board of supervisors public hearing...zcpa 2003-0005 ashburn village proffer amendment board of...

DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING STAFF REPORT

BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING

DATE OF HEARING: March 8, 2005 ZCPA 2003-0005, Ashburn Village Proffer Amendment

DECISION DEADLINE: April 5, 2005 ELECTION DISTRICT: Broad Run PROJECT PLANNER: Matthew R. Jesick

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ashburn Village Development Corporation of Bethesda, Maryland, and the Ashburn Village Community Association of Ashburn, Virginia have submitted an application to amend the concept plan and proffers for Ashburn Village to remove proffered trails from the Concept Plan to avoid steep slopes, mature vegetation and required landscaping and to revise the design of a proffered park site to meet citizen requests. No change in residential density is proposed by this application. The subject properties are located throughout Ashburn Village and are zoned PD-H4 (Planned Development – Housing) subject to the 1972 Zoning Ordinance. The area is governed by the policies of the Revised General Plan and the Dulles North Area Management Plan

which designate this area for residential uses and which recommend that communities have a full complement of recreational amenities.

RECOMMENDATIONS The Planning Commission and staff recommend approval of the application, subject to the proffer statement and based on the findings contained in the staff report. SUGGESTED MOTIONS 1. I move that the Board of Supervisors forward ZCPA 2003-0005, Ashburn Village

Proffer Amendment, to the April 5 Business Meeting for action. OR 2.a. I move suspension of the rules. AND

# 11

ZCPA 2003-0005 Ashburn Village Proffer Amendment BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING MARCH 8, 2005

2

2.b. I move that the Board of Supervisors approve ZCPA 2003-0005, Ashburn Village

Proffer Amendment, subject to the proffer statement dated September 9, 2004 and revised through January 31, 2005 and based on the findings contained in the February 8, 2005 staff report.

OR 3. I move an alternate motion.

VICINITY MAP

Directions from Leesburg: Take Route 7 east to a right on Ashburn Village Boulevard. Follow Ashburn Village Boulevard south to Gloucester Parkway. Turn left to reach the park site, or continue south to a right on Cheltenham Circle to reach the majority of the trail locations.

Park Site

Trails already built Trails to be built Trails to be deleted Existing Sidewalks

ZCPA 2003-0005 Ashburn Village Proffer Amendment BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC HEARING

MARCH 8, 2005

3

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Application Information ..................................................................................... 4 II. Issues Summary and Status .............................................................................. 5 III. Planning Commission Review and Findings ................................................... 5 IV. Project Review .................................................................................................... 7 A. Context ..................................................................................................... 7 B. Summary of Outstanding Issues ............................................................ 8 C. Overall Analysis ....................................................................................... 8 D. Zoning Ordinance Criteria for Approval .............................................. 15 V. Attachments ...................................................................................................... 19


4

I. APPLICATION INFORMATION APPLICANTS: Ashburn Village Development Corp. Ashburn Village Community Association Ms. Staci Harvey David J. Austin 7501 Wisconsin Avenue, 15th

Bethesda, MD 20814 Ashburn, Virginia 20147-3320 Floor 44025 Courtland Drive

703-729-2127 703-729-5162 REPRESENTATIVE: Reed Smith, LLP Sara Howard-O’Brien, AICP 44084 Riverside Pkwy, Suite 300 Leesburg, VA 20176 703-729-8500 PROPOSAL: Zoning Concept Plan Amendment to amend Ashburn Village

proffers (ZCPA 1996-0001) to convert a park facility in Section 37A from tennis courts and multi-purpose courts to passive/active recreation. This application is also requesting to remove a portion of the pedestrian trail system in Sections 33B, 60, 61 and 65.

LOCATION: The park site is on the north side of Gloucester, east of Ashburn

Village Blvd. The trails are located between Ashburn Village Blvd. and Ashburn Rd., north of Farmwell Rd., as well as along the eastern boundary of Ashburn Village.

