Lane, LLC 615 Cami Lane Light 040C5 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Industry N 560114500 Morningstar 3101 Sugar Hill Lane R‐1SC Development, LLC Crozet, VA 22932 O 560114400 Franklin St, LLC 1845 James Monroe Pkwy R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 P 560114300 Franklin St, LLC 1845 James Monroe Pkwy R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 Q 560114200 Franklin St, LLC 1845 James Monroe Pkwy R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 R 560113000 Burgess, Lane PO Box 1054 R‐1SC Properties, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 S 560109000 Jaba Timberlake 674 Hillsdale Dr, Ste 9 PUD Place, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22901 T 560114000 Dominick, Betty Jo 1610 E Market St R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 U 560114100 Gelburd, Greg 1612 E Market St R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 V 56011500 Sam & Moose, LLC 1001 E Market St, Ste 202 R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 W 560112000 Goddin, Charles Burr 511 Moseley Dr R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 X 560110000 Emory, William 1604 E Market St R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 Y 560111000 Emory, William 1604 E Market St R‐1SC Charlottesville, VA 22902 Z 560108000 Syme, Preston Trigg, 1600 E Market St R‐1SC Etal, Trustees Charlottesville, VA 22902 AA 560107000 Childress, Connor J M 1516 E Market St R‐1SC & Mariel T Charlottesville, VA 22902 BB 560040400 Jaba Timberlake 674 Hillsdale Dr, Ste 9 PUD Place, LLC Charlottesville, VA 22901 CC 560082000 Lombardo, 313 Parkway St R‐2 Jacqueline & Joseph Charlottesville, VA 22902 DD 560081000 Redd, Bernice 1408 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 EE 560079000 Linke, Robin 1412 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 FF 560078000 Kitelinger, Luke 1410 Rialto St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 GG 560078100 Gibson, E Wayne & 1416 Midland St R‐2 Shelby Charlottesville, VA 22902 HH 560078200 Pugh, Paul & Joyce 1418 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 II 560088000 Chung, Jonathan 1500 Midland St R‐2 CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 10 Charlottesville, VA 22902 JJ 560088200 Newman, Lauren 1502 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 KK 560088300 Beach, Benjamin 1504 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 LL 560098000 Smith, Gary 1506 Midland St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 MM 560101B00 McDaniel, Donnie 1304 Carlton Ave, #1 R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22902 NN 560101A00 Ryan, Edward & 708 Franklin St R‐2 Sherry Charlottesville, VA 22902 OO 560103000 Hammell, Adam & 718 Franklin St R‐2 Weesner, Jillian Charlottesville, VA 22902 PP 56010500 Local Oak, LLC PO Box 359 R‐2 Keene, VA 22964 QQ 560106000 Slezak, David & 722 Franklin St R‐2 Martha Loach Charlottesville, VA 22902 RR 560087000 White, John Jr 1012 Grove St R‐2 Charlottesville, VA 22903 IA 560085V00 Chhetri, Keshar & 509 Nassau St PUD Parbati Charlottesville, VA 22902 IB 560085U00 Amaya, Wendy 511 Nassau St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IC 560085T00 Brown, Latoya 513 Nassau St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 ID 560085S00 Hammond, Verma 515 Nassau St PUD Towander Charlottesville, VA 22902 IE 560085R00 Ince, Alexander 1433 Midland St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IF 560085Q00 Cunningham, 1431 Midland St PUD Timothy Charlottesville, VA 22902 IG 560085P00 Southern Property, 170 S Pantops Dr PUD LLC Charlottesville, VA 22911 IH 560085J00 Martinez‐Fuentes, 1420 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Jasmin Leticia Charlottesville, VA 22902 IJ 560085I00 Mayo, Rachel 1418 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IK 560085H00 Martin, Danna 1414 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Katrice Charlottesville, VA 22902 IL 560085G00 Briggs, Lisa 1412 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IM 560086B00 Candelario, Louisa 1406 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IN 560086A00 Ayite, Kokou & Eya 1404 Sunrise Park Ln PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IO 560086C00 Ott, Joshua 506 Rives St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 11 IP 560086D00 Yang, Steve 508 Rives St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IQ 560086F00 Southern Property, 170 S Pantops Dr PUD LLC Charlottesville, VA 22902 IR 560086G00 Martin, John Nelson 514 Rives St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IS 560086H00 Smith, Michael 516 Rives St PUD Anthony Charlottesville, VA 22902 IT 560085A00 Almafraji, Mohamad 1403 Midland St PUD & Sanaa Aldolemi Charlottesville, VA 22902 IU 560085B00 Viglietta, Evan & 1405 Midland St PUD Sally Charlottesville, VA 22902 IV 560085C00 Folley, Harold Jr & 1407 Midland St PUD Clarissa Charlottesville, VA 22902 IW 560085D00 Allah Mohammad, 1409 Midland St PUD Haji & Nasima Khuda Charlottesville, VA 22902 IX 560085E00 Anderson, Beverly J 1411 Midland St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22902 IY 560085F00 Guerra, Benjamin & 1413 Midland St PUD Maria Hernandez Charlottesville, VA 22902 IZ 5600851A0 Sunrise Park, LLC 919 W Main St PUD Charlottesville, VA 22903 CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 12 Public Facilities and Infrastructure Water and Sanitary Sewer The Carlton Views development extended sanitary sewer approximately 1,500 linear feet up Franklin Street and Carlton Street to serve the existing Pace Center and Phase I apartment building. This extension of the sanitary sewer also services the adjacent properties to the south and west of the development, extending sanitary sewer services to this area. The sanitary sewer was extended in 2013 and is currently operational and has the capacity for the proposed development and redevelopment of the adjacent properties. Also in 2013, the developers of the Pace Center worked together with the City of Charlottesville Utilities department to install a 12” waterline under the railroad tracks along Franklin Street. With the installation of this 12” waterline, the overall water pressure was increased within this portion of the neighborhood for overall fire protection. Prior to the installation of the 12” waterline, and existing waterline infrastructure in the neighborhood did not meet the current fire flow requirements. The improvements to the water infrastructure not only provided the necessary fire flows for the neighborhood, it provided adequate fire protection on the property for the Pace Center and the proposed apartment buildings. Pedestrian and Bicycle Improvements With the current development of the Carlton Views property, the streetscape along Carlton Avenue has been improved with the development. Pedestrian sidewalks and street trees have been installed along Carlton Avenue with each of the phases of development. Upon completion of the overall development, sidewalks and street trees will extend along Carlton Avenue and Franklin Street, tying into the existing pedestrian improvements within this area. A grass utility strip has also been installed between the sidewalk and the roadway to provide additional buffering for the pedestrians from the roadway. In addition to the pedestrian improvements, Carlton Avenue has been widened along the frontage of the property. The widening of this section of Carlton Avenue is consistent with the current width of the remaining portions of Carlton Avenue, which accommodates (2) lanes of traffic, on‐street parking, and bike lanes. Carlton Avenue has extended the existing shared street bicycle route down Carlton Street to the intersection of Franklin Street. This extension of the shared bicycle route helps connect downtown Charlottesville with the redevelopment projects along Broadway, as well as connecting to more of the residential neighborhoods to the north and south of Carlton Avenue. Shared bike lane pavement markings shall be added to Carlton Avenue. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 13 Picture of Carlton Avenue Streetscape Picture of Carlton Avenue Improvements CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 14 Transportation Improvements Carlton Views has improved the portion of Carlton Avenue from the intersection of Carlton Avenue and Nassau Street east to the intersection of Carlton Avenue and Franklin Street. The road improvements include widening, reconstruction, and overlay of Carlton Avenue along the road frontage of the property. With the widening of the roadway, both vehicular and bicycle traffic can be accommodated on this portion of the roadway, tying into the existing Carlton Avenue streets that also accommodate both vehicular and bicycle traffic. Shared bicycle lane striping shall be incorporated into the Carlton Avenue improvements. In addition, on‐street parking has been designed within the streetscape improvements along this portion of the roadway. A recent traffic study was completed in late 2016 for the proposed redevelopment of the Woolen Mills historic property located in Albemarle County. The traffic impact analysis included traffic studies along Carlton Avenue, including the Carlton Avenue/Franklin Street intersection and the Carlton Avenue/Carlton Road intersection. Both of these intersections currently operate at an acceptable level, and the additional residential units will have minimal impacts on these intersections. With the additional traffic from the Woolen Mills development project, all the main intersections around this portion of the neighborhood, including the Carlton Avenue/Carlton Road intersection and the Carlton Avenue/Franklin Street intersection still operate at the same level of services (between an A and C level of service) during the peak AM and peak PM traffic. Any additional non‐residential development on the Carlton Views properties, as allowed within the use matrix, will require additional traffic studies at the site plan level. Currently, the Carlton Views property is located on the CTS bus route, providing transit opportunities for the commercial services and residential units on the property. The transit system helps reduce the dependence on vehicular cars to access the residential units and commercial services on the property. In addition, Jaunt and other transit systems provide bus access to the Pace Center and the adjacent residential units. These transit facilities will continue to operate in this area, and ADA accessible access routes and sidewalks have been incorporated into the design of the Carlton Views development to provide access from the buildings to the transit stop locations. Stormwater Management Improvements Carlton Views has addressed stormwater run‐off with a series of different low impact designs, including rain gardens, bio‐filters, water quality swales, and underground storage tanks. These measures will continue to capture and treat the run‐off from the development in accordance with city and state stormwater requirements. Environmental Features and Impacts Prior to the current redevelopment, the existing property was a concrete manufacturing and supply plant, as shown in Figure 7 below. Most of the site was impervious area that drained directly to Carlton Avenue, without any water quality or detention measures. