HomeMy WebLinkAbout20041201actionsACTIONS
Board of Supervisors Meeting of December 1, 2004
December 17, 2004
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION
ASSIGNMENT
1. Call to Order.
• Meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m., by the
Chairman, Mr. Dorrier. All BOS members were
present. Also present were Bob Tucker, Larry
Davis and Ella Carey.
4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
• Lizbeth Palmer, on behalf of the League of
Women Voters Natural Resource Committee,
asked the Board to request the Planning staff
and Planning Commission to review the new
Water Supply Plan to insure it is consistent with
the County’s Comprehensive Plan. She also
announced that the Rivanna Water & Sewer
Authority will hold a public meeting on
Thursday, December 2, 2004, 6:00 p.m., at
Monticello High School, on the alternative to
expand the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir by
adding a bladder to the Dam.
5. Presentation: GFOA Awards.
• The Chairman presented The Certificate of
Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting award to the Finance Department
and staff.
• The Chairman presented The Distinguished
Budget Presentation Award to the Office of
Management and Budget staff.
6.2 Approval of two ACE Appraisals for Year 2003-04.
• APPROVED the two appraisals by Hallmark
Properties for the Bieker and Shifflett
applications from the Fiscal Year 2003-04
applicant pool as recommended by staff and
the ACE Appraisal Review Committee.
Ches Goodall/David Benish: Proceed as
approved.
6.3 Request for Military Leave Pay – W. Coleman
Gentry.
• APPROVED.
Clerk: Notify Human Resources of approval.
6.4 Mountain Top Farm Road Name Change Request.
• APPROVED the road name change as
requested and GRANTED staff the authority to
coordinate/implement the change.
Tex Weaver: Proceed as approved.
6.5 Crozet Master Plan Comprehensive Plan
Amendment Revision (CPA-2003-07).
• ADOPTED CPA-2003-07, Crozet Master Plan
Comprehensive Plan Amendment, replacing the
existing Land Use Plan Profile for the Crozet
Community with the revised Crozet Profile, and
incorporating by reference the Crozet Master
Plan language recommended by the Planning
Commission with recent changes noting the
general nature and date of the cost estimates
and final authority of the CIP for capital
expenditures.
• Ken Boyd asked that, in the future, staff provide
David Benish/Susan Thomas: Incorporate
language into Comprehensive Plan.
(Attachment 1 is copy of Community Profile;
Master Plan language on file in Clerk’s office)
1
a summary on the implications (e.g. legal,
procedural, policy and fiscal impact) of changes
to the Comprehensive Plan.
6.6 Requested FY 2004 Appropriation (Form
#2004094).
• APPROVED.
• Ken Boyd asked that staff provide a summary
on the difference in criteria used for Federal
and County funding reimbursement of the
Family Support Program.
Clerk: Forward signed appropriation form to
Finance and copy appropriate persons.
6.7 Approval of Addendum to Interjurisdictional
Agreement between the County, City of
Charlottesville and University of Virginia for the
regional 800 MhZ public safety radio communica-
tions system.
• APPROVED an Addendum to the Interjurisdic-
tional Agreement and AUTHORIZED the
County Executive or his designee to execute
the Addendum on its behalf.
County Attorney: Provide Clerk with copy of
agreement after it has been executed.
(Attachment 2)
6.8 Contribution - Virginia Hosting NACo Conference in
2007.
• AUTHORIZED contribution of $1,000 to be sent
to Conferences, Inc. to actively support hosting
NACO’s Annual Conference in Virginia.
• Sally Thomas asked that a flag of Albemarle
County be provided to VACo for display.
Clerk: Forward approval to Accounting for
processing.
Clerk: Coordinate with Mike Stumbaugh.
7a. Transportation Matters: Work Session: Six Year
Secondary Road Plan.
Georgetown Road:
• Dennis Rooker noted that the proposed
improvements have increased by approximately
$4.0 million. He asked for a copy of the plans;
if the plans have changed or if the change is the
cost estimate; if any additional planning and
engineering have been done; and if VDOT is
still look at the same project design. Wayne
Cilimberg asked if VDOT still has the same
concept recommended by the committee in
their cost estimates.
Southern Parkway:
• Dennis Rooker asked for written confirmation
from VDOT on whether this project qualifies for
allocation of Secondary Road Funds
• The Board SUPPORTED staff developing a
policy that can be integrated into a VDOT
written policy when property owners work
directly with VDOT to complete major
improvements to roads such as road
realignments/relocations and paving of unpaved
roads. This policy should include a public
notification process and County expectations.
Brent Sprinkle: Provide requested information
to Board.
David Benish/Juan Wade: Research and bring
language back to Board in the Spring.
7b. Criteria Utilized to Rank Secondary Road Projects.
The following comments were made:
• Attachment B, under Average Daily Traffic,
include year
• Attachment B, under “In adopted Plan”
reference the particular plan
David Benish/Juan Wade: Proceed as directed.
2
• If possible include available “V/C Ratio”
information for public hearing
• Identify safety criteria subset on school, fire
and/or rescue requests, and accident data.
• Reflect public comment/input for unpaved roads
and the immediate threat to closure due to
safety.
• Shows roads from Area B Study that may want
to have in plans.
7c. Transportation Matters not Listed on the Agenda.
David Wyant:
• Mentioned ditch and drainage issues on
Bloomfield Road.
• Thanked VDOT for its work on Millington Bridge
and VDOT staff for getting back with him on
previously mentioned drainage issues in
Crozet.
Sally Thomas:
• Said someone has installed reflectors on sticks
Dry Bridge Road (Route 708), at mailbox 717.
Neighbors have asked if VDOT can install
guardrail in the area.
• Thanked VDOT for its work at the Tillman Road
intersection.
• Asked if the bids for Rural Rustic Road projects
have been received. Mr. Sprinkle responded
“no’, hopefully will have in January.
Lindsay Dorrier:
• Handed Mr. Sprinkle a petition, from Silvia Mills,
with a list of about 60 names, asking VDOT to
address some safety concerns on Route 53.
