HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200700001 Executive SummaryCOUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
SP 07-01 Four Seasons Learning Center
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Increase enrollment from 40 children to 64
children at 254 Lakeview Drive on TMP 061X-
00-00-00500
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Cilimberg, Echols
AGENDA DATE:
August 19, 2008
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: YES
BACKGROUND:
On June 24, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Four Seasons Learning Center
request for an increase in 24 children at their facility located at 254 Lakeview Drive. At the meeting, the
applicant provided a traffic study for the Planning Commission's review which they had not previously been
provided to staff. After some discussion, the applicant requested deferral of the public hearing until staff
was able to review the traffic study. The staff report and minutes of that meeting are contained in
Attachments 1 and 2, respectively. There were also questions concerning the number of parking spaces
needed for the facility and provided by the applicant.
DISCUSSION:
The traffic study provided by the applicant is included as Attachment 2. After reviewing the applicant's
traffic study, the County Engineer concluded that the applicant and staff had performed different kinds of
analysis. Staff's analysis was based on vehicle trips per day while the applicant's analysis was performed
on peak hour trips. The County Engineer's comments are below:
The traffic generation report by Raina Rosado for Four Seasons Learning Center has been reviewed. I agree
with the conclusion that the traffic generated during the peak hour will be around 52 trip ends. It is also correct
that this does not pass the thresholds for a traffic study, as set by the VDOT 527 regulations.
The conclusion that transportation on Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive will not be significantly affected
is not as easy to agree with. Below I briefly summarize each road situation:
Four Seasons Drive has a traffic count of 4100 average daily trips according to the latest VDOT counts from
2007. This translates to about 200 trips in each direction during the peak hour. The entering turning
movements for the daycare (52) make about 26% of opposing volume. If the homes on Lakeview Drive are
added, this rises to above 30%. While this appears to fall just below the VDOT thresholds for a left turn lane
volume warrant requirement, I would not say it is insignificant.
Lakeview Drive is a small cul-de-sac with 19 homes, plus the daycare. It generates about 19 trips on the road
during the peak hour (AM or PM, assumed 10516). The daycare generates about 104 (two times the number of
trip ends, for a car comes in, and goes out, passing by twice for one trip end.). Thus, the daycare generates
about 5 times the traffic that this small cul-de-sac might otherwise experience.
I have attached a recent aerial photo of the site. (See Attachment 3.) The frontage is confusing due to
improvements made by the applicant, and on -street parking issues. If this application is approved, it is my
recommendation that curbing be installed to establish the edge and the turning taper, with parking prohibited in
this area.
As an aside, the numbers presented in the previous report might have been a bit high, as the particular ITE
table referenced is based on the number of employees, rather than the number of students, which is what the
above numbers are based on. It is also comparing apples and oranges, as the staff report talked about daily
totals or averages, and the applicant's study uses peak hour only. It is important to distinguish clearly between
average daily traffic and peak hour traffic, and also between trip ends, and trips. Putting numbers aside for a
moment, the general conclusions are that this use is rather large for the small neighborhood. It will be noticed
on Four Seasons Drive, but does not appear to meet VDOT warrants for improvements.
Using the County Engineer's analysis, the additional 24 students represent a 46% increase in peak hour traffic.
The recommendation for curbing deals with Four Seasons Drive where VDOT has prohibited parking in any
case.
Another outstanding issue at the Commission meeting had to do with parking requirements. The number of
required parking spaces was not clear because it was unclear how many staff members would be working
at the facility. The applicant has indicated that there will be 6 employees at the facility, which translates into
a total parking requirement of 13 spaces. The Zoning Division has confirmed that 13 spaces are available
either on-site or on -street next to the property on Lakeview Drive.
Also, since the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has asked staff to verify its assertion that, if
this were a new facility, only 51 students would be allowed. In reviewing the staff's calculations, it appears
that the infant room was left out of the calculations. Staff now believes that, if the Four Seasons Learning
Center were a new facility, it would be allowed 58 students, not 51 students. Although staff has attempted
to verify this conclusion several times with the Verona office of Virginia Department of Social Services, they
have not provided the information. A letter from Social Services is in Attachment 4. Staff has received
several letters from parents who have children in the day care facility who support the expansion. They are
provided in Attachment 5.
Staff continues to believe that the primary issue involved with this special use permit is scale and impact. In
addition to traffic impacts, the scale issue stands out even more because of the intensity of the use and the
location on a neighborhood street. It is even more apparent when one looks at the child care facilities that
have been approved in the development areas since 1980.
There have been nine "stand alone" child care facilities (not located in a church) approved in the
development areas since 1980. Of these nine, three have been approved on neighborhood streets. Two of
the facilities using neighborhood streets were approved in the Four Seasons development. They are the
Charlottesville Day School is on Four Seasons Drive and the Four Seasons Learning Center. The third
facility is on Barclay Place off of Hydraulic Road. The remaining 6 facilities have been approved on primary
streets.
The facilities range in intensity (measured in students per acre) from less than 7 students per acre to a
maximum of 115 students per acre. Four Seasons Learning Center has the equivalent of 114 students per
acre. As such, it is at the high end of the spectrum. With the additional 24 students it would have the
equivalent of 182 students per acre which is greater than any other facility, with one exception.
In 1987, SP 87-24 was approved for 325 children on 1.395 acres which translates into an equivalent
intensity of 233 students per acre. The special use permit for the facility for 325 students expired and the
facility kept its approval for only 75 students. It was the same facility described above on Barclay Place off
of Hydraulic Road. The distinction between this facility and Four Seasons Drive has to do with its setting.
Barclay Place provides access to a multi -unit development and is a short distance off of Hydraulic. Four
Seasons Learning Center is within a mixed single-family and multi -family development on a street which
has all single-family residences. No other special use permit has been approved in a similar setting with the
intensity proposed.
Staff notes that there are no children per acre standards in the zoning ordinance or in state regulations.
Staff just uses this information as a measure of intensity of the existing and proposed use.
2
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff sympathizes strongly with parents who need affordable, reliable child care and believes that Four Seasons
Learning Center provides these things now. However, staff continues to believe that the traffic associated with
24 additional students along with the traffic patterns and volumes already existing on Lakeview Drive will be in
excess of an acceptable limit. Staff thinks that both the traffic and proposed intensity of the use will change the
character of this part of the Four Seasons PUD. For these reasons, staff believes the current restriction of 40
students is an acceptable limit for the facility and recommends denial of the request.
If the Commission, however, wishes to recommend approval of the request, staff recommends that this special
use permit be approved for an office OR nursery school and day care center with the following conditions:
Conditions #1 - #5 below apply to the nursery/day care center:
1. The building, parking and access shall be as shown (with noted dimensions) on the "Plat
Showing As -Built Survey Parcel A -Patio House Section Four Seasons Learning Center 254
Lakeview Drive" by David C. Blankenbaker, L.S., dated July 21, 2008.
2. There shall be submitted, no later than sixty (60) days after the date of approval of this special
use permit, an as -built site plan which meets the requirements of Zoning Ordinance Section 32.6
Final Site Plan Content, except for those items waived by the Agent as not applicable. The as -
built site plan shall meet all of the requirements of Section 32.6 and be approved by the County's
site plan agent prior to occupancy of the nursery/day care center by more than forty (40)
children.
3. The number of children occupying the nursery/day care center shall not exceed sixty-four (64) or
the number approved by the Department of Social Services, whichever is less, at any time.
4. A twenty foot buffer shall be maintained between the property and TMP 61X1 -AA -B.
5. The concurrent use of the property for a nursery/day care center and a residential use is
prohibited.