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 15 No streams or wetlands are located on the property, as the site slopes from the railroad tracks down to Carlton Avenue. There is a portion of the site adjacent to Franklin street with steep slopes and existing large specimen trees. This portion of the site will be preserved, maintaining the steep slopes in this area and the wooded buffer between the development and Franklin Street. Additional information on the preservation of this area and the steep slopes can be found on the application plan that is accompanying the PUD narrative. The redevelopment of this site has also substantially reduced the noise, light pollution, and dust from its former levels under the operation as a concrete plant. With the redevelopment, the property is also a buffer for the surrounding community from the adjacent industrial uses. The new commercial uses of the Blue Ridge PACE Center and the proposed apartment buildings will eliminate that industrial impact to the neighborhood, while upgrading light, noise and other environmental impacts to current standards. Lighting conditions and regulations that were part of the Special Use Permit will be adhered to and proffered with this PUD application. Figure 7: Previous Use – Concrete manufacturing plant CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 16 Affordable Housing The residential properties at Carlton Views/PACE will incorporate affordable and accessible housing into the land use plan. Units will be set aside for low income residents earning under sixty‐percent (60%) of the area median income (AMI) and extremely low income residents earning under forty percent (40%) of the area median income. In addition, a specified number of affordable units will meet UFAS requirements for accessibility and VHDA requirements for universal design. Specific use requirements will include:  a minimum of 30% affordable housing, defined as residents earning under 60% AMI.  a minimum of 15% of all affordable units set aside for residents earning under 40% AMI.  a minimum of 15% of all affordable units designed to meet UFAS guidelines for accessibility.  a minimum of 30% of all affordable units designed to meet VHDA guidelines for universal design. It is the intent of the developer to provide 100% affordable units on this project, provided that funding is obtained for the affordable development units. The developer shall provide documentation that they actively sought to obtain funding to create affordable units for each dwelling unit, prior to developing the dwelling unit as a market rate unit. Each of these requirements will remain in place for no less than 20 years from the time an affordable unit is first placed in service. The affordability period shall be codified through an Extended Use Agreement or other deed restriction recorded in the land records at the Circuit Court in Charlottesville. In addition, Section 8 voucher holders will have first priority for any available units that have been designated affordable across the properties. These conditions have also been incorporated in the proffers for the PUD application. By designing for affordability, accessibility and universal design, Carlton Views/PACE will provide much needed housing opportunity for frail elderly and disabled tenants. Residential buildings shall be comprised primarily of one and two‐bedroom units. The number of bedrooms in any residential building shall not exceed three‐bedrooms. In addition, with a majority of the housing available for elderly and disabled tenants, the impacts to the existing schools in the neighborhood should be minimal. And the design of the apartments as primarily one and two‐bedroom units will be self‐limiting to smaller families in the community CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 17 PUD Objectives 1) To encourage development of equal or higher quality than otherwise required by the strict application of zoning district regulations that would otherwise govern. As a successful mixed‐use, mixed‐income development, Carlton Views is a vibrant addition to the Carlton/Belmont neighborhood. It provides high quality housing opportunity in a climate in which affordable housing is increasing difficult to preserve and grow. A strict application of the Zoning Ordinance would not allow for the unit density necessary to develop additional housing on this site and would effectively prohibit the build‐out of the project as initially conceived. 2) To encourage innovative arrangements of buildings and open spaces to provide efficient, attractive, flexible and environmentally sensitive design. As an in‐fill project on an abandoned site, Carlton Views epitomizes efficient, attractive and sensitive design. Approving a PUD rezoning will ensure the completion of this innovative effort, provide an appropriate level of housing density, and increase affordable housing options in close proximity to community services. 3) To promote a variety of housing types, or within a development containing only a single housing type, to promote inclusion of houses of various sizes. Carlton Views is committed to providing affordable and accessible rental housing set aside for low‐income elderly and disabled residents. As such, the majority of the units in the project will be one and two‐bedroom units designed to meet UFAS accessibility requirements and/or VHDA universal design standards. There is a very limited supply of this housing type in the City of Charlottesville. 4) To encourage the clustering of single‐family dwellings for more efficient use of land and preservation of open space. Carlton Views is a multifamily development. Its higher level of density and relatively small unit size allows for land use efficiency and the preservation of landscaped and open space. The preponderance of elderly and disabled tenants without automobiles will allow for a cooperative parking arrangement, greatly reducing the number of parking spaces required to serve the residential development. 5) To provide for developments designed to function as cohesive, unified projects. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 18 Carlton Views has been organized and designed around the Blue Ridge PACE Center. The design intent is to provide accessible housing in close proximity to requisite services and to accommodate easy access across the site. 6) To ensure that a development will be harmonious with the existing uses and character of adjacent property and/or consistent with the patterns of development noted with respect to such adjacent property. The Carlton Views/PACE project enhances the residential character along Carlton Avenue and, though higher in density than much of the neighborhood, serves to anchor the northeastern corner of the Belmont/Carlton neighborhood. It is bound to the north by the CSX railroad, to the east and west by warehouse and manufacturing uses and to the south, across Carlton Avenue, by a large trailer park. The neighboring property at its southwest corner, across Carlton Avenue, is Sunrise Park, a successful PUD redevelopment incorporating a variety of single and multi‐family housing types, including a three‐story apartment building. Carlton Views is consistent with this pattern of higher density development. 7) To ensure preservation of cultural features, scenic assets and natural features such as trees, streams and topography. The Carlton Views project is the redevelopment of an old concrete manufacturing plant for which natural topography and other features have been dramatically altered with retaining walls, storage bins and hoppers. While few natural features remain, the site and landscape design will address each buildings relationship to the street at Carlton Avenue and provide pedestrian connectivity to City sidewalks and streets. 8) To provide for coordination of architectural styles internally within the development as well as in relation to adjacent properties along the perimeter of the development. The buildings at Carlton Views have all been imagined and developed by the same design team and reflect a coordinated design across parcels and uses. Each building incorporates clean, modern lines with a mix of brick and hardiplank cladding, modern fenestration, storefront doors, and flat rooflines. 9) To provide for coordinated linkages among internal buildings and uses, and external connections at a scale appropriate to the development and adjacent neighborhoods. While the topography along Carlton Avenue presents challenges, the site design links sidewalks across parcels and provides for accessible crossings from each site to the PACE Center. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 19 10) To facilitate access to the development by public transit services or other single‐vehicle‐ alternative services, including public pedestrian systems. The PACE Center, in coordination with Jaunt, provides transportation to and from the center for its daycare clients. In addition, the buildings at Carlton Views are within a 1/4 mile of an existing bus stop, and the owner/applicants are eager to work with CAT to provide an additional stop centered on the new development. Overall connectivity to City sidewalks and streets has been addressed in each phase of development. General Development Plan Development Plan The Carlton Views/PACE Center project is a mixed‐use project combining commercial and residential uses. The development plan contemplates a mix of uses more in line with the residential character of the neighborhood and abandons many previously permitted industrial and manufacturing uses on the site. The development establishes medium‐density residential in buildings up to four stories as the dominant land use on three of the four parcels making up the Planned Use Development (PUD). With residential uses dominant across much of the site, many uses currently permitted under the M‐I zoning designation will no longer complement the residential character of the site or the surrounding neighborhood. To reflect this change in use, many of the industrial and manufacturing uses previously permitted under the M‐1 zoning have been removed in favor of general commercial and retail uses. Table 2 sets forth the allowable residential and non‐residential uses on the properties. Below in Table 1, the proposed maximum heights, density, and maximum non‐residential square footages are included for each property. Note, the allowable density is calculated cumulatively over all four (4) parcels. Table 3 on page 21 includes the allowable setbacks for each parcel. Table 1: Overall Allowable Densities Maximum Phase Project Acreage Dominant Non‐ Maximum Land Use Residential Residential 1 PACE 1.932 Commercial 30,000 Combined 2 Carlton I 1.262 Multi‐family 7,500 Total Units: 3 Carlton II 0.627 Multi‐family 5,000 154 across 4 Carlton III 1.034 Multi‐family 7,500 (4) parcels Total 4.855 50,000 154 max. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 20 Table 2: Land Use Matrix Use Types Carlton Views PUD PH 1 PH2 PH3 PH4 PACE Carlton I Carlton II Carlton III RESIDENTIAL AND RELATED USES Accessory buildings, structures and uses B B B B Adult assisted living 1—8 residents B B B B Greater than 8 residents B B B B Adult day care B B B B Amateur radio antennas, to a height of 75 ft. B B B B Dwellings: Multifamily B B B B Single‐family attached B B B B Single‐family detached B B B B Townhouse B B B B Two‐family B B B B Nursing homes B S S S Occupancy, residential 3 unrelated persons B B B B 4 unrelated persons B B B B Residential density (developments) FOR DENSITY CALCULATIONS ‐ SEE TABLE 1: OVERALL ALLOWABLE DENSITIES Residential treatment facility 1—8 residents B B B B 8+ residents S S S S Shelter care facility S S S S Single room occupancy facility S S S S NON-RESIDENTIAL: GENERAL and MISC. COMMERCIAL Access to adjacent multifamily, commercial, B B B B industrial or mixed‐use development or use Accessory buildings, structures and uses B B B B Art gallery: GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B GFA up to 10,000 SF B B B B Art studio, GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 21 Art workshop B B B B Auditoriums, theaters B Houses of worship B Bakery, wholesale GFA 4,000 SF or less B GFA up to 10,000 SF B Banks/ financial institutions B Clinics: Health clinic (no GFA limit) B Health clinic (up to 10,000 SF, GFA) B Health clinic (up to 4,000 SF, GFA) B Public health clinic B Veterinary (without outside pens/runs) S Clubs, private S Communications facilities: Attached facilities utilizing utility poles as the B B B B attachment structure Attached facilities not visible from any B B B B adjacent street or property Attached facilities visible from an adjacent B B B B street or property Carrier on wheels (COW) P Towers B Monopole tower B Data center >4,000 B <4,000 B Daycare facility B Libraries B B B B Museums: Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B Up to 10,000 SF, GFA B Offices: Business and professional B B B B Medical B B B B Philanthropic institutions/agencies B B B B Property management B B B B Other offices (non‐ specified) B B B B Photography studio B B B B CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 22 Photographic processing; blueprinting B Radio/television broadcast stations B Recreational facilities: Indoor: health/sports clubs; tennis club; B B B B swimming club; yoga studios; dance studios, skating rinks, recreation centers, etc. (on City‐ owned, City School Board‐owned, or other public property) GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B GFA up to 10,000 SF B GFA more than 10,000 SF B Restaurants: Full service B Technology‐based businesses B Transit facility B Utility facilities S S S S Utility lines B B B B NON-RESIDENTIAL USES: RETAIL Accessory buildings, structures and uses B Consumer service businesses: Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B B B B Up to 10,000 SF, GFA B 10,001+ GFA B Farmer's market S Grocery stores: Convenience B B B B General, up to 10,000 SF, GFA B General, 10,001+ SF, GFA B Home improvement center B Pharmacies: 1—1,700 SF, GFA B 1,701—4,000 SF, GFA B 4,001+ SF, GFA B Other retail stores (non‐ specified): Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B B B B Up to 20,000 SF GFA B 20,000+ SF, GFA CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 23 Table 3 – Setbacks and Maximum Building Heights Front Side Yard Rear Yard Maximum Phase Project Acreage Setbacks Setbacks Setbacks Bldg Height 1 PACE 1.932 20’ min. 0 0 45 2 Carlton I 1.262 20’ min. 0 0 65 3 Carlton II 0.627 20’ min. 0 0 65 4 Carlton III 1.034 20’ min. 0 0 65 Total 4.855 Note: Building setbacks are based on the allowable M‐1 setbacks. The application plan illustrates the proposed building and parking envelopes for the Carlton II and Carlton III parcels. Development will occur within these proposed envelopes. Structured parking under the building may be allowed within the Carlton III building envelope to achieve additional parking. Parking The Carlton Views/PACE Center project is designed to meet the parking needs for the commercial and residential uses. A minimum of 161 spaces shall be provided on site and another 31 spaces will be created along the existing street frontage along Carlton Avenue. Additional parking spaces may be created through cooperative agreement(s) with neighboring property owners. The PUD application is seeking a 35% reduction of the required residential parking. With many of the apartment units provided specifically for frail elderly and disabled residents, the parking spaces required for the overall development is much lower than an average apartment complex. In addition, the property is located on a transit loop with access to public transportation to the city. Other transportation services are also available with the Pace Center, which helps reduce the need and requirement of vehicular transportation. Bicycle parking will be provided with the overall development in accordance with City requirements. The combination of the type of apartments proposed with the development and the availability of transit reduces the overall parking demands for the development. The proposed 35% reduction is for the overall residential parking on the site. The total residential parking required by the city ordinance is 154 parking spaces, and 103 residential off‐street parking spaces are proposed with this development. An additional 31 on‐street parking spaces (not included in the parking reduction calculations) are available along Carlton Avenue for overflow parking needs for the development. These on‐street parking spaces were constructed with the overall improvements to Carlton CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 24 Avenue. The parking reduction does not include any reduction in parking for the Blue Ridge Pace Center. Open Space The proposed Carlton Views project shall incorporate a minimum of 27% open space in the proposed development plan. Currently, there is a minimum of 1.3 acres of open space proposed with the development plan, providing 27% open space over 4.855 acres. The open space areas are shown on the attached application plan. These open spaces include pocket parks, plazas, recreational areas, passive recreational areas, and landscaped areas. In addition, an open space preservation area and buffer area of 0.35 acres is proposed along the eastern property line adjacent to Franklin Street and the northeast property line along the CSX Railroad. These open space areas will protect the critically sensitive slopes on this side of the site, preserve the existing trees on the site, and provide a buffer between the development and the residential neighborhoods to the east and northeast of the property. Much of the additional open space provided through‐out the project site shall include landscaped buffers, stormwater management facilities, and other open landscaped areas. Picture of Greenspace area within existing Carlton Views I Apartments CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 25 Landscaping The landscaping in the Carlton Views development shall be concentrated between the proposed development and Carlton Avenue. Attractive trees and shrubs shall be planted to enhance the proposed streetscape. Large shade street trees shall be planted within the limits of the property along Carlton Avenue at a maximum distance of 35’ on center. These large street trees shall have an open planting space of 13’ x 13’ minimum to allow for the trees for fully develop and achieve maximum canopy size. The development plan shall include the required open space and landscaping of the front yards and lots as required per the City of Charlottesville Code of Ordinances, Chapter 34, Article VIII, Division 2 – Landscaping and Screening. In addition, an evergreen landscaping buffer shall be provided between the existing railroad and the proposed parking areas to help screen parking and lighting from the adjacent properties across the railroad tracks. All proposed landscaping shall be provided using materials permitted in the city code ordinance and the city’s list of approved plantings. Landscaping shall be designed to enhance the recreational and aesthetic value of the site and provide a continuous buffer of vegetation along the Carlton Avenue frontage. All landscaping within the public streetscape areas and open space shall be maintained by the Homeowners Association for the development. Picture of the proposed Streetscape Landscaping CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 26 The existing tree preservation area along Franklin Street shall be protected with tree protection fencing. These trees shall remain undisturbed, along with the existing critical slopes in this area. Architectural Elements The architectural standards and guidelines for the Carlton Views development will be consistent with the Pace Center and existing apartment building currently constructed on the property. Each building shall incorporate clean, modern lines with a mix of brick and hardiplank cladding, modern fenestration, storefront doors, and flat rooflines. Windows will be vinyl architectural windows. Shudders, if installed on the houses, will be operable shutters. Wood and metal railings will be used for the porches. Pictures of the exiting Pace Center and Carlton Views Apartments CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 27 Signage The signage regulations established in the City Zoning Ordinance shall govern all signage within the Carlton Views PUD. Lighting The lighting and dark sky regulations established in the City Zoning Ordinance shall govern all lighting within the Carlton Views PUD. In addition, the site lighting shall meet the conditions of the special use permit that are proffered conditions for the PUD. CARLTON VIEWS PUD APPLICATION Page 28 Attachment D Carlton Views Planned Unit Development BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA IN RE: PETITION FOR REZONING (City Application No. ZM18-00002) STATEMENT OF PROFFERED DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS Dated as of November 13, 2018 Subject Property: City of Charlottesville Tax Map 56, Parcels 430, 431, 432, & 433 TO THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE: The undersigned individuals are all of the owners of the Subject Property (“Owner(s)”) who have petitioned the Charlottesville City Council to approve the above-referenced rezoning petition (“Proposed Rezoning”), to allow for development of a specific project, identified as the Carlton Views Planned Unit Development (“PUD”) as specifically described within a proposed PUD Development Plan dated September 12, 2018. In furtherance of the Proposed Rezoning, the Owners hereby proffer for City Council’s consideration several voluntary development conditions, which the Owners agree are reasonable. Each of the Owners agrees that, if the Subject Property is rezoned as requested, the use and development of the Subject Property will be subject to and in accordance with the following conditions: 1. Specific Development--The Subject Property shall be developed in accordance with the PUD Development Plan dated September 12, 2018 (“Development Plan”). 