Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009-10-14  B OARD OF SUPERVISORS T E N T A  T I V E OCTOBER 14, 2009 6:00 P.M. ­ LAN E AUDITORIU M C OUNTY OFFICE BUILDIN G         1.          C all to Order. 2.          Pledge of Allegiance. 3.          Moment of Silenc e. 4.          From the Board:  Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 5.          From the Public:  Matters Not Lis ted for Public  Hearing on the Agenda. 6.         Consent Agenda (on next sheet).   PUBLIC HEAR INGS: 7.         To amend the Six Year Secondary R oad Priority List that was approved by the Board of Supervisors on May 13, 2009.  The proposed amendment w ill remove Dickerson Road (Rt. 606) and add Broomley Road bridge over the Buckingham R oad railroad. 8.         PROJECT:  SP­2008­009. A nimal Wellness C enter.  PROPOSED : Veterinary Clinic for small animals. ZON ING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: D CD Dow ntown Crozet District­variety of commercial uses including office, retail, service, and civic uses ; residential uses if mixed use (up to 36 units /ac re); light industrial uses  by  special use permit. SECTION : 20B.2.E.17 Veterinary offices and animal hospitals. Veterinary office and hospital;  5.1.11 Commercial Kennel, Veterinary Servic e, Office Or Hospital, Animal H ospital, Animal Shelter. COMPREH ENSIVE PLAN  LAND USE/D ENSITY: Community of Crozet, CT5 N eighborhood Center in the C roz et Master Plan which allow s for a mix of us es and residential types at net densities of up to 12 units per acre; up to 18 units per acre if in a mixed use setting and CT 1 Development Area Preserve. ENTRANCE COR RID OR: Yes. LOC ATION : 1100 Crozet Avenue/Route 240, approx. 400 feet south of the intersection of Jarmans Gap R oad and Crozet Avenue. TAX MAP/PARC EL: 056A2­01­00­ 00700. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:  White Hall. 9.         STA­2008­001. Rural Areas 2­lot street standard; single point of access.  Amend Sections  14­207, Rural s ubdivisions, 14­224.1, Waiver of certain requirements by the agent, 14­225.1, Waiver of certain requirements by  the planning commission, 14­404, Lot location to allow acc ess  from lot onto street or s hared drivew ay, 14­412, Standards for private streets only, and 14­434, Completion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval, of Chapter 14, Subdivision of Land, of the Albemarle C ounty C ode.  This ordinance would amend Sec. 14­207 by making rural subdivisions  subject to Sec. 14­404 if any proposed lot would have less than five hundred (500) feet of frontage on a major rural street identified on the map adopted as  Appendix A to the Subdivision Ordinance; Sec s. 14­224.1 and 14­225.1 by transferring from the planning c ommission to the subdivision agent the authority to grant waivers permitted under Secs. 14­ 404 and 14­412; Sec. 14­404 by  requiring that a s ubdivision plat establish a single public or private access into the subdivision from an exis ting public or private street, by requiring that the proposed street provide s uch access for all lots within the subdivision, and by amending the procedure for waiving that requirement and the criteria for approving a waiver; Sec. 14­412 by establis hing new des ign standards for private streets s erving 2 lots  (by requiring that such streets not exceed a 16% grade over 50 feet, have a travelway at least 10 feet wide, and maintain a 10 foot by 14 foot unobstructed z one) and private s treets serv ing 3 to 5 lots in the rural areas (by  requiring that such streets not exceed a 16% grade over 50 feet, allowing s treets having a grade of less than 7% to be gravel, and maintain a 10 foot by 14 foot unobstructed zone); Sec. 14­434 by deleting the exception for certain private streets from the requirement that all on­site improv ements be c ompleted prior to approval of the final plat where surety in lieu of completion of the improv ements is not authorized.  10.        ZTA ­2008­002. Planned Developments and Neighborhood Model District.  Amend the follow ing s ections of C hapter 18, Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code: 3.1, Definitions, to amend and delete s everal definitions ; 8.2, Relation of planned development regulations to other z oning regulations , to change s ection heading, to clarify the regulations applicable to planned developments  (“PD”), to require that waivers and modifications  be express ly granted, and to reorganize the section; 8.3, Planned development defined, to revise the definition of “planned development”; 8.5.1, Applications and documents to be submitted, to revise the standards and information acc ompanying an application to establish a PD  district; 8.5.2, Preapplication c onferences, to revise the parties  in a preapplication conference; 8.5.3, Rev iew and recommendation by the planning commiss ion, to revis e the matters considered by the planning commission in acting on an application for a PD district; 8.5.4, Review and action by the board of supervis ors, to change section heading and to c larify the documents applicable to a PD upon approval of the PD  rezoning; 8.5.5, Final site plans and subdivis ion plats, to change section heading; 8.5.5.1, Contents of s ite plans and subdivision plats, to revise a c ross­reference; 8.5.5.2, Rev iew of site plans  and subdivis ion plats, to provide that when s ubdivision plats and site plans  are reviewed, they shall be review ed for compliance as follows : (a) if the PD district was established on or before D ecember 10, 1980, the zoning and subdivision regulations currently in effect apply unless vested rights are established; (b) if the PD  district was es tablished after December 10, 1980, at the option of the dev eloper, the zoning and subdivision regulations  in effect when the PD  district w as established or those currently in effect apply, provided that if the developer elects the former, six delineated subjects of regulation are not so grandfathered and the developer must comply w ith current regulations pertaining to thos e 6 subjects unless  vested rights are established; to revise the zoning administrator’s and director of planning’s rev iew for compliance and add the county engineer’s review, to define “applicable regulations,” to declare the applicability of C hapter 17 of the County Code, and to declare that vested rights are not impaired; 8.5.5.3, Variations from approved plans , c odes, and standards of development, to revise the provisions of a plan, c ode or standard the director of planning may  vary, and to authorize the director to require that specified information be provided ; 8.5.5.4, Building permits and erosion and sediment control permits, to revise referenc es to county officers and bodies and to clarify other clauses ; 8.5.5.5, Site plan and subdivis ion plat requirements for planned development zoning districts  es tablished w ithout an application or applic ation plan, to c hange the section heading and to clarify the proc edure and requirements for reviewing a site plan or subdiv ision plat where there was no application plan when the PD district was established; 8.6, Amendments to planned development districts , to revise and ex pand the procedure to amend a PD dis tric t by establis hing requirements for who is an eligible applic ant, submitting a map if the rezoning affects les s than the entire district, notice, and factors c ons idered during review ; 20A.3, Application requirements; required documents  and information, to change the reference from “general development plan” to “application plan” and to provide circumstances when applicant may delay  submitting parking and loading needs study until site plan; 20A.4, General development plans, to change section heading and the required elements of an application plan in a neighborhood model district (hereinafter, N MD ”); 20A.5, C odes of dev elopment, to clarify that any substantive or procedural requirement of the Zoning Ordinance applies in an NMD unless  the subject matter is expressly addressed in the c ode of development (hereinafter, the “code”), to expressly require that the code be in a form required or approved by the director of planning, to change the required elements of a c ode, and to limit the applicable architectural s tandards in pre­existing codes to only the new  required elements unless determined to be k ey features; 20A.6, Permitted uses, to change the referenc e from “general development plan” to “application plan” and to allow a code to provide that any  use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district be a use allowed by special use permit in an NMD; 20A.7, Residential density, to correctly state the formula for calculating residential dens ity in an NMD; 20A.9, Green spaces, amenities , conservation areas and preservation areas, to change references from “site area” to the “area proposed to be rezoned” when c alculating the areas of green s paces and amenities; and 20A.10, Streets, to change a referenc e from “department of engineering and public works ” to the “department of community development. 11.        From the Board:  Matters Not Lis ted on the Agenda. 12.        Adjourn to October 16, 2009, 9:00 a.m., Department of Forestry Building.         CON SENT AGEND A     FOR APPR OVAL:   6.1        Approval of Minutes.       6.2        FY 2010 Appropriation.   6.3        Voting Credentials for VACo Annual Busines s Meeting.   6.4        ZMA­2006­008. Berkmar Business Park; Applic ant request for 12­month ex tension.   6.5        Cancel November 11, 2009 Board of Superv isors’ meeting.     Ret urn t o Top of   Agenda Ret urn t o Board of  Superv isors Home P age Ret urn t o Count y  Home Page COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY     AGENDA  TITLE: FY 2010 Appropriation     SUBJECT/PR OPOSAL/REQUEST: Approv al of Appropriation #2010038 for Emergency Rescue N otification Sys tem     STAFF CON TA CT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Wiggans, and Letteri     LEGAL R EVIEW:   Yes   AGENDA  DA TE: October 14, 2010   ACTION:                INFORMATION:      CON SENT A GEND A:   A CTION:   x           INFORMATION:        ATTACH MEN TS:   Yes     REVIEW ED BY:       BACK GROUND : Virginia Code § 15.2­2507 provides that any locality may  amend its budget to adjus t the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the fis cal year as shown in the currently adopted budget; provided, however, any such amendment w hich exceeds one percent of the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget must be accomplished by first publishing a notice of a meeting and holding a public hearing before amending the budget. The Code section applies to all C ounty funds , i.e., General Fund, Capital Funds, E911, School Self­Sus taining, etc.   The total of the new requested FY 2010 appropriations, itemized below, is $171,000.  A budget amendment public hearing is not required bec ause the cumulative appropriations will not exceed one perc ent of the currently adopted budget.     STRA TEGIC PLAN: Goal 5:  Develop a comprehensive funding strategy/plan to address the County’s growing needs.     DISCU SSION : This request involves the approval of one (1) FY 2010 appropriation as follows:          One (1) appropriation (#2010038) totaling $171,000 reappropriating an unc ompleted local government project from FY09;   A description of this request is provided in Attachment A.     RECOMMENDA TION S: Staff recommends approv al of the budget amendment in the amount of $171,000.00 and the approval of Appropriation #2010038     ATTAC HMENTS A – Desc ription of Appropriations Ret urn t o c ons ent  agenda Ret urn t o regular agenda Attachment A   Appropriation #2010038                                                                                                                                                                                        $ 171,000.00      R evenue Sourc e:                        Gen. Govt. CIP Fund Balance    $  171,000.00   This request reappropriates the costs related to the Fire/Rescue Emergency Radio Notification System, w hich was uncompleted as of June 30, 2009.  R eappropriation of funds supports the purchase of radio equipment (550 pager/radios) for a system currently being installed w hich is set to be online by the firs t of the year.  D elaying the purchas e w ill not allow  for proper programming of the equipment and will ultimately impact the ability to go online.       Ret urn t o ex ec  summary COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY     AGENDA  TITLE: Amendment to the FY2009/10 through 2014/15 Six Year Secondary System Construction Program     SUBJECT/PR OPOSAL/REQUEST: Public hearing to consider a proposed amendment to the Six  Year Secondary System Cons truction Program to trans fer road paving funds to the Broomley R oad (Rt. 677) R ailroad Bridge Project and to remove the Dickerson Road Project (R t. 606) from the Program.     STAFF CON TA CT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, Benish, and W ade     LEGAL R EVIEW:   Yes   AGENDA  DA TE: October 14, 2009   ACTION:     X          INFORMATION:    CON SENT A GEND A:   A CTION:             INFORMATION:      ATTACH MEN TS:   Yes     REVIEW ED BY:       BACK GROUND : At its September 2, 2009 meeting, the Board directed staff to proceed with an amendment to the approved VDOT Six Year Secondary System Construction Program (the “Program”) in order to trans fer unpaved secondary road funds from the Dickerson Road Paving Project to the Broomley Road Railroad Bridge Improvement Project.    The es timated cost for the Dickerson R oad Paving Project and related bridge improvements is $11,600,000, of which VDOT has allocated approximately $1.6 million in unpaved road funds to date. The County is  not scheduled to receive any  additional paving funds over the next five years; therefore, the D ickerson Road Paving Project could not move forw ard to cons truction in the foreseeable future.    The ex isting Broomley R oad bridge s tructure has a weight limit of eight tons and cannot be used by  large emergency vehicles. Replacing the bridge is the only  means of providing a structure adequate to carry all emergency vehicles.   In order to amend the approved Program, the locality mus t hold a public hearing on the proposed Program amendment, the Board must adopt a Resolution to approve the Program amendment, and staff must request that VDOT amend the Program.  The public  hearing has been set for October 14, 2009.  A draft resolution is attached for the Board’s review prior to the public hearing (Attachment A).      STRA TEGIC PLAN: Goal 3: Develop Policies  and Infrastructure Improvements to Address the County’s  Growing Needs.     DISCU SSION : The Amendment to the VD OT Program: The ac tual amendment to the VDOT Program w ould remove the Dick ers on Road Project from the Program and would trans fer the $1.6 million in funds  allocated for road paving from that Project to the Broomley Road Bridge Improv ement Project.   Consistency with County  Priority List of Road Improvements: The proposed amendment to the VDOT Program is c ons istent with the County’s Priority List of Secondary Improv ements and no amendment to the Priority List is  necessary at this  time.  The C ounty’s Priority List was approved on May 13, 2009. It identifies the Dickerson R oad Project (including road paving and bridge improvements) as priority #23 and is c ons idered the highest priority road paving project due to its location within the Hollymead Development Area.  How ever, without additional unpaved road fund alloc ations, any future planned road paving projects  are unlikely to be completed in the near future.   The County‘s Priority Lis t also includes a priority list for bridge improvements. There are three bridge projects listed ahead of the Broomley Road Bridge Improvement Projec t. The status  of the three projects is: Route 743, Advance Mills­ under construction Route 708, Dry  Bridge Road­ In VDOT’s Program to be cons tructed in FY13 with Federal Bridge funds Route 616, Black  Cat R oad­ In VDOT’s Program to be construc ted in FY15 with Federal Bridge funds   The es timated cost of the Broomley Road Bridge Improv ement Projec t, including roadway approac hes , is $4 million to $5 million. VD OT s taff has indicated that additional w ork is needed to provide a more accurate es timate. VDOT’s process  is to establish a more detailed cost estimate during the project scoping that occurs after a project is placed in the Program. If approv ed, the $1.6 million will only allow the Broomley  Road Bridge Improvement Project to enter the preliminary engineering phase. Federal bridge funds are estimated to be available to fund the cons truction of this project in FY 2017.   Use of Road Paving Funds on Other Projects: The Board of Supervisors has been informed that, pursuant to Virginia Code § 33.1­23.1:1, reallocation of road paving funds to a non­pav ing project w ould result in an adjustment in future secondary fund allocations for unpaved roads (See Attachment B). For each $250,000 or portion thereof removed from road paving projects  and applied to secondary construction projects under this provision, VDOT has indicated that the amount of the C ounty's nonsurface treated roads  used to distribute funds under this section in subsequent years  will be reduc ed by one mile or proportional part of one mile. The $1.6 million that is  proposed to be reallocated represents approximately six miles that would be reduced in subsequent years from the funding formula used by VDOT.  VDOT requires that any Board resolution supporting the proposed amendment must indicate that the Board fully understands  that this adjustment will occur (the attached draft resolution includes such language).  The monetary impact of reallocating the $1.6 million is impossible to determine at this time, since the amount of future alloc ations is unk now n.  However, VD OT estimates that the County could expect to receive about $150,000 less per six  year period if funding were restored to prev ious funding levels.  In current dollars, this would amount to the reduction of about one average rural rustic project over the six year period.     BUDGET IMPACT: There will be no budget impact other than a potential reduction in future VD OT unpaved secondary road funds.     RECOMMENDA TION S: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached R esolution reques ting that VDOT amend the Albemarle County Six Year Secondary System Construction Program to: 1) add the Broomley R oad Bridge Improvement Project; 2) remove the D ickerson Road Project; and, 3) request that the Unpav ed Secondary Road Funds currently allocated by VDOT for the Dickerson Road Project be added to the County’s Secondary System C onstruction Funds to be used for the Broomley Road Bridge Improvement Project.     ATTAC HMENTS A ­ Resolution B – Virginia State Code, § 33.1­23.1:1. U npaved secondary road fund c reated; alloc ations Ret urn t o regular agenda RESOLUTION               WHEREAS, on May 13, 2009, the  A lbe ma rle County Board of Supe rvisors a pproved the County Priority List of Se c ondary Roa d Improve ments for Fisc a l Y e ars 2009/10 through 2104/15 (the  “Priority List”) and authorize d the County Exe cutive  to sign the  VD OT Se conda ry Syste m Construc tion Progra m for A lbe ma rle County (the “A lbe ma rle County V D OT Construction Program”); and               WHEREAS, the  Priority List include d roa d improve me nts for State  Route 606 (Dic ke rson Roa d) be tw ee n Route  850 and Route  1575 w hic h would include  re pla cing two bridge s a nd re construc ting a nd surfa ce trea ting the  existing non­hard surfa ce d roa d, a nd these  improve ments a re  ide ntifie d in the Albema rle  County V DOT Construction Program a s V D OT Proje ct N umbe rs 0606002296, 0606002297 and 0606002P75 (the “Dic ke rson Road Proje c t”); and   WHEREAS, the  D icke rson Roa d Proje ct is be ing funde d from the  U npa ve d Sec onda ry Roa d Fund provide d by Virginia Code  § 33.1­23.1:1 but, to da te , only $1.6 million of the  estimate d $11.6 million cost to ma ke the  improve me nts has be e n a lloca ted by VD OT; and               WHEREAS, the  Boa rd ha s ide ntifie d a  more  urge nt nee d for a  bridge  replac e me nt projec t on Broomle y Roa d, referre d to a s the  Broomle y Roa d Railroad Bridge  Improveme nt Proje ct (the  “Broomle y Roa d Proje c t”) be c ause the  existing bridge has a n eight ton limit tha t re stricts its use  by c e rtain e me rgenc y vehic les.               NOW, THER EFORE, be  it hereby resolve d tha t the Boa rd of Supervisors requests that V DOT a me nd the  Albemarle  County VDO T Construc tion Progra m to add the Broomle y Roa d Proje ct, a nd to re move  the D ickerson Roa d Projec t; a nd               BE IT FU RTHER  R ESOLV ED  tha t the  Board re que sts tha t the Unpaved Se conda ry Road Funds currently a lloc ate d by V DOT for the  D icke rson Roa d Proje ct be  a dde d to the County’s Se conda ry Syste m Construc tion Funds to be  use d for the  Broomle y Roa d Proje ct as provide d by Virginia  Code  § 33.1­23.1:1(C); a nd               BE IT FU RTHER  R ESOLV ED  tha t the  Board a cknowle dge s that, a s provide d by Virginia Code  § 33.1­23.1:1(C), for ea c h $250,000 or portion thereof added to the  County’s Se c onda ry Syste m Construc tion Funds, the  a mount of the  County’s nonsurfa c e tre ate d roa ds use d to distribute  Unpa ve d Se c ondary Roa d Funds in subsequent ye ars shall be  reduce d by one  mile  or proportiona l part of one mile; and                BE IT FU RTHER  R ESOLV ED  tha t the  County Exec utive  is a uthoriz ed to sign the VDOT Construc tion Progra m tha t is a me nde d c onsiste nt w ith this resolution.   G o to next a tta c hment Re turn to exe c summa ry § 33.1­23.1:1. U npaved s econdary road fund created; allocations. A. Before funds are alloc ated for distribution for highway construction pursuant to § 33.1­23.1 B 1, B 2, and B 3, a fund shall be established for the paving of nonsurface treated secondary roads whic h c arry fifty vehic les or more per day. Suc h fund shall contain 5.67 percent of the total funds available for highway construction under § 33.1­23.1 B 1, B 2, and B 3. B. Suc h funds shall be dis tributed to counties in the sec ondary system based on the ratio of nonsurfac e treated roads in each county c arrying fifty vehicles or more per day to the total number of suc h nonsurface treated roads in the Commonw ealth. C. The governing body  of any county  may have funds allocated to the county under this  section added to the county's  secondary sys tem construction funds allocated pursuant to § 33.1­23.4. For each $250,000 or portion thereof added to secondary construction funds under this provision, the amount of the county's nonsurface treated roads used to distribute funds under this  section in s ubs equent years s hall be reduc ed by one mile or proportional part of one mile. (1979, c. 84; 1985, c. 42.)   Ret urn t o ex ec  summary Augus t 27, 2009   Hillary  Cook DVM 3276 Fox Mtn R oad Crozet VA 22932   RE:       SP2008­00009 A nimal Wellness C enter – H illary C ook             Tax Map 056A 2, Section 01, Parcel 7   Dear Ms. Cook:   The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on August 18, 2009, by a v ote of 7:0 rec ommended approval of the above­noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.   Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:   1. Dev elopment of the use shall be in accord with the concept plan, entitled “Animal W ellness” prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC and last revised July 14, 2009, as determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator.  To be in c onformity with the plan, development shall reflect the following elements only and all other elements of the plan may be modified during site plan review and approv al: entrance relocation, general location of parking areas , and outside area for walking animals. Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to ensure c ompliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. This spec ial use permit applies to the exis ting building and any new buildings for the veterinary use will require a new s pec ial use permit. 3. No overnight boarding us e, other than for those animals under medical care shall take place at the veterinary hos pital. 4. The building shall be sound­proofed in accordance with Section 5.1.11(b) and air­conditioned. 5. No outdoor exercis e area shall be permitted. How ever, walking of animals is permitted and shall be separated from access by the public and limited to the area behind the building as identified in Attachment D. 6. Use shall not commence until the building is served by public  sewer.   Request for modification of Section 5.1.11.b­Approval •          By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commis sion approved the modification of the minimum 200 foot setback requirements with the condition that additional soundproofing around the existing window s be provided or for new windows they  provide for adequate sound dampening. (Condition #4 above)   Waiver to allow alternative location of parking area­Approval •         By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commission approved the w aiver to allow alternative location of parking area, provided that the parking is screened in acc ordance with the DC D requirements and rec ommendations of the ARB.   Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receiv e public comment at their meeting on September 9, 2009.   View PC s taf f report and attac hments View PC minutes Ret urn t o regular agenda   If you should have any  questions or c omments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me at (434) 296­5832.   Sincerely,       Rebecca Ragsdale Senior Planner Planning D ivision   COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY     Project Nam e:  SP 2008­009 Animal Wellness   Staff: Rebec ca Ragsdale   Planning Commission Public Hearing:  August 18, 2009   Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: Not yet scheduled   Owners:  1100 Crozet Avenue, LLC (Gwendolyn/Henry  Smith)Applicant:  Animal Wellness  Acreage:  3.45 acres Special Use Permit: Veterinary  Hos pital TMP: 56A2­1­07, Location: 1100 Crozet Avenue Existing Zoning and By­ri ght use:   Downtown Crozet District (DCD)  Magisterial District: White Hall Conditions: Yes  Proposal:  Reuse of an exis ting building for a v eterinary  clinic Requested # of Dwelling Units:  NA                            DA: Community of Croz et   Com prehensive Plan Desi gnation: CT 5 Urban Center & CT 1 Preservation Character of Property: Previously  residential, now vacant/s torage use Use of Surrounding Properties: office, res idential, and undev eloped Factors Favorable:   1.      The Land Use Plan is supportiv e of the vet use. 2.      The vet  will be a new bus iness located in Downtown Crozet adaptively reusing a currently  vacant building. 3.      There will be no detrimental impac ts on s urrounding properties. Factors Unfavorable:   There are no unfavorable factors .   RECOMMENDATION: Staff  recommends  approv al with c onditions of the s pecial use permit request. Modifications  t o regulations to minimum setback s for veterinary clinics  of Sec tion 5.1.11 and waiver of park ing location requirements of t he Downtown Croz et Distric t are als o reques ted and rec ommended for approval.                 STAFF PERSON:                                                                                      Rebecca Ragsdale             PLANNING COMMISSION DATE:                                                               August 18, 2009             BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE:                                                             Not yet scheduled           SP 2008­009 Animal Wellness   PETITION: PROJECT:  SP 2008­009 Animal Wellness Center PROPOSED: Veterinary Clinic for small animals ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: DCD Downtown Crozet District­variety of commercial uses including office, retail, service, and civic uses; residential uses if mixed use (up to 36 units/acre); light industrial uses by special use permit. SECTION: 20B.2.E.17 Veterinary offices and animal hospitals. Veterinary office and hospital;  5.1.11 Commercial Kennel, Veterinary Service, Office Or Hospital, Animal Hospital, Animal Shelter COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Community of Crozet, CT5 Neighborhood Center in the Crozet Master Plan which allows for a mix of uses and residential types at net densities of up to 12 units per acre; up to 18 units per acre if in a mixed use setting and CT 1 Development Area Preserve. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: 1100 Crozet Avenue/Route 240, approx. 400 feet south of the intersection of Jarmans Gap Road and Crozet Avenue TAX MAP/PARCEL: 056A2­01­00­00700 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:  White Hall     CHARACTER OF THE AREA The veterinary hospital is proposed within an exis ting one­story building, previously us ed as apartments , t hat dates t o 1950. The parcel is about 3.4 acres, is zoned Downtown Crozet District (DCD) and is  designated CT 5 and CT 1 in the Crozet Master Plan on the edge of Downtown. The building is set  back  from Crozet Av enue with driveway, parking, and trees in front. The bac k half of the property  is  mostly undevelopable. Powell’s  Creek forms the wes tern boundary of the property with stream buffers and there is als o a drainage way  that runs behind the existing building, which is included in the County’s  s tormwater project for Downtown. The adjoining property  to the north is also zoned DCD and hous e on that property is used for as off ices. The properties  adjoining to the s outh, east and west are z oned R2 Residential. The property to the s outh will be purchas ed and used for the County ’s stormwater project. Properties  to the eas t and wes t are us ed for residences . (Attachments  A­Aerial, Attachment B­Zoning, Attachment C­Crozet Master Plan)   SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL The applicant is propos ing a v eterinary  clinic within the exis ting 24’x100’ struc ture.  The applicant has indic ated that  there will be minimal outdoor activity , with occ asional dog walking but no other outdoor ac tivities or kennels. There will be no boarding services provided, except for thos e animals  at the vet for treatment. The expected number of employees will be 6­8, and there may be additional interns or summer employees. A proposed floor plan is provided as Attachment D. With reuse of the property, VDOT requires a relocated entrance and parking is  needed which necessitates a s ite plan. The applic ant is  als o reques ting a modification from the DCD requirements for the location of park ing, s ince it will not be relegated. Since this is reus e of an exiting building with limited sit e improv ements, the special use permit review is limited to impac ts of the v eterinary clinics land use, whic h is only permitted by special us e permit in the DCD district (Conc ept Plan is  provided as  Attac hment E)         PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY The property  was  zoned R2 Residential prior to 1980 when it was z oned C­1 Commerc ial. The property was  rezoned to Downtown Crozet Dis tric t (DCD) by the County on J une 11, 2008. The property  could develop by­right with a range of commerc ial uses or mix ed us e under the DCD district.          CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN   Croz et Master Plan Staff believes that this propos al is in keeping with the mas ter plan goals f or Downtown. The property is des ignated CT 5 Urban Center and CT1 Dev elopment Area Pres erv e. The range of land uses  recommended for CT 5 is open, including retail, s erv ices, office, and res idential us es, s o veterinary clinic s would be a commercial us e c ons istent with that land use designation.  The Mas ter Plan also rec ommends Development Area Preserve CT1 (natural area greenway ) on the parcel. (see inset s below) The CT1 (green) area running through the middle of the property is intended to represent preservat ion of the drainage c hannel that runs behind the building propos ed for redevelopment. The Green Infrastructure Plan als o sugges ts a future greenway  connection (white line on Green Infrastruc ture map below) running along the rear property  line. The County  has not begun discussions  with the applicant regarding the future greenway as  efforts have been f oc used on work ing with the applicant to ac complish the County Stormwater project, whic h would impact portions of the front of this property , as well as along the drainage channel behind the building, with needed easements .                                