Conditions #6 - #8 below apply to the use of the facility as offices:
6. The maximum number of employees shall be ten (10).
7. A twenty foot buffer shall be maintained between the property and TMP 61X1 -AA -B.
8. The concurrent use of the property for an office and a residential use is prohibited.
Conditions #9 & #10 below apply to any use of the property:
9. The concurrent use of the property for a nursery/day care center and an office use is prohibited.
10. The small evergreen tree on the Four Seasons Drive frontage at the corner of the parking shall
be relocated toward the building, as recommended by VDOT, a sufficient distance to prevent
future line -of -sight problems.
Should the Planning Commission recommend approval, these conditions may need additional "wordsmithing"
between the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors' meeting.
ATTACHMENTS:
ATTACHMENT 1:
June 24, 2008 Staff Report
ATTACHMENT 2:
Planning Commission Minutes
ATTACHMENT 3:
Traffic Study by Hurt and Proffitt dated 6-16-08
ATTACHMENT 4:
Orthophotography showing Four Seasons Learning Center
ATTACHMENT 5:
Letter from Social Services Licensing Division dated July 29, 2008
ATTACHMENT 6:
Letters from parents
ATTACHMENT 7:
Child Care Special Use Permits from 1980
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP 2007-01 Four Seasons
Staff: Elaine K. Echols, AICP
Learning Center
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
June 24, 2008
TBD
Owners: Krzystzof and Barbara Sliwinski
Applicant: Krzystzof and Barbara Sliwinski
Acreage: 0.35 acres
Special Use Permit for: Request for
expansion of child care facility in accordance
with Section 20.3.2.1 of the Zoning ordinance
TMP: 061X-00-00-00500
Conditions: Yes
Location: At the corner of Four Seasons Drive and
Lakeview Drive in the Four Seasons development
Existing Zoning and By -right use: PUD -
Magisterial District: Rivanna
residential (3 — 34 units per acre), mixed with
j
commercial and industrial uses. By special use
permit, this facility may have up to 40 students.
j Comprehensive Plan Designation: Urban
DA (Development Area): X
Density Residential — residential (6-34 units/acre)
RA (Rural Area):
and supporting uses such as religious institutions,
schools, commercial, office and service uses.
Factors Favorable:
Factors Unfavorable:
1. There is a need for child care facilities in
1. Additional traffic from the 24 students
Albemarle County.
will have a negative impact on the
2. The addition of 24 students and associated
neighborhood due to the increase in
parking requirements can be accommodated
vehicles and opportunities for conflict,
on-site or adjacent to the site.
especially in the morning when children
are being dropped off.
2. The enlarged day car enrollment will
create a use that is out of scale with
this part of the Four Seasons
development.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends disapproval. a
y
ATTACHMENT 1
STAFF PERSON: ELAINE K. ECHOLS, AICP
PLANNING COMMISSION: APRIL 22, 2008
SP2007-01 Four Seasons Learning Center
Applicant's Proposal: Krzystzof and Barbara Sliwinski are requesting an amendment to their
existing special use permit for a day care facility at the corner of Four Seasons Drive and
Lakeview Drive. Their existing special use permit allows 40 children; they would like to have 24
additional children for a total of 64 children. Attachment A shows their most recently approved
site plan waiver and letter of revision for the facility.
Petition:
PROJECT: Four Seasons Learning Center
PROPOSED: Amend special use permit to increase maximum number of children in daycare from
40 to 64. No residential units proposed.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: PUD Planned Unit Development which allows
residential (3 - 34 units per acre), mixed with commercial and industrial uses
SECTION: 20.3.2.1, which allows for child care facilities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban
Neighborhood 1.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes No X
LOCATION: 254 Lakeview Drive
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61 X1, Parcel 5
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio
(See Attachment B.)
Density Residential (6-34 units/acre) in
Character of the Area: The area surrounding the facility is residential with townhouses,
apartments, single-family detached and single family attached units. A recreational facility
(ACAC) is nearby. The day care center is located at the corner of Four Seasons Drive and
Lakeview Drive. Lakeview Drive is a cul-de-sac approximately 400 feet in length.
Planning and Zoning History: The Four Seasons development was approved in 1969 as a
conditional use permit in an A-1 Agricultural District. County appraisal records indicate the
building in which the day care facility is located was constructed in 1968. A conditional use permit
was granted for an office in that building in 1969. In 1974, the office use was vacated and a
special use permit was requested for the day care facility (SP 412). It was granted with several
conditions including a maximum capacity of 32 children. Office uses were still allowed under the
special use permit.
Since that time, several changes have been approved by SP and by SDP. A brief history follows:
• SP 89-023 Amendment of SP 412 to reduce the setback of the sign
• SDP 00-72 -- changes to circulation approved on site plan
• Letter of Revision to site plan approved December 5, 2000
2
h
• SP 02-06 Amendment to allow for 40 children
• SDP 06-55 — changes proposed to address as -built conditions
• V102004-167 — Notice of zoning violation for failure to build in accordance with
approved site plan
• V102007-156 — Notice of zoning violation for failure to comply with special use
permit conditions
• AP 07-02 — Appeal of notices of violation/decision of Zoning Administrator. BZA
upheld decision of Zoning Administrator
• Appeal of decision by Zoning Administrator appealed to Circuit Court; decision dated
September 24, 2007 for Applicant to abate the zoning violation; civil penalties
assessed until conformity was achieved
• December 2007 - Conformity achieved
Attachment C contains the staff report, minutes of the Planning Commission meeting and
approved conditions for SP 02-06.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan shows this area as Urban Density Residential in
Neighborhood 1. Because no changes are proposed to the site, the project has not been
assessed for conformity with the Neighborhood Model. There are no environmental features on
the site which should be preserved, according to the Open Space Plan.
Details of the Proposal: The applicants have requested an increase in students to help meet
demand of families in the community who need day care for their children. No building additions
are proposed and the facility can accommodate the 64 children, according to the licensing division
of the Department of Social Services.
The site, with the additional children, requires 13 parking spaces (1 space per 10 children plus 1
space per employee). Nine spaces are accommodated on—site. The applicant has requested
that the additional parking be allowed on -street. The Zoning Administrator has determined that
there are 4 spaces adjacent to the facility on Lakeview Drive which can be used to provide
required parking. The site meets requirements of the zoning ordinance for the expansion and the
Zoning Administrator will allow 4 on -street parking spaces to be used.
STAFF COMMENT:
39.2.4.9: Special Use Permits provided for in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding
by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent
property,
In evaluating whether a use will be a detriment to adjacent properties, the intensity of the use and
other impacts are evaluated. Comments and concerns of neighboring properties are also
considered. One measure of the intensity of the use in relation to nearby and adjoining properties
is the traffic impact and the biggest complaint from neighbors on Lakeview Drive has to do with
traffic. Based on the number of students proposed for the day care facility, the
lY
Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Traffic Generation Manual, 7th Edition there are 200
trips generated by the current facility. An additional 120 trips from the 24 additional students
would yield 320 trips per day. Calculated with 190 trips from the existing residential uses, there
will be a traffic increase from 51 % to 63% of the traffic on Lakeview Drive.
The second biggest complaint from the neighbors has to do with on -street parking. In order to
keep the parking lot available for parents picking up and dropping off their children, employees
often park on the street in front of the houses on Lakeview Drive. Occasionally, parking on -street
results in blocked entrances to driveways. From time -to -time employees must be asked to move
their cars away from the driveways. Also, residents use on -street parking at times.
In the County's designated development areas, on -street parking is expected and encouraged,
especially near "centers". A distinction which could be made in this setting is the fact that the
street is a cul-de-sac, rather than a through -street. On -street parking is encouraged more often in
a "grid network" situation than on cul-de-sacs. It should be noted, however, that the streets in the
Four Seasons development are public streets. Even though property owners often consider the
area on the street in front of their house as belonging to their lot, the spaces are available for
public parking if allowed by VDOT. Joel DeNunzio with VDOT has said that the spaces are
available for parking and that on -street parking is not restricted at this location (See Attachment
D.)
