HomeMy WebLinkAbout2015-5-13Tentative
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
T E N T A T I V E
MAY 13, 2015
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
LANE AUDITORIUM
3:00 p.m.
1. Call to Order.
Work Sessions:
2. 3:00 p.m. – 4:15 p.m. - Capital Improvements Program. (Trevor Henry, Director of the
Office of Facilities Development)
3. 4:15 p.m. – 4:45 p.m. - Objectives for Years Two and Three of the FY 15-17 Strategic
Plan (Louise Wyatt, Organizational Development Manager)
4. 4:45 p.m. - Closed Meeting.
6:00 p.m.
5. Reconvene and Call to Order.
6. Certify Closed Meeting.
7. Pledge of Allegiance.
8. Moment of Silence.
9. Adoption of Final Agenda.
10. Brief Announcements by Board Members.
11. Proclamations and Recognitions:
a. Business Appreciation Month 2015, (Adrian Felts, Operations Manager, Battelle
Charlottesville)
12. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
13. Consent Agenda (on next page).
Public Hearings:
14. PROJECT: CLE-2015-00041. Ms. Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady). (Previously
approved by CLE201400041). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio. PROPOSED: Special exception to
allow for an existing family day home to continue operation to care for up to 12 children in a
residence and may include one employee on a part-time basis. ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL
USAGE: PUD Planned Unit Development – residential (3 – 34 units per acre), mixed with
commercial, service and industrial uses. SECTION: 20.3.1 13. Family day homes (reference
5.1.56). COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND. USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential - residential
(6.01-34 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions, schools, commercial, office
and service uses in the Places 29 Development Area (Neighborhood 1). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR:
No. LOCATION: 64 Woodlake Drive. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 061X2000W00800. (Rebecca Ragsdale,
Senior Planner)
15. PROJECT: SP-2015-00004. Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project (Signs
#45&46). MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 03700-00-00-01100, 03700-
00-00-011A0, 03700-00-00-011B0. LOCATION: 8258 Gordonsville Road. PROPOSAL: Replace
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2015Files/0513/0.0_Agenda.htm (1 of 3) [10/8/2020 9:11:17 AM]
Tentative
existing electrical-transmission-line, and replace existing wooden poles with steel structures
approximately 16 feet taller PETITION: Energy and communications transmission facilities under
section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance (reference 5.1.12). No dwelling units proposed. ZONING:
RA Rural Areas - agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre in
development lots). ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Areas –
preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/
density (0.5 unit/ acre in development lots). (Scott Clark, Senior Planner)
Presentations:
16. Shenandoah National Park Annual Presentation, Jim Northup, Superintendent.
17. Albemarle County Service Authority Quarterly Report, Gary O’Connell, Executive Director.
18. Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Quarterly Report, Tom Frederick, Executive Director.
Discussion:
19. CPA-2013-01. Comprehensive Plan Update/Amendment. (Elaine Echols, Principal Planner)
20. From the Board: Committee Reports and Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
21. From the County Executive: Report on Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
22. Adjourn.
CONSENT AGENDA
FOR APPROVAL (action required):
13.1 Set public hearing for June 3, 2015, on an ordinance to amend Chapter 2, Administration,
of the Albemarle County Code, to amend Section 2-202, Compensation of board of
supervisors, to increase the compensation of the members of the Board of Supervisors by an
inflation factor of 2.3% effective July 1, 2015.
13.2 Resolution to accept road(s) in Dunlora Forest Subdivision into the State Secondary
System of Highways. (Rio Magisterial District) (Glenn Brooks)
13.3 Resolution to accept road(s) in Haden Place Subdivision into the State Secondary System
of Highways. (White Hall Magisterial District). (Glenn Brooks)
13.4 SDP-2014-075 Cascadia, Block 1-3- Final Site Plan- Special exception to authorize
variations from the Code of Development for ZMA 2002-004. (Rivanna Magisterial District) (Megan
Yaniglos)
13.5 Resolution Providing Board Comments on Proposed Policy Change to the Comprehensive
Services Act. (Doug Walker)
file:////coba-webapp01/BOSForms/Agenda/2015Files/0513/0.0_Agenda.htm (2 of 3) [10/8/2020 9:11:17 AM]
Tentative
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/0513/0.0_Agenda.htm (3 of 3) [10/8/2020 9:11:17 AM]
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Objectives for Years Two and Three of the FY15-17
Strategic Plan
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Preliminary Discussion of Draft Objectives for Years
Two and Three of the FY15-17 Strategic Plan
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Letteri, Walker, Davis, Catlin, Allshouse, and
Wyatt
PRESENTER (S): Louise Wyatt
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
May 13, 2015
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Supervisors has formally engaged in the County’s strategic planning efforts since 2001. The Board provided
direction and guidance for the development of the FY15-17 Strategic Plan during a retreat held on June 10, 2014. After
additional discussion at subsequent Board meetings, the Board gave final approval of eight goals and associated Year
One Priorities at its October 1, 2014 meeting. At the February 4, 2015 meeting, staff provided a progress report on the
strategic plan and indicated that draft objectives for Years Two and Year would be coming for Board review at an
upcoming meeting.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
The County’s FY15-17 Strategic Plan reflects the Board’s strategic priorities.
DISCUSSION:
The purpose of Wednesday’s discussion is to get Board feedback on draft objectives for Years Two and Three of the
Strategic Plan (see Attachment A). Ultimately, these objectives should reflect what the Board considers to be the most
significant strategic issues to be addressed over the next two years. Based on feedback provided by the Board, staff
will bring revised objectives back to the Board for final consideration in June.
Staff drafted these objectives based on:
Board priorities identified at June 2014 retreat (see Attachment B)
General Board discussion and action over the past several months
Input from County department heads
As a reminder, the objectives and strategies of the FY15-17 Strategic Plan are being tracked and managed on a
regular basis. Reports are provided to the Board on a monthly basis through the County Executive’s Monthly Report,
with comprehensive updates provided biannually. The Board will receive its next formal biannual Strategic Plan update
at the annual strategic planning retreat scheduled on September 25, 2015.
As new strategic issues associated with the existing Strategic Plan are identified, staff will bring them to the Board’s
attention for consideration. For example, the Board may want to revisit strategic objectives once Citizen Survey data
and recommendations from the Citizen Committee are available.
For reference, the most recent progress report on Year One objectives is provided in Attachment C.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The Strategic Plan provides direction for the County’s Five-Year Financial Plan and annual budget processes.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that Board members provide feedback on the attached draft objectives for Years Two and Three
(Attachment A). Based on that feedback, staff will bring revised objectives back to the Board for final consideration in
June.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A—Draft Objectives for Years Two and Three of the FY15-17 Strategic Plan
Attachment B—Board Aspirations and Priorities Identified at June 2014 Strategic Planning Retreat
Attachment C—February 2015 Progress Report on FY15-17 Strategic Plan
Return to agenda
1
FY15-17 Strategic Plan: Proposed Year Two and Three Objectives
Goal 1: Citizen Engagement:
Successfully engage citizens so that local government reflects their values and aspirations
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, increase opportunities for meaningful citizen engagement.
B. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Establish and implement protocols, resources, and technologies that
reach and respond to citizens from diverse circumstances. Example strategy/action: Implementation of
Granicus and live streaming
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Create and implement initiatives that strengthen community
leadership capacity. Example strategy/action: Working with neighborhood associations
Goal 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
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, establish and implement a 3-5 year plan for the use of the Ivy
Material Utilization Center as a waste handling and recycling facility.
B. Adopted Year One Objective: By October 2015, establish a long-term solid waste plan, with an emphasis on
reducing, reusing, and recycling.
C. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, establish direction and begin the design process to meet the
long-term needs of the Circuit and General District Court operations.
D. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Develop differentiated funding strategies for core vs. enhanced (e.g.,
quality of life projects like parks, etc.) projects.
E. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Establish and implement strategic direction including appropriate
public engagement, for the following community needs:
Broadband
Urban infrastructure
School space needs (e.g., preschool, modernization of facilities)
Goal 3: 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
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, complete Comprehensive Plan Review and adoption.
2
B. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Adopt a work plan and schedule for implementation of
Comprehensive Plan strategies related to the Development Areas.
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Work towards creation of midtown district by completing updated
Places 29 Master Plan including Rio/Rt. 29 Small Area Plan.
D. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Work to enhance Rivanna river corridor by completing updated
Pantops Master Plan including Rivanna River Corridor Small Area Plan.
E. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Explore and develop strategies designed to revitalize aging urban
areas, focusing on existing neighborhoods and redevelopment possibilities.
F. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Determine appropriate levels of service for urban areas and evaluate
potential use of Urban Service District to fund those services.
G. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Determine alternatives to expand multi-modal transportation options.
Goal 4: Economic Prosperity:
Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital investments, and tax revenues that support
community goals
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, establish an Economic Development Office to achieve the
County’s economic development mission and goals.
B. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Establish and begin implementation of a Board-approved work plan
(to include workforce development activities) for the County’s newly-created Economic Development
Office.
Goal 5: Educational Opportunities:
Provide lifelong learning opportunities for all our citizens
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, in partnership with the school system, identify potential
improvements in funding strategies for K-12.
B. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, a collaborative work group, which includes members of the
School Division, Local Government and community members, will identify possible short- and long-term
solutions to maintain, and possibly increase, the current availability of quality pre-school opportunities.
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Finalize direction and develop a plan to enhance educational
opportunities for at-risk preschoolers.
Goal 6: Natural Resources:
3
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
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By October 2015, establish direction and funding for a program to improve
water quality.
B. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Develop and begin implementation of a comprehensive program to
improve water quality.
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Establish and begin implementation of priorities for a natural
resource program.
Goal 7: Operational Capacity:
Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that achieves community priorities
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By December 2014, complete review of staffing needs through consideration
of the Five Year Financial Plan.
B. Adopted Year One Objective: By January 2015, identify and propose staffing resources needed to meet the
Board’s transportation priorities.
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Develop alternate, sustainable funding strategies to address the
County’s long-term operational and capital funding needs.
D. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Develop and begin implementation of pay strategies that address staff
recruitment and retention challenges, especially as related to salary compression.
E. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Develop and implement strategies for addressing imminent
retirement of senior county staff.
D. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: In partnership with the school system, develop recommendations to
enhance joint operations to achieve greater efficiencies and improved service delivery.
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
A. Adopted Year One Objective: By June 2015, complete Comprehensive Plan Review and adoption.
B. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Adopt a work plan and schedule for implementation of
Comprehensive Plan strategies related to the Rural Areas
C. Proposed Year Two/Three Objective: Initiate the development of a rural transportation plan
1
BOARD DRAFT ASPIRATIONS
Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors
6-10-14
ECONOMIC PROSPERITY
DEVELOPMENT AREAS
NATURAL RESOURCES
CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE CITIZEN ENGAGEMENT
OPERATIONAL CAPACITY
Foster an environment that stimulates
diversified job creation, capital
investments, and tax revenues that
support community goals
Prioritize, plan and invest in critical
infrastructure that responds to past
and future changes and improves the
capacity to serve community needs
Successfully engage citizens so
that local government reflects
their values and aspirations
Ensure County government’s ability to provide high
quality service that achieves community priorities
Preserve the character of
rural life with thriving farms
and forests, traditional
crossroad communities, and
protected scenic areas,
historic sites, and biodiversity
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
Provide lifelong learning
opportunities for all our citizens
EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES
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
2
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 2030 Aspirations
June 10, 2014
Educational Opportunities:
Provide lifelong learning opportunities for all our citizens
Economic Prosperity:
Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital investments, and tax
revenues that support community goals
Operational Capacity:
Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that achieves community
priorities
Citizen Engagement:
Successfully engage citizens so that local government reflects their values and aspirations
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
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
3
DRAFT ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 3-YEAR PRIORITIES
June 10, 2014
Items highlighted in green are proposed 1st Year priorities.
Educational Opportunities: Provide lifelong learning opportunities for all our citizens
1 In partnership with the school system, identify a process to identify potential
improvements in funding strategies for K -12 and school readiness
Consider a blue ribbon committee to explore funding methods
Examine the funding relationship between the Board and School Board
2 Research and determine the successful components and outcome measurements for a
lifelong educational system
Determine who does what (respective responsibilities) and where opportunities
may lie; consider what piece each partner may play
Determine continuing education needs by using the Economic Development Office
to work with businesses to define those needs
3 Support the CATEC Strategic Plan in order to improve workforce development that is
aligned with our local economy
Incorporate CATEC Strategic Plan into County plans (i.e. economic development)
Expand the role of CATEC
Improve vocational/workforce/employer links
Increase internships and apprenticeships
4 Change process for oversight of the CIP to ensure that the Board and School Board get
better input earlier on and that we achieve greater citizen awareness
Economic Prosperity: Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital
investments, and tax revenues that support community goals
1 Establish a successful Economic Development Office that achieves the County’s
economic development goals
Determine focus and direction of efforts; create appropriate role and structure
Determine reasonable measurements for success
Leverage career ladder jobs within our target industries (multiplier jobs)
Educate the community about the importance of economic development, what it
would look like, and how the Economic Development Office is a resource for the
County
2 Evaluate the Orange Dot program in the County
3 Define policies and incentives for redevelopment
4 Review our assets and economic engines within the community and enhance and
protect our relationships so that we are able to utilize more partnerships when
4
appropriate
Operational Capacity: Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that
achieves community priorities
1 Attract and retain high performing professionals and managers
2 Bring staffing capacity up to a level required to implement the Board’s strategic
priorities
Consider/evaluate a Transportation Planning position
Consider/evaluate a Water Resource Manager position
Consider/evaluate a Rural Areas Planning position
3 Continue with our long term plan to fund the Police Department’s core services and
geo-policing
4 Continually evaluate others’ best practices and encourage an organizational culture
that innovates and is a model for others
Help staff with furthering “One Organization Committed to Excellence”
5 Obtain and maintain infrastructure of sufficient quality to support government
operations (i.e. IT, buildings, vehicles)
6 Strengthen regional collaboration efforts
Citizen Engagement: Successfully engage citizens so that local government reflects their values
and aspirations
1 Improve citizen communication and participation
Develop an interactive mapping approach that enhances geographic information
that is available to citizens
Support elected officials meeting with and coordinating ombudsman activities with
citizens
Continue to establish protocols, resources, and technologies that reach and
respond to citizens from diverse circumstances
[Note: Consider whether any of these bulleted items should be separate priorities]
Critical Infrastructure: Prioritize, plan and invest in critical infrastructure that responds to past and
future changes and improves the capacity to serve community needs
1 Establish and implement a solid waste management plan with emphasis on reducing,
reusing, and recycling
Develop and execute short term solutions/actions and begin the implementation of
a long range strategy to address solid waste issues
2 Consider the formation of a regional transit authority and consider creating a service
5
district for funding
Update previous study
Identify partners
Look at funding alternatives
3 Explore the basis for calculating school capacity to insure alignment with our
development plans
Process is underway to produce a long range plan that will inform the CIP process
Address Pre-K space needs; consider whether schools can support Pre -K education
4 Revisit our capital investments and prioritize those that are needed, particularly as
they relate to Master Plan implementation
5 Examine/revisit the possibility of financing our CIP projects through a local bond issue
6 Begin design for court expansion and renovation
7 Revisit the process for the CIP across schools
[Note: This Priority may be combined with Educational Opportunities #4 into one
priority regarding the CIP and will be addressed under the appropriate Aspiration]
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
1 Perform transportation impact planning to determine how growth is affecting existing
neighborhoods, businesses, etc.
Include safety improvements in master plan areas
Enhance transit service, routes, and bus stops
2 Define new small area plans with related improvements
Expand and sensibly place light industrial areas
3 Develop and implement policies and/or performance measurements to protect
existing neighborhoods
4 Explore redevelopment policies and incentives
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
1 Set up a program to improve water quality
Determine the level of service and funding
Revisit the funding mechanism for storm water management
6
2 Successfully implement the County’s stormwater management programs
3 Identify important biodiversity areas and provide information to landowners on the
importance of those areas
4 Consider steps suggested in the LCAPP to ease/mitigate climate change
[Note: Revise this Priority after Comprehensive Planning presentation to the Board]
Rural Areas: Preserve the character of rural life with thriving farms and forests, traditional
crossroad communities, and protected scenic areas, historic sites, and biodiversity
1 Optimize management of the County’s parks and open spaces
Determine the optimum relationship between tourism and preservation and ensure
that tourism (overuse) is not having a negative impact
Consider how we may better develop our park system
Review park/open space usage to determine what parks may be overused; how to
open new parks to spread usage, and how to get people to our parks
Consider how funding for the ACE program may contribute
Include volunteer system for trail maintenance
2 Carefully address agri-tourism mandates to assess rural impact
3 Develop a rural transportation plan
Identify entrance corridor roads (i.e. Barracks Road)
Address connectivity including trails, bikeways, greenways, rural rustic road, etc.
4 Ascertain the core services expectations in rural areas and examine the “social
contract” that the County has with rural residents in the delivery of services
The community facilities plan addresses this and will lead to Board policy
Develop common theme and messages that Board Members can communicate
5 Establish a minimum acceptable level of broadband service and pursue opportunities
to bring that level of service to all citizens
6 Encourage rehabilitation of crossroads communities
1
FY15-17 Strategic Plan Progress Report (as of January 2015)
Goal 1: Citizen Engagement:
Successfully engage citizens so that local government reflects their values and aspirations
A. Objective: By June 2015, increase opportunities for meaningful citizen engagement.
Strategies and Actions
Restructured the County Executive’s Office to improve support for elected official meetings with
constituents and coordination of ombudsman activities.
Developed and implemented a plan to support the Five Year Financial Plan and budget town hall
meetings.
At the December 10, 2014 Board meeting, conducted a work session on community engagement/
communication strategies and solicited input from the Board; the Board provided suggestions and
also decided not to move forward with videostreaming at this time; suggestions will be incorporated
into the strategic communications plan that will be presented to the Board in late spring.
□ Establish protocols and improve resources and technologies that reach and respond to citizens from
diverse circumstances.
□ Develop an interactive mapping option that enhances the geographic information that is available to
citizens.
Goal 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
A. Objective: By June 2015, establish and implement a 3-5 year plan for the use of the Ivy Material
Utilization Center as a waste handling and recycling facility.
Strategies and Actions
□ By March 2015, determine the near term use of the Ivy MUC as either a Transfer Station or
Convenience Center.
□ By April 2015, if a transfer station is desired, submitted required plans to DEQ.
□ By June 2015, start construction planning process as required.
□ By June 2015, establish necessary agreements with Rivanna Solid Waste Authority.
B. Objective: By October 2015, establish a long-term solid waste plan, with an emphasis on reducing,
reusing, and recycling.
Strategies and Actions
Appointed members to the Long Range Solid Waste Solutions Advisory Committee.
Approved a Public Engagement Plan to support the work of the Committee.
□ By February 2015, evaluate the need for consultant assistance for the Committee.
□ By April 2015, adopt the solid waste section of the Community Facilities Chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan.
□ By August 2015, the Committee delivers a report to the Board with recommended alternatives to
meet long term needs.
□ By October 2015, approve a long term solid waste plan.
2
C. Objective: By June 2015, establish direction and begin the design process to meet the long-term needs of
the Circuit and General District Court operations.
Strategies and Actions
In December 2014, concluded joint meetings of courts committee and established direction.
□ By June 2015, finalize negotiations on cost-sharing, property disposition, parking solutions, and
facility development option.
□ By June 2015, initiate RFP process for design firms.
Goal 3: 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
A. Objective: By June 2015, complete Comprehensive Plan Review and adoption.
Strategies and Actions
□ Schedule monthly meetings pursuant to Board direction.