2. Provision of Accessible, Affordable Dwelling Units. For purposes of these proffers,  “60% Affordable Units” shall mean residential dwelling units within the PUD occupied by, or reserved for occupancy by, households having income of not more than sixty- percent (60%) of the area median income (“AMI”) for the area including the City of Charlottesville published annually by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), as adjusted for family size.  40% Affordable Units’ shall mean residential dwelling units within the PUD occupied by, or reserved for occupancy by, households having income of not more than forty- percent (40%) of AMI.  “UFAS Units” shall mean dwelling unit meeting Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (“UFAS”) standards for accessibility.  “Universal Design Units” shall mean dwelling units meeting Virginia Housing Development Authority (“VHDA”) standards for universal design. Attachment D Except as otherwise described here, during the Income Limit Period (as defined below) where the Development Plan indicates residential uses, the portion(s) of the Subject Property that will contain residential dwelling units shall incorporate handicapped-accessible dwelling units and affordable dwelling units, as set forth following below. a. Affordable dwelling units will be provided within the PUD, as follows: i. At least thirty percent (30%) of the residential dwelling units within the PUD shall be 60% Affordable Units (“Required ADUs”) and at least fifteen percent (15%) of the Required ADUs shall be 40% Affordable Units . ii. At least fifteen percent (15%) of the Required ADUs shall be UFAS Units and at least thirty percent (30%) of the Required ADUs will be Universal Design Units. b. The Owners shall record within the land records of the Circuit Court for the City of Charlottesville one or more instruments containing covenants or restrictions assuring that the Subject Property will provide the Required ADUs referenced in Paragraph 2(a), above, for a period of not less than twenty (20) years from the date the first Required ADU is occupied by a household of persons meeting the applicable AMI requirements (“Income Limit Period”). The Owners shall notify the City’s zoning administrator promptly of the date on which the first Required ADU is occupied by a household of persons meeting the applicable AMI requirements. c. Administration of the Required ADUs shall be conducted in a manner such that books and records will be kept to document the following: i. Section 8 voucher holders will have first priority for occupancy of any available Required ADU within the PUD. ii. Each Owner of a residential dwelling unit within the PUD shall maintain records documenting the household income of the occupants of the dwelling unit, and of the Owner’s efforts to obtain funding or financing to facilitate the occupancy of the dwelling unit as an ADU in accordance with the AMI levels referenced in paragraph 2(a), above. iii. Upon request by the City, the Owners shall provide a written report to the zoning administrator, accompanied by evidence verifying the Owner’s efforts and results in satisfying the requirements of paragraphs 2(a)(i) and (ii). d. Notwithstanding the foregoing, if, on or before December 31, 2019, both of the following conditions have been satisfied (“Funding Conditions”), then paragraph 2(a), above shall be replaced with the following: a. Affordable dwelling units will be provided within the PUD, as Attachment D follows: i. one hundred percent (100%) of the residential dwellings within the PUD will be 60% Affordable Units (“Maximum ADUs) and at least fifteen percent (15%) of the Maximum ADUs shall be 40% Affordable Units . ii. At least fifteen percent (15%) of the Maximum ADUs shall be UFAS Units and at least thirty percent (30%) of the Maximum ADUs will be Universal Design Units. For purposes of this paragraph, the term “Funding Conditions” shall mean: i. an allocation of federal low income housing tax credits and syndication thereof, and ii. permanent and construction financing from VHDA. 3. Development design and features—in addition to any requirements of the City’s zoning ordinance, subdivision ordinance, water protection ordinance, or other applicable laws or ordinances, the use and development of the Subject Property shall comply with all of the following: a. No building or structure within the PUD shall exceed a height of 65 feet. Building elevations demonstrating compliance with this requirement shall be included within the final site plan for the PUD development. b. Each building façade that fronts on Carlton Avenue shall be designed to include a door or other entrance feature. Building elevations depicting how this requirement will be satisfied shall be included within the final site plan for the PUD development. c. Within the PUD, the number of on-site parking spaces shall not exceed the minimum required by the City’s zoning ordinance; however, if additional parking spaces are required as a condition of receiving grant funding, or other financing, to support the provision of the Required ADUs or other permitted use outlined in the PUD rezoning application, then upon presentation of documentation of such requirement to the City’s zoning administrator, a landowner may include the additional number of on-site parking spaces necessary for receipt of such funding. d. All outdoor light fixtures shall be equipped with full-cutoff luminaires, and with devices for redirecting light (e.g., shields, visors, hoods, etc.) to eliminate light glare and block direct light spillover onto neighboring properties. Each light fixture shall be recessed to conceal the light source from all viewing positions except those positions permitted to receive illumination. Directional task lighting (e.g., floodlights, spotlights, sign lights, etc.) shall illuminate only the intended Attachment D task, and no light from any fixture(s) used in such task lighting shall shine directly onto neighboring properties or roadways, nor shall any task lighting have the effect of causing an excessive amount of light to be released skyward. e. Upon written request from a public official of the City of Charlottesville, a landowner shall provide a location within the Subject Property at which Charlottesville Area Transit can, without charge, establish a bus stop/ shelter. The City shall bear the cost of providing, installing and maintaining the bus stop/ shelter. f. The Landowners shall retain the existing tree canopy on the east side of the Subject property, adjacent to Franklin Street, within an area designated as open space for the PUD. The final site plan for the PUD development shall depict how this requirement will be satisfied. g. Site design shall provide pedestrian linkages connecting on-site buildings, buildings on-site open space, and neighborhoods adjacent to the PUD. These pedestrian linkages shall be depicted within the final site plan proposed for the PUD development. WHEREFORE, the undersigned Owner(s) stipulate and agree that the use and development of the Subject Property shall be in conformity with the conditions hereinabove stated, and in accordance with other applicable federal, state or local laws, ordinances, and requirements. Respectfully submitted this 13th day of November, 2018. Each of the undersigned individuals represents and warrants that he or she has been duly authorized to execute this Proffer Statement on behalf of the Landowner and to bind the Landowner hereto. [Insert one signature block for each Landowner, listing the Landowner’s legal name. If Landowner is an LLC, the individual who signs should indicate whether he or she is a “member” or a “managing member”.] LANDOWNER: _________________________[type legal name] Signed By: ___________________________________ [signature of individual] Print Name: ____________________________ Its: ___________________________________[member, managing member, etc.] LANDOWNER: _________________________[type legal name] Signed By: ___________________________________ [signature of individual] Attachment D Print Name: ____________________________ Its: ___________________________________[member, managing member, etc.] LANDOWNER: _________________________[type legal name] Signed By: ___________________________________ [signature of individual] Print Name: ____________________________ Its: ___________________________________[member, managing member, etc.] LANDOWNER: _________________________[type legal name] Signed By: ___________________________________ [signature of individual] Print Name: ____________________________ Its: ___________________________________[member, managing member, etc.] Attachment E Attachment E Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I Use Types Carlton Views PUD Z.O. Sec 34-480 Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I Residential and Related Uses Accessory apartment, internal Accessory apartment, external Accessory buildings, structures and uses B B B B B Adult assisted living 1—8 residents B B B B B Greater than 8 residents B B B B B Adult day care B B B B B Amateur radio antennas, to a height of 75 ft. B B B B B Bed-and-breakfast: Home stay B&B Inn Boarding: fraternity and sorority house Boarding house (rooming house) Convent/monastery B Criminal justice facility S Dwellings: Multifamily B B B B S Single‐family attached B B B B S Single‐family detached B B B B S Townhouse B B B B S Two‐family B B B B S Family day home 1—5 children 6—12 children Home occupation P Manufactured home park Night watchman's dwelling unit, accessory to B industrial use Nursing homes B S S S B Occupancy, residential 3 unrelated persons B B B B B 4 unrelated persons B B B B B Residential density (developments) 1 – 21 DUA 154 Units Max for the overall site SUP Residential treatment facility 1—8 residents B B B B S Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I 8+ residents S S S S Shelter care facility S S S S Single room occupancy facility S S S S Temporary family health care structure T Non-Residential: General and Misc. Commercial Access to adjacent multifamily, commercial, B B B B B industrial or mixed‐use development or use Accessory buildings, structures and uses B B B B B Amusement center S Amusement enterprises (circuses, carnivals, T etc.) Amusement park (putt-putt golf; skateboard parks, etc.) Animal boarding/grooming/kennels: With outside runs or pens S Without outside runs or pens B Animal shelter B Art gallery: GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B B GFA up to 10,000 SF B B B B B Art studio, GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B B Art workshop B B B B B Assembly (indoor) Arena, stadium (enclosed) S Auditoriums, theaters B B Houses of worship B B Assembly (outdoor) Amphitheater S Stadium (open) S Temporary (outdoor church services, etc.) T Assembly plant, handcraft B Assembly plant B Automobile uses: Gas station B Parts and equipment sales B Rental/leasing B Repair/servicing business B Sales B Tire sales and recapping B Bakery, wholesale GFA 4,000 SF or less B B Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I GFA up to 10,000 SF B B Banks/ financial institutions B Bowling alleys Car wash B Catering business B Cemetery S Clinics: Health clinic (no GFA limit) B Health clinic (up to 10,000 SF, GFA) B B Health clinic (up to 4,000 SF, GFA) B B Public health clinic B Veterinary (without outside pens/runs) S B Veterinary (without outside pens/runs) B Clubs, private S Communications facilities: Attached facilities utilizing utility poles as the B B B B B attachment structure Attached