An expansion of Claudius Crozet Park can move forward once the nonprofit that owns it raises enough funds.
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved an amendment Wednesday evening of a special-use permit for the park to expand.
Supporters of the park have said that the expansion would allow more recreation opportunities, but some neighbors don’t think the expansion should happen due to the lack of sidewalks and potential for increased traffic.
The plan will add a two-story, 34,200-square-foot recreation building, which is set to include exercise areas, sports courts, community meeting spaces and a pool expansion. A second phase of the project would include an indoor pool facility adjacent to the existing pool deck.
Here’s hoping that the County is able to build sidewalks and bike lanes leading to and from the Park so that people won’t be forced to drive to take advantage of the new Park.
The approval comes with nine conditions, including sound and lighting limitations and a number of fencing and screening requirements.
The commission added a 10th proposed condition that the park should include additional on-site bicycle infrastructure, such as bike racks, bike lockers, bike lanes and other on-road or adjacent bicycle access. They also recommended that the county prioritize the installation and/or repair of sidewalks along High Street, Hill Top Street and Park Road.
Claudius Crozet Park seeks to amend an existing special use permit to build a fitness center and indoor pool. The Planning Commission recommended approval on September 28. (report)
From the report
There’s a lot here, and this has been a reasonably quick process, by Albemarle County development standards. (and yes, this is the formatting on the County’s site)
SP202000016 Claudius Crozet Park. PROJECT: SP202000016 Claudius Crozet Park MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall TAX MAP/PARCEL(S): 056A2010007200; 056A20100072A0; 056A20400000A4 LOCATION: 1075 Claudius Crozet Park, Crozet, Virginia 22932 PROPOSAL: Request to amend existing special use permit SP199500043 in order to expand the existing community center at Crozet Park with a fitness center and a pool expansion, along with additional parking spaces and pedestrian connections. PETITION: Special Use Permit request for a community center and swim, golf, tennis, or similar athletic facilities in accordance with Sections 10.2.2.1, 10.2.2.4, 16.2.2.1, and 16.2.2.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, on three parcels totaling approximately 22.806 acres. No dwelling units proposed. ZONING: RA, Rural Areas – agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre in development lots); and R-6 Residential – 6 units/acre OVERLAY DISTRICT(S): EC – Entrance Corridor; Steep Slopes – Mana…
My thought remains – This facility being built was a foregone conclusion; building it without commensurate building of supporting bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure is negligent.
The Crozet Park’s proposal for an expanded recreational facility goes back before the Planning Commission this Tuesday, September 28, at 6 pm. (Meeting information here.) I support this amended plan, and I hope others do, too. (For the record, I’m not affiliated with the Park in any way—just a Crozetian who spends a lot of time there with my preschooler.)
The Park’s initial proposal did, indeed, raise many issues—from parking to construction traffic to loss of tree cover to noise levels—and the revised proposal has made numerous changes that mitigate or eliminate the vast majority of the community’s concerns. So I think this is actually a terrific example of the Park and the community working together: neighbors raised legitimate issues, and the developer took them seriously and used that feedback to improve the project. Aside from the Downtown Crozet Plaza, that kind of collaboration is rare in Crozet. It should be a model for other projects.
I’d encourage everyone to see for themselves the Park’s presentation, which details the current plan and the revisions they’ve made in response to community members’ concerns. (As just one example, I was originally upset that the plan would eliminate the small playground just to the south of the pool. The revised plan addresses that by adding a brand-new playground just to the west of the facility building.)
Online, some Crozetians have opposed the project because, in their view, it would result in a loss of “greenspace.” After looking at the revised plan, I wanted to briefly respond to their specific points.
(1) The proposal doesn’t meaningfully “reduce existing greenspace”
Yes, it’s true that this proposal would increase the amount of concrete in the Park, but it’s not a huge increase—compared to the overall Park land. The Park’s presentation (p. 8) notes that buildings would go from taking up 1.6% of the Park’s total land to 4.6%. Sidewalks and parking lots would go from about 10% to 12.5% of the park’s total area. So, overall, the project would increase the Park’s hardscape from about 12.5% of the Park’s total land to about 17%. But more than 80% of the Park would remain “open space” and athletic fields.