Noise is the only other possible impact from this use. The noise of children playing outside is
expected with this type of use. No complaints have been received regarding noise.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby,
The Four Seasons development is a PUD — planned unit development -- which was originally
developed in the 1960's. It has a mixture of uses and dwelling types. The day care facility is
located on a corner across Four Seasons Drive from the Four Seasons Apartments. At this
location, it acts as a transition between the higher density of the apartments and the lower density
of the detached units on Lakeview Drive. Increasing the intensity of the day care use at this
location by 24 students and associated traffic will likely affect the character of a portion of the
district, specifically Lakeview Drive as a single-family residential street, although it would not have
much effect on the apartments across the street.
that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
The purpose and intent of the PUD is to provide for a mixture of uses and housing types.
Commercial uses are intended to be limited to a scale appropriate to the support of the residential
uses within the PUD. Of course, as with most non-residential uses including religious institutions,
users of the facility come from beyond the geographic boundaries of the development. In this
case, the assessment is whether the scale is appropriate to the district.
When this day care facility was first permitted, it was limited to 32 children. There were two
employee/owners and the facility was smaller. Over the last 6 years, it has grown to 40 children
and the building has been expanded. The issue in this case is whether the scale is appropriate to
4
rest of the development. Staff believes that the scale of the operation at 40 students is the upper
end of what should be allowed. Expanding the use to allow for 24 additional children will create a
use that is out of scale with neighborhood due to the traffic impacts, discussed below.
with uses permitted by right in the district,
Residential uses are the primary uses allowed by -right in the district. Day care facilities are
considered supporting uses to residential uses in all residential districts,
with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance,
Supplementary regulations from Section 5 of the zoning ordinance require conformity with
licensure requirements of the Virginia Department of Social Services and periodic inspections by
the Fire Official. Because of concerns for the safety of children these types of facilities are
inspected regularly by the Fire Official. Their records indicate the last inspection was in
December of 2007.
Staff has also been in touch with the Virginia Department of Social Services and ascertained that
the size of the facility would support up to 79 children, based on the requirement of 25 square feet
of area per child. Although the law recently changed to require 35 square feet per child, this
facility is grandfathered because the building addition allowed under SP 2002- 06 was completed
before July 1, 2008. If Four Seasons Learning Center were just starting out after July 1, 2008, it
would only be allowed 51 students.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
Traffic is the biggest concern that exists for an expansion of this use at the corner of Four
Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive. With the expansion, staff expects another 120 vehicle trips
per day (inclusive of both staff and parent trips). As indicated earlier, expansion of this use will
make it a larger traffic generator than the rest of the uses combined on Lakeview Drive. This is of
most concern during the mornings when traffic leaving Lakeview Drive is mixing with parents
dropping off children at the child care facility. Added to this are neighborhood concerns about
poor sight distance at the corner of Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive.
One resident said this, "Ingress and egress is so close to the corner that it is treacherous to all
vehicles traveling along Four Seasons Drive and especially to those who tum into Lakeview Drive
from the Commonwealth Drive side. The right turn into Lakeview is "blind" to those vehicles
existing the day care parking lot (and vice -versa) and I have seen dozens of close calls there. "
VDOT has indicated (see Attachment D) that there is adequate sight distance at the corner of
Lakeview and Four Seasons Drive. The perception of residents is different.
Another traffic issue relates to driver behavior around day care facilities. Oftentimes parents are
in a hurry to drop their children off and are not always cognizant of the fact that the facility is in a
residential neighborhood. All of these factors in combination suggest that increasing the number
of children at this location is not advisable.
5
MA
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request:
1. There is a need for child care facilities in Albemarle County.
2. The addition of 24 students and associated parking requirements can be accommodated
on-site or adjacent to the site.
Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request:
1. Additional traffic from the 24 students will have a negative impact on the neighborhood due
to the increase in vehicles and opportunities for conflict, especially in the morning when
children are being dropped off.
2. The enlarged day car enrollment will create a use that is out of scale with this part of the
Four Seasons development.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Although residents along Lakeview Drive may disagree, staff believes that the current facility
operates adequately within the neighborhood. With 24 additional students and the traffic patterns
and volumes already existing on Lakeview Drive staff believes that the facility will exceed an
acceptable limit and change the character of a portion of the Four Seasons PUD. For that reason
staff recommends denial of the request.
However, if the Planning Commission wishes to recommend approval, staff recommends that
previous conditions be carried through with reference to the letter of revision approved in 2000:
This permit is approved for an office OR nursery school and day-care center. The
conditions below apply to the nursery/day-care center.
a. Development of the site shall be in general conformity with the Minor Site Plan
Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community
Development and later approved by Letter of Revision dated December 5, 2000. If
modifications are made to the site, a twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained
between the property and Lot B shown on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved
July 18, 2000 and later approved by Letter of Revision dated December 5, 2000 by the
Department of Planning and Community Development.
b. The maximum number of children shall not exceed 64 at any given time or the number
approved by the Department of Social Services, whichever is less.
c. An outdoor play area with equipment shall be provided and maintained by the applicant.
The play area shall be fenced with a chain link fence.
d. The fence across the front of the property shall be a barrier fence, 4'/2 feet high, set
back 25 feet from the property line. The fencing on the other three sides of the property
is to be chain link.
R
L/
e. No certificate of occupancy for BP 2000-01520 (one-story addition with finished
basement) and no zoning clearance for any increase in the number of children more
than the 32 allowed under SP 74-412 shall be provided prior to completion of i.)
construction of the building addition, and ii.) parking lot approved in the Minor Site Plan
Amendment approved July 18, 2000 and later approved by Letter of Revision dated
December 5, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development
f. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special
use permit.
1. If the building is to be used for an office, the following conditions shall apply:
a. The maximum number of employees shall be ten employees.
b. A twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained between the property and Lot B
shown on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 and later approved
by Letter of Revision dated December 5, 2000 by the Department of Planning and
Community Development.
c. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special
use permit.
2. No sign shall be located less than five feet from the right-of-way of Four Seasons Drive. It
shall be placed in the general location depicted on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved
July 18, 2000 and later approved by Letter of Revision dated December 5, 2000 by the
Department of Planning and Community Development. It shall be single -faced and not exceed
eight square feet. Materials, color, and lettering shall be consistent with the photograph
initialed RSK and dated May 17, 1989, in the file of SP 89-23. Any replacement sign shall be
of materials, color, and lettering compatible to the Four Seasons Patio Homes sign, as
approved by the Zoning Administrator.
If the Board approves this special use permit, staff also recommends that the Board require the
applicant to provide a site plan that reflects as -built conditions to better assist staff and the
applicants. The approved site plan waiver is difficult to read and some improvements are not
accurately shown. In addition, the prior site plan will not suffice because this Special Permit
allows additional students and therefore requires additional parking which needs to be shown on
an approved site plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
A -- Site Plan Waiver/Amendment (July 18, 2000) and Letter of Revision for the facility (dated
December 5, 2000)
B -- Location Map
C -- Staff report, Planning Commission minutes and approved conditions for SP 02-06
D -- VDOT comments
E -- ACSA comments
ftl-
COUNTY OF ALBE1,1RLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 1,
(804) 296 - 5823 Ext. 3385.