facilities not visible from any B B B B B adjacent street or property Attached facilities visible from an adjacent B B B B B street or property Carrier on wheels (COW) P P Towers B B Monopole tower B B Guyed tower B Lattice tower B Self-supporting tower B Contractor or tradesman's shop, general B Crematorium (independent of funeral B Data hcenter ome) >4,000 B B <4,000 B B Daycare facility B B Dry cleaning establishments B Educational facilities (non-residential) Elementary High schools Colleges and universities Artistic up to 4,000 SF, GFA B Artistic up to 10,000 SF, GFA B Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I Vocational, up to 4,000 SF, GFA B Vocational, up to 10,000 SF, GFA B Electronic gaming café Funeral home (without crematory) GFA 4,000 SF or less B GFA up to 10,000 SF B Funeral homes (with crematory) GFA 4,000 SF or less B GFA up to 10,000 SF B Golf course Golf driving range S Helipad S Hospital Hotels/motels: Up to 100 guest rooms S 100+ guest rooms S Laundromats B Libraries B B B B Manufactured home sales S Micro-producers B Small Breweries B Mobile food units P Movie theaters Municipal/governmental offices, buildings, B courts Museums: Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B B Up to 10,000 SF, GFA B S Music halls S Offices: Business and professional B B B B B Medical B B B B B Philanthropic institutions/agencies B B B B B Property management B B B B B Other offices (non‐ specified) B B B B B Outdoor storage, accessory S Parking: Parking garage B Surface parking lot B Surface parking lot (more than 20 spaces) B Temporary parking facilities T Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I Photography studio B B B B B Photographic processing; blueprinting B B Radio/television broadcast stations B B Recreational facilities: Indoor: health/sports clubs; tennis club; B B B B B swimming club; yoga studios; dance studios, skating rinks, recreation centers, etc. (on City‐ owned, City School Board‐owned, or other public property) GFA 4,000 SF or less B B B B B GFA up to 10,000 SF B B GFA more than 10,000 SF B S Outdoor: Parks, playgrounds, ball fields and S ball courts, swimming pools, picnic shelters, etc. (city owned), and related concession stands Outdoor: Parks, playgrounds, ball fields and S ball courts, swimming pools, picnic shelters, etc. (private) Restaurants: Dance hall/all night Drive-through windows B Fast food B Full service B B 24-hour Taxi stand B Towing service, automobile B Technology‐based businesses B B Transit facility B B Utility facilities S S S S S Utility lines B B B B B Non-residential uses: Retail Accessory buildings, structures and uses B B Consumer service businesses: Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B B B B B Up to 10,000 SF, GFA B B 10,001+ GFA B S Farmer's market S B Greenhouses/nurseries B Grocery stores: Convenience B B B B B General, up to 10,000 SF, GFA B B Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I General, 10,001+ SF, GFA B B Home improvement center B B Pharmacies: 1—1,700 SF, GFA B B 1,701—4,000 SF, GFA B B 4,001+ SF, GFA B B Shopping centers Shopping malls Temporary sales, outdoor (flea markets, craft fairs, promotional sales, etc.) Other retail stores (non‐ specified): Up to 4,000 SF, GFA B B B B B Up to 20,000 SF GFA B S 20,000+ SF, GFA S NON-RESIDENTIAL: INDUSTRIAL Accessory buildings, structures and uses B Assembly, industrial B Beverage or food processing, packaging and B bottling plants Brewery and bottling facility B Compounding of cosmetics, toiletries, drugs and B pharmaceutical products Construction storage yard B Contractor or tradesman shop (HAZMAT) B Frozen food lockers B Greenhouse/nursery (wholesale) B Industrial equipment: service and repair B Janitorial service company B Kennels S Laboratory, medical B Laboratory, pharmaceutical B Landscape service company B Laundries B Manufactured home sales B Manufacturing, light B Moving companies B Printing/publishing facility B Open storage yard B Outdoor storage, accessory to industrial use B Research and testing laboratories B Self-storage companies B Attachment F Use Types Phase I Phase II Phase III Phase IV M-I Warehouses B Welding or machine shop B Wholesale establishments B Sign painting B CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE DEPARTMENT OF NEIGHBORHOOD DEVELOPMENT SERVICES STAFF REPORT TO THE ENTRANCE CORRIDOR REVIEW BOARD (ERB) ENTRANCE CORRIDOR (EC) CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS DATE OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING: November 13, 2018 Project Name: Dairy Central - Phase 2 Design Planner: Jeff Werner, AICP Applicant: Dairy Holdings LLC Applicant’s Representative: Chris Henry Applicant’s Relation to Owner: Owner Application Information Property Street Address: 946 Grady Avenue Property Owner: Dairy Holdings LLC Tax Map/Parcel #: 310060000 Total Square Footage/Acreage Site: 4.366 acres Comprehensive Plan (Land Use Plan) Designation: Mixed Use Current Zoning Classification: Central City District Corridor Entrance Corridor Overlay District: §34-307(a)(11) Preston Avenue (from McIntire Road to Rosser Avenue) Current Usage: Vacant Background The ERB reviews Entrance Corridor Certificate of Appropriateness applications for new construction. This approximately 4.4 acre parcel is currently occupied by buildings associated with the former Monticello Dairy. The site is within the Preston Avenue Entrance Corridor. The Dairy Central project has 1 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final four proposed phases. Phase 1, in the northern portion, contains the dairy buildings and is designated an Individually Protected Property (IPP). Phase 1 was reviewed by the BAR and the COA approval process was completed in June 2018. Phases 2, 3 and 4 are outside IPP boundary and are thus subject to ERB review. ERB Review of Phase 2 March 14, 2018: ERB review of a Special Use Permit request to: a) increase the residential density from its current maximum (43 DUA) to a maximum of 60 DUA; and b) increase the maximum permitted height (55-feet) to a maximum of 65-feet. The ERB found that the proposed SUP would not adversely impact the Preston Avenue EC. June 12, 2018: Planning Commission review of a Special Use Permit request to: a) increase the residential density to a maximum of 260 units at 60 DUA; and b) increase the maximum permitted height to 65-feet. The ERB recommended approval, citing that the request complies with the EC Guidelines for Building Mass, Scale, and Height. (SP18-00002 approved by City Council July 2, 2018.) Note: The Planning Commission’s June 12 approval included:  Three conditions related to the design: o The design, height, density and other characteristics of the Development shall remain essentially the same, in all material aspects, as described within the application materials dated January 23, 2018, submitted to the City and in connection with SP18- 00002. Except as the design details of the development may subsequently be modified to comply with the requirements of a certificate of appropriateness issued by the City’s BAR, modified to comply with the requirements of entrance corridor review by the City’s Entrance Corridor Review Board, or by any other provision(s) of these SUP Conditions, any substantial change of the Development that is inconsistent with the Application shall require a modification of this SUP. o Along 10th Street NW, the 5th floor of the structure shall be stepped back a minimum of 10 feet from the face of the building for floors 1- 4, as shown on sheet #9 of the Dairy Central Phase 2 and 3 Special Use Permit Exhibits, dated May 22, 2018. o Along West Street, the 5th floor of the structures shall be stepped back a minimum of 45 feet from the property line, as shown on sheet #9 of the Dairy Central Phase 2 and 3 Special Use Permit Exhibits, dated May 22, 2018.  Four revisions [from the discussion] related to the design: o Design the courtyards facing West Street to be usable spaces. o Ground floor entrances onto 10th Street. [This elevation would not present a back wall.] o The parking garage set low and screened from West Street. o Landscaping shall be as provided in the plan dated June 12, 2018. Applicant’s Request: Phase 2 Construction of 228,700 square foot apartment building with 175 units, 1,358 square feet of commercial retail space and approximately 143 parking spaces in garage beneath the building. Except for a few minor changes—primarily some slight changes to window and balcony locations on the north and south facades--the architectural design, materials, massing, and scale is identical to what the ERB reviewed at its June 12, 2018 meeting. The three conditions (above) have been met. The four noted revisions (above) are reflected in the current submittal materials. Note: sheet #s below refer to the applicant’s drawings 2 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final Building Elevations South Elevation - West Street (sheet #9) Mitigating the impact on the residential neighborhood to the south, this elevation has a 20-foot setback and courtyards separate the building’s three bays. The courtyards framed by the junction of the three bays and the five-story, east-west oriented main building. West Elevation - 10th Street NW (sheet #10) The base of the building is articulated with the incorporation of individual stairway entrances to each residential unit providing active circulation at multiple points along the facade. The sidewalk features landscaped planters with seating. North Elevation - Alley/Muse (sheet #11) The three bays here extend only slightly beyond the five-story main building. The heights correspond with—and complement--the southern portion of Phase 1, across the Alley. East Elevation - Wood Street (sheet #12) Street level here drops below project’s primary first-floor, allowing at the northeast corner a two-story entrance. South of this entrance, the building is set back from and elevated above the street-level sidewalk. From the sidewalk, a staircase extends up to a railed terrace. The sidewalk features landscaped planters with seating. Building Materials The building’s three bays, contemporary design, and variation of materials, textures, patterns and colors break the massing into modules that are more compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood [compared to a monolithic structure]. The materials include brick, fiber cement and metal panels, metal railings, and full-lite doors and windows. Three bays: The first floor elevations are a combination of brick, metal storefront and punched windows. At the upper floors of each bay is a section faced with brick—color to be either a tan-red or a buff-grey. Projecting slightly from the masonry walls are sections clad in either fiber cement or metal panel. These feature punched windows and recessed balconies with glass doors and metal railings. A segment of each bay extends to five-stories, to be clad in fiber cement panels with punched windows, capped by metal coping and fascia trim. Main building: The first floor elevations are a combination of brick, metal storefront and punched windows. The upper floors will be clad in fiber cement panels and feature punched windows and doors; doors will access cantilevered balconies with metal railings. A metal-screened