Crozet Mas ter Plan Place­Type & Built Infras tructure Map                   Green I nfras tructure Map       Neighborhood Model­ A full analysis  of the Neighborhood Model has not been done bec aus e of t he low level of c hange proposed for the sit e. The relevant principles are redevelopment, relegated park ing and pedestrian orientation. The special us e permit request is for a veterinary use within an exis ting building and site development c hanges to acc ommodate reuse of the building include relocation of the ent rance drive, park ing, and landsc aping. The existing building pre­dates z oning and the neighborhood model. Until or unless  a new building is construc ted which would be closer to Crozet Av enue and given the env ironmental features on the site, it is not possible to relegate parking. This  is  dis cus sed further under the DCD waiv er request for park ing location below. The Downtown Crozet District also requires  a sidewalk  and street  tres s, whic h would provide for pedes trian orientation/neighborhood friendly s treets  and paths. Staff notes that this propos al will provide redevelopment in Downtown Crozet.      STAFF COMMENT Staff will address  each provis ion of Sec tion 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance as  follows :   31.2.4.1: Special Use Perm its provided for in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property,   There is  no expected detriment  to adjoining properties. The supplemental regulations in Section 5.1.11 of t he Zoning Ordinance dis cus sed below address potential impact s unique to a veterinary use, such as  noise affec ting nearby res idential properties or compatibility  with other adjac ent c ommercial uses .   that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and This proposal is for reuse of an existing struc ture and a relocat ion of a new driveway to meet VDOT s tandards . The property is loc ated along an Entranc e Corridor (Route 240/Croz et Avenue) and within the potential Crozet His toric Dis trict. Adv isory staff comments  have been provided regarding the proposal from ARB staff. This property forms  a portion of the southern boundary of the potential Crozet Hist oric Dis tric t. As suc h it forms the entranc e to the his toric district  from the south on Crozet Av enue. The distric t has been determined eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Plac es, and this  property is  cons idered a contributing resource to that dis trict. The one­s tory masonry struc ture was constructed as  an apartment building c a. 1950. The property  currently retains a residential charac ter. Retaining the exis ting drive would hav e less  impac t on the site in general and on the wooded area in partic ular and was recommended ins tead of creating a new drive to reduce impac ts to the Entranc e Corridor and the his toric district. However, the relocated driveway  is needed to meet sight distanc e and provide for a safe entrance /ex it to the property. To mitigate impac ts to the Entranc e Corridor from the new driv e, new planting will be required along the frontage and in the disturbed areas. Entrance Corridor guidelines and recommendations  from the Crozet Historic Resources study will be c ons idered during the rev iew of the planting proposal, at the time a s ite plan is  submitted. The planting will be ex pec ted to maintain the residential character of the site and to sc reen the view of the parking from the road.     that such use will be in harm ony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, The DCD Zoning District was  established to facilitate traditional downtown development, as des cribed for t he CT6 Urban Core and CT5 Urban Center transec ts in t he Crozet mas ter plan. To thes e ends, the DCD provides for flexibility and v ariety of development for retail, servic e, and civ ic uses  with light industrial and residential uses as sec ondary uses . The regulations  for the DCD are intended to promote a development form and charac ter that is different from typic al s uburban dev elopment allowed by  conv entional z oning, and are also intended to: (i) promote the economic and social vitality  and divers ity of downtown Crozet; (ii) implement the Crozet master plan for the downtown area of Crozet so that it may s erv e as the commercial hub of Croz et and its environs; (iii) provide a greater mix of uses in downtown Crozet, including inc reased employment; (iv) facilitate infill and redevelopment; (v) increas e the utility of the land; (vi) retain the uniquely  div ers e charac ter of Crozet; and (v ii) promote a pedestrian­friendly env ironment.   The proposed vet at this  loc ation is c ons istent with this district  in that it provides for reuse of the site in a manner that adds  to the mix  of uses in Downtown and a contributing s tructure to the potential historic  dis tric t is  being adaptively reused.     with uses permitted by­right in the district, Veterinary  uses  are by special us e permit so that any c onflicts  with other uses in the district can be considered. Supplemental regulations ens ure that noise and other potential impacts are addressed s o there is on conflict with other by­right uses. The v eterinary clinic will us e the ent ire building on the property  so there would be no conflicts  with other by­right uses  on the site.         with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance,   Sec tion 5.1.11 is applicable to t he proposed v et use and eac h regulation is addres sed below.   a. Except where animals are confined in soundproofed, air­conditioned buildings, no structure or area occupied by animals shall be closer than five hundred (500) feet to any agricultural or residential lot line. For non­soundproofed animal confinements, an external solid fence not less than six (6) feet in height shall be located within fifty (50) feet of the animal confinement and shall be composed of concrete block, brick, or other material approved by the zoning administrator; (Amended 11­15­89)   Animals  will be confined to the building while rec eiving treatment at the veterinary clinic.   b. For soundproofed confinements, no such structure shall be located closer than two hundred (200) feet to any agricultural or residential lot line. For soundproofed confinements, noise measured at the nearest agricultural or residential property line shall not exceed fifty­five (55) decibels; (Amended 11­15­89; 6­14­00)   A request from the applicant has been made to modify this requirement.   The building in which the veterinary use would be located is less than 200 feet from t he adjoining R1 Residential lot line to the south and is approximately 50’ from that property  line. The Count y is under negotiations to purchase that property  for the Crozet Stormwater Project and it is not antic ipated to develop with residential uses . The applic ant has also submitted an engineer’s  report confirming that the building is soundproofed, but that if the room with a window is us ed for treatment, additional s oundproofing may  be needed as a precaution. Staff recommends approv al of this  modification, provided that additional s oundproofing around the ex isting windows is provided, or for new window, adequate s ound dampening is provided. The applicant has indicated they  intend to replace all windows, which would prov ide additional sound dampening.   c. In all cases, animals shall be confined in an enclosed building from 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. (Amended 11­15­89; 6­14­00)   The applicant has  indicated that this requirement will be met based on propos ed bus iness hours , by appointment, between 7:30a.m. and 6:00p.m. There would be no out door activity outs ide these hours.   d. In areas where such uses may be in proximity to other uses involving intensive activity such as shopping centers or other urban density locations, special attention is required to protect the public health and welfare. To these ends the commission and board may require among other things: (Amended 11­15­89)   ­Separate building entrance and exit to avoid animal conflicts; (Added 11­15­89) ­Area for outside exercise to be exclusive from access by the public by fencing or other means. (Added 11­15­89)   As mentioned abov e, the v et will be the sole occupant of the building on t he property  s o there is not need to impose any additional requirements for a separate building entrance. The applicant has explained that there is  not a need for the proposed v et bus iness to hav e a defined fenced­in area as the only outdoor activity  will be occ asional walk ing of dogs. Nevertheles s, staff feels that t he area of outdoor activity should be s pec ified with the special us e permit and has  recommended a condition of approval that separates this activity from public access .   and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The public health, safety, and general welfare of the community are protected through the s pec ial use permit proces s which as sures that the proposed uses are appropriate in the loc ation reques ted. Albemarle County Service Aut hority  (ACSA) and the Riv anna Water and Sewer Authority (RWSA) have provided comments . (Attachment G and H) The s ite is currently  served by public water but is not connected to sewer. The applicant intends to c onnect to s ewer as part of this project  and will connect to the ACSA line although there is also a RWSA s ewer line near the site.     Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) requires that the entrance to the site be reloc ated to the south to prov ide adequate s ite dis tance and that it be upgraded to VDOT standards for a commercial ent rance. (Attachment I)The reloc ated entrance is provided on the applic ant’s Conc ept Plan.   DCD Requirem ents­ Waiver to allow alternative location of parking area   The DCD requires  relegated parking and f or that parking as an acc ess ory  use, that it be no clos er to the right­of­way than any ex isting or proposed primary  s tructure on a lot. Parking areas are required to be located to the rear/and or side of primary  structures  as  v iewed from the right­of­way. The ordinance makes no exc eption for exis ting parking areas but prov ides for a Planning Commission waiver to allow an alternate parking loc ation. The waiv er sec tion and staff analys is are provided below.   Waiver to allow alternative location of parking area. The parking area s etback requirements  in subsection 20B.3(A) may be waiv ed as follows :   1. Consideration by commission. The commiss ion may waive the parking area setback  requirements in subsec tion 20B.3(A) and allow a park ing area to be located between a street  and a primary s tructure, s ubject to reasonable conditions  that it may impose, upon a finding that:   a. There are unus ual physic al conditions on the lot or an adjoining lot including, but not limited to, the location of existing s tructures and parking areas, steep topography  or other environmental features, narrownes s or shallowness  or the size or shape of the lot that make it impossible or unfeasible to provide parking to the side or rear of a primary structure;   The waiver is  requested and s upported by  staff based on this  criteria of the ordinanc e. The applicant wishes to reuse an ex isting s tructure, which is permitted in the DCD dis trict. However, due to the location of the existing s tructure and drainage c hannels on t he site, and narrowness  of the lot,  it is not possible to locate parking s o that it is no closer to the street than the exis ting structure.   b. The potential safety of pat rons and employees cannot be achieved with adequate lighting and other reasonable des ign solutions; or                 There are no safety c onc erns and this is not an iss ue for c ons ideration of the waiver.                 c . The stric t applic ation of the applic able regulations  in subsection 20B.3(A) would not further the purposes of this  c hapter or otherwise s erv e the public health, s afety, or welfare or achieve the goals establis hed in the c omprehensive plan   The strict application of the parking s etback s can only be achieved if the site is  completely redeveloped. There are no conflicts  public  safety issues  or conflicts  with the goals of the comprehensive plan with permitting this  waiv er. The projec t would meet the following goals for Downtown from the mas ter plan and also stated in the intent of the DCD district: o        Implement the Crozet mas ter plan for the downtown area of Crozet s o that it may serve as  the commercial hub of Croz et and its environs; o        Prov ide a greater mix  of us es in downtown Crozet, inc luding increas ed employment; o        Facilitate infill and redevelopment   Staff rec ommends approv al of the waiv er, prov ided that the park ing is screened in acc ordance with the DCD requirement s and recommendations of the ARB.                   SUMMARY Staff has  identified the following fac tors fav orable to this application: 1.      The Land Us e Plan is s upportive of  the vet us e. 2.      The vet will be a new busines s located in Downtown Crozet adaptively reusing a currently  v acant building. 3.      There will be no detrimental impac ts on surrounding properties.   Staff has  identified not identified unfavorable f ac tors to t his  application.     RECOMMENDED ACTION:    SP 2009­008 Based on the findings contained in this s taff report, s taff rec ommends approval of Special Us e Permit 2008­009 with the following conditions :  1. Development of the us e s hall be in acc ord with the concept plan, entitled “Animal Wellness” prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC and last revis ed July 14, 2009, as  determined by the Direc tor of Planning and the Zoning Administrator.  To be in conformity with the plan, development shall reflect the following elements only and all other elements  of the plan may be modified during site plan review and approval: entrance relocation, general location of parking areas, and outside area for walking animals. Minor modific ations to the plan whic h do not conflic t wit h the elements abov e may be made to ens ure c ompliance with the Zoning Ordinanc e. 2. This  spec ial use permit applies to the existing building and any  new buildings for the veterinary use will require a new special us e permit. 3. No ov ernight boarding use, other than for those animals under medical c are shall t ak e place at the veterinary hospital. 4. The building s hall be sound­proofed and air­conditioned. 5. No outdoor ex erc ise area shall be permitted. Howev er, walk ing of animals is permitted and s hall be separated from ac ces s by the public  and limited to the area behind the building as  identified in Attachment D. 6. Us e s hall not c ommenc e until the building is s erv ed by  public  sewer. Waiver and Modification Requests   Request for modification of Secti on 5.1.11.b Staff rec ommends the modification of minimum 200 foot setbac k requirements be approv ed. Staff recommends approv al of this  modification, provided that additional s oundproofing around the existing windows be provided or for new windows they prov ide for adequate sound dampening. (Condition #4 above)   Waiver to allow alternative location of parking area Staff rec ommends approv al of the waiv er, prov ided that the park ing is screened in acc ordance with the DCD requirement s and recommendations of the ARB.   ATTACHMENTS A.      Location Map­Aerial B.     Loc ation Map­Zoning C.     Loc ation Map­Crozet Master Plan D.     Conc ept Plan E.     Floor Plan of proposed v eterinary hospital F.      Engineers Report certifying soundproof building G.    Albemarle County Serv ice Authority  comments , e­mail dated October 24, 2008 from Gary  Whelan and memo dated March 12, 2008 from Gary Whelan H.     Rivanna Water and Sewer Authorit y comments, e­mail dated J uly 14, 2009 from J ustin Weiler, E.I.T. I.        VDOT c omments, e­mail correspondenc e last dated November 14, 2008 from Joel DeNunzio, P.E., Staff Engineer        Return to PC actions  letter Albemarle County Planning Commission August 18, 2009   The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing and meeting on Tuesday, August 18, 2009, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.   Members attending were Don Franco, Linda Porterfield Marcia Joseph, Calvin Morris, Bill Edgerton, Thomas Loach, Vice Chair and Eric Strucko, Chairman. Julia Monteith, AICP, non­ voting representative for the University of Virginia was present.    Other officials present were Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner; David Benish, Chief of Planning; Eryn Brennan, Senior Planner; Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning; Elizabeth Moratta, Senior Planner; Glenn Brooks, County Engineer; Ron Higgins, Chief of Zoning; Scott Clark, Senior Planner; Bill Fritz, Director of Current Development and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney.    Call to Order and Establish Quorum:   Mr. Strucko called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum.   SP­2008­00009 Animal Wellness Center PROPOSED: Veterinary Clinic for small animals. ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: DCD Downtown Crozet District­variety of commercial uses including office, retail, service, and civic uses; residential uses if mixed use (up to 36 units/acre); light industrial uses by special use permit. SECTION: 20B.2.E.17 Veterinary offices and animal hospitals. Veterinary office and hospital;  5.1.11 Commercial Kennel, Veterinary Service, Office Or Hospital, Animal. Hospital, Animal Shelter. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Community of Crozet, CT5 Neighborhood Center in the Crozet Master Plan which allows for a mix of uses and residential types at net densities of up to 12 units per acre; up to 18 units per acre if in a mixed use setting and CT 1 Development Area Preserve. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes. LOCATION: 1100 Crozet Avenue/Route 240, approx. 400 feet south of the intersection of Jarmans Gap Road and Crozet Avenue. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 056A2­01­00­00700. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:  White Hall                  (Rebecca Ragsdale)   Ms. Ragsdale presented a PowerPoint presentation and summarized the staff report.    This is a request in Downtown Crozet for a veterinary clinic on a site that was rezoned to Downtown Crozet District.  There is some existing vegetation along Route 240.  The existing building proposed to be used for the reuse of the vet is setback from the road.  There is an existing driveway.    Staff found that this use was consistent with the CT­5 Urban Center Designation in Downtown.  Powell Creek and storm water easements are located to the rear of the property.   The entrance will be relocated to meet safety and sight distance requirements for VDOT.  There will be some parking for the vet use, which is required to be relegated.  There are provision the Commission to waive or modify that requirement.  In this case because of the existing building and features on the site staff supports that modification.   There is another modification that goes along with this special use permit under Section 5.0 Supplemental Regulations for Veterinary Uses in the Zoning Ordinance.  Because of the proximity of the existing building to the residential zoned property line there is a modification to the setback requirement that is requested.  The applicant provided a sound test that demonstrates that the sound proofing requirements in the ordinance can be met.  Staff supports that request.   This property is located in the Entrance Corridor.  The Design Planner has reviewed it for impacts to the Entrance Corridor.  This property is also located in the potential Crozet Historic District.  Based on that perspective it was preferable not to provide the new entrance and disturb it, but that was necessary for VDOT approval and access to the site.  So there are recommendations for mitigating those impacts with a landscaping plan.  The applicant will have to meet the site plan requirements and landscaping requirements of the Architectural Review Board.    In summary, staff found that this was consistent with the Crozet Master Plan and Land Use Plan and was a business that would be a new business in Downtown Crozet supporting the goal for Downtown as the commercial center in Crozet.  There would be no detrimental impacts to adjoining property owners.    Staff did not find any unfavorable factors and recommended approval of the special use permit SP­2008­00009 Animal Wellness Center with the conditions outlined in the staff report along with the approval of the two modifications with regard to Section 5.0 and allowing the alternative parking location provided that landscaping screening requirements are met.    Mr. Strucko invited questions for staff.  He asked if staff received comments from the adjacent property owners.   Ms. Ragsdale replied that she had not.   Mr. Cilimberg noted that the adjacent owner letter was sent to all adjoining property owners.    Mr. Loach asked if the easements been worked out for the storm water project. He noted that the staff report said that the county has not begun discussions with the applicant regarding the future greenways as an emphasis and focus on working with the county storm water project.   He asked what the status of the easements is.   Ms. Ragsdale replied that the county does not have signed easements regarding the storm water project.  But the project managers have been in discussion and going over the design of the project so that it met the property owners concerns.  Those easements would be for the drainage channel that runs along the northern property line and then the drainage channel in back for channel improvements to the adjoining what will hopefully be the county owned property for the storm water project.  So the easements were not in place yet.   Ms. Joseph noted that she had a question about the entrance.  The concern was that they have an historic district and it would be better to keep the entrance where it was. If this was not a special use permit and someone came in and wanted to use this property under the existing zoning category would they require them to move that entrance?   Mr. Cilimberg replied that if a site plan was involved yes.   Ms. Joseph said if they were able to meet the parking requirements, etc. would they need a site plan.  If someone has been using the property as a commercial use and someone else came in to use it as another commercial use that did not require a site plan they would not need a site plan. She was amazed that they needed sight distance because this is an urban area.  She was trying to figure out what is the speed limit out there that they need to move this entrance to get the sight distance.   Mr. Cilimberg noted that there are certain elements of site development that kick the requirement for a site plan in. The establishment of parking is one of those. Once a site plan would be required then they are dealing with construction that is not permitted by for adequate sight distance and such for entrances.    Ms. Joseph said that they are not dealing with a recommendation, but a requirement from VDOT.   Ms. Ragsdale replied yes.  VDOT reviewed the concept plan and provided those comments, which would be their requirements as part of the special use permit review.  The property was previously used for residential as apartment buildings.  Although the property has been zoned commercially, C­1, for some time she did not know that there has use of that building commercially to date.  It may not have come up before.   Mr. Strucko opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission.   Dr. Hillary Cook, representative for the request, offered to answer any questions.   Mr. Loach noted that the operating hours was listed as 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.  He questioned if they would want any emergency hours.   Dr. Cook replied no, that there were veterinary emergency clinics in town.  She would probably carry a pager for her clients.   Mr. Strucko invited public comment.   Joan Meyer, a Crozet resident, supported the practice being moved to Crozet.  She has kept animals as part of her family for about 25 years.  She is the first vet who has ever heard her concerns about how her animals are taken care of. Rather than just throwing drugs at a condition she has successfully determined what the root cause of a problem may be.  She noted that after eight months of pain and infection she has a dog that is happy and healthy. She will look forward to visiting the veterinary clinic with the rest of her family in Crozet if this request is approved.   Anne Dagner, resident of 1122 Crozet Avenue which three doors down from the proposed site, spoke in support of the proposal. She agreed with staff’s recommendation that the veterinary use is a business that fits with the Crozet Downtown District Development Plan.  As a side she and her husband were both veterinarians and would be happy to have a veterinary office down the road and don’t see any problems with that at all.    There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and the matter before the Planning Commission.   Motion on Special Use Permit:   Motion:  Mr. Loach moved and Mr. Morris seconded for approval of SP­2008­00009, Animal Wellness Center with staff’s recommended conditions.    1. Development of the use shall be in accord with the concept plan, entitled “Animal Wellness” prepared by TCS Engineering Co., LLC and last revised July 14, 2009, as determined by the Director of Planning and the Zoning Administrator.  To be in conformity with the plan, development shall reflect the following elements only and all other elements of the plan may be modified during site plan review and approval: entrance relocation, general location of parking areas, and outside area for walking animals. Minor modifications to the plan which do not conflict with the elements above may be made to ensure compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 2. This special use permit applies to the existing building and any new buildings for the veterinary use will require a new special use permit. 3. No overnight boarding use, other than for those animals under medical care shall take place at the veterinary hospital. 4. The building shall be sound­proofed in accordance with Section 5.1.11(b) and air­ conditioned. 5. No outdoor exercise area shall be permitted. However, walking of animals is permitted and shall be separated from access by the public and limited to the area behind the building as identified in Attachment D. 6. Use shall not commence until the building is served by public sewer.   The motion carried by a vote of 7:0.   Mr. Loach pointed out that this is another success story of the Crozet Master Plan.       Mr. Strucko noted that SP­2008­00009 would go before the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for approval on a date to be determined.   Motion on Two Modifications:   Motion:  Mr. Loach moved and Mr. Morris seconded for approval of the two recommended modifications of Section 5.1.11.b and the critical slopes waiver as recommended by staff.   The motion carried by a vote of 7:0.   Mr. Strucko noted that the modifications were approved as noted below and did not go to the Board of Supervisors.    Request for modification of Section 5.1.11.b ­ Approval •         By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commission approved the modification of the minimum 200 foot setback requirements with the condition that additional soundproofing around the existing windows be provided or for new windows they provide for adequate sound dampening. (Condition #4 above)   Waiver to allow alternative location of parking area ­ Approval •         By a vote of 7:0, the Planning Commission approved the waiver to allow alternative location of parking area, provided that the parking is screened in accordance with the DCD requirements and recommendations of the ARB.   Return to PC actions letter  COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY     AGEN D A  TITLE: STA 2008 ­01 Private Streets and Single Point of Access   SU B JECT/PR OPOSAL/R EQUEST: Public hearing on an ordinance to amend C ounty Code Chapter 14, Subdivision of Land, to 1) limit the number of entrances  existing parcels may  have onto public streets and to establis h standards and procedures for waivers therefrom and 2) modify the street standards for private streets .   STAFF CONTACT(S): Mess rs. Tucker, Foley, D avis, Kamptner, Graham, and Fritz; and Ms. McCulley   LEGAL R EVIEW :   Yes   A GENDA DATE: October 14, 2009   A C TION:     X          INFORMATION:      C ON SENT A GENDA:   ACTION :              IN FORMATION:        A TTACHMENTS:   Yes     R EVIEW ED B Y:     B A C K GR OU N D : On November 12, 2008, the Board held a public hearing on this proposed subdivision ordinance text amendment, which w ould amend County C ode § 14­404 to reduce the number of entranc es allowed onto public roads, amend County C ode § 14­412 to change the road standards for private roads serving 2­lot and 3 to 5­lot subdivisions, and amend the applicable requirements for R ural Subdivisions by making the requirements of Section 14­404 applicable to them.  At the close of the public hearing, the Board directed staff to work with the community to identify c oncerns and alternativ es.  On February 26, 2009, staff conducted a R oundtable discussion.  On June 3, 2009 the Board held a w orksession to discus s the options identified at the Roundtable.  The Board directed staff to prepare an ordinance that w ould apply only to certain streets and to dev elop administrative waiver criteria.  The Board also directed staff to amend the private street standards so that they were consistent with the driveway s tandards found in the Zoning Ordinance.    STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 1:  Enhance Quality of Life for all Citizens Goal 4: Effectively Manage Growth & Development  Adoption of regulations designed to improv e emergency acces s (street standard) and minimizes  entranc es (single point of access) can promote these goals.    D ISC U SSION: The proposed ordinance would amend the Subdivision Ordinance to reflect the June 3, 2009 directions  from the Board.  Some of the key components of the proposed ordinance are outlined below.    Single Point of A ccess Apply ing single point of acc ess requirements only to c ertain roads The proposed ordinance would require single points of acces s on Major Rural Streets if the frontage of any proposed lot is less than 500 feet.  Major Rural Streets inc lude those roads with more than 1,400 vehicle trips per day (v tpd) with two exceptions.  Generally, s treets of over 1,400 v tpd are considered collector streets  intended for mobility.  Streets of less than 1,400 v tpd are considered local streets intended for accessibility.  Greater regulation of entrances on the higher volume roadw ays serv es to protect the traveling public and preserv e the primary purpose of those streets which is mobility.  Some streets with less than 1,400 vtpd hav e been identified as Major Rural Streets.  These include Iris h R oad (Route 6) and Old Ballard Road.  Iris h Road was added bec ause it is a Primary Road with approximately  1,200 vtpd.  Old Ballard Road (R oute 677) was added at the request of the Board to reflect the volume of traffic on the road combined w ith the level of dev elopment on the road and the geometrics of the road.  H owever, the number of entranc es on streets with low er traffic volumes will not be restric ted by the proposed ordinance and will continue to be able to have more points  of acc ess than those s ubdivisions on major rural streets.    The proposed ordinance als o would reloc ate from subsection 14­404(B) to s ubsection 14­404(A) the current acces s The proposed ordinance als o would reloc ate from subsection 14­404(B) to s ubsection 14­404(A) the current acces s requirements applicable to a subdivision lot that is later subdiv ided itself.  This requirement is amended to clarify that the acc ess requirements apply to any lot, rather than just the residue, of the original subdivision. W aivers A clear desire was stated by the participants at the Roundtable discussion to inc lude administrative waiver provisions.  The proposed ordinance authorizes  administrative waivers for all w aivers pertaining to single points of access.  The factors  that w ould be considered to waive the single point of acces s requirement include: whether installing a s ingle point of access w ould substantially impact environmental res ources such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, and floodplain; w hether construc tion of a single point of acces s would substantially impact features existing on the property  prior to October 14, 2009; whether granting the w aiver would contribute to maintaining an agricultural or forestal use of the property; and whether granting the waiver would facilitate development of areas identified in the open space plan as  containing significant resources.    