Planning Commission Meeting   5/10/2022

Mr. Mayor, is council in order?

We are indeed.

That being the case, Mr. Offley, can you please start us off?

And that will be followed by a presentation from the applicant.

Mr. Mitchell, questions for staff on this?

The only thing that I would recommend Matt do is walk, remind the public what standard number one is.

Standard number one under the standards of review in looking at HUP states that whether the proposed use or development will be harmonious with the existing patterns of use and development within the neighborhood.

Mr. Mitchell, did you have anything else?

For what reason do we feel, does staff feel that it does not meet that standard?

But it will, you know, it also states in the report there are other documents, planning documents, that talk about increased density in this part of the city, but Standard 1 is pretty clear on existing patterns of development.

I think that was either mentioned later on in another document, or does Standard 1 elude to that?

Mass in a

Ms.

And Jody, I think, responded or sent it out about an email that was received from the public about the difference in the staff report.

That email was, I think Jeff is going to talk to that, but that email was more related to the entrance corridor review.

Thank you.

Mr. Bob, questions?

When are we reviewing those?

Which Planning Commission would review if the SGP was granted, this would come back at final site plan, which would have a detailed landscaping and lighting plan.

What kind of schedule did they enforce it at?

With that, I'll turn it over to the city traffic engineer, Vernon Duncan, if you want to address that.

I mean, honestly, the police do the enforcement, so I can't even answer that question as far as what their schedule, you know, if they do patrols, I don't know that you'd have to ask them that.

Thank you.

Mr. Lohendra, please.

And yet in the recommendations, which of the recommendations addresses the problems that they have with massing and scale?

by having a very planted S3 screening would help mitigate that impact.

So is that addressed in any of these conditions?

But I'll let Jeff speak more on that.

Thank you.

Mr. Stolzenberg.

like what the risk is to those utilities, how that risk is mitigated and how, you know, the city in the site plan review added in inspection of the as built can ensure that there are no adverse effects on neighbors from that.

Their stance was kind of any development in the site would need to meet standards, utility and engineering standards.

Is it wider?

I don't believe they're touching the right of way really on observatory Okay, so all those sidewalks and that buffer are all within the site as it is now?

Do we have a number on how many new entree parking spots there will be?

That would definitely show up more at site plan level.

their driveways, and how is that determination made vis-a-vis street width or other obstacles when you're doing these reviews?

I'm not sure if that answers your question or not.

I think we're going to have that net new parking anyway.

We're just going to put a blank parking spot across the street from every driveway.

Thanks.

Do you have any questions for staff?

Didn't know if you had anything to add to that or what your thoughts on that are.

MR. Okay.

clearly state for everybody what the specific non-conformance was that you're focusing on there.

that answer what you were looking for?

Council, questions for staff on this?

Thank you very much.

I'm sorry.

Council?

I just wanted to clarify that the permits are not in the evenings and weekends, right?

They're not 24-hour permits.

and midnight is free parking for

Is it possible to do that 24-hour permit parking?

Yeah, we would probably have to amend the city code that references the Zone 1, whether that's going to apply to all Zone 1 or if we kind of create a subzone where that would apply to.

I just would think that the neighbors would be more concerned about weekends and evening guests than they would about daytime 9 to 5 guests I know that's when I've had issues with parking it hasn't been from 9 to 5 it's been in the evenings when friends are coming over which is great that friends are coming over but if someone's gone to Gersh's door they can't necessarily park when they come back

Additional questions from Council?

Is that the upshot?

Is that the question?

I'm just confirming that.

Yes, that is correct.

I didn't see the, maybe I didn't look close enough, but didn't see the actual new zebra lines or whatever in terms of will there be new crossings, new pedestrian type protected spaces?

So we're basically just asking them to improve that one, do bump outs for pedestrian safety, and give us, you know, a better crossing where we can actually make the grades work.

Alfell, is that correct?

Hopefully, but Councilor Mattisville.

if this are you able to speak sort of from your professional experience and just the sense of things if this were a by right development if the if the developer were able to do sort of what they wanted to in the space do you feel like it would still violate one or is that is that not a fair question for you well I understand where you're coming from but I think it these standards don't come into play when you're doing by right

So it's kind of wouldn't even really be looked at because they would be doing their by right 20, 21 dwelling units per acre, which I believe, I don't have that number off my head, but I know it's in the report where what that would get you.