appurtenance will conceal roof-top mechanical equipment. Landscaping and Site Parking garage is accessed through the alley between 10th Street and Wood Street. Bicycle parking is located adjacent to the garage in a designated bike room accessed off the alley near the building lobby. Wide sidewalks extend the frontage along both 10th Street NW and West Street; planted strips and street trees create shade and a sense of enclosure and defined edges. A new street and block plan on the site creates pedestrian paths and connectivity through the site linking the buildings, parking areas and green spaces. Landscaping (sheet #19) includes a mix of low plantings in beds and planters accented by a variety of trees. Along West Street are twelve American Hornbeam trees, set in groups of four that align with the 3 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final three building bays. Along 10th Street are ten Ginkgo trees in a curbside bed that separates the sidewalk from the street. Along the Alley are ten Serviceberry’s in a curbside bed. All of the tree species are consistent with the city’s tree list. In the two courtyards, the design intent is to use precast concrete pavers; the green shaded areas a mixture of planters/tree boxes and planting beds with various plantings and small trees; the blue shaded area is water feature. Site lighting (sheet #20) is achieved through a combination of street lamps [city standard], pole mounted and bollard lights, recessed and surface mounted wall lights, and recessed downlights. Standard of Review The Planning Commission serves as the entrance corridor review board (ERB) responsible for administering the design review process in entrance corridor overlay districts. This development project requires a site plan, and therefore also requires a certificate of appropriateness from the ERB, pursuant to the provisions of §34-309(a)(3) of the City’s Zoning Ordinance. The ERB shall act on an application within 60 days of the submittal date, and shall either approve, approve with conditions, or deny the application. Appeal would be to City Council. Standards for considering certificates of appropriateness: In conducting review of an application, the ERB must consider certain features and factors in determining the appropriateness of proposed construction, alteration, etc. of buildings or structures located within an entrance corridor overlay district. Following is a list of the standards set forth within §34-310 of the City Code: §34-310(1): Overall architectural design, form, and style of the subject building or structure, including, but not limited to: the height, mass and scale; The general footprint for Phase 2 is 157’ x 288’, including the two courtyards. The shorter length at the side elevations facing 10th Street NW (to the west) and Wood Street (to the east); the longer sides face the Alley/Mews (to the north) and West Street (to the south, and which is broken up by the courtyards). At its tallest, the building is 60’, with sections stepped down to 49’-6”. The setbacks and stepped down building heights mitigate the impact on the adjacent neighborhood. Note: The massing and heights (and general footprint) are unchanged from what the ERB reviewed in March and June. Staff Analysis: The height, mass and scale is appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. §34-310(2): Exterior architectural details and features of the subject building or structure; The building’s three bays, contemporary design, and variation of materials, textures, patterns and colors break the massing into modules that are more compatible with the adjacent residential neighborhood [compared to a monolithic structure with a limited materials palate]. The upper stories are supported on a base that features (darker) masonry with the metal and glass storefronts. The overall design does not feature any single or monumental architectural feature or element, but is instead a composite of simpler elements that complement the adjacent Phase 1. Staff Analysis: The architectural design and details are appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. 4 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final §34-310(3): Texture, materials and color of materials proposed for use on the subject building or structure; The proposed building materials consist of (refer to elevations and Sample Board on sheet #18):  Walls – Fiber Cement: o Type 1 (grey in color, with a rough surface sim. to stucco) o Type 2 (light grey/tan in color, with a smooth surface.) o Type 3 (dark grey in color, with a rough surface in a vertical tambour) o Type 3 alternate (gray in color, with simulated wood grain) o Type 3 alternate (brown in color, with simulated wood grain)  Walls - Masonry: o Brick Type 1 DK Iron Spot o Brick Type 1 (Alternate) DK SMK BZ o Brick Type 2 Flash Tan o Brick Type 2 (Alternate) Dove Grey o Mortar: For Brick Type 1 (darker base brick), mortar will be darker to match. For Brick Type 2, mortar will be light--buff/lighter gray (Note: Strong, contrasting mortar colors will not be used.)  Walls - Metal Panels: Panel 1 Alabaster (Panel 1, Bone White, is the alternate.)  Cornice/Coping/Soffit: (match selected metal wall panels)  Rooftop mechanical screening: (match selected metal wall panels)  Windows and glass doors [at residential units]: o Frames (metal): Type 1, Bone White o Glass: Low-E glazing with 56 VLT  Doors at street level residential entries: Solid, unglazed. Color to complement selected palate.  Storefronts: o Frame (metal): Mull 1 (white) is proposed; Mull 2 (black) is the alternate o Glass: (See sample panel), 70 VLT  Railings: Metal, to be painted.  Light Fixtures: (See sheet #20)  Street Lights: City standard. Staff recommends same fixture approved for Belmont Bridge and East High Street. (Landscape Forms FGP Area Type 5)  Walkways and stairs (areas that are not public sidewalks): Stairs and landings to be light gray concrete, broom finished. (Note: At west elevation, stair risers to be Brick Type 1; treads to be concrete.) Walkways to be precast concrete pavers.  Pedestrian benches and sidewalk planters: Light gray, board-formed concrete planters with wood pedestrian benches. Staff Analysis: The mix of building materials and color palate--both the base and the alternates—are appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. Storefront (street level) glass is specified as clear, with a 70% VLT. (Re: VLT of the residential glass, see note in Staff Recommendations.) The mixture of light and dark materials and the mixture of a material types add visual texture and reduces the building mass. Brick and fiber cement panels (in that they simulate stucco) are durable and consistent with building materials typically seen in the city. §34-310(4): Design and arrangement of buildings and structures on the subject site; The three primary facades (east, south and west) all engage the street; not present a back wall. The two courtyards provide open space for the building occupants. Along the three primary facades, the wide sidewalks, landscaping—including street trees at 10th and West streets--and benches provide a welcoming streetscape to pedestrians. 5 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final Staff Analysis: The design and arrangement of the building on the site appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. §34-310(5): The extent to which the features and characteristics described within paragraphs (1)-(4), above, are architecturally compatible (or incompatible) with similar features and characteristics of other buildings and structures having frontage on the same EC street(s) as the subject property. The EC goals are to make the site function well for the users of the site and the EC, and to have an attractive development that is compatible with its surrounding context. The new building will provide a residential component to a larger mixed-use project, of which a key component is the adaptive reuse and rehabilitation of a historic structure. Staff Analysis: Within the context of the Preston Avenue EC, the proposed building and site improvements are appropriate for and compatible with this Entrance Corridor. §34-310(6): Provisions of the Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines. Section 1 Introduction. The Entrance Corridor design principles:  Design for a Corridor Vision  Preserve History  Facilitate Pedestrian Access  Maintain Human Scale in Buildings and Spaces  Preserve and Enhance Natural Character  Create a Sense of Place  Create an Inviting Public Realm  Create Restrained Communications  Screen Incompatible Uses and Appurtenances:  Respect and Enhance Charlottesville’s Character Staff Analysis: The proposal is consistent with the germane design principles. Section 2 Streetscape. Landscaping, pedestrian routes, bicycle route, lighting, street furniture, public signage, public art, and utilities and communication equipment. Staff Analysis: The proposed streetscape features are appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. Section 3 Site: Connectivity between areas and neighborhoods and between and within sites, building placement, parking, landscaping and open space, lighting, walls and fences, signs, and utilities and service areas. Staff Analysis: The site features are appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines. Section 4 Buildings. Architectural compatibility, building mass, scale and height, facade organization and storefronts, materials and textures, color, details, roof forms and materials, awnings, appurtenances, additions and corridor conversions, franchise design, gas station canopies, civic and institutional buildings and multi-family buildings. Staff Analysis: The building design is appropriate and consistent with the Design Guidelines 6 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final Section 5 Individual Corridors. Vision for Preston Avenue EC (EC Guidelines, Section 5, pages 36-38) Create a variety of new, mixed use, larger scale projects that would replace some existing structures. These new uses should transition in scale to the residential areas located on both sides of Preston Avenue behind the commercial uses (Rose Hill neighborhood to the north, and the 10th & Page neighborhood to the south). The 10th & Page neighborhood is a potential historic district. On Preston Avenue several of the larger structures (auto showrooms, bottling plants, and industrial buildings) are also historic assets. The generous landscaped median is an amenity that should be maintained, but strategies should be used to reduce the scale and perceived width of the avenue and to unify both sides of Preston. These may include additional landscaping, and pedestrian amenities such as benches and safe pedestrian crosswalks, especially near Washington Park. Additional pedestrian and human scale features may include sidewalk cafes, pocket parks and public art. Recommended General Guidelines  Carefully study historic significance of large older structures before demolition  Continue to encourage partitioning of industrial structures into smaller leased spaces  Use streetscape elements like lighting and banners to add definition to corridor Central City Corridor (CC): The intent of the Central City Corridor district is to facilitate the continued development and redevelopment of the quality medium scale commercial and mixed use projects currently found in those areas. The district allows single use development, but encourages mixed-use projects. The regulations are designed to encourage use of and emphasize proximity to natural features or important view sheds of natural features. Development allowed is of a scale and character that is appropriate given the established development that surrounds the district. Staff Analysis: See emphasis above, which indicates elements and components featured in this project. (Note: Much of the Vision refers to elements directly on and specifically related to Preston Avenue. Phase 2 of this project has no frontage on Preston Ave.) Public Comments Received No public comments have been received to date for this CoA request. Staff Recommendations Staff supports the proposed design and suggests the following as conditions of approval: 1. The applicant will provide an inventory of all final materials, colors and light fixtures selected. 