Private road standards The proposed ordinance would:                        Make priv ate roads serving 2­lot subdiv is ions subject to the same design standards as for a driveway as prov ided in Zoning Ordinance § 4.6.6.                      Apply the clearance and maximum grade requirements for a driveway  as provided in Zoning Ordinanc e § 4.6.6 to subdivisions of 3 to 5 lots.                      Specify that a road’s grade is measured over a distance of 50 feet.                      Establis h administrative waiver procedures and criteria for all road standard design requirements.   B U D GET IMPACT: Administration of the proposed ordinance w ill require additional staff time to evaluate entrance conditions, 2 lot private road standards, and proc ess waiver requests .  However, the increase is considered minimal and no additional funding or staffing will be needed.     R ECOMMEN D A TIONS: After conducting a public hearing, staff recommends adoption of the attached ordinance.     A TTACHMENTS A – Proposed Subdivision Ordinance B – Major R ural Street Map View PC minutes  of August  26 2008 and October 7, 2008 Ret urn to regular agenda  Draft: 09/21/09 1 ORDINANCE NO. 09-14( ) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 14, SUBDIVISION OF LAND, ARTICLE II, ADMINISTRATION AND PROCEDURE, AND ARTICLE IV, ON-SITE IMPROVEMENTS AND DESIGN, 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 14, Subdivision of Land, Article II, Administration and Procedure, and Article IV, On-Site Improvements and Design, are hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 14-207 Rural subdivisions Sec. 14-224.1 Waiver of certain requirements by the agent Sec. 14-225.1 Waiver of certain requirements by the commission Sec. 14-404 Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared driveway Sec. 14-412 Standards for private streets only Sec. 14-434 Completion of on-site improvements required prior to plat approval Chapter 14. Subdivision of Land Article II. Administration and Procedure Sec. 14-207 Rural subdivisions The following sections of this chapter shall apply to each rural subdivision: A. General: Sections 14-100 through 14-108. B. Administration and procedure: Sections 14-200 through 14-204 and sections 14-209, 14-226, 14-229 and 14-236. C. Plat requirements and documents to be submitted: Sections 14-300, 14-301, 14-302(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (9), (10), (11), (14) and (15), 14-302(B)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10), 14-303(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (H), (I), (L), (O) and (P), 14-304, 14-305(B), 14-308.1, 14-309, 14-310, 14-312, 14-314 and 14-316. D. On-site improvements and design: Sections 14-400, 14-403, 14-404 if any proposed lot would have less than five hundred (500) feet of frontage on a major rural street identified on the map adopted as Appendix A to this chapter, 14-406, 14-414, 14-416, 14-421, 14-426, 14-427, 14-433 and 14-438. (9-5-96, 7-9-86, 12-21-83, 2-4-81, 5-2-79, 11-13-74, 8-28-74; 1988 Code, § 18-13(b); Ord. 98-A(1), 7-15-98; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference--Va. Code § 15.2-2241(9). Sec. 14-224.1 Waiver of certain requirements by the agent The agent may waive requirements as provided in sections 14-313, 14-401, 14-404, 14-405, 14-407, 14- 409, 14-412, 14-419 and 14-420, as follows: A. A subdivider shall submit to the agent a written request stating the reason and justification for the request and all proposed alternatives. The subdivider shall have the burden of producing the evidence to enable the agent to make the findings required by this section. Draft: 09/21/09 2 B. The subdivider may appeal the disapproval of a waiver, or the approval of a waiver with conditions objectionable to the subdivider, to the commission as provided in section 14-226. In reviewing a waiver request, the commission may approve or disapprove the waiver based upon the applicable findings set forth in this section, amend any condition imposed by the agent, and impose any conditions it deems necessary. (Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) Sec. 14-225.1 Waiver of certain requirements by the commission The commission may waive requirements as provided in sections 14-234, 14-404, 14-409, 14-410, 14- 412, 14-414 and 14-422, as follows: A. A subdivider shall submit to the agent a written request stating the reason and justification for the request and all proposed alternatives. The subdivider shall have the burden of producing the evidence to enable the commission to make the findings required by this section. The agent shall review the request and transmit his recommendation of approval, approval with conditions, or disapproval to the commission. If the agent recommends approval or approval with conditions, the recommendation shall be accompanied by a statement by the agent as to the public purpose served by the recommendation, particularly in regard to the purpose and intent of this chapter, the zoning ordinance and the comprehensive plan. The director of planning and the county engineer shall provide recommendations to the commission as to whether and how the waiver would accomplish county goals, policies, good planning practice and good engineering practice. B. The subdivider may appeal the disapproval of a waiver, or the approval of a waiver with conditions objectionable to the subdivider, to the board of supervisors as an appeal of a disapproval of the plat as provided in section 14-226. In reviewing a waiver request, the board may approve or disapprove the waiver based upon the applicable findings set forth in this section, amend any condition imposed by the commission, and impose any conditions it deems necessary. (9-5-96, 8-28-74 (§ 10); 1988 Code, § 18-3; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98, § 14-237; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference--Va. Code § 15.2-2242(1). Article IV. On-Site Improvements and Design Sec. 14-404 Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared driveway. Each lot within a subdivision shall be located as follows: A. Single point of access required. Each lot, other than a corner lot within the development areas, shall have reasonable access to the building site from only one street, shared driveway or alley established at the same time as the subdivision;. B. provided that Conditions when single point of access not required. Notwithstanding subsection (A), a lot may be located so that its driveway enters only onto a public street abutting the subdivision if: (i) the commission grants agent approves a waiver under subsection (C); (ii) the subdivider obtains an entrance permit from the Virginia Department of Transportation for the access; (iii) the entrance complies with the design standards set forth in sections 14-410(F) and 14-410(G); and (iv) the subdivider demonstrates to the agent prior to approval of the final plat that the waiver does not violate any covenants to be recorded for the subdivision. For purposes of this section, the term “reasonable access” means a location for a driveway or, if a driveway location is not provided, a location for a suitable foot path from the parking spaces required by the zoning ordinance to the building site; the term “within the subdivision” means within the exterior boundary lines of the lands being divided. Draft: 09/21/09 3 B. If the subdivision is within the rural areas, all subsequent divisions of the residue shall enter only onto such street(s) shown on the approved final plat and shall have no immediate access onto to any public street. C. Standards for waiver. The requirements of this section subsection (A) may be waived by the commission agent as provided in section 14-225.1 14-224.1. In reviewing a waiver request, the commission shall determine whether: (i) the county engineer recommends an alternative standard; or (ii) because of unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interests of the subdivider, strict application of the applicable requirements would result in significant degradation of the property or to the land adjacent thereto. In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring the standard would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. In reviewing a waiver request, the commission may allow a substitute design of comparable quality, but differing from that required, if it finds that the subdivider would achieve results which substantially satisfy the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or exceeding the desired effects of the requirement. A request for a waiver may be made prior to or with submittal of a preliminary or final plat, as follows: 1. Information to be submitted. A request shall include a justification for the waiver and a conceptual plan. The conceptual plan shall: (i) be drawn at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property or an alternative scale approved by the agent; (ii) show the topography of the property at the best interval available from the County including delineation of proposed building sites; (iii) show the locations of streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, floodplains, and known wetlands; and (v) show the proposed layout of lots, location of existing features such as buildings, fences, drainfields, existing driveways or other access ways, or other significant features. 2. Consideration and findings. In reviewing a waiver request, the agent shall consider whether: (i) installing a single point of access would substantially impact environmental resources such as streams, stream buffers, critical slopes, and floodplain; (ii) construction of a single point of access would substantially impact features existing on the property prior to October 14, 2009; (iii) granting the waiver would contribute to maintaining an agricultural or forestal use of the property; and (iv) granting the waiver would facilitate development of areas identified in the open space plan as containing significant resources. In approving a waiver, the agent shall find that requiring the extension would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. D. Terms defined. For purposes of this section, the term “reasonable access” means a location for a driveway or, if a driveway location is not provided, a location for a suitable foot path from the parking spaces required by the zoning ordinance to the building site; the term “within the subdivision” means within the exterior boundary lines of the lands being divided. (§ 18-36 (part), 9-5-96, 8-28-74; § 18-39 (part), 9-5-96, 10-19-77, 5-10-77, 8-28-74; 1988 Code, §§ 18-36, 18- 39; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98, §§ 14-500(C), 14-505; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference--Va. Code § 15.2-2241(5). Sec. 14-412 Standards for private streets only. In addition to the minimum design requirements set forth in section 14-410, the following minimum design requirements shall apply to private streets authorized by this chapter: A. Residential private streets. Each private street serving detached residential uses authorized under sections 14-232 or 14-233 shall satisfy the following: Draft: 09/21/09 4 1. Streets serving two lots. Each private street serving two (2) lots shall satisfy the following: (i) easement or right-of-way widths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; (ii) the required materials and minimum depth of base shall satisfy the minimum requirements described in the design standards manual; and (iii) the surveyor shall include the following wording on the final plat: “The existing and/or proposed right-of- way is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelway passable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of the travelway, as required by section 14-412 of the Albemarle County Code.” : (i) shall not exceed a sixteen (16) percent grade calculated over a distance of fifty (50) feet; (ii) shall have a travelway that is at least ten (10) feet in width; and (iii) shall include a rectangular zone superjacent to the driveway that is clear of all obstructions, including any structures and vegetation, that is at least ten (10) feet in width and fourteen (14) feet in height. The subdivider shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the county engineer that the street will meet the requirements of this subsection. 2. Streets serving three to five lots. Each private street serving three (3) to five (5) lots shall satisfy the following: (i) vertical centerline curvature shall meet a minimum design K value of five (5) for crest curves and fifteen (15) for sag curves; (ii) sight distances shall not be less than one hundred (100) feet; (iii) turnarounds shall be provided at the end of each street per American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials guidelines; (iv) street easements or right-of-way widths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; and (v) the radius for horizontal curvature shall be forty (40) feet or greater, unless otherwise authorized by this chapter. Any standard in this paragraph (2) may be reduced to the standard for streets serving two (2) lots where a driveway departs from the street and two lots remain to be served, and a turnaround is provided. In addition, the following shall also apply: (a) Private streets in the rural areas. For such private streets in the rural areas: (i) travelway widths shall be fourteen (14) feet minimum, with three (3) feet minimum shoulder widths, and a minimum of four (4) feet from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline; (ii) the grade shall not exceed sixteen (16) percent calculated over a distance fifty (50) feet; (iii) if the grade of any portion of the street exceeds seven (7) percent in grade, the entire street shall be surfaced as required by Virginia Department of Transportation standards; streets of lesser having a grade of seven (7) percent or less may use have a gravel surface; and (iv) the street shall have a rectangular zone superjacent to the street that is clear of all obstructions, including any structures and vegetation, that is at least fourteen (14) feet in width and fourteen (14) feet in height. (b) Private streets in the development areas. For such private streets in the development areas: (i) an urban cross-section street design shall be provided, with a minimum width of twenty (20) feet measured from the curb faces or such alternative design, including a street easement or right-of-way width, deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare; additional widths shall be provided for gutters to control drainage at the discretion of the county engineer; and (ii) the entire street shall be surfaced as required by Virginia Department of Transportation standards. 3. Streets serving six lots or more. Each private street serving six (6) or more lots shall satisfy Virginia Department of Transportation standards, provided: (a) Private streets in the rural areas. For such private streets in the rural areas, the commission may approve Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain if the subdivider demonstrates, for a specific, identifiable reason, the general welfare, as opposed to the proprietary interests of the subdivider, would be better served by the application of those standards. (b) Private streets in the development areas. For such private streets in the development areas, the agent may approve Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain or an alternative standard deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare. Draft: 09/21/09 5 4. Streets serving family or two-lot subdivisions. Each private street authorized to serve a family subdivision under section 14-232(B)(1) or a two-lot subdivision under section 14-232(B)(2) shall satisfy the following: (i) easement or right-of-way widths shall be ten (10) feet minimum; and (ii) the surveyor shall include the following wording on the plat: “The existing and/or proposed right-of-way is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelway passable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of the travelway, as required by section 14-412 of the Albemarle County Code.” B. Private streets serving non-residential, non-agricultural, attached residential, multi-unit residential and combined residential and non-residential uses. Each private street authorized to serve non- residential, non-agricultural, attached residential, multi-unit residential and combined residential and non- residential uses under sections 14-232 or 14-233 shall satisfy Virginia Department of Transportation standards or an alternative standard deemed adequate by the agent, upon the recommendation of the county engineer, to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare. The agent may require minimum travelway widths to provide for on-street parking upon a determination that the provisions for off-street parking may be inadequate to reasonably preclude unauthorized on-street parking. C. Clearing land for improvements. A private street constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation standards shall not be subject to that department’s clear zone requirements. D. Landscaping and other improvements permitted. Subsequent to construction of a private street, a subdivider may install ornamental plantings and any other improvements provided that they do not conflict with sight distance, drainage facilities or other required improvements. E. Waiver. The requirements standards of sections 14-412(A)(1)(i) and 14-412(A)(2)(a) relating to street easement or right-of-way widths may be waived by the commission agent as provided in section 14-225.1 14-224.1, as follows: . 1. Waiver of section 14-412(A)(1)(i). The agent, with the recommendation of the county engineer and the fire marshal, may waive the standard in section 14-412(A)(1)(i) and authorize a street having a grade that exceeds sixteen (16) percent if the subdivider demonstrates to the satisfaction of the county engineer and the fire marshal that public safety vehicles would be able to access each lot even though the grade may exceed sixteen (16) percent. In developing their recommendation to the agent, the county engineer and the fire marshal shall consider: (i) the length of the segment of the street that would exceed sixteen (16) percent; and (ii) whether the segment that would exceed sixteen (16) percent would require the public safety vehicle to travel uphill towards each lot. In authorizing such a grade, the agent may impose reasonable conditions to assure that the public safety vehicles may access the lot including, but not limited to, a condition limiting the maximum length any segment of the driveway may exceed sixteen (16) percent. 2. Waiver of section 14-412(A)(2)(a). In reviewing a waiver request for a lesser street easement or right-of-way width under section 14-412(A)(2)(a), the commission agent shall consider whether: (i) the subdivision will be served by an existing easement or right-of-way of fixed width that cannot be widened by the subdivider after documented good faith effort to acquire additional width; and (ii) the existing easement or right-of-way width is adequate to accommodate the required travelway and its maintenance. If the waiver pertains to minimum street easement or right-of-way widths over an existing bridge, dam or other structure, the commission agent shall consider whether: (i) the long-term environmental impacts resulting from not widening the bridge, dam or other structure outweigh complying with the minimum width requirements, as determined by the county engineer; or (ii) whether the bridge, dam or other structure is a historical structure. In approving a waiver, the commission agent shall find that requiring the standard street easement or right-of-way widths would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto. Draft: 09/21/09 6 G. Eligibility for future acceptance into the system of state highways. Any and all streets that are not constructed to meet the standards necessary for inclusion in the system of state highways shall be privately maintained and shall not be eligible for acceptance into the system of state highways unless improved to current Virginia Department of Transportation standards with funds other than those appropriated by the General Assembly and allocated by the Commonwealth Transportation Board. (§ 18-36, 9-5-96, 8-28-74; § 18-37, 9-5-96, 11-21-79, 3-29-78, 8-28-74(part); 1988 Code, §§ 18-36, 18-37, 18- 38; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98, § 14-514; Ord. 02-14(1), 2-6-02; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference--Va. Code §§ 15.2-2242(3), 33.1-72.2. Sec. 14-434 Completion of on-site improvements required prior to plat approval. Except as provided in section 14-435, all on-site improvements required by this chapter, other than a private street authorized under section 14-232(B)(1), 14-232(B)(2), 14-233(A)(2) or 14-433(B)(2) serving less than three (3) lots, shall be completed prior to approval of the final plat. Prior to approval of the final plat: A. The subdivider shall submit to the agent a certificate of completion of all of the improvements prepared by a professional engineer or a land surveyor, to the limits of his license; and B. The subdivider shall certify to the agent that all of the construction costs for the improvements, including those for materials and labor, have been paid to the person constructing the improvements. 9-5-96, 12-15-82, 4-21-76, 2-19-76, 8-28-74 (§ 3); 1988 Code, § 18-18; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98, § 14-412; Ord. 05-14(1), 4-20-05, effective 6-20-05) State law reference--Va. Code § 15.2-2241(9). I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of _____ to _____, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on _________________________. __________________________________ Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Boyd ____ ____ Mr. Dorrier ____ ____ Ms. Mallek ____ ____ Mr. Rooker ____ ____ Mr. Slutzky ____ ____ Ms. Thomas ____ ____ STONY POINT RDSEMINOLE TRLBROWNS GAP TPKEBLENHEIM RDJ A MES RIVER RDFRE E UN I O N RD RICHMOND RD RED HILL RD SIMMONS GAP R D ROL L I N G RDGORDONSVILLE RDCCC RD OLD LYNCHBURG RDS E C R E T ARYS RD P O R T E R S R DRIDGE RDESM O N T R D DICKERSON RDGREEN CREEK RDP LAN K RD SKYLINE DRIRISH RD IVY RD SCOTTSVILLE RDLOUISA RDGARTH RD MONACAN TRAIL RD ROCKFI SH G A P T P K E W A T T S P A SSAG E PROFFIT RDVIA LN MARKWOOD R D THOMAS JEFFERSON PKWY CLARK R D JARMANS GAP R D JEFFERSON M ILL RDMILLINGTON RD TURKEY SA G R DR I O R D EAL B E R E N E R D O R T MAN R D CRAIGS STORE RDOLD GREEN MTN RDSU G A R H O L LOW R D £¤29 §¨¦64 £¤250 MARTIN KINGS R DTAYLORS GAP RDSECRETARYS SAND RDBURNLEY S T A TI O N RD LANGHORNE RDHOWARD SVI L LE TPKESTON Y P O I N T PAS SREAS F O R D R D MILTON RDADVANC E M I L LS RDCARTERS MOUNTAIN RDBREAK HEART RD F O X M O U N TAIN TRL FO X M OUNTAIN RD B U C K MOUNTAIN RDC L UB DR BUCK ISLAND RDMILLER S C H OOL RDPRESIDENTS RDCOVE G A R D E N RDED J ON E S R DD IC K W O O D S R D WOODLANDS RD C A T T E R TON R D OWENSVILLE RDCAMP B E L L R DBROAD AXE RDWHITE HALL RDWESLEY CHAPEL RDGILBERT STATION RD SHILOH M O UNTAIN TR L B U R C HS C R E E K RDCHESTNUT GROVE RD B L U F T O N R D APPLEBERRY MTN TRLGLENDOW E R R D BEAR CREEK RDOLD BALLAR D R DC HALK MTN TRLSPRING VALLEY RD BLACKWELLS HOLLO W R D S T J O H N RDM T AL T O R D K E SW ICK RDTURKS GAP RDH EARDS MOUNTAIN RD T H R E E N OTCH'D RD T ILMAN RD BOAZ RD BUFFALO RIVER RDAVON STREET EXTCOLES R O L LI N G RDDUDLEY MOUNTAIN RDEARLYSVILLE R D HOPE LN EDG E V A L LEY RD FRAYS M IL L R D C L A R K S TRACT B A R BER S H O P H I L L R DMI L L ER L AKE RDBOO N E S V IL L E R D LIND SAY R D5T H S T JONES MILL R D 29 BY PASS EXPWBEAGLE G AP TRL DOCTORS XINGHYDRAULIC RDBLEAK HOUSE RD D AVIS SHOP RDJAMES MONROE PKWYBROADHEAD M TN TRL FRAYS MTN RD BLOOM FIE LD RDBARRACKS RD RIO MILLS RDF R A Y RDBROOMLEY RDCOWAN RDMORGANTOWN R D GREEN MOUNTAIN RDEYELAND DRPOLO GROU N DS RDTURKS LNC ATLIN RD E ST E S R DGALLEN FARM LN M O UNT PLEASANT FARMWOLF MTN LNS U TH E R L A ND RDSOUTH FORK TRLNORFOR D LN SH I F F L E T T S M I L L R D SCHUYLER RDD U R R ETT RIDGE RDVIA GAP TRLRESERVOIR R D WAL N U T L E V E L R D LON E S O M E M O UNTAIN RD BUNGLETOWN RD E C H O V A L L EY RDM I D W AY RD 250/29 B Y P A S S PRITCHETT LNHAPPY CREEK RD WHITE MOUNTAIN RDB LAN DEMAR DR PO U NDING CREEK RDBUCK MTN FORD LNC O W PATH LNWOODS EDGE RDMOU N T W A RREN LNLAMB S RD B A R R A C K S FARM R D N YDRIE DRGREENWOOD RDWO L F T R A P R DLAKE A LBEM ARLE RD MOUNTAIN V I S T A RD BUR N T M ILL R DSUGAR R I D G E RDT H URSTON DR P A N ORA M A R D PRED DY CREEK RDSTARLIGHT RDS M I T H RDB UCK S E L B O W M TN RDBUCK RDCOMMONWEALTH DRIVY FARM DR M C C O R M I C K R DWI L D O N GROVE RDBENTIVAR DRS T E E P RDG OLD BROOK RDJIM LANE RDBL U F T O N M ILL R D LEW I S T O N FORD RDL O S T V A L L E Y R D SPRING LNPEAVINE HOL L OW RDTOWNLEY LNBLACKS L N GREENWOOD S TATION RD EDNAM DRM ORVEN D R LITTLE FLAT MTN TRL AIRPORT RD POCKET LN HILDRIDG E D RSAGE CTR E D L A N D S FARMM AXFIELD RD CH A P EL SP R I N G L N H A W KSHILL LNOLD K E S WICKL AKE RD DAR B Y RD F A R LEY LN LINK E V A N S L N STO N EY CRES T L N CLAYMONT DRDAMON RD C A N N O N B R O OK WAY GRAND CRU DR FR AYS RIDGE RD RACOON RDGGEORGETOWN RDDEANNA LNBOX HOL L Y L NLAKE TREE LN H A LCYO N D R BROKEN SUN RDGAINES LNA U B U R N DR M ECHUN K R D H E A D Q U A R T ERS LN WEST DR LOFTL A N D D R H O L K HAM DR OAKEN C R O F T L N CORDON LN SAMS LN E M E R Y S L N IV Y L N IVY DRN UTM EG FA R MMONACAN TRAIL R D SECRETARYS S A ND R DD I CK WOO D S R D B A TE S V I L L E RDBATESVILLE R D ¡629 ¡634 ¡640 ¡611 ¡626 ¡774 ¡712 ¡668 ¡667 ¡665¡671 ¡736 ¡795 ¡708 ¡672 ¡717 ¡715 ¡692 ¡633 ¡723 ¡614 ¡606 ¡810 ¡637 ¡664 ¡662 ¡630 ¡713 ¡706 ¡639 ¡682 ¡729 ¡724 ¡601 ¡679 ¡618 ¡663 ¡821 ¡621 ¡745 ¡678 ¡696 ¡680 ¡602 ¡624 ¡721 ¡631 ¡704 ¡683 ¡694 ¡743 ¡676 ¡690 ¡726 ¡673 ¡659 ¡845 ¡850 ¡635 ¡811 ¡740 ¡695 ¡784 ¡710 ¡658 ¡725 ¡760 ¡677 ¡643 ¡699 ¡661 ¡603 ¡660 ¡762 ¡829 ¡783 ¡818 ¡609 ¡649 ¡604 ¡787 ¡855 ¡616 ¡727 ¡644 ¡759 ¡732 ¡788 ¡859 ¡681 ¡719 ¡839 ¡684 ¡744 ¡779 ¡657 ¡803 ¡848 ¡842 ¡613 ¡847 ¡700 ¡827 ¡854 ¡741 ¡765 ¡802 ¡701 ¡707 ¡817 ¡705 ¡871 ¡720 ¡781 ¡792 ¡853 ¡793 ¡778 ¡642 ¡709 ¡856 ¡828 ¡830 ¡814 ¡636 ¡736 ¡713 ¡664 ¡678 ¡743 ¡601 ¡795 ¡606 ¡633 ¡627 ¡677 ¡672 ¡665 ¡614 ¡770 ¡831 ¡865 ¡768¡869 ¡823 ¡780 ¡890 ¡600 ¡637 ¡708 ¡637 }ÿ20 }ÿ53 }ÿ22 }ÿ231 }ÿ302}ÿ240 }ÿ20 }ÿ6 £¤250 £¤29 §¨¦64 §¨¦64 µ 0 2 41Kilometers 0 2 41Miles City of Charlottesville Town of Scottsville County ofAlbemarle Prepared by Albemarle CountyOffice of Geographic Data Services (GDS). Map created by Elise Hackett, May 2009. Note: The map elements depicted are graphic representations and are not to be construed or used as a legal description.This map is for display purposes only. Legend Major RoadsRailroadsParcelsCity Boundar yCounty Boundar yMajor Rural Streets Albemarle County Planning Commission August 26, 2008     STA­2008­00001 RA 2 Lot R oad Standard/SPOA Amend Sections 14­404, Lot loc ation to allow acces s from lot onto street or shared drivew ay, 14­412, Standards for private streets only, and 14­434, C ompletion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval, of Chapter 14, Subdiv ision of Land, of the Albemarle County Code.  This ordinance would amend Sec. 14­404 by requiring that the first subdivision plat approved for a parcel after the effec tive date of this ordinanc e (the "parent parcel") must establish a single public or private access from an ex isting public or private street outside of the parent parcel to the lots within the subdivision, and would require that the proposed s treet provide such access for all future subdivisions within the parent parcel, and would delete the requirement that all subsequent divisions of the residue enter only onto such streets shown on the approved final plat and have no immediate access  onto any public street; Sec. 14­412 by deleting the standard for residential private s treets serving 2 lots and requiring such streets to meet the standard currently required for streets serving 3 to 5 lots; Sec. 14­434 by deleting the exception for certain private streets from the requirement that all on­site improvements be completed prior to approval of the final plat where surety in lieu of completion of the improvements is not authoriz ed.  A copy of the full text of the ordinance is on file in the office of the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and in the Department of Community Development, County Office Building, 401 Mc Intire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. (Amelia McCulley)   Ms. McCulley presented a Pow er­point presentation and summarized the staff report.  (See Staff Report)   This is a Subdivision Ordinance amendment that achieves two things :   The first is to establis h a road standard for a private road serving tw o (2) lots.  This shall be the same as the existing standard for a private road serving 3 to 5 lots.  Therefore, the new road s tandard would become a 2 to 5 lot private road standard.   This is being proposed to improve emergency  ac cess to these properties. To improve routine access to these properties bec ause it just has  to be pass able.  Planning for roads that may be ex tended in the future to serve other properties, which they want to meet the County standards.   The second is to require that all subdivision of property (from the effectiv e date forward) to s hare the s ame access road / entrance onto any  public street.   Reducing the number of entrances onto a public road ­ Each entrance onto a public road is a conflict point and an opportunity for acc idents for the traveling public.  It is common for local zoning and subdivis ion regulation to reduc e and limit the numbers of entrances available to property. Reduce the number of access roads that serve property.  The res ulting roads  would meet a higher construction standard and priv ate road maintenance would be shared among more properties. Establishing a road standard for a private street serving two (2) lots ­ The current Albemarle Subdivis ion regulations  do not have a specific construction standard for a private s treet serving two lots.  It only requires a “trav elway pass able by ordinary passenger v ehic les in all but temporary extreme w eather c onditions.”  Establishing a road standard for these streets will establish and effectively increase the minimum des ign and construction standards for private streets serving two lots .  In addition, it will result in improv ed emergency acc ess to thes e properties. Family divisions are not reviewed under this regulation.  They are reviewed under other regulations and not these two prov isions proposed for amendment. There are shared driveways in the development area that serve the Neighborhood Model.  They don’t want to jeopardize that.  This amendment does not affect shared driv eways in the development area.   Staff recommends  adoption of the draft ordinance found in Attachment C.     Mr. Morris opened the public hearing and invited public  comment.   Katherine Russell, resident of North Garden, felt that the changes w ere unnecess ary .  Currently a surveyor c an determine when a lot is requested to be filed if an emergency vehicle can get to the lot.  There is already a sight distance requirement that is sufficient.  She did not think that they need to increase the bureaucracy of the county and inc rease their control for things that hav e not presented big problems.  It w ill restrict what people can do w ith their land even further.  It will mean that a lot of people who may w ant to do something won’t be able to afford to do it.  Unfortunately, the county continues to find w ays to infringe upon on the ow ner’s ability to utilize their property .    Property  owners  hav e vested interest in their properties.  Every time another regulation is adopted that does not serve the public as a whole they are trampling on people’s interest.  She opposed the amendments  since it would allow the county to continue to infringe upon the property ow ner rights to us e their property.  She felt that the general public does  not understand the proposal. The county should work on its current responsibilities and does not need more c ontrol.   Gorky Shack elford said that he had a farm in Stony Point in the Rivanna distric t.  He was asked by other directors of the Albemarle Farm Bureau to come and represent them tonight.  He would like to use his own s ituation as an example. Some time ago they had their property divided out on paper in case they had to sell a lot or tw o in order to keep the rest of the farm, w hich he hopes does not happen.  The pic ture shows one 5­ac re lot, two 10­acre lots and the others 21 to 30 acres.  He tried to make the lots fit into the terrain and not interfere with the appearance of the farm as a whole.  W ith this ordinance, if it is pass ed, it would look very differently.  The county would effectively be taking away every division right that they have with the sight distance requirement on the country road, whic h they don’t hav e, and the stream crossing regulations that has already been passed.  