HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-4-08Tentative
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
T E N T A T I V E
APRIL 8, 2015
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
6:00 P.M. - LANE AUDITORIUM
1. Call to Order.
2. Pledge of Allegiance.
3. Moment of Silence.
4. Adoption of Final Agenda.
5. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
6. Proclamations and Recognitions:
a. Resolution Proclaiming April, 2015 as Child Abuse and Neglect Prevention
Month in Albemarle County. (Brad Wentz, Child Protective Services Supervisor)
b. Proclamation Proclaiming May 2 as the 50th Anniversary of the Friends of the
Jefferson Madison Regional Library. (Fran Feigert, President of the Friends)
7. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
8. Consent Agenda. (on next page)
Public Hearings:
9. To receive comments on Proposed Calendar Year 2015 Tax Rates for Real Property.
10. ZTA-2015-00001. Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes. The
Board of Supervisors intends to adopt an ordinance to amend Secs. 18-3.1, Definitions, and 18-
5.1.40, Personal Wireless Service Facilities, of Chapter 18, Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code.
This ordinance would implement recently published federal regulations (47 C.F.R. § 1.40001) by
amending Secs. 18-3.1 and 18-5.1.40 by adding and amending definitions and regulations
pertaining to the “collocation” of “transmission equipment” on “eligible support structures,” which
must be approved by the County within 60 days unless the collocation would result in a “substantial
change” to the physical dimensions of the eligible support structure; one such “substantial change”
arises if the collocation would defeat the “concealment elements of the existing support structure,” a
term defined in this ordinance that is not defined in 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001. This ordinance also would
amend Sec. 18-5.1.40 by renaming and reorganizing the section, updating and clarifying
terminology, amending the procedure to review collocations and replacements that would result in a
substantial change (Tier I review with a special exception), and amending the procedures for
application review and action, including the time by which applications shall be acted upon (not
more than 60, 90, or 150 days, depending on the application). (Bill Fritz, Chief of Special Projects)
Action Item:
11. Belvedere Station Land Trust - Interpretation of Proffers 3.2 and 3.3. (Rebecca Ragsdale,
Senior Permit Planner)
12. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
13. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2015Files/0408/0.0_Agenda.htm (1 of 2) [10/8/2020 8:53:31 AM]
Tentative
14. Adjourn to April 14, 2015, 3:00 p.m., Lane Auditorium.
CONSENT AGENDA
FOR APPROVAL (action required):
8.1 Approval of Minutes: July 2, July 9, September 3 and September 10, 2014.
8.2 South Pantops - State Farm Boulevard Sidewalk. (Trevor Henry)
8.3 Resolution to accept road(s) in The Farms at Turkey Run Phase II into the State Secondary
System of Highways (Scottsville Magisterial District). (Glenn Brooks)
FOR INFORMATION (no action required):
8.4 CPA-2013-01 Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment. (Elaine Echols)
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP TO SPEAK AT PUBLIC HEARINGS ONLY
Return to Top of Agenda
Return to Board of Supervisors Home Page
Return to County Home Page
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2015Files/0408/0.0_Agenda.htm (2 of 2) [10/8/2020 8:53:31 AM]
________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
South Pantops - State Farm Boulevard Sidewalk Project
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request to approve the purchase of right-of-way and
easements for sidewalks along State Farm Boulevard
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Davis, Herrick, and Henry
PRESENTER (S): N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
April 8, 2015
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Office of Facilities Development is completing the right-of-way phase for the South Pantops-State Farm Boulevard
Sidewalk project. This locally administered Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Revenue Sharing Project will
complete the 475-foot gap in the existing South Pantops Drive sidewalk and construct approximately 2600 feet of sidewalk
and drainage improvements along the west side of State Farm Boulevard from South Pantops Drive to Route 250. The
acquisitions of public right-of-way and temporary construction easements across Parcel 78-72 (Guaranty Savings & Loan,
also known as Union First Market Bank) and temporary construction easements across Parcel 78-62 (Sandollar Ltd and
Upland LLC), and Parcel 78-63 (Virginia High School League) are necessary to construct this project.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
2. Critical Infrastructure: Prioritize, plan and invest in critical infrastructure that responds to past and future changes and
improves the capacity to serve community needs.
DISCUSSION:
The costs of acquiring the right-of-way and the easements are subject to a state match from VDOT’s Revenue Sharing
Program. As a condition of the Revenue Sharing Program, VDOT required the County to obtain an independent appraisal
to establish the fair market value of the right-of-way and the easements to be acquired, and to offer just compensation to
the property owners. The appraisal determined the fair market values as provided below. This information was shared
with the property owners as required by the Revenue Sharing Program agreement.
Parcel No. Fair Market Value
TMP 78-62: $ 2,010.50
TMP 78-63: $ 3,054.00
TMP 78-72: $32,188.00
The owners of Parcel 78-62 (Sandollar Ltd and Upland LLC) have signed their deed of easement (Attachment A) and
accept just compensation in the amount of $2,010.50. The owners of Parcel 78-63 (Virginia High School League) and
Parcel 78-72 (Guaranty Savings & Loan) have agreed in principle and are expected to sign their dedication documents by
March 28. To keep to VDOT’s milestone schedule, staff must complete the right-of-way and easement acquisitions and
submit a Right-of-way Certification by April 15 in order to have VDOT authorization to advertise by May 15. Therefore,
staff is requesting Board approval of the Parcel 78-62 acquisition based on the agreed compensation value and of the
Parcel 78-63 and Parcel 78-72 acquisitions in an amount not to exceed just compensation.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Funds in the amount of $959,408 were previously appropriated for project design, right-of-way and easement
acquisitions, and construction. The budgeted right-of-way and easement acquisition cost is estimated at $49,600 at
completion. The combined cost of these acquisitions based on the just compensation values is within the budget.
Staff expects the County to be reimbursed 50% of this cost from the VDOT Revenue Sharing funds allocated to this
project.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment D) authorizing the Parcel 78-62 acquisition
for the agreed just compensation amount and the Parcel 78-63 and Parcel 78-72 acquisitions for an amount not to exceed
just compensation, and authorizing the County Executive to sign, in a form approved by the County Attorney, all
documents necessary to complete the acquisitions.
AGENDA TITLE: South Pantops - State Farm Boulevard Sidewalk Project
April 8, 2015
Page 2
ATTACHMENTS:
A – Parcel 78-62 Deed of Easement
B – Parcel 78-63 Deed of Easement
C – Parcel 78-72 Deed of Dedication
D – Resolution
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
1
This document was prepared by:
Albemarle County Attorney
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Parcel ID Number 07800-00-00-06300
This deed is exempt from taxation under Virginia Code §§ 58.1-811(A)(3) and from Court Clerk’s fees under Virginia
Code § 17.1-266.
DEED OF EASEMENT
THIS DEED OF EASEMENT is made this ___ day of ___________________, 20______
by and between VIRGINIA HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE, INC., Grantor, and the COUNTY OF
ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner of that certain real property (hereinafter the
“Property”) located in Albemarle County, Virginia, more particularly described as follows:
That certain real property shown and designated as “New Permanent Drainage Easement,”
shown on the plat of Lincoln Surveying, dated November 1, 2013, revised January 6, 2014,
and titled “Plat Showing a New Permanent Drainage Easement and Temporary
Construction Easements Across Tax Map 78 Parcel 63 Located on State Farm Boulevard
Rivanna District, Albemarle County, Virginia,” a copy of which plat is attached hereto to be
recorded with this deed (hereinafter, the “Easement” and the “Plat”). Reference is made to
the Plat for a more particular description of the easement conveyed herein.
WHEREAS, the Property is described further as a portion of that certain lot or parcel of l and
situated in the Rivanna Magisterial District of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, designated as Lot
3, Pantops, containing 1.9168 acres on a plat by B. Aubrey Huffman & Associates, LTD., dated
September 6, 1979 and recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County,
Virginia in Deed Book 681, Page 331, also being a portion of the same property conveyed to the
Grantor herein by deed of E. Grant Cosner and Barbara H. Cosner, husband and wife, recorded
in said Clerk’s Office in Deed Book 906, Page 157; and
2
WHEREAS, it is the desire and intent of the Grantor to dedicate, grant and convey the
Easement for public use in accordance with this Deed of Easement; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire and intent of the Grantor to dedicate, grant and convey all rights,
title and interest in all ditches, pipes and other improvements and appurtenances within the
Easement established for the purpose of conveying stormwater (hereinafter collectively referred to
as the “Improvements,” whether referring to existing Improvements or those to be established in
the future by the Grantee), excluding building connection lines.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and TEN DOLLARS ($10), cash in
hand paid, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby
acknowledged, the Grantor does hereby GRANT, CONVEY, and DEDICATE to public use with
GENERAL WARRANTY and ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE unto the Grantee, its
successors and assigns, a perpetual exclusive easement as shown on the Plat and as referred to
herein as the Easement.
FURTHER, pursuant to the consideration described herein, the Grantor does hereby
GRANT, CONVEY, and DEDICATE to public use the Improvements.
The Easement shall be subject to the following:
1. Right to construct, reconstruct, install, maintain, repair, change, alter and replace the
Improvements. The Grantee shall have the right to construct, reconstruct, install, maintain, repair,
change, alter, and replace present or future Improvements (hereinafter referred to as “inspecting,
maintaining and operating” or derivations thereof) for the purposes of collecting storm water and
transmitting it through and across the Subdivision, protecting property from flooding, protecting
water quality, and otherwise controlling stormwater runoff.
2. Ownership of the Improvements. All Improvements within the Easement, whether they
were installed by the Grantee or any predecessor in interest, shall be and remain the property
3
of the Grantee.
3. Right of ingress and egress. The Grantee shall have the right and easement of ingress and
egress over any lands of the Grantor adjacent to the Easement between any public or private roads
and the Easement, to inspect, maintain and operate the Improvements.
4. Right to inspect, maintain and operate the Improvements. The Grantee may enter the
Easement to inspect, maintain and operate the Improvements.
5. Right of Grantee to disturb and maintain the Easement premises. The Grantee shall have
the right within the Easement to trim, cut or remove any trees, brush or shrubbery, remove fences,
structures or other obstructions, and take other similar action reasonably necessary to provide
adequate and fully functioning Improvements; provided, however, that the Grantee, at its own
expense, shall restore as nearly as possible, the premises to their original condition. This
restoration shall include the backfilling of trenches, the replacement of fences and shrubbery, the
reseeding or resodding of lawns or pasture areas, and the repair or replacement of structures and
other facilities located outside of the Easement that were damaged or destroyed by the Grantee.
However, the Grantee shall not be required to repair or replace any structures, trees, or other
facilities located within the Easement, but be required only to repair or replace groundcover within
the Easement that was disturbed, damaged or removed as a result of installing or maintaining any
of the Improvements. In addition, the Grantee shall remove from the Easement all trash and
other debris resulting from the installation, maintenance or operation of an Improvement, and
shall restore the surface thereof to its original condition as nearly as reasonably possible.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Grantee shall not be required to repair or replace anything
identified in this paragraph if to do so would be inconsistent with the proper maintenance or
operation of the Improvements. In addition, neither the Grantee nor any other public agency,
4
including the Virginia Department of Transportation, shall be responsible for conducting routine
maintenance as described in paragraph 6 except as expressly provided in this paragraph.
6. Right of Grantor to maintain the Easement premises. The Grantor shall have the right to
perform routine maintenance of the Easement premises, including the removal of trash and
landscaping debris, mowing and manicuring lawns and groundcovers, and making any other
aesthetic improvements desired by the Grantor that are not inconsistent with the rights herein
conveyed, and which do not adversely affect the proper operation of any Improvement. The right
to maintain the Easement premises does not include the right to maintain the Improvements.
7. Temporary construction easement. The Grantee shall have those temporary construction
easements shown on the Plat as “New Temporary Construction Easements,” in order to construct,
install, maintain, repair, change, alter, or replace the public Improvements along State Farm
Boulevard. These temporary construction easements shall expire upon completion of the work.
8. Exclusivity; restrictions. The Easement conveyed herein is an exclusive easement. Neither
the Grantor nor any person acting under the Grantor’s express or implied consent shall modify,
alter, reconstruct, interfere with, disturb or otherwise change in any way the land within the
Easement or any Improvement located within the Easement; and further provided that such
persons shall not construct or maintain any roadway, or erect any building, fence, retaining wall or
other structure within the Easement.
9. Grantee’s right to assign. The Grantee shall have the right to assign this Easement as its
interests may require.
10. Binding effect. The Easement and the rights and obligations established herein
shall run with the land in perpetuity, and shall be binding upon the Grantor, the Grantee, and their
successors and assigns. All references herein to the “Grantor” and the “Grantee” include their
5
respective successors and assigns. All references to the “Grantee,” when exercising any right or
obligation herein, includes the Grantee’s officers, employees and agents.
The Grantee, acting by and through its County Executive, duly authorized by resolution
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, accepts the conveyance
of this property pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-1803, as evidenced by the County Executive’s
signature hereto and the recordation of this Deed.
[SIGNATURES ARE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGES]
6
GRANTOR: VIRGINIA HIGH SCHOOL LEAGUE, INC.
By: ___________________________________
Kenneth G. Tilley, Executive Director
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF _________________________:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of
_____________________, 20___ by Kenneth G. Tilley, Executive Director, on behalf of Virginia
High School League, Inc., Grantor.
______________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ____________________
Notary Registration No. _____________________
GRANTEE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
By: ________________________________
Thomas C. Foley, County Executive
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of
_____________________, 20____ by Thomas C. Foley, County Executive, on behalf of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia, Grantee.
_____________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ____________________
Notary Registration No. _____________________
Approved as to form:
___________________________
County Attorney
This document was prepared by:
Albemarle County Attorney
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road, Suite 325
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Parcel ID Number 07800-00-00-07200
This deed is exempt from taxation under Virginia Code § 58.1-811(A)(3) and from the Circuit Court Clerk’s fees
under Virginia Code § 17.1-266.
DEED OF DEDICATION
THIS DEED OF DEDICATION is made this 18th day of March, 2015 by and between
GUARANTY SAVINGS AND LOAN, F.A., a Federal Savings Association (hereinafter
“Grantor”), and the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, the Grantor is the owner in fee simple of the real property located in
Albemarle County that is described below and hereinafter referred to as the “Property;”
WHEREAS, the Grantor offers to grant, convey and dedicate the Property to the County
in fee simple for public use, namely, a public right-of-way and other public purposes; and
WHEREAS, the Grantee is willing to accept the Grantor’s offer of dedication.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, the Grantor hereby
grants, conveys, and dedicates for public use to the Grantee, its successors and assigns, with
GENERAL WARRANTY and ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE, the following real
property, to wit:
All that certain lot or parcel of land situated in the County of Albemarle, Virginia, located
on State Farm Boulevard, containing 0.031 acres, more or less, shown as Parcel “W” on a
plat by Lincoln Surveying, dated June 13, 2012 and last revised March 9, 2015, titled
“Subdivision Plat Showing Parcel ‘W’ --Being a Portion of Tax Map 78 Parcel 72 Property
Belonging to Guaranty Savings and Loan, F.A., Hereby Dedicated to Public Use, Located
on State Farm Boulevard, Rivanna District, Albemarle County, Virginia,” a copy of which
2
is attached hereto and to be recorded with this deed (the “Plat”). Reference is made to the
plat for a more particular description of the location of the described lands.
This Parcel is a portion of Albemarle County Parcel ID 07800-00-00-07200, containing
2.152 acres, more or less, conveyed to the Grantor herein by deed from Hurt Investment
Company, a Virginia corporation, by deed dated October 24, 1995, recorded in the Clerk’s
Office of the Circuit Court of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, in Deed Book 1502, page
83.
The Grantor does further GRANT and CONVEY unto the Grantee those certain
temporary construction easements shown and labeled “New Temporary Construction Easement”
on the Plat. The conveyance of these temporary construction easements includes the right of
ingress and egress for the above-mentioned purpose. The temporary construction easements shall
expire upon completion of construction. The improvements constructed shall be the property of
the Grantee.
This conveyance is made subject to all easements, reservations, restrictions and conditions,
if any, contained in duly recorded deeds, plats and other instruments constituting constructive
notice in the chain of title to the above-described property which have not expired by a time
limitation contained therein or have otherwise not become ineffective.
The Grantee, acting by and through its County Executive, duly authorized by resolution
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, accepts the conveyance
of this property pursuant to Virginia Code § 15.2-1803, as evidenced by the County Executive’s
signature hereto and the recordation of this Deed.
[SIGNATURES ARE ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]
3
GRANTOR: GUARANTY SAVINGS AND LOAN, F.A.
By: ________________________________
________________________________
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF _________________________:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of
_____________________, 201__ on behalf of Guaranty Savings and Loan, F.A., Grantor.
______________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ____________________
Registration No. ____________________________
GRANTEE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
By:________________________________
Thomas C. Foley
County Executive
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ____ day of
_____________________, 201___ by Thomas C. Foley, on behalf of the County of Albemarle,
Virginia, Grantee.
_____________________________
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: ____________________
Registration No. ____________________________
Approved as to form:
___________________________
County Attorney
RESOLUTION TO AUTHORIZE ACQUISITION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY AND
EASEMENTS ON THREE PROPERTIES LOCATED ON STATE FARM BOULEVARD
(Parcels 78-72, 78-62, and 78-63)
WHEREAS, the County’s Office of Facilities Development is completing the right -of-
way and easement acquisition phase for the South Pantops-State Farm Boulevard Sidewalk
Project; and
WHEREAS, a right-of-way and temporary construction easement on Parcel 78-72 and
temporary construction easements on Parcelss 78-62 and 78-63 are necessary to construct the
Project; and
WHEREAS, the Owners of Parcels 78-72, 78-62 and 78-63 have agreed to sell said
right-of-way and easements for just compensation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors hereby approves the acquisition of a right-of-way and temporary construction
easement on Parcel 78-72 and temporary construction easements on Parcels 78-63 and 78-72 that
are necessary for the South Pantops-State Farm Boulevard Sidewalk Project for an amount not to
exceed just compensation, and further authorizes the County Executive to execute all documents
in a form approved by the County Attorney that are necessary to complete the acquisitions.
I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a
Resolution 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 ____ ____
Ms. Dittmar ____ ____
Ms. Mallek ____ ____
Ms. McKeel ____ ____
Ms. Palmer ____ ____
Mr. Sheffield ____ ____
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin ia, in regular meeting on the
8th day of April 2015, adopted the following resolution:
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the street(s) in The Farms at Turkey Run Subdivision, as described on the
attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated April 8, 2015, fully incorporated herein by reference, is
shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia;
and
WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Departmen t of Transportation has
advised the Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street
Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors
requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the street(s) in The Farms at Turkey
Run, as described on the attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated April 8, 2015, to the secondary
system of state highways, pursuant to §33.2-705, Code of Virginia, and the Department's
Subdivision Street Requirements; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right -of-
way, as described, exclusive of any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described
on the recorded plats; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident
Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
* * * * *
The road(s) described on Additions Form AM-4.3 is:
1) Courtenay Glen Way (State Route 1348) from existing end of state maintenance
to extend Route 1348 to cul-de-sac, as shown on plat recorded in the office the
Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 3463, pages 447-457, for a
length of 1.30 miles.
Total Mileage – 1.30
BOS CPA 2013-01
Page 1 of 2
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
CPA-2013-01 Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Priority Strategies
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Cilimberg, Echols
PRESENTER (S): Elaine Echols
LEGAL REVIEW: No
AGENDA DATE:
April 8, 2015
ACTION: INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Over the last eighteen months, the Board has reviewed the Comprehensive Plan Draft that was recommended by the
Planning Commission in August 2013. T o date, the Board has: completed its review of chapters 1-12, including all
strategies; directed staff to make changes in each chapter; reviewed all changes; and set a public hearing for May 13,
2015. The last item needing attention is the priority strategies in Chapter 13 Implementation. The Planning
Commission provided the Board a list of its recommended top three (3) to six (6) priorit y strategies per chapter in June
of last year which is attached for your reference (Attachment A).
At the March 10 Board work session, staff noted that the priority strategies will provide guidance to future initiatives of
the County, including the work programs of different departments and the County Strategic Plan. Staff indicated it
would provide the Board a recommendation on how to be st prioritize strategies for the proposed Comprehensive Plan
Draft.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
The Comprehensive Plan addresses all of the Board’s aspirations.
DISCUSSION:
During its review of each chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, the Board modified some strategies and added others.
Attachments B through K list all of the strategies resulting from the Board’s review by category, distinguishing on-
going programs and initiatives from enhanced and new activities that will involve additional time and effort of staff and
others. Staff has noted the Commission’s recommended priorities as well as strategies for which the Board showed
significant interest during the Comprehensive Plan work sessions. Staff has also identified where strategies indicate
the need for additional staff or where text under a strategy in the Plan indic ates more staff will be needed.
Staff believes the attached list of strategies, including the noted priorities, are consistent with the Board’s direction
provided during their review of the individual chapters of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff will incorporate Attachments
B through K into Chapter 13 of the Plan for the May 13th public hearing. (Please note that minor edits for grammar and
consistency are still taking place for the Board’s review of the final Comprehensive Plan draft.) As is the case with the
content of all chapters of the Comprehensive Plan, should the Board wish to modify any p articular priorities after
receiving public input it can do so as part of its action to adopt the Comprehensive Plan. Once adopted, the priority
strategies will provide a basis for considering some of the future initiatives of the County, including work pr ograms and
the Strategic Plan.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Budget impacts for implementation of priority strategies will be addressed with future work programs and the Strategic
Plan.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
This information is provided for information in advance of the Ma y public hearing on the Comprehensive Plan.
AGENDA TITLE: CPA-2013-01 Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment
April 8, 2015
BOS CPA 2013-01
Page 2 of 2
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A: June 3, 2014 Memorandum from the Planning Commission
Attachment B: Priority Strategies for Growth Management
Attachment C: Priority Strategies for Natural Resources
Attachment D: Priority Strategies for Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Attachment E: Priority Strategies for Economic Development
Attachment F: Priority Strategies for the Rural Area
Attachment G: Priority Strategies for the Development Area
Attachment H: Priority Strategies for Housing
Attachment I: Priority Strategies for Transportation
Attachment J: Priority Strategies for Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Attachment K: Priority Strategies for Community Facilities
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Memorandum
BOS ES 4-8-15
Page 1 of 5
___________________________________________________________________________
MEMORANDUM
To: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
From: Elaine K. Echols, FAICP
Date: June 9, 2014
Subject: Highest Priority Strategies for Implementation of the Comprehensive Plan,
Recommended by the Planning Commission on June 3, 2014
**************
On June 4, 2014 during the Board’s Comprehensive Plan work session, staff reported recent
actions of the Planning Commission related to priority strategies for implementing the Plan.
Selection of these priority strategies augmented work previously done by the Commission
during the reorganization and update of the Plan completed in July and August of 2013. Under
the topic chapters of growth management, natural resources, historic, cultural, and scenic
resources, economic development, the Rural Area and Development Areas, housing,
transportation, parks, and other community facilities, the Commission had provided 312
strategies. These strategies represent continuation of existing programs and actions as well as
enhanced and new programs needed to implement the Plan. For each topic chapter of the
Plan, the Commission also selected strategies as the most imminent for success. These 126
priority strategies are provided in Chapter 13, Implementation.
Believing that the Board might appreciate knowing the Commission’s recommendations for the
most important new or enhanced programs, on June 3, 2014, the Commission selected the top
3 – 4 strategies in each Chapter for recommending to the Board. The Commission believes that
these 37 strategies for new or enhanced activities should be undertaken in the near future to
achieve the most success. The 37 strategies are provided on the following pages to aid the
Board in its work, when the Board gets to Chapter 13 Implementation of the Comprehensive
Plan.
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Memorandum
BOS ES 4-8-15
Page 2 of 5
Priority Strategies from Planning Commission to Board of Supervisors for
New and Enhanced Programs* as Part of Implementation of
the Comprehensive Plan (Draft 1-23-14)
Natural Resources
Priority #1
1d
Promote the concept of water conservation as a community-wide issue. Initiate proactive
measures to encourage community-wide water conservation and use efficiency through
multi-agency programs.
Priority #2
4b
Develop an Action Plan to protect significant areas of biological importance in the
County.
Priority #3
7c Increase awareness of areas which are prone to debris flow in the County.
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Priority 1 -
- 1a
Maintain a permanent Historic Preservation Committee and re-establish the full-
time Historic Preservation Planner position to assist in implementation of the
Preservation Plan.
Priority 1 -
- 2b
Consider adopting regulatory measures for preservation and conservation such
as those outlined in the adopted 2000 Historic Preservation Plan and its updates.
Priority 3 -
- 4a
Create and strengthen partnerships among all interest groups, including but not
limited to the City of Charlottesville, the University of Virginia, County and State
officials, nearby counties, local businesses, historic sites, such as Ashlawn-Highland
and Monticello, and community organizations to collaborate on and forward the
cause of historic preservation and to promote heritage tourism throughout the
County and the region.
*In two instances, committees made recommendations for priority strategies for existing programs.
Cultural and Scenic Resources
Priority #1
- 7c
Update EC Design Guidelines to better reflect expectations of the Neighborhood Model
for the Development Areas, including but not limited to recommendations on ways to
provide for relegated parking without buildings turning their backs to the Entrance
Corridor, and on coordinating landscaping requirements with utility corridors.
Priority #2
- 7d
Develop corridor-specific guidelines for all Entrance Corridors to reflect the unique
character of each corridor.
Priority #3
- 10d
Take a leadership role in protecting the Dark Skies by designing lighting in public
building projects, including playing fields and parking lots, to serve as models of
appropriate and efficient lighting; by adopting a resolution asking power companies to
cease promotion of unshielded and inefficient outdoor lighting; and by exploring the
feasibility of participating in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Green Lights
Program to promote energy efficiency in building design and maintenance.
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Memorandum
BOS ES 4-8-15
Page 3 of 5
Economic Development
Priority #1
- 5f
Explore opportunities to create appropriate incentives that address the needs of the
County's target industries as well as emerging entrepreneurial enterprises.
Priority #2
- 2i
Establish a proactive rural support program that provides assistance to the local
agricultural community and that includes an ongoing dialogue with farm industry
stakeholders.
Priority #3
- 6a
Increase support for initiatives that foster career planning, decision making and
workplace readiness skills for the K-12 population, as well as continuing education and
training programs to prepare the local workforce for demands of current and future
employers.
Rural Area
Priority #1
-2c
Establish active support of agricultural land uses through the creation of a Rural Support
Program position that provides agricultural assistance, including community education,
marketing strategies, the exploration of agricultural support businesses, and information
about alternative agricultural uses.
Priority #2
-1g
Strengthen the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) Program by providing a
stable dedicated funding source and staff resources for administering the program.
Priority #3
-1d
Consider modifying the zoning regulations to achieve Rural Area objectives without
reducing development rights.
Development Areas
Priority #1
- 2a
Provide ongoing education to the public on the relationship of density in the
Development Areas and efforts to prevent sprawl.
Priority #2
- 5a
Plan and provide for necessary infrastructure improvements that are currently
impediments to developing vacant sites.
Priority #3
- 4k
Provide for multi-modal transportation opportunities in new development and
encourage the building of complete streets.
Priority #4
- 8b
Update the capacity analysis every two years to ensure adequate residential land
exists for new housing needs.
Housing
Priority #1
for ongoing
programs -
4a
Through rezonings and special use permits, continue to ensure a mixture of housing types
are provided that also support all income levels of residents in Albemarle County.
Priority #1
for new or
enhanced
programs -
6e
Gather information on the location of affordable and proffered units in the County.
Develop mechanisms to promote long term affordability and protect direct public
resource investments.
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Memorandum
BOS ES 4-8-15
Page 4 of 5
Priority #2
for ongoing
programs -
6b
Continue to ensure that at a minimum, 15% of all units developed under rezoning and
special use permits be affordable, as defined by the County’s Office of Housing, or a
comparable contribution be made to achieve the affordable housing goals of the
County.
Priority #2
for new or
enhanced
programs -
5a
Encourage developers to include housing for seniors and individuals with disabilities in
new residential and mixed-use developments. Approve these proposals when they are
in keeping with the Neighborhood Model.
Priority #3
for ongoing
programs -
5b
Continue to require and provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths in the Development
Areas and support expanded transit services.
Priority #3
for new or
enhanced
programs -
4b
Amend the Zoning Ordinance to provide for greater opportunities to construct accessory
units to diversify the housing supply as well as meet a portion of the County's
affordable housing needs.
Transportation
Priority #1
2e
Reinstate the Transportation Planner position at the County to improve coordination with
State, regional, and local transportation planning efforts.
Priority #2
4b
Improve funding for an ongoing walkway, bicycle, and greenway construction fund in
the Capital Improvements Program (CIP). Utilize all possible funding sources for the
construction of walkways and bicycle facilities.
Priority #3
3c
Create dedicated bicycle-pedestrian connections across physical barriers within the
community.
Parks, Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Priority #1
- 2b
Continue to develop the County’s greenway system as shown in the Master Plans and on
the Greenway Plan.
Priority #2
- 2e
Set up a Greenway Trail Advisory Committee to assist the County in designing,
implementing, promoting, and maintaining a greenway system.
Priority #3
- 2j
Coordinate adjacent land development with consideration of the greenway, so that
existing and future development can be integrated and harmonious with the greenway
system.
ATTACHMENT A
Planning Commission Memorandum
BOS ES 4-8-15
Page 5 of 5
Community Facilities
Priority #1
- 9h Continue to assess ways in which the costs of stormwater maintenance can be paid.
Priority #2
- 7b
Increase understanding of the need for solid waste management and increase the
participation of individuals, businesses, and institutions in waste reduction.
Priority #2
- 7d
Analyze possible economic savings and other benefits for solid waste management by
methods including City-County and private or regional funding to match public services
to service gaps that are not addressed by the private sector.
Priority #3
- 3i
Promote walking and bicycling to school where schools are accessible from pedestrian
and bicycle facilities.
Priority #3
- 3j
Program necessary funding in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP) to provide for
bikeway and walkway linkages to schools.
ATTACHMENT B
Growth Management
Growth Management - Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Continue to consistently use the Growth Management Policy as the
basis on which to guide decisions on land use, capital expenditures,
and service provision. x
Strategy 1a: Continue to approve new development proposals in the
Development Areas as the designated location for new residential, commercial,
industrial, and mixed-use development. Only approve new development
proposals in the Rural Area that are supported by Rural Area goals,
objectives, and strategies.
x
Strategy 1b: To help promote the Development Areas as the most desirable
place for growth, continue to fund capital improvements and infrastructure and
provide a higher level of service to the Development Areas.
x x
Strategy 1c: Continue to recognize the shared responsibility between the
County and new development to pay for infrastructure and improvements to
the Development Areas to address the impacts of new development.
x
April 8, 2015
Page 1 of 1
ATTACHMENT C
Natural Resources
Natural Resources Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1
Ensure clean and abundant water resources for public health,
business, healthy ecosystems, and personal enjoyment by
preventing shortages and contamination.
x
Strategy 1a: Continue to apply the Watershed Protection Ordinance
throughout the County to help protect and preserve water resources.x
Strategy 1b: Prepare, submit, and implement a Watershed Implementation
Plan to control stormwater pollution, as required by the State.x
Strategy 1c: Develop and implement a comprehensive water resources plan
that sets expectations for quantity of public water supply, surface water
protection and improvement, and groundwater protection.x
Strategy 1d: Educate the public on how they can help with water resource
protection.x
Strategy 1e: Secure funding for water resource management programs.x
Strategy 1f: Continue to allow and manage recreational uses of drinking
water reservoirs and adjacent public land only as incidental uses to the
primary function as a public water supply and in such a manner as to prevent
cumulative impacts that may impair that primary function.
x
Objective 2 Protect air quality.x
Strategy 2a: Help protect local and regional air quality by reducing the
County's carbon footprint and by promoting alternatives to single-occupancy
vehicles, such as walking, bicycle use, ride-sharing, and public transit services.x
PC Priority
BOS Priority
Additional
staff
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 1 of 4
ATTACHMENT C
Natural Resources
Objective 3
Recognize the economic value of the County’s mineral resources
while giving due consideration to the potential harm mineral
extraction activities and byproducts can have on human health and
property values.
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 3a: Provide educational materials to owners of properties in the
Natural Resource Extraction Overlay District on geological assets and
limitations in the Rural Area.
x
Objective 4 Protect the biological diversity and ecological integrity of the County
in both the Rural Area and Development Areas.
Strategy 4a: Develop an Action Plan for Biodiversity to protect significant
areas of biological importance in the County. x
Strategy 4b: Regularly repeat the land use/land-cover data-gathering
process carried (as begun in 2009) for the purpose of monitoring landscape
changes.
x
Strategy 4c: Collaborate with federal, state, and regional partners which have
geographic information on biological resources to help build a biodiversity
inventory.x
Strategy 4d: Assess the need for hiring a County staff member with expertise
in conservation biology, and/or training existing County staff in principles of
conservation biology to assist in development of the action plan and
coordination with other County actions.
x
Strategy 4e: Encourage the use of native plants in landscaping to protect and
provide habitat for native biodiversity, to save water, and connect landowners
to the local ecosystem.
x
Strategy 4f: Increase the community’s awareness of the importance of
biodiversity to encourage protection of biological resources.x
Strategy 4g: Provide information to potential land subdividers on the
importance of protecting habitat when creating lots for development.
Strategy 4h: Preserve existing vegetation in areas shown as Parks and Green
Systems on Development Area Master Plans.x
PC Priority
Additional
staff
recommended
April 8, 2015
Page 2 of 4
ATTACHMENT C
Natural Resources
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Objective 5 Retain mountain resources.x
Strategy 5a: Continue to protect mountain resources identified in the Mountain
Contour List.x
Strategy 5b: Continue to protect critical slopes in the Rural Areas. x
Strategy 5c: Protect slopes of 25% or greater in the Development Areas that
are shown as part of Parks and Green Systems on Development Area Master
Plan maps.
x
Strategy 5d: Encourage voluntary measures, such as conservation easements,
agricultural and forestal districts, and use value taxation to protect mountain
resources.
x
Objective 6 Retain and improve land cover near rivers and streams and protect
wetlands.x
Strategy 6a: Continue to use the Water Protection Ordinance, critical slopes
regulations, and other measures to preserve designated river and stream
valleys in their natural state to protect significant resources associated with
river and stream valleys and to provide buffer areas.
x
Strategy 6b: Protect wetlands from inappropriate uses, and protect or restore
them, where possible, to maintain surface water quality and for other benefits.x
Strategy 6c: Use Development Area Master Plans to identify important streams
and wetlands that should be protected.x
Objective 7 Protect residents and properties from damage that can be prevented
when natural hazards are present.x
Strategy 7a: Through continued application of the Flood Hazard Overlay
District, protect floodplains from uses that impair the function of the floodplain.x
Strategy 7b: Continue to maintain County-owned dams.x
Additional
staff
recommende
April 8, 2015
Page 3 of 4
ATTACHMENT C
Natural Resources
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 7c: Increase awareness of areas which are prone to debris flow in
the County.x
Strategy 7d: Continue to participate in hazard mitigation planning as part of
the Regional Natural Hazard Mitigation Plan.x
Objective 8 Recognize changes occurring to the earth’s climate to anticipate and
mitigate impacts to the County.x
Strategy 8a: Study the expected effects of climate change on Albemarle
County and develop a Community Resilience Plan to prevent harm to human
and biologic health.
x
PC Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 4 of 4
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Continue to identify and recognize the value of buildings,
structures, landscapes, sites and districts that have historical,
architectural, archaeological, or cultural significance.
x
Strategy 1a: Maintain a permanent Historic Preservation Committee and re-
establish the full- time Historic Preservation Planner position to assist in
implementation of the Preservation Plan.
x x
Strategy 1b: Compile and maintain a current and comprehensive
information base on Albemarle County’s prehistoric, historic, and cultural
resources for use by all County departments and the public.
x
Strategy 1c: Document as fully as possible all historic resources prior to
demolition and retain historic records. Complete documentation with the
assistance of County staff, the Historic Preservation Committee, local
preservation groups, applicants and property owners.
x
Objective 2
Pursue additional protection measures and incentives to preserve
Albemarle’s historic and archaeological resources in order to foster
pride in the County and maintain the County’s character. x
Strategy 2a: Encourage landowners to pursue voluntary methods of
preservation and conservation, including requesting landmark and district
designations, conservation easements, and tax and other financial incentive
programs, as outlined in the adopted 2000 Historic Preservation Plan and
its updates. Pursue historic district designations in cooperation with the
surrounding neighborhoods and in partnership with the City of
Charlottesville, where applicable.
x
Strategy 2b: Continue to find ways for preservation of historic structures
and sites to become financially viable to property owners.x
PC Priority
Additional staff
recommended
BOS Priority
April 8, 2014
Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Strategy 2c: Consider adopting regulatory measures for preservation and
conservation such as those outlined in the adopted 2000 Historic
Preservation Plan and its updates.
x
Strategy 2d: Practice good stewardship of the historic resources under
County control by using recognized practices for the preservation of historic
resources.
x
Objective 3 Provide educational programs in the community about historic
resources and preservation.x
Strategy 3a: Develop and engage in heritage education programs that
foster community pride, good citizenship, a strong school curriculum, and
stewardship of the County’s historic resources.
x
Strategy 3b: Use a variety of tools (brochures, video, workshops, lectures,
the internet, oral histories, and a comprehensive database) to educate and
provide guidance to County residents, property owners, County boards and
committees, and County staff about the County’s historic resources and its
preservation policies.
x
Strategy 3c: Partner with the City of Charlottesville to prepare and
maintain coordinated information on requirements, responsibilities and
support programs for historic resources that are designated, eligible to be
designated, or otherwise historically significant to the community.
x
Objective 4 Promote regional cooperation in preservation and conser-vation
efforts, including the promotion of heritage tourism.x
Strategy 4a: Create and strengthen partnerships among all interest groups,
including but not limited to the City of Charlottesville, the University of
Virginia, County and State officials, nearby Counties, local businesses,
historic sites (like Ashlawn-Highland and Monticello) and community
organizations to collaborate on and forward the cause of historic
preservation and to promote heritage tourism throughout the County and the
region.
x
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2014
Page 2 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Strategy 4b: Prepare and maintain a single map of formally designated
City and County historic resources and make it available as a layer on both
City and County data systems.
x
Objective 5 Help protect Monticello's Viewshed.x
Strategy 5a: Make available to the public the Monticello Vistas map that
represents all properties potentially visible from the Monticello mountaintop.x
Strategy 5b: Help land developers with properties potentially visible from
the Monticello mountaintop connect with the Thomas Jefferson Foundation
(TJF) to help prevent negative visual impacts on the Monticello viewshed.x
Strategy 5c: When reviewing discretionary land proposals, consider impacts
on Monticello’s viewshed and encourage mitigation measures that are in
keeping with the County’s Comprehensive Plan.
x
Strategy 5d: When revising zoning and subdivision regulations, consider the
impacts of new regulations on Monticello’s viewshed.x
Objective 6 Continue to protect and enhance scenic resources for residents and
tourists. x
Strategy 6a: Continue to promote voluntary measures of protection for
scenic resources.x
Strategy 6b: Support enabling legislation for Albemarle County to provide
for a scenic protection and tourist enhancement overlay district. x
Strategy 6c: Work with the City of Charlottesville, the University of
Virginia, and other regional bodies to more consistently enhance the visual
quality and multi-modal experiences along scenic corridors. Focus on
Entrance Corridors, shared boundaries, the creation of distinctive
destinations, urban area walkability, and consistent signage.
x
April 8, 2014
Page 3 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Objective 7 Maintain or improve the visual quality of all of Albemarle’s
roadways.x
Strategy 7a: Pursue additional scenic road designations to promote tourism
and to maintain the visual quality of the County’s scenic roads. x
Strategy 7b: Take an active role in the design of Virginia Department of
Transportation road improvements and bridges on scenic roads.x
Strategy 7c: Consider whether additional setback is needed along scenic
highways in the Rural Area.x
Objective 8 Maintain the visual integrity of Albemarle’s Entrance Corridors.x
Strategy 8a: Taking into consideration the former Scenic Highway
regulations, review the EC guidelines for effectiveness in protecting the
integrity of exceptionally scenic EC road corridors, such as Route 250 East,
Route 250 West, and Route 22/231.