Ken Boyd:
• Asked for an update of the Route 22/231 truck
restriction request. Mr. Cilimberg said the
request probably won’t go to the CTB until the
Spring.
Brent Sprinkle:
• Said VDOT has held extensive meetings with
the Airport and the contractor to address safety
and other issues relative to the Airport Runway
Extension project.
• Said VDOT has received numerous inquiries
from the public regarding its role in the Ivy
Business Park and Faulconer construction site
usage. He has seen the eight conditions but
would like to know if the County will make a
written request to VDOT. If VDOT has to do a
structural review of the roadway it could be
expensive and time consuming. It also
depends on what segment of roadway the
County wants reviewed. Mr. Rooker
commented that the review should not include
all roads in the community. Mr. Tucker said all
costs associated with VDOT’s review is the
applicant’s responsibility. Mr. Davis suggested
a letter outlining the conditions should come
from the Planning staff with a copy provided to
the applicant.
Brent Sprinkle: Handle as requested.
Wayne Cilimberg/Bill Fritz: Prepare letter as
requested. Provide copy to Clerk for files.
3
8. Virginia Department of Forestry Presentation,
Nelson J. Shaw, Area Forester.
• RECEIVED.
9. Presentation: Southern Albemarle Historic District.
• RECEIVED.
RECESS
At 11:15 a.m., the Board recessed, and reconvened
at 11:26 a.m.
10. Biodiversity Work Group Presentation.
• ACCEPTED the Biodiversity Report from the
Biodiversity Work Group and DIRECTED staff
to prepare a report evaluating the next steps for
reviewing and implementing the BWG’s
recommendations. This review should include
an assessment of implementing these
recommendations, including implications for
current County policies and procedures, and
impacts to staff and fiscal resources. Staff to
schedule a presentation on this report in
February.
Scott Clark: Proceed as directed.
11. Affordable Housing Policy Advisory Committee
Report.
• ACCEPTED the report from the Affordable
Housing Policy Advisory Committee and
support of the recommendations included in the
report. Supported staff’s recommendation that
members of the Advisory Committee serve with
one or more small groups to address the
remaining issues and that the Advisory
Committee reconvene to review further
recommendations. The Chief of Housing and
key personnel in Community Development to
be responsible for ensuring that remaining
issues be addressed in a timely manner with a
final report projected by June 2005 to the
Housing Committee and, subsequently, to the
Board of Supervisors.
Ron White: Proceed as directed.
12. Social Services Advisory Board Annual Report.
• RECEIVED.
13. Human Resources Annual Report.
• RECEIVED.
14. Update on Lane Auditorium Renovations (continued
from September 1).
• CONSENSUS to support Option 2, as
presented by staff, and maintain as much
seating capacity as possible.
Mike Stumbaugh/Ron Lilley: Proceed as
directed.
15. Closed Session.
• At 12:39 p.m., the Board went into Closed
Session pursuant to § 2.2-3711(A) of The Code
of Virginia, under subsection (1) to consider
appointments to boards, committees, and
commissions; under subsection (3) to discuss
with legal counsel and staff the acquisition of
property for a public use; under subsection (7)
to discuss with legal counsel and staff legal
matters concerning probable litigation regarding
a zoning decision; under subsection (7) to
consult with legal counsel and staff regarding
4
pending litigation; and under subsection (7) to
discuss with legal counsel and staff specific
legal issues regarding an interjurisdictional
agreement.
16. Certify Closed Session.
• At 2:10 p.m., the Board reconvened into open
session and certified the closed session.
17. Appointments.
• REAPPOINTED Mr. Ross L. Stevens to the
ACE Appraisal Review Committee, with said
term to expire December 31, 2005.
• REAPPOINTED Dr. Leo Mallek to the Joint
Airport Commission, with said term to expire
December 1, 2007.
• APPOINTED Ms. Caroline Taylor to the Jordan
Development Corporation, with said term to
expire August 13, 2005.
• APPOINTED Ms. Rosa Hudson to the Jordan
Development Corporation, with said term to
expire August 13, 2005.
• APPOINTED Ms. Martha Hill to the Historic
Preservation Committee (no term limit).
• APPOINTED Mr. Kevin Fletcher to the
Agricultural and Forestal District Advisory
Committee (no term limit).
Clerk: Prepare appointment letters for
Chairman‘s signature, update Boards and
Commissions book, web page and copy
appropriate persons.
18. Proposed FY 2005 Budget Amendment.
• APPROVED the FY 2005 Budget Amendment
in the amount of $2,483,889.50, and
APPROVED Appropriations #2005030,
#2005031, #2005032, #2005033, #2005034,
#2005035, #2005036, #2005037, and
#2005038 to provide funds for various General
Government, School, and Capital programs.
Clerk: Forward copy of signed appropriation
forms to Richard Wiggans, OMB and
appropriate staff persons.
19. An ordinance to amend Chapter 15, Taxation,
Article VII, of the Albemarle County Code, that
amends Section 15-704, Persons eligible for
exemption, and Section 15-705, Amount of
exemption, relating to Tax Relief for the Elderly and
Disabled Program.
• ADOPTED the proposed Ordinance
amendment.
Clerk: Forward signed ordinance to Richard
Wiggans and copy to County Attorney’s office
for inclusion in next update of County Code.
(Attachment 3)
20. Moorman’s River Agricultural and Forestal
District Review.
• ADOPTED the proposed Ordinance.
Clerk: Forward adopted ordinance to Rebecca
Ragsdale and copy to County Attorney’s office
for inclusion in next update of County Code.
Prepare letters, for Chairman’s signature, to
acknowledging individuals in District.
(Attachment 4)
21. Update on Comprehensive Revision of the
Subdivision Ordinance (STA-2001-08).
• HELD. Next work session scheduled for
December 8th.
• Dennis Rooker noted a correction in Sec. 14-
313, Overlot grading plan, 2nd line from the
bottom, the language should read “…. or is
less than one hundred….”
Mark Graham/Elaine Echols: Proceed with
work session.
22. Review of Business Plan Report.
• RECEIVED.