Goal 4: Economic Prosperity:
Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital investments, and tax revenues that support
community goals
A. Objective: By June 2015, establish an Economic Development Office to achieve the County’s economic
development mission and goals.
Strategies and Actions
Completed Board and public engagement regarding the focus and priorities of the Office for the first
three years.
□ By Feb 2015, complete the hiring process for the new Director. This is on schedule.
□ By Oct 2015 complete a three year action plan for the Office that reflects the County’s economic
development focus and priorities and measures of success
□ Educate the community about the importance of economic development, what it will look like, and
how it will serve as an important resource for Albemarle County.
Goal 5: Educational Opportunities:
Provide lifelong learning opportunities for all our citizens
A. Objective: By June 2015, in partnership with the school system, identify potential improvements in
funding strategies for K-12.
Strategies and Actions
As part of the Five Year Planning process, General Government and School Division staff worked
closely together to provide information and scenarios for the Board’s review and consideration.
□ Staff is planning to bring an Executive Summary to the Board in the near future to get more direction
on additional desired actions, which includes consideration of a blue ribbon committee to explore
funding alternatives.
3
B. Objective: By June 2015, a collaborative work group, which includes members of the School Division,
Local Government and community members, will identify possible short- and long-term solutions to
maintain, and possibly increase, the current availability of quality pre-school opportunities.
Strategies and Actions
□ There are four separate local work groups engaged in pre-school discussions in varying stages of
development and with varying charges:
1) A School Board and Board of Supervisors work group that has a focus on funding outside K-12
including funding for pre-school;
2) A Community Summit on pre-school that is planned for the spring of 2015 to be hosted by
Charlottesville Tomorrow;
3) A community-wide work group with a City-County focus is in the planning stages; and
4) A work group focused on short-term solutions for Albemarle County public pre-school
established by the County Executive. On December 3, 2014, Director of Social Services Kathy
Ralston presented this update to the Board of Supervisors on the short-term work group’s progress.
The work group’s charge includes the following actions:
□ Determine best approach to maintain funding and in-kind support for existing pre-school
classrooms.
□ Determine best approach for overall leadership and management of pre-school services for
Albemarle County.
□ Identify actions that can be taken to enhance services to Albemarle residents through the
existing pre-school network of services and develop cost estimates to achieve those actions.
□ Develop a long-range plan to ensure universal access to Evidence Based or Evidence
Informed Practice pre-school services for Albemarle residents including cost estimates.
Members of the short-term work group will continue to meet and will plan to bring a final report with
recommendations to the Board in March 2015.
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
A. Objective: By October 2015, establish direction and funding for a program to improve water quality.
Strategies and Actions
Established the Water Resources Funding Advisory Committee.
Hired a consultant to support the Committee.
In January 2015, the Board provided input on a desired level of service.
□ By September 2015, the Committee to deliver a report to the Board.
□ By October 2015, the Board to approve the desired level of service and select a funding solution for
the Five Year Plan.
Goal 7: Operational Capacity:
Ensure County government’s ability to provide high quality service that achieves community priorities
A. Objective: By December 2014, complete review of staffing needs through consideration of the Five
Year Financial Plan.
Complete.
4
B. Objective: By January 2015, identify and propose staffing resources needed to meet the Board’s
transportation priorities.
Strategies and Actions
At its November 5, 2014 meeting, the Board approved a Transportation Planner position to be filled
in FY15.
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
A. Objective: By June 2015, complete Comprehensive Plan Review and adoption.
Strategies and Actions
□ Schedule monthly meetings pursuant to Board direction.
BUSINESS APPRECIATION MONTH 2015
WHEREAS, Governor Terry McAuliffe has recognized May 2015 as BUSINESS APPRECIATION
MONTH in the COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, and called this observance to the
attention of all citizens; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County businesses play an essential role in supporting the needs and
development of our local communities; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County businesses are vital to the successful creation and maintenance of a
diverse, strong, and sustainable economy; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County applauds the successes of local businesses and their role in supporting
the County’s goals by reinforcing our commitment to bringing innovation and variety to
the community through exceptional professional practices; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County is pleased to distinguish the many accomplishments of our many
business owners, and to appreciate the many small businesses that have chosen the
County as their home;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, we, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, do
hereby recognize
The month of May 2015
as
BUSINESS APPRECIATION MONTH
in the County of Albemarle, and express our appreciation to our local, regional and
state business partners for their valuable contributions to our community.
Signed and sealed this 13th of May, 2015.
Return to agenda
Draft: April 28, 2015
ORDINANCE NO. 15-2(1)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE
II, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, 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
2, Administration, Article II, Board of Supervisors, of the Code of the County of Albemarle,
Virginia, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Section 2 -202, Compensation of Board of
Supervisors, as follows:
CHAPTER 2. ADMINISTRATION
ARTICLE II. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Sec. 2-202 Compensation of board of supervisors.
The salary of the board of supervisors shall be fifteen thousand two hundred eighty-two
dollars ($15,282.00) fifteen thousand six hundred thirty-three dollars ($15,633.00) for each board
member effective July 1, 2014 2015. In addition to the regular salary, the vice -chairman shall
receive a stipend of thirty-five dollars ($35.00) for each and every meeting chaired and the chairman
shall receive an annual stipend of one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800.00).
(6-13-84; 5-8-85; 5-14-86; 7-1-87; 7-6-88; 6-7-89; Ord. of 6-13-90; Ord. of 8-1-90; Ord. of 8-7-91;
Ord. of 7-1-92; Ord. No. 95-2(1), 6-14-95; Ord. No. 98-2(1), 6-17-98; Code 1988, § 2-2.1; Ord. 98-
A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. No. 99-2(1), 5-5-99; Ord. No. 00-2(1), 6-7-00; Ord. 01-2(2), 6-6-01; Ord. 02-2(2),
5-1-02; Ord. 03-2(1), 6-4-03; Ord. 04-2(1), 6-2-04; Ord. 05-2(1), 6-1-05, Ord. 06-2(1), 6-7-06; Ord.
07-2(1), 6-6-07; Ord. 08-2(2), 6-4-08; Ord. 11-2(1), 5-4-11; Ord. 12-2(1), 5-2-12; Ord. 13-2(1), 5-1-
13)
State law reference--Compensation of board of supervisors, Va. Code § 15.2-1414.3.
This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 2015.
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 ____ ____
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin ia, in regular meeting on the
6th day of May 2015, adopted the following resolution:
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the street(s) in Dunlora Forest Subdivision, as described on the attached
Additions Form AM-4.3 dated May 13, 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 Department of Transpo rtation 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 Dunlora Forest, as
described on the attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated May 13, 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) Sawgrass Court (State Route 1793) from Route 1792 (Dunlora Forest Drive) to
0.08 miles north, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.08 miles.
2) Barefoot Court (State Route 1794) from Route 1793 (Sawgrass Court) to .075
miles south, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.08 miles.
3) Dunlora Forest Drive (State Route 1792) from Route 631 (Rio Road) to .023 miles
east, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle
County in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.02 miles.
4) Sawgrass Court (State Route 1793) from Route 1794 (Barefoot Court) to 0.036
miles north, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 4320, page 171, for a length of 0.04 miles.
Total Mileage – 0.22
The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin ia, in regular meeting on the
6th day of May 2015, adopted the following resolution:
R E S O L U T I O N
WHEREAS, the street(s) in Haden Place Subdivision, as described on the attached
Additions Form AM-4.3 dated May 13, 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 Department of Transporta tion 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 Haden Place, as
described on the attached Additions Form AM-4.3 dated May 13, 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) Haden Place (State Route 1029) from Route 1028 (Haden Way) to 0.16 miles
south, as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of
Albemarle County in Deed Book 4171, page 554, for a length of 0.02 miles.
2) Haden Way (State Route 1028) from Route 1029 (Haden Place) to .06 miles west
to Route 1215 (Killdeer Lane), as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of
Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 4171, page 554, for a length of
0.06 miles.
3) Haden Way (State Route 1028) from Route 1029 (Haden Place) to .06 miles west,
as shown on plat recorded in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle
County in Deed Book 4171, page 554, for a length of 0.06 miles.
Total Mileage – 0.14
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
SDP2014-075 Cascadia, Block 1-3- Final Site Plan-
Special exception to authorize variations from the Code of
Development for ZMA 2002-004
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Adoption of a Resolution approving variations from the
approved Code of Development for street layouts,
maintenance of streets, garage setbacks, build to lines,
and location of proposed parks
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Kamptner, Cilimberg, Benish,
Yaniglos
PRESENTER (S): N/A
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
May 13, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
Cascadia was rezoned to Neighborhood Model District, with an associated Application Plan and Code of Development
(COD), in August 2006 (ZMA2002-004). The owner has requested a special exception to allow six variations from the
approved Code of Development (COD). These requested variations are necessary before the final site plan can be
approved by staff.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Development Areas: Attract quality employment, commercial and high density residential uses into development areas by
provided services and infrastructure that encourage redevelopment and private investment while protecting the quality of
neighborhoods.
DISCUSSION:
There have been six previously approved variations. The applicant is requesting the following variations (numbered 7
through 12) from the requirements of the approved COD:
7. To vary the street layout
8. To allow public maintenance of various streets
9. To vary the street sections for Delphi Drive, Marietta Lane, and Terrace Lane, and provide new street
sections for townhouse lots 68-75 and 106-111 (Knoll Lane)
10. Garage setbacks
11. To vary the build-to line
12. Location of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1 and 2
County Code § 18-8.5.5.3 allows a variation to approved Application Plans and Codes of Development upon determi-
nation that the proposed variation: (1) is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan; (2) does not
increase the approved development density or intensity of development; (3) does not adversely affect the timing and
phasing of development of any other development in the zoning district; (4) does not require a special use permit; and (5)
is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved application. County Code § 18-33.5(a)(1) requires that
any request for a variation be considered and acted upon by the Board of Supervisors as a special exception. Generally,
staff opinion is that the requested variations meet the five criteria listed. A detailed analysis is provided in the Staff Report
(Attachment A).