PARCELS:

Tax Map Parcel MCPI 79 46 059-37-2819 (portion) 62/F((27)) 2 086-18-5790 62/F((14)) 61D 086-17-8473 62/F((25)) 65A 086-27-3610 62/F((14)) 61B 087-47-5051 62/I((8)) 33B1A1 058-16-4872 62/F((27)) S-60 086-19-4533

ZONING: PD-H4,

1972 Zoning Ordinance

PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL UNITS: None PROPOSED NON-RESIDENTIAL FLOOR AREA: None


MARCH 8, 2005

5

SURROUNDING LAND USES/ZONING:

NORTH PDH-4 Residential (Ashburn Village) SOUTH PDH-4 Residential (Ashburn Village) EAST PDH-4 Residential (Ashburn Village and future retirement) WEST R-1/PDH-4 Residential (Ashburn Farm, Timberbrooke)

II. ISSUES SUMMARY AND STATUS Referral Agency or

Topic Area Issues Examined and Status

Comprehensive Plan

• Tot lots in the redesigned park should be at least 5,000 square feet in size. Status: Resolved.

• Staff recommends that a trail be constructed under Route 641 bridge to connect existing Ashburn Village trails to those existing in the Timberbrooke development. Status: The applicant has chosen not to build this connection but rather direct funds to the proposed outdoor seating area.

• Staff recommends that a trail be constructed along Farmwell Road from Ashburn Village Boulevard to Ashburn Road. Status: The applicant has chosen not to build this connection but rather direct funds to the proposed outdoor seating area.

Transportation

• If trails are to be eliminated, connectivity must be maintained throughout the development. Status: Resolved. Although some trails will not be built, other trails and sidewalks will still connect locations in Ashburn Village.

• Staff recommends that a trail be constructed under Route 641 bridge to connect existing Ashburn Village trails to those existing in the Timberbrooke development. Status: The applicant has chosen not to build this connection but rather direct funds to the proposed outdoor seating area.

• Staff recommends that a trail be constructed along Farmwell Road from Ashburn Village Boulevard to Ashburn Road. Status: The applicant has chosen not to build this connection but rather direct funds to the proposed outdoor seating area.

Parks and Rec. • New amenities should have approximately the same value as previously proffered amenities. Status: Resolved.

Proffer Review • Applicant has revised proffers based on County Attorney comments. Status: Resolved.

III. PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND FINDINGS On January 10 the Planning Commission held a briefing meeting on this application. At that meeting the Commission asked the applicant to elaborate on community involvement in the application process, notice for the Public Hearing, the impact of deleting the trail segments and the availability of active recreational amenities near the Section 37A park site. The applicant’s written response to those questions can be found as Attachment 7. The Commission held a Public Hearing on this item on January 24, 2005. One member of the public spoke at the meeting. The speaker agreed with


6

the proposal to remove trails based on the concerns listed by the applicants, but felt that they should be replaced with trails at other locations to enhance pedestrian safety. The speaker also expressed concern about potential noise from the proposed outdoor seating area. The Commission had a few questions about the genesis of the park design change and the potential to construct new trails. The applicant responded that the park redesign was initiated only at the request of homeowners. The applicant also stated that they did not wish to construct trails at the locations suggested by staff because of liability and maintenance concerns and because of difficulties working with VDOT. The Commission also asked the applicant to respond to citizen complaints about refuse collecting along the shore line of Lake 2. The applicant agreed to clean up the debris. The Commission voted 9-0 to forward the application to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation of approval, subject to the proffer statement and based on the findings contained in the staff report and on the condition that the applicant clean up the west and south sides of Lake 2. The applicant stated that the lake has now been cleared of all debris.

Findings for Approval

1. Deleting the specified trails will prevent damage to steep topography, environmental features and required landscaping.

2. Redesigning the park will provide a valuable recreation area for the citizens of Ashburn Village.

3. The proposed proffer amendment is consistent with the bicycle and pedestrian policies of the Comprehensive Plan in that connectivity is maintained through other, already-constructed trails and sidewalks.