Fax (804) 972 - 4035
December 5, 2000
Sliwinski, Krzysztof and Barbara
cio Four Seasons Learning Center
20 Lake View Drive
CharlortesviIle, VA 2901
RE: SDP 00-072 Four Seasons Learning Center ;Minor Amendment
Dear Nir. and Mrs. Sliwinski:
This letter is in response to your request to increase the size of the approved addition to the above
mentioned development. According to information received from the Department of Building Code
and Zoning Services there will be no increase in the number of students enrolled in the school, so the
proposed changes will not result in an increase to the required number of parking spaces. Therefore,
the Department of Planning and Community Development has reviewed and approved your request
as a "Letter of Revision" to the approved final site plan [SDP 00-07 2 Four Seasons Learning Center
Minor Amendment].
Please accept this letter as final approval for your request. This is viewed as your first "Le~<er of
Revision", and all construction must be performed in accordance with information submitted with
the building permit for this project. You are allowed a total of three Q) letters of revision before- all
changes to the plan are required to be submitted in the form of aminor site plan amendment.
Please update your records with a copy of this letter. The Planning Department evil; fonvard a copy
of this approval letter to the Department of Building Code and Zoning Services.
Please contact the Department of Building Code and Zoning Services for further information
regarding- any permits and related inspections that will be required for this proiect.
If you should have any ".:rther questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Stephen B. Waller
Planner
Attachments: Building Permit and Sketch Plan
Copy: SDP 00-072
John Grady; Manager of Zoning Permit Review
John Shepherd, Manager of Zoning Administration
Attachment A
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT ON C)�C f3c`%i'. ��-', i �eJ6' I Stllty tt ttlt t tttlt t.trlY tII.)wn un
T41IS I! AJ AND THAT THE TITLE LINES (WALLS OF THE BUILDINGS ARE SHOWN )N
�iF'O�"GriQT Y /c.S' /VO T /A/ T/r'c.. f//./o
/40 Xiv. ILDOL) zc /V(f". a�c��%✓���� osc.�9.f�1x3 c.r..s
t:lC:E'Tif/G97i:�—_— Av;i2. //70
Lv,5Ra:/C CJT/G /7;1625
K�� vire
1 5 P
'PEP I E to PLC)'-( E E
f^ coa 1r `
l/.VOEi���if'�U k 110t' E N
y SpA����' t-rl)p0'{F:t.5
Lj spf) Cf S
'lk 1 (N I, 1.'Ft �' l _.I h l ,m 1
1 C7c
:
ti n
P— S
Q n. sv I� a, _i-? f}��1 Ci-: {- 01r1 S -`� '' _ + L `a !" i '
i
Z� � n J � Ali• i � !o ,; .= 2
Cf \,t t' Q C. i' Cv:J•,c�
Aj✓on a
�Y
11
-
Vi z
Ing,'
t1U li
�;�arn�ie
cy)Ayo--ice s on i. Lev; ,ec✓ 7,y:re W 11
o k�I,-�n� s a rcpose�
A',vows
Attachment A K'1-3
iZ
v
3 A04
N
as 9rviaoonn t°
co CSM
( It y
MLL
Itco i rl' O , l
11 {{ t—nT,cor
co IT
Q
z
m ItID -'
!I
IT
LL
N r4
co
N
C? i h N ._s, �: w) tD
V �,.._ p_Nt M N N It
J t!1 CON 'v N N
C M NM ! N Q CO -
Cl O M O N 00 0) N N
i" O N4 Z�,�.N to N \ ORCD o N,
Ln N
Vi 3 N CN _ t6 C) tD N + to
C) `,Y N co N +
N
fn + t + ` h � +
o i N
+ + +
+ a
O M ri ., .4 .4 tD
U- t N m ~ to 't +
1J DN18dS + M
4 + t
lJ 4
pt ..+ M M
3 aM ^f + .ti
., rn w +
Attachment B ��
Ln rl tnt _ ......d-Ih Vt t� Qt iy -�,. _ _ Q ..
000 t0 tD 1D "v .r .4 N N NTN -.w..._....
s0 t0 tD m
M 6D LA
.ti 1
t0 .a .v . tD
0"'
- tD
to tD
.4 4sa .v � tD
i
2
\
Ow 0 0—
14 C4 4 tD0 y W 0 tD D
14 v
M'Ft N .vM
�
n N@ o '" a
�- - h
Ln N IT h
CC4, J
t,
ti
t�
.=`.hClr :.h 00 �^t �
M tp
to N
��i
r ��
a
�„'ytD to
_ h h rl-. N
�1_..
" .moitD 1D n
.r
co14 ko v
i'�•�i•�•",
t
C�
M N�1J nrib ^� .� .a �`
tD hLn h M
N
Q tD 'T N OM / W
iDra/�
E
.v NN
.i rl N N 01 N U1
o ., h h h h .+ c h y�
^� N °
.•v co to
., .. h
-"
r,
O14
N
tD O •, .� n ;o
o 0 rb
j
x
MO
f ,
Attachment B ��
(A)UNTY OF AL BEMARLE
Deparimcnt of Planr:mg & Community D cciop viv
401 N1clni�%: Road. Roost 2 18
Cirtrlottcsville. Virginia 22902-1190
(43 -' i 2 1) 0 - ?v2?.
Fax (434) 92 - 40
July 11, 2002
Barbara & Krzysztok Kalemba-Sliwinski
3516 Doctors Crossing
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE SP -2002-006 Four Seasons Learning Center; Tax Map 6 iXi, Parcel 5
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Kalemba-Sliwinski:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on July 3, 2002, unanimously approved the
above -noted request. Please note that this approvai is subject to the following conditions.
1.- permit is approved for an office or a nursery school and daycare center, provided however,
both uses shall not exist simultaneousiv.
2. If the building is to be used for a nursery school and daycare center, the following conditions shall
apply
a. Development of the site shall be in general conformity with the Minor Site Plan
Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community
Development. If modifications are made to the site, a twenty (20) -foot buffer shall be
provided and retained between the property and Lot B shown on the Minor Site Plan
Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community
Development;
b. The maximum number of chiidren shall not exceed forty (401 at any given time or the
number approved by the Department of Social Services. whichever is less,
C, An outdoor play area with equipment shall be provided and maintained by the applicant
The play area shall be fenced with a chain link fence;
d. The fence across the front of the property shall be a barrier fence, four and one-half (4 '/Z)
feet high, set back twenty-five (25) feet from the property line. The fencing on the other
three (3) sides of the property is to be chain link,-
e.
ink;e. No certificate of occupancy for BP 2000-01520 (one [1J -story addition with finished
basement) and no zoning clearance for any increase in the number of children more than
the thirty-two (32) allowed under SP 74-412 shall be provided prior to completion of: h
construction of the building addition, and ii) parking lot approved in the Minor Site Pian
Amendment approved July 18. 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community
Development, and
f. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special
use permit.
If the building is to be used for an office, the following conditions shall apply:
a. The maximum number of employees shall be ten (10) employees;
b. A twenty (20) -foot buffer shall be provided and retained between the property and Lot
shown on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of
Planning and Community Development; and
c. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special
use permit.
:Attachment C 0 ,(�
Page 2
July 11, 2002
4. No sign shall be located less than five (5) feet from the right-of-way of Four Seasons Drive It
shall be placed in the general location depicted on the Minor Site Pian Amendment approved July
18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development. It shall be single -faced
and not exceed eight (8) square feet. Materials, color. and lettering shall be consistent with the
photograph initialed RSK and dated May 17, 1989, in the file of SP 89-23 Any replacement sign
shall be of materials, color, and lettering compatible to the Four Seasons Patio Homes sign, as
approved by the Zoning Administrator.
In the event that the use, structure or activity for which this special use permit is issued shall not be
commenced within twenty-four (24) months after the issuance of such permit, the same shall be deemed
abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon terminate. For purposes of this section,
the term "commenced" shall be construed to include the commencement of construction of any structure
necessary to the use of such permit within two (2) years from the date of the issuance.