BUDGET IMPACT:
There are no budget implications related to this request.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment D) approving a special exception for
variations #7-12 with conditions.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Staff Report
B. Applicant request and exhibits
C. ZMA2002-004 approved application plan
D. Resolution
Return to consent agenda
Return to regular agenda
STAFF PERSON: Megan Yaniglos
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: May 13, 2015
Staff Report for Variations #7-12 from ZMA2002-004, Cascadia
VARIATIONS FROM APPROVED PLANS, CODES, AND STANDARDS OF DEVELOPMENT
Each variation request has been reviewed for Zoning and Planning aspects of the regulations. Variations
are considered by the Board of Supervisors as a Special Exception under Chapter 18 Sections 33.5 and
33.9. Staff analysis of each variation request under County Code § 18-8.5.5.3(c) is provided below.
VARIATION #7- To Vary the Street layout:
The applicant submitted the following justification (Attachment B): “In an effort to meet VDOT minimum
street design requirements, we propose the modified street layout as shown on the attached site plan. We
have eliminated alleys A, B, C, and D as well as Village Drive in favor of providing four public streets,
Marietta Drive, Delphi Lane, Delphi Drive and Terrace Lane, and one private street, Knoll Lane, located in
Block 3.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The revised street layout is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan by
providing on-street parking, while meeting VDOT requirements. The design is consistent with the
goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan while recognizing the practical engineering
realities of this development. Since the rezoning was approved VDOT street standards have
changed, also in order to address grade changes, the streets would need to be adjusted and
modified. The design changes were also recommended and/or required by VDOT and
Engineering.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of an y
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application while also addressing
the concerns of
VDOT.
VARIATION #7 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #7 as shown and described in Attachment B
with the following condition:
1. The street layout shall be varied as shown on the drawing entitled “Variation # 1 Vary the Street
Layout,” dated March 18, 2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015,
provided that a turn around shall be designed and constructed for Marietta Drive that complies
with the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual.
VARIATION #8- To allow public maintenance of various streets:
The applicant submitted the following justification: “The COD denotes certain streets to be publicly
maintained per Note 1 on Page 21 of the COD. It also allows the developer to request other streets in the
development to be publicly maintained as approved by VDOT and the Director of Planning per Note 2 on
Page 21 of the COD. Streets requested to be publicly maintained: Marietta Drive, Terrace Lane and
Delphi Drive.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives by allowing for the streets to be publicly
maintained instead of privately, which is a County policy.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
The variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application by the re view and
approval of this request by the Director of Planning and VDOT per the Code of Development.
VDOT has not objections to this variation request.
VARIATION #8 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #8 as shown and described in Attachment B
with the following condition:
1. The streets depicted on the drawing entitled “Variation # 2 Maintenance of Streets,” dated April
14, 2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015, shall be designed and
constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation standards so that they may be accepted into
the secondary state highway system .
VARIATION #9- To vary the street sections for Delphi Drive, M arietta Lane and Terrace Lane, and
provide new street sections for townhouse lots 68-75 and 106-111 (Knoll Lane):
The applicant submitted the following justification: “In order to accommodate the current VDOT and Fire
Marshal requirements, it is necessary to update the typical street sections. For Delphi Drive, Marietta
Lane and Terrace Lane, we are proposing public roads at 29’ wide measured from curb to curb. This
allows parking to be provided on one side of the street. For Marietta Lane, a planting strip of 8’ is
proposed on one side to accommodate existing sanitary sewer. Also for the private alley, Knoll Lane, we
are proposing a 20’ wide cross sloped pavement section in a 24’ wide access easement whereas the
COD calls for a 14’ wide cross-sloped pavement section in a 20’ wide access easement. This additional
width is necessary to accommodate Fire Marshal requirements.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The design is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan while
recognizing the practical engineering realities of this development. The design changes were also
approved and/or required by Fire Rescue.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application while also addressing
the concerns of Fire Rescue.
VARIATION #9 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #9 as shown and described in Attachment
B with the following condition:
1. The street sections for Delphi Drive, Marietta Lane, and Terrace Lane shall be varied, and the
street sections for Knoll Lane abutting lots 68-75 and 106-111 shall be established, such that they
are designed and constructed as provided on the drawing entitled “Variation # 3 Vary Road
Sections,” dated March 15, 2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14,
2015.
VARIATION #10- Garage setbacks:
The applicant submitted the following justification: “Bullet Item #6 under Architectural Ornam entation and
Façade Treatments on Page 17 of the Code of Development states that: Garage doors shall (face)
towards, where possible, the alley, side yard, or to the side street. When a single family dwelling’s
garage is facing a street it shall be recessed from the face of the building wall by three (3) feet. In order
to address this COD requirement, we are hereby requesting a variation to allow the builder to use a front
porch to qualify as the “building wall” to determine the distance that the garage is recessed. Included with
this request, please find architectural elevations for three unit types that provide at least 5 feet between
the face of porch and the garage wall. This variation is being requested since the builder’s standard
housing products do not include a footprint where the garage is recessed from the actual face of the
building wall. Approval of this variation would not lessen the vision of the COD, since the full porches will
serve to provide visual relief as the garages will not protrude past the perceived fronts of the houses.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
Allowing the porch to be considered the building wall is consistent with the goals and objectives of
the comprehensive plan by relegating the parking to a higher standard than that which was
required for the Code of Development. The units will have a garag e that will be recessed at a
minimum of five (5) feet from the face of the porch.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
This variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application while also addressing
the developers desire to have certain unit types and builder.
VARIATION #10 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #10 as shown and described in Attachment B
with the following condition:
1. The method of measuring the minimum garage setback shall be varied from that stated in Item 6
in the Architectural Ornamentation and Facade Treatments section on page 17 of the Code of
Development to allow the front porch of the dwelling to be the “building wall” for the purpose of
measuring the garage setback, and the minimum garage setback shall be varied so that it is
increased from a minimum of three (3) feet to a minimum of five (5) feet.
VARIATION #11- Vary the Build-To Line:
The applicant submitted the following justification: “Item 1 under Lot and Building Height Regulations on
Page 16 of the Code of Development states: The build-to line shall be a specific number and shall be
measured from the front property line. Prior to site plan or subdivision approval, the Developer shall
establish a specific build-to line for each Building Block. The build-to line shall be within the Front Build-to
Line Range established in Table D. At least 50% of a structure’s façade shall be built within eighteen (18)
inches of either side of the build-to line within that Building Block. The “Structure’s Façade” is defined as
the main part of the structure exclusive of the types of structures listed in Footnote number 2 below. A
“Building Block” is defined herein as a group of similar Unit Types located on the same side of a public or
private road and situated between the intersections of two travelways or alleys. To help address this COD
requirement, we will provide a “Building Block Plan” indicating blocks and build -to lines which will be
made part of the final plan documents as was done on the final site plan for Blocks 4-7. However, in
order to implement this plan, we are hereby requesting the following variations from the COD:
1) All lots that have frontage on roads with a curved centerline shall be allowed to vary from the 18
inch range described by the COD. Based on the geometry of the lots and roads that have been
established on the Initial Site Plan, it is not practical to strictly adhere to the build -to requirements
around road curves without significantly impacting the site design. Approval of this variation is
consistent with the vision of the COD.
2) The front yard of corner lots shall be established as indicated on a “Building Block Plan” as will be
shown on the final site plan. The COD is not clear on the setbacks for corner lots. Approval of
this variation is consistent with the vision of the COD.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan by identifying
what the build-to line will be and allowing for flexibility based on the engineering on the site.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
The variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application by the creation of a
‘Building Block Plan’ that identifies what the build-to lines will be in certain areas.
VARIATION #11 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #11 as shown and described in Attachment B
with the following condition:
1. The build-to lines shall be varied as shown on the sheet entitled “Building Block Plan/Phasing
Plan,” dated December 1, 2014, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015.
VARIATION #12- Location of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1 and 2:
The applicant submitted the following justification: “Based on the varied layout, it is also necessary to shift
the location of Knoll Park to the east. Please note that the area of Knoll Park exceeds the area as shown
on the COD. Similarly, the two pocket parks (1 and 2) located near the southeast corner of Block 3 have
been shifted slightly per the site design. Similarly, the areas of the pocket parks exceed the area as
shown on the COD.”
Staff analysis of the variation request is provided below:
1) The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives of the comprehensive plan.
The variation is consistent with the goals and objectives by providing open space for the future
residents while taking into consideration the changes in road layout.
2) The variation does not increase the approved development density or intensity of
development.
Density is not increased.
3) The variation does not adversely affect the timing and phasing of development of any
other development in the zoning district.
The timing and phasing of the development is unaffected.
4) The variation does not require a special use permit.
A special use permit is not required.
5) The variation is in general accord with the purpose and intent of the approved rezoning
application.
The variation is in general accord with the approved rezoning application as the parks are still
being provided and they remain in the same general location and provide additional open space
area.
VARIATION #12 RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval of the variation request #12 as shown and described in Attachment B
with the following condition:
1. The locations of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1 and 2 shall be varied as shown on the drawing
entitled “Variation # 6 Vary Location of Parks,” dated March 18, 2015, attached to the Owner’s
Variation Request dated April 14, 2015.