4. The proposed proffer amendment is consistent with the green infrastructure policies of the Revised General Plan

in that:

a) not building the currently proffered trails will allow steep slopes to remain wooded and therefore less prone to erosion;

b) not building the currently proffered trails will permit the preservation of healthy stands of trees that provide benefits such as animal habitat and temperature moderation;

5. The proposal conforms to the regulations of the 1972 Zoning Ordinance

.


MARCH 8, 2005

7

IV. PROJECT REVIEW A.

CONTEXT

The applicant is seeking to amend the concept plan and proffers associated with Ashburn Village. When Ashburn Village was rezoned, the applicant proffered a comprehensive system of trails, sidewalks and recreational amenities. Most of those amenities have been constructed, but the applicant has asked that about 6,200 feet of trails be deleted from the proffered trail map and that a planned park have a different array of amenities than originally proposed.

Many of these trees would need to be removed to install a trail along the lake. For the locations of trails to be deleted, please see the graphic in section C. Overall Analysis. The trails are proposed to be deleted because of the extreme topography on the southern and western shore of Lake 2, because of required landscaping and berming along Ashburn Village’s eastern property boundary and because of privacy concerns. Not only is the topography steep along the lakeshore but a stand of mature hardwood trees would have to be removed to install the trail. Please see the photo of the trees above. In lieu of the trail construction, the applicant is proposing to build a terraced outdoor seating area at the existing community center on the south shore of the lake.


8

The park redesign is based on citizen input at homeowners’ association (HOA) meetings. The residents near the future park were interested in having amenities such as tot lots rather than multi-use courts. They were concerned that the multi-use courts would attract crime and vandalism. The original proffers called for five multi-use courts and one tennis court. The new proposal calls for replacement of the courts with a lawn, two tot lots and a picnic pavilion. B.

SUMMARY OF OUTSTANDING ISSUES

Staff has no outstanding issues with the application. The proffer statement is under review by the County Attorney and will be finalized prior to the Public Hearing. C.

OVERALL ANALYSIS

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN Ashburn Village is planned for residential uses. The Revised General Plan states that residential developments should have a mix of office, commercial, civic, open space and recreational uses. Ashburn Village has been developed with such a land use mix. The community has also built a network of trails to connect the various parts of the development. The Comprehensive Plan strongly supports multi-modal transportation as a means to reduce dependence on the automobile. The pedestrian transportation network of Ashburn Village will not be disrupted by this application; all areas of the Community will still be accessible on foot. The Plan also promotes the provision of civic amenities as places for residents to gather and foster a sense of community identity. The proposed amphitheatre will act as a civic and recreational use. Furthermore, the green infrastructure policies of the Revised General Plan

promote the preservation of existing vegetation and discourage development on steep slopes. Deleting the trail on the slope overlooking Lake 2 will accomplish these goals. Staff finds that this application meets the policies of the Comprehensive Plan.

REMOVAL OF TRAILS Approximately 6,200 feet of trails proffered with Ashburn Village are now proposed to be deleted from the recreational amenities exhibit and not built. The applicant proposed the deletion in order to avoid steep slopes, environmental features and required landscaping and berming. The trails are in three areas: next to Lake 2, along Ashburn Road (Route 641) and at the eastern property boundary for Ashburn Village. This section will examine whether or not removal of each set of trails is appropriate.


MARCH 8, 2005

9

This image of central Ashburn Village shows existing sidewalks as green dots, existing trails as red lines, trails to be built as blue lines and trails to be deleted from the plans as shaded red lines. (If reading a black and white version of this document, please visit www.loudoun.gov to view a color version. The color version is also available in the Department of Planning.) LAKESIDE Steep slopes – almost cliffs – line portions of the southern and western shore of Lake 2. Trails could theoretically be constructed in this location, but only at great expense. First, the mature trees would need to be removed. Second, a retaining wall would need to be constructed or blasting may be necessary to carve out a shelf for the trail. This would entail not only the cost of the work itself, but the cost of getting equipment into this location to do the work. The photo below shows the steep slope on the southern shore of the lake. Staff agrees with the applicant that this is a logical place to not build a trail. A sidewalk parallels this trail segment on the front side of adjacent homes. And while direct access to the lake would be ideal, in this case it is not practical. The lake can be accessed from a number of other locations. The trail cannot be placed at the top of the slope because the residential lots extend to the edge of the steep topography.