x
Strategy 8b: Continue to use the Entrance Corridor design guidelines to
help maintain the integrity of Entrance Corridors in Albemarle County.x
Strategy 8c: Update EC Design Guidelines to better reflect expectations of
the Neighborhood Model for the Development Areas, including but not
limited to recommendations on ways to provide for relegated parking
x
Strategy 8d: Develop corridor-specific guidelines for all Entrance
Corridors to reflect the unique character of each corridor.x
Strategy 8e: Use recommendations from Development Area Master Plans
for frontage treatments of ECs to guide decision-making.x
Strategy 8f: Consider additional EC designations as appropriate, or as
road classifications change, for roads such as the John Warner Parkway,
Route 614 (Sugar Hollow Road), Route 692/712 (Plank Road), and Route
810 (Brown’s Gap Turnpike).
x
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2014
Page 4 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Objective 9 Protect the scenic quality of Albemarle’s rivers and streams.x
Strategy 9a: Pursue Virginia Scenic River designations for rivers meeting
State criteria. x
Strategy 9b: Review the effectiveness of County Scenic Streams regulations
and update them for consistency with the Water Protection Ordinance.x
Objective 10 Preserve important views as they relate to tourism and recreational
assets.x
Strategy 10a: Study ways to protect scenic views of and from the Blue
Ridge Mountains (Appalachian Trail and Skyline Drive), US Route 250, and
Shenandoah National Park.
x
Objective 11
Protect the dark sky of Albemarle County as one of the many
natural, scenic, scientific, and cultural resources for the benefit of
residents, visitors, and the larger scientific community.
x
Strategy 11a: Continue to pursue measures to reduce light pollution in the
County caused by uplighting, excessive lighting, glare, light trespass, and
inconsistent light, including but not limited to the development of guidelines
to address these issues for street lights in the Development Areas. Such
guidelines should focus on providing a safe and secure pedestrian
environment.
x
Strategy 11b: Protect the McCormick and Fan Mountain Observatories
through Dark Sky initiatives in the interest of scientific research, public
education, and future economic development opportunities. x
April 8, 2014
Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENT D
Historic, Cultural, and Scenic Resources
Strategy 11c: In cooperation with the University of Virginia and other
interested parties, develop a community-based educational program on the
value of the Dark Sky and on technical lighting topics. Target individuals in
the building materials, electrical contracting, design, construction, and
associated industries, as well as individual homeowners.
x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application of
Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Strategy 11d: Take a leadership role in protecting the Dark Skies by
designing lighting in public building projects, including playing fields and
parking lots, to serve as models of appropriate and efficient lighting; by
adopting a resolution asking power companies to cease promotion of
unshielded and inefficient outdoor lighting; and by exploring the feasibility
of participating in the Environmental Protection Agency’s Green Lights
Program to promote energy efficiency in building design and maintenance.
xPC Priority
April 8, 2014
Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT E
Economic Development
Economic Development Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1
Promote economic development activities that help build on
the County’s assets while recognizing distinctions between
expectations for the Development Areas and the Rural
Area.
x
Strategy 1a:Promote new employment activities in the
Development Areas and encourage developers of commercial and
industrial to incorporate the Neighborhood Model principles. x
Strategy 1b:Promote agriculture,forestry,and agribusiness
enterprises in the Rural Area that help the support the Rural Area
goals for a strong agricultural economy.
x
Strategy 1c:Promote tourism that helps preserve scenic,historic,and
natural resources.x
Strategy 1d: Promote a balance of jobs to housing.x
Strategy 1e: Encourage all businesses to adopt environmentally
sustainable business practices.x
Objective 2 Create a broader economic development program to assist
the County in its endeavors to stimulate job creation,capital
investments, and tax revenues.
x
Strategy 2a:Support efforts of the recently hired Economic
Development Director to help expand the County’s existing economic
development program.
x
Strategy 2b:Continue to provide support to the business community
and assistance for business retention and expansion.x
Strategy 2d: Monitor the results of implementation of the County’s
Strategic Plan and the Comprehensive Plan in relation to education,
housing, day, care, transportation and other areas, to determine if
barriers experienced by the local work force, particularly those with
the greatest needs, are being addressed.
x
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 1 of 5
ATTACHMENT E
Economic Development
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Objective 3
Provide diversified economic opportunities that benefit
County citizens and existing businesses by basing policy
decisions on efforts which support and enhance the
strengths of the County.
x
Strategy 3a: Continue to use the 2012 Target Industry Study to
guide decisions for economic development.x
Strategy 3b: Provide assistance to target industries and businesses
which provide jobs in bioscience and medical devices.x
Strategy 3c:Provide assistance to target industries in business and
financial services,especially with information on location
opportunities.
x
Strategy 3d:Provide assistance to target industries providing jobs in
the arts, design, sports, and media. x
Strategy 3e:Provide assistance to target industries and businesses
which provide jobs in information technology.x
Strategy 3f:Work directly with federal officials to encourage base
location and expansion that is consistent with County policies. x
Strategy 3g:Continue to provide support to local businesses for
which agriculture is a main component. x
Strategy 3h:Establish a proactive rural support program that
provides assistance to the local agricultural community,and that
includes an ongoing dialogue with farm industry stakeholders.x
Strategy 3i:Acknowledge and support the work of companies which
help achieve sustainability goals for the County.x
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 2 of 5
ATTACHMENT E
Economic Development
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Objective 4 Ensure that there is sufficient land to accommodate future
business and industrial growth and plan for infrastructure to
serve employment areas where these businesses are
located.
x
Strategy 4a:Provide a strategic assessment of properties
available for existing business expansion,start-up industries,and
desirable locations for target industries.Continue to assess the
quality of the areas designated for business and industry to ensure
that there is land for business and industrial growth that has suitable
size, topography, location, and availability of infrastructure.
x
Strategy 4b:Encourage development of business and industrial uses
in the Development Areas on appropriately zoned land and
consider proactively rezoning land to allow for light industrial uses
that have been identified on Master Plans.
x
Strategy 4c: Explore opportunities to assist with redevelopment of
underutilized commercial and industrially zoned properties.x
Objective 5
Continue to work with regional economic development
partners to improve the County’s economy.x
Strategy 5a: Retain membership in the Central Virginia Partnership
for Economic Development and maintain cooperation with the City of
Charlottesville, Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission
(TJPDC), other jurisdictions in the region, the University of Virginia,
and Piedmont Virginia Community College along with State partners
such as the Virginia Economic Development Partnership (VEDP).
x
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 3 of 5
ATTACHMENT E
Economic Development
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Strategy 5b: Continue to work with UVA and the City to promote
entrepreneurial talent and research and development through a
variety of initiatives and partnerships. The County should also work
with UVA and the UVA Foundation to encourage redevelopment of
properties that can provide employment opportunities in the
community. It is particularly important that context sensitive design
play a major role in redevelopment of University facilities in the
County.
x
Objective 6
Increase local business development opportunities,
including support for entrepreneurial and start-up
businesses.
x
Strategy 6a:Make data on County plans,zoning,sites,and policies
available on request. x
Strategy 6b:Continue to evaluate the fiscal impacts of new
business and industrial development as one indicator of positive
economic development,along with other impacts,such as
environmental impact, traffic impact, and standard of living impact.x
Strategy 6c:Continue to improve the County’s application and
approval processes to improve efficiency without sacrificing
standards of quality.
x
Strategy 6d:Support and coordinate with existing organizations
that assist new small,locally owned,local agricultural businesses,
minority businesses and micro-enterprises in their start-up and early
operation efforts.
x
April 8, 2015
Page 4 of 5
ATTACHMENT E
Economic Development
Strategy 6e: Explore opportunities to create appropriate incentives
that address the needs of the County’s target industries as well as
emerging entrepreneurial enterprises.x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program New Project/Program
Objective 7 Increase workforce development to further career-ladder
opportunities and higher wages.x
Strategy 7a:Increase support for initiatives that foster career
planning,decision making and workplace readiness skills for the K-
12 population,as well as continuing education and training
programs to prepare the local workforce for demands of current
and future employers.
x
Strategy 7b: Continue the use of information gathering strategies to
help identify employer needs and workforce training needs. x
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 5 of 5
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
The Rural Area Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Support a strong agricultural and forestal economy.x
Strategy 1a:Continue to promote use of Rural Preservation Developments
(RPDs),conservation easements,and Transfer of Development Rights (TDRs)
programs,if developed,to help preserve agricultural and forestal soils and
to increase the acreage of productive soils for agriculture and forestry. x
Strategy 1b:Continue to promote farming and forestry activities in the
County by retaining Rural Area zoning on Rural Area designated land.x
Strategy 1c:Establish active support of agricultural land uses through the
creation of a Rural Support Program position that provides agricultural
assistance,including community education,marketing strategies,the
exploration of agricultural support businesses,and information about
alternative agricultural uses.
x
Strategy 1d:Continue to assist Rural Area property owners in diversifying
agricultural activities,including helping to connect local farms to local
consumers.
x
Strategy 1e:Continue to provide support to wineries and cideries,and farm
breweries as part of the County’s agricultural support activities.x
Strategy 1f: Study ways in which the County can better support the local
horse industry.x
Strategy 1g:Continue to promote retention of forest soils in conjunction with
preservation developments and provide contacts with the Department of
Forestry, which oversees timbering operations.x
Strategy 1h:Change zoning regulations to permit appropriately-scaled
collection and distribution facilities for local agricultural products in the Rural
Area. Consider allowing these uses by-right.x
PC Priority
Additional staff
recommended
April 8, 2015
Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 1i:Clarify the difference between home occupations and other uses
that are listed in the Zoning Ordinance.x
Strategy 1j:Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow storage of
landscape materials and landscape services in the Rural Area.x
Objective 2
Protect and preserve natural resources,which include mountains,
hills,valleys,rivers,streams,groundwater,and and retain
continuous and unfragmented land for agriculture,forestry,
biodiversity and natural resource protection.
x
Strategy 2a:Direct residential development to and continue to make the
Development Areas more livable, attractive places.x
Strategy 2b: Provide information to property owners in the Rural Area on
alternatives to subdividing their land, including donating conservation
easements and use value taxation.
x
Strategy 2c:Continue rural conservation programs such as
Agricultural/Forestal (Ag/For)Districts and use value taxation as incentives
for owners to avoid subdividing for residential uses.
x
Strategy 2d: Continue to promote conservation easements to provide a
financially attractive way for landowners to protect family farms in
Albemarle County and their unique open space resources, to provide an
opportunity for landowners to voluntarily sell a conservation easement to a
public agency to be held in trust for perpetuity, and to preserve important
features of the Rural Area for all.
x
Strategy 2e:Strengthen the Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE)
Program by providing a stable dedicated funding source and staff resources
for administering the program.
x
Strategy 2f:Continue to provide staff support to the Public Recreational
Facility Authority (PRFA).x
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 2 of 6
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
Strategy 2g:Assess how a program for the transfer of development rights
might be designed to redirect development potential from sections of the
Rural Area with high-value natural and cultural resources to locations outside
of the Rural Area.
x
Strategy 2g:Assess how a program for the transfer of development rights
might be designed to redirect development potential from sections of the
Rural Area with high-value natural and cultural resources to locations outside
of the Rural Area.
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 2h:Work with property owners who are proposing subdivision of
rural land in both conventional and Rural Preservation Developments (RPD)to
make “development right”lots as small as possible and large lots (21+acres)
as large as possible to reduce impacts of forest and habitat fragmentation in
the Rural Area.
x
Strategy 2i: Encourage connectivity of conservation land wherever feasible. x
Strategy 2j:Consider modifying the zoning regulations for residential
development to help achieve Rural Area objectives.x
Objective 3 Protect the County’s historic, archeological, and cultural resources.x
Strategy 3a:Promote reuse of historic structures that support agricultural and
forestal uses in the Rural Area. x
Strategy 3b:Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow for
restaurants in historic buildings (as defined in the Historic Resources section of
the Plan) in crossroads communities.
x
Strategy 3c:Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow for artist
residencies in historic buildings (as defined in the Historic Resources section of
the Plan [hyperlink]).
x
Objective 4
Promote rural and historic landscapes which enhance the visitors’
experience and give historic sites as authentic a setting as possible. x
April 8, 2015
Page 3 of 6
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
Strategy 4a:Continue to require special permission for events at farm
wineries,farm breweries,and bona fide agricultural operations for over 200
persons and for other events in the Rural Area over 150 persons.These
special events should promote or support agricultural production or a uniquely
rural activity, such as a County fair, and be limited to once or twice per year.
x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 4b:Review the zoning regulations related to recreational uses to see
whether updates are needed to better reflect rural recreational activities that
should be available by special use permit in the Rural Area.x
Strategy 4c:Study the nature of and extent to which transient lodging is
currently taking place and consider whether policy and regulatory changes
should occur to better accommodate them.If such changes are determined not
to be needed or appropriate,develop and implement a plan to bring errant
operators of transient lodging into conformity with the County's regulations in
a timely fashion.
x
Objective 5
Recognize and support crossroads communities, which serve as
rural-scale community meeting places and provide opportunities for
residents to take part in community life.
x
Strategy 5a:Identify the geographic limits of a crossroads community by
meeting with Rural Area residents. x
Strategy 5b:Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow for small-
scale,supportive uses in designated crossroads communities.Examples of such
uses are country stores,offices,day care facilities,doctor/dentist offices,and
public institutional uses, such as post offices.
x
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 4 of 6
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
Strategy 5c:Consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to allow community
centers and religious institutions at an appropriate scale in designated
crossroads communities without legislative review in existing structures.x
Objective 6 Provide distinct boundaries between the Development Areas and
buildings and sites which are clearly rural.x
Strategy 6a:Promote use of Rural Area land up to the boundary with the
Development Area.Do not require transitional areas between the Rural Area
and the Development Areas.
x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 6b:Develop rural design standards to be used in conjunction with
site plans in the Rural Area,especially for parking lots,signage,entrance
requirements, and landscaping.
x
Strategy 6c:Permit uses at rural interstate interchanges which support
agriculture and forestry. x
Strategy 6d: Study the infrastructure challenges at the Shadwell interchange
to determine the potential level and concentration of operations which are
appropriate.
x
Objective 7
Provide information to citizens so they are well-informed and
understand the cultural, economic, and ecological aspects of the
Rural Area.
x
Strategy 7a: Inform existing property owners, realtors, and prospective
property owners in the Rural Area that the rural Area is not intended for
residential development. Instead, emphasis is placed on stewardship of the
land, retaining agricultural and forestal activities, protecting natural
resources, and maintaining unfragmented land to protect biodiversity.
x
Objective 8 Retain the character of Rural Area land located in Area B.x
April 8, 2015
Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENT F
Rural Area
Strategy 8a:Continue to use the Milton Airport property for research
activities of the University of Virginia and for an indoor firing range for
regional emergency personnel training.
x
Strategy 8b:Continue to use the UVA Farm (former vivarium and incinerator
site) on Route 20 South for UVA storage activities.x
Strategy 8c:Continue to use the Northridge Medical Park properties for
medical purposes associated with the University of Virginia.x
Strategy 8d: Continue to use recommendations for Rural Area uses for
properties in Area B shown as Rural Area.x
April 8, 2015
Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Development Area - Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Use Master Plans to guide development and investment in each
Development Area.x
Strategy 1a: Update Master Plans every five years to keep them current.x
Strategy 1b: Continue to use Community Advisory Councils to help develop
Master Plan updates, provide guidance on conformity of proposed projects
with the Master Plan, assist in implementation of the Master Plan, and to act
as a clearinghouse for information that is important to the Development Area.x
Strategy 1c: To the extent possible, create uniformity in format and land use
categories in Master Plans.x
Objective 2
Create a physical environment that supports healthy lifestyles
through application of the Neighborhood Model Principles x
Strategy 2a: Continue to require and provide sidewalks and pedestrian paths
in the Development Areas.x
Strategy 2b: Promote block development rather than long cul-de-sacs and
provide guidance to developers on ways to create blocks and streetscape
with Albemarle County’s topography.x
Strategy 2c: Continue to promote pedestrian safety through construction of
crosswalks for sidewalks. x
Strategy 2d: Conduct a study on ways in which street lights can enhance
pedestrian safety in the Development Areas.x
Strategy 2e: Continue to approve mixed-use developments that are in
keeping with the Neighborhood Model and Master Plans.x
Strategy 2f: Continue to promote centers as focal points for neighborhoods
and places for civic engagement.x
April 8, 2015
Page 1 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 2g: Through Master Plans and rezoning approvals, ensure that all
Development Areas provide for a variety of housing types and levels of
affordability.
x
Strategy 2h: Encourage builders to make affordable housing units
indistinguishable on the exterior from other units.x
Strategy 2i: Through rezoning and special use permit decisions, ensure that
affordable housing units are dispersed throughout the Development Areas
rather than built in enclaves.x
Strategy 2j: Continue to require that streets are interconnected in the
Development Areas; ensure that exceptions occur rarely and not routinely.x
Strategy 2k: Provide for multi-modal transportation opportunities in new
development and encourage the building of complete streets.x
Strategy 2l: Acquire, develop, and maintain public parkland shown on
Master Plans. Continue to require recreational amenities in residential
developments.
x
Strategy 2m: Continue to promote appropriate scale, massing, and enclosure
with new development proposals.x
Strategy 2n: Continue to work with developers to design and build projects
which relegate parking to the side or rear of site and which results in the
fronts of buildings facing the street.x
Strategy 2o: Promote redevelopment as a way to improve and take
advantage of existing investment in the Development Areas.x
Strategy 2p: Encourage developers to design buildings which fit into the
terrain rather than flattening the land for trademark buildings.x
Strategy 2q: Require that re-graded slopes result in smooth rather than
abrupt or steep grades that are difficult to vegetate and maintain.x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 2 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Strategy 2r: Promote use of Development Area land up to the boundary with
the Rural Area. Do not require transitional areas between the Rural Area and
Development Areas.
x
Objective 3:Promote Livability in Existing Residential Neighborhoods x
Strategy 3a: Work with neighborhood groups and/or Community Advisory
Councils to identify specific areas in neighborhoods with needs, the nature of
those needs, and ways to help the neighborhoods become safer and more
attractive.
x
Strategy 3b: Invest in public services and improvements for sidewalks,
drainage, public parks and other features that improve older neighborhoods. x
Strategy 3c: Identify property maintenance concerns and establish
maintenance expectations. Initiate County programs to address maintenance
issues and ensure that resources will enable the programs to be effective.x
Strategy 3d: Identify and build pedestrian, bikeway, roadway, and transit
connections that facilitate movement between neighborhoods and services,
especially near wide, busy roads, such as Route 29 and Route 250. x
Objective 4:Use Development Area land efficiently to prevent premature
expansion of the Development Areas x
Strategy 4a: Continue to monitor building activity in both the Development
Areas and the Rural Area to gain information on the rate of residential and
non-residential development in the County.x
Strategy 4b: Update the capacity analysis every two years to ensure
adequate residential land exists to meet new housing needs.x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 3 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Objective 5:Promote density within the Development Areas to help create new
compact urban places.x
Strategy 5a: Provide ongoing education to the public on the relationship of
density in the Development Areas and efforts to prevent sprawl.x
Strategy 5b: Encourage developers to build at the higher end of the density
range, on greenfield sites, provided that development will be in keeping with
design recommendations in the Neighborhood Model.
x
Strategy 5c: Encourage developers to build within the density range
recommended in the Master Plans on infill sites. x
Strategy 5d: Review the cash proffer policy to assess its effects on density.x
Strategy 5e: Study the extent to which transient lodging is taking place that
is not in conformity with zoning regulations and discuss whether policy and
regulatory changes are needed. If policy and regulatory changes are not
needed, develop and implement a plan to timely bring errant operators of
transient lodging into conformity with the County's regulations.
x
Objective 6:Promote infill development that is compatible with surrounding
neighborhoods and uses.x
Strategy 6a: Encourage developers to meet with neighborhoods to find ways
to minimize any negative impacts of infill. Use neighborhood meetings to help
find solutions to potential compatibility issues.
x
Strategy 6b: Use design and architectural techniques with infill to help new
development blend into existing neighborhoods. If needed, create guidelines
for residents and developers.
x x
Strategy 6c: Continue to require screening, buffering, and, physical
separation, where necessary, to promote compatibility of residential and non-
residential uses.
x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Objective 7:Create vibrant, active employment and commercial areas. x
Strategy 7a: Continue to ensure that sufficient developable land is available
for future commercial and industrial development needs.x
PC Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
Page 4 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Strategy 7b: Identify tools needed to help create and maintain vibrant
employment centers.x
Objective 8:Preserve natural systems which are shown for preservation on
Master Plan Land Use Plans.x
Strategy 8a: Continue to provide detailed information on elevation, steep
slopes, streams, stream buffers, floodplain, and wooded areas through the
County’s Geographic Information System (GIS) on-line database and share
this information with property owners and developers.
x
Strategy 8b: Review new state and federal water resource protection
requirements for consistency with County stream buffer regulations in the
Development Area. If necessary, update County stream buffer regulations for
intermittent streams and modify Master Plans accordingly.
x
Strategy 8c: Review zoning standards for calculating density and, if
necessary, amend the Zoning Ordinance to better align density allowances
with the Comprehensive Plan.x
Objective 9:Match infrastructure availability and capacity with new
development, especially in Priority Areas.x
Strategy 9a: Continue to establish Priority Areas in all Master Plans. x
Strategy 9b: Make decisions to approve new development with an
understanding of where public investments are being focused. Give priority to
approving rezonings and special use permits that are consistent with priority
areas established in the Development Area Master Plans.
x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 9c: Do not approve proposed rezonings and special use permits
outside of Priority Areas when planned facilities are not in place to support
the project and existing neighborhoods, unless the proposed project will
provide significant improvements to ensure adequate infrastructure and
services are available to the area.
x
April 8, 2015
Page 5 of 6
ATTACHMENT G
Development Areas
Objective 10: Continue to work with the City of Charlottesville, the University of
Virginia, and the Town of Scottsville on issues of joint interest to the
community.
x
Strategy 10a: Continue participation in the Planning and Coordination
Council and the Three-Party Agreement.x
Strategy 10b: Building on the successful collaboration between the City and
the County on the Livability Project, continue to work together on areas of joint
interest to achieve mutual goals of the City and the County.
x
Strategy 10c: Continue collaboration between the County and the Town of
Scottsville on projects of mutual interest.x
Objective 11:
Consider allowing for urban agriculture practices to increase access
to healthy, local, and affordable foods and encourage the
productive use of vacant land.x
Strategy 11a: Study ways to allow chickens, goats, bees, and other forms of
agriculture in the Development Areas without harming the safety, welfare,
and enjoyment the property of adjoining owners.
x
Strategy 11b: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to allow gardening as a
standalone use in zoning districts in the Development Areas.x
April 8, 2015
Page 6 of 6
ATTACHMENT H
Housing
Housing -- Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Support the provision of decent, safe, and sanitary housing in good
repair for all residents.x
Strategy 1a: Continue to assist nonprofit partners in securing funding for
housing rehabilitation, including applying for grant funding for housing
rehabilitation and community improvement programs.x
Objective 2 Ensure that housing is equally available to all populations.x
Strategy 2a: Continue to make information on equal housing opportunities
available in public places.x
Strategy 2b: Continue to monitor the use of County money in support of
housing to ensure non-discrimination. x
Objective 3
Ensure sufficient land area exists in the Development Areas to
accommodate future residential housing.x
Strategy 3a: Continue to monitor the supply of land designated and zoned
for residential use in the Development Areas to ensure adequate capacity for
future populations.
x
Objective 4
Provide for a variety of housing types for all income levels and help
provide for increased density in the Development Areas.x
Strategy 4a: Through rezonings and special use permits, continue to ensure a
mixture of housing types are provided that also support all income levels of
County residents.x
Strategy 4b: Amend the Zoning Ordinance to provide for more opportunities
to construct accessory units that will help diversify the housing supply as well
as meet a portion of the County's affordable housing need.x
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
1 of 3
ATTACHMENT H
Housing
Objective 5 Support provision of housing which meets the needs of various ages
and levels of mobility.x
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 5a: Encourage developers to include housing for seniors and
individuals with disabilities in new residential and mixed-use developments.
Approve these proposals when they are in keeping with the Neighborhood
Model.
x
Strategy 5b: Continue to require and provide sidewalks and pedestrian
paths in the Development Areas and support expanded transit services.x
Strategy 5c: Support local agencies that provide residential living facilities
for persons with disabilities and senior citizens.x
Objective 6
Provide affordable housing options for low-to-moderate income
residents of Albemarle County and those persons who work within
Albemarle County who wish to reside in Albemarle County.x
Strategy 6a: Provide guidance, resources, and incentives to non-profit and for-
profit development and financing entities to increase the supply of affordable
housing (both rental and owned) for households with incomes between 0% and
80% of area median income.x x
Strategy 6b: Continue to ensure that at a minimum, 15% of all units
developed under rezoning and special use permits are affordable, as defined
by the County’s Office of Housing, or a comparable contribution be made to
achieve the affordable housing goals of the County.x
Strategy 6c: Encourage developers and builders, through by-right zoning, to
provide for affordable housing using density bonuses available in the Zoning
Ordinance.x
Strategy 6d: Provide sufficient staffing to implement affordable housing
policies and assist low-to-moderate income individuals in obtaining affordable
housing. (text refers to Homebuyer's Club)
x
PC Priority
PC Priority
PC Priority
Additional staff
recommended
April 8, 2015
2 of 3
ATTACHMENT H
Housing
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 6e: Gather information on the location of affordable and proffered
units in the County. Develop mechanisms to promote long term affordability
and protect public investments.x x
Strategy 6f: Where necessary, amend the Zoning Ordinance with relation to
density and minimum lot size in residential districts to provide greater
flexibility in the provision of affordable housing.
x
Strategy 6g: Continue to direct affordable housing activities to the
designated Development Areas.
Objective 7
Promote the inclusion of affordable units throughout neighborhoods
and strive for similarity in exterior appearance to market-rate units. x
Strategy 7a: Approve developments which mix affordable units with market
rate units throughout neighborhoods and work with developers to ensure visual
compatibility.
x x
Objective 8
Work with the City of Charlottesville to provide a range of housing
types that support various incomes, ages, and levels of mobility. x
Strategy 8a: Develop a plan for regional cooperation in provision of
affordable housing in the community and affordable housing that is connected
to community amenities, parks, trails, and services in the City and in the
County’s Development Areas.
x
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
3 of 3
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Transportation- Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1 Continue to participate fully in State, regional, and local
transportation planning efforts. x
Strategy 1a: Continue to maintain compliance and ensure coordination of local
transportation objectives and strategies with Statewide transportation plans,
such as Virginia’s Long-Range Multimodal Transportation Plan (VTrans2035)
and the 2035 Virginia Surface Transportation Plan (2035 VSTP).x
Strategy 1b: Continue to recognize the Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan
Planning Organization (MPO) as the transportation planning body for the
region's MPO Area. x
Strategy 1c: Continue to participate in development and adoption of the
MPO’s LRTP for the CA-MPO Area.x
Strategy 1d: Continue to support construction of projects adopted into the
LRTP and the Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). x
Strategy 1e: Continue to recognize the TJPDC's rural planning function by
taking formal action on rural transportation planning recommendations and
reviewing the TJPDC's adopted studies and, where appropriate, consider
adopting such studies into this Plan.
x
Objective 2 Continue to plan transportation improvements in accordance with the
County’s Growth Management Policy.x
Strategy 2a: Continue to implement the transportation planning
recommendations in the County’s adopted Master Plans.x
Strategy 2b: Continue to work closely with State, regional and local partners
to ensure that transportation improvements meet Albemarle County
Comprehensive Plan goals and priorities as annually reflected in VDOT’s Six
Year Improvement Program (SYIP) and State Secondary Six Year Plan (SSYP).x
April 8, 2015
1 of 6
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 2c: Continue to work closely with State, regional and local partners
to ensure that roadway structures (bridges and culverts) with low sufficiency
ratings are annually prioritized in the SSYP for funding, repair and/or
replacement.
x
Objective 3 Continue to improve, promote, and provide regional multimodal and
accessible transportation options. x
Strategy 3a: Continue to coordinate multimodal transportation planning
among the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and the University of
Virginia.
x
Strategy 3b: Increase and expand transit network efficiency and use
throughout the region.x
Strategy 3c: Create dedicated bicycle-pedestrian connections across physical
barriers within the community.x
Strategy 3d: Continue to provide community education about multimodal
transportation options. x
Strategy 3e: Collaborate to strengthen intrastate and interstate rail and air
transportation opportunities.x
Strategy 3f: Coordinate with developers and the City to provide and enhance
multimodal connections between employment centers and areas of high
residential density.x
Objective 4 Strengthen efforts to complete a local transportation system that
includes access to pedestrian and bicycle facilities.x
Strategy 4a: Continue to include bicycle lanes, bikeways, sidewalks, and
crosswalks within new developments in the Development Areas. Provide
amenities such as bike racks in employment and shopping areas. x
Strategy 4b: Improve funding for an ongoing walkway, bicycle, and
greenway construction fund in the Capital Improvements Program (CIP). Use all
possible funding sources for the construction of walkways and bicycle facilities.x
BOS Priority
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
2 of 6
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 4c: Continue to implement recommendations for future bicycle and
pedestrian projects as identified in adopted local and regional transportation
plans and studies and Development Areas Master Plans.
x
Strategy 4d: Study and evaluate methods to ensure long-term maintenance of
street trees within the tree lawn areas of road right-of-ways. x
Strategy 4e: Continue to use VDOT and railroad excess and/or abandoned
right-of-way for multi-use trails.x
Objective 5
Continue to preserve the functionality of the roadway systems in
Albemarle County and plan for and implement access management
strategies.
x
Strategy 5a: As Development Areas Master Plans are updated, address
access management strategies. When transportation studies or projects are
planned in the Rural Area, ensure access management strategies are
addressed.
x
Objective 6
Continue to provide safe, effective, and improved urban roads in the
Development Areas while recognizing that multimodal opportunities
help to improve road functions.x
Strategy 6a: Use and continue to implement Development Areas
transportation planning recommendations as found in adopted local
transportation planning documents and studies.x
Strategy 6b: Standardize a process and method to complete the major road
network in the Development Areas.x
Objective 7
Continue to provide safe and effective transportation options while
preserving the character of the Rural Area. x
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
3 of 6
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 7a: In the Rural Area, continue to focus on safety improvements
rather than on paving and widening rural roads. Consider rural traffic
calming techniques to reduce speeding. Adhere to and implement the
recommendations found in the Rural Road Design Standards. x
Strategy 7b: Except for agricultural and forestal purposes, continue to limit
construction of new roads in the Rural Area, especially where road building
would have an impact on or fragment natural habitats. x
Strategy 7c: Continue to pursue the Rural Rustic Roads Program as an
alternative to the Pave-In-Place program for qualified roads that have been
designated to be paved by the County. x
Strategy 7d: Continue to provide and enhance rural transit opportunities for
elderly and disabled residents. Enhance ridesharing opportunities.x x
Objective 8 Continue to improve public transit service.x
Strategy 8a: Continue to use the recommended improvements for public transit
in local Development Areas Master Plans and regional transportation plans
such as the Long Range Transportation Plan, the Transit Development Plan, and
other studies to determine the location and timing for the provision of transit
services.
x
Strategy 8b: Continue to provide public transit service hours at nights and on
weekends on appropriate routes to improve ridership and service. Continue to
provide service to the Rio Road area, including service to CATEC and the
residential neighborhoods along Rio Road.
x
April 8, 2015
4 of 6
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Strategy 8c: Expand transit service to the Hollymead Development Area,
Cedar Hill Mobile Home Park, south of I-64 on Avon Street Extended, and Rt.
250 West.
x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 8d: Continue to recognize JAUNT, Inc. as the primary public
transportation provider for rural Albemarle County and the County’s
transportation disadvantaged.
x
Strategy 8e: Participate in the formation of a Regional Transit Authority (RTA)
that is sufficiently funded to significantly expand transit service in the region
with fast, frequent transit service along priority transit corridors.
x
Objective 9 Continue to implement travel demand management strategies.x
Strategy 9a: Continue to work with the MPO and JAUNT to develop a
regional system of Park and Ride lots. x
Strategy 9b: Continue to contribute to and participate in ride sharing services.x
Strategy 9c: Work with area employers through the MPO to encourage
development of ridesharing and vanpooling programs and transportation
demand reduction programs. Encourage development of ridesharing and
transportation demand reduction programs as part of rezonings and parking
lot requests for major industrial, office, and commercial development projects.
x
Objective 10
Continue to support air transportation planning and participation in
the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Authority.x
Strategy 10a: Continue to participate in the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport
Authority.x
Strategy 10b: Continue to participate in updates and revisions to the
Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Master Plan in order to ensure land use
coordination.
x
Objective 11 Continue to support rail service for passengers and freight.x
Strategy 11a: Continue to maintain existing rail passenger service and pursue
enhanced service for the Charlottesville-Albemarle community. x
April 8, 2015
5 of 6
ATTACHMENT I
Transportation
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 11b: Provide support for the Charlottesville passenger train station in
order to accommodate future demand by Albemarle County residents. x
Strategy11c: Participate in studying the benefits of increased passenger train
frequencies that can assist with ridership growth in the Albemarle-
Charlottesville region, as well as extended service to the Roanoke area.
x
Strategy 11d: Participate in a study of a new east-west passenger train route
through the Albemarle-Charlottesville region.x
Strategy 11e: Support extending rail service from Charlottesville to Roanoke. x
Strategy 11f: Continue to implement railroad improvement at intersection with
roadways and trails by adding adequate safety devices for passage across
the tracks using grade-separated intersections where possible.x
April 8, 2015
6 of 6
ATTACHMENT J
Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Parks and Recreation, etc. - Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1
Preserve and maintain important natural areas, rivers, and lakes in
County-owned parks in the Development Areas and the Rural Area ,
in parks jointly owned with the City, and in City-owned parks in the
County.
x
Strategy 1a: Continue to preserve and maintain the County’s Rural Area parks:
William S.D. Woods Heritage Preserve, Beaver Creek Lake Park, Chris Greene
Lake Park, Heyward Park, Mint Springs Valley Park, Patricia Ann Byrom Forest
Preserve, Preddy Creek Trail Park, Totier Park, and Walnut Creek Park.x
Strategy 1b: Continue to maintain and enhance existing smaller parks and
recreational facilities in the County.x
Strategy 1c: Continue to allow and manage recreational uses of drinking
water reservoirs and adjacent public land only as incidental uses to the primary
function of water supply and in such a manner as to prevent cumulative impacts
that may impair that primary function.
x
Strategy 1d: Work with the City and the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
(RWSA) on ways to make City and RWSA owned land around reservoirs in the
County’s Rural Area available for greater public enjoyment of these natural
areas and resolve misuse of resources.x
Strategy 1e: Preserve important natural areas shown on the Development
Area Master Plans. x
Strategy 1f: Develop criteria for reviewing offers of park land and accept
donations that will help achieve the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. x
Strategy 1g: Consider whether the County should adopt a new policy for
acceptance of Rural Area land for rural park preserves.x
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
1 of 5
ATTACHMENT J
Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Objective 2 Develop parks for active recreation. x
Strategy 2a: Update the County’s parks and recreation needs assessment. As
part of this assessment, determine whether the needs of all age groups are
being met with existing outdoor parks and recreational facilities.x
Strategy 2b: Provide a full range of recreational opportunities within specific
service areas.
Strategy 2c: Study the parks and recreational needs of residents of existing
neighborhoods in the Development Areas to determine whether parkland for
public neighborhood parks should be acquired and developed.x
Strategy 2d: Acquire the sites for and develop public parks shown for active
recreation on Development Area Master Plans. x
Strategy 2e: Obtain and develop additional public multi-purpose athletic field
facilities and/or park land, where needed and appropriate in the Rural Area
to ensure a balance of athletic fields throughout the County. x
Strategy 2f: Ensure that all improvements and upgrades to park and
recreational facilities meet the standards provided in the Americans with
Disabilities Act (ADA). Permit individuals with mobility disabilities to use other
power-driven mobility devices (OPDMDs).
x
Strategy 2g: Continue to use County school facilities as an integral part of
recreational opportunities for County residents.x
Strategy 2h: Work to make school park facilities more user-friendly. x
Objective 3 Complete the greenway trail system and provide access to blueways.x
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
2 of 5
ATTACHMENT J
Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Strategy 3a: Enhance, protect, and maintain stream and river corridor
vegetation, water quality, and wildlife habitats by acquiring greenways and
blueways and, in some instances, improving designated greenways by adding
trails.
x x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 3b: Continue to develop the County’s greenway system as shown in
the Development Area Master Plans and on the Greenway Plan.x
Strategy 3c: Continue to upgrade and maintain parks and greenway trails
using the resources of public and private entities.x
Strategy 3d: Secure funding for greenways, greenway trails, blueways, and
blueway improvements. x
Strategy 3e: Set up a Greenway Trail Advisory Committee to assist the County
in designing, implementing, promoting, and maintaining a greenway system.x
Strategy 3f: Work with volunteers and greenway partners from the State to
the local level to complete the greenway system. x
Strategy 3g: Continue to encourage developers to contribute to the greenway
system by dedicating land, donating easements or funds, and/or constructing
portions of the trails identified on the Greenway Plan.x
Strategy 3h: Continue to demonstrate the benefits and values of greenways to
individual landowners whose land, or parts thereof, could be made a part of
the greenway system through donation of the land or an easement.x
Strategy 3i: Increase public awareness of greenways and provide educational
opportunities, such as nature hikes, species and plant identification, and
interpretation of historic, architectural, and natural resources.x
PC Priority
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
3 of 5
ATTACHMENT J
Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Strategy 3j: Coordinate adjacent land development with the greenway, so
that existing and future development can be integrated into and harmonious
with the greenway system.x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 3k: Improve the functionality of Greenway Plan maps so that they
are more accessible to the public and can be more easily understood.x
Objective 4 Provide access points to greenways and blueways.x
Strategy 4a: Provide access to public greenways at locations shown in
Development Area Master Plans and in places listed in the Greenway Plan.
Details are provided in the Appendix to this Plan.x
Strategy 4b: Provide boat access at appropriate locations along the Rivanna
River, the Rivanna Reservoir, and the James River. Target access or
improvements to access points at the locations listed in the Greenway Plan.
Details are provided in the Appendix to this Plan.
x
Objective 5
Provide bicycle and pedestrian connections from City and County
parks and schools in the Development Areas to neighborhoods,
employment centers, shopping areas, public parks, and public
schools.
x
Strategy 5a: With the City of Charlottesville, continue to coordinate
connections to City and County parks, using sidewalks, multipurpose paths along
roads, and greenway trails.
x
Strategy 5b: Coordinate with the Albemarle County School Board to connect
multipurpose paths and greenway trails to public school sites throughout the
County. In the Development Areas, sidewalks should provide access to school
sites.
x
Strategy 5c: Coordinate the transportation improvements identified in the
Transportation Plan with greenway trails to further develop a pedestrian and
bicycle network in the Development Areas.x
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
4 of 5
ATTACHMENT J
Parks and Recreation, Greenways, Blueways, and Green Systems
Objective 6 Connect Rural Area parks to each other and to other nearby parks. x
Strategy 6a: Develop a detailed plan and strategies for interconnecting public
parks in the Rural Area. x
Continuation of Existing
Program or Application
of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Objective 7
Work with the City of Charlottesville on joint projects to improve
parks and recreation services, greenways, blueways, and green
systems.
x
Strategy 7a: Create a plan that incorporates a unified vision for land
adjacent to the Rivanna River. x
Strategy 7b: With the City of Charlottesville, continue to develop ways in
which residents may more easily use the parks, recreational facilities, and
programs of the other locality.
x
Strategy 7c: Pursue joint partnerships for ownership and maintenance of
regional resources. x
Strategy 7d: Work with the City to prepare and apply for grants to fund the
greenway system.x
Strategy 7e: Encourage the maintenance and enhancement of existing public
access points to Shenandoah National Park and the Appalachian Trail. Provide
for public trail connections to Biscuit Run State Park.x
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
5 of 5
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Community Facilities- Priorities and Strategies
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
PC priorities from June 2014 are shown in the first column; BOS priorities have been identified during worksessions. Recommendation for additional staff resources are in green.