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION
FOR ZMA 2002-004, CASCADIA
WHEREAS, Cascadia Development LLC is the owner of Tax Map and Parcel Number 06200-00-
00-02500 (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, in addition to six variations previously approved for the Application Plan and Code of
Development associated with ZMA 2002-004 Cascadia, approved in August 2006, Cascadia Development
LLC filed a request for a special exception in conjunction with SDP 2014-075 Cascadia, Block 1-3 Final Site
Plan, to vary the Code of Development approved in conjunction with ZMA 2002-004 Cascadia, to vary the
street layout; allow public maintenance of various streets; vary the street sections for Delphi Drive, Mariet ta
Lane and Terrace Lane, and provide new street sections for townhouse lots 68-75 and 106-111 on Knoll
Lane; allow the builder to use a front porch to qualify as the building wall to determine the distance that the
garage is recessed; 11) to vary the build-to-line; and to shift the location of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1
and 2 located near the southeast corner of Block 3 and to increase the area of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1
and 2, as shown on the Owner’s variation request dated April 14, 2015 with attachments, attached hereto.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the executive
summary prepared in conjunction with the special exception request, staff’s supporting analysis included in
the executive summary and the attachments thereto, and all of the factors relevant to the special exceptions in
Albemarle County Code §§ 18-8.5.5.3(c) and 18-33.8, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby
approves the special exception to vary the Code of Development approved in conjunction with ZMA 2002-
004 Cascadia, as described hereinabove, subject to the conditions attached hereto.
* * *
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 ____ ____
SDP 2014-75 Cascadia, Block 1-3 – Final Site Plan Special Exception Conditions
1. The street layout shall be varied as shown on the drawing entitled “Variation # 1 Vary the Street
Layout,” dated March 18, 2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015,
provided that a turn around shall be designed and constructed for Marietta Drive that complies with
the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual (Variation No. 7).
2. The streets depicted on the drawing entitled “Variation # 2 Maintenance of Streets,” dated April 14,
2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015, shall be designed and
constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation standards so that they may be accepted into the
secondary state highway system (Variation No. 8).
3. The street sections for Delphi Drive, Marietta Lane, and Terrace Lane shall be varied, and the street
sections for Knoll Lane abutting lots 68-75 and 106-111 shall be established, such that they are
designed and constructed as provided on the drawing entitled “Variation # 3 Vary Road Sections,”
dated March 15, 2015, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015. (Variation
No. 9).
4. The method of measuring the minimum garage setback shall be varied from that stated in Item 6 in
the Architectural Ornamentation and Facade Treatments section on page 17 of the Code of
Development to allow the front porch of the dwelling to be the “building wall” for the purpose of
measuring the garage setback, and the minimum garage setback shall be varied so that it is increased
from a minimum of three (3) feet to a minimum of five (5) feet (Variation No. 10).
5. The build-to lines shall be varied as shown on the sheet entitled “Building Block Plan/Phasing Plan,”
dated December 1, 2014, attached to the Owner’s Variation Request dated April 14, 2015 (Variation
No. 11).
6. The locations of Knoll Park and Pocket Parks 1 and 2 shall be varied as shown on the drawing
entitled “Variation # 6 Vary Location of Parks,” dated March 18, 2015, attached to the Owner’s
Variation Request dated April 14, 2015 (Variation No. 12).
RESOLUTION
COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT FOR AT-RISK YOUTH AND FAMILIES (CSA)
WHEREAS, a proposed State policy now open for public comment would impose new
administrative requirements, arbitrary deadlines, and costs on local governments under the
Comprehensive Services Act for At-Risk Youth and Families (CSA); and
WHEREAS, the proposed policy imposes a new responsibility on each local Family
Assessment and Planning Team (FAPT) to assess cases, sometimes after the fact, involving
children whose parent or guardian admits them to a residential treatment facility without going
through the local FAPT process; and
WHEREAS, additional concerns include the understanding that the proposed policy:
• inserts FAPT into the process after the child placement - not necessarily before it
occurs - and requires FAPT, only then, to perform an assessment and determine
if community-based services would be more cost-effective;
• creates the opportunity for additional trauma for a child who is placed in a facility
prior to FAPT review and then must be moved again if the FAPT subsequently
determines that community-based treatment is more appropriate;
• creates local government financial responsibility for placements not initially
authorized by the FAPT;
• sets an arbitrary deadline for FAPT action which includes assessment,
development of a service plan, and identification/scheduling of providers;
• assesses a de facto financial penalty by shifting the residential treatment costs to
the locality if the locality cannot safely move the child back to the community
before the arbitrary deadline;
• assesses that financial penalty on localities for missing a deadline when there is
no guarantee that the FAPT will receive the referral in a timely manner after a
placement is made;
• fails to account for localities with large FAPT caseloads, localities with part-time
coordinators, and those with regional FAPTs; and
• allocates no additional state administrative funds to help localities with new
responsibilities.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
that the Office of Comprehensive Services and the State Executive Council refrain from
adopting this policy, as proposed, that shifts from the state to the county direct and indirect
costs associated with expanding the mandated population under CSA and, instead, support the
expansion of state funding for community-based behavioral health services for children and
adolescents which would address the basic issue that is driving the interest in this proposed
policy; and
BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER that any movement on this proposed policy be postponed
until it can be determined that there is truly a need for such a policy and, if so, that any new
commitments affecting the County not add unrealistic administrative burdens or impose
unfunded mandates; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution be sent to the Office of Comprehensive
Services for At-Risk Youth & Families with copy to Albemarle County’s delegation to the Virginia
General Assembly.
*****
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 ____ ____
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
CLE 2015-41 Ms.Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady)
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Resolution approving a Special Exception for an existing
family day home to care for up to 12 children. Property is
located at 64 Woodlake Drive (TMP 061X2000W00800)
in the Rio District
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Kamptner, McCulley, Ragsdale
PRESENTER (S): Rebecca Ragsdale
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
May 13, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
A “family day home” is a “child day program offered in the dwelling unit of the provider or the dwelling unit that is the home
of any of the children in care for one through twelve children under the age of thirteen . . . when at least one child receives
care for compensation.” (Virginia Code § 15.2-2292; County Code § 18-3.1 (definition of family day home)). Family day
homes for five or fewer children are treated as a residential occupancy and, therefore, no zoning-related approvals are
required. The provider’s own children and any children who reside in the home are not counted in these numbers.
Virginia Code § 15.2-2292 enables localities to administratively approve family day homes for six to twelve children,
provided that notice is given to abutting owners and none of them object. If a timely objection is received, a public hearing
is required before the governing body. On September 11, 2013, the Board adopted an ordinance to amend the County’s
family day home regulations to no longer require a special use permit for family day homes for six to twelve children and to
allow them to be administratively approved, and to require a special exception if an abutting owner objects (See
Attachment A for the current regulations).
Ms. Lala’s Child Care (CLE 2014-041) applied for a family day home for six to twelve children in March, 2014, which
received abutting owner objections. Because of the abutting owner objections, a special exception was required. On May
14, 2014, a public hearing was held, and the Board approved the special exception, which included conditions of approval
to address abutting owner concerns, including a condition that the approval would expire on May 14, 2015 and would be
subject to reapplication and approval for continued use after that date (Attachment B). Ms. Lala’s Child Care reapplied for
a family day home on March 4, 2015 (CLE 2015-41). Because abutting owner objections were received again, the request
for Ms. Lala’s Child Care is before the Board as a request for a special exception.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
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
Economic Prosperity: Foster an environment that stimulates diversified job creation, capital investments, and tax revenues
that support community goals
Educational Opportunities: Provide lifelong learning opportunities for all our citizens
DISCUSSION:
Ms. Lala’s Child Care is located at 64 Woodlake Drive (TMP 061X2-00-0W -00800) in the Four Seasons neighborhood.
The parcel is zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. This portion of the neighborhood consists of 165 townhomes served
by Woodlake Drive, a public loop road, located off of Four Seasons Drive (See Attachments F and G). Delois Grady has
operated Ms. Lala’s Child Care for 15 years and is currently licensed by the Virginia Department of Social Services for up
to 12 children. The parents of the children attending Ms. Lala’s Child Care are often involved in shift work that does not fit
commercial day care center hours. The family day home hours are typically from 6:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., but most
children arrive and depart between 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m ., and Ms. Grady intends to phase out evening hours.
Currently, Ms. Lala’s Child Care is the only family day home licensed for up to 12 children in this neighborhood; the family
day home previously approved at 54 Woodlake Drive is no longer in operation. A letter from Delois Grady, the applicant, is
provided as Attachment E.
AGENDA TITLE: CLE 2015-41 Ms.Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady)
May 13, 2015
Page 2
The objections from abutting owners are provided as Attachment C and they include concerns regarding: (1) traffic; (2)
parking; (3) noise generated by pick -up and drop-off activities and children playing outdoors; (4) property values; and (5)
using common areas and other areas for outdoor play. Similar concerns were raised with the family day home when it was
approved with conditions in May, 2014. Since the family day home was approved, the County has received no complaints
regarding the use. Detailed staff comments on the neighbor concerns are provided as Attachment D.
County Code § 18-5.1.56(b)(7)(b) provides that, in acting on a special exception, the Board “shall consider whether the
proposed use will be a substantial detriment to abutting lots.” Staff opinion is that the family day home authorized to
provide care for up to 12 children, as conditioned, would not impose a substantial detriment to abutting lots. There have
been no citizen complaints about the operation over the past year prior to notice to neighbors of this reapplication. Staff
does not see a reason to limit the period that this special exception is valid and recommends that current Condition 4 be
deleted.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no anticipated budget impact with this request.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment H) approving this special exception with the
following conditions:
1. No outside activities before 10:00 a.m. or after 7:30 p.m. associated with this use;
2. Parking for child pick-up and drop-off and any employee not residing in the home shall be on-street only;
and
3. Before the family day home for six to twelve children uses HOA common area for activities, the applicant
shall provide evidence to the Zoning Administrator that it has obtained the consent of the HOA to use the
HOA common area for that purpose.