Before beginning this use. you must obtain a zoning clearance from the Zoning Department. Before the
Zoning Department will issue a clearance, you must comply with the conditions in this letter. For further
information, please call Jan Sprinkle at 295-5832.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above -noted action, please do not hesitate
to contact me.
Sincerely:
V. Wayne Cilir6berg
Director of Planning & Comounity Dev opment
VWC!jcf
Cc: Amelia McCulley
Jack Kelsey
Tex Weaver
Steve Allshouse
Matt Grimes, VDOT
1(c
.Attachment C }
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE: SP 02-006 Four Seasons Learning
Center Special Use Permit Amendment
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request to amend a special use permit to increase the
number of children from 32 to 40 at the Four Seasons
Learning Center. The property, described as Tax. Map
61X1 Parcel 5, contains 0.35 acres, and is located in
the Rio Magisterial District on at 254 Lakeview Drive at
the intersection of Lakeview Drive and Four Seasons
Drive. The property is zoned PUD Planned Unit
Development. The Comprehensive Plan designates this
property as Urban Density Residential in Neighborhood
1. (See Attachments A & B.)
STAFF CONTACT(S): Ms, Echols
PC AGENDA DATE:
NUMBERS:
June 4, 2002
BOS AGENDA DATE:
June 19, 2002
ACTION:
Recommend approval of
Special use permit with
Conditions.
ATTACHMENTS:
yes
ITEM
INFORMATION:
BACKGROUND: On August 27, 1974, the Board of Supervisors approved the original special use permit (SP
74-412). The allowable sign area was changed with SP 89-023 on March 22, 2989. Several site plans and
site plan amendments have been approved over the last 28 years. A complete history of the activities at the
site is included as Attachment C. The conditions of approval for the 1974 & 1989 special use permits are
included as Attachment D. At present the applicants are finishing construction of a building addition. They
would like to add 8 children to the maximum number of children approved for the Learning Center.
DISCUSSION: Staff has reviewed the request and the existing approved minor site plan amendment
(Attachment E). The minor amendment recently approved allowed for a building addition and enlarged parking
area. Construction began in August of 2000. Once construction is finished, the facility and site will
accommodate the additional 8 children and the required parking. The Special Use Permit amendment is to
increase the maximum number of children to 40 from 32.
Only one problem exists with the current use; however, it can easily be rectified. At present, the construction
activities on-site are interfering with the ease in which children are picked up and dropped off. Spaces in the
parking lot are not always available for use. Several residents near the facility have expressed concerns with
traffic backups and turning movements when parents drop off children, especially during the peak morning
period. Concern has also been expressed with the amount of time involved in completing construction and the
possibility of the addition of a dwelling unit or units to the facility. The nearby resident concerned with
residential use of the structure is worried about the level of activity on the site because the development is
already so dense. When all construction is completed and the parking lot is fully functional, the traffic
problems should disappear. The PUD approval for Four Seasons limits the number of residential units in the
development; so, the addition of a dwelling unit to the facility or conversion of the facility to residential units or
other uses would require an amendment to the zoning.
All staff reviewers have recommended approval of the increased numbers of children. The Building Inspector
has indicated that the facility will meet building code requirements. No impact on roads, utilities, adjoining
properties, or schools is expected with the proposal. No adverse impact is expected for the neighborhood,
provided the parking lot is completed prior to allowing the additional children in the facility.
Attachment C iq /
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the same general conditions approved with SP 74-412 and 89-
023 be approved with this request with three exceptions. These exceptions are that the maximum number of
children may increase from 32 to 40 children, no certificate of occupancy shall be given until both the building
and parking lot are completed, and no residential use of the property is to be allowed without abandoning the
special use permits. The recommended conditions are:
1. This permit is approved for an office OR nursery school and day-care center. The conditions below apply
to the nursery/day-care center.
a. Development of the site shall be in general conformity with the Minor Site Plan Amendment
approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development. If
modifications are made to the site, a twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained between the
property and Lot B shown on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the
Department of Planning and Community Development.
b. The maximum number of children shall not exceed 40 at any given time or the number approved by
the Department of Social Services, whichever is less.
c. An outdoor play area with equipment shall be provided and maintained by the applicant. The play
area shall be fenced with a chain link fence.
d. The fence across the front of the property shall be a barrier fence, 4 '/ feet high, set back 25 feet
from the property line. The fencing on the other three sides of the property is to be chain link.
e. No certificate of occupancy for BP 2000-01520 (one-story addition with finished basement) and no
zoning clearance for any increase in the number of children more than the 32 allowed under SP 74-
412 shall be provided prior to completion of i.) construction of the building addition, and ii.) parking
lot approved in the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of
Planning and Community Development
f. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special use permit.
2. If the building is to be used for an office, the following conditions shall apply:
a. The maximum number of employees shall be ten employees.
b. A twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained between the property and Lot B shown on the
Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and
Community Development.
c. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special use permit.
3. No sign shall be located less than five feet from the right-of-way of Four Seasons Drive. It shall be placed
in the general location depicted on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the
Department of Planning and Community Development. It shall be single -faced and not exceed eight
square feet. Materials, color, and lettering shall be consistent with the photograph initialed RSK and dated
May 17, 1989, in the file of SP 89-23. Any replacement sign shall be of materials, color, and lettering
compatible to the Four Seasons Patio Homes sign, as approved by the Zoning Administrator.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A — Location Map
Attachment B — Property Map
Attachment C — History of Site
Attachment D — Conditions of Approval of Previous Special Use Permits
Attachment E — Approved Minor Site Plan Amendment
:attachment C.'
ATTACUMFINTA
Attachment C
wUR S`NSG"\1S
I
a
SEC710N oixt
(wove Maar line)
r.
WESTIP4R1! PLAZA ;ONOO ,y '� ✓'� ','• �./
•'•
61XI-29 i-12
C.B. 925 oq.312 • J ;r1 .I j•� ✓'a'� !/� `✓�`''\
SP 2002-006 FOUR SEASONS LEARNING CENTER ✓`'
RIO ^iSTr91G"
SEC
ATTACHMENT B
Attachment C LoA
-..\
�I
`E71:vN CIXG
? below mimic line)
RIO ^iSTr91G"
SEC
ATTACHMENT B
Attachment C LoA
ATTACHMENT C
I/
I i -=V l 91 061X1-00-00-00500 CLE -1986-548 06/18/1986 Mary Jane Coster etas
6--�1 --' 061X1-00-00-00500 SP -1974-412 08127/1974 WOODLAKE OORPORATION
—6e l J= j 061X1-00-00-00500 VA -1989-027 03/17/1989 Mother's Care of Virginia
6i 1 1=71 6& 061X1-00-00-00500 SDP2001058 06/01/2001 Sliwinski, Barbra Kr_ysztof
�=�+°) 061X1-00.00-00500 SDP2002304 01/1412002 Kaiembai Sliwisk Barbara or Kr_yszto'
od P -q I 6E01 061X1-00-00-00500 VIO-1989-024 02/15/1989 Mother's Care or Virginia
Attachment C � S'
Tax Mar') File Number
1 x 1
Appeals
ARB Clearances0
ATL's Compliance letter,.
A r licant Date Range,-
01/01/1 to .
-.- -__....958 12/31;2(
Determinations SDP - . J S118 ' _ Variances f `a„ W ZMA;
,� Home Occs I] Signs �� SPS/CUPS ill ViolaUonsJComplaints -C ZTAs
ViewEdit Prn'
TAX MAP
TYPE PROJECT s..-- 'b
,..... E..