He wondered if it w as worth it because there is  a great deal of loss in it.  There are already a lot of private entrances on the country roads, which can’t be changed, and a lot of people are going to have to use the same entrance any way.  He did not think  that all situations would allow  the lots to come out on one road as  presented.  He did not think that one or two commercial entranc es w ere going to improv e the s afety.  If s afety is the purpose of this proposal he did not think that it would accomplish much.  If dow n zoning is the purpose of it, then it is a very effective ordinance.   Clara Belle Wheeler, resident of Stony Point Rd, objected to the propos ed amendments.  We live in a w orld where our property rights in Albemarle County, as  have already been stated, are being restricted on a daily  basis by ordinanc e being passed by elected and non­elected bodies.  They live in an area, w hich is the bedrock  and foundation of this country , w here personal freedoms were fought and died for. Choic es and consequences should be the standards by which each of us liv es.  If should be her c hoice if she wants to live at an end of a dirt road that s he can only  get to in a four­wheel drive v ehic le.  .  If she has a heart attack in the middle of the night and an ambulance cannot get to her, then that is her choice and she will die with the consequences.  It is not up to any one else to decide where she can or cannot live because she can’t spend $100,000 to build a road that meets s ome arbitrary standard.  Property rights are personal and are important and they are trying to restrict them.  The people in the community  are tired of being told what they  can and c annot do with their property.  She is  an environmentalist and a farmer who felt that they would do les s damage by putting in a little road to their hous e as oppos ed a huge asphalt covered road.  She objected to the proposal for many reasons, but the cost alone w ould prohibit people from being able to build on their property.  She felt that this was a sneak y underhanded way by going around the back door to restrict property owner rights.  She asked that they not pass this amendment because building two houses on a piece of property should not require the Planning Commission or Board to restrict them.   Kathy Rash, farmer and owner of tw o piec es of property in the W hite Hall D istrict and southern Albemarle, pointed out lik e many others she just found out about this meeting.  She was taken back by the rules  and regulations imposed.  It seems that more and more regulations are being added to small farmers and people in the rural area.   Most of the other farms in her area have 50 to 60 acres.   Every time she turns around the county is taking more rights and putting more restrictions on them.  If their intention is to prevent them from building on their land by tak ing away their property rights, then the county should just say so.  The small farmers feel that they are being impos ed upon.  She s tressed that they need to have the same goals and be able to w ork  together to k eep the county beautiful and the way it is now .   Rose Scarlet Myers, owner of a farm in Earlysville, said she came to this area in 1994.  When they moved here it was a very rural area.  There has been a lot of development in the area, whic h has taken the quality down in the county.  The quality of the streams has been affected by the added asphalt and not taking care of the land.  Every time they continue to cut up the land in that way they  are creating more havoc in the streams.  She asked the Commis sion to defeat this  motion   Sarah Henley, resident in the C rozet area, s aid her husband and family had a farm in this  area sinc e 1900.  This land that the bureaucrats  and Albemarle County are talking about is very dear to the people who liv e on the land that they are talking about. She asked that they consider their heritage and life sty le. They have made a lot of sacrifices.   She has been involved recently with people involved w ith developers and real estate who feel that they have more of a v ested interest in the property than the people who live on it.  It is important that they are able to continue to farm this land.  She looked at it as an inv estment that they  have held onto for their families.  People in this county may have $100,000 in the bank in case someone gets  sick, but they have made sacrifices and their $100,000 is in a little parcel of land on the end of their farm.  They need to be able to s ell that if it is necessary .  There is  no one that wants  to do it.  The restrictions  being placed on their farm land is making it impossible for farmers to manage their investment.  She opposed the additional regulations  being adopted.  She questioned if others would like to hav e their investments put on the line for the county to decide what they can keep.   There being no further public comment, Mr. Morris closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Planning Commis sion.    Mr. Strucko s aid that from listening to the speakers and reading the staff report and looking at some of the information that he has several questions.  He wrestles with the notion of Albemarle County maintaining its rural character and to allow  folk s to farm and use their land as they s ee fit.  But, as soon as the land is subdivided and that lot is put on the market he w as also c ons idering that consumer and what rights he should have.   That parcel’s consumer should have s ome guarantees that protect their public  health, safety and welfare.  As he reads the resolution that was unanimously adopted by the Board of Supervisors that is  how it starts. So he was wrestling w ith the County continuing to impose restrictions, which he felt were standards that the purchaser of the lot should expect when the lot was placed on the market.  H e asked if this road requirement that minimum standard.  He asked if the standard includes impervious surface.   Mr., Fritz replied that the standard for 2 to 5 lots proposed w ould be a 14’ travel way and would only be pav ed if the grade exceeded 7 perc ent.  It would be gravel otherwise.    Ms. Joseph asked if family divisions can be done without any restrictions.   Mr. Fritz replied that the proposal has no effect on family division.  It w ould still require reasonable passage by a passenger vehicle as currently required in the ordinanc e.   Ms. Joseph asked if the farmer needed the $100,000 he could subdivide the land as a family divis ion and sell it to a family member.   Mr. Fritz  replied that was c orrect.   Ms. Porterfield said that the C ommission heard from some C ounty residents that this will truly affect their ability to sell off land.  She asked staff to address  that issue.   Mr. Fritz replied that this  does not affect development rights.  This is a design standard and does not affect the utilization of development rights.  C urrently for 3 to 5 lots, the road has to meet X standard.  What is being propos ed is for 2 to 5 lots to meet that standard.    Mr. Cannon noticed that the elected officials made a unanimous decision to bring forth this resolution.  He assumed that there was a s et of facts and concerns that gave rise to this resolution.  H e asked staff to summarize or explain that information.  He as sumed it has  to do with the purpose and intent to provide for orderly subdiv ision, minimize the points of acc ess  on public roads and to bring roads  that are going to be used to open up land to develop to meet a standard.    H e asked what other things lead to this proposal.   Mr. Fritz replied that the Board asked s taff to come before them and explain how three separate provisions of the ordinanc e w ere applied on a day to day basis and what the res ulting developments were.  The first w as the two­step process  where there were two large lots and further division of those lots.  The other was what the road standards were.  The other prov ision had to do with frontage for the rear lot.  Staff is only bringing two of the three before the Commis sion tonight.  The Board asked staff to explain how the ordinance allows development to oc cur in the County.  That is the res olution that staff has brought before the Planning Commission tonight.   Ms. Porterfield asked if there was consideration of safety for fire department and police access to thes e lots.    Mr. Fritz replied that Board acknow ledged that the road standard is a higher standard to provide improved access .  But, he was not sure of the particulars on it.   Ms. Joseph asked for c omments from Mr. Loach and Mr. Strucko from their experience in their volunteer fire/resc ue service.  She noted that the County does  spend money on rescue squads and the equipment.  She would like to hear about the conditions of these roads .   Mr. Strucko said that as  a volunteer fire fighter at Earlysville Fire Department and member of Western Albemarle Rescue Square that he has experienced many  s ituations on rural roads w here they don’t know that a road is substandard until they are actually  confronted with a very narrow access point or driveway.  There are many safety issues involved.  Occ asionally they have to abandon some of the bigger vehicles.  There have been instances when respons e time has been delayed due to s ubstandard road.  It is more of a safety  iss ue particularly for larger vehic les such as  pumper truck s.   Mr. Loach said that he was a volunteer fire fighter w ith C rozet Fire Department.  W hen someone calls 911 they expect s omeone to show up. H e voiced concerns about the safety of the consumer and the members risking their lives in the truc ks from substandard roads.  Not only are they risking the lives of the fire fighters, but the cos t of the trucks is enormous.  It is a problem.  So if they are s etting a standard for safety for the consumer, then he supported the notions  presented.   Mr. Kamptner noted that the one thing this text amendment does is clos e an inconsistency . Several months ago the Board adopted the ordinance that es tablishes drivew ay standards.  One of the things that drove that was to have standards to ensure that emergency v ehicles c ould reach hous es on drivew ays.  The standard that ex ists right now for two­lot subdivisions is not a standard that requires access by emergency vehicles.  So there is an inconsistency between the existing and the current driv eway standards .  What came out of the driveway text amendment was the example given by fire/resc ue and it touches on one of the issues that a speak er raised if they w ant to die because an emergency vehicle c an’t reach then that it is their right.  Fire/rescue pointed out that the house that is not accessible might catc h on fire and that fire might s pread if the emergency  vehicle can’t reach that house.  That w as one of the public concerns  that Fire/res cue had in supporting the driveway standards.   Motion:  Mr. C annon moved and Mr. Edgerton seconded for approval of the resolution of intent put forw ard in STA­ 2008­0001 RA 2 Lot Road Standards/SPOA as presented.   Ms. Joseph noted that it was the actual text that they w ere talking about.   Mr. Morris replied that it was the zoning text in Attachment C .   Ms. Joseph pointed out that this action affects her because she has five development rights.  Therefore, she was not sitting here imposing regulations on people that she w as not imposing on herself.   The motion passed by  vote of 7:0.   Mr. Morris said that STA­2008­0001, RA 2 Lot Road Standards/SPOA will go to the Board of Supervisors with a recommendation for approval at a time to be determined with the follow ing proposed ordinance language set out in materials distributed on 8/26/08 as Attachment C for STA­2008­00001 RA 2 Lot Road Standard/SPOA   ORDINAN CE N O. 08­14   AN ORDIN ANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER  14, SU BDIVISION OF LAND , AR TICLE  IV, ON­SITE IMPROVEMENTS AN D D ESIGN, OF THE C ODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA   BE IT OR DAIN ED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that C hapter 14, Subdivision of Land, Article IV, On­Site Improvements and Design, is hereby amended and reordained as follows:   By Amending:   Sec. 14­404       Lot location to allow acc ess from lot onto street or shared driveway Sec. 14­412       Standards for private s treets only Sec. 14­434       Completion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval   Chapter 14.  Subdivision of Land   Article IV.  On­Site Improvements and Design   Sec. 14­404  Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared driveway.               Each lot within a s ubdivision shall be located as follows:   A.         The first subdiv ision plat approved for a parcel on and after [ins ert effective date] (hereinafter, the “parent parcel”) shall es tablish a s ingle public or private street to provide access from an existing public or private street outside of or adjac ent to the parent parcel to the lots within the s ubdivision.  The street shall als o provide such access for all future s ubdivisions within the boundaries of the parent parcel as it existed on [insert effective date].  The requirement of a single acces s street shall not apply to any subdivision whose streets and acc ess  are subject to section 14­409.     AB.       Each lot, other than a corner lot within the development areas, shall have reasonable access  to the building site from only one street, shared driveway or alley established at the s ame time as the subdivision or the subdivision of the parent parcel as provided in subsection (A); provided that a lot may be located so that its drivew ay enters only onto a public  street abutting the subdivis ion if: (i) the commission grants  a waiver under subsection (C ); (ii) the subdivider obtains an entranc e permit from the Virginia D epartment of Trans portation for the access; (iii) the entranc e complies with the design standards set forth in sections 14­410(F) and 14­410(G); and (iv) the subdivider demons trates to the agent prior to approval of the final plat that the waiver does  not violate any  covenants to be recorded for the s ubdivision.  For purposes of this  s ection, the term “reas onable access” means a location for a driveway  or, if a drivew ay location is not prov ided, a location for a suitable foot path from the parking spac es required by the zoning ordinance to the building site; the term “within the subdivision” means w ithin the exterior boundary lines of the lands  being divided.                B.         If the subdivision is within the rural areas, all subsequent divisions of the residue shall enter only onto such street(s) show n on the approved final plat and shall have no immediate access onto to any  public street.    C .         The requirements  of this section may be waived by  the commission as provided in section 14­ 225.1.  In review ing a waiver request, the c ommission shall determine whether: (i) the c ounty engineer recommends an alternative standard; or (ii) because of unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interests of the subdivider, strict applic ation of the applicable requirements w ould result in s ignificant degradation of the property or to the land adjacent thereto.  In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring the standard would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwis e serve the public  interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly  development of the area, to s ound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto.  In reviewing a waiver reques t, the commission may allow a substitute design of comparable quality, but differing from that required, if it finds that the subdiv ider would achieve results w hich substantially satis fy the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or exc eeding the desired effects of the requirement.   (§ 18­36 (part), 9­5­96, 8­28­74; § 18­39 (part), 9­5­96, 10­19­77, 5­10­77, 8­28­74; 1988 Code, §§ 18­36, 18­39; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, §§ 14­500(C ), 14­505; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effectiv e 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2241(5).   Sec. 14­412  Standards for private streets only.   In addition to the minimum des ign requirements set forth in section 14­410, the following minimum des ign requirements shall apply  to private streets authorized by  this chapter:               A.         Res idential private s treets.  Eac h private street serving detached residential uses authorized under sections  14­232 or 14­233 shall satisfy  the following:                           1.         Streets serving two lots.  Eac h private street s erving two (2) lots shall satis fy the following: (i) easement or right­of­way widths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; (ii) the required materials and minimum depth of base shall satisfy the minimum requirements described in the design standards manual; and (iii) the surveyor shall include the following wording on the final plat: “The existing and/or proposed right­of­way  is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelw ay pas sable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary  extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenanc e of the travelw ay, as required by section 14­412 of the Albemarle County  Code.”   21.        Streets serv ing three two to five lots.  Each private street serving three (3) two (2) to five (5) lots  shall satisfy the follow ing: (i) vertical centerline curv ature s hall meet a minimum design K value of five (5) for crest curves and fifteen (15) for sag curves; (ii) sight distances shall not be less than one hundred (100) feet; (iii) turnarounds shall be provided at the end of each street per American Association of State H ighw ay and Transportation Officials  guidelines; (iv) street easements  or right­of­way w idths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; and (v) the radius for horiz ontal curvature shall be forty (40) feet or greater, unless  otherwis e authorized by this chapter.  Any standard in this paragraph (2) may be reduced to the standard for streets serving two (2) lots w here a drivew ay departs  from the street and two lots remain to be served, and a turnaround is provided.  In addition, the follow ing shall also apply:               (a)        Private streets in the rural areas.  For such private streets in the rural areas: (i) travelway w idths shall be fourteen (14) feet minimum, with three (3) feet minimum shoulder widths , and a minimum of four (4) feet from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline; (ii) if any portion of the street exceeds seven (7) percent in grade, the entire street shall be surfaced as required by Virginia Department of Transportation standards; streets  of lesser grade may use a grav el s urface.                           (b)        Private streets in the development areas.  For such private streets  in the development areas: (i) an urban cross­section street design shall be prov ided, with a minimum width of twenty (20) feet measured from the curb faces or such alternativ e des ign, including a street easement or right­of­way width, deemed adequate by the c ounty engineer to be equiv alent to or greater than the applicable standard in the des ign standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or w elfare; additional widths shall be provided for gutters to control drainage at the discretion of the county engineer; and (ii) the entire s treet shall be surfaced as required by Virginia Department of Trans portation standards.    32.        Streets serving six lots or more.  Each private street serving six (6) or more lots shall satisfy Virginia D epartment of Transportation standards, provided:                         (a)        Priv ate s treets in the rural areas .  For such priv ate streets in the rural areas, the commis sion may approv e Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain if the subdivider demons trates, for a specific, identifiable reason, the general welfare, as opposed to the proprietary  interests of the subdivider, would be better served by the application of those standards .               (b)        Private streets in the development areas.  For such private streets in the development areas, the agent may approve Virginia Department of Transportation s tandards for mountainous terrain or an alternativ e standard deemed adequate by the county  engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare.                43.        Streets serv ing family or two­lot subdivisions.  Each priv ate street authoriz ed to serve a family subdivision under section 14­232(B)(1) or a tw o­lot subdivision under section 14­232(B)(2) shall satisfy the following: (i) easement or right­of­way w idths shall be ten (10) feet minimum; and (ii) the surveyor shall include the following wording on the plat: “The exis ting and/or proposed right­of­way  is  of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to acc ommodate a travelw ay pas sable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of the travelw ay, as required by section 14­412 of the Albemarle County Code.”   B.         Private streets serving non­residential, non­agricultural, attached residential, multi­unit residential and combined residential and non­res idential uses.  Each private s treet authoriz ed to serve non­residential, non­ agricultural, attached residential, multi­unit residential and combined residential and non­residential uses  under sections  14­232 or 14­233 shall satisfy Virginia Department of Transportation standards or an alternative standard deemed adequate by the agent, upon the recommendation of the county engineer, to be equivalent to or greater than the applic able standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety  or welfare.  The agent may  require minimum travelway widths to provide for on­street parking upon a determination that the provisions for off­street parking may be inadequate to reasonably preclude unauthorized on­street parking.   C .         Clearing land for improvements.  A private street constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation standards  shall not be subject to that department’s clear zone requirements.               D.         Landsc aping and other improvements permitted.  Subsequent to construction of a private street, a subdivider may install ornamental plantings and any other improvements  provided that they do not conflict w ith sight distance, drainage facilities or other required improvements.               E.         Waiver.  The requirements of section 14­412(A)(2)(a) 14­412(A)(1)(a) relating to street easement or right­of­way widths may be waiv ed by the commission as provided in section 14­225.1.  In reviewing a waiv er request for a lesser street easement or right­of­way width, the commis sion shall consider w hether: (i) the subdivis ion will be s erv ed by an ex isting easement or right­of­way of fixed width that cannot be widened by the subdivider after documented good faith effort to acquire additional w idth; and (ii) the existing eas ement or right­of­w ay width is adequate to acc ommodate the required travelw ay and its maintenanc e.  If the w aiver pertains to minimum street easement or right­of­way widths ov er an existing bridge, dam or other structure, the commiss ion shall consider whether: (i) the long­term environmental impacts resulting from not w idening the bridge, dam or other structure outweigh complying w ith the minimum width requirements, as determined by the county engineer; or (ii) whether the bridge, dam or other structure is a historical structure.  In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring the standard street easement or right­of­way widths would not forw ard the purposes of this chapter or otherwis e serve the public  interest; and granting the w aiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly  development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto.   (§ 18­36, 9­5­96, 8­28­74; § 18­37, 9­5­96, 11­21­79, 3­29­78, 8­28­74(part); 1988 Code, §§ 18­36, 18­37, 18­38; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, § 14­514; Ord. 02­14(1), 2­6­02; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2242(3).   Sec. 14­434  C ompletion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval.               Except as provided in section 14­435, all on­site improvements required by this chapter, other than a private street authorized under s ection 14­232(B)(1), 14­232(B)(2), 14­233(A)(2) or 14­433(B)(2) serving less than three (3) lots, shall be completed prior to approval of the final plat.  Prior to approv al of the final plat:                 A.         The subdivider shall submit to the agent a certificate of completion of all of the improvements prepared by a profess ional engineer or a land surveyor, to the limits of his license; and               B.         The subdivider shall certify to the agent that all of the construction costs for the improvements, including those for materials and labor, have been paid to the person constructing the improvements.   9­5­96, 12­15­82, 4­21­76, 2­19­76, 8­28­74 (§ 3); 1988 Code, § 18­18; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, § 14­412; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2241(9).   I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing w riting is a true, correc t copy  of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Superv isors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of _____ to _____, as recorded below , at a regular meeting held on _________________________.                             __________________________________                                         Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye      Nay Mr. Boy d                       ____     ____ Mr. Dorrier                     ____     ____     Ms. Mallek                     ____     ____ Mr. Rooker                    ____     ____ Mr. Slutzky                    ____     ____ Ms. Thomas                  ____     ____     Go to next set of minutes Return to exec summary Albemarle C ounty Planning C ommission October 7, 2008               Public Hearing Items:   STA­2008­00001 R ural Areas 2­lot Street Standards Amend Sections 14­207, Rural subdivisions, 14­404, Lot location to allow  access from lot onto street or shared driveway, 14­412, Standards for private streets only, and 14­434, C ompletion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval, of C hapter 14, Subdivision of Land, of the Albemarle County C ode.  This ordinance would amend Sec. 14­207 by making rural subdivisions subject to Sec. 14­404; Sec. 14­404 by requiring that the first subdivision plat approved for a parcel after the effective date of this ordinance (the “parent parcel”) must establish a single public or private access from an existing public or private street outside of the parent parcel to the lots within the subdivision, and would require that the proposed street provide such access for all future subdivisions within the parent parcel, and would delete the requirement that all subsequent divisions of the residue enter only onto such streets show n on the approved final plat and have no immediate access onto any public street; Sec. 14­412 by deleting the standard for residential private streets serving 2 lots and requiring such streets to meet the standard currently required for streets serving 3 to 5 lots; Sec. 14­434 by deleting the exception for certain private streets from the requirement that all on­site improvements be completed prior to approval of the final plat w here surety in lieu of completion of the improvements is not authorized.  A copy of the full text of the ordinance is on file in the office of the C lerk of the Board of Supervisors and in the D epartment of C ommunity D evelopment, County Office Building, 401 McIntire R oad, Charlottesville, Virginia. (Amelia McCulley)   Mr. Fritz separated the request into two parts because there are two main areas of this proposal. The first part is a single point of access component, and the other is the road standard.  This is a rehashing of an action that was taken on February 6, 2008.  There are two amendments being proposed ­ the two­lot road standard and the single point of access.  H e made a power­point presentation and reviewed the staff report.    Mr. Morris asked if the items w ould be taken separately.   Mr. Fritz replied that the Planning C ommission can take a single action, but the presentation w ill be done separately so there can be two separate conversations.            The proposal is to require all subdivisions of property from an effective date forw ard to share the same point of access, a single entrance.  Why is this back before the Commission?  Frankly, staff told the C ommission w hat the ordinance would do, but forgot to actually write the ordinance to do that.  Therefore, staff made a mistake and now is adding that language.  Staff is proposing a section that will require rural divisions to comply w ith Section 14­404, w hich is the section being amended.  The purpose of this amendment is to reduce the number of entrances onto a public road and thereby reduce conflict points for accidents.  By reducing the number of access roads serving a property, the resulting roads would meet a higher construction standard and private road maintenance will be shared amongst more properties.  These changes do not impact family divisions or development­area shared driveways.              What happens is that a large parcel is divided into Parcel A and Parcel B.  This is a rural division, and each lot is approved with a separate entrance onto the public street.  Subsequent subdivisions occur where Parcel A is divided into a front and back division served by a private street serving parcels A1 and A2.  Another subdivision w ould subdivide Parcel B into B1 and B2 w ith a private street that serves those tw o.  Under the proposed ordinance, there would be a single entrance.  Waivers from the Commission are available.           Staff recommends that the Commission adopt the revised subdivision text amendment that is Attachment B.  This subdivision text amendment is set for a public hearing with the Board of Supervisors on November 12.  The ordinance codifies w hat staff described in its August presentation to the Commission.   Ms. Joseph asked w hat section they w ere looking at and where are the changes.   Mr. Fritz noted that the only changes from the material presented to the Commission in August w ere in Section 14­207(d) in 14­404.    Ms. Joseph noted that the big concern expressed by the public after the last meeting w as the Highway D epartment and that this w ould stop rural development because of H ighw ay Department requirements.  She questioned if it had something to do w ith sight distance.  With a single point of access it has to have a certain sight distance.  A driveway does not have a sight distance requirement.   Mr. Fritz noted that on the slide w here Parcel A and Parcel B are divided and Parcel A is further divided, the lots are served either by one or tw o access points. Therefore, the VD OT standard is going to be the private­street access.  If on the other hand the ordinance w as amended, all four of the lots w ould require that a single point of access be used for the property as it exists now and all subsequent divisions of the property w ould have to use that access.  There would be four lots accessing a single point.  That would require a commercial entrance, w hich does have higher entrance requirements.    Ms. Joseph said that in essence it is supposed to be a safer entrance for all of the four residents that are using it.   Mr. Fritz agreed that it improved the sight distance.   Ms. Porterfield asked if family subdivisions would be the only properties not affected by this change.   Mr. Fritz replied that this will not apply to family subdivisions. There is also an exemption to a different provision of the ordinance regarding inter­parcel connections in the development areas.  What you would have is one section of the ordinance saying have multiple connections and another section of the ordinance saying that you will only get one.  Staff removed that conflict.   Ms. Porterfield questioned why family divisions w ere not included.   Mr. Fritz said that if a family division occurs and it is held for four years and the family chose to further divide that property, then it would be subject to this regulation.  That would not be a family division.    Mr. Strucko asked if no upgrades to different standards would have to be made.   Mr. Fritz replied that is correct.   Mr. Edgerton asked if the State Code would prohibit the C ommission from applying this to family divisions.    Mr. Kamptner noted that because Albemarle C ounty is a high­growth locality, the County can establish the regulations they desire.   