But it's a dramatically smaller.

Correct.

OK, thank you.

Additional questions from Council?

One, do you happen to know and could you remind me in our future land use map what this area is designated as and what the by right height would be in that corridor?

And what they're asking for is 75 feet.

And so would it be correct that the max height by right under the future land use map, if this was not, entrance corridor would be five feet, or not five, five stories.

for more important intersections.

and is my understanding correct that the around $500,000 they're contributing to the affordable housing fund that's the minimum requirement under the formula for what they have to contribute with the special use permit?

either providing either nine units on site, off site, or contributing close, you know, close to 500,000 to the affordable housing fund, which they have indicated, the applicants indicated they, you know, would want to contribute.

Are there any long-term renters living there currently?

That I'm not sure, but the applicant might be able to speak to that during their presentation.

Mr. Snook, questions?

Is that right?

We have no guidance documents that indicate key intersections in any of our planning documents.

I guess I'm not familiar enough with the entrance corridor policies to understand.

So staff was using professional opinion to determine key intersections.

Presumably that's part of what we're going to be working on this year, is defining those terms.

That would be helpful.

Is that part of why you're thinking maybe this does not do violence to the neighborhood, character of the neighborhood?

That's kind of when we get to the bottom of it, you're not going to be able to have a smaller building really with this level of density.

Are we coming across something that you all have already talked about and we're just not aware of it?

I can't think of a specific way to answer that, you know, a specific meeting.

Right.

Okay.

I know that we implicit in our thinking was, in fact, that that area is going to be denser, and we just frankly took that for granted.

Yeah.

Okay.

put that word in the right category, I guess, to make kind of ambiguous now.

and I guess the and I while I you know I tried to pay attention to most of y'all's meetings but I didn't say I didn't watch all of them so I was wondering whether there was some discussion of this in some meaningful way that that I had not had not seen so okay that's all thank you Mr. Chair of course I would like to say and from my perspective there are pieces of the comprehensive plan that talk about this indirectly but no specific area that says this is exactly how it's going to be

Can you talk about what that means and how that is different?

So that was why we used that as opposed to just a general mid-rise, high-rise apartment complex.

Do you believe that this approach could apply to other areas near the university?

you know a little bit more closely and maybe set some parameters you know for future applications as to you know how far away do you use this and so forth but for this one in particular it was a no-brainer exciting thank you for your innovation that's good to see I believe that is all the questions for this section Mr. Werner please tell us more

Any questions for me?

Let's start with Mr. Mitchell.

Is that accurate?

You're asking me?

Yes.

We're going to have to think that one through and work it through, but that's the intent of the process, is to get to a design that meets the guidelines and solves the problem for the applicant and resolves the design issues for the city.

Is that accurate?

the design review process will resolve those.

Should that impact our thinking tonight or should it impact our thinking if we see this again?

or Chody, jump in here and help us.

Should we also include Jeff's three recommendations in our SUP approval?

with that, that you could note that one way or the other, but if it was going in a positive direction, you could note these are items that we would also like Council to consider as this move forward.

You all may want to

And then the actual weeds of what that is is a later step if other things happen in the process.

So the council I'm getting from Jody and you is that we shouldn't get into the, if we decide to move forward with this and recommend approval, we should not get into the design things that

You could think about the questions that'll come later, but the questions that right now and then continuing through the process depending on how things go.

Fantastic.

Thank you.

Dowell, please.

Oh, I didn't have any questions for the ERP or not.

Thank you.

Mr. Lhendra, Aesthetics.

Jeff, you implies when you said something about the north end of this project site wasn't as much of a concern because you couldn't see it from JPA but in fact the entire site is included in the overlay map for the entrance corridor so it needs to be considered it needs to be part of our consideration

It was very wise.

So do we or do we not consider a review of what's going on at the north end of this project site as part of the entrance corridor review?

So I think if you do feel that there are elements towards the rear of the site, if that rear setbacks that matter, I don't think there's anything wrong with expressing that.

Thank you.

Aesthetics.

So my question, Jeff, sorry, Mr. Warner, do you believe that human scale is achieved on observatory in Washington?

MS.

to say that to know one way or the other fully because we have a conceptual design that would be refined if it moves forward through the process.