23. Parks and Recreation Consultants Report. Pat Mullaney: Coordinate with YMCA and
5
• SUPPORTED an approach where the County
would provide land and put the major
responsibility for funding and construction on
the YMCA. The Board asked the YMCA to
come back to them with a proposal of what they
want to build and what they think they would
need from the County to make it happen.
consultants, and schedule on agenda when
ready to come back to Board.
24. Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Amendment
(CPA-2003-006).
• Bring final draft back to the Board for review on
January 5th. CONSENSUS to hold public
hearing on February 9th.
David Benish/Joan McDowell: Proceed
according to schedule.
25. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Sally Thomas:
• Proposed a resolution supporting dredging of
the Rivanna Reservoir. CONSENSUS to
schedule on Board’s December 8th consent
agenda to give Board members the opportunity
to review the resolution.
• Asked if someone could reply to Liz Palmer’s
request that the Commission look at water
supply. CONSENSUS that Mr. Cilimberg
respond based on comments/discussion made
at the Board meeting.
David Bowerman:
• Said there is an additional cost needed for the
Birnam Basin project. There use to be a
vegetative buffer that provided privacy from the
public path to five of the homeowners. The
funds are available in the budget. The cost is
$9600 to provide the buffer. CONSENSUS of
Board to move forward.
• Mentioned the need to look more closely at the
times allotted on the agenda when there are a
lot of items scheduled.
Lindsay Dorrier:
• Said he recently met with Cecil Cobb, Chairman
of the Fluvanna County Board of Supervisors,
to talk about the rescue squad and funding.
He, Mr. Dorrier, and Mr. Foley will be meeting
with the Chairman of the Buckingham County
Board of Supervisors next week to also discuss
funding. One of the issues that came up with
Mr. Cobb was water supply. Fluvanna and
Louisa Counties are considering a regional
water supply pipe and invited Albemarle to
participate in the discussions if they want. Mr.
Rooker suggested finding out their time frame.
Mr. Dorrier said he would write them, suggest
that we keep the lines of communication open
and ask that they notify us of their next meeting.
Clerk: Schedule on December 8th agenda.
Wayne Cilimberg: Prepare response. Provide
copy to Clerk for files.
Paul Muhlberger: Proceed as approved.
26. Adjourn to December 7, 2004, 3:00 p.m., Meeting
with Legislators.
• At 5:00 p.m., the meeting was adjourned until
December 7, 2004, for a joint meeting with
Legislators.
/ewc
6
Attachment 1 – Crozet Master Plan Comp Plan Amendment (CPA-2003-07) - Community Profile
Attachment 2 – Addendum to Interjurisdictional Agreement for 800 MhZ public safety radio system
Attachment 3 – Ordinance to amend Chapter 15, relating to Tax Relief for the Elderly and Disabled
Program.
Attachment 4 – Ordinance - Moorman’s River Agricultural and Forestal District
7
ATTACHMENT 1
Crozet Community
Location
The Community of Crozet is located west of the City of Charlottesville generally lying between Three
Notch’d Road (Route 240) and the Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Route 250 West). The southern boundary
extends west from the Lickinghole Basin dam along the south side of Lickinghole Basin and Creek,
intersecting the Rockfish Gap Turnpike east of the Clover Lawn development, and continuing west along
the north side of the highway from there. The entire Development Area is within the Lickinghole Creek
watershed, with the exception of a small northern strip containing portions of the old downtown
commercial and residential area. The eastern boundary is the ridgeline for two streams which flow into
the Lickinghole Creek sedimentation basin. The boundary follows this stream system north to Three
Notch’d Road, crosses it and from a point opposite the Acme property heads north to the south side of
Parrot Creek. From there it continues west, turning north to parallel the eastern boundary of the new
Crozet Elementary School parcel to its north property line, then angling west to the south side of Old
Ballard Road. At that point it continues in a westerly direction through Weston subdivision across Buck
Road (Route 789) to take in the water tank, then south to Railroad Avenue. This northern boundary to
the Development Area is defined as containing the area draining to a series of proposed stormwater
facilities located along the Parrot Branch drainage. The western boundary runs along Route 684 to its
intersection with Route 691. At this point, it turns eastward and follows a stream system until it reaches
the Rockfish Gap Turnpike.
In December 2003, the portion of the Development Area lying north of Three Notch’d Road (Route 240)
and Railroad Avenue was added to the Community of Crozet, with the caveat that no intensification of
use in this area should occur until stormwater management facilities along the Parrot Branch drainage
leading to Beaver Creek Reservoir were in place. This adjustment of the Development Area boundary
was based on a recommendation of the Crozet Master Plan that the jurisdictional division of downtown
that placed land south of Three Notch’d Road within the Development Area and land north of this road in
the Rural Areas be eliminated. As a part of the same boundary amendment recommended by the Master
Plan, the area lying south of Lickinghole Basin and east of Clover Lawn was removed from the
Development Area, based on its environmental sensitivity, terrain, scenic corridor resources, and lack of
transportation connections to the rest of the Community of Crozet.
Background
History - The community of Crozet began as a whistle stop on the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad in
1876 that was established at the request of the Miller Manual Labor School (the Miller School), which had
been founded a year earlier. It was named for Colonel B. Claudius Crozet (1789-1864), a French born
civil engineer and artillery officer under Napoleon who is best remembered as the chief engineer for the
seventeen mile long railroad tunnel through the Blue Ridge Mountains. Since its inception, it has
functioned as a distinct settlement with a unique history of agriculture, small business enterprises, and a
dynamic civic spirit. Crozet in particular was known for its fruit industry, and in the 1930’s it lead the state
in the production of Albemarle Pippin and Winesap apples. It also was known as the Peach Capital of
Virginia. With the arrival of Acme Visible Records and Morton Foods (ConAgra) in the 1950’s, year-round
employment was available to balance the area’s seasonal economy. Although these businesses closed
in the 1990’s, technology-related enterprises as well as other small contracting firms are now occupying
portions of the old plant buildings, with space still available for future adaptive re-use.