Mr. Loach asked for clarification that this came out of the resolution of intent dated February 6, 2008 from the Board of Supervisors as Attachment A.   Mr. Fritz replied that it was the resolution of intent that was included in the packet dated February 6, 2008, w hich w as supported by the Board of Supervisors.   Mr. Loach asked if there was a provision for a w avier of this requirement.   Mr. Fritz replied a w aiver could be requested.   Mr. Loach asked if this was done in accordance with Fire/R escue officials.   Mr. Fritz replied that Fire/Rescue issues were included in road standards.  Single point of access does not have much to do with the road standards that were developed in association with Fire/R escue and engineers.   Ms. McCulley noted that the indirect positive impact and basic planning concept behind restricting access is reducing the number of conflict points along a highw ay.  Each conflict point could create an accident. In terms of public safety, this a better solution than allow ing as many entrances as the frontage allowed.   Mr. Morris asked staff if they w ant to take the second part for public input.   Mr. Fritz noted that the second part deals with the standard of the road once you get past the actual entrance.            There is a current provision in the Zoning Ordinance that says when a building permit application is made, certain design standards must be met for the access to that new dwelling. These standards were created in association w ith Fire/Rescue.  The current Zoning Ordinance has road standards that apply to roads serving three or more lots.  The draft ordinance w ould make that tw o or more lots. Currently if you have two lots, the road standard is simply reasonable access by motor vehicle.          The Zoning Ordinance lot­access standards are more restrictive in some respects than the subdivision road standards.  Particularly, the maximum grade is 16 percent and there is a minimal vertical clearance of 14’.  Private streets in the rural area currently do not have that requirement.  Ms. McC ulley has provided a very good table in the packet. It compares the provisions for driveways, 2­lot subdivision, 3­lot to 5­lot subdivision and 6 or more lots.  If you look at the maximum grade for driveways, there is a 16 percent grade. But there is no maximum grade for 2­ lot or 3­to­5 lot subdivision roads.  When you get over 7 percent, it is required to be paved.  But there is no maximum grade.  In the 3­to­5 lot standard there is a minimum surface requirement with a 14’ w ide gravel travel way.  But, there is no similar standard for a drivew ay.      C onsideration of Differences –            Could a current subdivision approval result in a lot design and/or road that w ill not meet driveway standards for issuance of a building permit?  The answ er to that question is yes.          If driveway standards are based on access by public vehicles, should the subdivision road also meet this standard?  That question is one for the Commission to consider.   Options for the C ommission            Separate the road­standard issue for further discussion and allow  the SPOA Subdivision Amendment to move forw ard; OR          Recommend a revision of the road standard (w here less restrictive than the driveway standard) to be incorporated into the pending STA­2008­001.          Or, the Commission could make no changes to the draft Subdivision Text Amendment.  The draft Subdivision text is to simply apply the 3­to­5 lot standard to 2 lots, thereby becoming a 2­to­5 lot standard.   Mr. Edgerton asked if the current drivew ay maximum grade of 16 percent does not even apply to the 3­to­ 5 lots.   Mr. Fritz replied that was correct.   Mr. Edgerton said the second alternative is to get these into alignment before they approve them.  H e said w hat w ould change here is that they w ould have 16 percent listed for a new  box that would say 2­to­5 lots.   Mr. Fritz replied that was correct.   Mr. Morris opened the public hearing and invited public comment.  There being none, the public hearing w as closed and the matter came back before the C ommission.   Ms. Joseph said that it sounds as if they are just cleaning up something that they missed the first time around w ith the rural areas insertion.  It makes perfect sense if they are going to have high standards for driveways that they ought to have that same standard for the entry going into it.  Therefore, she could support both.   Mr. Edgerton asked if she was recommending a revision of the road standard (w here less restrictive than the driveway standard) to be incorporated into the pending STA­2008­001.  H e asked if that was something that w ould send everybody back to square one and start over again.   Mr. Fritz noted that if the C ommission’s intent is to give staff direction to incorporate the drive­way standards into the 2­to­5 lot standard, they can get the language right before it goes to the Board.   Mr. Edgerton asked if that would include up to 16 percent grade and the 14’ high vertical grade to accommodate equipment such as a fire truck.   Mr. Fritz replied yes.   Ms. McCulley noted that they would still be able to keep this on the November 12 Board of Supervisors public hearing date.   Mr. Edgerton noted that there were a lot of members of the public that were present at the w ork session that are not here tonight. He questioned if there was a notice requirement that they have to w orry about.   Mr. Fritz noted that staff had been instructed that no additional public notice was needed.   Mr. Edgerton suggested that this was the most appropriate way to move ahead.   Ms. McCulley questioned if they need to provide additional legal notice.   Mr. Kamptner replied no, that the notice has been provided and the Commission is making its recommendation.  These changes are not any of the types of things that would trigger the need for additional notice at the Planning C ommission stage.   Motion:  Ms. Joseph moved and Mr. Edgerton seconded to recommend approval of STA­2008­0001 R ural Areas 2­lot Street Standards and Lot Access Driveway Standards to the Board of Supervisors as recommended by staff, amended as follows:            Include revised text on SPOA (single point of access), and          Include a revision of the private road standard for revision for grade and vertical clearance to be consistent w ith the driveway standard.   The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (C annon absent)   Mr. Morris noted that STA­2008­0001 Rural Areas 2­lot Street Standards and Lot Access D riveway Standards w ould go before the Board of Supervisors on November 12 w ith a recommendation for approval w ith the resolution of intent as follow s:   OR DINANC E NO. 08­14(  )   AN OR DINANCE TO AMEN D  CHAPTER 14, SU BDIVISION OF LAN D, ARTICLE II, ADMINISTR ATION  AND PR OCEDU R E, AR TICLE  IV, ON ­SITE IMPR OVEMENTS AN D D ESIGN, OF TH E COD E OF THE C OUN TY OF ALBEMARLE, VIR GINIA   BE IT OR DAIN ED  By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 14, Subdivision of Land, Article II, Administration and Procedure, and Article IV, On­Site Improvements and D esign, are hereby amended and reordained as follows:   B y Amending:   Sec. 14­207    Rural subdivisions Sec. 14­404    Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared drivew ay Sec. 14­412    Standards for private streets only Sec. 14­434    Completion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval   Chapter 14.  Subdivision of Land   Article II.  Administration and Procedure   Sec. 14­207 R ural subdivisions               The following sections of this chapter shall apply to each rural subdivision:               A.         General:  Sections 14­100 through 14­108.               B.         Administration and procedure:  Sections 14­200 through 14­204 and sections 14­209, 14­ 226, 14­229 and 14­236.               C.        Plat requirements and documents to be submitted:  Sections 14­300, 14­301, 14­302(A)(1), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (9), (10), (11), (14) and (15), 14­302(B)(1), (2), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9) and (10), 14­ 303(A), (B), (C), (D), (E), (F), (H), (I), (L), (O) and (P), 14­304, 14­305(B), 14­308.1, 14­309, 14­310, 14­ 312, 14­314 and 14­316.                D.        On­site improvements and design: Sections 14­400, 14­403, 14­404, 14­406, 14­414, 14­ 416, 14­421, 14­426, 14­427, 14­433 and 14­438.    (9­5­96, 7­9­86, 12­21­83, 2­4­81, 5­2­79, 11­13­74, 8­28­74; 1988 Code, § 18­13(b); Ord. 98­A(1), 7­15­ 98; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2241(9).   A rticle IV.  On­Site Improvements and Design   Sec. 14­404  Lot location to allow access from lot onto street or shared driveway.               Each lot w ithin a subdivision shall be located as follows:   A.         The first subdivision plat approved for a parcel on and after [insert effective date] (hereinafter, the “parent parcel”) shall establish a single public or private street to provide access from an existing public or private street outside of or adjacent to the parent parcel to the lots within the subdivision.  The street shall also provide such access for all future subdivisions within the boundaries of the parent parcel as it existed on [insert effective date].  The requirement of a single access street shall not apply to any subdivision w hose streets and access are subject to section 14­409.     AB.      Each lot, other than a corner lot within the development areas, shall have reasonable access to the building site from only one street, shared driveway or alley established at the same time as the subdivision or the subdivision of the parent parcel as provided in subsection (A); provided that a lot may be located so that its driveway enters only onto a public street abutting the subdivision if: (i) the commission grants a waiver under subsection (C ); (ii) the subdivider obtains an entrance permit from the Virginia Department of Transportation for the access; (iii) the entrance complies with the design standards set forth in sections 14­410(F) and 14­410(G); and (iv) the subdivider demonstrates to the agent prior to approval of the final plat that the w aiver does not violate any covenants to be recorded for the subdivision.  For purposes of this section, the term “reasonable access” means a location for a driveway or, if a driveway location is not provided, a location for a suitable foot path from the parking spaces required by the zoning ordinance to the building site; the term “within the subdivision” means w ithin the exterior boundary lines of the lands being divided.                B.         If the subdivision is w ithin the rural areas, all subsequent divisions of the residue shall enter only onto such street(s) shown on the approved final plat and shall have no immediate access onto to any public street.    C.        The requirements of this section may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14­225.1.  In review ing a waiver request, the commission shall determine whether: (i) the county engineer recommends an alternative standard; or (ii) because of unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interests of the subdivider, strict application of the applicable requirements w ould result in significant degradation of the property or to the land adjacent thereto.  In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring the standard w ould not forw ard the purposes of this chapter or otherw ise serve the public interest; and granting the w aiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or w elfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto.  In review ing a waiver request, the commission may allow a substitute design of comparable quality, but differing from that required, if it finds that the subdivider w ould achieve results which substantially satisfy the overall purposes of this chapter in a manner equal to or exceeding the desired effects of the requirement.   (§ 18­36 (part), 9­5­96, 8­28­74; § 18­39 (part), 9­5­96, 10­19­77, 5­10­77, 8­28­74; 1988 Code, §§ 18­36, 18­39; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, §§ 14­500(C), 14­505; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2241(5).   Sec. 14­412  Standards for private streets only.   In addition to the minimum design requirements set forth in section 14­410, the following minimum design requirements shall apply to private streets authorized by this chapter:               A.         R esidential private streets.  Each private street serving detached residential uses authorized under sections 14­232 or 14­233 shall satisfy the following:                           1.         Streets serving two lots.  Each private street serving tw o (2) lots shall satisfy the follow ing: (i) easement or right­of­way widths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; (ii) the required materials and minimum depth of base shall satisfy the minimum requirements described in the design standards manual; and (iii) the surveyor shall include the following wording on the final plat: “The existing and/or proposed right­of­way is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelw ay passable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme weather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of the travelway, as required by section 14­412 of the Albemarle County C ode.”   21.       Streets serving three tw o to five lots.  Each private street serving three (3) two (2) to five (5) lots shall satisfy the following: (i) vertical centerline curvature shall meet a minimum design K value of five (5) for crest curves and fifteen (15) for sag curves; (ii) sight distances shall not be less than one hundred (100) feet; (iii) turnarounds shall be provided at the end of each street per American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials guidelines; (iv) street easements or right­of­w ay w idths shall be thirty (30) feet minimum; and (v) the radius for horizontal curvature shall be forty (40) feet or greater, unless otherwise authorized by this chapter.  Any standard in this paragraph (2) may be reduced to the standard for streets serving two (2) lots where a drivew ay departs from the street and tw o lots remain to be served, and a turnaround is provided.  In addition, the follow ing shall also apply:               (a)        Private streets in the rural areas.  For such private streets in the rural areas: (i) travelway widths shall be fourteen (14) feet minimum, with three (3) feet minimum shoulder w idths, and a minimum of four (4) feet from the edge of the shoulder to the ditch centerline; (ii) if any portion of the street exceeds seven (7) percent in grade, the entire street shall be surfaced as required by Virginia D epartment of Transportation standards; streets of lesser grade may use a gravel surface.                           (b)        Private streets in the development areas.  For such private streets in the development areas: (i) an urban cross­section street design shall be provided, w ith a minimum w idth of twenty (20) feet measured from the curb faces or such alternative design, including a street easement or right­of­w ay w idth, deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare; additional widths shall be provided for gutters to control drainage at the discretion of the county engineer; and (ii) the entire street shall be surfaced as required by Virginia D epartment of Transportation standards.    32.       Streets serving six lots or more.  Each private street serving six (6) or more lots shall satisfy Virginia Department of Transportation standards, provided:                         (a)        Private streets in the rural areas.  For such private streets in the rural areas, the commission may approve Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain if the subdivider demonstrates, for a specific, identifiable reason, the general welfare, as opposed to the proprietary interests of the subdivider, would be better served by the application of those standards.               (b)        Private streets in the development areas.  For such private streets in the development areas, the agent may approve Virginia Department of Transportation standards for mountainous terrain or an alternative standard deemed adequate by the county engineer to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare.                43.       Streets serving family or two­lot subdivisions.  Each private street authorized to serve a family subdivision under section 14­232(B)(1) or a two­lot subdivision under section 14­232(B)(2) shall satisfy the follow ing: (i) easement or right­of­way widths shall be ten (10) feet minimum; and (ii) the surveyor shall include the following w ording on the plat: “The existing and/or proposed right­of­way is of adequate width and horizontal and vertical alignment to accommodate a travelway passable by ordinary passenger vehicles in all but temporary extreme w eather conditions, together with area adequate for maintenance of the travelway, as required by section 14­412 of the Albemarle County Code.”   B.         Private streets serving non­residential, non­agricultural, attached residential, multi­unit residential and combined residential and non­residential uses.  Each private street authorized to serve non­residential, non­agricultural, attached residential, multi­unit residential and combined residential and non­residential uses under sections 14­232 or 14­233 shall satisfy Virginia Department of Transportation standards or an alternative standard deemed adequate by the agent, upon the recommendation of the county engineer, to be equivalent to or greater than the applicable standard in the design standards manual, so as to adequately protect the public health, safety or welfare.  The agent may require minimum travelw ay w idths to provide for on­street parking upon a determination that the provisions for off­street parking may be inadequate to reasonably preclude unauthorized on­street parking.   C.        C learing land for improvements.  A private street constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation standards shall not be subject to that department’s clear zone requirements.               D.        Landscaping and other improvements permitted.  Subsequent to construction of a private street, a subdivider may install ornamental plantings and any other improvements provided that they do not conflict with sight distance, drainage facilities or other required improvements.               E.         Waiver.  The requirements of section 14­412(A)(2)(a) 14­412(A)(1)(a) relating to street easement or right­of­way widths may be waived by the commission as provided in section 14­225.1.  In reviewing a w aiver request for a lesser street easement or right­of­w ay w idth, the commission shall consider whether: (i) the subdivision will be served by an existing easement or right­of­w ay of fixed w idth that cannot be w idened by the subdivider after documented good faith effort to acquire additional w idth; and (ii) the existing easement or right­of­w ay w idth is adequate to accommodate the required travelway and its maintenance.  If the waiver pertains to minimum street easement or right­of­way widths over an existing bridge, dam or other structure, the commission shall consider whether: (i) the long­term environmental impacts resulting from not widening the bridge, dam or other structure outw eigh complying w ith the minimum w idth requirements, as determined by the county engineer; or (ii) w hether the bridge, dam or other structure is a historical structure.  In approving a waiver, the commission shall find that requiring the standard street easement or right­of­way widths would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver w ould not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, to sound engineering practices, and to the land adjacent thereto.   (§ 18­36, 9­5­96, 8­28­74; § 18­37, 9­5­96, 11­21­79, 3­29­78, 8­28­74(part); 1988 Code, §§ 18­36, 18­ 37, 18­38; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, § 14­514; Ord. 02­14(1), 2­6­02; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­ 05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2242(3).   Sec. 14­434 C ompletion of on­site improvements required prior to plat approval.               Except as provided in section 14­435, all on­site improvements required by this chapter, other than a private street authorized under section 14­232(B)(1), 14­232(B)(2), 14­233(A)(2) or 14­433(B)(2) serving less than three (3) lots, shall be completed prior to approval of the final plat.  Prior to approval of the final plat:                 A.         The subdivider shall submit to the agent a certificate of completion of all of the improvements prepared by a professional engineer or a land surveyor, to the limits of his license; and               B.         The subdivider shall certify to the agent that all of the construction costs for the improvements, including those for materials and labor, have been paid to the person constructing the improvements.   9­5­96, 12­15­82, 4­21­76, 2­19­76, 8­28­74 (§ 3); 1988 Code, § 18­18; Ord. 98­A(1), 8­5­98, § 14­412; Ord. 05­14(1), 4­20­05, effective 6­20­05)               State law reference­­Va. Code § 15.2­2241(9).   I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle C ounty, Virginia, by a vote of _____ to _____, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on _________________________.                                __________________________________                                            C lerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye      N ay Mr. Boyd                      ____    ____ Mr. Dorrier                   ____    ____    Ms. Mallek                   ____    ____ Mr. Rooker                  ____    ____ Mr. Slutzky                  ____    ____ Ms. Thomas                ____    ____       Return to exec summary COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE   EXECUTIVE SUMMARY     AGENDA TITLE: ZTA­2008­002. Planned Developments and Neighborhood Model District.   SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to bring titles and other references in conformity with current Community Development job titles and current zoning references, to clarify how amendments to PDs can be made, to address vesting of old projects, to change timing for a parking study, and to reduce the architectural information required for NMDs.   STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, and Cilimberg, and Ms. Echols   LEGAL REVIEW:   Yes   AGENDA DATE: October 14, 2009   ACTION:     X          INFORMATION:      CONSENT AGENDA:   ACTION:              INFORMATION:        ATTACHMENTS:    Yes     REVIEWED BY:       BACKGROUND: On August 5, 2009, the Board held a worksession on the proposed changes to the Planned Development District and Neighborhood Model District regulations.  The Board discussed the proposal, recommended no changes and asked staff to set a public hearing for the next available public hearing date.  The executive summary dated July 1, 2009, which was deferred until August 5, 2009, is available on­line with all of its attachments:   http://www.albemarle.org/upload/images/Forms_Center/Departments/Board_of_Supervisors/Forms/Agenda/2009Files/20090701/ZTA200802PDExecSummary.htm.   A summary of all of the proposed changes is included as Attachment C.   STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 1:  Enhance the Quality of Life; Goal 4:  Effectively Manage Growth and Development.   DISCUSSION: Minor changes for clarity have been made to the draft ordinance the Board reviewed on August 5, 2009. Sections 8.2(b)(1) and 8.2(b)(3), which pertain to waivers, were revised to consolidate the required findings in one subsection and clarify that the applicant must submit information that addresses the required findings. Section 8.5.1(c)(5), which pertains to the maps submitted with an application plan, was amended to change the phrase “adjacent parcels” to “abutting parcels” since staff requires only information regarding parcels physically touching the land proposed for rezoning . Sections 8.5.5.5(a) and (b), which pertain to the applicable procedure when the planned development district was established without an application plan, were modified to refer to a subdivision plat or site plan that was valid at the time of the rezoning, or was approved in conjunction with the rezoning.    BUDGET IMPACT: This zoning text amendment is expected to reduce staff time related to regulating architecture and the timing of review of parking studies.  An increase in staff time may be experienced in reviewing and making determinations relative to vesting.   RECOMMENDATIONS: After conducting a public hearing, staff recommends the Board adopt the attached ordinance.     ATTACHMENTS A – Draft Ordinance B – July 1, 2009/August 5, 2009 Executive Summary C – Proposed Changes to Planned Development Section of Zoning Ordinance and Neighborhood Model Section of Zoning Ordinance, September 30, 2009 Return to regular agenda Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 1 ORDINANCE NO. 09-18( ) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE I, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE II, BASIC REGULATIONS, AND ARTICLE III, DISTRICT REGULATIONS, 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 18, Zoning, Article I, General Provisions, Article II, Basic Regulations, and Article III, District Regulations, are hereby amended and reordained as follows: By Amending: Sec. 3.1 Definitions Sec. 8.2 Relation of planned development regulations to other zoning regulations Sec. 8.3 Planned development defined Sec. 8.5.1 Applications and documents to be submitted Sec. 8.5.2 Preapplication conferences Sec. 8.5.3 Review and recommendation by the planning commission Sec. 8.5.4 Review and action by the board of supervisors Sec. 8.5.5 Final site plans and subdivision plats Sec. 8.5.5.1 Contents of site plans and subdivision plats Sec. 8.5.5.2 Review of site plans and subdivision plats Sec. 8.5.5.3 Variations from approved plans, codes, and standards of development Sec. 8.5.5.4 Building permits and erosion and sediment control permits Sec. 8.5.5.5 Site plan and subdivision plat requirements for planned development zoning districts established without an application or application plan Sec. 8.6 Amendments to planned development districts Sec. 20A.3 Application requirements; required documents and information Sec. 20A.4 General development plans Sec. 20A.5 Codes of development Sec. 20A.6 Permitted uses Sec. 20A.7 Residential density Sec. 20A.9 Green spaces, amenities, conservation areas and preservation areas Sec. 20A.10 Streets Chapter 18. Zoning Article I. General Provisions Sec. 3.1 Definitions . . . Application plan: The graphic depiction of a proposed development containing the information required by section 8.5.1(d)(e) and, within the neighborhood model district, section 20A.4. A plan designated and approved as a general development plan for a neighborhood model district between March 19, 2003 and October 14, 2009 is an application plan for the purposes of this chapter. (Added 3-19-03) . . . Block: An area shown on an application plan or a general development plan that is typically surrounded by streets and within which land use activities occur. Although blocks usually imply a grid street system, where steep topography exists blocks may exist in non-rectilinear shapes. (Added 3-19-03) . . . General development plan: An application plan for a proposed development within the neighborhood model district, containing the information required by sections 8.5.1(d) and 20A.4. (Added 3-19-03) Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 2 Article II. Basic Regulations Sec. 8.2 Relation of planned development regulations to other zoning regulations Applicable regulations; waivers and modifications Planned developments shall be subject to the following regulations in this chapter: a. Sections applicable. Unless expressly superseded by a regulation of the applicable planned development district, Tthe regulations in section 8 shall apply to the establishment and regulation of all planned development districts of this chapter, other than those pertaining to conventional development districts stated in sections 10 through 18, 20B, 22, 23, 24, 27 and 28, shall apply to each planned development district unless the subject matter is expressly addressed in the code of development under section 20A.5, or the regulation is waived or modified as provided in subsection 8.2(b). b. Waivers and modifications. An applicant may request that any requirement of sections 4, 5, 21, 26 and 32, or the applicable planned development district regulations be waived or modified if it is found to be inconsistent with planned development design principles and that the waiver or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances. by the board of supervisors, as follows: 1. Submittal of request for waiver or modification. If the applicant requests such a waiver or modification as part of the application plan, the applicant shall submit its request in writing as part of the application plan, and shall demonstrate that the waiver or modification would not adversely affect the public health, safety or general welfare and, in the case of a requested modification, that the public purposes of the original regulation would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by the modification how the findings required by subsection 8.2(b)(3) would be satisfied. 2. Timing of request. Notwithstanding any regulation in sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or 32 establishing a procedure for considering a waiver or modification, any request for such a waiver or modification shall be reviewed and considered as part of the application plan. Nothing in this section prohibits ; provided that an owner within a planned development from requesting may request a waiver or modification of any requirement of sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or and 32 at any time, under the procedures and requirements established therefore. 3. Findings. In addition to making the findings required for the granting of a waiver or modification in sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or and 32, such a waiver or modification may be granted only if it is also found: (i) to be consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances, and satisfies all other applicable requirements of section 8; (ii) to be consistent with planned development design principles; (iii) that the waiver or modification would not adversely affect the public health, safety or general welfare; and (iv) in the case of a requested modification, that the public purposes of the original regulation would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by the modification. 