I don't have a question other than like not exactly being on the same page, not exactly knowing how we're evaluating this.

You do not have to get the design right tonight if that helps.

I don't have any other questions.

Mr. Stolzenberg, aesthetics.

Would it be reasonable to make putting those trees in the or the utilities underground in the median a condition?

No.

Are they off-site?

They're off-site.

Oh, good.

Mr. Palmer, any thoughts on aesthetics?

Not at this time.

Counsel, do you have questions on aesthetics?

And again, I don't say that with any intention of trying to block density increases here or prevent it, but how do we get to yes and make it work?

it doesn't solve all problems so I'm sorry I'm going but as far as yes the block length the standard of what went wrong you'll have to talk with some former members of VAR and Missy and others I'll tell you more about that than I can further questions from council on aesthetics that was easy

Because there's a couple of apartment buildings in this block and there's some houses as well.

I mean, I know what's there.

I'm sure he's listening and can give us some numbers.

I thought they said 17 dwelling units.

Yeah, that seems like a number.

Are you talking about the number of housing on the site or the neighborhood more broadly?

On that particular site.

That's in the report.

I just couldn't find it.

Any additional questions from Council on aesthetics?

Thank you.

Good analysis.

Thank you.

I believe we are ready to hear from the public.

We will be soon, but the applicant would love an opportunity to speak.

Please.

Okay, got it.

Thank you.

Next slide.

The proposed building is consistent with these heights.

Although, again, the current zoning ordinance would allow 101, and you get sort of another story on both sides at the moment.

and the next slide please.

So we welcome any questions at this point.

I would like to start with Mr. Mitchell, please.

MR. No questions at the moment.

Dowell.

Does that represent the shadow that this new building will propose on the existing neighborhood?

So it has nothing to do with how it hits the building at all or any of the sun conditions.

Thank you.

Mr. Bob, questions for the applicant?

I know you did the bulk play to kind of establish that, but did you consider any along Washington Avenue where it is seven stories next to the, you know, small detached homes?

And that's based on the GIS data and the census data.

The other question I had was, you had a diagram, or I don't think I saw this, but could you talk to what the extent of the parking is on the first two levels when it wraps around that corner from, you know, you have the habitable space on the front at JPA, and where does that parking, is it all the way to the face of the brick, is there some space there on Washington?

Okay.

Mr. Landry.

I'm pretty sure you probably aren't going to push the building back.

what it will do is we'll have to adjust obviously the dimensions of what we show currently for the street trees and the terraces and we'll have to work through that to figure out you know do we do we push the building back a little bit squeeze all those dimensions a little bit and still remain hopefully under that bulk plane which is the you know one of the key components to us of trying to achieve compatibility with the rear condition

You would still be committed to providing some of that.

Okay, good.

Thank you.

Russell.

Does individual trash cans serve that many residents?

all coordinated with what's available locally from service providers.

I could just see that being a big mess at that location.

I don't recall at the moment and maybe John Matthews if you have any further comment to make on that you can chime in.

It will be totally taken care of.

That's all my questions.

Is it just reducing the amount of excavation?

You basically just have less excavation at that point.

So underneath that terrace, you know, inside of that brick masonry, is that excavated space used for parking then?

no it is not because it's in this in the setback and so it cannot have any occupiable space in it it's allowed to be a terrace but um it you can't put occupiable space in the setback okay but then so behind the terrace i guess within the building footprint is that parking parking

I see.

And then further towards the middle of the building, it's the fitness center, which is an amenity for the residents.

It would just be parking unless you were to turn that into commercial space and then excavate further in to replace those spots.

but that would interrupt the ramp condition and we would have even less parking at that point.

So help me understand why you want that kind of cutout space to be at that southwest corner by JPA, rather, say, than in the rear of the site.

And then sort of a third reason would be that the pool location being at the southwest corner is better for that outdoor space to have sun than putting it in shadow right behind the building on the north side.

And also I think that kind of heavy tenant activity that could be happening up there feels like it would be better

oriented toward JPA then back into the neighborhood where presumably we'd rather the building get quieter.

We didn't want to put the pool at the rear and put all those people at the rear creating noise adjacent to the quiet single family or not single family but the few single family that are still there but the lower density.