Objective 1
Continue to provide public facilities and services in a fiscally
responsible and equitable manner.x
Strategy 1a: Give priority to facilities that address emergency needs, health
and safety concerns and which provide the greatest cost-benefit ratio to the
population served.
x
Strategy 1b: Give priority to the maintenance and expansion of existing
facilities to meet service needs.x
Strategy 1c: Continue to design all buildings, structures and other facilities to
permit expansion as necessary. Sites should be able to accommodate existing
and future service needs. x
Strategy 1d: Continue to locate related or complementary services and
facilities together when possible and when other goals of the Comprehensive
Plan can be met.
x
Strategy 1e: Schedule funding of government facilities through the Capital
Improvements Program (CIP), based on the needs identified in the Development
Area Master Plans, the Transportation Chapter and other adopted County Plans.x
Strategy 1f: Look for opportunities to join in public-private partnerships and use
volunteers to help provide cost effective facilities and services x
Strategy 1g: Ensure that all government facilities conform to County regulations,
site development standards, and policies.x
Strategy 1h: Prior to the disposal of any existing but obsolete facilities and
sites, determine the value of maintaining them for potential reuse by other
services and facilities.
x
Strategy 1i: Continue to design and construct public facilities that are energy
efficient and environmentally responsible.xBOS Priority
April 8, 2015
1 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 1j: Continue to design and construct buildings with a commitment to
occupant health and government benefits. x
Strategy 1k: Ensure that public buildings and spaces provided in the
Development Areas conform to the principles of the Neighborhood Model. x
Provide high quality policing to the County. (Text notes that service
standards for police per capita are not being met.)x
Strategy 2a: Use the Police Service Model Geographic Policing to provide
service to the County.x
Strategy 2b: Locate Police District Stations within all designated police service
areas of the County. x
Strategy 2c: Evaluate the need for a County-owned public safety training
facility. If deemed appropriate, locate the training facility in a central location
to provide convenient access for all regional members (See Strategy 4c)x
Objective 3
Provide physical facilities that enable the School Division to provide a
high quality educational system for students in Albemarle County. x
Strategy 3a: Locate new schools in the Development Areas. Only locate new
schools in the Rural Area by exception when physical constraints, land area
needs or availability, or service consideration may necessitate it.x
Strategy 3b: Maintain and upgrade existing schools in the designated Rural
Area, as necessary, in order to continue to serve rural residents. x
Strategy 3c: Provide facilities in locations that are appropriate for projected
enrollment to ensure educational parity for all students. Ensure school location
and facility design is based on the recommendations of the Long-Range Plan for
Albemarle County Schools and Development Area Master Plans, to the greatest
extent possible.
x
Objective 2
Additional staff
recommended
April 8, 2015
2 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 3d: Ensure capital funding is programmed to achieve parity in the
provision of all level of school facilities.x
Strategy 3e: Provide adequate recreational and athletic facilities on a school
site to serve the students of the school and to provide park facilities as identified
in the Parks and Recreation Chapter of this Plan.
x
Strategy 3f: Give preference to locating schools on individual sites rather than
having multiple schools on one site. x
Strategy 3g: Use modular facilities only during periods of enrollment
fluctuations or prior to expansion or development.x
Strategy 3h: Encourage innovative alternatives to address new school facility
needs, including potential cooperation with the City of Charlottesville.x
Strategy 3i: Promote walking and bicycling to school where schools are
accessible from pedestrian and bicycle facilities. x
Strategy 3j: Program necessary funding in the Capital Improvements Program
(CIP) to provide for bikeway and walkway linkages to schools. x
Objective 4 Provide firefighting and rescue facilities and equipment as needed to
meet the characteristics of particular service areas.x
Strategy 4a: Locate new fire / rescue facilities in places where the most
properties can be served and where ingress and egress is not hindered.x
Strategy 4b: Continue to assist volunteer fire and rescue stations that do not
have the financial means to fund building repairs and minor building renovation
projects.
x
Strategy 4c: Evaluate the need for a County-owned public safety training
facility. If deemed appropriate, locate the training facility in a central location
to provide convenient access for all regional members (See Strategy 2c)x
PC Priority
PC Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
3 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Objective 5
Continue to provide facilities for both local government and schools
administrative services in a central location that is convenient for
County residents.
x
Strategy 5a: Continue to provide for local government and schools
administration centers at the County Office Building on McIntire Road (COB-
McIntire) and the County Office Building on 5th Street (COB – 5th).
x
Strategy 5b: Continue to provide a separate location for County court services
that can accommodate County court facility and service needs. x
Objective 6
Continue to operate an emergency communications center that
coordinates emergency communications within the region in an
expedient and professional manner.
x
Strategy 6a: Continue to be a member of a regional Emergency
Communications and Emergency Operations Center in conjunction with the City of
Charlottesville and the University of Virginia to direct emergency calls to service
providers and coordinate a unified regional response to emergencies.
x
Objective 7
Enable efficient and cost-effective solid waste disposal and
sustainable materials management to reduce waste, conserve
resources, protect human and environmental health and decrease
greenhouse gas emissions.
x
Strategy 7a: Use the waste hierarchy (reduce, reuse, recycle, dispose) to guide
waste management policy.x
Strategy 7b: Ensure that solid waste generated in the County is collected,
processed, and disposed of in a manner consistent with the waste management
hierarchy, the TJPDC Solid Waste Plan and the County’s Environmental
Management Policy.
x
Strategy 7c: Increase educational outreach to the community in order to
communicate the benefits of reducing waste, reusing and recycling materials and
diverting useful and valuable resources from the landfill.
xPC Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
4 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 7d: Continue to identify best practices for the management of solid
waste, in order to provide guidance for the County.x
Strategy 7e: Develop local and/or regional cooperation to advance
sustainable materials management.x
Strategy 7f: Continue to provide and consider expansion of comprehensive
hazardous waste disposal services for the County’s citizens and County
businesses.
x
Strategy 7g: Study whether the Ivy Materials Utilization Center (MUC) can
continue or potentially expand services and programs for the County.x
Strategy 7h: Develop programs to recycle electronic waste and safely dispose
of pharmaceuticals.x
Strategy 7i: Establish benchmarks and goals for measuring waste reduction,
diversion of useful materials, and the safe disposal of municipal solid waste.x
Strategy 7j: Update strategies for solid waste management, if needed, after
the Long Range Solid Waste Solutions Advisory Committee completes its work.x
Objective 8 Provide high quality library services for County residents.x
Strategy 8a: Retain existing library locations in conjunction with the Jefferson-
Madison Regional Library System.x
Strategy 8b: Operate the recently opened Northside Library on the County-
owned site located on West Rio Road west of the Route 29 North intersection to
better serve residents of the northern part of the Development Areas. x
Strategy 8c: Evaluate the feasibility of constructing a new library facility to
serve the southern part of the Development Areas. x
Strategy 8d: Continue to monitor need for new library services. x
Strategy 8e: Maintain existing Bookmobile service to the outlying areas,
especially those areas that require outreach service. x
PC Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
BOS Priority
April 8, 2015
5 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 8f: Continue to recognize evolving changes in technology, such as on-
line transactions, downloadable books, and self check-out kiosks.x
Objective 9 Provide public water and sewer in the Development Areas.x
Strategy 9a: Continue to provide public water and sewer in jurisdictional areas. x
Strategy 9b: Continue coordination of water and sewer services among the
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA), the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority (RWSA), the City of Charlottesville, the University of Virginia, and the
County.
x
Strategy 9c:Complete planned public water and sewer system upgrades for
the Development Areas adjacent to the City. x
Strategy 9d: For the Development Areas of Crozet, Village of Rivanna and the
Town of Scottsville water and sewer systems (the non-urban system), monitor
demand and plan for systems and facilities upgrades concurrent with community
growth.
x
Strategy 9e: Continue to support and implement water demand management
strategies as outlined in the 2011 Water Supply Plan by maintaining efficient
water use through ordinance, by reducing water use through conservation
initiatives, and by reducing water loss through system operation and
maintenance.
x x
Strategy 9f: Continue to ensure that private central water and sewer systems
are only used to solve potable water and / or public health or safety problems
of existing Rural Area residents.
x
Strategy 9g: Continue to manage County-owned stormwater facilities. x
Strategy 9h: Continue to assess ways in which the costs of stormwater
maintenance can be paid.x
Objective 10
Support provision of private electricity, telephone, natural gas,
wireless, and fiber optic service when provision is in keeping with
other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan.
x
PC Priority
April 8, 2015
6 of 7
ATTACHMENT K
Community Facilities
Continuation of
Existing Program or
Application of Policy
Enhancement of
Program
New
Project/Program
Strategy 10a: Continue to ensure the adequate provision of electricity,
telephone, fiber optics, and natural gas services to support existing and
anticipated development in the County through coordination with utility
companies.
x
Strategy 10 b: Continue to coordinate reviews of development proposals with
service providers through the site development review process. x
Strategy 10c: Continue to require reviews for compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan for requests for gas line extensions to and through the Rural
Area. Require compliance reviews with the Comprehensive Plan for requests for
fiber optic extension to and through the Rural Area.
x
Strategy 10d: Locate utilities to minimize impacts on the visual and natural
environment.x
Strategy 10e: Continue to ensure that personal wireless facilities are provided
in accordance with the County’s personal wireless service policy.x
Strategy 10f: Develop a broadband policy to reflect the County’s desire to
have internet service speeds appropriate for educational, business, and
residential purposes in all parts of the County.
xBOS Priority
April 8, 2015
7 of 7
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZTA 2015-01 Wireless Communications – FCC
Mandated Changes
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Adoption of an ordinance to amend the Personal
Wireless Service Facilities Regulations
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, W alker, Davis, Kamptner, Fritz, Baldwin
PRESENTER (S): Bill Fritz
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
April 8, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Federal Communications Commission has issued new rules that will take effect April 8, 2015. These rules require the
County to approve certain types of collocations and replacements of transmission equipment on existing structures,
including towers, and impose a new “shot clock” under which all wireless applications must be reviewed and acted upon.
The Planning Commission adopted a resolution of intent for this ordinance on December 2, 2014 and held a public hearing
on March 10, 2015. After the public hearing, the Commission unanimously recommended approval of the ordinance.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Economic Prosperity: Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital investments, and tax
revenues that support community goals.
Goal 6: Natural Resources: Thoughtfully protect and manage Albemarle County’s ecosystems and natural resources in
both the rural and development areas to safeguard the quality of life of current and future generations.
Goal 8: Rural Areas: Preserve the character of rural life with thriving farms and forests, traditional crossroad communities,
and protected scenic areas, historic sites, and biodiversity.
DISCUSSION:
The Planning Commission’s staff report included an annotated version of the draft ordinance as Attachment D, and a non-
annotated version as Attachment E. Those versions of the draft ordinance are not being provided because many of the
comments in the annotated version have been supplemented, typographical errors have been corrected, and minor non-
substantive clarifications have been made to the ordinance text. Attachment A, the revised annotated version, provides a
line by line analysis of the proposed ordinance, legal analysis of certain provisions (e.g., the definition of “concealment
elements of the eligible support structure”), whether a provision is existing or is required by the new FCC rules, and why an
existing provision is being amended and its possible effects. It also includes definitions related to wireless services that
are not proposed to be amended to provide the reader with additional information and context. Attachment B is the non-
annotated version of the ordinance prepared for the Board’s consideration and adoption.
The Commission’s March 10 recommendation for approval of the ordinance included a recommendation that the Board
consider regulations regarding new setbacks for new facilities from dwelling units and historic structures, as well as
amending the flush-mounting antenna design standard (a maximum 12 inches from the structure) by changing the point of
measurement from the face of the antenna to the back of the antenna, and increasing the maximum area for each
antenna from 1152 to 1400 square inches. After the Commission meeting, staff concluded that these recommended
changes were beyond the scope of the resolution of intent and the advertised public hearing. The recommended changes
to setbacks will require further staff analysis. Ntelos has since filed an application to initiate a zoning text amendment to
amend the two antenna design standards included in the Commission’s recommendation.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The proposed amendments remove redundant review procedures without reducing notice to abutting owners or
removing Board of Supervisors discretion. This new review process will result in improved review efficiencies and reduced
review costs. Staff is unable to calculate the exact amount of savings to the County.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
After the public hearing, staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached proposed ordinance (Attachment B).
ATTACHMENTS
A – Annotated Draft Ordinance
B – Draft Ordinance
PC staff report and attachments
PC minutes of December 2, 2014 and March 10, 2015
Return to agenda
Draft: 03/31/15
1
ORDINANCE NO. 15-18( )
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE I, GENERAL PROVISIONS, AND
ARTICLE II, BASIC 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, and Article II, Basic Regulations, are hereby amended and reordained as follows:
By Amending:
Sec. 3.1 Definitions
Sec. 5.1.40 Personal wireless service facilities
Chapter 18. Zoning
Article I. General Provisions
Sec. 3.1 Definitions
. . .
Antenna array: An orderly arrangement of antennas mounted at the same height on a tower or other structure and
intended to transmit a signal providing coverage over a specific area for a single provider of personal wireless
services. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Avoidance area: An area having significant resources where the initial siting of personal wireless service facilities
could result in adverse impacts as follows: (i) any ridge area where a personal wireless service facility would be
skylighted; (ii) a parcel within an agricultural and forestal district; (iii) a parcel within a historic district; (iv) any
location in which the proposed personal wireless service facility and three (3) or more existing or approved
personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground
having a radius of two hundred (200) feet; or (v) any location within two hundred (200) feet of any state scenic
highway or by-way. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is amended to clarify that avoidance areas are relevant at the time of the initial
siting of a personal wireless service facility.
. . .
Base station. A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables Federal Communications Commission-
licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network.
1. Services to which the term applies. The term includes, but is not limited to, equipment associated with
wireless communications services such as private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as
unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul.
2. Equipment to which the term applies and does not apply. The term includes, but is not limited to, radio
transceivers, antennas, coaxial, or fiber optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable
Draft: 03/31/15
2
equipment, regardless of technological configuration, including distributed antenna systems and small-cell
networks. The term does not include any equipment associated with a tower.
3. Structures to which the term applies and does not apply. The term includes any structure, other than a
tower, that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the county, supports or houses equipment
described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this definition that has been reviewed and approved under section
5.1.40 or the applicable zoning process in effect prior to October 13, 2004. The term does not include: (i) a
tower as defined in this section; and (ii) any structure that, at the time the relevant application is filed with
the county under section 5.1,40, does not support or house equipment described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
this definition.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to that in 47 CFR 1.40001(b)(1), but is slightly
reorganized and revised to remove repeated statements that towers are not base stations.
. . .
Collocation.: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, the
mounting or installation of one or more antennas for the purpose of providing personal wireless services on an
existing personal wireless service facility, the addition of related cables, wiring, supporting brackets and other
structural equipment, and the addition of transmission equipment. (Added 5-8-13) The mounting or installation of
transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio
frequency signals for communications purposes.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to that in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(2).
. . .
Collocation, exempt: A collocation that would not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of an
eligible support structure.
Comment: Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 requires that
collocations that do not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of a tower must be
approved by the County, and must be approved within a very limited period of time. This definition is added
to distinguish those collocations that must be approved from those that result in a substantial change to the
physical dimensions of an eligible support structure. Note that 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(3) defines these types of
collocations, replacements, and removals as “eligible facilities requests,” but that term is abstract in the
overall context of the wireless regulations and was not used in this ordinance. Collocations that do not result
in a substantial change will continue to be processed as Tier I applications.
. . .
Concealment elements of the eligible support structure. Any condition of approval, including any applicable
requirement of section 5.1.40 in effect at the time of approval, established and imposed on the personal wireless
service facility as a concealment technique and which includes conditions or regulations pertaining to antenna size,
color of the structure and all equipment, antenna mounting techniques, including the requirement that antennas be
flush mounted, maximum tower diameters at the base and top, limitations on tower height relative to a reference
tree, screening by trees including the restrictions on removing trees that are screening the tower, siting towers so
that they are not skylighted, requirements as to how cables should be located on a tower, and the size, location,
design, and screening for ground based equipment.
Draft: 03/31/15
3
Comment:
Introduction
The FCC Rules provide that, if a modification does not substantially change the physical dimensions of a
structure, the County is required to approve the modification. However, 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v) provides
that if a modification would “defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure,” the
modification is a substantial change and subject to normal review by the County. The FCC Rules do not
define concealment or concealment elements. This definition is added to clarify that gap in the FCC Rules.
The basis for the proposed definition of the term concealment elements
Staff opinion is that the several objective standards referenced in the definition are all concealment elements
that the County has applied to personal wireless service facilities for many years, and all of them have been
requirements of County Code § 18-5.1.40 since the section was adopted in 2004.
In reaching this conclusion, staff analyzed the meaning of concealment elements under controlling legal
principles. The analysis begins with the language in the FCC Rules to determine whether the regulation itself
is unambiguous. Dickenson-Russell Coal Co., LLC v. Secretarty of Labor, 747 F.3d 251, 258 (4th Cir. 2014). It
is assumed that the words were meant to express their ordinary meaning. Dickenson-Russell, 747 F.3d at 258.
This plain meaning of the language governs unless that meaning would lead to absurd results. Dickenson-
Russell, 747 F.3d at 258. In order for a meaning to be found to be genuinely absurd, a court would have to be
convinced that it was “patently inconceivable that the agency intended the result.” Dickenson-Russell, 747
F.3d at 259. Applying these rules to this case, the FCC Rules are unambiguous, the plain meaning of the term
concealment elements therefore applies, and as explained below, the meaning that the County proposes to
apply to the term is reasonable, rather than absurd.
Because the FCC Rules are unambiguous and the plain meaning of the terms used in the Rules should apply,
staff also turned to the dictionary to find the appropriate meaning of concealment in the context in which it is
used here. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (2002) defines conceal to mean: “1: to prevent
disclosure or recognition of . . .: draw attention from: . . . 2: to place out of sight: withdraw from being
observed: shield from vision or notice.” Thus, staff has identified in this definition the concealment elements
the County has imposed in its regulation of wireless facilities.
The current Tier I regulations require that the antennas be flush-mounted and be of a color that matches the
color of the existing structure to which they will be attached. The current Tier II regulations include
requiring that the monopole be a “dark brown natural or painted wood color that blends into the
surrounding trees,” be of a height relative to the identified reference tree, have a maximum diameter, have
flush-mounted antenna, not be skylighted so that it blends in with the terrain, and have its cables concealed.
Based on the plain meaning of conceal, any element of an eligible support structure that prevents its
disclosure or recognition, or places it out of sight, withdraws it from being observed, or shields it from vision
or notice, is a concealment element.
Therefore, the County’s Tier I and Tier II standards described above are concealment elements within the
meaning of 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v).
Finally, staff also reviewed the administrative record and, while the reader may find perhaps inconsistent
use of terminology, even by the FCC, one also finds support there for the County’s proposed approach. For
example, in Paragraph 200 of the FCC Report and Order, the FCC states that is agrees “with commenters
that in the context of a modification request related to concealed or “stealth”-designed facilities—i.e.,
facilities designed to look like some feature other than a wireless tower or base station —any change that
defeats the concealment elements of such facilities would be considered a ‘substantial change.’” (italics
added) In that same paragraph, the FCC cites with approval comments of the Colorado Communications and
Utility Alliance, which state that
Draft: 03/31/15
4
[T]ower owners, wireless providers, and localities all across the nation have become creative in
developing unique methods to camouflage towers so as to minimize impacts on sensitive view
corridors or other aesthetics of a community. The Commission should continue to encourage this
kind of creative and collaborative facility siting, and should make clear that, if specific conditions of
approval have been placed on a tower site to address aesthetic concerns, any change in the physical
dimensions of that tower that negatively impacts those site specific concerns will be considered
substantial, and thus not subject to mandatory approval under Section 6409(a) . . .
and:
Many of these Local Governments, like their colleagues throughout the nation, have worked
creatively with industry on the siting of wireless facilities in visually and environmentally sensitive
areas. If the Commission adopts a rule that tells local governments that no matter how much they
try to work creatively to achieve an acceptable sensitive design with an industry applicant, that
facility is likely to be changed into a highly visible, more traditional tower site after one, two, or
more mandatory collocations, the Commission will have effectively ended the incentive of local land
use authorities to seek creative ways to site these facilities.
From the language used by the FCC in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v) and the administrative record, it is
reasonable to conclude that the FCC did not intend for the term concealment elements to be assigned the
narrow meaning suggested by the wireless industry, i.e., that concealment is found only in wireless facilities
completely within existing structures, behind rooftop facades, or within structures designed to look like
artificial coniferous trees. The FCC noted with approval those comments that recognized the creative
solutions that localities and the wireless industry have developed over the years within those particular
communities.
The plain meaning given the language by the County does not lead to absurd results such that it is “patently
inconceivable” that the FCC intended to allow the concealment techniques used in the County’s current
regulations to be considered concealment elements within the meaning of 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v). If the
FCC had intended to limit concealment to only camouflaging techniques, it would have been a simple matter
to have stated so. That, however, was not the FCC intention, based on the statement of the Chairman of the
FCC, who said that the new Rules “preserve[ ] local governments’ authority to adopt and apply the zoning,
safety, and concealment requirements that are appropriate for their communities” (italics added). Statement of
Chairman Tom Wheeler, FCC Report and Order, p. 147. The proposed definition of concealment elements
goes no further than to identify those elements that are appropriate for Albemarle County.
The wireless industry’s position on the meaning of the term concealment elements
The wireless industry disagrees with the County’s proposed definition. Its representatives argue that the
term concealment elements is limited to antennas placed in, for example, church steeples or behind solid
screens on rooftops, or towers designed to look like artificial trees. Staff agrees that the first two industry
examples reflect concealment techniques that the County currently encourages as Tier I facilities. However,
there are also Tier I facilities that cannot be located entirely within structures and for those facilities the Tier
I regulations require other concealment elements. For example, the antennas must be flush-mounted and be
of a color that matches the color of the existing structure to which they will be attached. The reason for these
requirements is to ensure that the Tier I facility continues to look like the existing structure.
Staff disagrees with the wireless industry that an artificial coniferous tree, such as the one on the State
Department of Forestry site in Fontaine Research Park, has concealment elements within the meaning of 47
CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v), but that a Tier I or Tier II facility does not. Although the artificial coniferous tree
may conceal, for example, antennas and cables, it is nonetheless a large man-made structure.
Draft: 03/31/15
5
County staff’s response to the wireless industry’s position
When the wireless industry speaks to using concealment techniques such as wireless facilities designed to
look like artificial coniferous trees, it is more specifically referring to the technique of camouflaging the
wireless facility. Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (2002) defines camouflage to mean, as
relevant to the FCC Rules: “1 a : the disguising of an installation, vehicle, gun position, or ship with paint,
garnished nets, or foliage to reduce its visibility or conceal its actual nature or location from the enemy . . . 2a
: concealment by means of disguise . . . 2b: a disguise, behavior, or expedient adopted or designed to deceive
or hide.” The preamble to the FCC’s Rules published in the Federal Register (Federal Register, Volume 80,
No. 5, January 8, 2015, page 1255) and the discussion in the FCC’s Report and Order (FCC Report and
Order (FCC 14-153), adopted October 17, 2014, released October 21, 2014) also use the term stealth facilities.
Webster’s Third New International Dictionary (2002) defines stealth to mean, as relevant to this matter: “2:
the act or action of going or passing furtively, secretly, or imperceptibly” Perhaps the more accurate term
would have been “stealthy,” which Webster’s Third New International Dictionary defines to mean, as
relevant to this matter: “2: intended to escape observation.”
Two things are apparent from these various terms: (1) concealment, the term selected by the FCC in its
Rules, is the broadest of the three terms; (2) camouflage, which is a technique that disguises a wireless facility
as, for example, an artificial coniferous tree, has the narrowest meaning of the three terms, i.e., camouflage is
merely one way in which something can be concealed; thus, although camouflage may be used to conceal,
concealment may be achieved by means other than camouflage.
Conclusion
At bottom, the concealment elements in the County’s current wireless regulations provide, for example, Tier
II treetop facilities that are better concealed and more stealthy than a facility designed to look like an
artificial coniferous tree. Moreover, assuming, for the sake of argument, that the wireless industry is correct
– that the FCC intended that the concealment elements within the meaning of 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v)
actually extend only to camouflaging techniques, the objective standards in the County’s current regulations
for Tier I and II facilities would satisfy that narrower term. A Tier I facility that is located outside of a
structure is to be camouflaged to look like the existing structure to which it is attached. A Tier II facility is
similarly “designed to look like some feature other than a wireless tower or base station” (FCC Report and
Order, ¶ 200), whether the viewer would see such a facility as trees in the woods that surround the facility, or
as a simple monopole-style utility pole. Thus, when concealment elements are characterized as camouflage, if
there is any distinction between a wireless facility that looks like an artificial coniferous tree and a County -
approved Tier II (treetop) facility that is concealed to look like a tree or a monopole-style utility pole, it is a
distinction without a material difference for purposes of 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7)(v).
. . .
Eligible support structure. Any tower or base station, provided that it is existing at the time the relevant application
is filed with the County.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to that in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(4).
. . .
Existing personal wireless service facility or existing facility: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions
pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, a personal wireless service facility that was approved under section
5.1.40 or by special use permit prior to October 13, 2004, was thereafter established, and has continued in existence
since being established, and which provides personal wireless services. (Added 5-8-13)
Comment: This definition is replaced by “existing tower or existing base station,” which relates to the
definition of eligible support structure.
Draft: 03/31/15
6
Existing structure: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, a
structure, other than a flagpole or an existing personal wireless service facility tower, that was lawfully constructed
or established and complies with the minimum applicable bulk, height, setback, floor area or other structure
requirements of the district in which the structure is located. (Added 5-8-13)
Comment: This definition is amended to refer to new definition of “existing tower” immediately below.
Existing tower or existing base station. As referred to in the definition of “eligible support structure,” a constructed
tower or base station that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning process, provided that a
tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not required to be reviewed when it was built, but
was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to that in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(5) and it serves to clarify
the definition of “eligible support structure.”
. . .
Mobile personal wireless service facility: A portable self-contained personal wireless service facility site that can be
moved to a location and set up to provide personal wireless services on a temporary or emergency basis.
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Personal wireless service facility: A facility for the provision of personal wireless services, which may be
composed of antennas, cables, wiring, supporting brackets and other structural equipment, grounding rods,
transmission equipment, one or more ground equipment shelters, and a self-supporting monopole or tower. (Added
10-17-01; Amended 10-13-04, 6-1-11, 5-8-13).
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
Personal wireless services: Commercial mobile services, unlicensed wireless services, common carrier wireless
exchange access services, as those services are defined by federal law and, for the purposes of this chapter,
unlicensed wireless broadband internet access services. (Added 5-8-13)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Reference tree: A tree designated for determining the top height of a treetop facility’s monopole mounting
structure. This may either be the tallest tree within twenty five (25) feet of the proposed monopole or a shorter tree
that has been strategically identified for screening and camouflaging purposes. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
Replacement: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, the
replacement of one or more antennas, cables, wiring, supporting brackets and other structural equipment,
transmission equipment, and ground equipment shelter, all of which is for the purpose of providing personal
wireless services on an existing personal wireless service facility transmission equipment of the same or lesser size
in the same location as the equipment being replaced on an eligible support structure. (Added 5-8-13)
Comment : Collocations and replacements are regulated the same way under the new federal regulations,
Draft: 03/31/15
7
although the term “replacement” is not defined in the federal regulations.
Replacement, exempt. A replacement that would not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the
eligible support structure.
Comment: Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 requires that the
replacement of equipment that does not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of a tower
must be approved by the County, and must be approved within a very limited period of time. This definition
is added to distinguish those replacements that must be approved from those that do result in a substantial
change to the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure. Note that 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(3) defines
these types of collocations, replacements, and removals as “eligible facilities requests,” but that term is so
abstract that this ordinance deals with them directly.
. . .
Ridge area: All land within one hundred (100) vertical feet of, and including, the ridgeline and peaks of a mountain
or chain of mountains, as identified on a ridge area map approved by the board of supervisors. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
Ridgeline: The uppermost line created by connecting the peaks of a mountain or chain of mountains, and from
which land declines in elevation on at least two (2) sides, as identified on a ridge area map approved by the board of
supervisors. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Skylight: Locating a personal wireless service facility in such a way that the sky is the backdrop of any portion of
the facility. Skylight has the same meaning as “skylining,” as that term is used in the wireless policy. (Added 10 -
13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Substantial change: A modification to an eligible support structure that meets one or more of the following criteria:
1. Increase in height. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the modification increases the
height of the tower by more than ten percent (10%) or by the height of one additional antenna array with
separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; for other
eligible support structures, the modification increases the height of the structure by more than ten percent
(10%) or more than ten (10) feet, whichever is greater. Changes in height shall be measured from the
original support structure in cases where deployments are or will be separated horizontally, such as on
buildings’ rooftops; in other circumstances, changes in height should be measured from the dimensions of
the tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were
approved prior to February 22, 2012.
2. Increase in width. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the modification involves
adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than
twenty (20) feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is
Draft: 03/31/15
8
greater; for other eligible support structures, the modification involves adding an appurtenance to the body
of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six (6) feet.
3. Excessive equipment cabinets. For any eligible support structure, the modification involves installation of
more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed
four (4) cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and base stations, the modification involves
installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets
associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent
(10%) larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure .
4. Expands tower site. The modification entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site.
5. Defeats concealment elements. The modification would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible
support structure.
6. Does not comply with conditions of approval. The modification does not comply with conditions associated
with the siting approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station
equipment; provided that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is noncompliant only in a
manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to that in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(7). In subsection (1), the
FCC regulations refer to the date the Spectrum Act (also known as the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job
Creation Act of 2012) was passed. The Act was passed on February 22, 2012, and that date replaces the
reference to the Act. Note that the current definition of substantial change in section 5.1.40, which was added
in response to Section 6409(a) of the Spectrum Act, provided that any collocation or relocation on an existing
facility within 500 feet of a dwelling unit on a different parcel was a substantial change requiring a Tier I,
Tier II, or Tier III facility, as applicable. This element of the current definition is not, and cannot, continue
in the new definition.
. . .
Tier I personal wireless service facility or Tier I facility: A personal wireless service facility that: (i) is located
entirely within an existing building but which may include a self-contained ground equipment shelter not exceeding
one hundred fifty (150) square feet that is not within the building or a whip antenna that satisfies the requirements
of subsection 5.1.40(c)(b)(1)(d); (ii) consists of one or more antennas, other than a microwave dish, attached to an
existing structure, together with associated personal wireless service equipment; (iii) is located within or
camouflaged by an addition to an existing structure determined by the agent to be in character with the structure
and the surrounding district; (iv) is a collocation or a replacement that does not substantially change the physical
dimensions of an existing personal wireless service facility as that phrase is used in subsection 5.1.40(f); or (iv) is
the replacement of a wooden monopole with a metal monopole that does not exceed the maximum dimensions
permitted under subsection 5.1.40(d)(5)(b)(9). (Added 10-13-04; Amended 5-8-13)
Comment: This definition is amended to reflect the amendments and reorganization of section 5.1.40.
Tier II personal wireless service facility or Tier II facility: A personal wireless service facility that is a treetop
facility not located within an avoidance area. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
Tier III personal wireless service facility or Tier III facility: A personal wireless service facility that is neither a
Tier I nor a Tier II facility, including a facility that was not approved by the commission or the board of supervisors
as a Tier II facility. (Added 10-13-04)
Draft: 03/31/15
9
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
. . .
Tower: As referred to in the definition of “eligible support structure” and “existing tower or base station,” any
structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any Federal Communications Commission licensed or
authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless
communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as
unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated tower site.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to the definition of “tower” in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(9).
Tower site: As referred to in the definitions of “substantial change” and “tower” and as used in section 5.1.40, for
towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the current boundaries of the leased or owned property
surrounding the tower and any access or utility easements currently related to the site, and, for other eligible
support structures, further restricted to that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission equipment
already deployed on the ground.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to the definition of “site” in 47 CFR § 1.40001(b)(6), but
the term is changed to “tower site” because the term “site” is already defined in the Zoning Ordinance and
has a different meaning.
. . .
Transmission equipment. As used in section 5.1.40, equipment that facilitates transmission for any Federal
Communications Commission licensed or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to,
radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes
equipment associated with wireless communications services, including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and
public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave
backhaul.
Comment: This definition is substantively identical to the definition of “transmission equipment” in 47 CFR
§ 1.40001(b)(8).
Treetop facility: A personal wireless service facility consisting of a self-supporting monopole having a single shaft
of wood, metal or concrete no more than ten (10) feet taller than the crown of the tallest tree within twenty-five (25)
feet of the monopole, measured above sea level (ASL), and includes associated antennas, mounting structures, an
equipment cabinet and other essential personal wireless service equipment. (Added 10-13-04)
Comment: This definition is included in this annotated draft for information purposes only.
Article II. Basic Regulations
Sec. 5.1.40 Personal wireless service facilities; collocation, replacement, and removal of transmission
equipment
The purpose of section 5.1.40 is to implement the personal wireless service facilities policy, adopted as part of the
comprehensive plan, in a manner that complies with Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C.
§ 332(c)(7)) for new personal wireless service facilities and collocations and replacements that result in a substantial
change in the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure; and to implement Section 6409(a) of the Middle
Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (47 U.S.C. § 1455) and 47 CFR § 1.40001 for collocations and
replacements that do not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure .
Draft: 03/31/15
10
Each personal wireless service facility and the transmission equipment of any other wireless service shall be subject
to the following, as applicable:
Comment: This is a completely revised and expanded introduction to incorporate references to Section 6409 of
the Spectrum Act, the new federal regulations in 47 CFR § 1.40001.
a. Application for approval: An application providing the following information shall be required for each
personal wireless service facility (hereinafter, “facility”) and transmission equipment that will be collocated
or replace existing equipment on an eligible support structure:
Comment: The structure of the requirements and standards in this ordinance has been converted into a table
format in the following subsections. The format in current section 5.1.40, which was developed when the first
wireless regulations were adopted in 2001, and which provided for only two different types of applications, has
become increasingly complex. There are now generally four application tracks with varying applicable
performance standards, review procedures, and deadlines for acting on applications. The proposed table
format is easier to understand and administer.
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Application form and signatures. A completed application form, signed by the parcel owner, the
parcel owner’s agent or the contract purchaser, and the proposed facility’s owner. If the owner’s agent
signs the application, he shall also submit written evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. If
the contract purchaser signs the application, he shall also submit the owner’s written consent to th e
application.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(1). For Collocations and Replacements, this
information is required because it is “reasonably related to determining whether the request
meets the requirements” of the Collocation and Replacement regulations of this subsection,
which implement 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X X X X
2. Plat or survey of the parcel. A recorded plat or recorded boundary survey of the parcel on which the
facility will be located; provided, if neither a recorded plat nor boun dary survey exists, a copy of the
legal description of the parcel and the Albemarle County Circuit Court deed book and page number.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(2). For Collocations and Replacements, this
information is required because it is “reasonably related to determining whether the request
meets the requirements” of the Collocation and Replacement regulations of this subsection,
which implement 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X X X X
3. Ownership. The identity of the owner of the parcel and, if the owner is other than a real person, the
complete legal name of the entity, a description of the type of entity, and written documentation that
the person signing on behalf of the entity is authorized to do so.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(3). For Collocations and Replacements, this
information is required because it is “reasonably related to determining whether the request
meets the requirements” of the Collocation and Replacement regulations of this subsection,
which implement 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X X X X
4. Plans and supporting drawings, calculations, and documentation. Except where the facility will be
located entirely within an eligible support structure or an existing building, a scaled plan and a scaled
elevation view and other supporting drawings, calculations, and other documentation required by the
agent, signed and sealed by an appropriate licensed professional. The plans and supporting drawings,
calculations, and documentation shall show:
(a) Existing and proposed improvements. The location and dimensions of all existing and proposed
improvements on the parcel including access roads and structures, the location and dimensions of
significant natural features, and the maximum height above ground of the facility (also identified
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
11
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
in height above sea level).
(b) Elevation and coordinates. The benchmarks and datum used for elevations shall coincide with
the State Plane VA South US Survey Feet based on the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD
83), and the benchmarks shall be acceptable to the county engineer.
(c) Design. The design of the facility, including the specific type of support structure and the design,
type, location, size, height, and configuration of all existing and proposed antennas and other
equipment.
(d) Color. Identification of each paint color on the facility, by manufacturer color name and color
number. A paint chip or sample shall be provided for each color.
(e) Topography. Except where the facility would be attached to an eligible support structure or an
existing building, the topography within two thousand (2,000) feet of the proposed facility, in
contour intervals not to exceed ten (10) feet for all lands within Albemarle County and, in
contour intervals shown on United States Geological Survey topographic survey maps or the best
topographic data available, for lands not within Albemarle County.
(f) Trees. The caliper and species of all trees where the dripline is located within fifty (50) feet of
the facility. The height, caliper, and species of any tree that the applicant is relying on to
provide screening of the monopole or tower. The height, caliper and species of the reference
tree. The caliper and species of all trees that will be adversely impacted or removed during
installation or maintenance of the facility shall be noted, regardless of their distances to the
facility.
(g) Setbacks, parking, fencing, and landscaping. All existing and proposed setbacks, parking,
fencing, and landscaping.
(h) Location of accessways. The location of all existing vehicular accessways and the location and
design of all proposed vehicular accessways.
(i) Location of certain structures and district boundaries. Except where the facility would be
attached to an eligible support structure or an existing building, residential and commercial
structures, and residential and rural areas district boundaries.
(j) Proximity to airports. If the proposed monopole or tower will be taller than one hundred fifty
(150) feet, the proximity of the facility to commercial and private airports.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(4). For Collocations and Replacements, this
information is required because it is “reasonably related to determining whether the request
meets the requirements” of the Collocation and Replace ment regulations of this subsection,
which implement 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
5. Photographs. Photographs of the location of the proposed monopole or tower shall be provided that
include, for applications for Tier II facilities, the reference tree, and for applications for Tier III
facilities, the area within fifty (50) feet of the proposed monopole or tower. These photographs shall
include reference points to enable the lease area, the vehicular access, the trees that will remain, and
the trees that will be removed, to be identified. In addition, photographs, where possible, or
perspective drawings of the facility site and all existing facilities within two hundred (200) feet of the
site, if any, and the area surrounding the site.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(5).
X X
Draft: 03/31/15
12
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
6. Balloon tests. For any proposed monopole or tower, photographs taken of a balloon test, which shall be
conducted, if requested by the agent, as follows:
(a) Scheduling. The applicant shall contact the agent within ten (10) days after the date the
application was submitted to schedule a date and time when the balloon test will be conducted.
The test shall be conducted within forty (40) days after the date the application was submitted,
and the applicant shall provide the agent with at least seven (7) days prior notice; provided that
this deadline may be extended due to inclement weather or by the agreement of the applicant and
the agent.
(b) Marking key boundaries and locations. Prior to the balloon test, the locations of the access road,
the lease area, the tower site, the reference tree, and the tallest tree within twenty five (25) feet of
the proposed monopole shall be surveyed and staked or flagged in the field.
(c) Balloon height. The test shall consist of raising one or more balloons from the facility site to a
height equal to the proposed facility.
(d) Balloon color or material. The balloons shall be of a color or material that provides maximum
visibility.
(e) Photographing balloon test. The photographs of the balloon test shall be taken from the nearest
residence and from appropriate locations on abutting properties, along each publicly used road
from which the balloon is visible, and other properties and locations as deemed appropriate by
the agent. The applicant shall identify the camera type, film size, and focal length of the lens for
each photograph.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(6).
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7. Additions of antennas. If antennas are proposed to be added to an eligible support structure or an
existing building, all existing antennas and other equipment on the structure, building, or facility, as
well as all ground equipment, shall be identified by owner, type, and size. The method(s) by which the
antennas will be attached to the mounting structure shall be depicted.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(7). For Collocations and Replacements, this
information is required because it is “reasonably related to determining whether the request
meets the requirements” of the Collocation and Replacement regulations of this subsection,
which implement 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X X X X
8. Site under conservation or open space easement. If the proposed facility would be located on lands
subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, a copy of the recorded deed of
easement and the express written consent of all easement holders to the proposed facility.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(8).
X X
9. Photographic simulations. At the request of the agent, photographic simulations of the proposed
facility.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(a)(9).
X X
10. Statement of justification for exempt collocation. If the application is for an exempt collocation, a
statement of the justification for the application qualifying as an exempt collocation.
Comment: This is new and applies only to Collocations and Replacements and may be required
under 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(1).