Lake 2


10

This view from the north side of Lake 2 shows the steep slopes on the southern shore. ALONG ASHBURN ROAD The trail segment parallel to Ashburn Road is proposed to be deleted for two reasons. One, to preserve forested areas as a buffer between the road and nearby homes, and two, to respect the privacy of homeowners. The residential lots on Carthagena Court come as close as 25 feet to the Ashburn Road right-of-way. Currently the HOA property is populated by a stand of cedar trees that provides adequate screening for the homes. A retaining wall creates a change in elevation between the forested buffer and the back yards of the homes. If a trail were placed on the HOA property in question, trees would be removed and the quality of the buffer would be greatly reduced. Also, because of the change in elevation between the homes and the buffer area, a trail would be at the same level as the second floor of the homes. A sidewalk along Carthagena Court permits pedestrian access to this area. Staff agrees with the applicant that this is a logical place to not build a trail. EASTERN BOUNDARY A berm and landscaping were required on the eastern boundary of Ashburn Village next to the One Loudoun Center property. At the location in question, the berm is approximately six feet high and occupies almost all of the 30 foot wide HOA property behind the residential lots. The landscaping is already in place on the berm. There is not enough room for the trail. Immediately to the north, the rear lot lines are a minimum of 60 feet from the Ashburn Village property line, allowing for both the required landscaping and a trail. While the trail segment under consideration could provide


MARCH 8, 2005

11

access to southern portions of Ashburn Village, staff agrees with the applicant that this is a logical place to not build a trail. In front of the homes, a sidewalk parallels this proffered trail segment and can connect residents north of this location to the recreational amenities to the south. Also, since the lots are established and the berm and landscaping are in place, it would be impractical and costly to now put the trail through.

The retaining wall at the left of the photograph creates a change in elevation between the buffer areas and the adjacent homes. The proffered trail would be located in the buffer area.

This berm with landscaping is located on Ashburn Village HOA property between the residential lots and the property of One Loudoun Center.


12

REPLACEMENT OF TRAILS A proffer is a voluntary contribution that a developer agrees to make to mitigate impacts or increase amenities as a part of the rezoning negotiation process. The County seeks to ensure proffers are fulfilled so that the residents of the rezoned property have the infrastructure and community facilities that are needed. In the case of Ashburn Village, the developer proffered to give to the community a certain array of amenities including a comprehensive network of trails. The County values the trails and the mobility they provide to the Ashburn residents. This application offers the opportunity to maintain or even enhance the overall level of mobility for the residents of Ashburn Village. It would be appropriate, therefore, to replace the trails being deleted with trail connections in other locations. A few suggestions were made for replacement trails including a new trail along Farmwell Road and a connection to the west under Ashburn Road. Broad Run High School and Parkhurst Plaza are destinations for residents of Ashburn Village. Unfortunately, no trail connection exists from Ashburn Village to either of those sites. The Office of Transportation Services has funds available to enhance the intersection of Farmwell and Ashburn Roads with pedestrian crossing signals. Staff therefore suggested that the applicant construct a trail along Farmwell Road from Ashburn Village Boulevard west to Ashburn Road, or at least to their property boundary. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Mobility Master Plan

calls for a trail along Farmwell Road. This trail would allow residents to reach those major destinations without getting in their cars or walking on the road. The applicants do not agree to construct the recommended trail; they were concerned about the impact to existing landscaping and the perception that such a trail would encourage the use of other Ashburn Village trails by outsiders, which can create a liability risk. They were also concerned about maintenance and interaction with VDOT. Ashburn Village Development Corp. offered to contribute $20,000 to the County to go towards a trail along Farmwell Road, but this amount is insufficient. Staff estimates that just the asphalt for an 8 foot-wide trail from Ashburn Village Boulevard to the Ashburn Village property line would cost over $40,000. That figure does not include grading or a base material such as stone.