8
Community Study - The first neighborhood study for the Crozet Community was completed in 1993 by
the Department of Planning and Community Development under the direction of a 13-member committee
appointed by the Board of Supervisors. The purpose of this study was to assist the County in establishing
policy to help guide public and private activities as they relate to land use and resource utilization within
Crozet. The recommendations of this study were considered and incorporated in the Master Plan, which
came ten years later, and the carry-over of many of the original recommendations demonstrates
residents’ commitment to principles such as downtown revitalization, adequate public facilities, and
historic preservation.
Crozet Master Plan - In October 2001 Crozet was the first Development Area selected for a Master Plan
by the Board of Supervisors, because of the community’s strong interest and the high level of
development activity occurring there. The master planning process encompassed nearly a dozen public
events and several dozen Small Task Group working sessions, in addition to Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors work sessions and public hearings to review the draft plan. The development
community also participated in the public events, and worked cooperatively with the project consultants
and public on design issues. A year-long public process produced the Crozet Master Plan Final Report,
which was then reviewed and edited by the Planning Commission. The Commission’s document, the
Crozet Master Plan, was adopted by the Board as part of the Comprehensive Plan, a guide for future
development and systematic change in the Community of Crozet.
Existing Land Use
Downtown - The geographic, cultural and commercial center of the Crozet Community is the downtown
area. The downtown consists of a variety of businesses, restaurants, offices, a retirement community, a
library, a fire and rescue squad, and a post office. The building styles, age, and location of some
structures make downtown Crozet a unique and special place. Most businesses and offices are located
close together and near the roadway. The buildings that service the downtown area are generally no taller
than 3 stories in height with the exception of Mountainside Senior Living, which is 7 stories in height.
Other than a limited area around Mountainside, there is currently no unifying design theme, such as tree
plantings, lighting, street furniture, etc., downtown. There are limited pedestrian linkages that exist
between the surrounding residential areas. There are a few small trees planted throughout the downtown
and some vegetation exists along the railroad track.
Residential - The Crozet Community (Development Area) contains an estimated 846 dwelling units and a
population of 2,224 people. Seventy two percent (610) of the housing units in the Neighborhood are
single-family attached; twelve percent (105) of the housing units are either townhouses, single family
attached or duplexes; six percent (46) of the housing units are multifamily; and ten percent (85) are
mobile homes (July 1996). Large residential areas in Community include the Crozet Mobile Home Park,
Parkview, Brookwood, Highlands at Mechum River, Orchard Acres, Mountainside, Western Ridge, Cory
Farm, Grayrock Orchard, Wayland’s Grant, and Crozet Crossing. [these figures to be updated with
most current statistics available at time of publication]
Commercial and Office - Most uses are located along Route 240 (Crozet Avenue and Three Notch’d
Road). Larger retail uses include the Square (13,427 square feet); Crozet Shopping Center (29,502
square feet-adjacent to the Development Area); and Blue Ridge Building Supply Company (Route 250
West-48,030 square feet).
Industrial - There are three large industrial uses in the Community. They are the former Con Agra
(464,821 square feet) and Acme Visible (286,187 square feet) plants, and the J. Bruce Barnes Lumber
Company. The plants are located on Route 240 (Crozet Avenue); the lumber yard is located adjacent to
the Square.
Other Land Uses - The Crozet Development Area contains a post office.
Environmental Characteristics
9
The topography of the Crozet area varies from gently rolling to steeply rolling terrain. The majority of the
Crozet Development Area drains into Lickinghole Creek; the entire Development Area is located within
the South Fork Rivanna River water supply watershed. The Lickinghole Creek Sedimentation Basin was
constructed to reduce nonpoint discharge from Crozet. The basin serves as an erosion, sedimentation
and runoff control device for development in the Crozet Development Area, and will soon be managed as
a park by the County.
Critical slopes occur in a scattered fashion in the southern portion of the Development Area. Wooded
areas are present throughout the Community. One-hundred year flood plain designations occur along
Powell’s Creek, Lickinghole Creek, Slabtown Branch and the Parrot Branch drainage.
Transportation
Route 250 (Rockfish Gap Turnpike) and Route 240 (Crozet Avenue and Three Notch’d Road) are the
primary roads serving the Development Area. Accessibility to portions of the Development Area south of
Three Notch’d Road and east of Crozet Avenue is restricted due to lack of public roads in these areas. In
the central portion of the Development Area, alignment and sight distance pose problems along both
Three Notch’d Road and Crozet Avenue, especially in the downtown area. In the western section of
Crozet, Route 684 (Jarman’s Gap Road) is of a substandard design to support proposed development,
and is scheduled for upgrading including widening, alignment improvements, bike lanes, and a sidewalk
on the north side under a VDOT project. The existing downtown sidewalk system is not interconnected
and some portions are in need of maintenance. Implementation of the Downtown Sidewalk and Parking
Study completed in 2002 is recommended to address this need, and to provide additional parking for
downtown revitalization. Bicycle facilities are inadequate within the community; however, construction of
these facilities is anticipated with road projects and new development projects. Greenway development is
underway from Lickinghole Basin and Western Ridge to Claudius Crozet Park, and in the area west of
Crozet Avenue in conjunction with the Old Trail development.
Water and Sewer
Water supply in Crozet is provided by the Beaver Creek Reservoir. Safe Yield of the reservoir is 2.0
million gallons a day (mgd) and is adequate to handle growth in Crozet at the build-out population of
12,000 people estimated by the Master Plan. Current water demand in Crozet is 370,000 gallons per day
(2003). The capacity of the treatment plant is 1 mgd; treatment plant equipment has been upgraded and
preliminary design work has been done to accommodate an expansion to 1.3 mgd. Wastewater service is
currently being provided through the Crozet Interceptor and Moore’s Creek Treatment Plant. The Crozet
interceptor will need to be expanded from a capacity of 2400 to 3600 gallons per minute to handle build-
out. This will be done through a planned replacement of the pump stations.
Public Facilities
The Crozet Community Development Area, along with the surrounding area, contains two elementary
schools, a middle school, a high school, a library, a fire and rescue stations, and a Community Park
(Claudius Crozet) with a pool, a baseball field and a soccer field. The old Crozet Elementary School
currently houses a private school. Two other parks/recreation areas (Mint Springs and Beaver Creek) are
located nearby. Fire/rescue service is adequate to this area. However, with continued growth to a build-
out population of 12,000, there will be a need to improve other public facilities in the area.