More importantly, though, it’s not as if they are clear-cutting forest or building on undeveloped land to do this. Consider what’s currently on the land where they propose to build the facility: A recreation center, pool, parking lots, roads, playground, and trees. And what does the Park propose for that site? A larger recreation center, pool, parking lots, roads, playground, and trees. To be sure, not all of those replacement trees will be mature; they’ll take time to grow. And, yes, we’ll lose a bit of grassy field—though in a part of the park that folks hardly use. But it’s not fair to equate this with other kinds of new development that we’ve seen in Crozet—like the clearing of virgin forest to build neighborhoods.
Lastly, a quick point about the trees: while the project will require removing some trees, the project will actually result in a net gain of 150 trees. Page 10 of the report notes that they will have to remove 44 trees; but they are planting 194 new ones to replace the ones lost and to create a visual buffer.
(2) “Greenspace” doesn’t just mean “open land”
As some have correctly noted, Crozet Park is currently designated as “Greenspace.” But “Greenspace” is a bit of a misnomer; that designation isn’t reserved for vacant, untouched forest or natural areas. Even under the 2010 Master Plan, the “Greenspace” category included both “environmental features, “open space,” and “privately owned park and recreational areas which may be active or passive.”
Moreover, the updated Crozet Master Plan (page 13) clarifies this somewhat confusing category and replaces “Greenspace” with two separate designations: “Green Systems” and “Public Land.” “Green systems” are what we typically think of as “greenspace,” and it includes “sensitive environmental features,” “privately-owned open space,” and “natural areas.” But Crozet Park is designated as “Public Land,” which is intended for “active, passive, or social recreational use.” Indeed, the Plan specifically says that while such land should contain few buildings, “community serving uses such as public recreational amenities can be considered.” That’s exactly what this project is.
(3) The proposal doesn’t reduce recreational opportunities; it increases them
Some commenters have noted, correctly, that the Crozet Master Plan’s Conservation section emphasizes enhancing “outdoor recreation.” But (a) the proposed facility doesn’t decrease outdoor recreation opportunities, and (b) outdoor recreation is not the only type of recreation we need in the area.
First, the proposed facility doesn’t diminish Crozetian’s opportunity for outdoor recreation. The proposed facility is being built on the sparsely used western side of the park. I’m at the park several times per week with my preschooler. We specifically play and practice our bicycle riding on that side of the park because there’s rarely anyone there. The proposed facility won’t disturb the walking trail, the soccer fields, the baseball fields, the basketball courts, the pickle ball courts, the dog park, or the large playground, and it will retain a smaller playground in the area. So where are we losing opportunities for outdoor recreation?
Second, while the Master Plan’s Conservation chapter emphasizes outdoor recreation, that’s not the only type of recreation we need. Sure, outdoor recreation is great when the weather is warm and sunny. But what about rainy days—or the entire months of December, January, and February, when the weather is often too cold to play outside for long periods? (Of course, kids can bundle up and do some things, but it’s pretty tough to play basketball in gloves and a ski coat.)
Moreover, the facility will be more than a pool and a gym: it will be an important community gathering place. For example, the Park Board has noted that the facility will allow for greatly expanded after-school programs for kids–something that’s sorely lacking in our area.
These kinds of amenities are desperately needed in Crozet. And where would be a better place to build them? On some undeveloped open space elsewhere in town? On some currently wooded area that we’d have to clear-cut? Clearly, the least-disruptive place to put a new recreation center is right where there is already a recreation center.
While there may be minor things we can quibble with at this point, the overall plan is sound, and I hope that others will attend the planning commission meeting and support this important project.
The Crozet Park Developer continues to pursue changes in the zoning rules that will allow them to build a for profit athletic center in a public park. What the developer proposes is not a building compatible with the location or surrounding neighborhoods – rather the complex is a way out of scale for the field in which it is proposed. In fact, the athletic center is more comparable to the Harris Teeter on Rte. 250 with all of its parking then any building in a 22 acre park should be.