2. Lamping for exterior lighting to be dimmable and not exceed a color temperature of 3000K. 3. The glass for the residential windows and doors will be no lower than 56 VLT. This is lower than the preferred 70 VLT, however these windows and doors are in residential units; the fenestration is punched (versus a glazed curtain wall or storefront); glass used in commercially produced residential windows (i.e. Pella, Marvin, etc.) typically has a VLT in the mid-50s and lower 60s; and for segments of Phase 1 of the Dairy Central project, the BAR approved the use of glass with VLT 50 and VLT 68 on some portions of Phase 1.* 4. Signage requires separate permits and approvals. All internally illuminated signage shall appear to be lit white at night. 5. Rooftop mechanical equipment will be screened within the appurtenance. 6. Metering and/or electrical service equipment for the proposed street lamps [to be installed in the public right of way] and for the building’s residents/occupants will be fully concealed or located so as to allow full screening. * Alternate #2: The glass for the residential windows and doors will be no lower than ___VLT. This is lower than the preferred 70 VLT, however these windows and doors are in residential units; the 7 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final fenestration is punched (versus a glazed curtain wall or storefront); glass used in commercially produced residential windows (i.e. Pella, Marvin, etc.) typically has a VLT in the mid-50s and lower 60s; and for segments of Phase 1 of the Dairy Central project, the BAR approved the use of glass with VLT 50 and VLT 68 on some portions of Phase 1. Suggested Motions Approval Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including the City Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines, I move to find that the proposed design for Phase 2 of the Dairy Central project (946 Grady Avenue), which lies within the Preston Avenue Entrance Corridor, satisfies the ERB’s criteria, is consistent with the Guidelines, and is compatible with the goals of this Entrance Corridor, and that the ERB approves the Certificate of Appropriateness application as submitted[.] […] as submitted with the following conditions…. Alternate Motions Denial Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including the City Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines, I move to find that the proposed design for Phase 2 of the Dairy Central project (946 Grady Avenue), which lies within the Preston Avenue Entrance Corridor, does not satisfies the ERB’s criteria, is not consistent with the Guidelines, and is not compatible with the goals of this Entrance Corridor, and that for the following reasons the ERB denies the Certificate of Appropriateness application as submitted: … ERB Deferral Having considered the standards set forth within the City Code, including the City Entrance Corridor Design Guidelines, I move to find that the proposed design for Phase 2 of the Dairy Central project (946 Grady Avenue), which lies within the Preston Avenue Entrance Corridor, does not satisfies the ERB’s criteria, is not consistent with the Guidelines, and is not compatible with the goals of this Entrance Corridor, and that the ERB defers the Certificate of Appropriateness application until acceptable resolution of the following: … Applicant Deferral I move to accept the applicant’s request to defer ERB action on this Certificate of Appropriateness application. Attachments: Stony Point Design/Build, LLC, Cunningham/Quill Architects, Timmons Group, and Waterstreet Studio drawings and graphics (20 sheets), dated 11.13.2018 (submitted October 23, 2018):  Cover  Submission Narrative and List of Drawings  Existing Site and Context - Previously Reviewed and Approved  Phase 2 Site Context Photographs  Phasing Diagrams: Proposed Phase Two  Building Bird’s Eye Perspective (NE) - Previously Reviewed and Approved  Building Bird’s Eye Perspective (NW) - Previously Reviewed and Approved  Proposed Level 1 Plan  Proposed South Elevation  Proposed West Elevation 8 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final  Proposed North Elevation  Proposed East Elevation  Exterior Architectural Details  Proposed Phase 2 Perspective  Proposed Phase 2 Perspective  Proposed Phase 2 Perspective  Proposed Phase 2 Perspective  Sample Board  Landscape Site Plan, Plantings and Details  Proposed Lighting Plan 9 Dairy Central – Phase 2 - EC – CoA (November 5, 2018) Final DA I RY C E N T R A L - P H AS E 2 EN TRANCE CORRIDOR REVI EW BOARD - NOVEMBER 13, 2018 ME E T I N G OCTO BER 23, 2018 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO E N T R A N C E CO RRIDIO R RE VIE W B OARD C ERTI FI C ATE OF A PPR OPR IATEN ESS SU B MISSION NOVE M BE R 13, 2018 DAIRY C E NT RAL - PH AS E 2 CHARLOTTESVI L L E , VA SUBMITTED OC TOB E R 2 3 , 2 018 PROJECT APPROVALS PROCESS NARRATIVE On March 14, 2018 the Monticello Dairy development and design team had a Preliminary Review Meeting with the Planning Commission and the Entrance Corridor Review Board (ERB) to discuss the development concepts of the proposed phase two residential project. Feedback from this preliminary meeting was incorporated into our formal LI ST O F D R AW I N G S SUP submission which was reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission on June 12, 2018. We also received initial Entrance Corridor Review Board (ERB) review and approval of the project on June 12th., 2018 The project SUP ultimately received City Council approval on July 2, 2018. A R C H I TE C TU R A L Cover...........................................................................................................................................................1 PROJECT PROGRAM - MULTIFAMILY Submission Narrative and List of Drawings.................................................................................2 The phase two residential project consists of approximately 175 multifamily dwelling units with a proposed small corner commercial component located on a site immediately Exisitng Site and Context - Previously Reviewed and Approved......................................3 south of the new approved historic Dairy Central Food Hall and Office Building addition project. Creating a mixed-use condition on this former industrial complex in the Central City Corridor District, the phase two site is bounded by 10th Street NW to the west, West Street to the south, former Wood Street to the east and an internally alley Phase 2 Site Context Photographs.................................................................................................4 street to the north. Parking for the project is located be in a partially below grade garage. The multifamily building has five (5) levels above the garage at the center of the Phasing Diagrams: Proposed Phase Two.....................................................................................5 site with a stepdown to four levels along West Street and setbacks along 10th Street N. Two large courtyards face south to the adjacent residential street and neighborhood breaking down the scale and minimizing the frontage of the building along the street. The garage parking entrance, bike storage and building loading are entered off of the Building Bird’s Eye Perspective (NE) - Previously Reviewed and Approved................6 alley street internal to the site. The main lobby and residential entrance is located at the northeast corner of the building at the internal active pedestrian focused corner Building Bird’s Eye Perspective (NW) - Previously Reviewed and Approved...............7 adjacent to the office building – food hall entrance of phase one. Large areas of glass open up the lobby and its activity to the surrounding streets. Proposed Level 1 Plan ........................................................................................................................8 Proposed South Elevation..................................................................................................................9 ENTRANCE CORRIDOR DESIGN GUIDELINES Proposed West Elevation..................................................................................................................10 Streetscapes and Sites Proposed North Elevation.................................................................................................................11 Per the guidelines, pedestrian routes create an inviting public realm and have been reinforced with eliminating multiple curb cuts along block frontages and only placing Proposed East Elevation....................................................................................................................12 them at the mid-block alley entrance along 10th Street NW and at the end of the block at Wood Street. A new street and block plan on the site creates pedestrian paths and Exterior Architectural Details...........................................................................................................13 connectivity through the site linking the buildings, parking areas and green spaces. Lighting on the site is controlled to avoid spillover of light onto adjacent properties. Per the adopted Streets That Work Plan, 6’-0” wide “clear walk zone” sidewalks extend the frontage along both 10th Street NW and West Street with large planted strips and Proposed Phase 2 Perspective........................................................................................................14 street trees creating shade and a sense of enclosure and defined edges. Proposed Phase 2 Perspective.......................................................................................................15 Buildings are oriented to face the streets external and internal. Parking for the project is located below grade and partially below grade garage with access through the Proposed Phase 2 Perspective.......................................................................................................16 internal street alley. Bicycle parking is located adjacent to the garage in a designated bike room accessed off the alley near the building lobby. Proposed Phase 2 Perspective.......................................................................................................17 