Crozet Master Plan
The Crozet Master Plan provides a series of Guiding Principles which reflect, to a large degree, the
Twelve Principles of the Neighborhood Model (see page 19 of the Land Use Plan). These principles are:
1. The physical design of Crozet is built upon distinct neighborhoods, a historic downtown
area and other smaller centers, which are appropriate in scale and type to the
community’s planned growth patterns.
2. Linking us both within the community and to our neighbors, Crozet values multiple
transportation options and infrastructure to support ease of access throughout the
10
community. Of particular note, the community promotes pedestrian and bicycle options
for alternative transportation choices.
3. Offering diversity, affordability, and choice in its housing stock, Crozet attracts people
from many social and economic experiences.
4. Crozet values the contributions of locally grown business in providing both jobs and
enhanced quality of life for residents.
5. Through a variety of cultivation, recreation, and conservation efforts, Crozet values its
natural resource assets.
6. Our families and our individual and shared histories provide the foundation for our
identity. Crozet is a place that encourages a sense of community in its diverse activities,
institutions, and interests.
7. Crozet actively supports its many community facilities and the role they play in the lives of
its citizens and believes that these facilities must accommodate the changing needs of
the community as it grows over time.
Because the Master Plan is lengthy and detailed, it is incorporated by reference in the Comprehensive
Plan. This Community Profile is intended to serve as a summary which further condenses the Master
Plan’s major principles, recommendations, and findings. The July 9, 2003 final report is the document
that most closely captures the history and products of the community planning process.
As with all elements of the Comprehensive Plan, the Crozet Master Plan is advisory in nature and sets
forth the County’s long-range recommendations for the development of land within Crozet. Development
guidelines contained in the maps, charts and other supplementary materials in the Master Plan are
intended as targets rather than specific requirements, consistent with the advisory nature of the
document. The County’s Capital Improvements Program (CIP), based on a two-year financial cycle, is
the final authority for funding policy, including funding level, timing and sources associated with specific
improvements. Although the CIP reflects funding commitments to capital improvements, the
implementation measures outlined in the Crozet Master Plan establish the fundamental context of need
and the desired relationship between population, timeframe and infrastructure development. Most
specifically, the “Costs and Strategies for Funding Improvements” contained in “Section II. Strategies for
Development” of the Master Plan reflect timing for the provision of public facilities and infrastructure
“triggered” by projected population growth in Crozet. It reflects an attempt to program facilities concurrent
with Crozet’s growth, an important goal voiced by the community in the planning process. The actual
programming of projects in the CIP will be based on the real timing of population growth, actual
development activity that occurs and availability of funding from the sources anticipated in the Master
Plan section of “Costs and Strategies for Funding Improvements.”
Master Plan Components
The Crozet Master Plan is illustrated graphically by two maps supported by a series of tables, drawings,
and guidelines. The maps are:
Place Type and Site Development Guidelines Map - This is the land use map, showing recommended
designations in the form of transect types ranging from the Urban Core to the Development Area
Preserve, organized around a hierarchy of Downtown, Neighborhood and Hamlet. A corresponding set of
Site Development Guidelines further describes the land use designations. It also illustrates proposed
infrastructure such as roads (by type), trails and community facilities. The Place Type Map is found on
page ___ .
Green Infrastructure Map – This map depicts the open space and preservation area system throughout
the community, showing streams and lakes, floodplains, slopes, and proposed improvements such as
parks and natural areas, neighborhoods and centers, roads and community facilities. A corresponding
set of guidelines further describes green infrastructure recommendations. The Green Infrastructure Map
is found on pages __ and __; the map on page__ further describes parks and open space types and
functions.
The tables and drawings provide additional detail on design elements such as thoroughfares (roads),
open space, block and lot type and examples of Hamlets, Neighborhoods and Downtown development
and redevelopment.
11
Master Plan Major Findings and General Recommendations
The following list highlights the findings and recommendations for Crozet. A full discussion of these
recommendations can be found in the full text of the Master Plan (incorporated by reference into the
Comprehensive Plan) and in the July 9, 2003 Crozet Master Plan final report.
1. Roads: Two major north/south connector roads will be required as baseline infrastructure
development. A new Main Street is needed south of the CSX tracks to provide an
additional interconnection throughout the community and to downtown. Main Street is
intended to provide an east/west orientation.
2. Greenways: A greenways-trails network should serve as an armature for both the
preservation of natural riparian resources and pedestrian movement within the Crozet
Development Area.
3. Centers: Individual centers within the Crozet Development Area will serve as the
foundation for walkable neighborhoods supporting both residential uses and local
economic activity.
4. Downtown: The largest and most important of these centers will be the Downtown area.
5. Development Phasing: Development in the immediate future should focus on the
redevelopment and invigoration of the downtown area.
6. Design Guidelines: Design guidelines outlined in the Neighborhood Model are applied to
fit the specific conditions of Crozet, and they provide the tools that will guide the form of
development.
7. Place Making: The creation of a strong place identity within the Crozet area requires
attention, initiative, coordination and collaboration between local government, the
business/development community and residents.
8. Development Review Process: New strategies for implementing the Master Plan
(based on the Neighborhood Model) may be needed to counter the option of doing strictly
by-right development. These strategies, if adopted, should identify both short and long
term solutions.
9. Local Businesses and Community Economic Development: County staff and officials
must engage in public/private partnerships with local businesses to realize the
development of Crozet as more than a ‘bedroom community’ to the City of Charlottesville.
Jobs that keep residents of Crozet working in Crozet will be key to revitalizing downtown
and mitigating a deteriorating traffic condition on Routes 240 and 250.
10. Affordable Housing: County staff and officials should support the development of a
comprehensive Affordable Housing Ordinance to support a broad demographic mixture
within the Development Areas.