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Section 5.1.56 Family Day Home supplemental regulations
B. CLE 2014-41 Ms. Lala’s child care-Board of Supervisors May 14, 2014 action letter
C. Neighbor objection letters received regarding CLE 2015-41 Lala’s childcare
D. Staff Comment on neighbor concerns
E. Letter from Applicant Delois Grady
F. Plat of Four Seasons Townhouses
G. Four Seasons Neighborhood and Site Photos
H. Resolution
Return to agenda
ATTACHMENT A
5.1.56 FAMILY DAY HOMES
Each family day home shall be subject to the following:
a. Care for five or fewer children. Each family day home providing care for five (5) or fewer children under the age
of thirteen (13), exclusive of the provider’s own children and any children who reside in the home, shall be regulated
as a single-family residential use.
b. Care for more than five but not more than twelve children. Each family day home providing care for more than
five (5) but not more than twelve (12) children under the age of thirteen (13), exclusive of the provider’s own
children and any children who reside in the home, shall be subject to the following:
1. Traffic. The additional traffic generated by a family day home, excluding trips associated with the dwelling unit,
shall not exceed twenty-four (24) vehicle round trips per day. For the purposes of this section, a “vehicle round trip”
means one vehicle entering and exiting the site. The limitation on the number of vehicle round trips per day may be
waived or modified by special exception. In acting on a special exception, the board shall consider whether the
waiver or modification of the number of vehicle round trips per day will change the character of the neighboring
agricultural area or the residential neighborhood, as applicable, and whether the additional vehicle trips per day will
be a substantial detriment to abutting lots. Notice of the application for a special exception shall be posted as
provided in section 33.4(m)(2).
2. Parking. Each family day home shall provide one (1) parking space plus one (1) parking space for each additional
employee. The parking spaces may be located on-site, on the street where authorized by law, or in a parking lot safe
and convenient to the family day home.
3. Entrance and access. In conjunction with each application for a zoning clearance, the zoning administrator shall
identify, if necessary, the applicable design and improvements required that are at least the minimum necessary to
protect public health and safety by providing safe ingress and egress to and from the family day home site, safe
vehicular and pedestrian circulation on the site, and the control of dust as deemed appropriate in the context of the
use. The zoning administrator may consult with the county engineer or the Virginia Department of Transportation
regarding the minimum design and improvements for the entrance and access.
4. State licensure. Each family day home shall acquire and maintain the required licensure from the Virginia
Department of Social Services. The owner or operator of the family day home shall provide a copy of the license to
the zoning administrator. The owner or operator’s failure to provide a copy of the license to the zoning administrator
shall be deemed to be willful noncompliance with the provisions of this chapter.
5. Inspections by fire official. The Albemarle County fire official is authorized to conduct periodic inspections of the
family day home. The owner or operator’s failure to promptly admit the fire official onto the premises and into the
dwelling unit to conduct an inspection in a manner authorized by law shall be deemed to be willful noncompliance
with the provisions of this chapter.
6. Waivers or modifications by special exception. Except as provided in subsection (b)(1), no requirement of this
section may be waived or modified.
7. Zoning clearance and notice of request. No family day home shall commence without a zoning clearance issued
under section 31.5, subject to the following:
a. Notice to abutting lot owners. At least thirty (30) days prior to acting on the zoning clearance, the zoning
administrator shall provide written notice of the application for a zoning clearance to the owner of each abutting lot
under different ownership than the lot on which the proposed family day home would be located. The notice shall
identify the proposed family day home, its size and capacity, its location, and whether a special exception under
subsection (b)(1) is requested. The notice shall invite the recipient to submit any comments before the zoning
clearance is acted upon. The notice shall be mailed or hand delivered at least thirty (30) days prior to the action on
the zoning clearance. Mailed notice shall be sent by first class mail. Notice mailed to the owner of each lot abutting
the site 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 to be compliance with this requirement.
b. Special exception. If the zoning administrator receives a written objection to the family day home from the owner
of an abutting lot within thirty (30) days after the notice was mailed or delivered, the zoning clearance shall not be
approved until after the applicant obtains a special exception for the family day home as provided in sections 33.5
and 33.9. In acting on a special exception, the board shall consider whether the proposed use will be a substantial
detriment to abutting lots.
8. Relationship to other laws. The provisions of this section are supplementary to all other laws and nothing herein
shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Social Services, Virginia
Department of Health, Virginia.
pF ALg ,
U 6t0 tJ
K74'
IRGII LP
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596
Phone (434) 296 -5832 Fax (434) 972 -4126
June 2, 2014
Delois Grady - -- -
64 Woodlake Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: CLE201400041 Ms. Lala's child care (family day home)
Dear Ms. Grady:
On May 14, 2014, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors took action on the above -
noted petition to approve a special exception for a family day home. This approval was
based on the following conditions:
1. No outside activities before 10:00 a.m. or after 7:30 p.m. associated with this
use;
2. Parking for child pick -up and drop -off and any employee not residing in the home
shall be on- street only;
3. Before the family day home for six (6) to twelve (12) children uses HOA common
area for activities, the applicant shall provide evidence to the Zoning
Administrator that it has obtained the consent of the HOA to use the HOA
common area for that purpose; and
4. This approval shall expire on May 14, 2015 and shall be subject to reapplication
and approval for continued use after that date.
If you have questions regarding the above -noted action, please contact Rebecca
Ragsdale at 296 -5832.
kebecca
y,
Ra g sd ale
Senior Planner
Zoning Division
CLE 2015-41 Ms.Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady)-Staff Comments on Neighbor Concerns
Concerns raised by adjoining property owners include: (1) traffic; (2) parking; (3) noise generated by pick-
up and drop-off activities and children playing outdoors; (4) property values; and (5) using common areas
and other areas for outdoor play. Similar concerns were raised with the family day home when it was
requested in May, 2014 and resulted in conditions of approval for the use. Since its approval in May,
2014, the County has received no complaints regarding the family day home and the applicant has
complied with the prior conditions.
Traffic: County Code § 18-5.1.56(b)(1) limits the number of vehicle round trips that may be associated
with a family day home to 24 per day, which is in addition to the trips generated by the residents of the
dwelling itself. Staff believes that the difference in children pick-up and drop-off times and their staggered
hours should preclude any substantial traffic impacts to the abutting lots. There have been no issues with
traffic since the family day home was initially approved in May, 2014.
Parking: County Code § 18-5.1.56(b)(2) requires that a family day home provide one parking space plus
one additional parking space for each emplo yee. The parking spaces must be either on-site, on the
street, or in a parking lot. Woodlake Drive is a 50 foot public right-of-way with on-street parking and
sidewalks on both sides of the street. Parking for this application is available either on-street or behind the
unit, where a shared driveway provides access to two parking spaces dedicated to Ms. Grady’s
townhome. Parent parking can safely be accommodated from either on-street parking spaces or the
spaces behind the townhome. To avoid additional traffic or parking in the shared driveway behind the
townhouse, on-street parking was required as a condition of approval of the special exception when it
was approved in May, 2014. Staff recommends a condition to require on-street parking to address this
concern (Condition 2).
Noise: Abutting owners raised concerns regarding the noise that may be generated when children are
picked up and dropped off and playing outdoors. Of particular concern is that children are dropped off in
the early hours of the morning at the front door, impacting the neighbor. Staff has recommended two
conditions (Conditions 1 and 2) to address impacts related to noise. Because the family day home serves
working parents with various schedules, a condition on the hours of operation has not been
recommended. The concerns have been shared with the applicant who is trying to address the concerns
and has parents enter through the back door now instead of dropping off at the front door.
Use of common areas: Abutting owners have raised concerns regarding the use of the HOA’s common
area by the children attending the family day home. In addition to the noise impacts discussed above, an
owner has expressed concern about the use of residential common area by a commercial activity, and
the wear and tear on HOA property this increased use would have. To address this concern, staff
recommends a condition requiring the applicant to obtain consent from the HOA before the family day
home for six to twelve children uses HOA common area for activities. (Condition 3). This was a condition
of approval of the family day home in May, 2014. Since that time, the family day home has not used the
common areas for activities.
FOUR SEASONS AND SITE PHOTOS OF 64 WOODLAKE DRIVE 64 64 64
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION
FOR CLE 2015-41 MS. LALA’S CHILD CARE (DELOIS GRADY)
WHEREAS, Delois L. Grady and Thomas N. Morton, Jr. are the owners of Tax Map and Parcel
Number 061X2-00-0W-00800 (the “Property”); and
WHEREAS, Delois Grady filed a request for a special exception in conjunction with CLE 2014-41
Ms. Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady) in March, 2014 to allow Ms. Lala’s Child Care to care for six to
twelve children; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors approved the special exception with conditions, including a
condition that the approval would expire on May 14, 2015 and would be subject to reapplication and
approval for continued use; and
WHEREAS, Delois Grady filed a request for a special exception in conjunction with CLE 2015-41
Ms. Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady), to allow Ms. Lala’s Child Care to continue to care for six to twelve
children.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the executive
summary prepared in conjunction with the special exception request, staff’s supporting analysis included in
the executive summary, and all of the factors relevant to the special exceptions in Albemarle County Code
§§ 18-5.1.56(b)(7)(b) and 18-33.9, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby approves the special
exception to allow Ms. Lala’s Child Care to continue to care for six to twelve children in conjunction with
CLE 2015-41, as described hereinabove, subject to the performance standards for this use in Albemarle
County Code § 18-5.1.56(b) and the conditions attached hereto.
* * *
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 ____ ____
CLE 2015-41 Ms. Lala’s Child Care (Delois Grady) Special Exception Conditions
1. No outside activities before 10:00 a.m. or after 7:30 p.m. associated with this use;
2. Parking for child pick-up and drop-off and any employee not residing in the home shall be on-street
only; and
3. Before the family day home for six to twelve children uses HOA common area for activities, the
applicant shall provide evidence to the Zoning Administrator that it has obtained the consent of the
HOA to use the HOA common area for that purpose.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
SP2015-04 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Resolution approving a Special Use Permit to replace
existing power transmission lines and their supporting
towers with higher-capacity lines and steel poles
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Foley, Walker, Davis, Kamptner, Cilimberg, Benish, Clark
PRESENTER (S): Scott Clark
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
AGENDA DATE:
May 13, 2015
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 21, 2015, by a vote of 6:0, recommended approval of
the above-noted Special Use Permit as recommended by staff.
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
DISCUSSION:
The County attorney has prepared the attached Resolution reflecting the recommendation of the Planning Commission.