DATE-
.... .. ... :,
'APPEICANT;
061X1-00-00OOD00
061X1-00-00-00500
V10-2001-113
A P2001005
04/1212001
07/17/2001
Kalembai Sliwiski Barbara or Krzysztof
Sliwinski; Barbra Krzysztof
061X1-00-00-00500
SP -1989-023
03/22/1989
MOTHERS CARE OF VA, IN
061X1-00-00-00500
V A2000002
02/07/2000
Sliwinski, Krzysztof and Barbara
061X1-00-00-00500
CLE -1983-549
05/23/1983
Shirley Searson (Cricketh
061X1-00-00-00500
CLE -1985-565
06/19/1985
Joselito Cruz
061X1-00-00-00500
VA -1981-052
07131/1981
Louise C Palmer
061X1-00-00.00500
S P2002006
02122/2002
Kalembai S6wiski Barbara or Krzyszto'
1�;V 441
061X1-00-00-00500
SDP2000072
06/12/2000
Sliwinski. Krzysztof and Barbara
�*
061X1-00-00-00500
CLE -1996-175
12/01/1998
Barbara Kalernba Four Seasons Learning
6d''I 1�;�
-6?
061X1-00-00-00500
ZMA2000002
02/24/2000
Sliwinski, Krzysztof and Barbara
� �
061X1-00-00-00500
S-2000-133
06/16/2000
Chris Siwinski Four Seasons Learning Cen
6e ) j
061X1-00-00-00500
VIO-2000-084
05/30/2000
Four Seasons Learning Center
I i -=V l 91 061X1-00-00-00500 CLE -1986-548 06/18/1986 Mary Jane Coster etas
6--�1 --' 061X1-00-00-00500 SP -1974-412 08127/1974 WOODLAKE OORPORATION
—6e l J= j 061X1-00-00-00500 VA -1989-027 03/17/1989 Mother's Care of Virginia
6i 1 1=71 6& 061X1-00-00-00500 SDP2001058 06/01/2001 Sliwinski, Barbra Kr_ysztof
�=�+°) 061X1-00.00-00500 SDP2002304 01/1412002 Kaiembai Sliwisk Barbara or Kr_yszto'
od P -q I 6E01 061X1-00-00-00500 VIO-1989-024 02/15/1989 Mother's Care or Virginia
Attachment C � S'
JQIiN L. HUMPHREY
COUNTY ht ANNLi!
HODER I W. TUCKER, JR.
ASSISTANT COUNIN' PIANNUI
:
i'i:;slllisl� I�cllr,r:.slleni;
Oil rAST HIGI( `_;TT.C(:T
CHARL0TT[:Sl'ILt_t5, \!II:GI(diA r_2so1
October. 28, 1.974
l:c Board of Supervisors ActioTi
Woodlake Corporation -
c/o Daley Craig
r
400 Seasons Drive
Charlottcisvill.e„ Va.
Dear Sir:
Aj..A.- i:. to 1.nf Drill you th >,: on Or t:nbe.r 37G
durirly the rcl;uIar nlcC:t::ilip of the:' Alb eul:.:z''t County
1;Ga?'Cl r,f StipC2'1'J.ror:,, ynt3r
ATTACHMENT D
A. RU T I I N111.LE
70NING ADMINISI 14A-
h6ARY Joi' SCAT
SCNtOn PkAWNLP
Fla:,
a,Tml-oved
with they fc) 1.ocri_ncr
cond.
ons
1) I.dTlinistrati
, e r;;�p oval
of
site plan:
2) Provi.sio(j Cc)
be
Tnu^de
:i(?T" £i
C17i.1.drC'.15tfi
1)la1} �'- r
equi.nT11211L 3) the 1>1.��Yarcyra tribe fc'TTcc!d f r c
_ _ J lae� C_ICt' :1 rt?! , thC' _rclnL
of t.;TC' pro eT'ty sla�1_l be a IIc_rrier r-enc_e, 4" h3� h, set. i�acl, 25' from
the nrvperty li.n�'. TI.e -fe!l c:irl„ on the c, jier thrQt:.-Saticr of t:iac property
is to be l.inl; 4 Em-ollmc i ��i_Tur 'of 32 e1k,ldn 1
_ nt l..nt.; tr.d to a max ln-;;t.,�
at nny_one tinTe, Q A limit of ons si. n on the pr.operl-y with ra maximum
of four sI utnre feet.
Office of Planning and 7.cnir,g
by 'rlary K. Fr.;azier
NOTE: This perin:it was appr.ovcd for an. office OF nurr:ery schou]. and day --care cenl-cr.
Thea above conditions apply to the nursery achoui/day-care center. if the bui.1ding
is, at a l.ai:er date, used for arl office, tlac:: following condi Lions, will apply,
1) Administrative approval. of site. Plan; 2) L:i:ua:it office personnel t:o ten employees;
3) Limit of one sign on property. Sil;n to have a naxlTimm arca of four-square feet.
;7-2'
Attachment C A op
ATTACHMENT D
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept, Of Planning & COTTIMUnity D(?veloprnent
401 McIntire Road
Cliarlottesvilic, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
May 24, 1989
Mothers Care of Virginia, Inc
20 Lakeview Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
ATTN: Mary Jane Coster
RE: SP -89-23 Mothers Care of Virginia, Inc
Dear Mrs. Coster:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on
May 17, 1989, approved the above -noted request to amend
Condition 45 of SP -412 as it relates to signs. Property,
located in the southern portion of the intersection of Four
Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive in the Four Seasons PUD.
Tax Map 61X1, Parcel 5. Charlottesville Magisterial
District. The Board approved this request subject to the
addition of condition No. 6 to SP -412 as follows:
6. Sign setback may be reduce to not less than five feet
from the right-of-way of Four Seasons Drive to be
located as generally depicted in Attachment D of
SP -89-23 MOTHERS CARE OF VIRGINIA, INC. Such sign
shall be single faced and not exceed eight square feet
4 and shall be consistent with the photograph initialed
RSK and dated May 17, 1989, in the file of SP -89-23
Any replacement sign shall be of materials, color, and
lettering compatible to the Four Seasons Patio Homes
sign, as approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Attachment C
ATTACHMENT D
Mothers Care of Virginia, Inc
Page 2
May 24, 1989
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
RSK/jcw
cc: Kathy Dodson
Z�{
Attachment C,
I
T►RS 15 TC) CERTIFY THAT ON .J(,1::'<.`., i '._`�..`: <='r..' :' :'S<:• 1 SIINYEYI it IN1, I°tttil•1 ATTACHMENT F
T 115 t`rr,T AND THAT THE TITLE L1NES ANI) WALL" OF THE IIIIIIONIt1.; AItE. 5N<1WN III fit 014,,
r
U4`/C/!�/l�� !'c?G ,''%�'. ". ... cJ; l�!_ ,t ._ F.ntrsti.C'.xs f.• ...
Gni%G/7i'6" t ,h f.1
rnm<a _ f
(.11LD;z ?
rtf t--> 10
ATTACHMENT E
2- 4
L_CL k _ev L
, c C_&-qA c�ovic;WoC4"or)
eV,
. / Pf: n j
No wQj
Avows C>n -TOLiV-;nj
-i
rv\AP 61\/1 P6L(Cpl
Attachment C G�
SO
2- 4
L_CL k _ev L
, c C_&-qA c�ovic;WoC4"or)
eV,
. / Pf: n j
No wQj
Avows C>n -TOLiV-;nj
-i
rv\AP 61\/1 P6L(Cpl
Attachment C G�
SP -02-006 Four Seasons Learning Center (Sign # 26 & 27) - Request to amend an existing
special use permit to allow a total of 40 children at the existing daycare facility in accordance with
Section 20.3.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for child care facilities. The property, described
as Tax Map 61 X1, Parcel 5, contains 0.35 acres and is located in the Rio Magisterial District at 254
Lakeview Drive at the intersection of Lakeview Drive and Four Seasons Drive. The property is zoned
PUD Planned Unit Development. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Urban Density
Residential in Neighborhood 1.