The developer is requesting that it be granted the right to add more traffic on the local roads that are already over taxed and acknowledge what changes to the roads will have to done will be determined after it has this right.
The developer is asking for a zoning exemption to build its building closer to neighboring properties than is allowed. The developer justifies its position not by accommodating the required setback but, instead by changing the measuring points without regard to how it impacts the rights of the adjacent neighbors.
The developer’s proposal includes the intention to buy Nutrient credits rather than deal with Storm Water run-off created by its elimination of green space even though this was a specific criticism of its earlier submission.
The developer’s presentation includes new charts and renderings that rely on exceptional artistic license and appears to circumvent the criticisms raised by the Planning Commission who disapproved the proposal in March 2021.
The Planning Staff issued a point by point criticism of the project in March based on the comments from the Planning Commissioners which the developer has avoided addressing directing. On the following pages is an annotated version of the complete text of the Commission’s March comments.
CROZET, VA Over 120 Artists and Exhibitors are coming back to Crozet Park for the 41st Annual Crozet Fall Arts and Crafts Festival! Recognized as one of the region’s leading fine arts and craft shows, the Crozet Arts & Craft Festival will be held rain or shine Saturday and Sunday, October 9th and 10th from 10 am to 5:30 pm on Saturday and 10 am to 5:00 pm on Sunday.
Safety is a priority for this socially-distanced, outdoor event. The Festival will implement COVID safety protocols, such as social distancing markers and additional hand sanitizing stations. The outdoor festival grounds and parking areas at Crozet Park allow for artists and patrons plenty of room for social distancing.
Artists: Top artists from across the country vied to be a part of the 41st bi-annual Crozet Art & Craft Festival on Columbus Day/Indigenous People’s Day weekend. From a large pool of creative candidates, a panel of talented and professional artist jurors chose the best in each arts category. Many new artists will join the seasoned and returning favorites of the past.
This year’s exhibitors will bring to Crozet an array of stunning jewelry, trendsetting apparel and leather, magnificent artwork, photography and exceptionally crafted glass, ceramics, sculpture, and more. Festival guests will find something for almost every taste and pocketbook, ranging from affordable gift giving to heirloom investments.
Music: The festival’s fine arts and crafts will be complemented by a variety of types and styles of popular local musicians playing throughout the days. On Saturday we welcome Driftwood Radio, The Skyline Country Cloggers, Wicked Olde, and The Sweet Potatoes. Performing on Sunday are Victoria Lee, Orta Vez, and Jackson Cunningham.
Food & Beer: An appetizing selection of Food Trucks will be complemented by beer from Starr-Hill Brewery and Three Roads Brewing Company and wine from Stinson Vineyards and Kings Family Vineyards.
Kids’ Area: The children’s area includes beloved musical guests Kim and Jimbo Cary, crafts with The Hive, balloon animals, and more!
Crozet Park treats exhibitors and guests to a most relaxing, accessible setting. Located just off the Route 64 bypass, take exit #107 west of Charlottesville by 20 minutes, Crozet Park is a beautiful, community-owned non-profit park that is the beneficiary of these Art Festival Events.
Tickets are $7 and children under 12 are free. Our event is pet-friendly! Everyone is encouraged to purchase their ticket online this year ahead of time to help with Covid safety. Tickets are available at: https://buytickets.at/crozetartsandcraftsfestival Parking is free.
For goodness sake, please walk or ride a bicycle to the Festival.
CROZET, VA Over 115 Artists and Exhibitors are coming back to Crozet Park for the 41st Annual Crozet Arts and Crafts Festival! Recognized as one of the region’s leading fine arts and craft shows, the Crozet Arts & Craft Festival will be held rain or shine Saturday and Sunday, May 8th and 9th from 10 am to 5:30 pm on Saturday and 10 am to 5:00 pm on Sunday.