11. Adjacent Rural Areas: A strong Rural Areas policy should be put in place to assist in
focusing growth within the Development Areas and to help in mitigating cumulative
impacts of additional traffic on Routes 240 and 250. This policy will also be important to
maintaining a clear boundary between Development and Rural Areas.
Master Plan Recommendations by Geographic Sector
For purposes of the Master Plan, the Community of Crozet is considered as three geographic sectors in
which future development and redevelopment projects are focused. They are the downtown area, the
area west of Crozet Avenue and the area east of Crozet Avenue. Each area holds unique characteristics
and challenges. This section of the Guide identifies the priority implementation strategies for each area
and outlines specific tasks required to carry out those strategies. Chart A, Crozet Priorities (p. ___in the
Master Plan), organizes these strategies in visual form by geographic location and level of urgency, and
includes additional actions that while also desirable rank lower in priority. For additional
recommendations applicable to the three geographic sectors and the community as a whole, see Other
Recommendations below in this Profile (page ___).
12
Downtown
Initial development in the Downtown area should emphasize the completion of the sidewalk system (per
the recommendations of the Crozet Downtown Sidewalk and Parking Study of 2001), placement of the
new library on Crozet Avenue, and creation of the first two blocks of Main Street. Specific
recommendations and tasks identified in the Master Plan for downtown include the following:
1. Allow mixed-use, infill development in support of downtown.
2. Implement improvements identified in the Downtown Sidewalk and Parking Study.
3. Construct the new library on the west side of Crozet Avenue near Mountainside.
4. Convert current library (depot) to civic center function, perhaps as a museum.
5. Construct Main Street by building the first segment from Crozet Avenue to the Barnes
Lumber property. (This will take trucks off “the Square.”)
6. Develop guidelines for renovating historic structures and for new buildings (scale,
materials, setbacks), and initiate establishment of a Historic District.
7. Encourage development in blocks adjacent to downtown core.
8. Create bike lanes to and in downtown.
9. Create downtown community green at “the Square.”
10. Develop signage for greenway trails (in downtown and throughout community).
11. Create a pedestrian railroad crossing in downtown core (below or above grade).
12. Explore alternatives to current underpass at Crozet Avenue.
13. Explore opportunities for redevelopment of Con Agra and Acme as an extension of
downtown.
14. Reuse Historic Crozet Elementary School. The former school could eventually serve as
an Albemarle County satellite facility for county services, public meetings and other
community uses and/or it could be adaptively reused with some public and private
residential functions in relation to the surrounding residential neighborhood.
15. Continue construction of Main Street east from Crozet Avenue, including pocket parks in
block development.
16. As opportunities arise for redevelopment of the lumber yard, focus on a mixed-use form
that emphasizes employment.
Crozet - West
Development in the area west of Crozet Avenue should emphasize neighborhood related road creation
and other improvements. Specific recommendations and tasks for Crozet-West include the following:
1. Encourage mixed use development in the center of the western area.
2. Protect Route 250 from further commercial development (in all three geographic sectors).
3. Implement improvements to Jarman’s Gap Road.
4. Construct Western Avenue.
5. Discourage improvements intended to increase capacity of Half Mile Branch Road in an
effort to encourage use of Western Avenue. (This does not apply to site distance and
safety improvements.)
6. Encourage development of western area starting from the south up (from Route 250).
7. Propose East-West Drive (with bridge across Slabtown Branch), and safety
improvements to the Meadows intersection with Route 240.
8. Establish Western Park with public/private collaboration.
9. Upgrade playing fields at Henley Middle School.
10. Create frontage road for Henley and Brownsville schools (avoiding existing fields and
working in conjunction with current improvements).
Crozet - East
Development for the area east of Crozet Avenue should focus on the construction of public amenities
such as the school and parks in addition to the creation of roads and bridges. Specific recommendations
and tasks for Crozet-East include the following:
13
1. Construct Eastern Avenue, Main Street, and primary neighborhood streets within the two
or three major properties available for new development.
2. Construct Lickinghole Bridge on a time-line appropriate to demand.
3. Construct crossing of CSX tracks between Acme and Con Agra buildings (below or
above grade options).
4. Establish greenway trail (for pedestrians and bikes) from Lickinghole Creek Basin to
Crozet Park and downtown.
5. Construct new neighborhood elementary school on time-line appropriate to demand, in
general location shown on plan.
6. Explore and develop potential access points to Lickinghole Creek Basin.
7. Establish Eastern Park with public/private collaboration.
Other Recommendations
These recommendations resulted from the 1993 Community Study, 1996 Land Use Plan, 2004 Crozet
Master Plan, and/or the Community Facility Plan, and reflect areas of special concern and on-going
interest:
• Construction of stormwater management facilities along the Parrot Branch drainage leading to
Beaver Creek Reservoir, to support and allow mixed-use, infill development and downtown
• revitalization.
• The boundary for the Crozet Development Area is generally based on the drainage area for the
Lickinghole Creek sedimentation basin; exceptions are the addition of the old portion of the
downtown area to the Development Area, and the exclusion of the far southeastern quadrant
which is environmentally sensitive and located along the 250 West corridor, a scenic highway.
• Any new commercial development along Tabor Street and Carter Street should be physically and
architecturally compatible and similar in scale to the existing residential units located in the area.
• Establish a new downtown zoning district to encourage revitalization and preservation and re-use
of historic buildings.
• Work collaboratively with the private sector and other entities to encourage revitalization of
downtown, and to develop new business and employment opportunities in Crozet.
• The Crozet Master Plan shall provide guidance for development that impacts the Community of
Crozet, including the designated entrance corridors.
• Transportation improvements include:
Establish a road system in the eastern portion of the Community which connects existing and
new residential areas to each other and to other areas in Crozet. Eastern Avenue will link Route
250 (Rockfish Gap Turnpike) and Route 240 (Three Notch’d Road). The design recommended
for this road shall be in keeping with the residential character of the area (i.e. two lanes, limited
through traffic, no through truck traffic, low speed limit). Main Street, as recommended in the
Master Plan, shall also serve as an east/west link between downtown and the eastern residential
and mixed-use neighborhoods. More specifically the intent is to:
• better integrate new and existing residential areas located east of Route 240 (Crozet
Avenue);
• improve connections to downtown from new and existing neighborhoods east of Crozet
Avenue;
• better distribute traffic to all roads, thereby reducing the ultimate design of any one road;
• provide an alternative route and to relieve traffic on Routes 240 (Crozet Avenue and Three
Notch’d Road), particularly to downtown.