X
Draft: 03/31/15
13
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
11. Evidence of prior approval. Approval letters or actions from the County authorizing the initial
construction of the facility and any approval letters or actions for modifications of the facility after
initial construction. If no approvals were granted by the County for the facility the applicant shall
provide evidence that the facility was constructed lawfully.
Comment: This is new and applies only to Collocations and Replacements and may be required
under 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(1).
X
12. Special exception. If the proposed facility does not comply with any provision of section 5.1.40, the
applicant shall request a special exception in writing as part of the application. The request shall
identify which regulation in section 5.1.40 for the special exception is requested and a justification for
the special exception.
Comment: Staff recommends that a special exception be the single procedure for any Tier I,
Tier II, or Tier III facility to modify or vary from the applicable standard that would otherwise
apply. This single simple procedure allows the County to ensure that the applicable deadline for
action is satisfied, but also provides the Board of Supervisors with the decision -making
authority for modifications and variations.
X X X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
b. Development requirements. Each facility or transmission equipment may be established upon approval as
provided in subsection (c) provided that the application satisfies the applicable requirements of subsection (a)
and demonstrates that the facility or transmission equipment will be installed and operated in compliance with
all applicable provisions of this chapter, and the following:
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. General design. The facility shall be designed, installed, and maintained as follows:
(a) Guy wires. Guy wires are prohibited.
(b) Outdoor lighting. Outdoor lighting for the facility shall be permitted only during maintenance
periods; regardless of the lumens emitted, each outdoor luminaire s hall be fully shielded as
required by section 4.17; provided that these restrictions shall not apply to any outdoor lighting
required by federal law.
(c) Ground equipment. Any ground equipment shelter not located within an eligible support structure
or an existing building shall be screened from all lot lines either by terrain, existing structures,
existing vegetation, or by added vegetation approved by the agent.
(d) Whip antenna. A whip antenna less than six (6) inches in diameter may exceed the height of the
facility, the eligible support structure, or the existing building.
(e) Grounding rod. A grounding rod, whose height shall not exceed two (2) feet and whose width
shall not exceed one (1) inch in diameter at the base and tapering to a point, may be installed at
the top of the facility, the eligible support structure, or the existing building.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(2). These requirements currently apply to Tier
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
14
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
2. Antennas and associated equipment. Antennas and associated equipment that are not entirely within a
proposed facility, an eligible support structure, or an existing building shall be subject to the following:
(a) Number of arrays. The total number of arrays of antennas shall not exceed three (3). All types of
antennas and dishes, regardless of their use, shall be counted toward the limit of three arrays.
(b) Size. Each antenna proposed under the pending application shall not exceed the size shown on the
application, which size shall not exceed one thousand one hundred fifty two (1152) square
inches.
(c) Projection. No antenna shall project from the facility, structure or building beyond the minimum
required by the mounting equipment, and in no case shall any point on the face of an antenna
project more than twelve (12) inches from the facility, structure or building; and
(d) Color. Each antenna and associated equipment shall be a color that matches the facility, structure
or building.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(3). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
3. Tree conservation plan; content. Before the building official issues a building permit for the facility,
the applicant shall submit a tree conservation plan prepared by a certified arborist. The plan shall be
submitted to the agent for review and approval to ensure that all applicable requirements have been
satisfied. The plan shall specify tree protection methods and procedures, identify all existing trees to be
removed on the parcel for the installation, operation and maintenance of the facility, and identi fy all
dead and dying trees that are recommended to be removed. In approving the plan, the agent may
identify additional trees or lands up to two hundred (200) feet from the lease area to be included in the
plan.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(4). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X X X
4. Creation of slopes steeper than 2:1. No slopes associated with the installation of the facility and its
accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other
stabilization measures acceptable to the county engineer are employed.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(7). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X X
X
5. Ground equipment shelter; fencing. Any ground equipment shelter not located within an existing
building shall be fenced only with the approval of the agent upon finding that the fence: (i) would
protect the facility from trespass in areas of high volumes of vehicular or pedestrian traffic or, in the
rural areas, to protect the facility from livestock or wildlife; (ii) would not be detrimental to the
character of the area; and (iii) would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or ge neral welfare.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(8). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X X X
6. Screening and siting to minimize visibility. The site shall provide adequate opportunities for screening
and the facility shall be sited to minimize its visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, regardless of
their distance from the facility. The facility also shall be sited to minimize its visibility from any
entrance corridor overlay district, state scenic river, national park or national forest, regardless of
whether the site is adjacent to the district, river, park or forest. If the facility would be located on lands
subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, or adjacent to a conservation easement
or open space easement, the facility shall be sited so that it is not visible from any resources
X X
Draft: 03/31/15
15
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
specifically identified for protection in the deed of easement.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(2). These requirements currently apply to Tier
II and Tier III facilities.
7. Open space plan resources. The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the natural
resources chapter of the county’s comprehensive plan and the parks and green systems chapters in any
county master plan.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(3). These requirements currently apply to Tier
II and Tier III facilities.
X X
8. Horizontal separation of multiple facilities. The facility shall not be located so that it and three (3) or
more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a
circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(4). This requirement currently applies to Tier II
facilities.
X
9. Diameter of monopole. The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty (30) inches and
the maximum diameter at the top of the monopole shall be eighteen (18) inches.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(5). This requirement currently applies to Tier II
facilities.
X
10. Height of monopole. The top of the monopole, measured in elevation above mean sea level, shall not
be more than ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the monopole, and
shall include any base, foundation or grading that raises the monopole above the pre -existing natural
ground elevation.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(6). This requirement currently applies to Tier II
facilities.
X
11. Color of monopole, antennas, and equipment. Each monopole shall be a dark brown natural or
painted wood color that blends into the surrounding trees. The antennas, supporting brackets, and all
other equipment attached to the monopole shall be a color that closely matches that of the monopole.
The ground equipment, the ground equipment shelter, and the concrete pad shall also be a color that
closely matches that of the monopole, provided that the ground equipment and the concrete pad need
not closely match the color of the monopole if they are enclosed within a ground equipment shelter or
within or behind an approved structure, façade or fencing that: (i) is a color that closely matches that
of the monopole; (ii) is consistent with the character of the area; and (iii) makes the ground
equipment, ground equipment shelter, and the concrete pad invisible at any time of year from any
other parcel or a public or private street.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(7). These requirements currently apply to Tier
II and Tier III facilities.
X X
12. Placement of cables, wiring, and similar attachments. Each wood or concrete monopole shall be
constructed so that all cables, wiring, and similar attachments that run vertically from the ground
equipment to the antennas are placed on the monopole to face the interior of the site and away from
public view, as determined by the agent. Metal monopoles shall be constructed so that vertical cables,
wiring and similar attachments are contained within the monopole’s structure.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(8). This requirement currently applies to Tier II
facilities.
X
13. Special use permit conditions. All conditions of approval of a special use permit.
Comment: This subsection is new in order to clarify that development requirements imposed
by special use permit condition also apply.
X
Draft: 03/31/15
16
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
14. No substantial change. The collocation or replacement shall not result in a substantial change to the
physical dimensions of an eligible support structure.
Comment: This subsection is new and implements 47 CFR § 1.40001.
X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
c. Applicability of other regulations in this chapter. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, each
facility or transmission equipment shall be subject to all applicable regulations in this chapter:
Applicability of other Development Requirements
in this Chapter
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Building site. Notwithstanding section 4.2.3(a), a facility is not required to be located within a building
site.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(1). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
X X X X
2. Vehicular access. Vehicular access to the facility site or tower site shall be subject to the requirements
of section 4.2 and shall not be exempt under section 4.2.6(c).
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(2). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
X X X X
3. Setbacks. Notwithstanding section 4.10.3.1(b), the agent may authorize a facility to be located closer in
distance than the height of the tower or other mounting structure to any lot line if the applicant obtai ns
an easement or other recordable document showing agreement between the lot owners, acceptable to
the county attorney as to addressing development on the part of the abutting parcel sharing the
common lot line that is within the monopole or tower’s fall zone. If the right-of-way for a public street
is within the fall zone, the Virginia Department of Transportation shall be included in the staff review,
in lieu of recording an easement or other document.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(3). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
X X X X
4. Area, bulk, and minimum yards. Notwithstanding the requirements of the district in which the facility
will be located, the area and bulk regulations, and the minimum yard requirements of the district shall
not apply.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(4). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
X X X X
5. Required yards. Notwithstanding section 4.11, a facility may be located in a required yard.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(5). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
X X X X
6. Site plan. Notwithstanding section 32.2, a site plan shall not be required for a facility, but the facility
shall be subject to the requirements of section 32, and the applicant shall submit all schematics, plans,
calculations, drawings and other information required by the agent to determine whether the facility
complies with section 32. In making this determination, the agent may impose reaso nable conditions
authorized by section 32 in order to ensure compliance.
X X X X
Draft: 03/31/15
17
Applicability of other Development Requirements
in this Chapter
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(b)(6). This provision currently applies to all
applications.
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
d. Performance standards and requirements for approved applications. In addition to the applicable
development requirements in subsections (b) and (c), the following performance standards and
requirements shall apply to facilities, as applicable:
Performance Standards and Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Building permit application; submitting certification of monopole height and revised plans. The
following shall be submitted with the building permit application: (i) certification by a registered
surveyor stating the height of the reference tree that is used to determine the permissible height of the
monopole; and (ii) a final revised set of plans for the construction of the facility. The agent shall
review the surveyor’s certificate and the plans to ensure that all applicable requirements have been
satisfied.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(9). These requirements currently apply to Tier
II facilities.
X
2. Tree conservation plan; compliance; amendment. The installation, operation, and maintenance of the
facility shall be conducted in accordance with the tree conservation plan. The applicant shall not
remove existing trees within the lease area or within one hundred (100) feet in all directions
surrounding the lease area of any part of the facility except for those trees identified on the plan to be
removed for the installation, operation, and maintenance of the facility and dead and dying trees.
Before the applicant removes any tree not designated for removal on t he approved plan, the applicant
shall submit and obtain approval of an amended plan. The agent may approve the amended plan if the
proposed tree removal will not adversely affect the visibility of the facility from any location off of the
parcel. The agent may impose reasonable conditions to ensure that the purposes of this paragraph are
achieved.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(5). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X X X
3. Completion of installation; submitting certifications of compliance. Within thirty (30) days after
completion of the installation of the facility, the applicant shall provide to the agent prior to issuance
of a certificate of occupancy: (i) certification by a registered surveyor stating the height of the tower or
monopole, measured both in feet above ground level and in elevation above mean sea level, using the
benchmarks or reference datum identified in the application; and (ii) certification stating that the
lightning rod’s height does not exceed two (2) feet above the top of the tower or monopole and its
width does not exceed a diameter of one (1) inch.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(10). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities.
X X X
4. Discontinuance of use; notice thereof; removal; surety. Within thirty (30) days after a tower or
monopole’s use for personal wireless service or any service facilitated by transmission equipment is
discontinued, the owner of the facility shall notify the zoning administrator in writing that the facility’s
X X X
Draft: 03/31/15
18
Performance Standards and Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
use has discontinued. The facility and any transmission equipment shall be disassembled and removed
from the facility site within ninety (90) days after the date its use for pe rsonal wireless service or any
service facilitated by transmission equipment is discontinued. If the agent determines at any time that
surety is required to guarantee that the facility will be removed as required, the agent may require that
the parcel owner or the owner of the facility submit a certified check, a bond with surety, or a letter of
credit, in an amount sufficient for, and conditioned upon, the removal of the facility. The type and
form of the surety guarantee shall be to the satisfaction of th e agent and the county attorney. In
determining whether surety should be required, the agent shall consider the following: (i) whether
there is a change in technology that makes it likely that the monopole or tower will be unnecessary in
the near future; (ii) the permittee fails to comply with applicable regulations or conditions; (iii) the
permittee fails to timely remove another monopole or tower within the county; and (iv) whenever
otherwise deemed necessary by the agent.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(c)(6). These requirements currently apply to Tier
I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities. The language has been revised to provide for wireless facilities
that may also have collocated transmission equipment on them.
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
e. Application review and action. Each application shall be reviewed and acted on as follows:
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Nature of review and action. The nature of the review and action on submitted applications are as
follows:
(a) Ministerial review and approval by the department of community development to determine
compliance with applicable requirements of this section.
(b) Legislative review and approval of a special use permit by the board of supervisors, subject to
the applicable requirements of this section and of sections 33.4 and 33.8; to the extent there is
any conflict between the time for action in this subsection and in section 33.4, this section shall
prevail.
1Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, an application for an exempt collocation shall
not be subject to review by the architectural review board and a certificate of appropriateness shall
not be required therefor.
Comment: This subsection is new to clarify the processes.
X
X
X
X1
2. Time for action. The application shall be acted upon within:
(a) 60 days.
(b) 90 days.
(c) 150 days.
2If the application requires a special exception, the time for acting on the special exception applies to
X
S2
X
S2
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
19
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
the entire application.
Comment: This subsection amends current section 5.1.40(h) by revising the current deadlines
for action (90 and 150 days) to require action within 60 days for all but Tier III special use
permit applications or Tier I or Tier II applications that require a special exception. The 60 -day
review period for Collocations and Replacements is required by 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(2) and
staff is confident that it can act on the other applications w ithin 60 days as well.
3. Calculating the time for action. The time for action on an application shall be calculated as follows:
(a) Commencement. The time for action on an application shall begin on:
(i) The date the application is received in the department of community development.
(ii) The submittal date established for this type of application by the director of planning.
(b) Determination of completeness. Within thirty (30) days after the application is r eceived, the
department of community development shall determine whether the application includes all of
the applicable information required by this section. If any required information is not provided,
the department shall inform the applicant within the thirty (30) day period of the information
must be submitted in order for the application to be determined to be complete.
(c) Resubmittal. Within ten (10) days after a resubmittal is received, the department of community
development shall determine whether the application includes all of the applicable information
required by the initial notice of incompleteness. If any required information was not provided,
the department shall inform the applicant within the ten (10) day period of the information must
be submitted in order for the application to be determined to be complete. Second or subsequent
notices that information is missing may not include information that was not identified in the
original notice of incompleteness.
(d) Tolling. The running of the time for action shall be tolled between the date the department
informs the applicant that its application is incomplete and the date on which the department
receives all of the required information from the applicant.
(e) Extending time for action. The time by which action must be taken may be extended upon
request by, or with the consent of, the applicant.
Comment: This subsection is primarily based on current section 5.1.40(h)(3); subsection (3)(c)
is a new requirement of 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(3)(iii).
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4. Notice. Notice to third parties shall be provided as follows:
(a) Notice of the agent’s consideration of an application for a Tier I facility with a special
exception or a Tier II facility shall be sent by the agent to the owner of each parcel abutting the
parcel on which the proposed facility will be located. The notice shall describe the nature of the
facility, its proposed location on the lot, its proposed height, and the appropriate county office
where the complete application may be viewed. The notice shall be mailed by first class mail or
hand delivered at least ten (10) days before the agent acts on the application. Mailed notice shall
be mailed to the last known address of the owner, and mailing the notice to the address shown
on the current real estate tax assessment records of the county shall be deemed compliance with
this requirement. The failure of an owner to receive the notice as provided herein shall not
affect the validity of an approved facility and shall not be the basis for an appeal.
(b) Notice of public hearings shall be provided as required by section 33.4(m).
Comment: Subsection (a) is current section 5.1.40(d)(11) and it applies only to Tier II facilities.
Subsection (b) is merely a reminder that notice for special use permits is as provided in current
S
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
20
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
section 33.4(m). The County has never provided notice for applications for a Tier I facility or a
Collocation or Replacement.
5. Action. An application shall be acted on as follows:
(a) The application shall be approved if it satisfies all of the applicable requirements of this section.
(b) The application shall be acted on as provided in sections 33.4 and 33.8.
Comment: This subsection is new to clarify the processes, and is related to subsection 1.
X
X
X
X
6. Disapproval of application; appeal. If an application is disapproved:
(a) If the agent disapproves an application, he shall identify which requirements were not satisfied
and inform the applicant what needs to be done to satisfy each requirement. The applicant may
appeal the disapproval of an application to the board of supervisors. An appeal shall be in
writing and be received in the office of the clerk of the board of supervisors within ten (10)
calendar days after the date of the disapproval by the agent. In considering an appeal, the board
may affirm, reverse, or modify in whole or in part, the decision of the agent, and its decision
shall be based upon the applicable requirements of this section.
(b) In lieu of the appeal provided in subsection (a), the applicant at its sole option may appeal the
disapproval of the application related to an alleged violation of 47 USC § 332(c)(7) or 47 CFR §
1.40001, as applicable, in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(c) The applicant may appeal the decision of the board of supervisors as provided in Virginia Cod e
§ 15.2-2285 and section 33.4.
Comment: This subsection is new to clarify the processes. Subsection (a) is current section
5.1.40(d)(12) and applies to Tier II facilities only ; the current regulations do not provide a right
of appeal for decisions regarding Tier I facilities, Collocations, or Replacements. For
Collocations and Replacements, the appeal to the Board of Supervisors is at the option of the
applicant because under 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(5), the applicant’s remedy is in court. Subsection
(b) adds the option of the applicant to challenge alleged violations of federal laws in court
without further pursuing the administrative remedy, and this right of appeal is based on the
federal laws cited in subsection (b). Subsection (c) provides the State court remedy for special
use permit decisions, and applies only to Tier III (special use permit) applications.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7. Effect of failure to act within time for action. The failure to act on an application within the time for
action shall:
(a) Be deemed to be approval of the application; provided that the deemed grant does not become
effective until the applicant notifies the department of community development in writing after
the review period has expired that the application has been deemed approved.
(b) Create a rebuttable presumption that the failure to timely act was not reasonable under 47
U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(ii).
Comment: The consequences of the failure to timely act on an application are est ablished by
federal law. Subsection (a) is a requirement of 47 CFR § 1.40001(c)(4).
X
X
X
X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
Draft: 03/31/15
21
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
S: Refers to an alternative review period that applies when an application for a special exception accompanies the
application.
f. Collocation or replacement that would result in a substantial change to an eligible support structure. Any
collocation or replacement of transmission equipment that would result in a substantial change in the
physical dimensions of an eligible support structure shall be subject to the procedures and standards for a
Tier I facility. A special exception shall be required for any substantial change that does not satisfy the
standards for a Tier I facility. Any collocation or replacement approved for an eligible support structure by
special use permit prior to October 13, 2004 shall not reclassify the eligible support structure as a Tier I, II,
or III facility.
Comment: This subsection revises the regulations as to how collocations and replacements that may result in
a substantial change are processed and reviewed, issues that are presently addressed in current subsections
5.1.40(f)(2), (f)(4), (g)(2) and (g)(3). These revisions are proposed in order to simplify the regulations while at
the same time ensuring that land use concerns are addressed by requiring a special exception for any
proposed collocation or replacement that does not satisfy the development standards for a Tier I facility.
g. Removal of transmission equipment on any eligible support structure. Any transmission equipment on any
eligible support structure may be removed as a matter of right and regardless of any special use permit
condition providing otherwise.
Comment: This subsection continues with updated terminology the current regulations allowing removal in
current subsection 5.1.40(f)(5).
h. Agent approval of increase in height of monopole based on increase in height of reference tree. Upon the
written request of the applicant, the agent may authorize the height of an existing Tier II facility’s
monopole to be increased above its originally approved height upon finding that the reference tree has
grown to a height that is relative to the requested increase in height of the monopole. The application shall
include a certified survey of the reference tree’s new height, as well as the heights of other trees to be
considered by the agent. The agent shall not grant such a request if the increase in height would cause the
facility to be skylighted or would increase the extent to which it is skylighted.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(d)(13).
i. Administration of special use permits for facilities approved prior to October 13, 2004; conditions. If any
condition of a special use permit for an eligible support structure approved prior to October 13, 2004 is
more restrictive than a corresponding standard in this section, the corresponding standard in this section
shall apply. If any condition of the special use permit is less restrictive than a corresponding standard in this
section and the applicant establishes that vested rights have attached to the approved facility, the special use
permit conditions shall apply.
Comment: This subsection is current § 5.1.40(g)(1).
j. Mobile personal wireless service facilities. Mobile personal wireless service facilities (“MPWSF”) shall not
be subject to any requirements of section 5.1.40, and are otherwise permitted by right in any zoning district,
subject to the following:
1. Zoning clearance required; temporary non-emergency event. The owner shall obtain a zoning
clearance under section 31.5 prior to placing a MPWSF on any site for a temporary non-emergency
event. The MPWSF may be placed on the site for a maximum of seven (7) consecutive days, and
shall not be placed on any site for any temporary non-emergency event more than twice in a
calendar year.
2. Zoning clearance required; declared state of emergency. If a state of emergency is declared by the
President of the United States, the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, or the board of
Draft: 03/31/15
22
supervisors, the owner shall obtain a zoning clearance under section 31.5 within forty-five (45)
days after placing a MPWSF on any site. The MPWSF may be placed on the site for the duration of
the state of emergency.
Comment: This subsection was added as subsection 5.1.40(i) as part of the Phase 2 Wireless ZTA adopted by
the Board on February 11, 2015.
The County of Albemarle, Virginia and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors reserve any and all rights that it
has under the United States Constitution including, but not limited to, the Commerce Clause and the Tenth
Amendment.
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 ____ ____
Ms. Dittmar ____ ____
Ms. Mallek ____ ____
Ms. McKeel ____ ____
Ms. Palmer ____ ____
Mr. Sheffield ____ ____
Draft: 03/31/15
1
ORDINANCE NO. 15-18( )
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 18, ZONING, ARTICLE I, GENERAL PROVISIONS, AND
ARTICLE II, BASIC 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, and Article II, Basic Regulations, are hereby amended and reordained as follows:
By Amending:
Sec. 3.1 Definitions
Sec. 5.1.40 Personal wireless service facilities
Chapter 18. Zoning
Article I. General Provisions
Sec. 3.1 Definitions
. . .
Avoidance area: An area having significant resources where the initial siting of personal wireless service facilities
could result in adverse impacts as follows: (i) any ridge area where a personal wireless service facility would be
skylighted; (ii) a parcel within an agricultural and forestal district; (iii) a parcel within a historic district; (iv) any
location in which the proposed personal wireless service facility and three (3) or more existing or approved
personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a circle centered anywhere on the ground
having a radius of two hundred (200) feet; or (v) any location within two hundred (200) feet of any state scenic
highway or by-way. (Added 10-13-04)
. . .
Base station. A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables Federal Communications Commission-
licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a communications network.
1. Services to which the term applies. The term includes, but is not limited to, equipment associated with
wireless communications services such as private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as
unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul.
2. Equipment to which the term applies and does not apply. The term includes, but is not limited to, radio
transceivers, antennas, coaxial, or fiber optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable
equipment, regardless of technological configuration, including distributed antenna systems and small-cell
networks. The term does not include any equipment associated with a tower.
3. Structures to which the term applies and does not apply. The term includes any structure, other than a
tower, that, at the time the relevant application is filed with the county, supports or houses equipment
described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of this definition that has been reviewed and approved under section
5.1.40 or the applicable zoning process in effect prior to October 13, 2004. The term does not include: (i) a
tower as defined in this section; and (ii) any structure that, at the time the relevant application is filed with
the county under section 5.1,40, does not support or house equipment described in paragraphs (1) and (2) of
this definition.
. . .
Draft: 03/31/15
2
Collocation.: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, the
mounting or installation of one or more antennas for the purpose of providing personal wireless services on an
existing personal wireless service facility, the addition of related cables, wiring, supporting brackets and other
structural equipment, and the addition of transmission equipment. (Added 5-8-13) The mounting or installation of
transmission equipment on an eligible support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio
frequency signals for communications purposes.
. . .
Collocation, exempt: A collocation that would not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of an
eligible support structure.
. . .
Concealment elements of the eligible support structure. Any condition of approval, including any applicable
requirement of section 5.1.40 in effect at the time of approval, established and imposed on the personal wireless
service facility as a concealment technique and which includes conditions or regulations pertaining to antenna size,
color of the structure and all equipment, antenna mounting techniques, including the requirement that antennas be
flush mounted, maximum tower diameters at the base and top, limitations on tower height relative to a reference
tree, screening by trees including the restrictions on removing trees that are screening the tower, siting towers so
that they are not skylighted, requirements as to how cables should be located on a tower, and the size, location,
design, and screening for ground based equipment.
. . .
Eligible support structure. Any tower or base station, provided that it is existing at the time the relevant application
is filed with the County.
. . .
Existing personal wireless service facility or existing facility: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions
pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, a personal wireless service facility that was approved under section
5.1.40 or by special use permit prior to October 13, 2004, was thereafter established, and has continued in existence
since being established, and which provides personal wireless services. (Added 5-8-13)
Existing structure: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, a
structure, other than a flagpole or an existing personal wireless service facility tower, that was lawfully constructed
or established and complies with the minimum applicable bulk, height, setback, floor area or other structure
requirements of the district in which the structure is located. (Added 5-8-13)
Existing tower or existing base station. As referred to in the definition of “eligible support structure,” a constructed
tower or base station that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning process, provided that a
tower that has not been reviewed and approved because it was not required to be reviewed when it was built, but
was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition.
. . .
Replacement: As used in section 5.1.40 and any definitions pertaining to personal wireless service facilities, the
replacement of one or more antennas, cables, wiring, supporting brackets and other structural equipment,
transmission equipment, and ground equipment shelter, all of which is for the purpose of providing personal
wireless services on an existing personal wireless service facility transmission equipment of the same or lesser size
Draft: 03/31/15
3
in the same location as the equipment being replaced on an eligible support structure. (Added 5-8-13)
Replacement, exempt. A replacement that would not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of the
eligible support structure.
. . .
Substantial change: A modification to an eligible support structure that meets one or more of the following criteria:
1. Increase in height. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the modification increases the
height of the tower by more than ten percent (10%) or by the height of one additional antenna array with
separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed twenty (20) feet, whichever is greater; for other
eligible support structures, the modification increases the height of the structure by more than ten percent
(10%) or more than ten (10) feet, whichever is greater. Changes in height shall be measured from the
original support structure in cases where deployments are or will be separated horizontally, such as on
buildings’ rooftops; in other circumstances, changes in height should be measured from the dimensions of
the tower or base station, inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were
approved prior to February 22, 2012.
2. Increase in width. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the modification involves
adding an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of the tower more than
twenty (20) feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is
greater; for other eligible support structures, the modification involves adding an appurtenance to the body
of the structure that would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six (6) feet.
3. Excessive equipment cabinets. For any eligible support structure, the modification involves installation of
more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but not to exceed
four (4) cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and base stations, the modification involves
installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if there are no pre-existing ground cabinets
associated with the structure, or else involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than ten percent
(10%) larger in height or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure .
4. Expands tower site. The modification entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site.
5. Defeats concealment elements. The modification would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible
support structure.
6. Does not comply with conditions of approval. The modification does not comply with conditions associated
with the siting approval of the construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station
equipment; provided that this limitation does not apply to any modification that is noncompliant only in a
manner that would not exceed the thresholds identified in paragraphs (1) through (4) of this definition.
. . .
Tier I personal wireless service facility or Tier I facility: A personal wireless service facility that: (i) is located
entirely within an existing building but which may include a self-contained ground equipment shelter not exceeding
one hundred fifty (150) square feet that is not within the building or a whip antenna that satisfies the requirements
of subsection 5.1.40(c)(b)(1)(d); (ii) consists of one or more antennas, other than a microwave dish, attached to an
existing structure, together with associated personal wireless service equipment; (iii) is located within or
camouflaged by an addition to an existing structure determined by the agent to be in character with the structure
and the surrounding district; (iv) is a collocation or a replacement that does not substantially change the physical
dimensions of an existing personal wireless service facility as that phrase is used in subsection 5.1.40(f); or (iv) is
Draft: 03/31/15
4
the replacement of a wooden monopole with a metal monopole that does not exceed the maximum dimensions
permitted under subsection 5.1.40(d)(5)(b)(9). (Added 10-13-04; Amended 5-8-13)
. . .
Tower: As referred to in the definition of “eligible support structure” and “existing tower or base station,” any
structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any Federal Communications Commission licensed or
authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including structures that are constructed for wireless
communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as
unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated tower site.
Tower site: As referred to in the definitions of “substantial change” and “tower” and as used in section 5.1.40, for
towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the current boundaries of the leased or owned property
surrounding the tower and any access or utility easements currently related to the site, and, for other eligible
support structures, further restricted to that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission equipment
already deployed on the ground.
. . .
Transmission equipment. As used in section 5.1.40, equipment that facilitates transmission for any Federal
Communications Commission licensed or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not limited to,
radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and backup power supply. The term includes
equipment associated with wireless communications services, including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and
public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as microwave
backhaul.
Article II. Basic Regulations
Sec. 5.1.40 Personal wireless service facilities; collocation, replacement, and removal of transmission
equipment
The purpose of section 5.1.40 is to implement the personal wireless service facilities policy, adopted as part of the
comprehensive plan, in a manner that complies with Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 (47 U.S.C.
§ 332(c)(7)) for new personal wireless service facilities and collocations and replacements that result in a substantial
change in the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure; and to implement Section 6409(a) of the Middle
Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (47 U.S.C. § 1455) and 47 CFR § 1.40001 for collocations and
replacements that do not result in a substantial change in the physical dimensions of an eligible support structure.
Each personal wireless service facility and the transmission equipment of any other wireless service shall be subject
to the following, as applicable:
a. Application for approval: An application providing the following information shall be required for each
personal wireless service facility (hereinafter, “facility”) and transmission equipment that will be collocated
or replace existing equipment on an eligible support structure:
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Application form and signatures. A completed application form, signed by the parcel owner, the
parcel owner’s agent or the contract purchaser, and the proposed facility’s owner. If the owner’s agent
signs the application, he shall also submit written evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. If
the contract purchaser signs the application, he shall also submit the owner’s written consent to the
application.
X X X X
Draft: 03/31/15
5
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
2. Plat or survey of the parcel. A recorded plat or recorded boundary survey of the parcel on which the
facility will be located; provided, if neither a recorded plat nor boundary survey exists, a copy of the
legal description of the parcel and the Albemarle County Circuit Court deed book and page number.
X X X X
3. Ownership. The identity of the owner of the parcel and, if the owner is other than a real person, the
complete legal name of the entity, a description of the type of entity, and written documentation that
the person signing on behalf of the entity is authorized to do so.
X X X X
4. Plans and supporting drawings, calculations, and documentation. Except where the facility will be
located entirely within an eligible support structure or an existing building, a scaled plan and a scaled
elevation view and other supporting drawings, calculations, and other documentation required by the
agent, signed and sealed by an appropriate licensed professional. The plans and supporting drawings,
calculations, and documentation shall show:
(a) Existing and proposed improvements. The location and dimensions of all existing and proposed
improvements on the parcel including access roads and structures, the location and dimensions of
significant natural features, and the maximum height above ground of t he facility (also identified
in height above sea level).
(b) Elevation and coordinates. The benchmarks and datum used for elevations shall coincide with
the State Plane VA South US Survey Feet based on the North American Datum of 1983 (NAD
83), and the benchmarks shall be acceptable to the county engineer.
(c) Design. The design of the facility, including the specific type of support structure and the design,
type, location, size, height, and configuration of all existing and proposed antennas and other
equipment.
(d) Color. Identification of each paint color on the facility, by manufacturer color name and color
number. A paint chip or sample shall be provided for each color.
(e) Topography. Except where the facility would be attached to an eligible support structure or an
existing building, the topography within two thousand (2,000) feet of the proposed facility, in
contour intervals not to exceed ten (10) feet for all lands within Albemarle County and, in
contour intervals shown on United States Geological Survey topographic survey maps or the best
topographic data available, for lands not within Albemarle County.
(f) Trees. The caliper and species of all trees where the dripline is located within fifty (50) feet of
the facility. The height, caliper, and species of any tree that the applicant is relying on to
provide screening of the monopole or tower. The height, caliper and species of the reference
tree. The caliper and species of all trees that will be adversely impacted or removed during
installation or maintenance of the facility shall be noted, regardless of their distances to the
facility.
(g) Setbacks, parking, fencing, and landscaping. All existing and proposed setbacks, parking,
fencing, and landscaping.
(h) Location of accessways. The location of all existing vehicular accessways and the location and
design of all proposed vehicular accessways.
(i) Location of certain structures and district boundaries. Except where the facility would be
attached to an eligible support structure or an existing building, residential and commercial
structures, and residential and rural areas district boundaries.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
6
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
(j) Proximity to airports. If the proposed monopole or tower will be taller than one hundred fifty
(150) feet, the proximity of the facility to commercial and private airports.
X X
5. Photographs. Photographs of the location of the proposed monopole or tower shall be provided that
include, for applications for Tier II facilities, the reference tree, and for applications for Tier III
facilities, the area within fifty (50) feet of the proposed monopole or tower. These photographs shall
include reference points to enable the lease area, the vehicular access, the trees that will remain, and
the trees that will be removed, to be identified. In addition, photographs, where possible, or
perspective drawings of the facility site and all existing facilities within two hundred (200) feet of the
site, if any, and the area surrounding the site.
X X
6. Balloon tests. For any proposed monopole or tower, photographs taken of a balloon test, whi ch shall be
conducted, if requested by the agent, as follows:
(a) Scheduling. The applicant shall contact the agent within ten (10) days after the date the
application was submitted to schedule a date and time when the balloon test will be conducted.
The test shall be conducted within forty (40) days after the date the application was submitted,
and the applicant shall provide the agent with at least seven (7) days prior notice; provided that
this deadline may be extended due to inclement weather or by the agreement of the applicant and
the agent.
(b) Marking key boundaries and locations. Prior to the balloon test, the locations of the access road,
the lease area, the tower site, the reference tree, and the tallest tree within twenty five (25) feet of
the proposed monopole shall be surveyed and staked or flagged in the field.
(c) Balloon height. The test shall consist of raising one or more balloons from the facility site to a
height equal to the proposed facility.
(d) Balloon color or material. The balloons shall be of a color or material that provides maximum
visibility.
(e) Photographing balloon test. The photographs of the balloon test shall be taken from the nearest
residence and from appropriate locations on abutting properties, along each pub licly used road
from which the balloon is visible, and other properties and locations as deemed appropriate by
the agent. The applicant shall identify the camera type, film size, and focal length of the lens for
each photograph.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7. Additions of antennas. If antennas are proposed to be added to an eligible support structure or an
existing building, all existing antennas and other equipment on the structure, building, or facility, as
well as all ground equipment, shall be identified by owner, type, and size. The method(s) by which the
antennas will be attached to the mounting structure shall be depicted.
X X X X
8. Site under conservation or open space easement. If the proposed facility would be located on lands
subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, a copy of the recorded deed of
easement and the express written consent of all easement holders to the proposed facility.
X X
9. Photographic simulations. At the request of the agent, photographic simulations of the proposed
facility.
X X
10. Statement of justification for exempt collocation. If the application is for an exempt collocation, a
statement of the justification for the application qualifying as an exempt col location.
X
Draft: 03/31/15
7
Application Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
11. Evidence of prior approval. Approval letters or actions from the County authorizing the initial
construction of the facility and any approval letters or actions for modifications of the facility after
initial construction. If no approvals were granted by the County for the facility the applicant shall
provide evidence that the facility was constructed lawfully.
X
12. Special exception. If the proposed facility does not comply with any provision of section 5.1.40, the
applicant shall request a special exception in writing as part of the application. The request shall
identify which regulation in section 5.1.40 for the special exception is requested and a justification for
the special exception.
X X X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
b. Development requirements. Each facility or transmission equipment may be established upon approval as
provided in subsection (c) provided that the application satisfies the applicable requirements of subsection (a)
and demonstrates that the facility or transmission equipment will be installed and operated in compliance with
all applicable provisions of this chapter, and the following:
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. General design. The facility shall be designed, installed, and maintained as follows:
(a) Guy wires. Guy wires are prohibited.
(b) Outdoor lighting. Outdoor lighting for the facility shall be permitted only during maintenance
periods; regardless of the lumens emitted, each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded as
required by section 4.17; provided that these restrictions shall not apply to any outdoor lighting
required by federal law.
(c) Ground equipment. Any ground equipment shelter not located within an eligible support structure
or an existing building shall be screened from all lot lines either by terrain, existing structures,
existing vegetation, or by added vegetation approved by the agent.
(d) Whip antenna. A whip antenna less than six (6) inches in diameter may exceed the height of the
facility, the eligible support structure, or the existing building.
(e) Grounding rod. A grounding rod, whose height shall not exceed two (2) feet and whose width
shall not exceed one (1) inch in diameter at the base and tapering to a point, may be installed at
the top of the facility, the eligible support structure, or the existing building.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
2. Antennas and associated equipment. Antennas and associated equipment that are not entirely within a
proposed facility, an eligible support structure, or an existing building shall be subject to the following:
(a) Number of arrays. The total number of arrays of antennas shall not exceed three (3). All types of
antennas and dishes, regardless of their use, shall be counted toward the limit of three arrays.
(b) Size. Each antenna proposed under the pending application shall not exceed the size shown on the
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
8
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
application, which size shall not exceed one thousand one hundred fifty two (1152) square
inches.
(c) Projection. No antenna shall project from the facility, structure or building beyond the minimum
required by the mounting equipment, and in no case shall any point on the face of an antenna
project more than twelve (12) inches from the facility, structure or building; and
(d) Color. Each antenna and associated equipment shall be a color that matches the facility, structure
or building.
X
X
X
X
X
X
3. Tree conservation plan; content. Before the building official issues a building permit for the facility,
the applicant shall submit a tree conservation plan prepared by a certified arborist. The plan shall be
submitted to the agent for review and approval to ensure that all applicable requirements have been
satisfied. The plan shall specify tree protection methods and procedures, identify all existing trees to be
removed on the parcel for the installation, operation and maintenance of the facility, and identify all
dead and dying trees that are recommended to be removed. In approving the plan, the agent may
identify additional trees or lands up to two hundred (200) feet from the lease area to be included in the
plan.
X X X
4. Creation of slopes steeper than 2:1. No slopes associated with the installation of the facility and its
accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other
stabilization measures acceptable to the county engineer are employed.
X X
X
5. Ground equipment shelter; fencing. Any ground equipment shelter not located within an existing
building shall be fenced only with the approval of the agent upon finding that the fence: (i) would
protect the facility from trespass in areas of high volumes of vehicular or pedestrian traffic or, in the
rural areas, to protect the facility from livestock or wildlife; (ii) would not be detrimental to the
character of the area; and (iii) would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare.
X X X
6. Screening and siting to minimize visibility. The site shall provide adequate opportunities for screening
and the facility shall be sited to minimize its visibility from adjacent parcels and streets, regardless of
their distance from the facility. The facility also shall be sited to minimize its visibility from any
entrance corridor overlay district, state scenic river, national park or national forest, regardless of
whether the site is adjacent to the district, river, park or forest. If the facility would be located on lands
subject to a conservation easement or an open space easement, or adjacent to a conservation easement
or open space easement, the facility shall be sited so that it is not visible from any resources
specifically identified for protection in the deed of easement.
X X
7. Open space plan resources. The facility shall not adversely impact resources identified in the natural
resources chapter of the county’s comprehensive plan and the parks and green systems chapters in any
county master plan.
X X
8. Horizontal separation of multiple facilities. The facility shall not be located so that it and three (3) or
more existing or approved personal wireless service facilities would be within an area comprised of a
circle centered anywhere on the ground having a radius of two hundred (200) feet.
X
9. Diameter of monopole. The maximum base diameter of the monopole shall be thirty (30) inches and
the maximum diameter at the top of the monopole shall be eighteen (18) inches.
X
10. Height of monopole. The top of the monopole, measured in elevation above mean sea level, shall not
be more than ten (10) feet taller than the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the monopole, and
shall include any base, foundation or grading that raises the monopole above the pre -existing natural
ground elevation.
X
Draft: 03/31/15
9
Development Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
11. Color of monopole, antennas, and equipment. Each monopole shall be a dark brown natural or
painted wood color that blends into the surrounding trees. The antennas, supporting brackets, and all
other equipment attached to the monopole shall be a color that closely matches that of the monopole.
The ground equipment, the ground equipment shelter, and the concrete pad shall also be a color that
closely matches that of the monopole, provided that the ground equipment and the concrete pad need
not closely match the color of the monopole if they are enclosed within a ground equipment shelter or
within or behind an approved structure, façade or fencing that: (i) is a color that closely matches that
of the monopole; (ii) is consistent with the character of the area; and (iii) makes the ground
equipment, ground equipment shelter, and the concrete pad invisible at any time of year from any
other parcel or a public or private street.