Staff also suggested providing a connection under Ashburn Road to another existing trail. Where Ashburn Road bridges Lake 2, a worn path beside the lake connects the trail in the Timberbrooke development to the Ashburn trail. Since this area is obviously highly used, staff suggested paving the path to make access to both trail systems easier. The applicants were again concerned about maintenance and the liability of non-residents using their trails and do not agree to construct the proposed trail.


MARCH 8, 2005

13

In lieu of these proposals, the applicants have decided to redirect any monies that would have been spent on trails to a proposed terraced, open-air seating area on the south shore of Lake 2. Staff would have preferred that the deleted trails be replaced with other pedestrian and bicycle amenities, but the seating area will be a valuable community feature. The facility will be an accessory to the existing community center off of Cheltenham Circle. (See the star on the graphic at right for the location.) The

The red dashed line in the graphic at left shows the location of staff’s proposal to pave a trail from Ashburn Village to Timberbrooke, west of Ashburn Road. The photo above shows where a trail has been worn under the Rt. 641 bridge.


14

area where the seating will be constructed is a graded, grassy slope between the swimming pool and the lake. The facility will be used to view fireworks and for small performances. It will seat 90 to 100 people. The seating area is referenced in the proffers, and the HOA has submitted a letter stating their approval of the current arrangement. (Please see Attachment 6.) CONVERSION OF PARK Section 37A of Ashburn Village, on the north side of Gloucester Parkway, has been proffered as a park site. The original plan for the parcel called for five multi-purpose courts and one tennis court. The applicant is now asking that that plan be revised based on citizen input. The new park would have an open lawn, two tot lots and a picnic pavilion. The nearby residents voiced concerns about the existing park design at HOA meetings. They were concerned that basketball courts would bring crime and vandalism to their neighborhood. Staff recommends a comprehensive array of recreational amenities at the site and suggested that the applicant keep one multi-purpose court along with the other proposed features. This suggestion was declined, but staff does not object to the proposed design. The tot lot, picnic pavilion and lawn will be desirable facilities for all the nearby residents. ZONING Ashburn Village is zoned PD-H4 and administered under the 1972 Zoning Ordinance

. Prior applications and associated proffers approved for Ashburn Village are ZMAP 329, ZMAP 1984-0007, ZCPA 1990-0001, ZCPA 1990-0008, ZCPA 1992-0003, ZCPA 1993-0002, ZCPA 1996-0001, and ZCPA 2002-0002. There are no outstanding zoning issues with this application.

D.

ZONING ORDINANCE CRITERIA FOR APPROVAL

Section 6-1211(E) of the Loudoun County Zoning Ordinance

states " ... if the application is for reclassification of property to a different zoning district classification on the Zoning Map… the Planning Commission shall give reasonable consideration to the following matters ... ":

(1) Standard

Whether the proposed zoning district classification is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.

Analysis

The zoning district will not change as a result of this proposal. The zoning will remain PD-H4. The array of recreational amenities will change.


MARCH 8, 2005

15

(2) Standard

Whether there are any changed or changing conditions in the area affected that make the proposed rezoning appropriate.

Analysis

Conditions immediately adjacent to the recreational amenities are not changing; The residential portion of Ashburn Village is largely built out.

(3) Standard

Whether the range of uses in the proposed zoning district classification are compatible with the uses permitted on other property in the immediate vicinity.

Analysis

The proposed recreational and civic amenities are compatible with the residential uses in the immediate vicinity.

(4) Standard

Whether adequate utility, sewer and water, transportation, school and other facilities exist or can be provided to serve the uses that would be permitted on the property if it were rezoned.

Analysis

Adequate utility, sewer and water facilities exist. The lakeside seating area will generate traffic on a level equivalent to the other activities at the community center such as swimming.

(5) Standard

The effect of the proposed rezoning on the County's ground water supply.

Analysis

The County’s groundwater supply will not be affected by this application. Groundwater will be protected by leaving existing vegetation in place on the steep slopes, thereby encouraging groundwater infiltration and preventing erosion and particulate pollution.