Safety is a priority for this socially-distanced, outdoor event. The Festival will implement COVID safety protocols, such as social distancing markers and a mask requirement for all attending. The outdoor festival grounds and parking areas at Crozet Park allow for artists and patrons plenty of room for social distancing.
Artists: Top artists from across the country vied to be a part of the 41st bi-annual Crozet Art & Craft Festival on Mother’s Day weekend. From a large pool of creative candidates, a panel of talented and professional artist jurors chose the best in each arts category. Many new artists will join the seasoned and returning favorites of the past.
This year’s exhibitors will bring to Crozet an array of stunning jewelry, trendsetting apparel and leather, magnificent artwork, photography and exceptionally crafted glass, ceramics, sculpture, and more. Festival guests will find something for almost every taste and pocketbook, ranging from affordable gift giving to heirloom investments.
Music: The festival’s fine arts and crafts will be complemented by a variety of types and styles of popular local musicians playing throughout the days. Jim Gagnon and Kai Crowe-Getty are performing on Saturday and The Sweet Potatoes and Koda and Marie from Chamomile and Whiskey are performing on Sunday.
Food & Beer: An appetizing selection of Food Trucks will be complemented by beer from Starr-Hill Brewery and Three Roads Brewing Company and wine from Stinson Vineyards and Kings Family Vineyards.
Kids’ Area:The children’s area includes beloved musical guests Kim and Jimbo Cary, The Creative Wagon, Ninos and Nature, and more!
Raffle: Win amazing prizes from Cville Picnic, The Looking Glass, and many Artists who will be at the event. #CrozetLOVE: A new LOVE sign has been installed at Crozet Park just in time for the festival. Designed by local artist Chicho Lorenzo. #CrozetLOVE is part of the LOVEworks campaign and is made possible by a grant from Virginia is for Lovers and theVirginia Tourism Corporation.
Crozet Park treats exhibitors and guests to a most relaxing, accessible setting. Located just off the Route 64 bypass, take exit #107 west of Charlottesville by 20 minutes, Crozet Park is a beautiful, community-owned non-profit park that is the beneficiary of these Art Festival Events.
Tickets are $7 and children under 12 are free. Everyone is encouraged to purchase their ticket online this year ahead of time to help with Covid safety. Tickets are available (here). Parking is free.
An expansion proposed for Claudius Crozet Park has been paused.
On Tuesday, the Albemarle County Planning Commission accepted a deferral of the proposal, after expressing a number of concerns about an amendment of a special-use permit for the park that would’ve allowed for its expansion.
The plan would add a two-story, 34,200-square-foot recreation building, which would include exercise areas, sports courts, community meeting spaces and a pool expansion. A second phase of the project would include an indoor pool facility that would be connected to the fitness building and adjacent to the existing pool deck.
Commissioner Karen Firehock said she did not support adding a facility of the size and scale proposed to what is a neighborhood green space.
In October I submitted written comments regarding the Special Use Permit Application by Crozet Park to build a commercial style recreation building with a 32,000 square footprint (about ¾ of an acre) that is 36 feet high. Unfortunately those comments were never discussed at the CCAC meeting (which was when I understood there would be a question and answer session) nor were they discussed with me at any other time. In fact, until a few weeks ago when I thought the applicant was still making changes to the drawings but was informed by staff they were not. The comments I made in October are still very valid.
I hope the drawing below will help provide context for how the proposed project sits the existing neighborhood. I used the files that staff identified as the latest drawings to create it. Most pertinent to Crozet Park’s request for a Special Use Permit is the size of the new building (in purple) compared to the size of the existing buildings (dotted in blue which have gable roofs about 20’ high), the number of new parking spaces (which are annotated totaling over 200 new), and the configuration of the intersection at Hilltop Road which the Park requests to use as a fulltime entrance/exit (currently only used as an exit in special events). It also provides context for how much of the park will become essentially a commercial enterprise and no longer green space. Please see my comments below the drawing regarding these points.