Buildings The phase two building massing, scale and height were reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission & Entrance Corridor Review Board (June 12, 2018) and the City Sample Board........................................................................................................................................18 Council (July 2, 2018). The design breaks up the frontage of the building along West Street stepping back in transition from the Preston Street Corridor to the residential neighborhood and in setbacks and step backs along 10th Street NW. The building design uses a variation of materials, textures, patterns and colors that are compatible with the adjacent new and existing buildings. Along 10th Street NW, the base of the building is highly articulated with the incorporation of individual stairway entrances to each LA N DS C A PE unit providing active circulation at multiple points along the facade. The accompanying materials board illustrates the proposed materials, textures and palette of colors of the building’s facades. Primary materials include brick, fiber cement panel and glass. Landscape Site Plan, Plantings and Details .............................................................................19 Proposed Lighting Plan...................................................................................................................20 03.14.2017 2 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION E X IST ING SITE & CONTEX T - P R EV I OUSLY R EV I EW E D & A P P R OV E D P E R S P - 0 0 0 02 MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA KEY LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PRESTON PLAZA NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER COMMERCIAL GR AD YA VEN BUSINESS AND UE TECHNOLOGY . , NW ST ER EET OK E NW BO MIXED USE IV STR DR ET, LL 10 ½ TRE PR HI ES SE TO HS RO N AV 10T ENU E WE ST S TRE ET W ,N ET RE ST H MONTICELLO 9T DAIRY - PHASE 2 11.13.2018 3 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO CURRENT LAND USE PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PH AS E 2 SITE CONTEX T P HOTOG R A P HS MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 1. A E RI A L V I EW O F T H E SI T E FRO M TH E NORTH - E AST 2 . A E R I A L V I E W O F T H E S I T E F R O M T H E W E ST 3 . LOOKI N G W EST DOWN WEST ST R E E T @ S E COR NE R OF P H AS E 2 S I TE 4. LO O K I N G N O RT H D OW N 1 0 T H ST R E E T @ CO R N E R O F 1 0 T H ST / W E ST ST 11.13.2018 4 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PH AS ING DIAGRAMS: P R OP OSED P HASE T WO - P R E V I O U S LY R E V I E W E D & A P P R OV E D P E R S P - 0 0 0 02 MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PRIMARY STREET 0' ­ 15' setback Phase 2 Residential GRADY AVENUE 50% S­1 buffer PRE STO N AVE Total Units: +/- 175 NUE 15' ­ 0" MAX. SETBACK PROPERT (based on projected unit sizes Y LINE D and mix) ADJUSTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY D PHASE 1 Total GSF: +/- 228,700 PROPERTY BOUNDARY DETERMINED BY SURVEY Bldg. PHASE 1 Height: 60’-0” to 65’-0” PHASE 4 SITE T LOADING T T T PRIMARY STREET 10TH STREET NW PHASE 2 PROPERTY BOUNDARY DETERMINED BY SURVEY PHASE 3 SITE KEY PROPERTY LINE INE RESIDENTIAL TY L PER PRO 40' ­ 2" 40' ­ 2" 0' ­ 0" MIN. 15' ­ 0" MAX. SETBACK ADJUSTED PROPERTY BOUNDARY PHASE 1 20' ­ 0" MAX. 5' ­ 0" MIN. PROPERTY LINE SETBACK SETBACK WEST STREET PROPERTY BOUNDARY DETERMINED BY SURVEY LINKING STREET 5' ­ 20' setback 50% S­1 buffer P HAS E T WO P L A N 1 0 8 16 3 2 F T. 11.13.2018 5 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION B U IL DING BIRD’S EY E P ER SP EC T I V E (LOOKI N G N O RTH - E AST) - P R E V I O U S LY R E V I E W E D & A P P R OV E D PER SP-00002 MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA R E S T O N A VE. P PHA SE 1 E T R E S T S T E 10 W TH ST RE ET E T RE ST T ES PHASE 1 W 10 TH ALLEY ST RE ET WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 WEST STREET 1 11.13.2018 6 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION B U IL DING BIRD’S EY E P ER SP EC T I V E (LOOKI N G N O RTH -W E ST) - P R E V I O U S LY R E V I E W E D & A P P R OV E D PER SP-00002 MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PR ES TO GRA N DY A AV VE. E . PHASE 2 PHASE 1 PHASE 3 (S.U.P.) W ES T ST RE ET PHASE 1 ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 WEST STREET 1 11.13.2018 7 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION L E VE L 1 P LA N MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA T T PHASE 1 T T ALLEY/MEWS 40' ­ 0" PHASE ONE GARAGE LOADING 9' ­ 5 1/2" 65' ­ 10" PHASE TWO 7' ­ 4" COMMON AMENITY COMMON AMENITY LOBBY BUILDING ENTRY COMMON AMENITY FUTURE PHASE 3 OUTDOOR AMENITY 10TH STREET NW OUTDOOR AMENITY SPACE SPACE WOOD STREET 157' ­ 0" 95' ­ 0" 46' ­ 2" NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL DN DN WEST STREET 66' ­ 4" 46' ­ 2" 63' ­ 0" 46' ­ 2" 66' ­ 4" PHASE 2: 288' ­ 0" SITE FOOTPRINT: 57,410 SF OPEN SPACE: Level 1 P R O P OS E D L E V E L 1 P LAN 21,900 SF 1 1 1/16" = 1'­0" S CALE: 1/ 16 ” = 1’–0 ” 38% OPEN SPACE   WEST STREET FRONTAGE:  38% OPEN @ GROUND FLOOR 11.13.2018 8 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION S O U T H ELEVATION MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA P RO P OS E D S O U T H E L E VAT IO N 1 S C A LE : 1”= 10 ’–0 ” PHASE 1 WINDOW SIZES AND MULLION PLACEMENTS MAY VARY. ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 WEST STREET 1 11.13.2018 9 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION W E ST EL EVATION MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 3 13 P ROP OS E D W E ST E L E VAT I O N @ 1 0T H ST RE E T NW 1 SC A L E : 1”= 10 ’–0 ” PHASE 1 WINDOW SIZES AND MULLION PLACEMENTS MAY VARY. ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 10 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION N ORT H ELEVATION MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 1 13 PHASE 1 P ROP OS E D N O RT H E L E VAT I ON 1 SC A L E: 1”= 10 ’–0 ” 1 WINDOW SIZES AND MULLION PLACEMENTS MAY VARY. ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 11 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION E AST E L E VATION MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA P ROP OS E D E AST E L E VAT I O N 1 SC A L E: 1”= 10 ’–0 ” PHASE 1 WINDOW SIZES AND MULLION PLACEMENTS MAY VARY. ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 12 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION WINDOW SIZES AND MULLION E X T E R IO R A RCHITECTU R A L D ETA I L S PLACEMENTS MAY VARY. MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 2 4 13 13 4 WA L L S E C TIO N 3 B AY ELEVATI ON 2 2 WA L L SECT ION 1 BAY E LE VAT I O N 1 S C A L E : 1 /4” = 1’- 0 ” SCA LE: 1 /4” = 1 ’ -0” SCA L E: 1 /4 ” = 1 ’- 0 ” S C A LE : 1/4 ” = 1’ - 0” 11.13.2018 13 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PR OPOS ED P HASE 2 P ER SP EC T I V ES MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PHASE 1 ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 P E R S P E C T I V E AT ALLE Y AND WO O D ST RE E T 1 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 14 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PR OPOS ED P HASE 2 P ER SP EC T I V ES MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PHASE 1 ALLEY WOOD STREET P E R S P E C T I V E AT 10T H ST RE E T & WE ST ST RE E T 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 1 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 15 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PR OPOS ED P HASE 2 P ER SP EC T I V ES MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PHASE 1 ALLEY WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 P E R S P E C T I V E AT WE ST ST RE E T AND WO O D ST RE E T 1 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 16 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION PR OPOS ED P HASE 2 P ER SP EC T I V ES MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA PHASE 1 ALLEY P E R S P E C T I V E AT ALLE Y AND 1 0T H ST RE E T 1 WOOD STREET 10TH STREET PHASE 2 PHASE 3 WEST STREET 11.13.2018 17 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ECB COA SUBMISSION E X T E R IO R MATERIA L SA M P L E BOA R D MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 11.13.2018 18 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION L A NDS CAP E P LANTINGS A N D D ETA I L S MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | 946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA INTERNAL STREET 10TH STREET NW - PLANTING WOOD STREET - PLANTING INTERNAL STREET WOOD STREET Amelanchier grandiora or Crataegus crus-galli var. inermis w/ Liriope muscari 10TH STREET Ginkgo biloba ‘Autumn Gold’ Ginkgo biloba ‘Autumn Gold’ Ilex crenata Carex pensylvanica Hydrangea quercifolia w/ Carex pensylvanica MAIDENHAIR TREE JAPANESE HOLLY PENNSYLVANIA SEDGE OAKLEAF HYDRANGEA Hydrangea quercifolia Ilex crenata WEST STREET - PLANTING Hydrangea quercifolia 10TH STREET Carpinus caroliniana Ilex crenata Panicum virgatum ‘Shenandoah’ Pennisetum alopecuroides Nepeta x faassenii WOOD STREET AMERICAN HORNBEAM JAPANESE HOLLY SWITCH GRASS FOUNTAIN GRASS NEPETA Carpinus caroliniana Carpinus caroliniana Carpinus caroliniana w/ Carex pensylvanica w/ Carex pensylvanica w/ Carex pensylvanica INTERNAL STREET - PLANTING Panicum virgatum ‘Shenandoah’ Panicum virgatum ‘Shenandoah’ Nepeta faassenii Pennisetum alopecuroides Amelanchier grandiora Crataegus crus-galli var. inermis Liriope muscari ‘Big Blue’ Carex pensylvanica Ilex crenata SERVICEBERRY THORNLESS HAWTHORN LILY TURF PENNSYLVANIA SEDGE Ilex crenata WEST STREET LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN feet 0 20 40 4'-6" 5'-0" 5'-0" 4'-0" 4'-6" 6'-8" INTERNAL STREET PLANTER SIDEWALK WOOD STREET SIDEWALK RAISED 10TH STREET PLANTER SIDEWALK PLANTER PHASE 2 KEY PLAN INTERNAL STREET - SECTION WOOD STREET - SECTION 10TH STREET - SECTION 11.13.2018 19 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO waterstreet studio PHASE 2 - LANDSCAPE PLANTING PLAN DAIRY CENTRAL - OLD MONTICELLO DAIRY PHASE 2 ERB SUBMISSION Cunningham Quill Schematic Exterior Lighting PR OPOS ED LIGHTIN G PL A N MONTICELLO DAIRY - PHASE 2 | T946 GRADY AVENUE | CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA T T T A Strategic Area Light ALLEY/MEWS PHASE ONE D Internal Glow E PHASE TWO E COMMON AMENITY COMMON AMENITY Light Poles LOBBY E B Ambient Light COMMON AMENITY FUTURE PHASE 3 Light OUTDOOR AMENITY OUTDOOR AMENITY 10TH STREET NW SPACE SPACE AreaSTREET Bollard Lights A StrategicWOOD NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL E E DN DN Recessed Wall Mounted Lights WEST STREET C General Illumination Legend A. Strategic Area Light: Pedestrian scale poles with fixtures using full cut off optics + bidirectional bollards Surface Wall Mounted Lights B. Ambient Light: Architectural integrated small aperture downlights for stairs and planters areas C. General Illumination: City standard TBD D. Internal Glow: Controlled interior lighting visible from exterior E. Egress Light: Wall or Step light style Recessed Down lights 11.13.2018 20 STONY POINT DESIGN/BUILD, LLC | CUNNINGHAM | QUILL ARCHITECTS | TIMMONS GROUP | WATERSTREET STUDIO Dairy Phase II 10.19.2018