X X
12. Placement of cables, wiring, and similar attachments. Each wood or concrete monopole shall be
constructed so that all cables, wiring, and similar attachments that run vertically from the ground
equipment to the antennas are placed on the monopole to face the interior of the site and away from
public view, as determined by the agent. Metal monopoles shall be constructed so that vertical cables,
wiring and similar attachments are contained within the monopole’s structure.
X
13. Special use permit conditions. All conditions of approval of a special use permit.
X
14. No substantial change. The collocation or replacement shall not result in a substantial change to the
physical dimensions of an eligible support structure.
X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
c. Applicability of other regulations in this chapter. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, each
facility or transmission equipment shall be subject to all applicable regulations in this chapter:
Applicability of other Development Requirements
in this Chapter
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Building site. Notwithstanding section 4.2.3(a), a facility is not required to be located within a building
site.
X X X X
2. Vehicular access. Vehicular access to the facility site or tower site shall be subject to the requirements
of section 4.2 and shall not be exempt under section 4.2.6(c).
X X X X
3. Setbacks. Notwithstanding section 4.10.3.1(b), the agent may authorize a facility to be located closer in
distance than the height of the tower or other mounting structure to any lot line if the applicant obtains
an easement or other recordable document showing agreement between the lot owners, acceptable to
the county attorney as to addressing development on the part of the abutting parcel sharing the
common lot line that is within the monopole or tower’s fall zone. If the right -of-way for a public street
is within the fall zone, the Virginia Department of Transportation shall be included in the staff review,
in lieu of recording an easement or other document.
X X X X
Draft: 03/31/15
10
Applicability of other Development Requirements
in this Chapter
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
4. Area, bulk, and minimum yards. Notwithstanding the requirements of the district in which the facility
will be located, the area and bulk regulations, and the minimum yard requirements of the district shall
not apply.
X X X X
5. Required yards. Notwithstanding section 4.11, a facility may be located in a required yard.
X X X X
6. Site plan. Notwithstanding section 32.2, a site plan shall not be required for a facility, but the facility
shall be subject to the requirements of section 32 , and the applicant shall submit all schematics, plans,
calculations, drawings and other information required by the agent to determine whether the facility
complies with section 32. In making this determination, the agent may impose reasonable conditions
authorized by section 32 in order to ensure compliance.
X X X X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
d. Performance standards and requirements for approved applications. In addition to the applicable
development requirements in subsections (b) and (c), the following performance standards and
requirements shall apply to facilities, as applicable:
Performance Standards and Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Building permit application; submitting certification of monopole height and revised plans. The
following shall be submitted with the building permit application: (i) certification by a registered
surveyor stating the height of the reference tree that is used to determine the permissible height of the
monopole; and (ii) a final revised set of plans for the construction of the facility. The agent shall
review the surveyor’s certificate and the plans to ensure that all applicable requirements have been
satisfied.
X
2. Tree conservation plan; compliance; amendment. The installation, operation, and maintenance of the
facility shall be conducted in accordance with the tree conservation plan. The applicant shall not
remove existing trees within the lease area or within one hundred (100) feet in all directions
surrounding the lease area of any part of the facility except for those trees identifie d on the plan to be
removed for the installation, operation, and maintenance of the facility and dead and dying trees.
Before the applicant removes any tree not designated for removal on the approved plan, the applicant
shall submit and obtain approval of an amended plan. The agent may approve the amended plan if the
proposed tree removal will not adversely affect the visibility of the facility from any location off of the
parcel. The agent may impose reasonable conditions to ensure that the purposes of this paragraph are
achieved.
X X X
3. Completion of installation; submitting certifications of compliance. Within thirty (30) days after
completion of the installation of the facility, the applicant shall provide to the agent prior to issuance
of a certificate of occupancy: (i) certification by a registered surveyor stating the height of the tower or
monopole, measured both in feet above ground level and in elevation above mean sea level, using the
benchmarks or reference datum identified in the application; and (ii) certification stating that the
lightning rod’s height does not exceed two (2) feet above the top of the tower or monopole and its
width does not exceed a diameter of one (1) inch.
X X X
Draft: 03/31/15
11
Performance Standards and Requirements
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
4. Discontinuance of use; notice thereof; removal; surety. Within thirty (30) days after a tower or
monopole’s use for personal wireless service or any service facilitated by transmission equipment is
discontinued, the owner of the facility shall notify the zoning administrator in writing that the facility ’s
use has discontinued. The facility and any transmission equipment shall be disassembled and removed
from the facility site within ninety (90) days after the date its use for personal wireless service or any
service facilitated by transmission equipment is discontinued. If the agent determines at any time that
surety is required to guarantee that the facility will be removed as required, the agent may require that
the parcel owner or the owner of the facility submit a certified check, a bond with surety, or a letter of
credit, in an amount sufficient for, and conditioned upon, the removal of the facility. The type and
form of the surety guarantee shall be to the satisfaction of the agent and the county attorney. In
determining whether surety should be required, the agent shall consider the following: (i) whether
there is a change in technology that makes it likely that the monopole or tower will be unnecessary in
the near future; (ii) the permittee fails to comply with applicable regulations or conditions; (iii) the
permittee fails to timely remove another monopole or tower within the county; and (iv) whenever
otherwise deemed necessary by the agent.
X X X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
e. Application review and action. Each application shall be reviewed and acted on as follows:
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
1. Nature of review and action. The nature of the review and action on submitted applications are as
follows:
(a) Ministerial review and approval by the department of community development to determine
compliance with applicable requirements of this section.
(b) Legislative review and approval of a special use permit by the board of supervisors, subject to
the applicable requirements of this section and of sections 33.4 and 33.8; to the extent there is
any conflict between the time for action in this subsection and in section 33.4, this section shall
prevail.
1Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, an application for an exempt collocation shall
not be subject to review by the architectural review board and a certificate of appropriateness shall
not be required therefor.
X
X
X
X1
2. Time for action. The application shall be acted upon within:
(a) 60 days.
(b) 90 days.
(c) 150 days.
2If the application requires a special exception, the time for acting on the special exception applies to
X
S2
X
S2
X
X
Draft: 03/31/15
12
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
the entire application.
3. Calculating the time for action. The time for action on an application shall be calculated as follows:
(a) Commencement. The time for action on an application shall begin on:
(i) The date the application is received in the department of community development.
(ii) The submittal date established for this type of application by the director of planning.
(b) Determination of completeness. Within thirty (30) days after the application is received, the
department of community development shall determine whether the application includes all of
the applicable information required by this section. If any required information is not provided,
the department shall inform the applicant within the thirty (30) day period of the information
must be submitted in order for the application to be determined to be complete.
(c) Resubmittal. Within ten (10) days after a resubmittal is received, the department of community
development shall determine whether the application includes all of the applicable information
required by the initial notice of incompleteness. If any required information was not provided,
the department shall inform the applicant within the ten (10) day period of the information must
be submitted in order for the application to be determined to be complete. Second or subsequent
notices that information is missing may not include information that was not identified in the
original notice of incompleteness.
(d) Tolling. The running of the time for action shall be tolled between the date the department
informs the applicant that its application is incomplete and the date on which the department
receives all of the required information from the applicant.
(e) Extending time for action. The time by which action must be taken may be extended upon
request by, or with the consent of, the applicant.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
4. Notice. Notice to third parties shall be provided as follows:
(a) Notice of the agent’s consideration of an application for a Tier I facility with a special
exception or a Tier II facility shall be sent by the agent to the owner of each parcel abutting the
parcel on which the proposed facility will be located. The notice shall describe the nature of the
facility, its proposed location on the lot, its proposed height, and the appropriate county office
where the complete application may be viewed. The notice shall be mailed by first class mail or
hand delivered at least ten (10) days before the agent acts on the application. Mailed notice shall
be mailed to the last known address of the owner, and mailing the notice to the address shown
on the current real estate tax assessment records of the county shall be deemed compliance with
this requirement. The failure of an owner to receive the notice as provided herein shall not
affect the validity of an approved facility and shall not be the basis for an appeal.
(b) Notice of public hearings shall be provided as required by section 33.4(m).
S
X
X
5. Action. An application shall be acted on as follows:
(a) The application shall be approved if it satisfies all of the applicable requirements of this section.
(b) The application shall be acted on as provide d in sections 33.4 and 33.8.
X
X
X
X
6. Disapproval of application; appeal. If an application is disapproved:
Draft: 03/31/15
13
Application Review and Action
Type of
Application
I II III C/R
(a) If the agent disapproves an application, he shall identify which requirements were not satisfied
and inform the applicant what needs to be done to satisfy each requirement. The applicant may
appeal the disapproval of an application to the board of supervisors. An appeal shall be in
writing and be received in the office of the clerk of the board of supervisors within ten (10 )
calendar days after the date of the disapproval by the agent. In considering an appeal, the board
may affirm, reverse, or modify in whole or in part, the decision of the agent, and its decision
shall be based upon the applicable requirements of this section.
(b) In lieu of the appeal provided in subsection (a), the applicant at its sole option may appeal the
disapproval of the application related to an alleged violation of 47 USC § 332(c)(7) or 47 CFR §
1.40001, as applicable, in any court of competent jurisdiction.
(c) The applicant may appeal the decision of the board of supervisors as provided in Virginia Code
§ 15.2-2285 and section 33.4.
X
X
X
X
X
X
X
7. Effect of failure to act within time for action. The failure to act on an application within the time for
action shall:
(a) Be deemed to be approval of the application; provided that the deemed grant does not become
effective until the applicant notifies the department of community development in writing after
the review period has expired that the application has been deemed approved.
(b) Create a rebuttable presumption that the failure to timely act was not reasonable under 47
U.S.C. § 332(c)(7)(B)(ii).
X
X
X
X
The following abbreviations are used in this table:
I, II, and III: Refer to Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III facilities, respectively.
C/R: Refers to exempt collocations and exempt replacements of transmission equipment.
X: Refers to a requirement that applies to the corresponding facility or transmission equipment.
S: Refers to an alternative review period that applies when an application for a special exception accompanies the
application.
f. Collocation or replacement that would result in a substantial change to an eligible support structure. Any
collocation or replacement of transmission equipment that would result in a substantial change in the
physical dimensions of an eligible support structure shall be subject to the procedures and standards for a
Tier I facility. A special exception shall be required for any substantial change that does not satisfy the
standards for a Tier I facility. Any collocation or replacement approved for an eligible support structure by
special use permit prior to October 13, 2004 shall not reclassify the eligible support structure as a Tier I, II,
or III facility.
g. Removal of transmission equipment on any eligible support structure. Any transmission equipment on any
eligible support structure may be removed as a matter of right and regardless of any special use permit
condition providing otherwise.
h. Agent approval of increase in height of monopole based on increase in height of reference tree. Upon the
written request of the applicant, the agent may authorize the height of an existing Tier II facility’s
monopole to be increased above its originally approved height upon finding that the reference tree has
grown to a height that is relative to the requested increase in height of the monopole. The application shall
include a certified survey of the reference tree’s new height, as well as the heights of other trees to be
Draft: 03/31/15
14
considered by the agent. The agent shall not grant such a request if the increase in height would cause the
facility to be skylighted or would increase the extent to which it is skylighted.
i. Administration of special use permits for facilities approved prior to October 13, 2004; conditions. If any
condition of a special use permit for an eligible support structure approved prior to October 13, 2004 is
more restrictive than a corresponding standard in this section, the corresponding standard in this section
shall apply. If any condition of the special use permit is less restrictive than a corresponding standard in this
section and the applicant establishes that vested rights have attached to the approved facility, the special use
permit conditions shall apply.
j. Mobile personal wireless service facilities. Mobile personal wireless service facilities (“MPWSF”) shall not
be subject to any requirements of section 5.1.40, and are otherwise permitted by right in any zoning district,
subject to the following:
1. Zoning clearance required; temporary non-emergency event. The owner shall obtain a zoning
clearance under section 31.5 prior to placing a MPWSF on any site for a temporary non-emergency
event. The MPWSF may be placed on the site for a maximum of seven (7) consecutive days, and
shall not be placed on any site for any temporary non-emergency event more than twice in a
calendar year.
2. Zoning clearance required; declared state of emergency. If a state of emergency is declared by the
President of the United States, the Governor of the Commonwealth of Virginia, or the board of
supervisors, the owner shall obtain a zoning clearance under section 31.5 within forty-five (45)
days after placing a MPWSF on any site. The MPWSF may be placed on the site for the duration of
the state of emergency.
The County of Albemarle, Virginia and the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors reserve any and all rights that it
has under the United States Constitution including, but not limited to, the Commerce Clause and the Tenth
Amendment.
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 ____ ____
Ms. Dittmar ____ ____
Ms. Mallek ____ ____
Ms. McKeel ____ ____
Ms. Palmer ____ ____
Mr. Sheffield ____ ____
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZTA 2015-01 Wireless Communications – FCC
Mandated Changes
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Consider and ordinance to amend the Personal
Wireless Service Facilities regulations to implement
recent rulemaking by the Federal Communications
Commission
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Fritz, Kamptner, Baldwin
PRESENTER (S):
Bill Fritz
AGENDA DATE:
March 10, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Federal Communications Commission (the “ FCC”), has issued new rules that will take effect April 8, 2015. These
rules require the County to approve certain types of collocations and replacements of transmission equipment and impose
a new “shot clock” under which all wireless applications must be reviewed and acted upon.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Economic Prosperity: Foster an environment that stimulates job creation, capital investments and tax revenues that
support community goals. Natural Resources: Thoughtfully protect and manage Albemarle County’s ecosystems and
natural resources in both the rural and development areas to safeguard the quality of life of current and future generations.
Rural Areas: Preserve the character of rural life with thriving farms and forests, traditional crossroad communities, and
protected scenic areas, historic sites, and biodiversity.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has prepared an analysis of the FCC rules which is included as Attachment A. The rules themselves are included as
Attachment B. Attachment C is a summary of changes to the review process which will allow the County to meet the new
“shot clock” requirements. Attachment D is an annotated version of the proposed ordinance with comments that explain
the source of each regulation (i.e., whether it is an existing regulation, is required by the FCC rules, or is new and
recommended by staff), why the regulation is being changed, and the impact of the change. Attachment D also includes
definitions related to wireless services that are not proposed to be amended by this ordinance to provide the reader with
additional context. Attachment E is the version of the proposed ordinance that staff recommends for ultimate adoption by
the Board. Attachment E omits the comments and the definitions not proposed to be amended.
The proposed ordinance also reorganizes County Code § 18-5.1.40 to improve its clarity and administration.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The proposed amendments removed redundant review procedures without reducing notice to abutting owners or removing
Board of Supervisors discretion. This more efficient review process will result in improved review efficiencies and reduced
review costs. Staff is unable to calculate the exact amount of savings to the County.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors with a
recommendation of approval.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Staff Summary of FCC Rule
Attachment B – Portion of FCC rule addressing “State and Local Review of Applications for Wireless Service Facilities
Modification”
Attachment C – Changes in Processing Special Exceptions
Attachment D – Proposed Ordinance (annotated)
Attachment E – Proposed Ordinance
Return to executive summary
Staff Summary of FCC Rule Attachment A
In this summary staff will highlight the most significant provisions of the FCC rule. For the specific
language of the FCC rule please refer to the Federal Register or Attachment B. The existing Federal law
(The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012) states that the County “may not deny and
shall approve any eligible facilities request for modification of an eligible support structures that does
not substantially change the physical dimensions of such structure”. The Federal law only defined
“eligible facilities request” it did not include a definition of “substantial change” or define any other
terms used in the law. The County adopted a definition of what constituted a “substantial change” in
2013. The new rule by the FCC defines “substantial change” and also establishes definitions for various
terms and modifies the “shot clock". The rule applies to “any Commission authorized wireless
communication services”. This includes licensed and unlicensed services. Some Wireless Internet
Service Providers, WISPs operate as unlicensed services. They and the traditional licensed carriers will
be able to operate under the FCC rule. Staff has summarized the impact of the FCC rule below. The only
provisions staff has commented on are those that will require the County to amend the Zoning
Ordinance.
Changes to the application process.
- Still have 30 days to determine if application is complete. However, if the application is deemed
incomplete it must specify the code provision, ordinance, application instruction or otherwise
publically-stated procedures.
- Once new information is submitted the County has 10 days to determine if the new information
completes the application.
- Second or subsequent notices that the application is incomplete my not specify missing
information not contained in the original notice of incompleteness.
- FCC does not enumerate what constitutes a “complete” application. However, information
requested on the application is limited to what is necessary to determine if the change is
substantial.
Changes in “Shot Clock” – The “Shot Clock” is the time used to describe the amount of time the County
has to act on an application.
- Shot clock for collocations that are not substantial changes (exempt collocation) is reduced from
90 days to 60 days. Shot clock for collocations that are substantial changes remains 90 days.
- Failure to act on applications that are exempt collocations within 60 days results in the
application being deemed granted. Applications that are a substantial change are not deemed
granted if the review extends beyond 90 days.
- Distributed Antenna Systems and Small Cells are to be reviewed under the new 60 day shot
clock.
Definitions are added for the following:
- Tower -any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any FCC licensed or
authorized antenna and associated facilities.
- Existing structure - is one that is in place or approved at the time the application for collocation
is made.
- Base station - any structure or equipment used for a County approved personal wireless services
and includes Distributed Antenna Systems (DAS) and small cells.
- Collocation - mounting on an eligible structure, which includes the installation of anything that
facilitates transmission. This includes, among other things, antenna, cables and primary and
backup power supplies.
- Eligible structure - any tower or base station.
- Eligible request - anything that isn’t a substantial change.
- Substantial change is a modification that:
o Increases the height of the tower by more than 10% or more than twenty feet,
whichever is greater.
o Increases the height of other eligible support structures by more than 10% or more than
ten feet, whichever is greater.
o Involves adding an appurtenance to the tower that would protrude from the edge of the
tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure, whichever
is greater.
o Involves adding an appurtenance to other eligible support structures that would
protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet, or more than the width
of the tower structure, whichever is greater.
o Involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for
the technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets.
o Involves any excavation or deployment outside of the current site.
o Would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure.
o Does not comply with conditions of approval for the eligible structure, provided that this
limit does not apply if the modification is consistent with the above limits.
Portion of FCC Rule Attachment B
Subpart CC—State and Local Review of Applications for Wireless Service Facility Modification
§ 1.40001 Wireless Facility Modifications.
(a) Purpose. These rules implement section 6409 of the Spectrum Act (codified at 47 U.S.C.
1455), which requires a State or local government to approve any eligible facilities request for a
modification of an existing tower or base station that does not substantially change the physical
dimensions of such tower or base station.
(b) Definitions. Terms used in this section have the following meanings.
(1) Base station. A structure or equipment at a fixed location that enables Commission-
licensed or authorized wireless communications between user equipment and a
communications network. The term does not encompass a tower as defined in this
subpart or any equipment associated with a tower.
(i) The term includes, but is not limited to, equipment associated with wireless
communications services such as private, broadcast, and public safety services,
as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as
microwave backhaul.
(ii) The term includes, but is not limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial
or fiber-optic cable, regular and backup power supplies, and comparable
equipment, regardless of technological configuration (including Distributed
Antenna Systems and small-cell networks).
(iii) The term includes any structure other than a tower that, at the time the
relevant application is filed with the State or local government under this
section, supports or houses equipment described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i) through
(ii) of this section that has been reviewed and approved under the applicable
zoning or siting process, or under another State or local regulatory review
process, even if the structure was not built for the sole or primary purpose of
providing such support.
(iv) The term does not include any structure that, at the time the relevant
application is filed with the State or local government under this section, does
not support or house equipment described in paragraphs (b)(1)(i)–(ii) of this
section.
(2) Collocation. The mounting or installation of transmission equipment on an eligible
support structure for the purpose of transmitting and/or receiving radio frequency
signals for communications purposes.
(3) Eligible facilities request. Any request for modification of an existing tower or base
station that does not substantially change the physical dimensions of such tower or base
station, involving:
(i) Collocation of new transmission equipment; (ii) Removal of transmission
equipment; or
(iii) Replacement of transmission equipment.
(4) Eligible support structure. Any tower or base station as defined in this section,
provided that it is existing at the time the relevant application is filed with the State or
local government under this section.
(5) Existing. A constructed tower or base station is existing for purposes of this section if
it has been reviewed and approved under the applicable zoning or siting process, or
under another State or local regulatory review process, provided that a tower that has
not been reviewed and approved because it was not in a zoned area when it was built,
but was lawfully constructed, is existing for purposes of this definition.
(6) Site. For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, the current
boundaries of the leased or owned property surrounding the tower and any access or
utility easements currently related to the site, and, for other eligible support structures,
further restricted to that area in proximity to the structure and to other transmission
equipment already deployed on the ground.
(7) Substantial change. A modification substantially changes the physical dimensions of
an eligible support structure if it meets any of the following criteria:
(i) For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it increases the
height of the tower by more than 10% or by the height of one additional
antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna not to exceed
twenty feet, whichever is greater; for other eligible support structures, it
increases the height of the structure by more than 10% or more than ten feet,
whichever is greater; (A) Changes in height should be measured from the
original support structure in cases where deployments are or will be separated
horizontally, such as on buildings’ rooftops; in other circumstances, changes in
height should be measured from the dimensions of the tower or base station,
inclusive of originally approved appurtenances and any modifications that were
approved prior to the passage of the Spectrum Act.
(ii) For towers other than towers in the public rights-of-way, it involves adding
an appurtenance to the body of the tower that would protrude from the edge of
the tower more than twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure
at the level of the appurtenance, whichever is greater; for other eligible support
structures, it involves adding an appurtenance to the body of the structure that
would protrude from the edge of the structure by more than six feet;
(iii) For any eligible support structure, it involves installation of more than the
standard number of new equipment cabinets for the technology involved, but
not to exceed four cabinets; or, for towers in the public rights-of-way and base
stations, it involves installation of any new equipment cabinets on the ground if
there are no pre-existing ground cabinets associated with the structure, or else
involves installation of ground cabinets that are more than 10% larger in height
or overall volume than any other ground cabinets associated with the structure;
(iv) It entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site;
(v) It would defeat the concealment elements of the eligible support structure;
or
(vi) It does not comply with conditions associated with the siting approval of the
construction or modification of the eligible support structure or base station
equipment, provided however that this limitation does not apply to any
modification that is non-compliant only in a manner that would not exceed the
thresholds identified in § 1.40001(b)(7)(i) through (iv).
(8) Transmission equipment. Equipment that facilitates transmission for any
Commission-licensed or authorized wireless communication service, including, but not
limited to, radio transceivers, antennas, coaxial or fiber-optic cable, and regular and
backup power supply. The term includes equipment associated with wireless
communications services including, but not limited to, private, broadcast, and public
safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless services and fixed wireless services such as
microwave backhaul.
(9) Tower. Any structure built for the sole or primary purpose of supporting any
Commission-licensed or authorized antennas and their associated facilities, including
structures that are constructed for wireless communications services including, but not
limited to, private, broadcast, and public safety services, as well as unlicensed wireless
services and fixed wireless services such as microwave backhaul, and the associated site.
(c) Review of applications. A State or local government may not deny and shall approve any
eligible facilities request for modification of an eligible support structure that does not
substantially change the physical dimensions of such structure.
(1) Documentation requirement for review. When an applicant asserts in writing that a
request for modification is covered by this section, a State or local government may
require the applicant to provide documentation or information only to the extent
reasonably related to determining whether the request meets the requirements of this
section. A State or local government may not require an applicant to submit any other
documentation, including but not limited to documentation intended to illustrate the
need for such wireless facilities or to justify the business decision to modify such
wireless facilities.
(2) Timeframe for review. Within 60 days of the date on which an applicant submits a
request seeking approval under this section, the State or local government shall approve
the application unless it determines that the application is not covered by this section.
(3) Tolling of the timeframe for review. The 60-day period begins to run when the
application is filed, and may be tolled only by mutual agreement or in cases where the
reviewing State or local government determines that the application is incomplete. The
timeframe for review is not tolled by a moratorium on the review of applications.
(i) To toll the timeframe for incompleteness, the reviewing State or local
government must provide written notice to the applicant within 30 days of
receipt of the application, clearly and specifically delineating all missing
documents or information. Such delineated information is limited to documents
or information meeting the standard under paragraph (c)(1) of this section.
(ii) The timeframe for review begins running again when the applicant makes a
supplemental submission in response to the State or local government’s notice
of incompleteness.
(iii) Following a supplemental submission, the State or local government will
have 10 days to notify the applicant that the supplemental submission did not
provide the information identified in the original notice delineating missing
information. The timeframe is tolled in the case of second or subsequent
notices pursuant to the procedures identified in this paragraph (c)(3). Second or
subsequent notices of incompleteness may not specify missing documents or
information that were not delineated in the original notice of incompleteness.
(4) Failure to act. In the event the reviewing State or local government fails to approve
or deny a request seeking approval under this section within the timeframe for review
(accounting for any tolling), the request shall be deemed granted. The deemed grant
does not become effective until the applicant notifies the applicable reviewing authority
in writing after the review period has expired (accounting for any tolling) that the
application has been deemed granted.
(5) Remedies. Applicants and reviewing authorities may bring claims related to Section
6409(a) to any court of competent jurisdiction.
Attachment C
Changes in Processing Special Exceptions
The FCC has imposed time limits (the shot clock) for the review of all types of wireless applications.
Meeting some of these deadlines is problematic. Staff believes that a modified process will remove
duplicative procedures while preserving the existing adjacent owner notification processes and retain
the Board’s ability to review requests. Should the Board choose to expand the notification process in
the future the recommended procedures below will accommodate any change.
Below are two scenarios for processing applications under the existing ordinance. The County is limited
to a 90 day review period by the Shot Clock.
Scenario Outline of Processing of a Substantial Change to Tier II Facility involving a Special Exception
New equipment is proposed on a Tier II facility that does not meet the design standards of the
ordinance. (The antenna size or standoff from the tower exceeds the ordinance requirements.) This
requires the change to be processed as a Tier II application with a Special Exception. The Tier II process
is administrative and includes notice to abutting owners. Staff approves the Tier II application
administratively and the Special Exception is presented to the Board of Supervisors on the consent
agenda. (If staff is recommending denial of the Special Exception the request first goes to the Planning
Commission before being placed on the Board’s regular agenda.) The County is able to process these
requests within the 90 day time period.
Scenario Outline of Processing of a Substantial Change to a Tier III Facility involving a Special Exception.
New equipment is proposed on a Tier III facility that does not meet the design standards of the
ordinance. (The antenna size or standoff from the tower exceeds the ordinance requirements.) This
requires the change to be processed as a Tier III application with a Special Exception. The Tier III process
requires a Special Use Permit. This requires the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors to hold
public hearings on the Special Use Permit. The review of the project must be completed prior to the
Planning Commission meeting. This meeting generally has to occur not more than 60 days after
submittal in order for the Board of Supervisors meeting to occur before the 90 day Shot Clock runs out.
This results in less time being available for the review of a Tier III Facility than is available for a Tier II
Facility because the review must really be completed within 60 days for the Planning Commission
meeting to occur.
Concerns of Existing Processes and Recommendations for Amendment
As can be seen by the above information the County actually has less time to review the more
complicated types of applications. The review of Tier II applications is redundant with staff
administratively acting on something that the Board will also act on.
Staff regularly meets with applicants to discuss the review process for the various applications they will
be making. One service provider has contacted the County with a proposal to update between 40 and
50 sites in the next two years. With all the conversations the County has had with the various service
providers it is expected that over 100 collocation requests may be submitted within the next six months
alone. Under the existing ordinance procedures the majority will have to be processed as Tier II or Tier
III applications, mostly due to the request by the applicant for special exceptions to the antenna design
standards. The application fee to process 40 applications as Tier II projects would be $72,800 (not
including notice fees which would be a minimum of an additional $8,000). The application fee to
process 40 applications as a Tier III would be $80,000 (not including notice fees which would be a
minimum of an additional $8,000 and the fee to advertising which is determined at the time the
application is processed.) While the revenue from these applications would appear to be beneficial to
the County, the fact is that the fees do not cover the County’s review cost. Processing this large a
number of applications represents a substantial burden on County resources. It is important to note
that these numbers are for only one service provider.
This processing is extensive and requires substantial and significant resource allocation. If the only
change is one that requires a special exception it would seem appropriate to only review that change
and not review the entire application as if it were a new facility. The County can still require the
necessary information to perform the review. In addition changing the process to make more efficient
use of the special exception process will allow the County to meet the “shot clock” without the use of
excessive County resources. The proposed amendments would require that requests for special
exceptions include a notice to abutting owners and would retain review by the Board of Supervisors.
The redundant review of the request as a Tier II or Tier III request is eliminated. The County will still be
able to consider all of the impacts generated by the proposal. It would just be done under the special
exception process.
Albemarle County Planning Commission
December 2, 2014
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, December 2, 2014, at
6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville,
Virginia.
Members attending were Cal Morris, Chair; Karen Firehock, Richard Randolph, Thomas Loach, Bruce
Dotson, Tim Keller, and Mac Lafferty, Vice Chair. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use Planner for the
University of Virginia was present.
Other officials present were Bill Fritz, Chief of Special Projects; Amanda Burbage, Senior Planner;
Claudette Grant, Senior Planner; Elaine Echols, Principal Planner; Sarah Baldwin, Senior Planner;
Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning; Sharon Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission and Greg
Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney.
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Morris, Chair, called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum.
Work Session
ZTA-2014-XXXX FCC Mandated Revisions to Wireless Regulations
Discussion of methods to implement mandated revisions and adoption of Resolution of Intent. (Bill
Fritz)
Mr. Fritz explained the purpose of this information was to allow us to understand what the impacts of
these regulations are. They are still in the learning stages about what these are. Sarah Baldwin and he
have been doing a lot of work on this and believe they probably are as far ahead if not farther ahead than
any jurisdiction in the country right now on understanding this. Just today they asked a question of the
FCC, which he thinks stumped them. So the FCC does not know the answer so they are still trying to
learn. The reason staff is bringing this to the Planning Commission now is the way that these rules will
go into effect. The rules will go in effect 90 days after it is published. However, it still has not been
published. Staff is expecting it to be published in the next two weeks, which was what the FCC told us
today, which means they have to start working on this. The information provided is what staff thinks right
now are the impacts. However, all staff is asking for today is approval of the resolution of intent so they
can start the advertising process and move it all forward. He was happy to talk to the Commiss ion about
what staff thinks the issue is.
Mr. Morris invited questions for staff.
Mr. Randolph said he understands the reason for the change in the design standards, but he does not
understand going from 90 days on the shot clock down to 60 days . He asked what the logic is in
shrinking the shot clock from 90 to 60 days when the feds have specified 90 days.
Mr. Fritz replied no, that is the new regulation. The new regulation is if you are not a substantial change
they only have 60 days. So there will be three shot clocks of 60 days, 90 days and 150 days. The 150
day shot clock is new construction.
Mr. Keller asked when Ms. Long came to the Commission awhile back with the tilted additions to the
towers is this in effect saying that those tilted additions are going to be by-right.
Mr. Fritz replied based on his understanding right now if the application was approved with conditions that
are specific as to antenna design, mounting standards and heights that those conditions are intended to
be a method of minimizing the impact of the facility. In other words, it is a concealment technique and
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – DECEMBER 2, 2014
Partial Draft Minutes ZTA-2014-XXX Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes – Submit to PC 3-9-2015
2
they would not be able to do that if it violated the original conditions. That is where they think they are
with this. So if they have an application that is prior to the mid to late 1990’s where they did not have
those kinds of conditions, yes they would be able to do additions to the tower that was 20’ off. It is in the
staff report. However, if they had something from the late 1990’s to about 2004 most but not all of those
are probably going to have some sort of condition that is getting towards minimizing the visual impact
concealment. Therefore, they would not be able to do a down tilt because it does not meet our design
standards since it would not meet that. Most everything after 2004, especially for the Tier II, is going to
have very specific standards. That is staff’s opinion right now based on what they think the FCC is doing.
Mr. Dotson said he mentioned that one provider would be coming forward with 40 to 50 sites to update
them. He asked what does update mean.
Mr. Fritz replied it was to update to new technology taking down an antennae and putting a new antennae
up or co-location. If you take something down and put something back up that is a co-location as is
adding a second set of antennas. He pointed out they are going to get a bunch of these.
Mr. Dotson asked if what he is saying is that is not an insurmountable workload that would be handled by
staff.
Mr. Fritz replied they are saying that we need to make some changes or it is going to be a major problem
given the shot clock and so forth. However, it can be done. They believe that staff can develop some
techniques and application forms so they know if it is or is not a s ubstantial change so they can move the
ones that are not a substantial change through the process very rapidly. For those that are a substantial
change they still have that 90 day shot clock they have to meet. If it is a Tier III it is a very difficult high
bar to meet. They have to receive the application, do the review, schedule it for a Planning Commission
meeting and then schedule it for a Board of Supervisors meeting all within 90 days. The Tier III is a
substantial change. The problem there is because of our lead times for preparing the ads and everything
the actual time staff has to review it is actually less than for a lower tier. So they need to move some
things around. Otherwise, it is going to be a real problem.
Mr. Dotson noted joint hearings are a possibility, but they don’t need to get into that now.
Mr. Fritz said it is just very difficult to schedule. Staff thinks it can be done and still preserve the spirit that
both the Commission and the Board have had where the public can still know of the applic ation, there is
still adequate time to review it and there is still an opportunity for those who are interested to participate in
the review process and have comment.
Mr. Keller suggested they ask Ms. Long to comment since they have had th e discussion about these tilted
larger add on pieces and he would like to hear the industry’s rebuttal. If the Commission has a concern
about that, then what is the process? He asked if this has been published.
Mr. Fritz pointed out this has not been published in the federal regulations yet.
Mr. Kamptner noted once it is published they will have 90 days to implement the regulations. The
regulations establish the minimum that localities are going to have to consider. Therefore, they can be
more lenient than what the FCC has mandated if they choose to. However, they can’t be more stringent.
Mr. Keller noted that is why he thinks it is worth five minutes right now to hear the other side.
Mr. Fritz pointed out there are people who don’t agree.
There being no further questions for staff, Mr. Morris opened the public hearing and invited Ms. Long to
speak.
Valerie Long pointed out she thinks they may have confused her with Lori Schweller who represents
Verizon Wireless. They are good friends and work closely together on many issues including issues
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – DECEMBER 2, 2014
Partial Draft Minutes ZTA-2014-XXX Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes – Submit to PC 3-9-2015
3
affecting the wireless industry. The industry representatives, including our client Jesse Wilmer who is here
from Ntelos tonight, are almost always in general agreement with Mr. Fritz, Ms. Baldwin and their team on
what they are proposing when it comes to Wireless Ordinance revisions. They have been g reat to work
with. Their proposals are reasonable and would do a lot to help facilitate deployment of wireless and
wireless broadband in the community without having an adverse impact on our community. They are
reasonable steps that are more streamlining and clarifying than anything else and would save not only the
industry time and money but significant amounts of time for the industry and staff. Generally speaking
they are always in agreement with them. However, she has some concerns with the way the FCC
regulations have been interpreted with regard to how they would affect Albemarle’s Ordinance. All
through this meeting she was rereading the published regulations, which are really helpful.
Mr. Fritz offered to hand out copies for anyone that wants one.
Ms. Long pointed out that a lot of that is footnotes. However, it is very helpful because they go in great
detail about what regulations and statutes they have imposed in the past; some of the ambiguities and
questions that have come up; what they asked for everybody to give comments on; what the industry
said; what the municipality said and the decision of the FCC on each of these issues and why. The main
concern she has is in the basic concept that the goal is to facilitate a rapid deployment of wireless for the
benefit of the community as a whole. It talks about all the reasons wireless and broadband are so vital to
our community. The absolute fundamental concept is to help co-locations be approved quickly without
unnecessary regulation and to make it cheaper and quicker so that they can be approved. Co-location is
the focus of this particular regulation. There was prior legislation that said as long as you don’t
substantially increase the size of a tower your co-location has to be approved very quickly. However, as
Mr. Fritz has noted in the past it did not really provide a lot of guidance on what does substantially
increase mean. Albemarle County implemented its o wn ordinance a year and a half ago with its
interpretation of what that meant. The FCC has come back and said they need greater certainty for the
industry, local governments and the public on what that means. So they have tightened up what that
means to be substantially increased for size. They have said as long as you don’t trigger a substantial
increase in size in one of these eight ways your co-location qualifies and the locality has to approve it in
60 days. They said, for instance, the reason it is so quick is because they think the scope of the review is
going to be so limited that the local governments won’t need much time to review it.
Ms. Long pointed out they have some specifics on a 10 percent increase in height and that sort of thing,
which she thinks will be controversial because it was one of the things they did not provide a lot of
guidance on. W hen you first look at it is one of the provisions talks about concealment elements. In her
read of the staff report staff has said our towers are all about concealment so any change made to a
tower will be a change to the concealment element. Therefore , it is a substantial increase in size and not
technically a co-location that merits this fast track review. In her reading of the regulations th ere is one
paragraph (200) that talks about it, which she thinks is a broader reading of what was intended. That
talks specifically about, for example, concealment requirements such as requiring the antennas to be
painted to match the structure they are mounted to. That is what they mean and it would also include
fake tree branches. If you have a fake tree and someone wants to co -locate on it, you would have to
make the new antennas being added also look like a fake tree. That is what they were talking about.
They have no problem with that. However, what is happening, as Mr. Fritz alluded to in the staff report, is
Ntelos who is the industry representative have 40 to 50 sites around Albemarle County that were built
over the last 15 years and need to upgrade the antennas. The antennas necessary for 4G deployment
are bigger and thicker than the county ordinance permits just by a little bit. As a result there is a size limit
on an antenna, which is 11.52 square inches. The Ntelos ones are just over 12 and because they are
larger than allowed they are not technically a co-location under the strict reading of the ordinance and not
a Tier 1.
Mr. Fritz pointed out they are a co-location, but a substantial change.
Ms. Long agreed it was a substantial change in the size of the facility, and therefore does not get the
benefit of this fast track. Clearly if you read the summary of the FCC regulations the intent was to allow
the carriers to upgrade their equipment to comply with the demand that they all have. T hey all want our I
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – DECEMBER 2, 2014
Partial Draft Minutes ZTA-2014-XXX Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes – Submit to PC 3-9-2015
4
Pads and I Phones to work. She would ask that staff really look at the intent of the regulations and not try
to be so narrowly restricted of it, particularly that concealment element. She did not think it was intended
to regulate every single aspect of every tower. It was a narrowly crafted reference that she thinks has
been misinterpreted. The impact is not only with these Ntelos applications that have already been
interpreted to not be co-locations that get Tier 1 treatment, but are Tier 3 applications. Ntelos has one
application pending, which is an old lattice tower that they would never approve new today. However, it
was approved years ago in 1994. Ntelos has its antennas on the structure and it merely wants to take the
old antennas off the top and replace them with ones that are slightly larger. However, the antennas are
larger than the allowable size. So that is the first strike against them.
Ms. Long pointed out there is a flush mounting requirement in the ordinance that from the outside face of
the pole to the outside face of the antenna it can’t be greater than 12 inches. So it includes the thickness
of the antenna. However, the newer antennas in order to work for all of our data devices have to be
thicker to meet the new technology. So it is 12 inches plus a few more. So they violate the 12 inch flush
mounting requirement not because they are trying to have it stand out farther, but merely because the
antennas are thicker. As a result of those two reasons that has gone from being a Tier 1 co-location,
which essentially just needs a building permit, to being a Tier 3 special use permit application. Even
under the best of situations the150 day review process is challenging. So multiply that times 40 or 50
and you can see why they are so focused on this issue, and that is just one carrier. AT&T has its own
system upgrades in the works. She knows from talking with Lori Schweller that Verizon does as well. So
they are not trying to skirt the rules or exploit the FCC r egulations in any way, but merely asking them to
take a look and see if there are some reasonable modifications they can make to that aspect of the
ordinance that will enable those minor upgrades to be treated as co -locations and fast tracked as co-
locations as is the intent of the FCC regulations. She wanted the Commission to understand the
background so they could understand the context.
There being no further public comment, Mr. Morris closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the
Planning Commission for discussion and action.