I feel like public comment has been stifled by the process. Perhaps it due to that the volume of development happening in the county that conflicting, inaccurate and incomplete information is often provided in public venues. Many of us are trying to understand unfamiliar processes and respond to processes, expecting that the public can question why decisions are made and how they can be impacted – I understand that this takes time but it is not happening now. The fact is that we have community meetings where comments are not allowed and Planning Commission meetings that we can not attend (replaced by zoom sessions with 3 minute comment periods that may or may not be sequenced so the public can respond to information presented at the meeting). I have yet to see a meaningful public question and answer session on any important topic.
The Planning Commission, as part of the Master Plan review process, recently approved, in concept, a site next to Brownsville Elementary along Route 250 as an acceptable location for a Recreational Facility and all parties agreed that the location was a good idea [my language might not be right here but this was discussed at the Planning Commission when Staff’s Crozet Master Plan update was reviewed]. The proposed project is in essence a commercial establishment with 985 projected visitors per day. A facility of this size does not belong in a neighborhood park setting.
That the findings of Staff misrepresent the scope and scale of the proposed building – YES IT WILL impact the character of the area. In a prime example of not listening to public comment the applicant has not provided drawings that show the scale of the proposed building within the neighborhoods nearby although drawings of this type were requested specifically. The unfortunate thing in this is that I have had a fantastic relationship with the park for years and now they are acting like an unchallenged developer maximizing land use, minimizing information – certainly not like a neighbor.
That we are running out of Green Space in Crozet and we should preserve the limited amount that is left. If this development is completed 1/3 of the park’s area will be impervious – not greenspace. Further this development was not mentioned in the Planning Commission’s review of the updates on the Crozet masterplan. Staff’s recommendation says it is in keeping with the Master Plan. It is difficult for me to understand that logic and why it was not discussed during the Master Plan reviews.
That the vague description of what happens at the proposed new permanent exit on to Hilltop should not be delayed until Site Plan review and, further, that the assertion that no traffic study is required on either Hilltop or Park Street should not be accepted. If the Hilltop exit becomes a “by right” condition for the applicant it means, as we have seen in other places, that the people impacted no longer have input into the outcome. I have been told in writing that my comments are important and spent hours reviewing drawings of “by right” applications finding issues and asking questions – none of my requests resulted in meaningful dialog with staff unless it was to tell me that the applicant had the right to move ahead prior to approval, or that engineering had approved it, or applicant was not required to provide information about a retaining wall abutting our properties. It is unfair to kick an issue like this the down the road in order for a developer or the park to have the power of “by right” on their side before it is even clear what they are doing. Further, this proposed development is not happening in isolation so traffic impacts to Park, Hilltop and other local streets should be studied in totality.
In closing I would like to remind the Planning Commission that many of us have been supportive neighbors of the park for years donating time and money to its development. This proposal is in itself OUT OF CHARACTER with the way the park has acted in the past. I won’t deny the project must have some redeeming qualities – access for a broader part of the community, expanded facilities certainly – but build it where it belongs – perhaps on the parcel you agreed was the right place for it on route 250.
[A] Character of the Neighborhood. The proposed building would be two stories, 36 ‘ high, and 34,000 square feet (3/4 of an acre). The present one-story building is about 8,000. The new two-story building would be located 30 feet from Indigo/Hill Top St. This is contrary to the county code, so a “Special Exemption” is being requested; zoning change might be more accurate. No one has made available drawings that show the scale of the building in comparison with the neighborhood. So it’s difficult to evaluate, much less accept, the county’s assurance that, on the proposal, “character of the nearby area is unchanged.”
[B] Traffic. County staff write that the expansion would generate 985 daily trips. The Hill Top entrance would become permanent, despite concerns about safety, sight lines, etc., raised by community members in correspondence with the county. The county/applicant replies to these concerns by punting on the details about the Hill Top Street entrance. They are to be put off until the Site Review stage Kicking traffic problems down the road — so to speak — does not seem like a good strategy.
The county staff report summary says, in response to traffic concerns, that “the applicant is proposing additional pedestrian paths throughout the park to provide better connections with the surrounding neighborhood and promote walking to the park,” using “future sidewalks.” Is this a serious response?