4. Express waiver or modification. Each waiver and modification must be expressly granted and no waiver or modification shall be deemed to have been granted by implication. (12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03; Ord. 05-18(5), 6-8-05) Sec. 8.3 Planned development defined A planned development is a development that meets all of the following criteria at the time it is established or amended: (1) the land area proposed to be rezoned or the area within the planned development district is under unified control and will be planned and developed as a whole; (2) the development is in general accord Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 3 conforms with one or more approved application plans; and (3) in all planned development districts other than a planned historic district, the development will provide, operate and maintain common areas, facilities and improvements for some or all occupants of the development where these features are appropriate. (12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03; Ord. 05-18(5), 6-8-05) Sec. 8.5.1 Applications and documents to be submitted Each application for a planned development district shall be submitted as provided for other zoning map amendments. The documents required by subsections (a) through (e) below shall be submitted with the application. After the application is submitted, the director of planning and community development director of planning may request additional plans, maps, studies and reports such as, but not limited to, traffic impact analyses, identification of specimen trees, and reports identifying potential non-tidal wetlands which are deemed reasonably necessary to analyze the application: a. A regional context map at a scale of not less one (1) inch equal to one thousand (1000) feet showing topography at a maximum of ten (10) foot intervals, surrounding properties, improvements to those properties, surrounding public streets, private roads, and other thoroughfares; b. An accurate boundary survey of the tract or plan limit area to be rezoned showing the location and type of boundary evidence and the source of the survey; c. A map at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet, provided that another interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director of planning where the size of the area proposed to be rezoned or topographic considerations warrant, showing: 1. The following existing physical conditions: streams, wooded areas, potential non-tidal wetlands, slopes in excess of twenty-five (25) percent, historic structures and sites included in the records of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, cemeteries, floodplain, and any identified features in the open space element of the comprehensive plan; 2. Existing topography accurately shown with a maximum of five (5) foot contour intervals at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet; other interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director of planning and community development where topographic considerations warrant using the county’s geographic information system or better topographical information, and the source of the topographical information; 3. Existing roads, easements, and utilities; 4. The existing owners and zoning district The name of the proposed development; the names of all owners; the name of the developer, if different from the owner; the name of the person who prepared the plan; all tax map and parcel numbers in fourteen (14) digit format; the zoning district and all overlay zoning districts; the magisterial district; the north point; the scale; one datum reference for elevation; if any part of the area proposed to be rezoned is within the flood hazard overlay district (section 30.3), United States Geological Survey vertical datum shall be shown and/or correlated to plan topography; sheet numbers on each sheet and the total number of sheets; the date of the drawing; and the date and description of the last revision; 5. The present use of adjoining tracts abutting parcels; and the location of structures on adjoining abutting parcels, if any; and departing lot lines; and 6. The existing location, type and size of ingress and egress to the site; Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 4 d. A traffic impact statement meeting the requirements of state law including, but not limited to, 24 VAC 30-155-10 et seq.; e. An application plan based on a minimum of two (2) data references for elevations to be used on plans and profiles at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet, provided that another interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director of planning where the size of the area proposed to be rezoned or topographic considerations warrant, showing: 1. The areas to be designated as preservation areas, if appropriate, and areas to be designated as conservation areas, such as streams, wooded areas, specimen trees, non-tidal wetlands, and other significant environmental features; 2. The proposed Conceptual grading/topography with a maximum of five (5) foot contour intervals using the county’s geographic information system or better topographical information, and the source of the topographical information, supplemented where necessary by spot elevations and areas of the site where existing slopes are twenty-five (25) percent or greater; 3. The general location of proposed streets, alleys, sidewalks, and pedestrian paths; 4. Typical street cross-sections to show proportions, scale, and streetscape; 5. Connections to existing and proposed streets, as well as proposed thoroughfares shown on the comprehensive plan; 6. Trip generation figures; 76. The general lay-out for the water and sewer systems, conceptual stormwater management, and a conceptual mitigation plan; 87. The location of central features or major elements within the development essential to the design of the development, such as major employment areas, parking areas and structures, civic areas, parks, open space, green spaces, amenities and recreation areas; 98. A summary of land uses including dwelling types and densities, and the gross floor areas for commercial and industrial uses; 109. The general A conceptual lot lay-out layout; and 1110. Standards for of development including proposed yards, building heights, open space characteristics, and any landscape or architectural characteristics related to scale, proportions, and massing at the edge of the district. (12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.2 Preapplication conferences Each applicant for a planned development shall attend a joint meeting with the planning, engineering, and zoning staff of the department of community development as well as other qualified officials from outside agencies such as the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of Transportation, and the Albemarle County Service Authority to review the application plan and the proposed development before the application is submitted. The purpose of the preapplication conference shall be to assist the applicant to assure that the application and the documents to be submitted with the application comply with all applicable regulations, and to identify as soon as possible conflicting regulations and necessary waivers or modifications. Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 5 Each applicant is encouraged to use the guidance provided in the preapplication conference process to develop an application for a planned development that, when submitted with its supporting documents, will be as complete and comprehensive as possible. (§ 8.5.3, 12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) (Former § 8.5.2 Planning Commission Procedures Repealed 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.3 Review and recommendation by the planning commission Each application for to establish or amend a planned development district shall be reviewed and acted on by the planning commission as follows: a. The commission shall consider and make its recommendation to the board of supervisors on each application for a planned development district as it does for other zoning map amendments. Within the time provided to make a recommendation, the commission may hold work sessions on the application and proceed to a public hearing after it determines that no further work sessions are necessary, or at any time the applicant requests a public hearing. b. In making its recommendation on the application to the board of supervisors, the commission shall make findings about the following In addition to any other factors relevant to the consideration of a zoning map amendment, the commission shall consider the following: 1. Whether the proposed planned development or amendment thereto satisfies the purpose and intent of the planned development district. 12. The suitability of the tract for the proposed planned development in terms of its relation to all applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan Whether the area proposed to be rezoned is appropriate for a planned development under the comprehensive plan; the physical characteristics of the land area proposed to be rezoned; and it’s the relation of the area proposed to be rezoned to the surrounding area; and 23. The relation of the proposed planned development to major roads, utilities, public facilities and services;. 3. Each requested waiver or modification, including whether the requirements of section 8.2 are satisfied. c. Depending on the findings it makes, tThe commission shall either recommend approval of the application as proposed, approval of the application with changes to be made prior to action on the application by the board of supervisors, or disapproval. The commission shall also make recommendations on all requested waivers and modifications. (§ 8.5.4, 12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.4 Review and action by the board of supervisors; effect of approval Each application to establish or amend a planned development district shall be reviewed and acted on by the board of supervisors, and approval of the application shall have effect, as follows: a. Review and action. The board of supervisors shall consider and act on each application for a planned development district as it does for other zoning map amendments. If the board approves the application, the approving action shall constitute approval of the application plan, and all standards for of development submitted by the applicant, and the code of development, as applicable. The board’s Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 6 action shall also identify which proffers it has accepted and which waivers or modifications it has granted. b. Effect of approval. Once an application is approved Upon approval of an application, the application plan, all submitted standards for of development submitted by the applicant, the code of development, as applicable, and all accepted proffers, and all approved waivers and modifications shall be included as part of the zoning regulations applicable to the planned development. (§ 8.5.5, 12-10-80; Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.5 Final sSite plans and subdivision plats Sec. 8.5.5.1 Contents of site plans and subdivision plats Each site plan and subdivision plat submitted for development in a planned development shall comply with the following: a. Generally. Each site plan for a planned development shall comply with section 32 of this chapter, subject to the waiver or modification of any such regulation pursuant to section 8.5.3(b)(3) 8.2(b). Each subdivision plat for a planned development shall comply with Cchapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle, subject to the waiver, variation or substitution of any such regulation pursuant to section 14-237. b. Within the neighborhood model zoning district. In addition to the requirements of paragraph subsection (a), each site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development within the neighborhood model zoning district shall pertain to a minimum area of one block and shall include a phasing plan, and each site plan shall include building elevations for all new or modified structures. (§ 8.5.6.1, 12-10-80; 9-9-92; § 8.5.5.1, Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.5.2 Review of site plans and subdivision plats Each preliminary and final site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations: (1) in effect at the time the lands were zoned to a planned development district; or, (2) at the option of the applicant, currently in effect. In addition, each preliminary and final site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with the following: a. The approved application plan, the approved standards for development, the accepted proffers, and the authorized waivers or modifications and any conditions imposed therewith, if any; b. The permitted uses within the planned development zoning district, including all proffers, as determined by the zoning administrator after consultation with the director of planning and community development; in making this determination, the zoning administrator shall be guided by section 22.2.1 of this chapter; c. In addition to the foregoing, conformity with the application plan and the standards of development. Within each neighborhood model zoning district, the general development plan and the code of development, as determined by the director of planning and community development after consultation with the zoning administrator. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations, as follows: Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 7 a. Planned development districts established on or before December 10, 1980. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district established on or before December 10, 1980 shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review; provided that, at the option of the developer or subdivider, each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat may be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development was approved if the developer or subdivider establishes a vested right as provided in Virginia Code §§ 15.2-2296 et seq. or 15.2-2307 to develop under the previously approved planned development district. b. Planned development districts established after December 10, 1980. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district established after December 10, 1980 shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established or, at the option of the developer or subdivider, in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review; subject to the following: 1. Election to comply with regulations in effect when district established; exception for certain current subjects of regulation unless vested rights established. If the developer or subdivider elects to have its site plan or subdivision plat reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established, all of the following subjects of regulation in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review shall apply unless vested rights are established under Virginia Code §§ 15.2-2296 et seq. or 15.2-2307: (i) entrance corridor overlay district (section 30.6); (ii) flood hazard overlay district (section 30.3); (iii) landscaping and screening (section 32.7.9); (iv) outdoor lighting (section 4.17); (v) parking (section 4.12); and (vi) signs (section 4.15). If rights are determined to have vested, the regulations for these six subjects in effect when rights vested shall apply. For the purposes of this section 8.5.5.2(b), an application plan approved on and after March 19, 2003 that complies with the requirements of an application plan under section 8.5.1(e) or section 20A.4, or a prior version thereof in effect on and after March 19, 2003, is a significant governmental act within the meaning of Virginia Code § 15.2-2307. 2. Election to comply with regulations in effect when district established; election to comply with certain current subjects of regulation. If the developer or subdivider elects to have its site plan or subdivision plat reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established, the developer or subdivider may also elect to comply with one or more of the subjects of regulation listed in subsection 8.5.5.2(b)(1) in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review instead of with the corresponding regulations in effect when the planned development district was established. c. Review for compliance and conformance. A site plan or subdivision plat shall be reviewed to determine whether it complies with the applicable regulations and other requirements of law, and whether it conforms to the application plan, as follows: 1. Zoning administrator. The zoning administrator shall determine whether a site plan or subdivision plat complies with the applicable regulations. In addition, the zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of planning, shall determine whether the proposed permitted uses comply with the applicable regulations and, in doing so, may permit as a use by right a use that is not expressly classified in this chapter if the zoning administrator further determines that the use is similar in general character to the uses permitted by right in the district or by the code of development and is similar in terms of locational requirements, operational characteristics, visual impacts, and traffic, noise and odor generation. 2. Director of planning. The director of planning shall determine whether a site plan or subdivision plat conforms to the application plan. In determining conformity, the director shall determine whether the central features or major elements within the development are in the Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 8 same location as shown on the application plan and if the buildings, parking, streets, blocks, paths and other design elements are of the same general character, scope and scale as shown on the application plan. 3. County engineer. The county engineer shall determine whether an erosion and sediment control plan, grading plan, stormwater management plan, road or street plan, and mitigation plan conform with the concept grading, stormwater management, streets, and mitigation shown on the application plan. d. Applicable regulations defined. For the purposes of this section 8.5.5.2, the term “applicable regulations” means, as appropriate and applicable, all zoning regulations, all subdivision regulations, the application plan (except for those elements authorized to be shown at a conceptual or general level), including those plans formerly referred to as general development plans, conditions of approval, accepted proffers, the code of development, special use permits, variances, and waivers, modifications and variations. e. Applicability of chapter 17. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district shall be reviewed for compliance with chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review, regardless of when the planned development was established or whether the developer or subdivider elects, or establishes vested rights, under sections 8.5.5.2(a) and (b) to proceed with review under the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development was approved. f. Vested rights not impaired. Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing the impairment of a vested right that may be established under Virginia Code §§ 15.2-2261(C), 15.2-2297, 15.2-2298, 15.2-2303 or 15.2-2307. (§ 8.5.6.2, 12-10-80; 9-9-92; § 8.5.5.2, Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.5.3 Variations from approved plans, codes, and standards of developments The director of planning and community development director of planning may allow a site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development to vary from an approved application plan, standard of development and, also, in the case of a neighborhood model district, a general development plan or code of development, as provided herein: a. The director of planning is authorized to grant a variation from the following provisions of an approved plan, code or standard: 1. Minor variations changes to yard requirements, build-to lines or ranges, maximum structure heights and minimum lot sizes; 2. Changes to the arrangement of buildings and uses shown on the plan, provided that the major elements shown on the plan and their relationships remain the same; 3. Changes to phasing plans; 4. Minor changes to landscape or architectural standards; and 5. Minor variations changes to street design and street location, subject to a recommendation for approval by the county engineer; and 6. Minor changes to the design and location of stormwater management facilities, land disturbance including disturbance within conservation areas, and mitigation, subject to a recommendation for approval by the county engineer. Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 9 b. The applicant shall submit a written request for a variation to the director of planning;. tThe request shall specify the provision of the plan, code or standard for which the variation is sought, and state the reason for the requested variation;. tThe director may reject a request that fails to include the required information. c. The director of planning is authorized to grant a variation upon a determination that the variation: (1) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan; (2) does not increase the approved development density or intensity of development; (3) does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district; (4) does not require a special use permit; and (5) is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application. d. The director of planning may require that the applicant provide an updated application plan and, in the case of changes to a code of development, a complete amended code of development, reflecting the approved variation and the date of the variation. If the director requires an updated application plan or code of development, the granting of the variation shall be conditional upon the applicant providing the plan or code within thirty (30) days after approval of the variation and a determination by the director that the plan or code were revised to correctly reflect the granted variation. e. Any variation not expressly provided for herein may be accomplished by rezoning zoning map amendment. (§ 8.5.6.3, 12-10-80; 9-9-92; § 8.5.5.3, Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.5.4 Building permits and erosion and sediment control grading permits Building permits and erosion and sediment control grading permits may be issued as provided herein: a. A building permit, including any special footings or foundation permits, may be issued for any work within a planned development, excluding the installation of street signs, only after the approval of the final site plan or final subdivision plat in the area in which the permit would apply. b. An erosion and sediment control grading permit may be issued for site preparation grading associated with an approved planned development if an the erosion and sediment control plan measures, disturbed area and grading are in conformity with the concept grading and measures shown on the application plan as determined by the county engineer, after consultation with the director of planning. satisfactory to the director of engineering and public works has been submitted and reviewed in conjunction with the application plan, and the director of planning and community development determines the proposed grading is consistent with the approved application plan. c. In cases where If, after consultation with the director of planning, the county engineer finds that there is not enough detail on the approved application plan to assure consistency that the proposed grading and other measures are consistent with the application plan, no erosion and sediment control permit shall a grading permit shall not be issued until the final site plan is approved, or the final subdivision plat is tentatively approved. cd. Within each neighborhood model district, the department of planning and community development shall review each building permit application or modification to determine whether the proposed structure conforms with the architectural and landscape standards in the approved code of development. (§ 8.5.6.4, 12-10-80; 9-9-92; § 8.5.5.4, Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.5.5.5 Site plan and subdivision plat requirements for planned development zoning districts established without an application or application plan Site plan and subdivision plat requirements when there is no application plan Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 10 Site plans and subdivision plats within a planned development district for which an application plan was not approved shall be subject to the following: a. No valid site plan or subdivision plat at time district established. If a planned development zoning district was established without before an approved application plan as was required by section 8 to be approved as part of the zoning map amendment and neither a final site plan or subdivision plat pertaining to the entirety of the planned development district was valid at the time of the zoning map amendment nor was approved in conjunction with the approval of the zoning map amendment, then neither a site plan nor a subdivision plat shall be approved for any lands within the district unless and until an application plan and all other documents required by section 8.5 are submitted by the owner and are approved as provided therein. b. Valid site plan or subdivision plat at time district established. If such a district was previously established in conjunction with an approved site plan If a planned development district was established before an application plan was required by section 8 to be approved as part of the zoning map amendment but a final site plan or subdivision plat pertaining to the entirety of the planned development district was valid at the time of the zoning map amendment or was approved in conjunction with the approval of the zoning map amendment, the valid or approved site plan or subdivision plat shall be deemed to be the application plan, and the district shall be deemed to have complied with the requirements of section 8. In such a case, if the site plan or subdivision plat has expired, a new site plan or subdivision plat must be approved prior to any development activity site plan or subdivision plat shall be reviewed as provided in section 8.5.5.2. (Amended 7-16-86) (§ 8.5.6.5, 12-10-80; 9-9-92; § 8.5.5.5, Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 8.6 Amendments to planned development districts Each amendment to a planned development district shall be submitted and reviewed as provided in section 8. In addition, with each application to amend the area of the planned development district, or to amend the proffers, the application plan, the general development plan, or the code of development within an area that is less than the entire district, the applicant shall submit a map showing the entire existing planned development district and identifying any area to be added to or deleted from the district, or identifying the area to which the amended proffers, application plan, general development plan, or code of development will apply. A planned development district may be amended after it is established, either by the addition or removal of land, or by an amendment to the application plan, code of development, proffers or any waiver or modification, in accordance with the procedures and requirements of section 8 and those applicable to zoning map amendments generally, and subject to the following additional requirements: a. Eligible applicant. Any owner, contract purchaser with the owner’s consent, or any authorized agent of the owner, of one or more parcels within a planned development district may apply to amend the existing planned development district as it pertains to the owner’s parcel(s). The owner of each parcel to which the proposed amendment would result in or require a physical change to the parcel, a change in use, density or intensity on that parcel, a change to any proffer or regulation in a code of development that would apply to the parcel, a change to an owner’s express obligation under a proffer or regulation in a code of development even if the proffer or regulation is not expressly changed, or a change to the application plan that would apply to the parcel, shall be an applicant. b. Amendment affecting less area than the entire district; map. If the proposed amendment would affect less area than the entire district, the applicant shall submit a map showing the entire existing planned development district and identifying any area to be added to or deleted from the district, or identifying the area to which the amended application plan, code of development, proffers or any waiver or modification would apply. Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 11 c. Individual notice. In addition to any notice required by Virginia Code § 15.2-2204 and sections 33.4 and 33.8 of this chapter, written notice of the proposed amendment shall be provided to the owner of each parcel within the planned development district. The substance of the notice shall be as required by Virginia Code § 15.2-2204(B), paragraph 1, regardless of the number of parcels affected. d. Factors to consider during review of proposed amendment. In addition to any other applicable factors to be considered in the review of a zoning map amendment, the following shall also be considered: 1. Whether the proposed amendment reduces, maintains or enhances the elements of a planned development set forth in section 8.3. 2. The extent to which the proposed amendment impacts the other parcels within the planned development district. Article III. District Regulations Sec. 20A.3 Application requirements; required documents and information Except where the option is exercised as provided in subsection 20A.3(b), below, tThe following documents and information shall be submitted in addition to any other documents required to be submitted under section 8.5 of this chapter: a. A statement describing how the proposed NMD satisfies the intent of the zoning ordinance and is consistent with the applicable goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan, the land use plan, the master plan for the applicable development area, and the Neighborhood Model; if one or more characteristics of the Neighborhood Model delineated in section 20A.1 are missing from an application, the applicant shall justify why all of the characteristics cannot or should not be provided; b. A parking and loading needs study that demonstrates parking needs and requirements and includes strategies for dealing with these needs and requirements, including phasing plans, parking alternatives as provided in section 4.12.8 of this chapter, and transportation demand management strategies as provided in section 4.12.12 of this chapter; provided that the applicant may elect to submit the parking and loading needs study in conjunction with the preliminary site plan for the development if it determines that the uses that may occupy the buildings are not sufficiently known at the time of the zoning map amendment. c. Strategies for establishing shared stormwater management facilities, off-site stormwater management facilities, and the proposed phasing of the establishment of stormwater management facilities. d. A general development An application plan, as provided in section 20A.4, including all information required by sections 8 or 20A to support any element of the plan. e. A code of development, as provided in section 20A.5, including all information required by sections 8 or 20A to support any element of the code. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 20A.4 General development Application plans A general development plan shall serve as the application plan required by section 8.5.1(d) of this chapter. In addition to the application plan requirements of section 8.5.1(de ), the following are required elements of the general development plan an application plan in the NMD: Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 12 a. The amount of gross square footage devoted to nonresidential uses and a residential equivalent, expressed as the product of the square feet per unit multiplied by the number of dwelling units proposed. If a residential equivalent is not provided by the applicant, it shall be the product of one thousand five hundred (1500) square feet multiplied by the number of dwelling units proposed. b. The general allocation of uses to each block in terms of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, amenities, parks, recreational facilities open to the public, and any other use category proposed by the applicant and which complies with the requirements of section 20A.8. c. The location of proposed green spaces, amenities, conservation areas or preservation areas, as provided in section 20A.9. d. Building footprints or graphic representations of central features or major elements that are essential to the design of the development, shown at the block level. a. The general location of proposed streets, alleys, sidewalks, and pedestrian paths; b. The location of proposed green spaces, amenities, conservation areas or preservation areas, as provided in section 20A.9; c. A conceptual lot lay-out; d. Conceptual grading/topography using the county geographic information system or better topographic information supplemented where necessary by spot elevations and areas of the site where existing slopes are twenty-five (25) percent or greater; e. Typical street cross-sections to show proportions, scale, and streetscape, which, alternatively, may be provided in the code of development; f. Any proposed connections to existing and proposed streets, as well as proposed thoroughfares shown on the comprehensive plan; g. The general lay-out for the water and sewer systems, conceptual stormwater management, and a conceptual mitigation plan; and h. The location of central features or major elements within the development essential to the design of the development, such as building envelopes, major employment areas, parking areas and structures, civic areas, parks, open space, green spaces, amenities and recreation areas. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 20A.5 Codes of development A code of development shall establish the unifying design guidelines, the specific regulations for the district, and the use characteristics of each block; provide for certainty in the location of and appearance of central features, and the permitted uses in the district; and provide a flexible range of a mix of uses and densities. Any substantive or procedural requirement of this chapter shall apply to an NMD unless the subject matter is expressly addressed in the code of development. Each code of development shall be in a form required or otherwise approved by the director of planning. To satisfy these requirements, each code of development shall establish: a. The uses permitted in the district by right and by special use permit, as provided in section 20A.6. Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 13 b. The amount of developed square footage proposed, delineated for the entire NMD and by block by use, and amenity, streets and lot coverage. The developed square footage may be expressed as a proposed range of square footage. c. The maximum residential densities, as provided in section 20A.7, and the maximum number of residential units for individual residential land use categories and mixed-use categories, number of residential dwelling units, dwelling units by type, and delineating at least two (2) housing types, as provided in section 20A.8. d. The amount of land area and percentage of gross acreage devoted to green space and amenities, as provided in section 20A.9. e. All requirements and restrictions associated with each use delineated in paragraph subsection 20A.5(a). f. All uses expressly prohibited in the district, so that they may not be considered to be uses accessory to a permitted use. g. Architectural and landscape standards that will apply in the NMD, which shall address the following: 1. The form, massing, and proportions of structures which may be provided through illustrations; 2. Architectural styles; 3. Materials, colors, and textures; 4. Roof form and pitch; 5. Architectural ornamentation; 62. Façade treatments, including window and door openings; 7. Landscape treatments; and 83. The preservation of historic structures, sites, cemeteries, and archeological sites identified by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. ; and 4. Architectural styles, materials, colors and textures if these elements are determined to be necessary in order for a proposed development to be compatible with its contiguous developed surroundings. The provisions in a code of development adopted prior to October 14, 2009 pertaining to subsections 20A.5(g)(1) through (4) shall be the only architectural standards in the code of development that apply to the planned development. h. Preliminary lot lay-out. Landscape treatments where landscaping in addition to that required by section 32 is proposed. The provisions in a code of development adopted prior to October 14, 2009 pertaining to landscape treatments as required under former subsection 20A.5(g)(7) shall apply to the planned development. i. For each block: 1. The range of uses permitted on the block by right and by special use permit; 2. All requirements and restrictions associated with each use delineated in paragraph (i)(1); Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 14 32. Build-to lines or ranges, which are the required distance from the right-of-way to a structure; 43. Minimum and maximum lot and yard dimensions; 54. Minimum number of stories and Mmaximum building heights; 65. Location of Ssidewalks and pedestrian paths locations; 76. Acreage devoted to and characteristics of Ggreen space, and amenities, and recreational areas and facilities as required by section 4.16; 87. Location, acreage and characteristics of Cconservation areas and preservation areas as defined in section 3.1, if applicable; 98. Location of Pparking areas; 109. Location, acreage and characteristics of Ccivic spaces, which are public areas for community or civic activities (e.g., libraries and their associated yards, schools and places of worship); (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 20A.6 Permitted uses The following uses shall be permitted in an NMD, subject to the regulations in this section and section 8, the approved general development application plan and code of development, and the accepted proffers: a. By right uses. The following uses are permitted by right if the use is expressly identified as a by right use in the code of development or if the use is permitted in a determination by the zoning administrator pursuant to subsection 8.5.5.2(c)(1): 1. Each use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district, except for those uses allowed only by special use permit delineated in subsections 20A.6(b)(2) and (b)(3); provided that the use is identified in the approved code of development. 2. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities, excluding tower structures and including poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines, pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central sewerage systems in conformity with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other applicable law. 3. Accessory uses and buildings including storage buildings. 4. Home occupation, Class A, where the district includes residential uses. 5. Temporary construction uses. 6. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices, parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies, public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. 7. Tourist lodgings, where the district includes residential uses. 8. Homes for developmentally disabled persons, where the district includes residential uses. 9. Tier I and Tier II personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04) Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 15 b. By special use permit. The following uses are permitted by special use permit if the use is expressly identified as use permitted by special use permit in the code of development: 1. Each use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district. 12. Drive-through windows serving or associated with permitted uses. 23. Outdoor storage, display and/or sales serving or associated with a by right permitted use, if any portion of the use would be visible from a travelway. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03; Ord 04-18(2), 10-13-04) Sec. 20A.7 Residential density Residential density within each NMD shall be as follows: a. The gross residential density should be within the applicable recommended gross density range established in the land use element of the comprehensive plan. In its deliberations regarding the appropriate residential density for the district, the board of supervisors shall take into account the amount of land devoted to non-residential uses. b. The gross residential density shall be measured in dwelling units per acre and calculated by taking the gross acreage of the district divided by the proposed number of dwelling units in the proposed district dividing the proposed number of dwelling units in the proposed district by the gross acreage of the district. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 20A.9 Green spaces, amenities, conservation areas and preservation areas Each NMD shall include the following: a. Green space. The minimum area devoted to green space is as follows: 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, transitional, neighborhood service, community service, or office service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the site area proposed to be rezoned. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office regional or industrial service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least fifteen percent (15%) of the gross acreage of the site area proposed to be rezoned. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in paragraphs subsections 20A.9(a)(1) and 20A.9(a)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to green space. 4. The minimum area devoted to green space may be reduced by the board of supervisors at the request of the applicant. In acting on a request, the board shall consider these factors: the relationship of the site to adjoining or nearby properties containing public green space such as parks or natural areas; the known future uses of the of the adjoining properties; and whether a reduction would better achieve the neighborhood model goals of the comprehensive plan. Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 16 b. Amenities. The minimum area devoted to amenities is as follows: 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, neighborhood service, and community service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the site area proposed to be rezoned. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office service, office regional service or industrial service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least ten percent (10%) of the gross acreage of the site area proposed to be rezoned. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in paragraphs subsections 20A.9(b)(1) and 20A.9(b)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to amenities. 4. The minimum area devoted to amenities may be reduced by the board of supervisors at the request of the applicant. In acting on a request, the board shall consider these factors: the relationship of the site to adjoining or nearby properties containing amenities; the proportion of residential uses to nonresidential uses proposed; the known future uses of the of the adjoining properties; and whether a reduction would better achieve the neighborhood model goals of the comprehensive plan. c. Additional requirements for amenities. Amenities shall also be subject to the following: 1. At least ninety percent (90%) of the residential units in the NMD shall be within a one-quarter mile walk of an amenity. 2. The size, location, shape, slope and condition of the land shall be suitable for the proposed amenity. 3. The amenity shall be suitable for the specific population to be served. 4. The design of any recreational facilities shall meet the minimum design requirements from recognized sources of engineering and recreational standards. 5. In nonresidential areas of the development, amenities shall be located so that they are easily accessible to patrons and employees of the development. d. Green space within parks and recreational amenities. Any portion of an amenity that is covered in grass or other vegetation may be counted as both green space and an amenity. e. Preservation areas within green space. Preservation areas that preserve environmental features shall be included as green space area. f. Conservation areas within green space. Conservation areas that maintain environmental features shall be included as green space area. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Sec. 20A.10 Streets Each street within an NMD shall meet the street standards for a traditional neighborhood development established by the department of engineering and public works community development. (Ord. 03-18(2), 3-19-03) Attachment A Draft: 09/29/09 17 I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of _____ to _____, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on _________________________. __________________________________ Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Boyd ____ ____ Mr. Dorrier ____ ____ Ms. Mallek ____ ____ Mr. Rooker ____ ____ Mr. Slutzky ____ ____ Ms. Thomas ____ ____ Attachment C, p.1 Proposed Changes to Planned Development Section of Zoning Ordinance and Neighborhood Model Section of Zoning Ordinance September 30, 2009 Section # Existing Text Proposed Text Impact/Reason for Change Section 3.1 Definitions Application plan: The graphic depiction of a proposed development containing the information required by section 8.5.1(d) Application plan: The graphic depiction of a proposed development containing the information required by section 8.5.1(d)and, within the neighborhood model district, section 20A.4. A plan designated and approved as a general development plan for a neighborhood model district between March 19, 2003 and [insert effective date] is an application plan for the purposes of this chapter. Cleanup Block: An area shown on an application plan or a general development plan that is typically surrounded by streets and within which land use activities occur. Although blocks usually imply a grid street system, where steep topography exists blocks may exist in non-rectilinear shapes Block: An area shown on an application plan that is typically surrounded by streets and within which land use activities occur. Although blocks usually imply a grid street system, where steep topography exists blocks may exist in non-rectilinear shapes Deletes term “general development plan”. (see below) General development plan: An application plan for a proposed development within the neighborhood model district, containing the information required by sections 8.5.1(d) and 20A.4. Definition deleted. General Develop-ment Plan is now just, “application plan” to eliminate confusion. Section 8.2 8.2 Relation of planned development regulations to other zoning regulations The regulations in section 8 shall apply to the establishment and regulation of all planned development districts. An applicant may request that any requirement of sections 4, 5 and 32, or the planned development district regulations be waived or modified if it is found to be inconsistent with planned development design principles and that the waiver or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances. If the applicant requests such a waiver or modification as part of the application plan, the applicant shall submit its request in writing as part of the application, and shall demonstrate that the waiver or modification would not adversely affect the public health, safety or general welfare and, in the case of a requested modification, that the public purposes of the original regulation would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by the modification. Notwithstanding any regulation in sections 4, 5, or 32 establishing a procedure for considering a waiver or Sec. 8.2 Applicable regulations; waivers and modifications Planned developments shall be subject to the following regulations in this chapter: a. Sections applicable. Unless expressly superseded by a regulation of the applicable planned development district, the regulations of this chapter, other than those pertaining to conventional development districts stated in sections 10 through 18, 20B, 22, 23, 24, 27 and 28, shall apply to each planned development district unless the subject matter is expressly addressed in the code of development under section 20A.5, or the regulation is waived or modified as provided in subsection (b). b. Waivers and modifications. An applicant may request that any requirement of sections 4, 5, 21, 26 and 32, or the applicable planned development district regulations be waived or modified by the board of supervisors as follows: 1. Submittal of request for waiver or modification. If the applicant requests such a waiver or modification as part of the application plan, the applicant shall submit its request in writing as part of the application plan, and shall demonstrate how Changes section title for easier reference, clarifies which sections are available for waivers and modifications, organizes section, and makes clear that waivers must be expressly granted by the Board. Attachment C, p.2 modification, any request for such a waiver or modification shall be reviewed and considered as part of the application plan. Nothing in this section prohibits an owner within a planned development from requesting a waiver or modification of any requirement of sections 4, 5 and 32 at any time, under the procedures and requirements established therefore. In addition to making the findings required for the granting of a waiver or modification in sections 4, 5 and 32, such a waiver or modification may be granted only if it is also found to be consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances, and satisfies all other applicable requirements of section 8. the findings required by subsection 8.2(b)(3) would be satisfied. 2. Timing of request. Notwithstanding any regulation in sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or 32 establishing a Procedure for considering a waiver or modification, any request for such a waiver or modification shall be reviewed and considered as part of the application plan; provided that an owner within a planned development may request a waiver or modification of any requirement of sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or 32 at any time, under the procedures and requirements established therefore. 3. Findings. In addition to making the findings required for the granting of a waiver or modification in sections 4, 5, 21, 26 or 32, a waiver or modification may be granted only if it is also found (i) to be consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances, and satisfies all other applicable requirements of section 8; (ii) to be consistent with planned development design principles; (iii) that the waiver or modification would not adversely affect the public health, safety, or general welfare; and (iv) in the case of a requested modification, that the public purposes of the original regulation would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by the modification. 4. Express waiver or modification. Each waiver and modification must be expressly granted and no waiver or modification shall be deemed to have been granted by implication. Section 8.3 PD defined 8.3 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DEFINED A planned development is a development that meets all of the following criteria: (1) the land is under unified control and will be planned and developed as a whole; (2) the development is in general accord with one or more approved application plans; and (3) in all planned development districts other than a planned historic district, the development will provide, operate and maintain common areas, facilities and improvements for some or all occupants of the development where these features are appropriate. A planned development is a development that meets all of the following criteria at the time it is established or amended: (1) the area proposed to be rezoned or the area within the planned development district is under unified control and will be planned and developed as a whole; (2) the development conforms with one or more approved application plans; and (3) in all planned development districts other than a planned historic district, the development will provide, operate and maintain common areas, facilities and improvements for some or all occupants of the development where these features are appropriate. Acknowledges that PDs can be amended; uses word, “conforms” to make distinctions between conventional districts and planned districts. 8.5.1 Application and documents to be submitted Each application for a planned development district shall be submitted as provided for other zoning map amendments. The documents required by subsections (a) through (e) below shall be submitted with the application. After the application is submitted, the director of planning and community development may request additional plans, maps, studies and reports such as, but not limited to, traffic impact analyses, identification of specimen trees, and Each application for a planned development district shall be submitted as provided for other zoning map amendments. The documents required by subsections (a) through (e) below shall be submitted with the application. After the application is submitted, director of planning may request additional plans, maps, studies and reports such as, but not limited to, traffic impact analyses, identification of specimen trees, and reports identifying potential non-tidal wetlands which are deemed Cleanup Attachment C, p.3 reports identifying potential non-tidal wetlands which are deemed reasonably necessary to analyze the application: reasonably necessary to analyze the application: b. An accurate boundary survey of the tract or plan limit showing the location and type of boundary evidence; b. An accurate boundary survey of the tract or area to be rezoned showing the location and type of boundary evidence and the source of the survey; Cleanup c. A map showing: c. A map at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet, provided that another interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director of planning where the size of the area proposed to be rezoned or topographic considerations warrant, showing: Clarification/cleanup and consistency with other required documents 1. The following existing physical conditions: streams, wooded areas, potential non-tidal wetlands, slopes in excess of twenty-five (25) percent, historic structures and sites included in the records of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, floodplain, and any identified features in the open space element of the comprehensive plan; 1. The following existing physical conditions: streams, wooded areas, potential non-tidal wetlands, slopes in excess of twenty-five (25) percent, historic structures and sites included in the records of the Virginia Department of Historic Resources, cemeteries, floodplain, and any identified features in the open space element of the comprehensive plan; Cleanup c.2. Existing topography accurately shown with a maximum of five (5) foot contour intervals at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet; other interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director of planning and community development where topographic considerations warrant; 2. Existing topography accurately shown using the county’s geographic information system or better topographical information, and the source of the topographical information; Cleanup 4. The existing owners and zoning district; and 4. The name of the proposed development; the names of all owners; the name of the developer, if different from the owner; the name of the person who prepared the plan; all tax map and parcel numbers in fourteen (14) digit format; the zoning district and all overlay zoning districts; the magisterial district; the north point; the scale; one datum reference for elevation; if any part of the area proposed to be rezoned is within the flood hazard overlay district (section 30.3), United States Geological Survey vertical datum shall be shown and/or correlated to plan topography; sheet numbers on each sheet and the total number of sheets; the date of the drawing; and the date and description of the last revision; Clarification and consistency with other required documents. 5. The present use of adjoining tracts and the location of structures on adjoining parcels, if any; and 5. The present use of abutting parcels; the location of structures on abutting parcels, if any; and departing lot lines; and Clarification and cleanup from Section d.6.: Trip generation figures; d. A traffic impact statement meeting the requirements of state law including, but not limited to, 24 VAC 30-155-10 et seq.; Cleanup to conform with state requirements d. An application plan based on a minimum of two (2) data references for elevations to be used on plans and profiles showing: e. An application plan at a scale of not less than one (1) inch equal to one hundred (100) feet, provided that another interval and/or scale may be required or permitted by the director Clarification and consistency with other required Attachment C, p.4 of planning where the size of the area proposed to be rezoned or topographic considerations warrant, showing documents. d.2. The proposed grading/topography with a maximum of five (5) foot contour intervals; 2. Conceptual grading/topography using the county’s geographic information system or better topographical information, and the source of the topographical information, supplemented where necessary by spot elevations and areas of the site where existing slopes are twenty-five (25) percent or greater; Clarification and consistency with other required documents. d.10. The general lot lay-out; and 9. A conceptual lot lay-out; and Clarification Standards for development including proposed yards, building heights, open space characteristics, and any landscape or architectural characteristics related to scale, proportions, and massing at the edge of the district. 10. Standards of development including proposed yards, building heights, open space characteristics, and any landscape or architectural characteristics related to scale, proportions, and massing at the edge of the district. Cleanup 8.5.2 Preapplication Conferences Each applicant for a planned development shall attend a joint meeting with the planning, engineering, and zoning staff as well as other qualified officials from outside agencies such as the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of Transportation, and the Albemarle County Service Authority to review the application plan and the proposed development before the application is submitted. Each applicant for a planned development shall attend a joint meeting with the staff of the department of community development as well as other qualified officials from outside agencies such as the Virginia Department of Health, the Virginia Department of Transportation, and the Albemarle County Service Authority to review the application plan and the proposed development before the application is submitted. Each applicant is encouraged to use the guidance provided in the preapplication conference process to develop an application for a planned development that, when submitted with its supporting documents, will be as complete and comprehensive as possible. Cleanup 8.5.3 Review and Recommendation by the Planning Commission Each application for a planned development shall be reviewed by the planning commission as follows: Each application to establish or amend a planned development district shall be reviewed and acted on by the planning commission as follows: Clarification b. In making its recommendation on the application to the board of supervisors, the commission shall make findings about the following: b. In addition to any other factors relevant to the consideration of a zoning map amendment, the commission shall consider the following: Cleanup 1.Whether the proposed planned development or amendment thereto satisfies the purpose and intent of the planned development district. Clarification 1.The suitability of the tract for the proposed planned development in terms of its relation to all applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan, physical characteristics of the land and it’s relation to the surrounding area; 2. Whether the area proposed to be rezoned is appropriate for a planned development under the comprehensive plan; the physical characteristics of the area proposed to be rezoned; and the relation of the area proposed to be rezoned to the surrounding area; and Cleanup 3.Each requested waiver or modification, including whether the requirements of section 8.2 are satisfied. deleted Moved to the section on waivers. Attachment C, p.5 c. Depending on the findings it makes, the commission shall either recommend approval of the application, as proposed, approval of the application with changes to be made prior to action on the application by the board of supervisors, or disapproval. c. The commission shall either recommend approval of the application, as proposed, approval of the application with changes to be made prior to action on the application by the board of supervisors, or disapproval. The commission shall also make recommendations on all requested waivers and modifications. Cleanup and clarification Sec. 8.5.4 Review and action by the board of supervisors Sec. 8.5.4 Review and action by the board of supervisors Sec. 8.5.4 Review and action by the board of supervisors; effect of approval Each application to establish or amend a planned development district shall be reviewed and acted on by the board of supervisors, and approval of the application shall have effect, as follows: Cleanup The board of supervisors shall consider and act on each application for a planned development district as it does for other zoning map amendments. If the board approves the application, the approving action shall constitute approval of the application plan, and all standards for development submitted by the applicant. The board’s action shall also identify which proffers it has accepted and which waivers or modifications it has granted. a. Review and action. The board of supervisors shall consider and act on each application for a planned development district as it does for other zoning map amendments. If the board approves the application, the approving action shall constitute approval of the application plan, all standards of development submitted by the applicant, and the code of development, as applicable. The board’s action shall also identify which proffers it has accepted and which waivers or modifications it has granted. Clarification Once an application is approved the application plan, all submitted standards of development and all accepted proffers shall be included as part of the zoning regulations applicable to the planned development. b. Effect of approval. Upon approval of an application, the application plan, all standards of development submitted by the applicant, the code of development, as applicable, all accepted proffers, and all approved waivers and modifications shall be included as part of the zoning regulations applicable to the planned development. Cleanup and clarification 8.5.5.1.Contents of site plans and subdivision plats a. Generally. Each site plan for a planned development shall comply with section 32 of this chapter, subject to the waiver or modification of any such regulation pursuant to section 8.5.3(b)(3). Each subdivision plat for a planned development shall comply with Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle, subject to the waiver, variation or sub-stitution of any such regulation pursuant to section 14-237. a. Generally. Each site plan for a planned development shall comply with section 32 of this chapter, subject to the waiver or modification of any such regulation pursuant to section 8.2(b). Each subdivision plat for a planned development shall comply with chapter 14, subject to the waiver, variation or substitution of any such regulation pursuant to section 14-237. Cleanup b. Within the neighborhood model zoning district. In addition to the requirements of paragraph (a), each site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development within the neighborhood model zoning district shall pertain to a minimum area of one block and shall include a phasing plan, and each site plan shall include building elevations for all new or modified structures. b. Within the neighborhood model zoning district. In addition to the requirements of subsection (a), each site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development within the neighborhood model zoning district shall pertain to a minimum area of one block and shall include a phasing plan, and each site plan shall include building elevations for all new or modified structures. Cleanup 8.5.5.2 Review of site plans and Each preliminary and final site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with the As requested by the Planning Attachment C, p.6 Subdivisions the applicable regulations: (1) in effect at the time the lands were zoned to a planned development district; or, (2) at the option of the applicant, currently in effect. In addition, each preliminary and final site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development shall be reviewed for compliance with the following: a. The approved application plan, the approved standards for development, the accepted proffers, and the authorized waivers or modifications and any conditions imposed therewith, if any; b. The permitted uses within the planned development zoning district, including all proffers, as determined by the zoning administrator after consultation with the director of planning and community development; in making this determination, the zoning administrator shall be guided by section 22.2.1 of this chapter; c. In addition to the foregoing, conformity with the application plan and the standards of development. Within each neighborhood model zoning district, the general development plan and the code of development, as determined by the director of planning and community development after consultation with the zoning administrator. applicable regulations, as follows: a. Planned development districts established on or before December 10, 1980. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district established on or before December 10, 1980 shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review; provided that, at the option of the developer or subdivider, each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat may be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations when the planned development was approved if the developer or subdivider establishes a vested right as provided in Virginia Code § 15.2-2297 or § 15.2-2307 to develop under the previously approved planned development district. b. Planned development districts established after December 10, 1980. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district established after December 10, 1980 shall be reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established or, at the option of the developer or subdivider, in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review; subject to the following: 1. Election to comply with regulations in effect when district established; exception for certain current subjects of regulation unless vested rights established. If the developer or subdivider elects to have its site plan or subdivision plat reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established, all of the following subjects of regulation in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review shall apply unless vested rights are established under Virginia Code §§ 15.2-2297, 15.2-2298, 15.2-2303 or 15.2-2307: (i) entrance corridor overlay district (section 30.6); (ii) flood hazard overlay district (section 30.3); (iii) landscaping and screening (section 32.7.9); (iv) outdoor lighting (section 4.17); (v) parking (section 4.12); and (vi) signs (section 4.15). If rights are determined to have vested, the regulations for these six subjects in effect when rights vested shall apply. For the purposes of this section 8.5.5.2(b), an application plan approved on and after March 19, 2003 that complies with the requirements of an application plan under section 8.5.1(e) or section 20A.4, or a prior version thereof in effect on and after March, 19, 2003, is a significant Commission, this section sets thresholds for conformity with current zoning regulations, where properties were rezoned before the current regulations went into place. None of the proposed changes affects rights established under vesting provisions of the State Code. It further clarifies the roles of the Zoning Administrator, Planning Director, and County Engineer in determinations of conformity for PDs. Attachment C, p.7 governmental act within the meaning of Virginia Code § 15.2-2307. 2. Election to comply with regulations in effect when district established; election to comply with certain current subjects of regulation. If the developer or subdivider elects to have its site plan or subdivision plat reviewed for compliance with the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development district was established, the developer or subdivider may also elect to comply with one or more of the subjects of regulation listed in subsection 8.5.5.2(b)(1) instead of with the corresponding regulations in effect when the planned development district was established. c. Review for compliance and conformance. A site plan or subdivision plat shall be reviewed to determine whether it complies with the applicable regulations and other requirements of law, and whether it conforms to the application plan, as follows: 1. Zoning administrator. The zoning administrator shall determine whether a site plan or subdivision plat complies with the applicable regulations. In addition, the zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of planning, shall determine whether the proposed permitted uses comply with the applicable regulations and, in doing so, may permit as a use by right a use that is not expressly classified in this chapter if the zoning administrator further determines that the use is similar in general character to the uses permitted by right in the district or by the code of development and is similar in terms of locational requirements, operational characteristics, visual impacts, and traffic, noise and odor generation. 2. Director of planning. The director of planning shall determine whether a site plan or subdivision plat conforms to the application plan. In determining conformity, the director shall decide whether the central features or major elements within the development are in the same location as shown on the application plan and if the buildings, parking, streets, blocks, paths and other design elements are of the same general character, scope and scale as shown on the application plan. 3. County engineer. The county engineer shall determine whether an erosion and sediment control plan, grading plan, stormwater management plan, road or street plan, and mitigation plan conform with the concept grading, stormwater Attachment C, p.8 management, streets, and mitigation shown on the application plan. d. Applicable regulations defined. For the purposes of this section 8.5.5.2, the term “applicable regulations”means, as appropriate and applicable, all zoning regulations, all subdivision regulations, the application plan (except for those elements authorized to be shown at a conceptual or general level), including those plans formerly referred to as general development plans, conditions of approval, accepted proffers, the code of development, special use permits, variances, and waivers, modifications and variations. Applicable regulations defined. For the purposes of this section, the term “applicable regulations” means, as appropriate, all zoning regulations, the application plan (except for those elements authorized to be shown at a conceptual or general level), including those plans formerly referred to as general development plans, conditions of approval, accepted proffers, the code of development, special use permits, variances, and waivers modifications and variations. e. Applicability of chapter 17. Each preliminary and final site plan and subdivision plat within a planned development district shall be reviewed for compliance with chapter 17 of the Albemarle County Code in effect when the site plan or subdivision plat is under county review, regardless of when the planned development was established or whether the developer or subdivider elects, or establishes vested rights, under sections 8.5.5.2(a) and (b) to proceed with review under the applicable regulations in effect when the planned development was approved. f. Vested rights not impaired. Nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing the impairment of a vested right that may be established under Virginia Code §§ 15.2-2261(C), 15.2-2297, 15.2-2298, 15.2-2303 or 15.2-2307. 8.5.5.3. Variations from approved plans, codes, and standards of developments The director of planning and community development may allow a site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development to vary from an approved application plan, standard of development and, also, in the case of a neighborhood model district, a general development plan or code of development, as provided herein: a. The director of planning and community development is authorized to grant a variation from the The director of planning may allow a site plan or subdivision plat for a planned development to vary from an approved application plan, standard of development and, also, in the case of a neighborhood model district, a code of development, as provided herein: a. The director of planning is authorized to grant a variation from the following provisions of an approved plan, code or Cleanup Attachment C, p.9 following provisions of an approved plan, code or standard: 1. Minor variations to yard requirements, maximum structure heights and minimum lot sizes; standard: 1. Minor changes to yard requirements, build-to lines or ranges, maximum structure heights and minimum lot sizes; 5. Minor variations to street design, and 5. Minor changes to street design and street location, subject to a recommendation for approval by the county engineer; and Cleanup Not currently listed as a variation 6. Minor changes to the design and location of stormwater management facilities, land disturbance including disturbance within conservation areas, and mitigation, subject to a recommendation for approval by the county engineer. Clarification and cleanup. b. The applicant shall submit a written request for a variation to the director; the request shall specify the provision of the plan, code or standard for which the variation is sought, and state the reason for the requested variation; the director may reject a request that fails to include the required information. c. The director is authorized to grant a variation upon a determination that the variation: (1) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan; (2) does not increase the approved development density or intensity of development; (3) does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district; (4) does not require a special use permit; and (5) is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application. b. The applicant shall submit a written request for a variation to the director of planning. The request shall specify the provision of the plan, code or standard for which the variation is sought, and state the reason for the requested variation. The director may reject a request that fails to include the required information. c. The director of planning is authorized to grant a variation upon a determination that the variation: (1) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan; (2) does not increase the approved development density or intensity of development; (3) does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district; (4) does not require a special use permit; and (5) is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application. Clarification Not in the ordinance d. The Director of Planning may require that the applicant provide an updated application plan and, in the case of changes to a Code of Development, an updated Code of Development reflecting the approved variation and the date of the variation. If the Director requires the updated plan or code, it shall be provided within 30 days of approval of the variation. Cleanup Any variation not expressly provided for herein may be accomplished by rezoning. e. Any variation not expressly provided for herein may be accomplished by zoning map amendment New requirement needed to keep track of approved variations within a planned development. Section 8.5.5.4 Building permits and erosion and sediment control permits Section 8.5.5.4 Building permits and erosion and sediment control permits Sec. 8.5.5.4 Building permits and grading permits Cleanup Building permits and erosion and sediment control permits may be issued as provided herein: Building permits and grading permits may be issued as provided herein: Cleanup Attachment C, p.10 b. An erosion and sediment control permit may be issued for site preparation grading associated with an approved planned development if an erosion and sediment control plan satisfactory to the director of engineering and public works has been submitted and reviewed in conjunction with the application plan, and the director of planning and community development determines the proposed grading is consistent with the approved application plan. c. In cases where the director finds that there is not enough detail on the approved application plan to assure consistency no erosion and sediment control permit shall be issued until the final site plan is approved, or the final plat is tentatively approved. d. Within each neighborhood model district, the department of planning and community development shall review each building permit application or modification to determine whether the proposed structure conforms with the architectural and landscape standards in the approved code of development. b. A grading permit may be issued for site preparation grading associated with an approved planned development if the erosion and sediment control plan measures, disturbed area and grading are in conformity with the concept grading and measures shown on the application plan as determined by the county engineer, after consultation with the director of planning. c. If, after consultation with the director of planning, the county engineer finds that there is not enough detail on the approved application plan to assure consistency that the proposed grading and other measures are consistent with the application plan, a grading permit shall not be issued until the final site plan is approved, or the final subdivision plat is tentatively approved. d. Within each neighborhood model district, the department of community development shall review each building permit application or modification to determine whether the proposed structure conforms with the architectural and landscape standards in the approved code of development. Sec. 8.5.5.5 Site plan and subdivision plat requirements for planned development zoning districts established without an application or application plan If a planned development zoning district was established without an approved application plan as required by section 8 then neither a site plan nor a subdivision plat shall be approved for any lands within the district unless and until an application plan and all other documents required by section 8.5 are submitted by the owner and are approved as provided therein. If such a district was previously established in conjunction with an approved site plan the approved site plan shall be deemed to be the application plan, and the district shall be deemed to have complied with the requirements of section 8. In such a case, if the site plan or subdivision plat has expired, a new site plan or subdivision plat must be approved prior to any development activity. Site plan and subdivision plat requirements where there is no application plan Site plans and subdivision plats within a planned development district for which an application plan was not approved shall be subject to the following: a. No valid site plan or subdivision plat at time district established. If a planned development district was established before an application plan was required by section 8 to be approved as part of the zoning map amendment and neither a final site plan or subdivision plat pertaining to the entirety of the planned development district was valid at the time of the zoning map amendment nor was approved in conjunction with the approval of the zoning map amendment, then neither a site plan nor a subdivision plat shall be approved for any lands within the district unless and until an application plan and all other documents required by section 8.5 are submitted by the owner and are approved as provided therein. b. Valid site plan or subdivision plat at time district established. If a planned development district was established before an application plan was required by section 8 to be approved as part of the zoning map amendment but a final site plan or subdivision plat pertaining to the entirety of the planned Cleanup and clarification Attachment C, p.11 development district was valid at the time of the zoning map amendment, the valid or approved site plan or subdivision plat shall be deemed to be the application plan, and the site plan or subdivision plat shall be reviewed as provided in section 8.5.5. Sec. 8.6 Amendments to planned development districts Each amendment to a planned development district shall be submitted and reviewed as provided in section 8. In addition, with each application to amend the area of the planned development district, or to amend the proffers, the application plan, the general development plan, or the code of development within an area that is less than the entire district, the applicant shall submit a map showing the entire existing planned development district and identifying any area to be added to or deleted from the district, or identifying the area to which the amended proffers, application plan, general development plan, or code of development will apply. A planned development district may be amended after it is established, either by the addition or removal of land, or by an amendment to the application plan, code of development, proffers or any waiver or modification, in accordance with the procedures and requirements of section 8 and those applicable to zoning map amendments generally, and subject to the following additional requirements: a. Eligible applicant. Any owner, contract purchaser with the owner’s consent, or any authorized agent of the owner, of one or more parcels within a planned development district may apply to amend the existing planned development district as it pertains to the owner’s parcel(s). The owner of each parcel to which the proposed amendment would result in or require a physical change to the parcel, a change in use, density or intensity on that parcel, a change to any proffer or regulation in a code of development that would apply to the parcel, a change to an owner’s express obligation under a proffer or regulation in a code of development even if the proffer or regulation is not expressly changed, or a change to the application plan that would apply to the parcel, shall be an applicant. b. Amendment affecting less area than the entire district; map. If the proposed amendment would affect less area than the entire district, the applicant shall submit a map showing the entire existing planned development district and identifying any area to be added to or deleted from the district, or identifying the area to which the amended application plan, code of development, proffers or any waiver or modification would apply. c. Individual notice. In addition to any notice required by Virginia Code § 15.2-2204 and sections 33.4 and 33.8 of this chapter, written notice of the proposed amendment shall be provided to the owner of each parcel within the planned development district. The substance of the notice shall be as required by Virginia Code § 15.2-2204(B), paragraph 1, regardless of the number of parcels affected. d. Factors to consider during review of proposed amendment. In addition to any other applicable factors to be considered in the review of a zoning map amendment, the following shall also be considered: 1. Whether the proposed amendment reduces, Clarification as to who can request an amendment to a PD, responding to Board of Supervisors’ request Attachment C, p.12 maintains or enhances the elements of a planned development set forth in section 8.3. 2. The extent to which the proposed amendment impacts the other parcels within the planned development district. 20.A.3 Neighborhood Model Appli-cation require-ments; required documents and information The following documents and information shall be submitted in addition to any other documents required to be submitted under section 8.5 of this chapter: Except where the option is exercised as provided in subsection 20A.3(b), below, the following documents and information shall be submitted in addition to any other documents required to be submitted under section 8.5 of this chapter: Cleanup Parking study b. A parking and loading needs study that demonstrates parking needs and requirements and includes strategies for dealing with these needs and requirements, including phasing plans, parking alternatives as provided in section 4.12.8 of this chapter, and transportation demand management strategies as provided in section 4.12.12 of this chapter; A parking and loading needs study that demonstrates parking needs and requirements and includes strategies for dealing with these needs and requirements, including phasing plans, parking alternatives as provided in section 4.12.8 of this chapter, and transportation demand management strategies as provided in section 4.12.12 of this chapter; provided that the applicant may submit the parking and loading needs study in conjunction with the preliminary site plan for the development if it determines that the uses that may occupy the buildings are not sufficiently known at the time of the zoning map amendment. Amend to allow a parking study at the time of rezoning or at the time of site plan approval. d. A general development plan, as provided in section 20A.4, including all information required by sections 8 or 20A to support any element of the plan. d. An application plan, as provided in section 20A.4, including all information required by sections 8 or 20A to support any element of the plan. Cleanup 20A.4 General development plans The requirements for an application plan for the NMD area as follows: In addition to the application plan requirements of section 8.5.1(d), the following are required elements of the general development plan: Application plans In addition to the application plan requirements of section 8.5.1(d), the following are required elements of an application plan in the NMD: Cleanup to clarify that all PD plans are called “application plans” b. The general allocation of uses to each block in terms of residential, commercial, industrial, institutional, amenities, parks, recreational facilities open to the public, and any other use category proposed by the applicant and which complies with the requirements of section 20A.8. Deleted Information is duplicated elsewhere c. The location of proposed green spaces, amenities, conservation areas or preservation areas, as provided in section 20A.9. Moved Cleanup d. Building footprints or graphic representations of central features or major elements that are essential to the design of the development, shown at the block level. Moved Cleanup Attachment C, p.13 Plan contents from Section 8 reiterated, except where requirements are in excess of Section 8. a. The general location of proposed streets, alleys, sidewalks, and pedestrian paths; b. The location of proposed green spaces, amenities, conservation areas or preservation areas, as provided in section 20A.9; c. A conceptual lot lay-out; d. Conceptual grading/topography using the county geographic information system or better topographic information supplemented where necessary by spot elevations and areas of the site where existing slopes are twenty-five (25) percent or greater; e. Typical street cross-sections to show proportions, scale, and streetscape, which, alternatively, may be provided in the code of development; f. Any proposed connections to existing and proposed streets, as well as proposed thoroughfares shown on the comprehensive plan; g. The general lay-out for the water and sewer systems, conceptual stormwater management, and a conceptual mitigation plan; and h. The location of central features or major elements within the development essential to the design of the development, such as building envelopes, major employment areas, parking areas and structures, civic areas, parks, open space, green spaces, amenities and recreation areas. Clarification/cleanup 20A.5. Codes of Development A code of development shall establish the unifying design guidelines, the specific regulations for the district, and the use characteristics of each block; provide for certainty in the location of and appearance of central features, and the permitted uses in the district; and provide a flexible range of a mix of uses and densities. To satisfy these requirements, each code of development shall establish: A code of development shall establish the unifying design guidelines, the specific regulations for the district, and the use characteristics of each block; provide for certainty in the location of and appearance of central features, and the permitted uses in the district; and provide a flexible range of a mix of uses and densities. Any substantive or procedural requirement of this chapter shall apply to an NMD unless the subject matter is expressly addressed in the code of development. Each code of development shall be in a form required or otherwise approved by the director of planning. To satisfy these requirements, each code of development shall establish: Establish standard format for ease of review and administration b. The amount of developed square footage proposed, delineated for the entire NMD and by block by use, amenity, streets and lot coverage. The developed square footage may be expressed as a proposed range of square footage. b. The amount of developed square footage proposed, delineated for the entire NMD and by block by use, and amenity. The developed square footage may be expressed as a proposed range of square footage. Cleanup c. The maximum residential densities, as provided in section 20A.7, and the maximum number of residential units c. The maximum number of residential dwelling units, dwelling units by type, and delineating at least two (2) housing Removal of extraneous Attachment C, p.14 for individual residential land use categories and mixed-use categories, delineating at least two (2) housing types, as provided in section 20A.8. types, as provided in section 20A.8. information. d. The amount of land area devoted to green space and amenities, as provided in section 20A.9. d. The amount of land area and percentage of gross acreage devoted to green space and amenities, as provided in section 20A.9. Clarification e. All requirements and restrictions associated with each use delineated in paragraph (a). e. All requirements and restrictions associated with each use delineated in subsection 20A.5(a). Cleanup g. Architectural and landscape standards that will apply in the NMD, which shall address the following: g. Architectural standards that will apply in the NMD, which shall address the following: Cleanup to separate landscape requirements from architectural standards. 1. The form, massing, and proportions of structures; 2. Architectural styles; 3. Materials, colors, and textures; 4. Roof form and pitch; 5. Architectural ornamentation 6. Façade treatments, including window and door openings; 7. Landscape treatments; and 8. The preservation of historic structures, sites, and archeological sites identified by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources. 1. The form, massing, and proportions of structures which may be provided through illustrations; 2. Façade treatments; 3. The preservation of historic structures, sites, and archeological sites identified by the Virginia Department of Historic Resources; and 4. Architectural styles, materials, colors and textures if these elements are determined to be necessary in order for a proposed development to be compatible with its contiguous developed surroundings. The provisions in a code of development adopted prior to [effective date of ordinance] pertaining to subsections 20A.5(g)(1) through (4) shall be the only architectural standards in the code of development that apply to the planned development. Deleted items do not relate specifically to the goals of the Neighborhood Model. d. 7. Landscape treatments; h. Landscape treatments where landscaping in addition to that required in Section 32 is proposed. The provisions in a code of development adopted prior to [effective date of ordinance] pertaining to landscape treatments as required under former subsection 20A.5(g)(7) shall apply to the planned development. Clarification h. Preliminary lot lay-out. Remove Information is duplicated elsewhere i. For each block: 1. The range of uses permitted on the block by right and by special use permit; 2. All requirements and restrictions associated with each use delineated in paragraph (i)(1); i. For each block: 1. The range of uses permitted on the block by right and by special use permit; 2. Build-to lines or ranges, which are the required distance from Clarification/cleanup Attachment C, p.15 3. Build-to lines, which are the required distance from the right-of-way to a structure; 4. Minimum and maximum lot and yard dimensions; 5. Maximum building heights; 6. Sidewalk and pedestrian path locations; 7. Green space and amenities; 8. Conservation areas and preservation areas, if applicable; 9. Parking areas; 10. Civic spaces, which are public areas for community or civic activities (e.g., libraries and their associated yards, schools and places of worship); the right-of-way to a structure; 3. Minimum and maximum lot dimensions; 4. Minimum number of stories and maximum building heights; 5. Location of sidewalks and pedestrian paths; 6. Acreage devoted to and characteristics of green space, amenities, and recreational areas and facilities as required by section 4.16; 7. Location, acreage and characteristics of conservation areas and preservation areas as defined in section 3.1, if applicable; 8. Location of parking areas; 9. Location, acreage and characteristics of civic spaces, which are public areas for community or civic activities (e.g., libraries and their associated yards, schools and places of worship); 20A.6. Permitted Uses The following uses shall be permitted in an NMD, subject to the regulations in this section and section 8, the approved plan and code of development, and the accepted proffers: a. By right uses. The following uses are permitted by right: 1. Each use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district, except for those uses allowed only by special use permit delineated in subsection (b) provided that the use is identified in the approved code of development. The following uses shall be permitted in an NMD, subject to the regulations in this section and section 8, the approved application plan and code of development, and the accepted proffers: a. By right uses. The following uses are permitted by right if the use is expressly identified as a by right use in the code of development or if the use is permitted by a determination by the zoning administrator pursuant to section 8.5.5.2(c)(1): 1. Each use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district, except for those uses allowed only by special use permit delineated in subsections (b)(2) and (b)(3); provided that the use is identified in the approved code of development. Clarification about what is and isn’t by-right in the Code of Development By special use permit. The following uses are permitted by special use permit: b. By special use permit. The following uses are permitted by special use permit if the use is expressly identified as use permitted by special use permit in the code of development: 1. Each use allowed by right or by special use permit in any other zoning district. Allowing a future use by special use permit allows for conditions to be applied in the future that may not be anticipated during the rezoning. 20 A.7 Residential Density b. The gross residential density shall be measured in dwelling units per acre and calculated by taking the gross acreage of the district divided by the proposed number of dwelling units in the proposed district. b. The gross residential density shall be measured in dwelling units per acre and calculated by dividing the proposed number of dwelling units in the proposed district by the gross acreage of the district. Corrects the error in the formula as currently stated. Sec. 20A.9 Green spaces, amenities, 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, transitional, neighborhood service, 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, transitional, neighborhood service, Cleanup and clarification Attachment C, p.16 conservation areas and preservation areas community service, or office service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the site. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office regional or industrial service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least fifteen percent (15%) of the gross acreage of the site. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to green space. community service, or office service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the area proposed to be rezoned. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office regional or industrial service, the area devoted to green space shall be at least fifteen percent (15%) of the gross acreage of the area proposed to be rezoned. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in subsections (a)(1) and (a)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to green space. b. Amenities. The minimum area devoted to amenities is as follows: 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, neighborhood service, and community service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the site. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office service, office regional service or industrial service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least ten percent (10%) of the gross acreage of the site. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in paragraphs (b)(1) and (b)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to amenities. b. Amenities. The minimum area devoted to amenities is as follows: 1. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as neighborhood density residential, urban density residential, neighborhood service, and community service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least twenty percent (20%) of the gross acreage of the area proposed to be rezoned. 2. For areas shown in the land use element of the comprehensive plan as regional service, office service, office regional service or industrial service, the area devoted to amenities shall be at least ten percent (10%) of the gross acreage of the area proposed to be rezoned. 3. For areas having a land use designation not addressed in subsections 20A.9 (b)(1) and 20A.9.(b)(2), the recommendations of the applicable provisions of the comprehensive plan shall be guidance on the minimum area devoted to amenities. Cleanup and clarification Sec. 20A.10 Streets Each street within an NMD shall meet the street standards for a traditional neighborhood development established by the department of engineering and public works. Each street within an NMD shall meet the street standards for a traditional neighborhood development established by the department community development. Cleanup