Mr. Fritz noted the answer to the question from Mr. Keller about how to deal with the down tilt or the size
of the antenna would be to change the design standards. Staff took that to the Board in April of this year
as a package of proposed changes and they chose not to pursue that. The item that was just before this
is what the Board moved forward with. The Board would have to give staff direction to proceed with those
other changes that they talked about. They had all sorts of other changes about heights of antennas,
size of antennas, mounting standards and what the definition of a tree top facility is, and those would be
all those kinds of things. It would be reopening the design standards.
Mr. Keller noted for fellow Commissioners that he went to that Supervisors meeting and heard these
presentations. That is why he wanted to bring this up because there are many more pieces to this that he
thinks do relate to our discussion.
Mr. Fritz noted it very complex and there are a lot of moving parts for this.
Mr. Morris noted the Commission’s task right now is to consider adopting a resolution of intent to amend
the Zoning Ordinance.
Motion: Mr. Dotson moved and Mr. Randolph seconded to adopt the resolution of intent to amend the
Zoning Ordinance to conform to the FCC mandated revisions to Wireless Regulations.
The motion passed by a vote of 7:0.
Mr. Morris noted the resolution of intent was adopted unanimously.
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES – DECEMBER 2, 2014
Partial Draft Minutes ZTA-2014-XXX Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes – Submit to PC 3-9-2015
5
WHEREAS, County Code § 18-5.1.40, which is part of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance,
establishes regulations pertaining to personal wireless service facilities; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Communications Commission adopted a Report and Order on October
17, 2014 and released it on October 21, 2014 (FCC 14-153) (the “FCC” and the “Report and Order”); and
WHEREAS, the Report and Order establishes new rules interpreting the FCC’s previous “Shot
Clock” Declaratory Ruling and Section 6409 of the Middle Class Tax Relief Act of 2012; and
WHEREAS, the FCC’s new rules will become effective 90 days after they are published in the
Federal Register; and
WHEREAS, in order to promote the efficient and effective administration of the County’s
regulations pertaining to personal wireless service and similarly regulated facilities, it may be desirable to
amend County Code §§ 18-3.1 and 18-5.1.40 to incorporate the applicable rules from the Report and
Order.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good zoning practices, the Albemarle County Planning Commission hereby adopts a
resolution of intent to consider amending Albemarle County Code §§ 18 -3.1 and 18- 5.1.40 and any other
sections of the Zoning Ordinance deemed to be appropriate, to ac hieve the purposes described herein;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the
zoning text amendment proposed pursuant to this resolution of intent, and make its recommendations to
the Board of Supervisors at the earliest possible date.
* * * * *
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT MINUTES – Submit to PC for approval
1
Albemarle County Planning Commission
March 10, 2015
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, March 10, 2015, at 6:00
p.m., at the County Office Building, Room 241, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Members attending were Cal Morris, Chair; Karen Firehock, Richard Randolph, Thomas Loach, Bruce
Dotson, Tim Keller, and Mac Lafferty, Vice Chair. Mr. Lafferty arrived at 6:03 p.m. Julia Monteith, AICP,
Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia was absent.
Other officials present were Bill Fritz, Chief of Special Projects; Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning;
Sharon Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney.
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Morris, Chair, called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum.
Public Hearing:
ZTA 2015-00001 Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes – The Planning Commission
will hold a public hearing to receive comments on its intent to recommend adoption of an ordinance
amending Secs. 18-3.1, Definitions, and 18-5.1.40, Personal Wireless Service Facilities, of Chapter 18,
Zoning, of the Albemarle County Code. This ordinance would implement recently published federal
regulations (47 C.F.R. § 1.40001) by amending Secs. 18-3.1 and 18-5.1.40 by adding and amending
definitions and regulations pertaining to the “collocation” of “transmission equipment” on “eligible support
structures,” which must be approved by the County within 60 days unless the collocation would result in a
“substantial change” to the physical dimensions of the eligible support structure; one such “substantial
change” arises if the collocation would defeat the “concealment elements of the existing support
structure,” a term defined in this ordinance that is not defined in 47 C.F.R. § 1.40001. This ordinance also
would amend Sec. 18-5.1.40 by renaming and reorganizing the section, updating and clarifying
terminology, and clarifying the time by which applications shall be acted upon. 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 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
(Bill Fritz)
Mr. Fritz explained this is just some of the information staff has had to do research on and distill down into
the report. Staff hopes the staff report has all of the information needed, which includes a very detailed
analysis to the Commission. He was not going to go over that in his presentation although he was happy
to answer any questions. However, he asked the Commission to just keep that in mind.
He presented a PowerPoint presentation on ZTA 2015-00001 Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated
Changes, as follows.
Focus: Only applies to collocations and replacement of equipment. New construction or replacement of
towers is not addressed in the new rules.
Summary of Changes
Allows existing facilities to have new equipment installed without co nditions provided that the
change to the site is not a substantial change.
Requires the County to approve the request in 60 days.
Cannot condition approvals
The easiest way to describe the rule made by the FCC is that it allows new equipment to be inst alled by
right and with limited review. There are some limitations on the installation of new equipment , which he
will discuss later in the presentation.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
2
Scope of Amendment
Terms are defined.
Establishes procedures for review.
Revises process for collocations involving special exceptions.
Reorganizes ordinance for ease of use.
Most of the changes to the ordinance are due to reorganization. With the implementation of the recent
FCC rulemaking we will now have four (4) types of facilities. Exempt Collocations, Tier I (which is our
current term for collocations. This will now be non -exempt collocations), Tier II and Tier III. No changes
in the Tier I, II or III is occurring other than carving out exempt collocations from the Tier I category. The
Tier I are the substantial changes. Tier II and Tier III are new construction. This presentation will cover
each of the above items except for the reorganization which is solely done as a means to ease the use of
the ordinance by the public, industry and the County.
Substantial Change Definition
• Allows by-right increase in tower height.
• Allows by-right additional antenna to be added.
• Allows by-right additional ground equipment.
• Does not allow excavation or deployment outside of lease area.
• Does not allow changes that defeat concealment elements.
• Does not allow violation of some conditions of the facilities original approval.
What you see here is a summary of the FCC’s definition of a substantial change. A few years ago the
Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 was adopted. That law mandated that the County
shall approve and may not deny collocations that were not substantial changes. However , the law did not
define substantial change so the County adopted its own definition. The FCC has adopted a definition of
Substantial Change and the County’s definition is not consistent with the FCC’s definition. For example,
the County’s existing ordinance states that a change to a facility within 500 feet of a dwelling is a
substantial change. That provision is not permitted by the FCC definition.
The FCC does not define what a concealment element is.
Increase – 10% or 20 feet. Whichever is greater.
Allows antenna to be up to 20 feet from the face of the tower.
Allows up to 4 additional four cabinets.
Activity outside the lease area is not permitted.
Defeat of concealment is not permitted.
Certain conditions – mostly building code related and setback related imposed on the original
approval cannot be defeated.
Concealment Elements
On page 2 of Attachment D there is an extensive discussion on how staff developed the definition of what
constitutes a concealment element.
There is no FCC or Congressional definition that exists.
Staff has done a lot of research as to how that should be defined. We define it as any condition
of a previous approval that serves to conceal the facility is a concealment element.
The industry has objected to the proposed language of the ordinance. The Commission has a
letter from Lori Schweller that he was sure they are going to talk about.
This is the impact of what these changes are:
• Facilities approved since 2004 have concealment techniques such as height and antenna design
that will still have to be met. This ordinance will have no impact on tho se facilities. Any changes
to them will either have to meet the design standards or will be substantial changes, which means
the Board of Supervisors can review those.
• Some facilities approved in the late 1990s to 2004 have conditions that are concealme nt
techniques which will still have to be met. They will have to be reviewed on a case by case basis.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
3
• Facilities approved prior to the late 1990s will most likely be able to be increased in height and
have larger antenna arrays installed without having to meet the design standards.
Procedures for Review
• The County must approve and cannot deny requests that are not a substantial change.
• Must determine if application is complete within 30 days.
– Application information is limited.
– If deemed incomplete must state specifically why.
• Must act on requests that are not a substantial change within 60 days.
• If action does not occur within 60 days the application is deemed approved.
The provisions for processing exempt collocation are taken directly from the FCC and included into the
ordinance. What you see here are the highlights of the process for exempt collocations. The
implementation of these provisions will require the prioritization of exempt collocations. Other types of
review may be delayed if large volumes of exempt collocations are received simultaneously. The County
does anticipate a large volume of applications over the next six months. However, at this time we do not
know how many of those will be exempt collocations and how many will be Tier I app lications. It is
important to note the FCC rule states that applications for exempt collocations that are not acted on within
60 days are deemed approved. This rule applies only to exempt collocations. No other types of
applications are deemed approved if the shot clock is not met.
So what they are proposing is a change in how they process special exceptions. They are proposing the
following:
Staff proposes to process all special exceptions as Tier I applications.
This preserves notice to abutting owners.
It preserves the discretion of the Board.
It insures the County meets Shot Clock.
It also is a much more efficient use of County resources.
Tier II Site with Special Exceptions:
In a slide Mr. Fritz pointed out an existing Tier II facility on Avon Street. If new antenna were proposed for
this tower that exceeded the antenna size limit or antenna standoff it would not be eligible to be
processed as an exempt collocation. Under the current ordinance the application would be processed not
as a Tier I building permit but as a Tier II because a special exception is proposed. This requires notice
to abutting owners, administrative review of the tower by staff , and review of the special exception by the
Board. Staff will always approve the tower portion of the review because the facility exists and meets all
requirements placed on it. (If it didn’t meet the requirements it would be in violation and would have to be
corrected.) The Board would hear the special exception for the antenna size and mounting st andards and
either approve or deny the request. Staff ’s proposal is to eliminate the administrative tower review and
retain the Tier I with special exception review. This is a much more efficient use of County resources and
retains all notice requirements. In other words, review the antenna not the tower.
Tier III Sites with Special Exceptions
In a slide Mr. Fritz pointed out a Tier III facility, which was more than 10 feet taller than the nearby trees.
The prior photo would also qualify as a Tier III if it were in an avoidance area such as a Historic District.
In other words, they would have a lot of these. Just as before antenna are proposed that require a
special exception. However, the request is processed as a Tier III which requires a special us e permit. It
is important to note that the County has only 90 days to review the request because it is a collocation.
This requires the Planning Commission and Board meetings to be accelerated. In order to make a
Planning Commission meeting early enough to allow the Board to act within 90 days the report for the
special exception must be prepared quickly. Ironically, due to the lead times for report preparation, the
time available for this type of review which is supposed to be the more complex is less than what is
available in the prior example. Meeting the shot clock requirements for this type of review is extremely
difficult and requires excessive demands on resources. Staff recommends this be processed as a Tier I
with a special exception just like in the prior example. Again, review the antenna not the tower.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
4
Just to give some additional information as something to think about staff is expecting a lot of applications
in the near future. They have already seen an upsurge in the number of applications. They do collect
fees. However, the fees do not actually cover our cost of review. So this is actually a substantial burden
to the county. By streamlining the process and going with just the Tier I with the special exception will be
a much more efficient use of County resources.
Compliance with Shot Clock for collocations that are a substantial change:
• One provider has estimated 40-50 applications in the next two years.
• Fees associated with these applications could be more than $80,000.
• Fees collected do not cover the cost to review.
• Amendments to the process preserve public input, reduce County review cost and allow
compliance with the Shot Clock.
Staff Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission forward ZTA 2015-01 to the Board of Supervisors with a
recommendation of approval.
Mr. Morris invited questions for staff.
Mr. Lafferty asked can an applicant have more than one application at the same time.
Mr. Fritz replied no, it is locked into place. They cannot increase the tower by 20’ and then later come
back in six months and increase it by 20’ again. It is based on the original approval and our ordinance
and the FCC action make that clear.
Mr. Lafferty asked if he was implying they can only do it once.
Mr. Fritz replied if they had a 100’ tower, as an example, and it was approved ten years ago and they
asked to increase it by 20’ that it would now be a 120’ tower and that would be it. They can’t do an
additional 20’. They can add more antennas to it, but they can’t make it 20’ taller. It goes back to that
original approval.
Mr. Kamptner added or a prior amendment. So if they had come in five years ago and increased it to
105’ that would be the benchmark against which their ability to collocate would be measured.
Mr. Fritz agreed it would be the most recent approval, which was a better way of saying that.
Mr. Morris asked Mr. Lafferty if that answered his question. His interpretation of his question is that if an
applicant came in with four separate towers to have reviewed, then it was four separate applications.
Mr. Fritz pointed out they pay four separate application fees and staff would process that. If they had one
tower it would be entirely conceivable to have multiple applications on one tower. Each company would
file their own application and it gets reviewed to see if it is an exempt or nonexempt collocation.
Mr. Lafferty asked if that was for the tower or the antenna size.
Mr. Fritz replied it is for the antenna structure because if they were building a new tower that would be a
unique application unto itself.
Mr. Lafferty noted he was worried about the punitive process of gradually going up and up.
Mr. Dotson asked staff to explain it further, even though he had said it, that the concern was with the t ime
crunch. Mr. Fritz had made the statement that staff actually has less time on the more complex
applications. He asked did he then say because of that staff is proposing to treat them as special
exceptions rather than special use permits. He asked what he said about that.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
5
Mr. Fritz replied what happens now if someone was proposing to do something on a Tier III tower and it
needs a special exception it kicks the request into the special use permit process. Staff is saying get rid
of the special use permit process and retain the special exception process which will still go to the Board
of Supervisors. It could also in theory come to the Planning Commission if they were recommending
denial of the special exception.
Mr. Dotson asked what in his judgment is lost by processing it as a special exception rather than a special
use permit in terms of the interests and protections.
Mr. Fritz replied they do not believe anything is lost. The proposed ordinance would require notifying the
abutting property owners just like they do for special use permits. There would not be a posting of the
property like there is now or an ad in the paper. Other than that for Tier III they would still be notifying
the abutting owners. They are the ones most directly affec ted by a facility. Staff is proposing that they
retain that. He would also point out that one of the things they know the Board of Supervisors has talked
about was modifying the notification procedures. They may want to increase the number of people who
are notified. They have crafted the ordinance so that if they ever decide to change it to be a distance, for
example, instead of abutting this ordinance can easily accommodate that. They would not have to come
back and really tinker with it because it would be very simple to plug it right in.
Mr. Randolph said he had several questions that are based on a communication received today from a
resident in Ms. Palmer’s district. First, regarding essentially timing she references the County staff,
“generating the state of emergency mentality.” His understanding, however, is given that April 8 is the
date of effectiveness with the federal law that the desire on the part of the County is to try to be consistent
in terms of County ordinance with federal law prior to that law coming into effect. He asked if that is
correct.
Mr. Fritz replied if they do not adopt this on April 8 the rule comes into effect and if they don’t adopt the
ordinance they don’t really have the tools to be able to be compliant with the rule the FCC has made.
Mr. Kamptner pointed out they still have to process the applications under the FCC regulations, but there
are some gaps in the regulations. One is the concealment elements. However, the others are just the
tools that they are using to make sure that they can comply with the shot clock requirements.
Mr. Fritz said that it is important to note for the collocation they have 90 days to review those for non-
exempt collocations, but only 60 days for exempt collocations. So they are not saying the sky is falling
because it is not falling. However, m eeting the shot clock is a difficult thing to do now. With these new
rules it will be even more difficult if they don’t have the tools to do it.
Mr. Randolph noted that was another reason to create time for the staff to be dedicated to those
applications which are subject to the 60 day time horizon. The second question is there was a
recommendation by the writer that a 500’ requirement should apply for every single cell tower. He asked
is that realistic and possible, or is that consistent with federal law.
Mr. Kamptner pointed out the 500’ requirement is what they have in the substantial change definition.
Mr. Fritz replied that they talked to the Board of Supervisors in April, 2014 about potential changes to the
ordinance, and that was one of the things that they could certainly do. However, that has no impact on
what they are talking about today. Staff has recommended, the public has recommended and the Board
and the Commission have talked about changes in our existing regulations for the construction and
design of new facilities. They still encourage the Board of Supervisors to have those conversations. Not
having facilities constructed within 500’ of a dwelling could be something the Board could consider.
Today they have a provision that says if you are making a change to a facility that is within 500’ of a
dwelling that is considered a substantial change. However, they can no longer do that. The location of a
dwelling in relationship to the tower has no bearing on whether or not it is or is not an exempt collocation.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
6
Mr. Randolph thanked staff for that clarification. The third argument this writer makes is that, “regulations
shall require the establishment, maintenance inspection and verification of effectiveness of tree cover
concealment prior to permitting any upgrades or maintenance of the tower.” Is that consistent with
federal law and existing County practice?
Mr. Fritz replied, again, that is something that they actually tried to talk with the Board of Supervisors back
in April about how to deal with tree preservation areas in relation to the construction of new facilities.
That would be something the Board of Supervisors would more appropriately take up in another zoning
text amendment about design. That is really dealing with new construction, which this does not address
at all.
Mr. Kamptner asked to go back to the 500’ setback from dwellings. Part of the FCC’s goal in these new
regulations is to expand the deployment of transmission equipment to include not only the personal
wireless type of equipment but also all other types of both licensed and unlicensed wireless related
services including broadband. As the technology changes and what the communication provider
expectations or obligations are, they have to under the license eliminate or address significant gaps in
coverage. That is kind of a moving target. Ten years from now what is considered a significant gap in
coverage will likely be significantly different than what is a significant gap now. W hen they had the
lawsuit on the Dudley Mountain tower in 2000 what a significant gap was different. The standard is
changing and 500’ may be unacceptable in two years.
Mr. Fritz pointed out they also have to analyze whether or not it results in a prohibition of service because
of the lack of area to put facilities. So they can certainly review it, but he did not know if it would pass. It
is a conversation for a different meeting.
Mr. Randolph thanked staff for answering those questions.
Mr. Loach said on the number of applications that they expect is there any provision in the law or has staff
made arrangements with the vendors so that these applications don’t come in at one time. There is
physically no way staff would be able to handle a large number of applications within the timeframe.
Mr. Fritz replied staff specifically asked that question of the FCC and were told they cannot do that. He
replied staff meets and works with the industry representatives regularl y, which is how they know how
many applications are coming in. Staff believes the way the process works for both the industry and staff
that they can only file so many applications. Staff thinks they can keep up with that because they have the
resources to do it because some staff has been moved around.
There being no further questions, Mr. Morris opened the public hearing for applicant and public comment.
He invited the applicant to address the Commission.
Lori H. Schweller, attorney with LeClair R yan representing Verizon Wireless, presented a PowerPoint
presentation entitled Albemarle County Planning Commission
ZTA to Implement FCC 15-153 - March 10, 2015 - Verizon Wireless Comments.
They appreciate the Commission devoting this time to this issue. They look forward to talking more about
this issue and taking questions. She would skip through the presentation because Mr. Fritz has already
covered a lot of it and they have been inundated with information. So they already know about the
Spectrum Act, which is this portion of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 that they
have been talking about for the past 2 ½ years. They already know what that does . The purpose of the
Spectrum Act is to promote the deployment and network facilities needed to provide broadband wireless
services to U.S. citizens. That is why it is very important to the industry.
Spectrum Act §6409(a)*
“Notwithstanding Section 704 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 [codified as 47 U.S.C. Sec.
332(c)(7)] or any other provision of law, a State or local government may not deny and shall approve, any
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
7
eligible facilities request for a modification of an existing wireless tower or base station that does not
substantially change the physical dimension of such tower or base station.”
* Aka Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012, codified in the Communications Act as 47
U.S.C. §1455(a).
Since they have been listening to their applications for many years the Commission knows they are
constantly updating equipment.
Collocations and Modifications
• Add new antennas
• Replace antennas
• Add equipment boxes to serve new antennas
• Small cells and DAS nationwide (So tens of thousands of new small cells come in.)
That is why this ruling which clarifies substantial change, clarifies the baseline for measuring substantial
change and adds affix dating to the approval period is extremely important in order to make all of this
happen. It will make their lives a whole easier they are hoping.
FCC Ruling 14-153 published January 8, 2015 (effective April 8, 2015)*
This ruling clarifies:
Substantial Change Defined
Baseline for measuring substantial change
60-Day Deemed Approval Period
Shot Clock applies to Small Cells
*47 CFR Parts 1 and 17 (“Acceleration of Broadband Deplo yment by Improving Wireless Facilities Siting
Policies”) codifying Report and Order FCC 14-153 adopted 10/17/2014 by the FCC
These are the things that constitute substantial change in the physical dimension of a wireless
tower or a base station.
(1) For towers outside of public rights-of-way, it increases the height of the tower by more than 10%,
or by the height of one additional antenna array with separation from the nearest existing antenna
not to exceed twenty feet, whichever is greater;
(2) For those towers in the rights-of-way and for all base stations, it increases the height of the tower
or base station by more than 10% or 10 feet, whichever is greater;
(3) For towers outside of public rights-of-way, it protrudes from the edge of the tower more than
twenty feet, or more than the width of the tower structure at the level of the appurtenance,
whichever is great
(4) For those towers in the rights-of-way and for all base stations, it protrudes from the edge of the
structure more than six feet ….
(5) it involves installation of more than the standard number of new equipment cabinets for the
technology involved, but not to exceed four cabinets;
(6) it entails any excavation or deployment outside the current site of the tower or base station;
(7) it would defeat the existing concealm ent elements of the tower or base station; or
(8) it does not comply with conditions associated with the prior approval of construction or
modification of the tower or base station unless the non-compliance is due to an increase in
height, increase in width, addition of cabinets, or new excavation that does not exceed the
corresponding “substantial change” thresholds identified above.
She wants to focus today on the one that would defeat the existing concealment elements of the tower or
the base station. They do interpret this differently from the County’s definition in the proposed ordinance.
What the FCC ruling says is that facilities designed to look like something other than a wireless tower or
base station by use of either disguise or concealment or conc ealment elements.” So in order to
understand your review of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance about what these terms mean they
looked at the Albemarle County Wireless Policy. That policy not only informs the zoning ordinance, but
the zoning ordinance reflects it and is meant to be the implementation of that policy. So these terms are
defined exactly to be consistent with the FCC’s ruling.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
8
Personal Wireless Service Facilities Policy
Albemarle County Department of Planning and Community Development, December, 2000
Disguise:
“A personal wireless service facility designed to appear to be something other than a personal
wireless service facility” p.13).
“Changing the appearance of a personal wireless service facility to appear to be something it isn’t
is considered disguise”
(p. 60).
“Concealment Elements” =
“facilities designed to look like something other than a wireless tower or base station by use of
either disguise or complete concealment”
She provided a slide with an example of a Concealment Element that she would call Disguise. It is what
they call a “monopine” and is at our Buckingham Circle site at the Department of Forestry.
Again, the definition of concealment in the County’s Wireless Policy is the same as the one in the ruling.
Concealment is to –
“To enclose a personal wireless service facility within a natural or man-made feature resulting in
the facility being either invisible or made part of the feature enclosing it” (p. 12).
“the complete enclosure of a personal wireless service facility so it can’t be seen is considered
concealment” (p. 60).
An example, as shown in a photo, was in the City of Charlottesville on the Omni. They have a brick
containment item on top of the building to contain all antennas. Again, that cupola contains antennas and
other equipment. So they think the County’s definition is not consistent with the Wireless Policy nor is it
consistent with the FCC. She thinks one of the most important ways to show that is true is to get to the
point. She would say briefly that as they all know the policy deals with all of these things:
Location
Siting
Design
• It distinguishes between Camouflage vs. Concealment or Disguise
The County is not trying to say that they are talking about location because that has to do with new
towers. However, the County is saying that every other element that they look at for wireless facilities ,
every aspect of siting and every aspect of design is a concealment element. It includes every single one.
So that completely undermines this ruling and does not allow the County to take advantage of Spectrum
Act and the Ruling Clarification of that Act. She thinks they can best see that when they look at a very
specific point that is made in the ruling when localities said what about condi tions attached to special use
permits. The answer to that question was yes, violation of conditions attached to special use permits
would be a substantial change to the dimensions unless they are talking about the things that they have
been talking about, height, width, and number of cabinets on the ground. That is a big issue since that is
everything that they are talking about here. So the County’s all encompassing concealment elements
definition simply does not make sense legalistically.
Mr. Morris asked Ms. Schweller to wrap it up and they could cover it under questions.
Ms. Schweller said she would wrap it up now. She offered some great photographs if they want some
examples of what this ordinance can do for you.
Mr. Morris invited questions for Ms. Schweller.
Mr. Keller asked Ms. Schweller to show the pictures to the Commission.
Ms. Schweller reviewed the photographs in slides. The first photograph was an example of an existing
Comcast tower where they added some antenna. They added flush mounted antenna in order to comply
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
9
with the current design standards. They think that the aspect of flush mounting, the aspect of 1,152
square inch face of antenna, and the aspect of 12 inches standoff from the tower that none of those make
sense as a concealment element for this tower. Under the ordinance the way it is written they would have
to get a special exception, just like they had to get a special use permit for that, and that does not really
make sense. Those are the types of things that should be approved by right under this ordinance.
Similarly, they did a tower flush mount, which is not a good idea. However, again those are clearly not
concealment elements.
Ms. Schweller noted the next photo was taken in Key West, which was an existing site that was a Tier II
because it was 10’ above the reference tree. So for this site there are no conditions since there is no
special use permit. The point that she made earlier about conditions does not apply. Obviously, they think
they should be able to extend this up or sideways because based on the definition in the Wireless
Ordinance a treetop by definition is camouflage.
Mr. Loach questioned what Ms. Schweller called the one in Buckingham Circle because he thought she
had it reversed from what he would say. Camouflage is what they made of that tower by the Department
of Forestry that made it look like it got in a 1950’s horror movie and it got zapped by nuclear radiation and
became a tree. That to him is camouflage. What they have been trying t o do is conceal these as much
as possible as a visual effect.
Ms. Schweller said she understands his point and his use of the language as was used in the staff report.
However, she was using the definitions in the FCC’s ruling and the definitions in the Albemarle’s Wireless
Policy. Those terms are defined twice in the policy and those definitions in the policy perfectly match the
definitions from the FCC ruling as she reads it. So concealment in the ruling and in the policy means to
make something look like something else, which is the type of concealment they call disguise, or to
completely conceal it in something that looks like an artificial structure like an architectural element or a
natural feature like a tree. So that is concealment.
Mr. Loach said he just doesn’t see how they can define this as camouflage.
Ms. Schweller noted the Wireless Policy defines it as camouflage, she doesn’t. The next slides show the
distinction first with a Tier II whereas the next slide describes the tower at Piedmont College which was a
Tier III that was 14’ above the reference tree. As they can see on the approval letter one of the conditions
of approval is that it can’t be more than the height of 90’. However, that is not permitted because they
cannot use a condition as a reason for not complying with the ruling. So what would actually happen is
they could increase it 10 percent or the height of adding an additional antenna array. So they would need
10’ separation. They have an 8’ antenna. Therefore, all th at would happen is that it would be 102’. That
is what would happen if the ruling is allowed to work its magic the way that it should. It is not going to be
a significant dramatic change to what they have now.
Mr. Morris invited the next speaker.
Ms. Schweller pointed out our RF Engineer with Verizon Wireless, Frank Mayer, is present. She wanted
to preface his remark by saying that if this ordinance is adopted it is going to be very important to all of us
to change the perimeters of design. So Mr. Mayer is going to talk in response to a request from Mr.
Kamptner about what they actually use at Verizon Wireless.
Frank Mayer, RF Engineer with Verizon Wireless, presented a PowerPoint presentation.
Being in the antenna design industry since 1996 he could say what they did in 1996 is very different
from what they do now. They are doing a lot more with the towers and trying to get more
technologies out on the towers. That is so they can provide services like this, video over the air,
wireless, broadband services and that kind of thing.
When designing in this area one of the restrictions about setting flush mount antenna is they can only
put so many technologies on one antenna. They currently have four different licenses in this market:
AWS, PCS, 850 and 700. In order to put four different technologies in one antenna it degrades the
effectiveness of the antenna, which would make it untenably wide for any in the way the ordinance is
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
10
written. So they have to use multiple antennas that require stacking them vertically. When they only
have 10’ above a tree and two 8’ antennas it means that one-half of the array is going to be down in
the trees. He described a three sector mount with two antennas per sector, which is kind of a low
profile. They have used this in other counties. That would allow us to do two antennas side by side
essentially bringing those two radiation centers to one. That is the same idea.
Another change in the industry recently is moving towards r emote radio heads. Essentially the idea is
they are putting the transmitting power at the top of the tower. They are not putting it at the base of
the tower anymore. This is beneficial because it eliminates the loss and signal that you get in the
coaxial line. At 120’ to 130’ run of the coaxial basically two-thirds of your power is lost in the
transmitting up or transmitting back down. That is important on the way up, but it is actually more
important on the way back down. The antennas are picking up a very faint signal . The closer you can
put that receiver to the antenna the more effective the radio is.
The diagram shows that right now they are limited to being just 12 inches off from the face of the
antenna to the face of the tower. In order to put a mount on the antenna if you have a 7 inch
antenna, a 3 inch pipe mount and then the bracket of the mount itself they run out of room pretty
quickly. The advantage of the radio heads is that they can mount them behind the antennas or inside
the same array. They certainly could not do that with this kind of standoff.
The next diagram shows the kind of design they ran into at a couple of sites in the area where just the
mere act of adding tilt to an antenna pushed it away from the tower enough that it would not be in
compliance with the Code. They tilt antennas in order to control the signal and keep the site so it
does not interfere with other sites. They also have antennas with electrical tilts inside. The ideal
environment for a radio is to be just one receiver with one tower. So they try to control the signal so it
does not interfere with each other. They do that with the horizontal beam width and the vertical beam
width. The horizontal beam width is one reason the antennas have gotten wider. A wider antenna
focuses the antenna signal in more directly. It is the same thing with the vertical antenna in that they
use vertical height. A 3-foot antenna has a very broad vertical beam. An 8-foot antenna will have a 7
to 8 degree vertical beam width so they can control that signal and k eep it from getting into the other
sites.
They use different antennas in different environments. They can’t just have one size fits all. In a rural
environment they may need more gain. In an urban environment they may need less gain where they
don’t want to have as much noise in the system. Whereas, a rural site they want the antenna to be
bigger and pick up more having more resolution on the up signal; whereas, in the urban environment
they can get away with smaller antennas in a lot of cases. Somet imes they still need a larger
antenna just to keep the tilt. But, different antennas are needed for different environments.
Our design criteria are to keep the noise in the system down, especially with the LTE signal and the
more date intensive signal. The more noise you have to overcome the more noise the handset
receives and the slower the transmission rates are. So every site they put in they have to tune the
sites around it to accommodate that so they keep the noise in the system as low as possible and that
handset is just seeing one transmitter.
The last item is just some of the newer antennas they are using. These are multi -technology
antennas. They are trying to put as much as they can into one. They have the electrical tilt capability,
but in order to use a wider beam width antenna they are going to be failing a lot of the 1,152 square
inch maximum. He pointed out an example of an antenna they have in a lot of areas. This antenna
does not have an electrical tilt, but it is one of the antennas where they run into not only the service
area but every time they try to tilt it they end up it being more than 12 inches from the base.
Mr. Morris invited questions.
Mr. Lafferty said there was a mention of a single cell antenna, which is a new type com ing along.
Mr. Mayer replied that some of the newer antennas they have, as shown in the slides, are where they are
combining both low band and high band signals. So they will put a 700 and our AWS signal in the same
antenna. That way they can put a little more in less area. However, if they are putting more elements in
that antenna the antenna is going to expand and be bigger.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
11
Mr. Dotson said this is very helpful in terms of understanding some of the new technologies and the
direction the industry is moving. He asked how this directly pertains to the proposed ordinance language
in front of us. It strikes him that it pertains more to the ongoing discussion at the Board of Supervisors
that they would be having about our basic requirements.
Mr. Mayer replied that he would feel that as far as the antennas changes it is a substantial change.
Mr. Fritz pointed out the answers to the questions. Right now the antenna size is limited to 1,152 square
inches. If that was increased say to 1,300 square inches there would then be fewer collocations that are
substantial changes meaning that there would be more exempt collocations.
Mr. Dotson said there is nothing in this proposed language that addresses changing the 1,152 square
inches.
Mr. Fritz replied no. However, they were talking about the 500 foot regulation. If there was a subsequent
discussion that would change the design standards these ordinance amendments would mean there
would be more exempt collocations versus non-exempt.
Mr. Kamptner said in presenting this to the Commission and Board they recognize the industry’s concern
or desire to increase or change some of the standards that they have in play due to the technology
changes. In the time frame they had to address the execution g iven the time frame to address the FCC’s
mandated changes they will precede with that. They thought it was important for the Commission to hear
this at this stage about what is going on because they expect it likely will be right after this text
amendment they will be asked to work on the next portion. They have to do phasing.
Mr. Loach asked as far as technologies does that actually boil down to bigger, taller and more visible.
Mr. Mayer replied in order to put two antennas side by side they need a se parate array. If they want to
stack them vertically on a collocated tower, yes, then that is going to expand them vertically.
Mr. Loach said the thing about concealment and camouflage is sort of crisp. However, he thinks what it
boils down to is what the Board is going to deal with, which is that big subject how much taller, how much
bigger, and much more visible are you going to accept. He thinks in many cases in the growth areas
where there are more opportunities for what he would consider camouflage that they can include the type
of technology. The real sticking point is going to be the rural areas and what they have tried to do in the
past versus the technology that is here and technology in the future with more demands for that with
higher visibility.
Mr. Morris invited other public comment.
Valerie Long, attorney with Williams Mullen, echoed the comments made by Lori Schweller and her
collegiate with regard to suggestions and proposals and the industry technology challenges. The clients
they represent have nearly identical challenges in all respects. Joining her tonight is a number of
representatives from Ntelos Wireless.
As they know they were here two weeks ago with an application at Piney Mountain, which is an
example of what is coming. They have several other applications already either about to be
submitted or already submitted. There are many more underway. Their goal is to upgrade their
antennas on existing sites to provide better service to their customers. The two main limitations
under the current ordinance that will exist and continue under this draft is the size limit on the
antennas of 1,152 square inches and the 12 inch flush mounting definition. This draft goes a long
way in helping in the sense that application the Commission saw a few weeks ago at Piney Mountain,
which requires a special use permit in a Tier III application and takes at a minimum six months.
Under this draft it would instead become a Tier I with a special exception. However, that special
exception still requires the staff to write a staff report, notices to be sent to all the abutting owners,
and the staff report to be placed on the consent agenda for the Board of Supervisors. It could always
get pulled and is always going to take time to get on the Board agenda.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
12
What they have proposed that would solve most of Ntelos goals would be two simple modifications to
this draft ordinance to increase the size of the antennas from 1,152 to 1,400 and a minor technical
change to the flush mounting requirement. It would not go as far as they would like it, but it would at
least solve our current dilemma. Right now the 12 inches is measured from the pole to the outside
base of the panel antenna. As the Verizon engineer indicated when you have a pole, a 3 inch
mounting bracket and an antenna that use to be maybe 3 inches thick and now are 6 to 8 inches thick
that if you do the math you cannot meet a 12 inch flush mounting requirement no matter how hard
you try. So they have proposed instead of saying measure to the outside face of the panel antenna
to just measure it for now to the inside face of the panel antenna. They are still flush mounting it to
the very best of their abilities under the technology.
That change if made would solve the vast majority of Ntelos’ applications. They would become Tier I
applications with no special exception needed or no staff report needed. They could s ubmit drawings
showing antennas with the old antennas coming off and new antennas going on. It would be done
and should not be a challenge to process those within 60 days. If a special exception is required it is
much better than a special use permit. However, it is still a substantial burden on the County’s
resources not to mention the resources of the applicants. As they have said Ntelos has 50
applications in Albemarle County alone. The vast majority of them are tree top facilities going back in
old tree top facilities replacing the antennas. Some of them are lattice towers. The irony of this
ordinance is that it is going to be far easier to collocate on an old lattice tower that is 150’ to 200’ tall
than it will be on a treetop tower. It is also going to create a tremendous burden on everyone in
having to analysis every application on a case by case basis. Just in the conversations she has had
with staff they have had 3 or 4 different examples each of them requires a case by case review
digging through all the old special use permit condition letters. It is going to be a burden on everyone.
She thinks Lori Schweller used a great expression that she likes, which is allow you to take
advantage of the opportunities that the new FCC regulations offer. It is all about streamlining a
process and making it easier.
The final thing she would end with is just to echo the comments about the c oncealment elements
issue, which she recognized is challenging. They are just taking the definitions that already exist in
the County policy and the FCC regulations, and they note that they match. They f eel staff’s
interpretation of the concealment elements exemption completely turns the FCC regulations on their
head and undermines the entire goal of those regulations, which is rapid deployment of new
technology and ease of collocation. So they fully understand staff is pretty set on their interpretation.
They ask that the Commission give that a consideration going forward and certainly give thought to
our suggestions on the antenna size and flush mounting definitions. She asked the Commission to
feel free to ask questions because there is a trem endous amount of industry experience and
knowledge in this room. They only get three minutes or maybe a few more, but please ask us
questions. Some of us have been working with this ordinance and this technology since before the
County had a policy. They are almost always on the same page with the staff. The concealment
elements issue is really the only time that she knows of in the past few years where they have not
been in complete agreement with the staff. So they have been working very well with them and they
hope to try to just make this process easier, save the County resources, not undermine the
community’s interest, and help further the goal of deployment of collocation.
Stephen W aller, a consultant with Verizon W ireless, said he was picking up on the key word that Mr.
Loach used, visual impact. He would like to make sure when they are considering what is a substantial
change that they also consider what actually is going to be a substantial change o r any type of change
that might increase the visual impact. If they have a site where they have hundreds of feet of backdrop
behind the tower and if they do not even want to increase the height of that tower, maybe they need to go
out and have two antennas at the same height. Someone has to assess whether or not the tower is going
to be no more visible than it was originally and that the visual impacts are not greater. He asked how that
could be a substantial change. It goes back to what Valerie Long and Lori Schweller were talking about
that everything has to be looked at on a case by case basis. However, he thinks there should be some
place for staff to look at a site, even if they are going to larger antennas or going to a wider spread on the
tower. If it is a well hidden site he would not think it would be a s ubstantial change if visual impact is the
main basis on which the policy and the ordinance were built on from the very start.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
13
Mr. Loach asked from a technical perspective on the new technology are the increases in what they need
due to more services or will they also get additional coverage for the areas. Is it one or the other or both?
Mr. Waller replied that he thinks it would be a little bit of both. He suggested that Mr. Mayer could
probably answer the question better. However, it is his understan ding that
from the County’s design aspects they are looking at two c ompeting issues. First, with the flush mounting
they can only get 3 antennas at the highest point on the tower. Then, as Mr. Mayer said, they have to
come down below that and get 3 more antennas. If they have a site and it does not increase visible
impact, then they can go side by side with antennas to get all of the antennas at one height . The level of
service from what services are being provided at the lower array and what services are being provided at
the higher array are going to match pretty much.
Mr. Loach pointed out the reason he asked was because he was looking more to the rural area and how
much of a trade-off are they making to give additional service versus additional coverage. As most
people know they have had problems in the rural areas getting coverage. In his perspective if he is
getting more coverage out of these antennas the trade-off is to be considered versus if he is giving more
services to the people who have it. But, the cost of that is much more visual clutter or maybe less so.
Mr. Waller noted the height restrictions and the flush mounting restrictions hurt the servers at the same
time in different ways. When they have the height restriction the lower set of antennas are going to be in
the trees. It does not matter if they are expanding the level of services to your customers because that
service coming from them is going to be restricted anyway. So if they add 4G to the lower array of
antennas and they are below the tree heights they do not have the option of even providing expanded
services. If there was a creep in height and also an expansion that allowed all the antennas to get above
the trees or even an expansion so you went from 10’ to 20’ above the trees so all the antennas are now
above the trees the coverage area could be expanded. With that top array they probably will expand the
coverage area, but the lower array will still be suffering from not providing the coverage as the height
above the tree line would allow.
Mr. Keller said he had a technical question.
Mr. Morris suggested they call the technical experts back up for questions. First, he asked if there was
any further public comment. There being no further public comment, the public hearing was closed and
the matter before the Planning Commission for discussion and action.