[C] Greenspace? 1/3 of Crozet Park will be paved or covered by a building, on this proposal — a massive increase in impermeable surface area. Multiple large trees will be lost. But the uses identified for areas designated as Greenspace in the Master Plan (as the park is) are “public parks, open space, and environmental features.”
[D] Commercial Space. The YMCA, a non-profit community organization, used to run recreational programs at the park. ACAC, a for-profit, does now. Will that continue? The proposal seems to be at least as much for a big commercial development as it is for a park the full use of which can be afforded by all community members.
Citizens can provide written comments that go directly to all seven Planning Commissioners at [email protected]
The Planning Commission makes recommendations to the Board of Supervisors. The BOS considers the recommendations that the Planning Commission makes, but ultimately the BOS makes the final decision. When the Planning Commission makes recommendations for denial, the application will still head to the Board, unless the applicant requests a deferral.
Letter by Tom Adajian
Disclosure: I live next to Crozet Park, and I’d forgotten we’d sent the letter referenced below.
My offer stands to Crozetians: want to research and write about developments affecting you, your neighborhood, Crozet? Let me know.
New letter from one of Crozet Park’s neighbors to Albemarle County staff.
After the Crozet Park Special Use Permit zooming meeting on the 14th I’ve taken some time to digest my impressions and wanted to share my thoughts about the process and the content.
First, I think it is a good thing to solicit neighborhood input although attending the meeting via zoom rather than in person was a bit confining. I am not clear on the Virtual Meeting process for responding to public questions or comments submitted prior to the Meeting. I do not know how others felt but it was odd to submit questions/comments prior to the meeting that may or may not be addressed by the people actually active in the Video/Zoom meeting.
Second, I had a chance to look at the additional Crozet Park Expansion project information that was attached to the previous Meeting Minutes which included staff and agency comments from the Applicant’s August Submittal. I see that some of the questions raised in my previous letter were also commented by staff and other agencies, however, I did not see where the impact of construction on the adjacent neighborhoods is addressed in the attachments to the previous meeting minutes.
Based on comments at the meeting it was clear to me the Applicant has no intention of disturbing its own Park operations during construction nor did they seem concerned about how construction work will impact adjacent neighborhoods. Incorporating neighborhood concerns should be equally aggressive and intentional. This is a serious issue for those of us experiencing the Foothill construction operation.
From my own observations, and mentioned by a resident at the meeting, based on the progress of the Foothill Crossing construction project next door to Crozet Park, it seems that it is considered acceptable by County Staff, the Applicant and its Designer to stage dump trucks and turn them around on neighborhood roads. It appears it is also acceptable to put Porto-johns in front of neighbor homes and Site Debris Management areas close to neighboring homes. The Foothill Crossing construction project plans include no requirement to stage construction vehicles within the Construction Site verses outside of the Construction site which makes the work more disruptive than it should be and is, frankly, inconsiderate.
Staff and agency comments did not address this at all – maybe it is beyond their purviews. The construction impact of these Projects/Developments can be mitigated, but planning for it has be intentional and should be seriously considered during early reviews. The manner in which the current Foothills Crossing construction work has been handled did not consider how it is disturbing neighbors in Parkside Village and along Hilltop Road. Construction impacts for this Project can be mitigated very cost effectively but they have to be planned just as intentionally as the applicant has – and some agency has to advocate for that.
Lastly, it was unclear at the community meeting what information Staff reviewed relative to the use of the Emergency Access Road entrance to Hilltop Road in the future. The Designer said it would only be used for large events while the Applicant indicated they would not accept any limitations on how they might use it. The VDOT Comments are also unclear on whether they reviewed the improvements as an Emergency Access road or a two way Entrance to the Park. This is a very serious issue for a lot of reasons – the Hilltop Road entrance sight distances, bus stops, traffic build up, sequence with the development of neighborhood infrastructure (future roads) to Downtown Crozet – and how all of this impacts the adjacent neighborhoods. I am looking forward to additional project information and a chance to review the Applicants response and comments.