Please note that a non-substantive modification has been made to the language of the condition of approval contained in
the Resolution. The original condition referred to “the property,” while the revised condition specifically identifies the tax-
map parcels (03700-00-00-01100 and 03700-00-00-011B0) where the replacement work will take place.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Action on this special use permit request does not have a budget impact.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution (Attachment A) approving the Special Use Permit to
replace existing power transmission lines and their supporting towers with higher -capacity lines and steel poles subject to
the following condition:
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on Tax Map and Parcel Numbers 03700-00-00-01100 and
03700-00-00-011B0 shall remain within the right-of-way easement recorded at the Albemarle County
Circuit Court in Deed Book 738, Page 758.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A – Resolution
Attachment B - PC Actions Letter
Attachment C – PC Staff Report with attachments
Attachment D – PC minutes
Return to agenda
RESOLUTION TO APPROVE
SP 2015-04 GORDONSVILLE-SOMERSET
WHEREAS, Merle Underwood Lawson and Robert J. Lawson, Trustees, under the Will of Albert J.
Lawson, are the owners of Tax Map and Parcel Numbers 03700-00-00-01100 and 03700-00-00-011B0 (the
“Lawson Parcels”), and Virginia Electric & Power Company is the owner of Tax Map and Parcel Number
03700-00-00-011A0; all of the owners of such parcels are referred to herein collectively as the “Owner” and
the parcels are referred to herein collectively as the “Property” and
WHEREAS, Virginia Electric & Power Company holds a right-of-way easement on the Lawson
Parcels to establish and maintain transmission facilities; and
WHEREAS, Virginia Electric & Power Company d/b/a Dominion Virginia Power (the “Applicant”)
filed an application for a special use permit to allow the replacement of existing power transmission lines and
their supporting towers, and the application is identified as Special Use Permit 2015-00004 Gordonsville-
Somerset (“SP 2015-04”); and
WHEREAS, the proposed use is allowed on the Property by special use permit under Albemarle
County Code § 18-10.2.2(6); and
WHEREAS, on April 21, 2015, after a duly noticed public hearing, the Albemarle County Planning
Commission recommended approval of SP 2015-04 with the condition recommended by staff; and
WHEREAS, on May 13, 2015, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors held a duly noticed
public hearing on SP 2015-04.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that, upon consideration of the foregoing, the staff
report prepared for SP 2015-04 and all of its attachments, the information presented at the public hearing,
and the factors relevant to a special use permit in Albemarle County Code § 18-33.8, the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby approves SP 2015-04, subject to the performance standards for this use in
Albemarle County Code § 18-5.1.12 and the condition attached hereto.
* * *
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 ____ ____
SP-2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on Tax Map and Parcel Numbers 03700-00-00-01100
and 03700-00-00-011B0 shall remain within the right-of-way easement recorded at the Albemarle
County Circuit Court in Deed Book 738, Page 758.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126
April 23, 2015
Courtney Fisher
701 E Cary St
Richmond Va 23219
RE: SP201500004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project
Dear Ms. Fisher,
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 21, 2015, by a vote of 6:0
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that this recommendation is subject to the following condition:
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on the property shall remain within the right-of-
way easement recorded at the Albemarle County Circuit Court in Deed Book 738, Page 758.
Within 30 days of the date of this letter, please do one of the following:
(1) Resubmit in response to Planning Commission recommendations
(2) Request indefinite deferral
(3) Request that your Board of Supervisors public hearing date be set
(4) Withdraw your application
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296-5832.
Sincerely,
Scott Clark
Senior Planner
Planning Division
Cc: FILE
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP201500004 Gordonsville-
Somerset
Staff: Scott Clark, Senior Planner
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
April 21 2015
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
TBA
Owner: Lawson, Albert J Estate; Merle
Underwood Lawson & Robert J Lawson, Trustees
(Parcels 37-11, 37-11B); Virginia Electric &
Power Co (Parcel 37-11A – substation)
Applicant: Dominion Virginia Power
Acreage: 260.051 acres Special Use Permit: 10.2.2.6, Energy and
communications transmission facilities
(reference 5.1.12)
TMP: 03700-00-00-01100, 03700-00-00-011A0,
03700-00-00-011B0
Location: 8258 Gordonsville Road
Existing Zoning and By-right use:
RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and
fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre
in development)
Magisterial District: Rivanna Conditions: Yes
Associated Special Exceptions: No
RA (Rural Areas): X Requested # of Dwelling Units: NA
Proposal: Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural
Areas - preserve and protect agricultural,
forestal, open space, and natural, historic and
scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre)
Character of Property: The property is primarly
open farmland, with an adjacent electric
substation.
Use of Surrounding Properties:
Surrounding properties include farms,
forests, and residences
Factors Favorable:
1. The proposed upgrade would remain
within a longstanding utility corridor.
2. No significant new physical or visual
impacts would be created by the
upgrade.
Factors Unfavorable: None found.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of this Special Use Permit, with conditions.
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 2
STAFF PERSON: Scott Clark
PLANNING COMMISSION: April 21, 2015
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: TBA
PETITION:
PROJECT: SP201500004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 03700-00-00-01100, 03700-00-00-011A0, 03700-00-00-011B0
LOCATION: 8258 Gordonsville Road
PROPOSAL: Replace existing electrical-transmission-line, and replace existing wooden
poles with steel structures approximately 16 feet taller
PETITION: Energy and communications transmission facilities under section 10.2.2.6
of the Zoning Ordinance (reference 5.1.12). No dwelling units proposed.
ZONING: RA Rural Areas - agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density
(0.5 unit/acre in development lots)
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Areas – preserve and protect agricultural, forestal,
open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre in
development lots)
CHARACTER OF THE AREA:
The surrounding area is characterized by farms, wooded parcels, and large residential
lots.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
Power lines have been in place in this location for decades—the original right-of-way
easement granted to the electrical utility of the date was recorded in 1927. Power lines
have been in the corridor since that era. Under the current zoning ordinance, the
facilities are an existing non-conforming use and need a special use permit to bring the
facilities into compliance for the upgrade.
The Lawson property (Parcels 37-11 and 37-11B) is under a conservation easement
acquired under the County’s Acquisition of Conservation Easements (ACE) program.
However, as Dominion’s power-line easement predates that conservation easement,
work permitted by Dominion’s easement is not subject to the restrictions of the
conservation easement. A condition of approval recommended by staff would ensure
that the new facilities remain within the pre-existing right-of-way, as proposed by the
applicants. Agriculture on the property is currently conducted under and around the
Dominion facilities, and the new facilities would still allow that.
DETAILS OF THE PROPOSAL:
A special use permit is being requested in accordance with section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning
Ordinance, which permits energy and communications transmission facilities, to allow the
replacement of existing power transmission lines and their supporting towers. The existing six
wooden towers (see Attachment B) would be replaced with six rust-colored metal towers that
would be approximately 16 feet taller than the existing towers. The purpose of the replacement is
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 3
to make upgrades to the electrical infrastructure to support increased demand. The majority of
the replacement project will take place in Orange County, but the line extends into Albemarle to
the substation on Route 646.
STAFF COMMENT:
Section 33.8 of the Zoning Ordinance states that the Planning Commission and Board of
Supervisors shall reasonably consider the following factors when reviewing and acting
upon an application for a special use permit:
No substantial detriment. The proposed special use will not be a substantial detriment
to adjacent lots.
Once installed, the replacement towers and lines would be within the route of the
existing facilities and would not create new impacts on adjacent properties.
Character of district unchanged. The character of the district will not be changed by
the proposed special use.
The replacement of towers and lines within an existing corridor would not change the
character of the district. There would be no long-term impacts to farming on the
property.
The power-line corridor is within view of the designated Entrance Corridor overlay
district on Route 231. However, the replacement of existing structures and lines, and the
relatively small increase in height of the towers, are not expected to have any significant
new impact on the corridor. (See Attachment C for photographs of the existing and
proposed towers.)
Harmony. The proposed special use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of
this chapter,
The Zoning Ordinance is intended to, among other goals, to “facilitate the provision of
adequate police and fire protection, disaster evacuation, civil defense, transportation,
water, sewerage, flood protection, schools, parks, forests, playgrounds, recreational
facilities, airports and other public requirements.” Electrical utilities consistent with
current needs can be considered “public requirements.”
…with the uses permitted by right in the district
The power lines would not conflict with agriculture, forestry, conservation, or by-right
uses such as residences in the district.
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 4
…with the regulations provided in section 5 as applicable,
5.1.12 PUBLIC UTILITY STRUCTURES/USES
a. The proposed use at the location selected will not endanger the health and
safety of workers and/or residents in the community and will not impair or prove
detrimental to neighboring properties or the development of same;
The proposed facilities are in the location of long-standing transmission facilities
and the adjacent substation. No new use is proposed.
b. Public utility buildings and structures in any residential zone shall, wherever
practical, have the exterior appearance of residential buildings and shall have
landscaping, screen planting and/or fencing, whenever these are deemed
necessary by the commission; In addition, trespass fencing and other safety
measures may be required as deemed necessary to reasonably protect the public
welfare; In cases of earth-disturbing activity, immediate erosion control and
reseeding shall be required to the satisfaction of the zoning administrator;
The only proposed structures are the replacement towers, which are not
significantly different from the existing towers. Earth-disturbing work will be
minimal, as the site is relatively level and not wooded.
c. Such structures as towers, transmission lines, transformers, etc., which are
abandoned, damaged or otherwise in a state of disrepair, which in the opinion of
the zoning administrator pose a hazard to the public safety, shall be
repaired/removed to the satisfaction of the zoning administrator within a
reasonable time prescribed by the zoning administrator;
No such structures currently exist. However, the existing structures will be
removed and replaced by the new steel structures.
d. In approval of a public utility use , the commission shall be mindful of the
desirability of use by more than one utility company of such features as utility
easements and river crossings, particularly in areas of historic, visual or scenic
value, and it shall, insofar as practical, condition such approvals so as to
minimize the proliferation of such easements or crossings, as described by the
comprehensive plan.
No new easements or crossings are proposed, and the new facilities would
effectively use the existing corridor.
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 5
…and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
Replacement of existing power lines in the same corridor does not introduce new safety
issues. Provision of upgraded power-transmission lines can increase general welfare by
ensuring more consistent service during periods of high demand.
Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan. The use will be consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan.
The Land Use Plan includes a goal to “Strongly support and effectively implement the
County's growth management priorities in the planning and provision of transportation
infra structure, public facilities and public utilities.” While this goal would be an
important factor for new facilities, the current proposal is an upgrade of existing
facilities to meet needs within and beyond the County. Staff feels that the proposal does
not conflict with the Comprehensive Plan.
The property is under a conservation easement, which is supportive of the Rural Areas
goals in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal would not have significant new impacts
on the property or conflict with the agricultural uses permitted under the easement.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application:
1. The proposed upgrade would remain within a longstanding utility corridor.
2. No significant new physical or visual impacts would be created by the
upgrade.
Staff has identified no factors unfavorable to this application:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of
SP201500004 Gordonsville-Somerset subject to the following condition:
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on the property shall remain
within the right-of-way easement recorded at the Albemarle County
Circuit Court in Deed Book 738, Page 758.
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 6
PLANNING COMMISSION MOTION:
A. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend approval of this special use permit:
Move to recommend approval of SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset subject to the
condition as recommended by staff.
B. Should a Planning Commissioner choose to recommend denial of this special use permit:
Move to recommend denial of SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset. Should a
commissioner motion to recommend denial, he or she should state the reason(s) for
recommending denial.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – Area Map
Attachment B – Site Map
Attachment C – Existing and Proposed Tower Designs
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 7
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 8
SP2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset
PC April 21, 2015
Staff Report Page 9
Attachment C
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – April 21, 2015
DRAFT MINUTES – Submit to PC
1
`Albemarle County Planning Commission
April 21, 2015
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a public hearing on Tuesday, April 21, 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 and Tim Keller. Absent was Mac Lafferty, Vice Chair. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use
Planner for the University of Virginia was present.
Other officials present were Scott Clark, Senior Planner; David Benish, Chief 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.
Regular Items:
a. SP-2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 03700-00-00-01100, 03700-00-00-011A0, 03700-00-00-011B0
LOCATION: 8258 Gordonsville Road
PROPOSAL: Replace existing electrical-transmission-line, and replace existing wooden poles with
steel structures approximately 16 feet taller
PETITION: Energy and communications transmission facilities under section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning
Ordinance (reference 5.1.12). No dwelling units proposed.
ZONING: RA Rural Areas – agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre
in development lots)
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Rural Areas – preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space,
and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density (0.5 unit/ acre in development lots)
(Scott Clark)
Scott Clark presented a PowerPoint presentation regarding SP-2015-0004 Gordonsville-Somerset
Rebuild Project.
This is a special use permit request for replacement of the lines and towers for an existing electrical -
transmission-line. It is located in the northeast corner of the county on Route 231 on the boundary with
Orange County. He pointed out that the two larger parcels as shown on the aerial view are the Lawson
Farm. There is a row of existing woodland pole towers going across the farm carrying the line from the
substation. He explained it was about 750’ from the highway to these towers. The existing wooden 70’
poles are being replaced with 85’ – 86’ metal poles, which would weather or rust to a brownish color. The
reason this is needed is the upgrades that are needed to the line involve heavier conductor lines that
need to be kept up off the ground or taller with more substantial poles. The proposal is for the
replacement of the existing towers in the existing right-of-way at least 750’ from the Entrance Corridor on
Route 231 changing from wood to metal poles with a 16’ increase. Staff did not see any significant
increases in physical or visual impacts. The towers are larger, but similar in the same location.
The Lawson farm is under an ACE Program Conservation Easement. The right-of-way easement for
these poles predates that conservation easem ent by several decades and so trumps the conservation
easement in this case. He did not see a real significant conflict anyway. However, when it comes down
to it the right-of-way already exists and been recorded. Therefore, the company has the right to do work in
that corridor. It does not affect the farm since they are already farming around the poles as it is and will
continue to do that.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES - SP-2015-0004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project (Submit to BOS)
2
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application:
1. The proposed upgrade would remain within a longstanding utility corridor.
2. No significant new physical or visual impacts would be created by the upgrade.
Staff has identified no factors unfavorable to this application:
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP-2015-00004
Gordonsville-Somerset subject to the following condition:
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on the property shall remain within the
right-of-way easement recorded at the Albemarle County Circuit Court in Deed Book
738, Page 758.
Mr. Morris invited questions for staff. There being none, Mr. Morris opened the public hearing to the
applicant and for public comment. He invited the applicant to come forward and address the Planning
Commission.
Courtney Fisher, present on behalf of Dominion/Virginia Power, said their business address was 701 East
Cary Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. She was here with her colleague S usan King. She would spare
the Commission any presentation, but merely wanted to take some time to thank staff for working with us.
She wanted to note for the record that they did have two open houses. There was one attendee who
actually was from Orange County. Mr. Lawson, the property owner, has signed off on the special use
permit application. They met with him and talked with him on several occasions. The need for this
project is just to ensure the local reliability of the electrical system. There are certain contingency events
that caused thermal overloads to the line. As Mr. Clark pointed out they are proposing to replace the
structures and the conductor with modern facilities. If there are any further questions, she would be
happy to answer them. Otherwise, if there are any speakers from the audience she would like to reserve
a little time to address any public comment.
Mr. Morris pointed out she would have five additional minutes for any rebuttal. He invited questions for
the applicant.
Mr. Dotson said they don’t see many of these applications and was trying to understand it more. They are
apparently the end of the line since this is a much larger project reaching back up into Orange County.
He wondered if she could describe the total project.
Ms. Fisher replied this project is not even 3 miles from the Gordonsville Substation to Somerset in Orange
County. The portion in Albemarle is .83 miles. The same construction will go on in Orange County just
replacing the existing structures with the new Corten structures.
Mr. Dotson said he was curious about the new taller metal structures. He could understand the metal is
more doable, stronger and so forth. He asked Ms. Fisher to explain the need for a taller structure and
whether there are any national standards they are complying with in doing that.
Ms. Fisher replied that they have to comply with the National Electric Safety Code. The new conductor is
heavier and when heated to its maximum potential has higher sag. The increase in height is necessary
in order to keep it to its minimum height above ground for safety purposes.
Mr. Dotson questioned if this is just the beginning of similar requests. The Planning Commission has
been seeing with cell towers, for instance, a beginning of a wave of upgrading multiple, multiple towers in
the county. He asked are they likely to see upgrading of multiple, multiple Dominion facilities to this same
standard?
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES - SP-2015-0004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project (Submit to BOS)
3
Ms. Fisher replied that Dominion Power is constantly evaluating the entire system to ensure reliability
across their service territory. She has worked on a number of projects in Albemarle County. However, it
is hard to pinpoint any other projects at this time that the Commission does not already know about.
Mr. Randolph questioned whether they are increasing the rural wattage on the line as a result of the
upgrade. He asked if additional power will now be coming into this substation.
Ms. Fisher replied that it would remain at the existing115 kV.
Mr. Randolph asked if that is all residential usage or is part of that line dedicated for a government facility
as well.
Ms. Fisher replied it is not segmented for government, commercial, industrial or residential. It is wherever
the need is. The115 kV voltage is not for distribution hooking up to individual homes or businesses.
Typically the transmission lines at Dominion runs are 115 kV, 230 kV and 500 kV. So this is a lower end
of our transmission system .
Mr. Randolph asked where the next substation would be located south of this location, and Ms. Fisher
replied that she did not know that.
Mr. Keller asked if they are seeing Dominion or other regional providers undergrounding power lines at
this level.
Ms. Fisher asked if he was asking are other companies undergrounding 115 kV lines.
Mr. Keller replied he was asking if Dominion is undergrounding power lines anywhere.
Ms. Fisher replied that Dominion Power typically does not underground transmission lines because the
cost to the rate payer goes up substantially. Dominion Power will underground residential distribution
lines. Most localities now have their zoning ordinances that would require that in new subdivisions. It is
completely different in the world of distribution and transmission. The distribution lines can be done with
a ditch witch whereas the transmission line is a much larger land disturbance activity and the costs go up.
The benefit is mostly visual, which she does not want to discount. However, at the same time, the cost to
our rate payers is substantial and the land disturbance involved with the undergrounding of 115 kV or any
transmission line goes up substantially.
Mr. Keller pointed out in Canada there are movements to underground more of these larger distribution
lines. He was just wondering if as a major regional provider whether Dominion is anticipating that in any
arena.
Ms. Fisher said she thinks our position would remain strong to not do that for our rate payers. The State
Corporation Commission has jurisdiction over lines 138 kV and above. So if they were to initiate any sort
of program like that it would have to be run though the State Corporation Commission as they look out for
the rate payers as well.
Mr. Morris invited public comment. There being no public comment, Mr. Morris closed the public hear ing
and bring it back to the Planning Commission for discussion and action.
Motion: Mr. Loach moved and Mr. Randolph seconded to recommend approval of SP-2015-00004
Gordonsville-Somerset subject to the condition as recommended by staff.
1. Transmission lines and supporting structures on the property shall remain within the right-of-
way easement recorded at the Albemarle County Circuit Court in Deed Book 738, Page 758.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Lafferty absent)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION – MARCH 10, 2015
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES - SP-2015-0004 Gordonsville-Somerset Rebuild Project (Submit to BOS)
4
Mr. Morris noted that SP-2015-00004 Gordonsville-Somerset would be forwarded to the Board of
Supervisors with a recommendation for approval on a date to be determined.
Mr. Benish pointed out staff found out yesterday they are going to have a pre-application meeting for a
Central Virginia Electrical Coop line in this similar area of the 231 Corridor that is essentially going to be
doing the same thing. To answer the question, staff is aware of one request coming along fairly quickly.
Mr. Morris asked if the new application to the best of his knowledge would have an increase in height and
so on.
Mr. Benish replied that he had not had a chance to look at it, but it is the same thing in they need to boost
up the capabilities of that corridor. So he assumes it is going to be something similar since the
preliminary meeting had just been scheduled.
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission & Planning Boards)