Mr. Keller said he had a general question of whether they are confronting kind of a turf war between fiber
optics and wireless here. They are kind of caught in a technology update issue among these things. His
question to this is when they are talking about the antennas that deliver different services that those
within the rural areas now are being provided by Dish N telos with small target antennas on houses and
broadband delivered at quite high speeds. As he understands that is something that can be located on
some of these towers. He asked if that is a correct question.
Mr. Mayer replied yes, they have a product called Home Fusion which is the same idea as basically a
LTE phone that you put on a little antenna on your house. It will run Wi -Fi, broadband and that kind of
thing.
Mr. Keller asked is that the antenna that is still receiving.
Mr. Mayer replied the transmitting antenna is still from a cell site.
Mr. Keller said it was within the ones that he showed the Commission. So when he was talking about the
multiple function antennas that would be paired with the cell phone.
Mr. Mayer replied yes, and the multiple functions. Right now they have three different technologies on
every tower for CD Meg, LTE and EVO. CD Meg is the old voice signal that they have always had. The
EVO is date over the same. LTE is basically a data compression system which packs more data, which is
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
14
the 4G that everybody is moving to. They can put a lot more data on there. People are moving towards a
system in the future where actually your voice is going to run over that same network. It is like Vonage
that runs on your home with an IP system. Eventually voice is going on t he LT network. In fact, they run
a voice on LT right now. Those technologies all require band width. In order to combine as much band
width as is available which goes across four different spectrums they have band width at 700, 50, PCS
and within the AWS spectrum. They have four different spectrums and in order to go across all of those
they need different antennas to transmit that signal.
Mr. Keller asked size wise if they are not talking about significantly different antennas sizes.
Mr. Mayer noted those are the multi cord antennas that are wider.
Mr. Keller said it still was another couple hundred of square inches.
Mr. Lafferty asked how he would rate the restrictions of Albemarle County compared to others nationally.
Mr. Mayer replied that they are very restrictive and it impairs our ability to bring sites to market quickly. A
site here is substantially needs more lead time than in other counties in the area.
Mr. Lafferty said he was sure that most everyone here would agree they want limited visibility and not to
see many towers. That is a problem because the Commission represents the public. He said he did not
want his grandsons to be driving from Crozet to Charlottesville and it looks like the antenna farm on
Carter’s Mountain. He thinks they are giving up little bits of their way of life when they do this. He just
wondered how much our restrictions drive your technology.
Mr. Mayer noted that nationally everybody is doing that. Our antennas, radio heads and things like that
are national products. They purchase from a national template of stuff. They go shop and find what fits
here. It is not driving new stuff actually.
Mr. Lafferty said to get back to what Mr. Loach’s question was is it expanded coverage they are looking
for or are they expanding functionality.
Mr. Mayer replied unfortunately a lot of times with the increase in functionality they actually lose some of
the footprint or some of the overall coverage. They are doing more with that tower and they don’t want
that tower getting out as far. So they try to contain it more and actually lose a little coverage. So there
will be more towers coming just to replace that coverage.
Mr. Lafferty noted at one time when there were new proposals coming to the Commission they
recommended seeing what the additional antenna would give us as expanded coverage. They looked at
contiguous properties and the physical impacts. However, they have never really gotten the impact on
what the increased coverage would be. He understands the m otive for the cell phone tower for people to
get a foot ahead. He asked are we buying new technology just for the companies to stay slightly ahead
of each other.
Mr. Mayer asked if he remembers the old 3 watt bag car phones. They would have two towers between
here and Richmond and you could talk all day. But, only 40 or 50 persons could do it. Now there are a
100,000 people between these two places that need to talk at the same time. Every site is a substantial
capital investment on our part, too, and they don’t take it lightly just to put something where they can.
They put them in with responsibility.
Mr. Morris thanked Mr. Frank Mayer for his information. He invited questions or further discussion.
Mr. Keller explained because of the public presentation he wondered if staff would desire an opportunity
to respond to any of the comments. He feels they have done an outstanding job in providing materials.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
15
Mr. Fritz noted there was one thing that Mr. Kamptner and he have commented and discussed. A couple
of speakers brought up that our Wireless Policy adopted in 2000 has a definition of concealment , which is
different than the definition of concealment they have proposed in the zoning text amendment before
them today. They would point out that at the time they were doing that in 2000 they were using
concealment in a different way than concealment is being used now. Even the FCC in their own
discussions uses the term concealment and camouflage almost interchangeably. It is the word
concealment that made it into the rule, but in all the supporting documentation about how they developed
the rule they talk concealment and camouflage. Mr. Kamptner uses plain language in what does
concealment mean and what does camouflage mean, which is how they arrived at the definition they
have today. That is why the two definitions are different. They were driving at different things. They often
go to a dictionary and there are multiple definitions for a single term and that is why they have that in this
particular case.
Mr. Morris asked if the concealment element they are talking about the reason why they are reluctant to
go to an expanded area for the antennas up on top.
Mr. Fritz replied no. The increased size of antennas or standoff of antennas standard was developed in
2000. Obviously, and the speakers are all spot on there, the technology has changed radically since then.
At the time that was the best information they had available and the best technologies that were available ,
which is how they came up with the 12’ and 1152 square inches. That is why they are recommending to
the Board of Supervisors a discussion about whether or not it may be appropriate at this time to consider
different standoff or antenna sizes. However, that is not a recommendation that they do anything other
than have the conversation.
Mr. Loach asked that he address Ms. Long’s discussion about just increasing that distance to make it
practically possible. They have already voted on some of these and approved them. He think s they were
sort of no brainers.
Mr. Fritz pointed out that special exceptions are approved all the time by the Board of Supervisors. That
would obviously be one of the things they would point out to the Board of Supervisors in any
consideration for amendment to the ordinance. If the ordinance were to be changed to measure it from
the back instead of to the front it is a relatively small change. Or, they could increase the standoff by
maybe 6” or something like that. As he said before it would move more applications from the non-exempt
into the exempt category, which would not need a special exception.
Mr. Morris invited other discussion.
Mr. Dotson said he had several points. Ms. Schweller makes the point that with a long list of factors that if
they modified concealment that there would not be any exceptions left. As such they would have defined
the problem away. He asked are there aspects or characteristics of towers, antennas, etc. that they have
not included in the list. The list now is antenna size, color, mounting techniques, tower diameter, height
relative to reference trees, etc. This list seems exhaustive, which gives creditability to her fear that there
would not be any exemptions.
Mr. Fritz pointed out that definition was developed by going into the existing provisions of Section 5.1.40
regulations that talk about antenna size and using those exact same terms. Staff pulled those existing
terms forward into the definition of concealment because those provisions are things designed to
minimize the visual impact to conceal or camouflage the facility. That will make it easier for administration
because you can go back and look at Section 5.1.40.
Mr. Kamptner noted the key thing they left out is the provision for the Tier II facilities that they have to do
things to minimize visibility. That is not as objective as the factors that they left in. The other thing that is
worth pointing out is that the other criterion for substantial change, which was the last one on the list, was
that any conditions that are imposed other than those that pertain to the height or width of the facility.
That would just throw out the flush mounting requirement for antennas and the tie into the reference tree.
But, if the other factors that they have listed would also be conditions of approval that would be qualifying
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
16
under that other no substantial change criterion. The list they put into the definition was intended to be
objective because that was something in reading the FCC report was an order in their discussion. The
comment was they were not concerned about subjective review with every application as to whether or
not something was a substantial change.
Mr. Dotson said he did not think they need more definitions since visibility and appearance is how it looks
when you see it versus the question of whether or how much of it you see. That is concealment. It is
whether or how much of it you see and not what does it look like when you see it. So he thinks things like
color and tower diameter are things they are going to see, and may be they are not concealment.
However, he thinks the heart or core of our approach is the height relative to the reference tree and
sighting so as not to skylight the tower. So if there were some compromise reached he thought those two
elements are the key of our ordinance and have to do with whether or how much you would see it. That
is just a comment and an observation. The second point is they allow 10’ above the reference tree.
Because of this new act someone could extend that 20’, which was a 200 percent increase in what they
can see. It is not a ten percent increase. He thought that said they need a provision in there that says if
there is a significant change in the concealment that they need to look at it, not exempt it, and analysis it
carefully. The third point is perhaps to give a little more focus in a few key points to the ordinance and
maybe they should use the word conceal. He would give a specific example, but there might be some
others. There is a section where they are talking about trees in Attachment D, page 10, item f. For
instance it says the caliper and species sentence, the height and caliper sentence, and the height, caliper
and species of any tree that the applicant is relying on to provide screening of the monopole or tower. He
would say that is a place where they should say to conceal or to provide concealment just so that they are
using some of the vocabulary in appropriate places. They might look through the ordinance and see if
there are a few places to stick in that word.
Mr. Dotson said the last thought is Ms. Long said there are two big issues right now being the antenna
size and the mounting method. He was certain that she wants those two items to move forward rapidly.
He was not sure whether she is hoping they could include those in this action or not. His guess is that the
public hearing notice did not make reference to those; and, therefore would have to be readvertised if
they were to include them. The second thought is that he thinks they have said they are going to see
those as part of another zoning text amendment coming to us in a matter of weeks.
Mr. Fritz noted that he did not think it would be a matter of weeks because that presumes that the Board
of Supervisors directs us to do that work. They went to the Board back in April to try to get that direction
and instead they got direction to proceed on a very small portion of a very large package. They would
need the Board to do that or for the Planning Commission to adopt a resolution of intent to work on that.
Mr. Kamptner said if the Commission was inclined they can include those two changes as part of their
recommendation and they can evaluate. Of course, the ordinance as it is advertised when it goes to the
Board of Supervisors will be once again advertised. They always adjust the advertisement to match what
has been recommended.
Ms. Firehock said she was in sympathy with Ms. Long. She has presented to the Commission several
times about the issue about the distance from the pole and the size of the structures. She was not clear
why the Board of Supervisors have declined to take this up. However, she very much would like to see
the Commission make a recommendation that these issues be moved on. It has been about six months
since they first brought this issue up to her attention.
Mr. Fritz said staff would pass that along to the Board.
Mr. Randolph said he would like to make several comments. First, he would like to talk about the
distinctions in here with the concealment/camouflage/tilt. He thinks Mr. Kamptner’s delineation of those
distinctions is outstanding. He thinks it is somewhat embarrassing with other localities including the FCC
who have not bothered given the number of lawyers working for the FCC from some fairly prestigious law
firms that they have not gone ahead and looked at these distinctions with kind of a rigor of decision that
Mr. Kamptner and staff have done. So he would give kudos to all of you. He shares Commissioner
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
17
Loach’s reaction to the depicted image of the tower in which was identified as actually being a case of
camouflage. Having served in the United States Army if that was camouflage and they sent out a group
of soldiers to camouflage the tower and they ended up with that appearance, they would be thrown into
the brig for insubordination and failure to follow through an adequate camouflaging.
Mr. Randolph pointed out the easiest way he can think of camouflaging is to use some analogies which
are in the public domain. Certainly Iran is interested in concealing its reactors , but they hope so far that
they have not camouflaged it. The Swiss are very good at concealing the fighter planes and putting them
underneath mountains. So they are concealed and not camouflaged. He think s the best way to look at it
is to say if they put a B-2 bomber down on a runway that certainly from the air with a case of a satellite
they would be able to see the B-2 bomber. It is a “stealth” bomber, but it is visible from outer space
because it is sitting there on a runway. If they take that same plane and move it into a hangar where you
put it underneath a mountain it is still a “stealth” bomber but now it is concealed. Or, they could take the
plane and put it into a field and proceed to put leaves and tree limbs completely over it and from the air it
might look like part of the field. In that case it would be camouflaged. So he thinks common sense tells
us there are these distinctions between the words. Again, he applauds staff for having put that level of
distinction here before us to see.
Mr. Randolph echoed Commissioner Firehock’s remarks that the Commission needs to make a
recommendation to the Board of Supervisors that the ordinance be looked at regarding several concerns
that he would explain.
- The first thing is the 500’ setback with residential units. He thinks this is something long overdue
because they have been petitioned twice by residents in Bellair. It may just be a single case study,
but in all likelihood as they continue to see additional towers go up if they don’t vigorously and
rigorously try to defend the 500’ setback they are going to have other problems in the future.
- Secondly, he thinks it is absolutely appropriate, again as Commissioner Loach has brought up, that
he did not see why they have not seen antenna design changes from the Board of Supervisors. He
was happy to look at a change that would move from 1,152 to 1,400 square inches because it is
sensible and seems reasonable in the face of it. They should actually have a proposal presented to
the Commission so they can as a package of proposals recommend to the Board of Supervisors.
- Thirdly, the tree cover concealment issue, which was brought up in a letter he cited earlier, and its
effectiveness that needs to be validated prior to permitting any upgrades to a tower. He noted that
trees grow, but towers don’t. So what they need to look at is that perhaps they are in a situation
where the tower needs to be higher and potentially there is also a possibility that if the existing
defined tree that determined the height of the tower went down that perhaps the tower should be
shorter.
- Fourthly, there needs to be a change in the distance under our ordinance of the antenna from the
pole that they should look at. That again is just common sense and long overdue. This will simplify
things for the industry and allow the Commission and staff to focus on the big picture issues that are
out there.
- Finally, he would like to be sure that the ordinance covers the existence of these towers and their
distance from historic structures. He did read a section of the FCC discussion about historic
structures and just wants to be sure that as they move forward and make changes that they keep that
section in the ordinance that historic structures are not going to be jeopardized by a greater ubiquity
of towers. However, he thinks that all of this is something the Planning Commission should
recommend to the Board of Supervisors with our enthusiastic and his hopes unanimous support and
endorsement.
Mr. Morris asked if he would like to put that in a form of a motion.
Mr. Randolph requested to put it in a motion.
Mr. Morris asked if the motion was to forward the proposed ordinance with the changes that have been
outlined, and if that was his recommendation.
Mr. Randolph agreed that was his recommendation.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
18
Mr. Kamptner asked Mr. Randolph to clarify if he wants all of the changes he discussed incorporated into
this ordinance.
Mr. Randolph replied no, not in this ordinance amendment. He wanted to recommend approval of this
ordinance. However, in addition he wants the Board of Supervisors to know that in our discussion they
are making another recommendation. The Board can decide what they want to do, and they might want
to kick it back to the Planning Commission.
Mr. Fritz said he understood the Commission wanted to move forward on those other things.
Mr. Morris said the Board of Supervisors would take it under consideration when they bring the zoning
text amendment before them and they may incorporate it. However, it shows that the Planning
Commission is making a recommendation to bump this. He asked if everybody was in agreement with
the recommended changes. He asked if there was a second to the motion.
Mr. Dotson seconded the motion.
There being no further discussion, Mr. Morris asked for a roll call.
The motion passed unanimously by a vote of (7:0).
Mr. Morris noted that ZTA-2015-01 Wireless Communications – FCC Mandated Changes would be
forwarded to the Board of Supervisors to be heard on April 8th with a recommendation for approval of the
ordinance language as recommended by staff with a second recommendation for consideration of
changes to reflect input provided by the Planning Commission. He thanked everyone for being here and
their input.
Ms. Long asked to speak, and Mr. Morris agreed.
Ms. Long said that perhaps she misunderstood, and if so she apologized. She was thinking that perhaps
she heard Ms. Firehock say that the Commission thought the suggestions they had for making minor
changes for the antenna size and flush mounting for this version of the ordinance was something they
were recommending, or was she saying no it should just wait until the next package of changes.
Ms. Firehock replied that she would like it to wait. She actually spoke with Mr. Kamptner, Supervisor Liz
Palmer and Commissioner Tim Keller yesterday to just get up to speed on all of this. They talked about
this issue and it seemed like it m ight be too much to file on at this time. However, what she was trying to
say was let’s hurry up and do this and let’s not have this conversation six months from now and wonder
why they did not do it. Therefore, she will be talking to her Supervisor about this.
Ms. Long said that would be great.
Mr. Randolph said that they were trying to tell Ms. Long that the cavalry is coming.
Ms. Long replied that they very much appreciate that. It is the type of thing as Mr. Fritz and Mr. Kamptner
will tell you they have been actually talking about for two years. So she got momentarily very excited
when she thought the Commission was going to direct them to update the notice to change those two for
the April hearing.
Ms. Firehock noted she had already asked that question yesterday, but it seemed like too much.
Ms. Long said they very much appreciate all of the Commission’s comments, appreciation and
understanding on those issues.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES – Submit BOS
19
Mr. Morris pointed out the Board of Supervisors would at least consider incorporating this in what they
approve. However, he doubts they will because it was just too much.
Ms. Long said if it was not advertised she did not think they can.
Mr. Kamptner noted they can advertise to include these issues and if the Board is so inclined because of
the deadline and everything they can.
Ms. Long said that would be good because they could at least have a discussion.
In summary, the Planning Commission forwarded the proposed ordinance to the Board of Supervisors
with a recommendation for approval with a second recommendation to look at the ordinance for
consideration of the following:
- Support standard that new facilities have a minimum 500’ setback from dwelling units.
- Consider amending the flush-mounting design standard by measuring the maximum 12-inch distance
from which an antenna may project from the tower from the back of the antenna instead of from the
face of the antenna
- Consider amending the maximum size for each antenna from 1152 square inches to 1400 square
inches
- Make sure the ordinance addresses new towers and their distance from historic structures.
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Belvedere – Interpretation of Proffers 3.2 and 3.3
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Adoption of a Resolution Affirming the Zoning
Administrator’s Determination regarding Belvedere
Proffers 3.2 and 3.3
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Letteri, Davis, Kamptner, McCulley,
Ragsdale
PRESENTER (S): Rebecca Ragsdale
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
April 8, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
AT TACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
On January 28, 2015, the County issued a request to Belvedere Station Land Trust (BSLT) (Attachment A) to comply with
Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 of the Belvedere rezoning, ZMA 2004-007(Attachment B). Proffer 3 requires: a) the dedication of
property along the Rivanna River for a greenway trail; b) a cash proffer payment of $10,000 for trail construction; and c) a
cash proffer payment of $10,000 for a greenway bridge, all within 30 days of the County’s request. Proffers 3.2 and 3.3
required that the request be made within seven years after “the date of the submission of the first final site plan.” Because
of a two year period in the proffer in which the County may use the funds, staff did not make the proffer request until
January 28, 2015, when the County was in a position to accept the greenway and begin construction of improvements,
such as the bridge. On February 10, BSLT sent an email contesting the County’s timeliness of the County’s request based
on BSLT’s disagreement over which “site plan” triggered the start of the running of the seven-year period (Attachment C).
The Zoning Administrator issued a Determination on February 17 (Attachment D) that the Zoning Ordinance’s definition of
“site plan” applied to the proffers, and BSLT appealed the Determination on February 28 (Attachment E). On appeal,
BSLT contends that the Zoning Administrator did not apply the correct definition of “site plan” which, in turn, resulted in her
allegedly erroneous conclusion that the County’s request was timely.
While most appeals of a Zoning Administrator’s determination are considered by the Board of Zoning Appeals, an appeal
pertaining to the interpretation of a proffer is considered by the Board of Supervisors, as provided by Virginia Code § 15.2-
2301 (Attachment F).
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Critical Infrastructure: Prioritize, plan and invest in critical infrastructure that responds to past and future changes and
improves the capacity to serve community needs
Development Areas: Attract quality employment, commercial, and high density residential uses into development
areas by providing services and infrastructure that encourage redevelopment and private investment while protecting
the quality of neighborhoods
DISCUSSION:
Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 state in relevant part: “If the request is not made within seven (7) years from the date of
submission of the first final site plan for Phase I, this cash proffer shall become null and void.” (The full text of Proffer 3
is included in Attachment B.) The first final site plan submitted for Belvedere was SDP 2008-22, submitted to the
County on February 7, 2008.
BSLT’s appeal is based on the argument that the term “final site plan” as used in Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 should not be
the term as it is defined and used in the Zoning Ordinance, but that it should have some other meaning, such as the
definition that is set forth in Wikipedia (see Attachment C). Wikipedia provides a generic definition of “site plan.” In a
March 20 email (Attachment G), BSLT argues that it had obtained approvals of “site plans” as that term is used in the
Zoning Ordinance as early as 2006 and, therefore, the seven-year period for the County to make a request under
Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 had expired. These earlier approvals were subdivision plats or engineering plans approved under
the Water Protection Ordinance, not site plans. In addition, the proffers use the term “final site plan,” a very specific
term whose plain meaning is found in the Zoning Ordinance, as explained below.
AGENDA TITLE: Belvedere – Interpretation of Proffers 3.2 and 3.3
April 8, 2015
Page 2
The definition of “site plan” in County Code § 18- 3.1 is:
“A plan satisfying the requirements of section 32 of this chapter that delineates the overall scheme of
development of one or more lots including, but not limited to, grading, engineering design, construction details
and survey data for existing and proposed improvements. The document identified in this chapter as a site
development plan is a site plan.” (Added 10-3-01)
When the Belvedere rezoning was approved and the proffers were accepted, County Code § 18-8.5.4 provided that,
once a planned development such as Belvedere was approved, “all accepted proffers shall be included as part of the
zoning regulations applicable to the planned development.” County Code § 18-8.5.4(b). Similar language exists today.
Therefore, when Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 use the term “final site plan,” those proffers are zoning regulations using a te rm
(“site plan”) that is defined in the Zoning Ordinance (County Code § 18-3.1), and using a modifier (“final” site plan) that
has a very specific and commonly understood meaning in County Code § 18-32. A “final site plan” is a site plan that is
submitted and reviewed under County Code § 18-32.4.3 and must be in a form and include the information required by
County Code § 18-32.6. The term “final” site plan distinguishes that site plan from a “preliminary”, or now, “initial” site
plan, which has different submittal, form, and content requirements.
The term “final site plan” was drafted by the developer and reviewed by County staff with deliberation and care.
Applying the plain and natural meaning of the term “final site plan,” considering its context in the proffer, as a zoning
regulation, and considering the other language used in the County’s Zoning Ordinance, the Zoning Administrator
correctly determined that the “submission of the first final site plan for Phase I” means the first final site plan meeting
the definition of a “site plan” in County Code § 18-3.1 that was submitted as a final site plan under County Code
§18-32. There is no reasonable basis to conclude that the term “final site plan” means anything other than a final site
plan as used in the County’s Zoning Ordinance. BSLT’s argument is also inconsistent with its prior acceptance of the
Zoning Ordinance’s meaning of “final site plan” in Proffer 6.3, which required BSLT to contribute up to $5,000 to fund
the cost of creating two roadside historical markers. Proffer 6.3 required that the County request the contribution within
one year after the date of approval of the first “final site plan” for Phase 1.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Proffers are intended, among other things, to provide mitigation of impacts and public benefits without increasing the
financial burden on the locality and its taxpayers. This proffer is designed to meet the public purposes of the Places 29
Parks and Green Systems plan, with completion of a portion of the greenway development along the Rivanna River. It
will also provide trail connections from adjacent and nearby neighborhoods to the greenway network. The satisfaction
of this proffer would save the County the cost of providing such improvements.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment H) Denying the Belvedere Land Trust’s
Appeal and Affirming the Zoning Administrator’s February 17, 2015 Determination.
The owner may file an application for a Zoning Map Amendment to request an amendment of the proffers.
ATTACHMENTS
A – January 28, 2015 letter requesting proffers
B – ZMA 2004-07 Belvedere Proffers
C – Appellants February 10, 2015 E-mail
D – Zoning Administrator’s February 17, 2015 Determination
E – Appellant’s February 28, 2015 Email to Appeal
F – Virginia Code § 15.2-2301
G – Appellant’s March 20, 2015 Email
H – Resolution
Return to agenda
J
A
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
McIntire Road Room Charlottesville Virginia
Phone Fax OctoberDon
Skelly Sachem PlaceCharlottesville V A REZMA
Belvedere SignTax
Map Parcels
portion and Tax
Map Parcels B C
and AandTax Map A ParcellDearMr
Skelly The Board ofSupervisors approved your rezoning application on October Your request to
rezone acres from R Residential to NMD Neighborhood Model District was
approved in accordance
with the Code of Development dated October and the attached profferscorrected and dated
October An applicationplan plan of developmentdated September was approved aspart ofthe rezoning
Please refer tothese documents for any future applications and requests on this property Please
be advised that although the AlbemarleCounty Board of Supervisorstook action on the
project noted above no uses on the property as approved above may lawfully begin until
all applicable approvals have been received and conditions
have been met This includes compliance with applicable PROFFERS compliance with requirements ofthe CODE
OF DEVELOPMENT compliance with the APPLICATION PLAN approval of and compliance with necessary SITE PLANS
and approval of aZONING COMPLIANCE CLEARANCE Ifyou have questions or comments
regarding
the above noted action
please do not hesitate tocontact Keith
Lancaster at
VWCaer
Cc Belvedere Station Land Trust Robert M Hauser Etal Trustees CO Hauser
Sachem Place Suite Charlottesville VA
Amf li Mf
rllllfVJTexWeaver
Chuck
Proctor Steve
Allshouse Keith
Lancaster Sarah
Baldwin l
Bruce W oodzell
Real Estate
Original Proffer AmendedProfferAmendment
PROFFER FORJV
Date
ofProffer
Signature ZMA Tax Map ParcelsTax MapParcels
A BC
A Tax Map AParcellAcrestoberezoned
from R to Neighborhood ModelDistrictNMDWithrespect to
the property described in
rezoningapp ication ZMA the ZMA Belvedere StationLand Trust is the fee simple
owner of the following parcels TMP TMP TMP TMP TMPTMPCTMP
AG TMP A Belvedere Station Land Trust isthe fee simple owner of
a hinterestang
with ChartteGand
Jacob CLevensonina
acre BevedereRoadROW
associated withTMPDOA
which iswhollyownedin
fee simpebyChar
tte G andJacobCLevenson
Duruora LLC is the fee simp e owner of the fonowing parcel TMP Robert Hauser Homes Inc
is the fee simp e owner ofthe fonowing parcel TMP B StoneHaus Inc and HenryNe
sonSprouse are the fee simple owners of the fonowing parcel TMP The foregoing parties are
col ectively referred to herein as theOwner which term shall
include anysuccessorsininterest
AIl of the parcels listed above are referred to collectively as the Property
Pursuant toSectionofthe
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance the Ordinance Owner hereby voluntary proffers theconditions listed inthis
Proffer Statementwhichshall
be applied to the Property if the ZMA is approved by Albemarle County These conditions
are proffered as part of the ZMA and it is agreed that the ZMA itself gjves rise to the needfortheconditionsandsuchconditionshaveareasonaberelationtotherezoningrequestedPlan
Exhibits lExhibits
not in the Code of Development The following exhibits which are not part of the
General Development Plans or the Code of Development are proffered as apart of this
rezoning Exhibit Archaeological Survey
Summary Exhibit Architectural Reconnaissance Survey
Affordable Housing Cash Contribution Owner
shall contribute to
Albemare County a minimum of one thousand dollars per single family detached
dwelling unit seven hundredfifty dol ars S per single family attached or townhouseunitandfivehundreddolarsSOOpermultifamilycondominiumunitThecash
contribution shanbe due and payable with each application for a bui ding pennit
This cash proffer sha not app y to Carriage House units or multi family rental
housing This cashcontribution shall be used for the purpose of funding affordable housing programs including
those provided by nonprofit housing agencies within Albemar e County IfthiscashcontributionhasnotbeenexhaustedbytheCountyforthestatedpurposewithin
ten years from the date of the last payment of the contribution al the unexpended funds shalberefundedtotheOwnerCarriageHouseUnitsOwnerproffers
torequire through the lot sale contracts on the Property the construction of aminimum
of Carriage House Units on the Property that meet the requirements for asingle family dwel
ing as defined in the Virginia Uniform Statewide Bui ding Code Each Carriage House
Unit shall conform to the Code of Development Appendix A Carriage House Units
General Standards Each Carriage House Unit shal be on the same
parcel as the primary dwelling unit to which it is accessory Carriage House Units may not besubdividedfromtheprimaryresidenceThesubdivisionrestrictionshallbedescribedonthe
pat creating such parcels arid be incorporated into each deed conveying title to such
parcels Open Space and Greenways Open
Space The Owner shal restrict
fromdevelopment all open space areas which are areas not shown as development parcels
on the General Deve pment Plan In no event shall the total area of open
space areas which include the preservation areas conservation areas greenway defined in below buffer
and park areas shown on ExhibitsSA SB and SC of the Genera Development
P an be less than twenty five percent S of the total and withinthePropertyTheseareasshanbefortheuseandenjoymentoftheresidentsofthePropertysubjcttotherestrictionsthatmaybeimposedbyanydeclarationrecordedaspartofaconveyanceoftheseareastoahomeownersassociation
GreenwayThe Owner shall dedicate and convey to Albemarle County upon demand bytheCountyastripoflandnolessthanonehundredfeetinwidthandadequateinwidthtoaccommodatetheconstructionmaintenanceanduseofatenlfootwidepedestriantrailalongtheRivannaRiverfromthePropertysboundarywithDunloraFarmTaxMapParcelAtothePropertysboundarywiththeSouthernRailwayrightofwayasitexistsonNovembertheGreenwayThepreciselocationofthegreenwayshallbemutuallyagreeduponby
the Owner and the County and such agreement shal not be unreasonably withhe d TheGreenwaywillbeconveyedinthefonnofageneralwarrantydeedandtheOwnershalbearthecostofasurveyandpreparingthedeedUponrequestbytheCountytheOwnershallalsocontributetcnthousanddollarscashforapplicationtowardthecostofconstructingtheGreenwayaccordingtotheCountyscurrentstandardsforaclassBtrailSuchcontributionshallbemadebyOwnerwithindaysofreceiptofawrittenrequestbytheCountyIftherequestisnotmadewithinsevenyearsfromthedateofsubmissionofthefirstfinalsiteplanforPhaseIthiscashproffershabecomenunandvoidIfsuchcashcontributionisnotfulyexpendedforthestatedpurposewithintwoyearsfromthedatethefundsarecontributedtotheCountyalunexpendedfundsshanberefundedtotheOwnerIfthegreenwayisnotusedforthepurposeforwhichitisdedicatedwithintenyearsfromthedateofdedicationtheCountyshantransferthelandbacktoandfortheuseoftheOwnertobeusedasopenspaceTheOwnerwillprovideapedestrianconnectiontotheGreenwaythroughtheBelvedereCommunitysinternaltrailsystemasillustratedinExhibitSASBandscGreenwaybridgeWithinthirtydaysfollowingrequestbytheCountyOwner
shallcontribute ten thousand dollars cash for application toward the cost of constructingapedestrianbridgelinkingtheRivannaRiverGreenwayinDunloraTaxMapParcelFAtoRiverRunTaxMapParcelDAtherebyallowingneighborhoodresidentsaccesstofaciitiesinPenParkandotherportionsoftheGreenwaysystemIftherequestisnotmadewithinsevenyearsfromthedateofsubmissionofthefirstfinalsitepanforPhaseIthisproffershallbecomenullandvoidIfsuchcashcontributionisnotexpendedforthestatedpurposewithintwoyearsfromthedatethefundswerecontributedtotheCountyallunexpendedfundsshallberefundedtotheOwnerRoadConstructionandReservationofllightofwayNorthFreeStateConnectorRoadTheOwnersshalldedicate
upon demand by the County a onehundredfoot
wideright of way to public use as shown on Exhibit B of theGeneralDevelopmentPlanandabeledReservedRoadROWWherelessthanonehundredfeetofrightofwayisavaiableontheOwnersPropertyApproximatelythefirstfeetfromRioRoadtheOwnershalldedicatetheavailablerightofwayFeesimpeinterestshalbededicatedbytheOwnerwithinsixmonthsfollowingreceiptbytheOwnerofwrittennoticeofdemandbytheCountyTheOwnershallpayforthecostsofsurveyingandpreparingdeedsnecessarytocompetesuchdedicationTheCountymustacceptthededicationwithintwelvemonthsfonowingitsdemandfordedicationFutureNorthFreeStateConnectorExtensionRoadTheOwnershandedicateaonehundredlfootstripoflandang
theProperty boundary with the Norfolk Southern Railroad as shown on Exhibit CoftheGeneralDevelopmentPlanandlabeledReservedRoadROWfordedicationupondemandbytheCountyforthepurposeofconstructingaroadthatextendstheNorthFreeStateConnectorRoadnorthwardacrossthe
Rivanna River The Owner sha dedicate rightofway within six months fol owing
written notice of demand by the County Such reservation shall remain in place through
December The County must accept the dedication within twelve months following its demand
for dedication Shou d this road be removed from the A bemarle County
Comprehensive Plan said reservation shall become nu and void and the Owner or Successors
shal retain fee simple ownership of the parcel North
FreeStateConnector Extension Road Design The Owner sha demonstrate to the satisfaction
ofthe County Engineer and VDOT that the North Free State Connector Extension Road can
be accommodated by the B ck Development Plan Approval by VDOT and
the County Engineer must be secured prior to final platting and road plan approval in Block
Free State Road Right of
wayThe Owner shall dedicate upondemandby the County a fifty foot wide right of
way along portions of the existing FreeStateRoad that are on the Owner s Property from its
proposed intersection with BelvedereBlvd between Road C and Road K to its intersection
with Loring Run Road Where the road isonly partially on the Property the Owner shall dedicate
sufficient right of way width to ensure a tota rightofway of not less than
fifty feetinclusiveof the existing proscriptive right of way The right of way shall be conveyed
withinsix months foowingreceipt of written notice by the County in the form of
a genera warranty deed and the Owner shal bear the cost of a survey and preparation of
the deed Ifthe dedicated land is not used for the purpose for which it was dedicated within two years
from the date of dedication the County shall transfer the land back to and for the
use of the Owner Connection to Dunlora Farm The Owner shall dedicate upon demand
bythe County a fifty foot wide right of way extending from Road D
to the property line at the easternterminusof Road J as shown on Exhibit C of the Genera
Development Plan The right of way shall be conveyed within six months following receipt of written
noticebythe County fee simple in the form of a general warranty deed and Owner
shall bear the cost of a survey and preparation of the deed The County must accept the dedication
within twelve months fol owing its demand for dedication If the dedicated land isnot used
for the purpose for which it was dedicated within ten years from the date of dedication
the County shall transfer the land back to and for the use of the Owner FairviewAccessTheOwneragreestoprovidetoFairviewSwimClubownrofa
fiftyfoot wide access easement from Belvedere Drive to the edge of theFairviewSwimC
ub Property Tax Map Parcel B and C tofacilitate vehicular access to the existing Fairview
entrance or in other such location thatismutual yagreeable to the parties and
in conformance with applicable County and VDOT regulations The Owner shan grant easement within sixty days
fol owing approval offinal road plan for Belvedere Bou evard in Phase
Overlot Grading Pl an Subdivision Plans The Owner shaH submit an overlot grading plan
meeting the requirement of
this section hereinafter theplan
withthe application for each subdivision of Property into single family detached lots and
sing e family attached dwe ing units shown on the General Deve pment
Plan The p an shaH show existing and proposed topographic
features to be considered in the developmcnt of the proposed subdivision The plan shalJ be
approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the subdivision plat The
Property within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved plan No
certificate of occupancy shal be issued for any dwelling on a t where the County Engineer
has determined the lot grading is not consistent with the approved grading plan The plan
shal satisfy the fol
owing a The p an shall show all proposed streets building
sites setbacks surface drainage driveways trails and other features the
County Engineer detennines are neededto verif y that the plan satisfies the requirements
of
this proffer b The plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater than one inch
equals fifty feet
c All proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater
than two feet All concentrated surface drainage over lots shal be deary shown
with the proposed grading All proposed grading shall be designed to assure
that surface drainage can provide adequate re ief from the flooding of
dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails
d Graded slopes on lots proposed to be p anted with turf grasses
awns shall not exceed a gradient of three feet of horizontal distance for each one
foot of vertical rise or fall Steeper s pes shal be vegetated with low maintenance
vegetation as detennined to beappropliate by the County s programauthority
in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land
disturbing activity Thesc steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two
feet of horizontal distance for each one foot of vertical rise or fall un ess the
County Engineer finds that the grading recommendations for steeper s pes have
adequate yaddressed the impacts eSurface drainage
may flow across up to three lots before being collected in a storm
sewer or directed toadrainage way outside of the ts fNo surface drainage
across a residentia t shall have more than one half acre of
and drainingto itg An drainage from
streets shall be carried across lots in a stonn sewer to a point beyond
the rear of the building site Preservation of Historic Structures
Sites and Archaeological Sites Archae gica Survey A Phase
IArchaeologica Study for the Property shall be submitted by the Owner to the
Director of P anning for his review and approval prior to issuance of a grading permit
An archaeological resource treatment plan shall be submitted by the Owner to and
approved by the Director of Planning for al sites in the Phase I study that are recommended for Phase
II eva uation and or identified as beingeligible for inclusion on the National Register
of Historic P aces If a Phase II study is undertaken such a study shal be approved
by the Director of Planning and a treatment plan for said sites shal be submitted to and
approved by the Director of P anning for sites that are detennined to bee igible
for inc usion the National Register of Historic P acesand or those sites that require
a Phase III study If in a Phase II study a site isdetennined to be e igible for
nomination tothe National Register of Historic Places and said site is to be preserved in place
the treatment plan shal inc ude nomination of the site to the National Register of Historic
P aces If a Phase III study is undertaken for said sites such studies sha beapprovedbytheDirectorof
Planning prior to land disturbance within the study area All Phase I Phase II and Phase III
studies shall meet the Virginia Department of Historic Resources Guidelines for PreparingArchaeologicalResourceManagementReportsandtheSecretaryoftheInteriorsStandard
and GuideJines for Archaeological Documentation as applicable and shall be conducted
under the supervision of a quaJified archaeologist who meets the qualifications set forth in
the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualification Standards All approved treatment
plans shall be incorporated into the plan of deve pment for the site and shall be adhered
to during the clearing grading and construction activities
thereonPotential Artifacts Should Phases I or II or III studies yie d objects or artifacts of
archaeologica significance these objects shall be conveyed to the Virginia Department of
Historic Resources VDHR for long term preservation Should Phase III fieldwork yieldsubsurfacearchitecturalfeaturesandartifactsrelatedtothorearlythcenturydomestic
occupations at Free State and should these sites be deemed archaeßlßgical ysignificambyarchaegistswiththeDigitalArchaeologicalArchiveofComparativeSlaveryDAACSbasedattheThomasJeffersonFoundationtheseartifactswillbesubmitted
to the archaeologists atthe ThomasJefferson Foundation for analysis and entry intoDAACSpriortobeingconveyedtotheVDHRTheOwnerwillbesolelyresponsiblefor
conveying all artifacts analyzed by DAACS to the VDHR within thirty days of receipt of
such
artifactsRoadside Markers Upon request by the County the Owner shall contribute upto five
thousand dollars cash tofund the cost of creating and installing two roadside historica markers as
described in section ofthe Code of Development If the request isnot made within one year
from the date of approval of the first fina site plan for Phase I this proffer shall become null and
void If such cash contribution is not expended for the stated purpose within two years from
the date the funds were contributed to the County all unexpended funds shall be refunded to
the Owner Phasing and Mitigation of Impact Phasing
Phases of Belvedere infrastructure will be
constructedsequentially beginning with Phase then etc This proffer shall notrestricttheOwnersabiEtytodevepmultiplephasesconcurrentlynorshallitrequirethecompletion