• provide better access, particularly emergency access to those residents living east and south
14
of Route 240 (Crozet Avenue).
Establish road, pedestrian, bicycle and greenway connections from Crozet Avenue west to the
Old Trail development, including the Meadows Connector; these connections are recommended
at various locations on the west side of Crozet Avenue, as development occurs.
Correct the horizontal and vertical alignment problems along both Three Notch’d Road and
Crozet Avenue. These improvements will become more critical as the Development Area is
developed.
Reconstruct Jarman’s Gap Road from Route 240 to Route 684 to improve horizontal and vertical
alignment and provide adequate sight distance at intersections. Bike facilities and walkways are
recommended to be constructed in conjunction with the upgrade of this road.
In the long term, consider constructing a permanent park and ride facility to the serve the
community. In the short term, explore the possibility of a joint-use park and ride lot.
• Utility improvements include:
Expand the water treatment plant as needed for full build-out.
Upgrade the Crozet interceptor pump stations as need for full build-out
• Public Facility Improvements include:
Maintain the old Crozet Elementary School as a public building; determine the appropriate use for
the facility through a community planning effort.
As development occurs in the eastern portion of the community (east of Crozet Avenue, north of
Rockfish Gap Turnpike and south of Three Notch’d Road), construct a new elementary school as
needed.
• Prevent crossing of the railroad tracks in the vicinity of the Square by constructing a fence along
the northern portion of The Square’s parking lot. Extend the fence to a point east of the library.
• Post office facilities should be located downtown.
15
ATTACHMENT 2
ADDENDUM
THIS ADDENDUM is entered into this ____ day of _________________, 2004 by and between
the County of Albemarle, Virginia, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia (the “County”),
the City of Charlottesville, Virginia, a Virginia municipal corporation (the “City”) and the Rector and Visitors
of the University of Virginia (the “University”), and modifies the Interjurisdictional Agreement dated June
27, 2003 entered into among the parties (the “Interjurisdictional Agreement”).
WITNESS:
WHEREAS, the Interjurisdictional Agreement provides for the payment of shared capital and
operating costs for the 800 MHz public safety radio system project currently under construction, and other
terms of mutual agreement;
WHEREAS, the County, City and University have agreed to procure and construct a Mobile Data
Communications System and Wireless Data Network and related services (the “Mobile Data System”) as
set forth in the Request for Proposals originally dated December 1, 2003;
WHEREAS, the Charlottesville/University of Virginia/Albemarle County Emergency Communica-
tions Center (“ECC”) has received an Interoperability Communications Equipment Grant from the U. S.
Department of Homeland Security, the proceeds of which are partially being utilized to pay for
infrastructure costs related to the Mobile Data System; and
WHEREAS, each party to this agreement has agreed to assume a portion of the remaining
capital project and operating costs of the Mobile Data System (the “System Costs”) according to an
agreed-upon allocation formula;
WHEREAS, it is desirable that the funding formula governing the allocation of System costs be
memorialized in writing.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises and covenants contained herein,
the County, the City and the University hereby agree as follows:
1. Each party shall pay its respective pro rata share of the System Costs according to the
operating formula currently in effect for the ECC (the “ECC Operating Formula”). Future maintenance,
support and operating costs of the Mobile Data System shall be allocated according to the ECC
Operating Formula, as amended, except for purchases of computers or other Mobile Data equipment by
individual jurisdictions, which shall remain the responsibility of the purchasing jurisdiction.
2. The County shall act as fiscal agent under the Mobile Data System purchase agreement,
and payments by the parties for their respective pro rata shares shall continue to be administered and
handled in the same manner as set forth in the Interjurisdictional Agreement.
3. Except as specifically amended hereunder, all terms and conditions of the Interjurisdic-
tional Agreement remain in effect.
WHEREFORE, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement, by their authorized
representatives, as of the day and year set forth above.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
By: _______________________________
Its: _______________________________
16
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
By: _______________________________
Its: _______________________________
RECTOR AND VISITORS OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA
_______________________________
Leonard Sandridge, Executive Vice President
And Chief Operating Officer
17
ATTACHMENT 3
ORDINANCE NO. 04-15(2)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 15, TAXATION, ARTICLE VII, REAL ESTATE EXEMPTION
FOR CERTAIN ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF
ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 15,
Taxation, Article VII, Real Estate Exemption for Certain Elderly and Disabled Persons, is hereby
amended and reordained as follows:
By Amending:
Sec. 15-704 Persons eligible for exemption
Sec. 15-705 Amount of exemption
CHAPTER 15. TAXATION
ARTICLE VII. REAL ESTATE EXEMPTION FOR
CERTAIN ELDERLY AND DISABLED PERSONS
Sec. 15-704 Persons eligible for exemption.
Persons who satisfy all of the following requirements are eligible for the exemption established in
section 15-703:
A. The person claiming the exemption shall have either:
1. Reached the age of sixty-five (65) years prior to the taxable year for which the
exemption is claimed; or
2. Became permanently and totally disabled prior to the taxable year for which the
exemption is claimed.
B. The person claiming the exemption shall be a person owning title or partial title in the
dwelling.
1. The person claiming the exemption shall own title or partial title to the real estate
for which the exemption is claimed on January 1 of the taxable year.
2. A dwelling jointly owned by a husband and wife may qualify if either spouse is
sixty-five (65) years of age or older or is permanently and totally disabled.
3. Except as provided in paragraph (B.2), the exemption shall not apply to a
dwelling jointly owned by a person who is sixty-five (65) years of age or older or who is permanently and
totally disabled (an “exempt person”), and a person who not an exempt person.
C. The person claiming the exemption shall occupy the dwelling as that person’s sole
dwelling.