Ms. Echols presented the staff report. (See the attached copy of the staff report.) She stated that the
applicants have been restricted to thirty-two children at the facility. The current owners of the facility
and the applicants would like to increase that number from thirty-two to forty. The special use permit
application was reviewed in light of that particular request. By and large, staff has no problem with
recommending approval on the increase of the number of children with a few exceptions. There has
been some construction activities going on there for quite some time which makes it difficult for the
parents to be able to park in the parking lot. Staff has heard from several of the residents in the
neighborhood about traffic backing up because of the parking lot situation. Staffs recommendation
for approval is contingent on the completion of all of the construction activity so that the parking lot
will be available for the children. Also, the construction will be complete. There were previous
special use permit conditions which have been modified slightly to make them work under our current
language. The special use permit was previously approved for both a day care center and for an
office. which remains as a condition for approval. The last condition has to do with conversion of this
facility to a residence. The residents in the neighborhood are concerned about increasing the density
of the development due to the constricted parking area. The residents have asked that we restrict it
from becoming a duplex or a residence. If it changes to a residence, then the special use permit will
Albemarle County Planning Commission Minutes Page 2
June 4, 2002
DRAFT MINUTES — SUBMITTED JUNE 18
2�
Attachment C '�
go away for that particular property for the day care center. It would be one or the other use, but not
a combination of both.
Mr. Loewenstein asked if the condition language makes it clear that the permit is an either or
proposition, but not both. After reading the staff report and the conditions, he understood the
condition, but was concerned that in the future that the condition could be misconstrued. He asked
Mr. Kamptner if he had anything that parallels this situation.
Mr. Kamptner noted that in reviewing the condition, it makes sense.
Mr. Loewenstein suggested that Mr. Kamptner think further about how to clarify the condition.
Ms. Echols suggested that condition number one, the first sentence, be a stand-alone condition.
Condition number 2 would stated that the conditions below apply to the nursery/daycare center.
Mr. Loewenstein noted that in a sense that would help. He suggested putting in a phrase at the end
of the first sentence that says "but not both." Since there were no further questions for staff, he
opened the public hearing and asked if the applicant would like to address the Commission.
SPEAKER FOR REQUEST:
Krzysztof Sliwinski, owner of the property, stated that they had owned the business since December
1998. He pointed out when they purchased the property that it was zoned commercial and
residential, R-6 & PUD. He noted that he did not understand when the R-6 went away and stayed
PUD. He stated that he did not know why the zoning kept going back and forth. He noted that the
property was zoned R-6 when they signed the contract to purchase the property. He noted that is
wife, Barbara Kalemba-Sliwinski, was present.
Mr. Loewenstein asked that the record note that there was a concern about the wording of the
condition that they are mutually exclusive uses. He suggested that it state that it is either for an office
or a nursery, but not both. He asked that Mr. Kamptner work on the condition to incorporate his
suggestion.
Mr. Finley asked what the property was currently being used for?
Ms. Echols stated that it was a daycare center.
Mr. Loewenstein asked for further discussion. There being none, he closed the public hearing and
placed the matter before the Commission.
Mr. Rieley moved for approval of SP -02-006, Four Seasons Learning Center, with staffs
recommended conditions as amended.
Ms. Hopper seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of SP -02-006, Four Seasons Learning Center
subject to the following conditions:
This permit is approved for an office or a nursery school and daycare center; provided, however,
both uses shall not exist simultaneously.
If the building is to be used for a nursery school and daycare center, the following conditions shall
apply:
a. Development of the site shall be in general conformity with the Minor Site Plan Amendment
approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development. If
Albemarle County Planning Commission Minutes Page 3
June 4, 2002
DRAFT MINUTES — SUBMITTED JUNE 18
Attachment C „,(
modifications are made to the site, a twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained
between the property and Lot B shown on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18,
2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development.
b. The maximum number of children shall not exceed 40 at any given time or the number
approved by the Department of Social Services, whichever is less.
c. An outdoor play area with equipment shall be provided and maintained by the applicant. The
play area shall be fenced with a chain link fence.
d. The fence across the front of the property shall be a barrier fence, 4 '/z feet high, set back 25
feet from the property line. The fencing on the other three sides of the property is to be chain
link.
e. No certificate of occupancy for BP 2000-01520 (one-story addition with finished basement)
and no zoning clearance for any increase in the number of children more than the 32 allowed
under SP 74-412 shall -be provided prior to completion of i.) construction of the building
addition, and ii.) parking lot approved in the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18,
2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development
f. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special use
permit.
3. If the building is to be used for an office, the following conditions shall apply:
a. The maximum number of employees shall be ten employees.
b. A twenty -foot buffer shall be provided and retained between the property and Lot B shown on
the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18, 2000 by the Department of Planning and
Community Development.
c. No residential use of the property shall be allowed without abandonment of the special use
permit.
4. No sign shall be located less than five feet from the right-of-way of Four Seasons Drive. It shall
be placed in the general location depicted on the Minor Site Plan Amendment approved July 18,
2000 by the Department of Planning and Community Development. It shall be single -faced and
not exceed eight square feet. Materials, color, and lettering shall be consistent with the
photograph initialed RSK and dated May 17, 1989, in the file of SP 89-23. Any replacement sign
shall be of materials, color, and lettering compatible to the Four Seasons Patio Homes sign, as
approved by the Zoning Administrator.
Mr. Loewenstein noted that the Board would hear the special use permit on June 19th.
Attachment C41z-9
sight line at intersection Four Seasons and Lake"wiew Rt. 1456 and Rt. 1458
Elaine Echols
From: Baber, Charles T. [Charles.Baber@VDCT.Virginia.gov)
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 12:05 PM
To: Elaine Echols
Cc: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Subject: sight line at intersection Four Seasons and Lakewview Rt, 1456 and Rt. 1458
Page I of I
This is to advise that the right out sight is 410' and at 25 MPH the required amount would be 280' and the left out
is 280' which is the required amount also be advised that there is a tree that was just planted in this area that
should be relocated as it will soon be at a height that will restrict the sight line in the very near future, this if
required by Albemarle co. as a part of the original site plan this could be moved approximately 8' to prevent future
safety problems any additional questions please advise thanks.
6.!17/2008
Attachment ll 01
Pao e 1 of 2
Elaine Echols
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [Joel.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 11:01 AM
To: Elaine Echols
Subject: RE: Four Seasons Learning Center Amendment to SP -2002-06
Sorry, it should read "at no time will be acceptable". Four Seasons Drive is a shoulder design and parking along
that road is not permitted.
Thanks,
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Staff Engineer
434-293-0011 Ext. 120
ioel.den unzio(grvdot.virginia.gov
From: Elaine Echols [mailto:EECHOLS@albemarle.org]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 10:43 AM
To: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Subject: RE: Four Seasons Learning Center Amendment to SP -2002-06
Hi --
I don't understand what you wrote that is in red below. Could you explain?
Thanks.
Elaine
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.[mailto:loel.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Monday, May 19, 2008 10:23 AM
To: Elaine Echols
Subject: Four Seasons Learning Center Amendment to SP -2002-06
Elaine,
I received The Four Seasons Learning Center Amendment to SP -2002-06 and have reviewed it. My only
comment is that parking along Four Seasons Drive a r:o' hme• wi i)e _acceptable and as long as the parking on
Lakeview is acceptable to the county, I have no additional comments.