of all buildings and other improvements in one phase before beginning construction on the
next Mitigation of Construction Traffic Impact The Owner shall neither estabEsh
norallow to be established ingress or egress for any vehicle heavy
equipment or farm machinery or farm equipment to and from the Property except at the
intersection of the aEgnment of Belvedere Bou evard and East Rio Road as shown on
Exhibit B and from the northern segment of Free State Road that crosses Free State Bridge
as shown on Exhibit of the Genera Development Plan or on any pubEc street shown
on a final subdivision plat that has been constructed and accepted by VDOT or bonded for acceptancebyVDOTForpurposesofthisprofferthetermvehiclemeanseverydeviceonor
by which any person or property isor may be transported or drawn on a highway except
devices moved by human power or used exclusively on stationary rails or tracks that are used
in the construction on or below the Property including all improvements p aced on the property by
the Owner its contractors subcontractors oragents The term heavy equipment means self propelled
se fpowered or pull type equipment and machinery includingengines
weighingfive
thousand poundsor more primarily employed for construction industrial maritime mining and
forestry uses Code Enforcement
Architectural Standards The
Ownershall prepare and record adeclaration of covenants conditions and restrictions that
among other things establishes architectural standards equal to or more
stringent than the architectural standards in the Code ofDevelopment and estab ishes an
Architectural Standards Committee ASC The declaration shaJJ include among
the powers and duties of the ASC the authority and responsibility to determine that
each structure within the Property complies with all applicable architectural standards
before submitting the proposal to the County to conduct its review for compliance
with the architectural standards established in the Code IlUl VCYCIU
lljHlZJlLBelvedereS
tion Land
Tru Trustee tJc QS n HT
SDunlora LLCby RobertHauser HoesIncManager
by Signatures of All wners bYCE StoneHaus
Inc by CE Signature
of
Attorney in Fact Printed
Names of AlOwnersDate
O O o s OS
VfLQI
U ˛Sl
DO rV
II rtsvr s rtØ J It P
crkfMeJ S C tvzJsjb s I QJ
yC YC hay D r cG Le v e y
Dill
OSPrintedName of Attorneyin Fact
Original Proffer AmendedProfferAmendment
PROFFER FORM
Date
ofProffer
Signature ZMA Tax Map ParcelsTax MapParcels
A BC
ATax Map AParcellAcrestoberezoned
from R to Nei hborhoodModelDistrictNMDWith respect
to the property described
inrezoning application ZMA the ZMA Belvedere StationLand Trust isthefee simple owner
of the following parcels TMP TMP TMP TMP TMP TMPCTMPA
TMP A Belvedere Station Land Trust is the fee simple owner of a Y
interest alongwithCharlotteG
and JacobCLevensonin
a acreBelvedereRoadROW
associated withTMPAwhich
iswhollyownedinfee
simple byCharlotteGand
Jacob CLevensonDunloraLLC
isthefeesimpleowner
of the following parcel TMP Robert Hauser Homes Inc is the fee simple owner of the following
parcel TMP B StoneHaus Inc and HenryNelson Sprouse are the fee simple owners ofthe followingparcel
TMPThe foregoing parties are collectively referred to herein as the Owner which term shall include
anysuccessors in interest All of the parcels listed above are
referred tocollectivelyasthe
Property Pursuant toSection of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance the Ordinance Owner
hereby voluntaryprofferstheconditions
listed in this Proffer Statement which shall
be applied to the Property if the ZMA is approved by Albemarle County These conditions
are proffered as part of the ZMA and it is agreed that the ZMA itself gives rise to the needfortheconditionsandsuchconditionshaveareasonablerelationtotherezoningrequestedPlanExhibits
Exhibits not in
theCode of Development The following exhibits which are not part of the General Development
Plans or the Code of Development are proffered as a part of this rezoning Exhibit
Archaeological Survey Summary Exhibit
Architectural Reconnaissance Survey Affordable Housing
Cash Contribution Owner shall contribute
to Albemarle County
aminimum of one thousand dollars per single family detached dwelling unit seven
hundred fifty dollars Sper single family attached or townhouse unit and five hundreddollarsSOOpermultifamilycondominiumunitThecashcontributionshallbedueand
payable witheach application for a building permit This cash proffer shall not apply
to Carriage House units or multi family rental housing This cash contribution shall be used
for the purposeof funding affordable housing programs including those provided by nonprofit housing agencies within
Albemarle County If this cash contribution has not been exhausted bytheCountyforthestatedpurposewithintenyearsfTomthedateofthelast
payment of the contribution all the unexpended funds shall be refunded to the Owner Carriage House UnitsOwnerprofferstorequirethroughthelotsalecontractson
theProperty the construction of a minimum of Carriage House Units on the Property that
meet the requirements for a single family dwelling as defined in the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code Each Carriage House Unit shall conform to the Code of Development Appendix A
Carriage House Units General Standards Each Carriage House Unit shall be on the
same parcel as the primary dwelling unit to which it is
accessory Carriage House Units may not be subdivided fTom the primary residence The subdivision restriction shall bedescribedontheplatcreatingsuchparcelsandbeincorporatedintoeachdeed
conveying title to such parcels Open Space and Greenwavs Open Space The Owner shall restrict
fTom development all open space areas
which are areas not shown
asdevelopment parcels on the General Development Plan In no event shall the total
area of open space areas which include the preservation areas conservation areas greenway defined in
below buffer and park areas shown on Exhibits SA SB and SC of theGeneralDevelopmentPlanbelessthantwentyfivepercentSofthetotalland
within the Property These areas shall be for the use and enjoyment of theresidentsofthePropertysubjecttotherestrictionsthatmaybeimposedbyanydeclarationrecordedaspartofaconveyanceoftheseareastoahomeownersassociation
GreenwayThe Owner shall dedicate and convey to Albemarle County upon demand bytheCountyastripoflandnolessthanonehundredfeetinwidthandadequateinwidth
to accommodate the construction maintenance and use ofa ten foot wide pedestrian trail along
the Rivanna River from the Property s boundary with DunloraFann Tax Map Parcel
lA to the Property sboundary with the SouthernRailway right of way as it existsonNovembertheGreenwayThepreciselocationofthegreenwayshallbemutuallyagreeduponby
the Owner and the County and such agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld The GreenwaywillbeconveyedinthefonnofageneralwarrantydeedandtheOwnershallbearthecostofasurveyandpreparingthedeedUponrequestbytheCountytheOwnershall
also contribute ten thousand dollars cash for application toward the cost of constructingthe Greenway
according to the County s current standards for a class B trail Suchcontribution
shall be made by Owner within days of receipt of a written request by the County
If the request is not made within seven years Tom the date of submission of the first final site
plan for Phase I this cash proffer shall become null and void If such cash contribution is not fully
expended for the stated purpose within two years from the date the funds are contributed totheCountyallunexpendedfundsshallberefundedtotheOwnerIfthegreenwayisnotusedforthepurposeforwhichitisdedicatedwithintenyearsTomthedateofdedicationtheCounty
shall transfer the land back to and for the use of the Owner to be used
as open space The Owner will provide a pedestrian connection to the Greenway through the Belvedere Community s internal trail
system as illustrated in Exhibit A B and CGreenwaybridge Within thirty
days following request by the County Owner shall contribute
tenthousand dollars cash for application toward the cost of constructing a pedestrianbridgelinkingtheRivannaRiverGreenwayinDunloraTaxMapParcelFAtoRiverRun
Tax Map Parcel Dl A thereby allowing neighborhood residents access tofacilities inPenParkandotherportionsoftheGreenwaysystemIftherequestisnotmadewithinsevenyearsTomthedateofsubmissionofthefirstfinalsiteplanfor
Phase I this proffer shall become null and void If such cash contribution is not expended for the
stated purpose within two years from the date the funds were contributed to the County all unexpended
funds shall be refunded to the Owner Road Construction and Reservation of Ri ht of
way North Free State Connector Road The Owners shall dedicate upon demand by
the County aone hundred foot widerightof
wayto public use as shown on Exhibit B of the General Development PlanandlabeledReservedRoadROWWherelessthanonehundredfeetofrightofwayisavailableontheOwnersPropertyApproximatelythefirstfeetfromRioRoadtheOwnershalldedicate
the available right of wayFeesimple interest shall be dedicated bythe Owner within six
months following receipt by the Owner of written notice of demand by theCountyThe OwnershallpayforthecostsofsurveyingandpreparingdeedsnecessarytocompletesuchdedicationTheCountymustacceptthededicationwithintwelvemonthsfollowingitsdemandfordedicationFutureNorthFreeState
Connector Extension Road The Owner shall dedicate a one hundred foot strip
of land along the Property boundary with the Norfolk Southern Railroad as
shownon Exhibit Cof the General Development Plan and labeled Reserved Road ROW
for dedication upon demand by the County for the purpose of constructing a road thatextendstheNorthFreeStateConnectorRoadnorthwardacrossthe
Rivanna River The Owner shall dedicate rightofway within six months following written
notice of demand by the County Such reservation shall remain in place through December
The County must accept the dedication within twelve months following its demand for
dedication Should this road be removed from the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan said
reservation shall become null and void and the Owner or Successors shall retain fee
simple ownership of the parcel North Free State Connector
ExtensionRoadDesign The Owner shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the County
Engineer and VDOT that the North Free State Connector Extension Road can be accommodated by
the Block Development Plan Approval by VDOT and the County Engineer must
be secured prior to final platting and road plan approval in Block Free State Road Right
of way The Owner shall
dedicateupon demand by the Countyafifty foot wide right of way along portions of
the existing Free State Road that areontheOwner sProperty from its proposed intersection with Belvedere
Blvd between Road CandRoad K to its intersection with Loring Run Road
Where the road is only partially on the Property the Owner shall dedicate sufficient right of way
width to ensure atotal right of way ofnotlessthan fifty feet inclusive of
the existingproscriptiveright of way The right of way shall beconveyed within six months following
receiptof written noticebythe County in the fonn of a general warranty deed and
the Owner shall bear the cost of a survey and preparation of the deed If the dedicated
land is not used for the purpose forwhich it was dedicated within two years from the date of dedication
the County shall transfer the land back to and for the use of the Owner Connection
to Dunlora Fann The Owner shall dedicate upon demand by the County a fifty
footwide right of way extending from Road D to the property line at
the eastern tenninus of Road J asshownon Exhibit C of the General Development Plan The right of
way shall be conveyed within six months following receipt of written notice by the County fee
simpleinthe fonn of a general warranty deed and Owner shall bear the cost of
a survey and preparation of the deed The County must accept the dedication within twelve m onths following
its demand for dedication If the dedicated land is not used for the purpose for which
it wasdedicated within ten years from the date of dedication the County shall transfer the landbacktoandfortheuseoftheOwnerFairviewAccessTheOwneragreestoprovide
to Fairview Swim Club s a sf a fifty foot wide access easement from
BelvedereDrive tothe edge of the Fairview Swim Club Property Tax MapParcelBand
C to facilitate vehicular access to the existing Fairview entrance or in other such location that
is mutually agreeable to the parties andin confonnance withapplicable County and VDOT regulations
The Owner shall grant easement within sixty days following approval of final road plan for Belvedere
Boulevard in Phase Overlot Gradine Plan Subdivision Plans The Owner shall submit an
overlot grading plan meeting the requirement of this section hereinafter the plan with the
application for each subdivision
of Property into single
familydetached lots and single family attached dwelling units shown on the General Development
Plan The plan shall show existing and proposed topographic
features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision The plan shall be
approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the subdivision plat The
Property within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved plan No
certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer
has determined the lot grading is not consistent with the approved grading plan The plan
shall satisfy the following
a The plan shall show all proposed streets building sites setbacks
surface drainage driveways trails and other features the County Engineer
determines are needed to verify that the plan satisfies the requirements of this
proffer
b The plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater than one l inch equals
fifty feet c
All proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater than
two feet All concentrated surface drainage over lots shall be clearly shown with
the proposed grading All proposed grading shall be designed to assure that
surface drainage can provide adequate relief from the flooding of dwellings in
the event a storm sewer fails dGraded
slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses lawns shall not
exceed agradient of three feet of horizontal distance for each one foot of vertical
rise or fall Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to
be appropriate by the County s program authority in its approvalof
an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity These steeper
slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two feet of horizontal distance
for each one foot of vertical rise or fall unless the County Engineer finds that the
grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts e Surface
drainage may flow across up tothree lots
before being collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way
outside of the lots fNo surface drainage across a residential lot shall have more
than one half llacre ofland draining to it g All drainage from
streetsshall be carried across lots in
a storm sewer to apoint beyond the rear of the building site Preservation
of Historic Structures Sites and Archaeological Sites Archaeological Survey A
Phase IArchaeological Study for the Property shall be
submittedby the Owner to the Director of Planning for his review and approval
prior to issuance of a grading permit An archaeological resource treatment plan shall be submitted by
the Owner to and approved by the Director ofPlanning for all sites
in the Phase I study that are recommended for Phase II evaluation and or identified as being eligible for
inclusion on the National Register of Historic PlacesIfaPhase II study is undertaken
such a study shall be approved by the Director of Planning and a treatment plan for said
sites shall be submitted to and approved by the Director ofPlanning for sites that are determined
tobe eligible for inclusion the National Register of Historic Places and or those sites that
require a Phase III study Ifin aPhase IIstudya site is determined to
be eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and said site is to be preserved in
place the treatment plan shall include nomination of the site to the National Register of Historic Places
If a Phase IIIstudy is undertaken for said sites such studies shall be approved by
the Director of
Planning prior to land disturbance within the study area All Phase I Phase II and Phase III
studies shall meet the Virginia Department of Historic Resources Guidelines for Preparing
Archaeological Resource Management Reports and the Secretary of the Interiors Standard
and Guidelines for Archaeological Documentation as applicable and shall be conducted
under the supervision of a qualified archaeologist who meets the qualifications set forth in
the Secretary of the Interiors Professional Qualification Standards All approved treatment
plans shall be incorporated into the plan of development for the site and shall be adhered to
during the clearing grading and construction activities thereon
PotentialArtifacts Should Phases Ior II or III studies yield objects or artifacts of archaeological significance
these objects shall be conveyed to the Virginia Department of Historic Resources
VDHR for long tenn preservation Should Phase III fieldwork yield subsurface architectural
features and artifacts related to lSth or early th century domestic occupations at
Free State and should these sites be deemed archaeologically significant byarchaeologists with
the Digital Archaeological Archive of Comparative Slavery DAACS basedattheThomasJeffersonFoundationtheseartifactswillbesubmittedtothearchaeologistsat
the Thomas Jefferson Foundation for analysis and entry into DAACS prior tobeing
conveyed to the VDHR The Owner will be solely responsible for conveying all artifacts analyzed
by DAACS to the VDHR within thirty days of receipt of such artifacts Roadside Markers
Upon
requestby the County the Owner shall contribute up to five thousand dollars cash to
fund the cost ofcreating and installing two roadside historical markers as described in section of
the Code of Development If the request isnot made within one year from the date of
approval of the first final site plan for Phase Ithis proffer shall become null and void If such cash
contribution is not expended for the stated purpose within two years from the date the funds
were contributed to the County all unexpended funds shall be refunded tothe Owner Phasing and
Mitigation of Impact Phasing Phases of Belvedere infrastructure
will be constructed sequentially beginning with
Phasethen etc This proffer shall not restrict the Owner s
ability to develop multiple phases concurrently nor shall it require the completion of allbuildings and other
improvements in one phase before beginning construction on the next Mitigation of Construction Traffic
Impact TheOwner shall neither establish nor allow to be established
ingressor egress for any vehicle heavy equipment or fann machinery or
fann equipment to and from the Property except at the intersection of the alignment of
Belvedere Boulevard and East Rio Road as shown on Exhibit B and from the northern
segment of Free State Road that crosses Free State Bridge as shown on Exhibit of the
General Development Plan or on any public street shown on a final subdivision plat that
has been constructed and accepted by VDOT or bonded for acceptance by VDOT For purposes ofthis
proffer the tenn vehicle means every device on or by which any person or property
isor may be transported or drawn on a highway except devices moved by human power or
used exclusively on stationary rails ortracks that are used in the construction on or below
the Property including all improvements placed on the property by the Owner its contractors subcontractors or agents
The tenn heavy equipment means self propelled self powered or pull type equipment and
machinery including engines weighing five
thousand poundsormore primarily employed for construction industrial maritime mining and
forestry uses Code Enforcement
Architectural Standards The
Ownershall prepare and record adeclaration of covenants conditions and restrictions that
among other things establishes architectural standards equal to or more
stringent than the architectural standards inthe Code ofDevelopment and establishes an Architectural
Standards Committee ASC The declaration shall include among the
powers and duties of the ASC the authority and responsibility to detennine that each
structure within the Property complies with all applicable architectural standards before
submitting the proposal tothe County to conduct its review for compliance with
the architectural standards established in the Code ofDevelopment f S VL
Be vedere
StionLand Tru Trustee
tu S iLDunlora LLC by
Robert HauserHo esIncManagerbyHauser
Signatures of All wners Signature ofAttorney
in
Fact Printed Names of
AllOwners DateOSO
OS OS Ie IVtlY V sp
J frd fI
J weJC
E yr Jso
J I
S QVLf C h a
Hc G Le veYl O Y fD
IIc˙Printed Name of Attorney inFact
Original Proffer AmendedProfferAmendment
PROFFER FORM
Date
ofProffer
Signature ZMA Tax Map ParcelsTax MapParcels
A BC
A Tax Map AParcellAcrestoberezoned
from R to Neighborhood ModelDistrictNMDWithrespect to
the property described in
rezoningapplication ZMA the ZMA Belvedere Station LandTrust is thefee simple owner
of the following parcels TMP TMP TMP TMP TMP TMPCTMP A
TMP A Belvedere Station Land Trust is the fee simple owner of ainterest
a ngwithCharlotteG
and JacobCLevensonin
a acreBelvedereRoadROW
associated withTMPAwhich
iswhollyownedinfee
simple byCharlotteGand
Jacob CLevensonDunloraLLC
is thefeesimpleowner
of the following parcel TMP Robert Hauser Homes Inc is the fee simple owner ofthe following
parcel TMP B StoneHaus Inc and HenryNelson Sprouse are the fee simple owners ofthe followingparcel
TMPThe foregoing parties are collectively referred to herein as the Owner which term shall include
any successors in interest Al of the parcels listed above are
referred tocollectivelyasthe
Property Pursuant to Section of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance the Ordinance
Owner herebyvoluntaryproffersthe
conditions listed in this Proffer Statement which shall
be applied to the Property if the ZMA is approved by A bemarle County TheseconditionsareprofferedaspartoftheZMAanditisagreedthattheZMAitselfgivesrisetotheneedfortheconditionsandsuchconditionshaveareasonablerelationtotherezoningrequestedPlan
Exhibits Exhibits not
inthe Code of Development The following exhibits which are not part of the GeneralDevelopmentPlansortheCodeofDevelopmentareprofferedasapartofthisrezoningExhibitArchaeologicalSurveySummary
Exhibit Architectural Reconnaissance Survey AffordableHousingCashContributionOwnershall
contribute toAlbemarle
Countya minimum of one thousand dollars per single family detached dwelling unitsevenhundredfiftydolIarsSpersinglefamilyattachedortownhouseunitandfivehundreddollarsSOOpermultifamilycondominiumunitThecashcontributionshallbedueandpayablewitheachapplicationforabuildingpennitThiscashproffershallnotapplytoCarnageHouseunitsormultifamilyrentalhousingThiscashcontributionshallbeusedforthepurposeoffundingaffordablehousingprogramsincludingthoseprovidedbynonprofithousingagencieswithinAlbemarleCountyIfthiscashcontributionhasnotbeenexhaustedbytheCountyforthestatedpurposewithintenyearsfromthedateofthelastpaymentofthecontributionalltheunexpendedfundsshallberefundedtotheOwnerCarnageHouseUnitsOwnerprofferstorequirethroughthelotsalecontracts
onthe Property the construction of a minimum of Carnage House Units on the PropertythatmeettherequirementsforasinglefamilydwellingasdefinedintheVirginiaUniformStatewideBuildingCodeEachCarriageHouseUnitshallconfonntotheCodeofDevelopmentAppendixACarriageHouseUnitsGeneralStandardsEachCarnageHouseUnitshallbeonthesameparcelastheprimarydwellingunittowhichitisaccessoryCarriageHouseUnitsmaynotbesubdividedfromtheprimaryresidenceThesubdivisionrestrictionshallbedescribedontheplatcreatingsuchparcelsandbeincorporatedintoeachdeedconveyingtitletosuchparcelsOpenSpaceandGreenwaysOpenSaceTheOwnershallrestrictfromdevelopmentallopen
space areas which are areas
notshown as developmentparcels on the General Development Plan In no event shall thetotalareaofopenspaceareaswhichincludethepreservationareasconservationareasgreenwaydefinedinbelowbufferandparkareasshownonExhibitsSASBandSCoftheGeneralDevelopmentPlanbelessthantwentyfivepercentSofthetotallandwithinthePropertyTheseareasshallbefortheuseandenjoymentoftheresidentsofthePropertysubjecttotherestrictionsthatmaybeimposedbyanydeclarationrecordedaspartofaconveyanceoftheseareastoahomeownersassociation
GreenwayThe Owner shan dedicate and convey to Albemarle County upon demand by
the County a strip of and no less than one hundred feet in width and adequate in width
to accommodate the construction maintenance and use ofa ten foot wide pedestrian trail along
the Rivanna River from the Property s boundary with DunloraFarm Tax Map Parcel
A to the Property s boundarywith the Southern Railwayright of way as it exists on
Novemberthe Greenway The precise location ofthe greenway shan be mutuany agreed upon by the
Owner and the County and such agreement shall not be unreasonably withheld The Greenway win
be conveyed in thefonn of ageneral warranty deed and the Owner shan bear the
cost of a survey and preparing the deed Upon request by the County the Owner shall also
contribute ten thousand dol ars cash for application toward the cost of constructingthe Greenway
according to the County s current standards for a class B trail Suchcontribution
shall bemade by Owner within days of receipt of a written request by the County
If the request is not made within seven years from the date of submission of the first final site
plan for Phase I this cash proffer shall become nun and void If such cash contribution is not fully
expended for the stated purpose within two years from the date the funds are contributed to
the County an unexpended funds shan be refunded to the Owner If the greenway is not
used for the purpose for which it is dedicated within ten years from the date of dedication the County
shall transfer the land back to and for the use of the Owner to be used
as open space The Owner will provide a pedestrian connection to the Greenway through the Belvedere Community s internal trail
system as illustrated in Exhibit A B and CGreenwaybridge Within thirty
days fonowing request by the County Owner shan contribute
tenthousand dollars cash for application toward the cost of constructing a pedestrian
bridge linking the Rivanna River Greenway inDunIoraTax Map Parcel FA to RiverRun
Tax Map Parcel DI IA thereby anowing neighborhood residents access to facilities in
Pen Parkand other portions of the Greenway systemIftherequest isnot
made within seven years from the date of submission of the first final site plan for
Phase I this proffer shan become nun and void If such cash contribution is not expended for the
stated purpose within two years from the date the funds were contributed to the County all unexpended
funds shall be refunded to the Owner Road Construction and Reservation of Right of way
North Free State Connector Road The Owners shan dedicate upon demand by the
County a one hundred foot wide rightofway
topublic use as shown onExhibit B of the General Development Plan and
labeled Reserved Road ROW Where less than one hundredfeetof right of way is available on the Owner
s Property Approximately the first feet from Rio Road the Owner shall dedicate the
available right of way Feesimpleinterest shan be dedicated by theOwner within six months
fonowing receipt by the Owner of written notice of demand by the CountyTheOwner shan
pay for the costs ofsurveying and preparing deeds necessary to complete such dedication The
County must accept the dedication within twelve months following its demand for dedication Future North Free State Connector
Extension Road The Owner shall dedicate a one hundred foot strip of
land along the Property boundary with the Norfolk Southern Railroad as shown
onExhibit Cof the General Development Plan and labeled Reserved Road ROW for
dedication upon demand by the County for the purpose of constructing a road that extends
the North Free State Connector Road northward across the
Rivanna River The Owner shall dedicate rightofway within six months fonowing written
notice of demand by the County Such reservation shall remain in p ace through
December The County must accept the dedication within twelve months following its demand
for dedication Should this road be removed from the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan
said reservation shall become null and void and the Owner or Successors shall retain
fee simple ownership of the parcel North Free State
ConnectorExtensionRoad Design The Owner shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
County Engineer and VDOT that the North Free State Connector Extension Road can be accommodated
by the Block Development Plan Approval by VDOT and the County Engineer
must be secured prior to final platting and road plan approval in Block Free State Road
Right of way The Owner
shalldedicate upon demand by theCountya fifty foot wide right of way along portions
of the existing Free State Road thatareon the Owner s Property from its proposed intersection with
Belvedere Blvd between RoadCand Road K to its intersection with Loring Run
Road Where the road is only partially onthe Property the Owner shall dedicate sufficient right of
way width to ensure a total right ofway ofnotless than fifty feet inclusive
of theexistingproscriptive right of way The right of way shall be conveyed within six months
followingreceipt of writtennoticeby the County in the form of a general warranty deed
and the Owner shall bear the cost of a survey and preparation of the deed If the
dedicated land is not used for the purpose for which it was dedicated within two years from the date of
dedication the County shall transfer the land back to and for the use of the Owner
Connection to Dunlora Fann The Owner shall dedicate upon demand by the County a
fiftyfoot wide right of way extending from Road Dto the property line
at the eastern terminus of Road Jasshownon Exhibit Cof the General Development Plan The right
ofway shall be conveyed within six months following receipt of written notice by the County
feesimplein the form of a general warranty deed and Owner shall bear the costofasurveyandpreparationofthedeedTheCountymustacceptthededicationwithintwelvemonthsfollowing
its demand for dedication If the dedicated land is not used for the purpose for which
it was dedicated within ten years from the date of dedication the County shall transfer the
land back to and for the use of the Owner Fairview Access The Owner agrees toprovidetoFairviewSwimClubQvRfQfafiftyfootwideaccess
easementfrom Belvedere Drive to the edge of the Fairview Swim Club PropertyTaxMap Parcel
B and C to facilitate vehicular access to the existing Fairview entrance or in other such
location that is mutually agreeable to theparties and inconformancewith applicable County and
VDOT regulations The Owner shall grant easement within sixty days following approval of final road plan
for Belvedere Boulevard in Phase Overlot Gradin Plan Subdivision Plans The Owner shall
submit an overlot grading plan meeting the requirement of this section hereinafter the plan
with the application for
each subdivision of Property
intosingle family detached lots and single family attached dwelling units shown on the
General Development Plan The plan shall show existing and proposed topographic
features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision The plan shall be
approved by the County Engineer prior to final approval of the subdivision plat The
Property within the subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved plan No
certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer
has determined the lot grading is not consistent with the approved grading plan The plan
shall satisfy the following
a The plan shall show all proposed streets building sites setbacks
surface drainage driveways trails and other features the County Engineer
determines are needed to verify that the plan satisfies the requirements of this
proffer
b The plan shall be drawn to a scale not greater than one inch equals fifty
feet c All
proposed grading shall be shown with contour intervals not greater than two
feet All concentrated surface drainage over lots shall be clearly shown with the
proposed grading All proposed grading shall be designed to assure that surface
drainage can provide adequate relief from the flooding of dwellings in the
event a stonn sewer fails dGraded slopes
on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses lawns shall not exceed
a gradient of three feet of horizontal distance for each one foot of vertical rise
or fall I Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to
be appropriate by the County s program authority in its approvalof
an erosion and sediment control p an for the land disturbing activity These
steeper slopes shan not exceed a gradient of two feet of horizontal
distance for each one foot ofvertical rise or fall unless the County Engineer finds that
the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts e
Surface drainage may flow across upto three
lots before being collected in astonn sewer or directed to a drainage
way outside of the lots f No surface drainage across a residential lot shan have
more than one half acre of land draining to it gAll drainage
from streetsshan be carried across lots in a
stonn sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site Preservation of
Historic Structures Sites and Archaeolo ical Sites Archaeological Survey A
Phase IArchaeological Study for the Property shallbe submitted
bythe Owner to the Director of Planning for his review and approval prior
toissuance of a grading permit An archaeological resource treatment plan shall be submitted by the
Owner to and approved by the Director of Planning for an sites in
the Phase I study that are recommended for Phase II evaluation and or identified as being eligible for inclusion
on the National Register of Historic Places IfaPhase IIstudy isundertaken such
a study shan be approved by the Director of Planning and a treatment plan for said sites
shan be submitted to and approved by the Director of Planning for sites that are detennined to
beeligible for inclusion the National Register of Historic Places and or those sites that require
aPhase IIIstudy Ifina Phase II studya site is detennined to be
eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places and said site is to be preserved in place
the treatment plan shall include nomination of the site to the National Register of Historic Places If
a Phase III study is undertaken for said sites such studies shan be approved by the
Director of
Planning prior to land disturbance within the study area All Phase I Phase II and Phase IIIstudiesshallmeettheVirginiaDepartmentofHistoricResourcesGuidelinesforPreparingArchaeologicalResourceManagementReportsandtheSecretaryoftheInteriorsStandardandGuidelinesforArchaeologicalDocumentationasapplicableandshallbeconductedunderthesupervisionofaqualifiedarchaeologistwhomeetsthequalificationssetforthintheSecretaryoftheInteriorsProfessionalQualificationStandardsAllapprovedtreatmentplansshallbeincorporatedintotheplanofdevelopmentforthesiteandshallbeadheredtoduringtheclearinggradingandconstructionactivitiesthereon
PotentialArtifacts Should Phases Ior II or III studies yield objects or artifacts of archaeological significancetheseobjectsshallbeconveyedtotheVirginiaDepartmentofHistoricResourcesVDHRforlongtennpreservationShouldPhaseIIIfieldworkyieldsubsurfacearchitecturalfeaturesandartifactsrelatedtothorearlythcenturydomesticoccupationsatFreeStateandshouldthesesitesbedeemedarchaeologicallysignificantbyarchaeologistswiththeDigitalArchaeologicalArchiveofComparativeSlaveryDAACSbasedattheThomasJeffersonFoundationtheseartifactswillbesubmittedtothearchaeologistsattheThomasJeffersonFoundationforanalysisandentryintoDAACSpriortobeingconveyedtotheVDHRTheOwnerwillbesolelyresponsibleforconveyingallartifactsanalyzedbyDAACStotheVDHRwithinthirtydaysofreceiptofsuchartifactsRoadsideMarkersUpon
requestby the County the Owner shall contribute up to five thousand dollars cash tofundthecostofcreatingandinstallingtworoadsidehistoricalmarkersasdescribedinsectionoftheCodeofDevelopmentIftherequestisnotmadewithinoneyearfromthedateofapprovalofthefirstfinalsiteplanforPhaseIthisproffershallbecomenullandvoidIfsuchcashcontributionisnotexpendedforthestatedpurposewithintwoyearsfromthedatethefundswerecontributedtotheCountyallunexpendedfundsshallberefundedtotheOwnerPhasinandMitiationofImpactPhasingPhasesofBelvedere
infrastructure will be constructedsequentially beginning with
Phasethen etc This proffer shall not restrict the Owner sabilitytodevelopmultiplephasesconcurrentlynorshallitrequirethecompletionofallbuildingsandotherimprovementsinonephasebeforebeginningconstructiononthenextMitigationofConstructionTrafficImpactTheOwnershallneitherestablishnorallowtobeestablished
ingressor egress for any vehicle heavy equipment or farm machinery orfannequipmenttoandfromthePropertyexceptattheintersectionofthealignmentofBelvedereBoulevardandEastRioRoadasshownonExhibitBandfromthenorthernsegmentofFreeStateRoadthatcrossesFreeStateBridgeasshownonExhibitoftheGeneralDevelopmentPlanoronanypublicstreetshownonafinalsubdivisionplatthathasbeenconstructedandacceptedbyVDOTorbondedforacceptancebyVDOTForpurposesofthisprofferthetermvehiclemeanseverydeviceonorbywhichanypersonorpropertyisormaybetransportedordrawnonahighwayexceptdevicesmovedbyhumanpowerorusedexclusivelyonstationaryrailsortracksthatareusedintheconstructiononorbelowthePropertyincludingallimprovementsplacedonthepropertybytheOwneritscontractorssubcontractorsoragentsThetennheavyequipmentmeansselfpropelledselfpoweredorpulltypeequipmentandmachineryincludingenginesweighingfive
thousand poundsor more primarily employed for construction industrial maritime mining and
forestry uses Code Enforcement
Architectura Standards The
Ownershall prepare and record a declaration of covenants conditions and restrictions that
among other things establishes architectural standards equal to or more
stringent than the architectural standards inthe Code ofDevelopment and establishes an Architectural
Standards Committee ASC The declaration shall include among the
powers and duties ofthe ASC the authority and responsibility to determine that each
structure within the Property complies with all applicable architectural standards before
submitting the proposal tothe County to conduct its review for compliance with
the architectural standards established in the Code ofDevelopment Printed Names of
All Owners
Date TJL v S VL
OOS BelvedereStion Land Tru Trustee
tWJ tU S D
Dunlora LLCbyRobert Hauser Ho esInc
Manager by Hauser
DG t UL OS Jt
bYCE
StoneHaus Inc byCE˙h n p
CharlotteGLevenson
Signature of Attorney in
Fact DQ
y e rv
tl rltiSl
sr p SAfLtJ
CleYE StJjsIj r C
hayI D Hc GLEv EY O l
IDf
ro PrintedName of Attorney in Fact
1
Rebecca Ragsdale
From:Bob Hauser [rhauser@stonehaus.net]
Sent:Tuesday, February 10, 2015 10:16 AM
To:Rebecca Ragsdale
Cc:rkroner@scottkroner.com; Michael Ball
Subject:Re: Belvedere Greenway Request letter
Rebecca,
I disagree with your determination, which seems to rely on Albemarle County's technical definition of a site plan to determine the
cut off date for this proffer, and that definition is not included in the proffer. Albemarle's zoning definitions are unique to
Albemarle, and are not universally accepted by those in the construction and design community. Most importantly I don't believe
your interpretation honors the intent of the proffer which was to provide Albemarle County a 7 year period to make a request,
which Albemarle failed to make. Belvedere's proffers were agreed to as part of the re-zoning of Belvedere to Neighborhood
Model, along with a conceptual development plan. At that point in time there would have been no reason to tie the proffer to a
specific type of development, which in Albemarle County requires a site plan prepared based on their definition. I believe the
proffer was intended to align the county's option for the Greenway with the time table of Belvedere's Phase 1 construction, which
included construction drawings for water, sewer, storm water management, mass grading, along with plans for our intended
subdivisions. These construction drawings were submitted in 2006 and construction commenced in 2007. Based on the
following definition of a site plan, from Wikipedia, the proffer would have expired in 2013.
A site plan is a "set of construction drawings that a builder or contractor uses to make improvements to a
property. Counties can use the site plan to verify that development codes are being met and as a historical
resource. Site plans are often prepared by a design consultant who must be either a licensed engineer, architect,
landscape architect or land surveyor".[3]
The site plan you reference, SDP 2008-22, was actually a site plan that was submitted to the county for a small section of Phase
1, which was nearing completion. These 8 lots, out of a total of 116 lots in Phase 1, were intended to be townhomes, had
already been graded, and were in the process of being served by roads, water, sewer and storm water based on plans that had
been submitted to Albemarle in 2006 and approved in 2007. The only reason for the site plan submittal was the technical
requirements of Albemarle's zoning code, which requires a site plan when building townhomes. I am confident that the use of
the term "site plan" in the proffer was not referencing a specific type of product which might someday be built in Belvedere.
The term was used in the proffer to reference construction drawings required by Phase 1's construction.
If you continue to disagree with my position I am willing to meet to discuss a compromise or I would like to know what my
options are for relief from your determination.
Respectfully,
Bob
On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:45 AM, Rebecca Ragsdale <rragsdale@albemarle.org> wrote:
Bob,
The proffer specifies that it shall expire 7 years from the date of submission of the first final site plan for Phase
I. That site plan was SDP 2008-22, submitted on February 7, 2008.
Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
2
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
(434) 296-5832 Ext. 3226
E-mail: rragsdale@albemarle.org
From: Bob Hauser [mailto:rhauser@stonehaus.net]
Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2015 9:30 AM
To: Rebecca Ragsdale; rkroner@scottkroner.com
Cc: Michael Ball
Subject: RE: Belvedere Greenway Request letter
Rebecca,
Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 both expire 7 years following the submittal of our plans for Belvedere Phase 1. I
have not yet researched the exact date that our plans were submitted to Albemarle County but I do
remember that Belvedere was under construction in the summer of 2007, which would seem to
indicate that the plans for the project were submitted more than 7 years ago.
Respectfully,
Bob
Robert M. Hauser
CEO
STONEHAUS
100 Tenth Street NE
Charlottesville, VA 22902
434-981-2034 (mobile)
3
From: Rebecca Ragsdale [mailto:rragsdale@albemarle.org]
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2015 9:43 AM
To: rkroner@scottkroner.com; Bob Hauser
Subject: Belvedere Greenway Request letter
Hello gentleman,
We put a copy of this request letter in the mail but I also wanted to email you a copy.
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Rebecca
Rebecca Ragsdale, Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
(434) 296-5832 Ext. 3226
E-mail: rragsdale@albemarle.org
§ 15.2-2299. Same; enforcement and guarantees.
The zoning administrator is vested with all necessary authority on behalf of the governing body
of the locality to administer and enforce conditions attached to a rezoning or amendment to a
zoning map, including (i) the ordering in writing of the remedy of any noncompliance with the
conditions; (ii) the bringing of legal action to insure compliance with the conditions, including
injunction, abatement, or other appropriate action or proceeding; and (iii) requiring a guarantee,
satisfactory to the governing body, in an amount sufficient for and conditioned upon the
construction of any physical improvements required by the conditions, or a contract for the
construction of the improvements and the contractor's guarantee, in like amount and so
conditioned, which guarantee shall be reduced or released by the governing body, or agent
thereof, upon the submission of satisfactory evidence that construction of the improvements has
been completed in whole or in part. Failure to meet all conditions shall constitute cause to deny
the issuance of any of the required use, occupancy, or building permits, as may be appropriate.
(1978, c. 320, § 15.1-491.3; 1983, c. 221; 1997, c. 587.)
§ 15.2-2301. Same; petition for review of decision.
Any zoning applicant or any other person who is aggrieved by a decision of the zoning
administrator made pursuant to the provisions of § 15.2-2299 may petition the governing body
for review of the decision of the zoning administrator. All petitions for review shall be filed with
the zoning administrator and with the clerk of the governing body within 30 days from the date
of the decision for which review is sought and shall specify the grounds upon which the
petitioner is aggrieved. A decision by the governing body on an appeal taken pursuant to this
section shall be binding upon the owner of the property which is the subject of such appeal only
if the owner of such property has been provided written notice of the zoning violation, written
determination, or other appealable decision.
An aggrieved party may petition the circuit court for review of the decision of the governing
body on an appeal taken pursuant to this section. The provisions of subsection F of § 15.2-2285
shall apply to such petitions to the circuit court, mutatis mutandis.
(1978, c. 320, § 15.1-491.5; 1988, c. 856; 1997, c. 587; 2011, c. 457; 2012, c. 401.)
RESOLUTION DENYING BELVEDERE STATION LAND TRUST’S APPEAL
AND AFFIRMING THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR’S
FEBRUARY 17, 2015 DETERMINATION
WHEREAS, on October 12, 2005, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved ZMA
2004-007 Belvedere with proffers; and
WHEREAS, Proffer 3.2 requires the dedication and conveyance of a greenway easement, as well
as a $10,000 payment toward the cost of constructing the greenway, and Proffer 3.3 requires a $10,000
payment toward the cost of constructing a pedestrian bridge linking the Rivanna River Greenway in
Dunlora to RiverRun; and
WHEREAS, Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 require the payments to be made within thirty days following a
request by the County, and that if the request is not made within seven years from the date of submission
of the first final site plan for Phase I, the cash proffers will become null and void; and
WHEREAS, the first final site plan for Belvedere (SDP 2008-22) was submitted to the County
on February 7, 2008, and the County issued its request for the cash proffers to BSLT on January 28, 2015,
less than seven years after the submission of the first final site plan for Belvedere; and
WHEREAS, on February 17, 2015, the Zoning Administrator issued a determination to the
trustees of the Belvedere Station Land Trust (“BSLT”) in which she concluded that the term “site plan,”
as used in Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 means a “site plan” as defined in the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance;
and
WHEREAS, BSLT appealed the Zoning Administrator’s February 17, 2015 determination to the
Board as provided by Virginia Code § 15.2-2301, asserting that the term “site plan” as used in Proffers
3.2 and 3.3 should be defined differently than as it is defined in the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the
executive summary prepared for the Appeal of the Zoning Administrator’s Determination and all of its
attachments, and the information presented at the Board of Supervisor’s April 8, 2015 meeting, the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby denies BSLT’S appeal and affirms the Zoning
Administrator’s February 17, 2015 determination that the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance definition
of the term “site plan” applies to Proffers 3.2 and 3.3 accepted in conjunction with ZMA 2004-007 and
that the County made a timely request for the cash proffers on January 28, 2015.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution 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 ____ ____
Ms. Dittmar ____ ____
Ms. Mallek ____ ____
Ms. McKeel ____ ____
Ms. Palmer ____ ____
Mr. Sheffield ____ ____