1. The dwelling shall not be used for commercial purposes.
2. The fact that a person who otherwise qualifies for exemption established by this
article resides in a hospital, nursing home, convalescent home or other facility for physical or mental care
for extended periods of time shall not be construed to mean that the real estate for which the exemption is
sought does not continue to be the sole dwelling of the person during such extended periods of other
residence so long as such real estate is not used by or leased to others for consideration.
18
D. A manufactured home is real estate eligible for the exemption established by this article if
the person claiming the exemption demonstrates to the satisfaction of the director of finance that the
manufactured home is permanently affixed. Either of the following shall be evidence that the
manufactured home is permanently affixed:
1. The person claiming the exemption owns title or partial title to the manufactured
home and the land on which the manufactured home is located, and the manufactured home is
connected to permanent water and sewage lines or facilities; or
2. Whether or not the manufactured home is located on land on which the person
claiming the exemption owns title or partial title, the manufactured home rests on a permanent foundation
and consists of two (2) or more units which are connected in such a manner that they cannot be towed
together on a highway, or consists of a unit and other connected rooms or additions which must be
removed before the manufactured home can be towed on a highway.
E. The total combined income shall not exceed thirty thousand dollars ($30,000.00) for the
calendar year immediately preceding the taxable year.
F. The net combined financial worth shall not exceed ninety thousand dollars ($90,000.00)
as of December thirty-first of the calendar year immediately preceding the taxable year.
(2-15-73; 3-20-75; 11-9-77; 8-13-80; 6-12-85; 5-13-87; Ord of 12-19-90; Ord. of 4-7-93; Ord. 96-8(2), 12-
11-96; Code 1988, § 8-26; 9-9-81; Ord. 12-19-90; Code 1988, § 8-26.1; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 00-
15(2), 9-20-00; Ord. 03-15(2), 11-5-03; Ord. 04-15(2), 12-1-04)
State law reference--Va. Code §§ 58.1-3210, 58.1-3211, 58.1-3212, 58.1-3214, 58.1-3215.
Sec. 15-705 Amount of exemption.
The amount of the exemption established by this article from the real estate tax for any taxable
year shall be as follows:
Percentage of Real Estate Tax Exempted
Net Combined Financial Worth $0- $80,000 $80,001-$85,000 $85,001-$90,000
$0-$18,000 100.0%90.0%80.0%
$18,001-$22,000 75.0%67.5%60.0%
$22,001-$26,000 50.0%45.0%40.0%
$26,001-$30,000 25.0%22.5%20.0%
Total Combined
Income
Over $30,000 0.0%0.0%0.0%
(2-15-73; 11-9-77; 8-13-80; Ord. of 12-19-90; Ord. of 4-7-93; Code 1988, § 8-27; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98;
Ord. 00-15(2), 9-20-00; Ord. 04-15(2), 12-1-04)
State law reference--Va. Code § 58.1-3212.
This ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 2005.
19
20
ATTACHMENT 4
ORDINANCE NO. 04-3(4)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 3, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL
DISTRICTS, ARTICLE II, DISTRICTS OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE, DIVISION 2, DISTRICTS, OF
THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 3,
Agricultural and Forestal Districts, Article II, Districts of Statewide Significance, Division 2, Districts, of the
Code of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, is hereby amended and reordained as follows:
By Amending:
Section 3-222 Moorman’s River Agricultural and Forestal District
CHAPTER 3. AGRICULATURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS
ARTICLE II. DISTRICTS OF STATEWIDE SIGNIFICANCE
DIVISION 2. DISTRICTS
Sec. 3-222 Moorman's River Agricultural and Forestal District.
The district known as the "Moorman's River Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the
following described properties: Tax map 27, parcels 32, 34, 34A, 40, 40A, 40A1, 42, 42A; tax map 28,
parcels 2, 2A, 3, 4, 5, 6, 6A, 6B, 7, 7A, 7A1, 7B, 8, 12, 12A, 12B, 13, 17A, 17C, 18, 23B, 23B1, 30, 30A,
30B 32B, 32D, 34B, 35, 35B, 37, 37A, 37B, 37C, 38; tax map 29, parcels 2C, 4E, 8, 8B, 8E, 8E1, 8H, 8J,
8K, 9, 10, 40B, 40C, 40D, 49C, 50, 54A, 61, 62, 63, 63A, 63D, 67C, 69D, 69F, 70A, 70B, 70C, 70F, 70F1,
70G, 70H1, 70K, 70L, 70M, 71, 71A, 73B, 74A, 76, 78, 79C, 80, 84; tax map 30, parcels 10, 10A, 12,
12C, 12D, 17A, 18E; tax map 41, parcels 8, 8B, 8C, 8D, 9E, 15, 17C, 18, 41C, 41H, 44, 50, 67, 67B, 68,
70, 72, 72B, 72C, 72D, 89; tax map 42, parcels 5, 6, 6B, 7, 8, 8A, 8C, 10, 10A, 10D, 37F, 37J, 38, 40,
40C, 40D, 40D1, 40G, 40H2, 41, 42B, 43, 43A, 44; tax map 43, parcels 1, 3, 3A, 3C, 3D, 4C, 4D, 5, 5A,
9, 10, 16B2, 16B3, 18E4, 18G, 18J, 19I, 19N, 19P, 20A, 20B, 20C, 2l, 21A, 24, 25A, 25B, 30, 30A, 30B,
30D, 30G, 30H, 30M, 30N, 32H, 33, 33E, 34D1, 41, 42, 43, 43A1, 44, 45, 45C, 45D; tax map 44, parcels
1, 2, 24, 26, 26A, 26C, 27B, 27C, 28, 29, 29A, 29D, 30, 30A, 30B, 31, 31A, 31A1, 31D, 31F, 31G; tax
map 59, parcels 32, 32A, 34, 35, 82A. This district, created on December 17, 1986 for not more than ten
years and last reviewed on December 1, 2004, shall be next reviewed prior to December 1, 2014.
(4-14-93; 12-21-94; 4-12-95; 8-9-95; Code 1988, § 2.1-4(g); Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 99-3(4), 5-12-99;
Ord. 00-3(1), 4-19-00; Ord. 04-3(4), 12-1-04)