And thank you, Mr. Palmer.

I just wonder how you, since we're talking about aesthetics, how you might understand how those would be accommodated on the site.

Does that answer?

Yeah, that's exactly what I was wondering.

McGill, questions for the applicant?

I said that's three four-bedroom townhouses, two three-bedroom townhouses, one two-bedroom, one three-bedroom apartment, a two-bedroom, a three-bedroom and a one-bedroom apartment and a six-bedroom house built in the 1900s

110 Washington has five units in it.

That's what I have, yeah.

In 2007, JPA has five units in it, four of which are uninhabitable and four of which are two bedrooms and one efficiency.

But the 2005 JPA would be torn down.

Yes.

So it's not like we necessarily be displacing anyone.

To my knowledge, I've been told that at least one unit has a professor, UVA professor in it, but all the other units, I believe, are all students.

Okay.

Thank you.

What is going on in that brick facade in Washington?

And should that not be what you want, we can address it in the entrance corridor review process to change it to something else or do something differently.

Thank you.

Mr. Payne, questions for the applicant?

So just to confirm if the existing properties there are any owner-occupied non-rentals?

On-site?

On-site, correct.

Okay.

So the color scheme you put up, is that just, you know, for the presentation or is that the color scheme you're planning to go with for the property?

So, yeah, I consider it preliminary.

That's it.

Mr. Pinkston, questions for the applicant?

Thank you.

What happened?

So that was the delay that was three months ago.

That was last month, I think, right?

Last month we delayed because the staff report was so extensive and we got it sort of the Friday, I think it was the Friday or the Monday right before the meeting, right before Tuesday, and we felt it was too extensive to try and absorb it all and reflect on all of it in sort of a really short timeframe.

Having now had a chance to reflect on it, has that caused you to change anything in the project?

or the design that we're proposing.

That's really just a presentation issue rather than, hey, we went back and reworked this piece of the design.

I think we there are still some outstanding neighborhood you know whether there's those porches that are on Observatory Avenue or there or not there we've heard it both ways from you know two different sides and so I think that can be for you know we can go either way but we would prefer to keep them

Thank you.

Can you talk a little bit about how that has informed your thinking about the design and possibly operational going forward, should this be approved?

actually picking up additional permit parking spaces on that street in particular, which is, I think, where most of the concern lies with the neighborhood.

At this time, I would like to hear from the public.

But would we be able to make that a condition in the SUP or would there have to be change in ordinance before we could make that a condition?

This building would not be eligible for any of those permits, so that is not a consideration necessarily, but because it's not 24-7, there are also things that could come into play, so that would have to be a separate discussion.

Exactly, that's where I was going.

Right, and this building would not be eligible for permits.

Yeah, yeah.

So I would just like to kind of counter on that.

Having looked at the site a couple of times now, they're being utilized.

So say probably 50 or 60 actual parking spaces on Washington.

I do want to hear from the public.

Duncan, can you comment upon the safety of those intersections and is there any data on accidents?

And if there's vehicles there, it is more difficult than at other intersections to make that maneuver.

On JPA, the road is coming uphill towards those intersections from east to west?

So observatory is higher than Washington.

Okay.

Or is that something you could do as part of the site plan process?

There's no parking within 20 feet of the intersection by code anyway, so it would basically be only be removing one parking space there additionally to kind of give some additional sight line there.

Creasy can offer additional details, I think.

And if you'd come to the microphone, that would be wonderful.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Yes.

So thanks.

And in person, please.

Our next in-person participant is Ellen Conte Morris.

We urge you to reject it.

Can we hear from online, please?

Okay.

Thank you.

Can we please hear from in person?

Okay, our next in person will be Ann Benham.

Please do not approve this application.

Can we please hear from someone online now?

Matthew?

Thank you for your time.

Can we please hear from someone in person?

Our next speaker, Megan Bushy.

Thank you so much for your time.

Creasy, could you describe the visual aid for those watching and for myself?

Yeah, it denotes the locations of the free trolley surrounding the parcel under discussion this evening and then provides a rendering right over the property of the proposal.

Can we please hear from someone on the line?

Oops.

Are we good?

Ethan, can we hear you?

Yes, yes.

Okay, wonderful.

Thank you.

Can we hear from someone in person, please?

Please give your name and address when you start, please.