(6) Standard

The effect of the uses allowed by the proposed rezoning on the structural capacity of the soils.

Analysis

The proposed recreational uses will not affect the structural capacity of the soils. The soils will be protected by leaving existing vegetation in place which will prevent erosion. Construction of the seating area will not affect existing vegetation.


16

(7) Standard

The impact that the uses permitted if the property were rezoned will have upon the volume of vehicular and pedestrian traffic and traffic safety in the vicinity and whether the proposed rezoning uses sufficient measures to mitigate the impact of through construction traffic on existing neighborhoods and school areas.

Analysis

This application will not increase the volume of vehicular or pedestrian traffic. Construction traffic will be greatly reduced due to this application. If trails were required along Lake 2, heavy equipment would be needed to clear the slopes of trees, install retaining walls and pour asphalt. Depending on the location of rock, blasting could also be required.

(8) Standard

Whether a reasonably viable economic use of the subject property exists under the current zoning.

Analysis

n/a

(9) Standard

The effect of the proposed rezoning on the environment or natural features, wildlife habitat, vegetation, water quality and air quality.

Analysis

The natural environment will be protected by eliminating the trails in the area of steep slopes on the south side of Lake 2. The mature trees will remain in place and provide habitat for animals. The trees and other vegetation will also prevent erosion, thus protecting water quality.

(10) Standard

Whether the proposed rezoning encourages economic development activities in areas designated by the Comprehensive Plan and provides desirable employment and enlarges the tax base.

Analysis

This application does not directly encourage economic development activities.

(11) Standard

Whether the proposed rezoning considers the needs of agriculture, industry, and businesses in future growth.

Analysis

n/a


MARCH 8, 2005

17

(12) Standard

Whether the proposed rezoning considers the current and future requirements of the community as to land for various purposes as determined by population and economic studies.

Analysis

The residents of every community desire recreational amenities. The members of the Ashburn Village community have determined that their current and future requirements are better met by the proposed amenities than by what was originally proffered.

(13) Standard

Whether the proposed rezoning encourages the conservation of properties and their values and the encouragement of the most appropriate use of land throughout the County.

Analysis

The park site will be in a location already planned for a park and the proposed lakeside seating area is at the site of an existing community center. These uses are appropriate in a residential community such as Ashburn Village.

(14) Standard

Whether the proposed rezoning considers trends of growth or changes, employment, and economic factors, the need for housing, probable future economic and population growth of the County.

Analysis

n/a

(15) Standard

The effect of the proposed rezoning to provide moderate housing by enhancing opportunities for all qualified residents of Loudoun County.

Analysis

n/a

(16) Standard

The effect of the rezoning on natural, scenic, archaeological, or historic features of significant importance.

Analysis

The natural and scenic amenity of the trees along Lake 2 and the landscaping and berming along the eastern property boundary will be preserved by removing the trails.


18

V. ATTACHMENTS (Unless noted otherwise, attachments are not available electronically but may be obtained from the Department of Planning.)

PAGE NUMBER

1. Review Agency Comments a. Community Planning (May 12, 2004 & Dec. 23, 2003) A-1 b. Office of Transportation Services (Oct. 14, ‘04 & Dec. 23, ‘03) A-7 c. Parks, Recreation and Community Services (Oct. 19, ’04 & Dec. 19, ’03) A-14 d. Zoning Administration (Oct. 12, 2004 & Nov. 19, 2003) A-18 e. County Attorney (Sept. 28, 2004) A-21 2. Disclosure of Real Parties in Interest A-23 3. Applicant’s Statement of Justification A-27 4. Applicant’s Response to Referral Comments A-41 5. Draft Proffer Statement A-66 6. Letter From HOA Agreeing to Amenities In Lieu of Trails A-74 7. Applicant Responses to Planning Commission A-75 8. Ashburn Village Concept Development Plan Following A-78 9. Ashburn Village Amenities Plan 10. Section 37A Park Plan

board of supervisors public hearing...zcpa 2003-0005 ashburn village proffer amendment board of...

Documents