Rio/29 Small Area Plan Phase 1

December 12, 2016

Rio/29 – Future Land Use Alternatives

1

2

3

4

5

1 BACKGROUND

2

ALTERNATIVES

OPEN HOUSE

2 COMMUNITY INPUT

3 DESIGN PRINCIPLES

PRESENTATION OVERVIEW

1 PROJECT BACKGROUND

3

Comprehensive

Plan

Places29

Master Plan

Rio/29

Small Area Plan

• Coverage area: County-wide

• Broad range of goals and objectives covering multiple topics.

• Last updated June 10, 2015

• Coverage area: Development Area

• Provides a more detailed future land use map, transportation, parks, community facilities.

• Adopted February 2011

• Coverage area: Neighborhood

• More detailed land use, transportation plan, design

• To be completed in 2017

PLANNING CONTEXT

BACKGROUND

Compact development….organized around centers

Pedestrian-oriented and mixed-use….variety of housing choices, retail environments, office types, and employment opportunities

Connected by…multimodal transportation

Parks and open spaces…contribute to an overall excellent quality of life

PLACES 29 VISION

BACKGROUND

STUDY AREA

Initiation/ Reconnaiss

ance

Market Assessment

Study Area Analysis

Alternatives Generation

Final Document

MILESTONES

BACKGROUND

PHASE 1

• An overarching vision for

the Rio/29 small area

• Identification of some

early actions to

implement this vision

PHASE 2

• A detailed Area Plan that

supports implementation

of the vision

Phase 1 Timeline (10-months)

WHY IS THIS IMPORTANT?

BACKGROUND8

Land Area

29 North Remainder of County

Sales/Business Tax Revenue

29 North Remainder of County

Source: Albemarle County

Note: Data show that the 29 North Business Corridor accounts for roughly 42.4% of the selected revenue sources in the County –

business license tax, motor vehicle dealer tax, food and beverage tax, short term rental tax, transient occupancy tax, and sales tax.

These taxes in aggregate across the County represent 7.0% of the total County Tax Revenue for FY13/14

RIO/29 PAST & PRESENT

9

1957

2014

BACKGROUND

PURPOSE

BACKGROUND10

WHAT

• Land Use Alternatives

• Show where and how

development could occur

• Long-term (up to 50 years)

WHY

• To explain tradeoffs

• To gather public input

• To define a preferred vision of

future development

• To guide Phase 2

PURPOSE

BACKGROUND

Tonight – To provide input on what you see as the pros and cons for each alternative

Things to keep in mind

• Node locations

• Intensity and amount of future development

• Transportation

• Potential economic impact

• Potential county costs and revenues

• Consistency with Places29 vision

2 COMMUNITY INPUT

WHAT HAVE WE HEARD SO FAR?

COMMUNITY INPUT 13

Advisory Committee

Community Meeting

Business/Land Owners Focus Group

Staff Technical Committee

Young Professionals Mixer

VISION THEMES

1. PLACE MAKING: Create a place where people and employers want to be

2. MIXED USE: Introduce more housing and employment uses to make a complete community

3. MULTIMODAL: Connectivity, transit, trails, and walk/bike friendly streets

4. OPEN SPACE & RECREATION: Parks, open spaces, buffers and river access

5. NEIGHBORHOOD PROTECTION: Balance the need for height and density to make redevelopment feasible with community concerns about local impacts and view sheds

6. INTERGENERATIONAL COMMUNITY: Mix of housing types and transportation options to meet the needs of people of all ages

7. VISITOR GATEWAY: Design and gateway features tell travelers they have arrived in a special place

GUIDING PRINCIPLES - PLAN

COMMUNITY INPUT

3 DESIGN PRINCIPLES

The Urban Land Institute identifies 10 core principles for “Reinventing the Suburban Strip”

PULSES OF DEVELOPMENT

DESIGN PRINCIPLESwww.uli.org/wp-content/uploads/ULI-Documents/Tp_SuburbanStrips

Core Principle

FUTURE TRANSIT AS AN ORGANIZING FEATURE

DESIGN PRINCIPLESSource: Places29

A NOTE ON TRANSIT ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

DESIGN PRINCIPLES 19

TOD

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

LIVABLE COMMUNITIES TRAVEL CHOICES

CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL TOD CHARACTERISTICS OF SUCCESSFUL COMMUNITY=

10-15-MINUTE WALKABLE COMMUNITY

DESIGN PRINCIPLES

Source: Places 29

Downtown Charlottesville

Source: Pictometry

RIO/29

Source:

Pictometry

Stonefield

Source: Pictometry

The Village at Shirlington

Source: Pictometry

North Hills, Raleigh, NC

Source: Pictometry

HOW THE ALTERNATIVES WERE DEVELOPED

DESIGN PRINCIPLES 26

PLACES 29/PLANS

PUBLIC /

STAKEHOLDER INPUT

PLANNING PRINCIPLES

ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C

What about areas

outside the Nodes?

• Develop as a mixture of

the following uses:

What about other

centers?• Secondary centers

along Berkmar could be

served by local

circulator bus lines

ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C

WHAT DO THESE ALTERNATIVES IMPLY?

• FUTURE OF THE CORRIDOR SHOULD CENTER ON “NODES”

OR CENTERS OF DEVELOPMENT

• HOW MANY CENTERS AND WHERE?

• WHAT SHOULD THE CENTERS LOOK LIKE?

• WHAT ABOUT AREAS OUTSIDE THE CENTERS?

WHAT COULD THE CENTERS LOOK LIKE?

ALTERNATIVE A ALTERNATIVE B ALTERNATIVE C

NEXT STEPS

• GET INPUT ON A ‘PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE’

• PREPARE REPORT ON FINDINGS TO CLOSE OUT PHASE 1

• PHASE 2 TO ADDRESS A MORE DETAILED PLAN AND

IMPACT ANALYSIS

5 OPEN HOUSE

First, any general questions?

At each station, please provide input on what you see as the pros and cons for each alternative

OPEN HOUSE

OPEN HOUSE 33

Things to keep in mind

• Node locations

• Intensity and amount of future development

• Transportation

• Potential economic impact

• Potential county costs and revenues

• Consistency with Places29 vision

34

BRT EXAMPLE

35

BRT EXAMPLE

Assembly Row, Somerville, MA

Virginia Beach Town Center, VA

Oyster Point City Center, Newport News, VA

Carlisle, Alexandria, VA

Reston Town Center, Fairfax County, VA

Reston Town Center, Fairfax County, VA