Albemarle planning staff outline changes to Rio/Route 29 form‑based code; commission presses for clearer incentives and maintenance rules

Mariah Gleason, senior planner in Albemarle County’s community development division, presented the second of two work sessions on proposed amendments to the Rio/Route 29 form‑based code, saying the revisions respond to what staff and the development community have learned since the code’s 2021 adoption.

Gleason said staff want to shift the code’s core areas to align with existing shopping centers such as the Bridal Hill Shopping Center, Albemarle Square and Fashion Square Mall, and to introduce a new “destination street” type — roughly 1,200 feet in length — to concentrate ground‑floor commercial uses where the market supports them. “The proposed changes recommend tailoring requirements for ground‑floor commercial to these destination streets rather than every street in the core,” Gleason said.

The proposal would keep the form‑based district optional for landowners but add flexibility intended to increase market uptake. Key proposals discussed included allowing owners to opt out if an approved site plan expires (staff noted the county’s standard five‑year site‑plan expiration), agent approval to phase large properties (15 acres or more), and narrowing building‑form relief to focus on entrance orientation and additions that preserve compatibility.

Commissioners generally supported the aim of greater flexibility to encourage developers to opt into the overlay, while urging staff to preserve a workable safety valve for board review in complex cases. One commissioner said the five‑year opt‑out period may be too short, suggesting a longer tenure, while others said five years is consistent with the county’s existing site‑plan expiration rules.

The commission spent substantial time on street types and maintenance. Staff proposed consolidating similar street types and adding destination streets to focus commercial activity. Commissioners pressed whether VDOT would accept urban street sections and what the county’s maintenance role should be. Staff said VDOT has accepted urban sections in some projects but that maintenance agreements are routine; when VDOT will not take sidewalks or street trees, the applicant typically must assume maintenance under negotiated agreements.

Members also pressed staff on how green infrastructure, low‑impact development (LID) and energy‑efficiency measures would be encouraged. Consultants and staff recommended using incentives and design guidance rather than heavy new mandates for the optional district, noting the risk of discouraging opt‑ins if the code becomes too prescriptive.

Gleason closed by saying staff will refine the ordinance and return it as a public‑hearing item. The commission’s discussion emphasized two recurring themes: preserve sufficient flexibility to make the optional district attractive to developers, and provide clearer mechanisms — whether incentives, maintenance agreements or design standards — so the code produces the pedestrian‑oriented, sustainable places it intends to create.

The commission did not take a formal vote on the ordinance at the work session and asked staff to return with revised language and clearer implementation guidance before the public‑hearing step.