If you have any questions, please let me know.
Thanks,
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Staff Engineer
434-293-0011 Ext. 120
joeI.denunzio@vdot.virgiiiia.gov
5/22/2008
Attachment D_. J
Page 2 of 2
From: Elaine Echols [mailto:EECHOLS@albemarle.org]
Sent: Friday, May 16, 2008 5:22 PM
To: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Subject: Four Seasons Learning Center
Hi Joel,
I sent you some info on Four Seasons Learning Center on -street parking a few weeks ago. Did you get it? I
would like comments as soon as you can get them.
Thanks.
Elaine
Elaine K. Echols. AICP
Principal Planner
Department of Community Development
Albemarle County, VA
434-296-5823 x 3252
eechols@albemarle.org
x/22/2008
Attachment D "71
TO: Elaine Echols, Planner
FROM: Gary Whelan, Civil Engineer
Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA)
DATE: February 26, 2007
RE: Site Plan Technical Review for: Four Seasons Learning Center
(TM 61X1 Parcel 5)
SP -2007-00001
The below checked items apply to this site:
X 1. This site plan is within the ACSA's jurisdictional area for:
X A. Water and sewer,-
B,
ewer;B. Water only;
C. Water only to existing structure;
_ D. Limited service.
X 2. A 6 inch water line is located approximately 35' distant.
X 1 Fire flow from nearest public hydrant, located 150' distant from this site
plan, is 2159 gpm ± at 20 psi residual.
X 4. An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately 50' distant.
_ 5. An Industrial Waste Ordinance survey form must be completed.
X 6. No improvements or obstructions shall be placed within existing or future
easements.
_ 7, and plans are currently under review.
_ 8. and plans have been received and approved.
_ 9. No plans are required.
—10, Final water and sewer plans are required for ACSA's review and
approval prior to granting tentative approval.
_ 11. Final site plan may/may not be signed.
—12. RWSA approval for water and/or sewer connections.
Comments: Backflow prevention is required.,Provide plumbing fixture
count to size meter.
The site plan does not show or incorrectly shows:
_ meter locations _ waterline size
_ waterline locations _ sewer line size
_ sewer line locations _ expected wastewater flows
easements — expected water demands
09 540 Four Seasons Learning Center Site Plan 02026-07
Attachment E
Albemarle County Planning Commission
June 24, 2008
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and a public hearing on
Tuesday, June 24, 2008, at 6:00 p.m., at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium,
Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Members attending were Marcia Joseph, Thomas Loach, Bill Edgerton, Linda
Porterfield, Eric Strucko and Calvin Morris, Chairman. Absent was Jon Cannon, Vice -
Chairman. Julia Monteith, AICP, Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia
was present.
Other officials present were David Benish, Chief of Planning; Bill Fritz, Chief of Current
Development; Ron Higgins, Manager of Zoning Enforcement; Gerald Gatobu, Senior
Planner; Joan McDowell, Principal Planner; Philip Custer, Engineer; Joe DeNunzio,
VDOT representative; Amelia McCulley, Director of Current Development &
Zoning/Zoning Administrator; Elaine Echols, Principal Planner and Greg Kamptner,
Deputy County Attorney.
Call to Order and Establish Quorum:
Mr. Morris called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. and established a quorum.
Public Hearing Items:
SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
PROPOSED: Amend special use permit to increase maximum number of children in
daycare from 40 to 64. No residential units proposed.
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: PUD Planned Unit Development which
allows residential (3 - 34 units per acre), mixed with commercial and industrial uses
SECTION: 20.3.2.1, which allows for child care facilities
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Urban Density Residential (6-34
units/acre) in Neighborhood 1.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No
LOCATION: 254 Lakeview Drive
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 61 X1, Parcel 5
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rio
(Elaine Echols)
Ms. Echols presented a power -point presentation and summarized the staff report.
(Attachment — power -point presentation)
The proposal is for a special use permit for Four Seasons Learning Center to increase
the number of children from 40 to 64. Staff noted the following concerns.-
There
oncerns:There are issues that relate to the traffic increase estimated with the additional
students.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —JUNE 24, 2008 ATTACHMENT 2
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
. SLI
• There are concerns with the driveway into the daycare center being very close to
the intersection and sight distance concerns.
• There are concerns that the scale of increase will change the character of the
Lakeview Drive and their on -street parking concerns.
Staff received a copy of a new traffic study during the break, which staff has not had a
chance to review. Copies of the new traffic study will be distributed by the applicant to
the Planning Commission.
There is a need for childcare facilities in Albemarle County, especially childcare facilities
in close proximity to residential units. Also, the addition of 24 students at this particular
location and associated parking can be accommodated on the site or adjacent to the
site on the street.
Staff has found several factors unfavorable to the request, which leads to a
recommendation of denial for this particular application.
• Staff feels that the number of additional students is going to have a negative
impact on the neighborhood due to the increase in vehicles and opportunities for
conflict because the entrance is so close to the intersection.
• The enlarged daycare enrollment will create a use that is out of scale with this
part of the Four Seasons development. The residences on Lakeview Drive are of
a different scale and character than what is across the street. People who turn
on Lakeview Drive to drop their children off by going in and out of the parking lot
are having traffic conflicts with the people that are entering and exiting the
neighborhood.
Staff recommends denial of this request. But, staff feels that there are pros and cons to
this particular development as pointed out in the staff report. If the Planning
Commission wishes to recommend approval, staff recommends the conditions listed in
the staff report, which basically were the same conditions that were approved with the
last special use permit several years back. Staff would suggest some modifications to
the conditions.
Mr. Loach asked if the request for additional students would increase the parking needs
for the additional staff or students.
Ms. Echols replied that the traffic information included in the staff report is based on the
number of vehicle trips which take into account the parents of students and facility. It is
the number of vehicle trips on Lakeview Drive. She noted that the additional staff and
parking are included.
Mr. Morris opened the public hearing and invited the applicant to address the Planning
Commission.
John Simpson, attorney for the applicant, said that they were concerned with a certain
arbitrariness and despair treatment that he would like to bring to their attention.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 2
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
�`7
• The staff appears to have three main objections to the increase in children that
they are asking to be allowed. Traffic is the main concern. Parking is the second
issue. The third concern seems to be the intensity of use issue. With respect to
parking, there are currently 40 children who attend the daycare. The report uses
a figure of 200 trips per day based upon this enrollment. The report says that if
there are an additional 24 children allowed, as requested, that will result in an
additional 120 trips. That would be a total of 320 trips to drop off and pick up
these 64 children everyday. He questioned if anybody had tried to apply the
math. He would submit that the numbers this traffic objection was based upon
really does not make any sense.
• Staff concludes that there will be a traffic increase as noted on the screen from
51 to 63 percent of all of the traffic on Lakeview Drive. The figures that they are
using for the 40 and the additional 32 children would mean five trips per child
every day. That is assuming that every one of these 40 or 64 children is being
driven individually in a separate car every day. That would mean that they have
no siblings going to the school, no one walking, no carpools or anybody absent.
They know that all of that is not true. They have eight siblings that attend the
school, someone that walks their child to school and children that are
occasionally absent. If they took 40 children, which is the current number
attending, there would be 80 trips counting the 40 drop offs and 40 pick ups.
That would leave them a little short of the 200 that staff is basing the traffic
objective on. So they would have to add on another 80 trips. So every parent of
every child in the school comes in and picks up their child for a doctor's
appointment, etc. and brings them back. That brings the number up to 160,
which are 40 trips short of the 200 that the county staff is basing their objection to
traffic on. That means that there is some other reason why the parents of the
children would go and pick them up on that day. On its face the numbers that
they are basing their objectives on they would submit are absurd. That is the
main objection that the staff has to the increase from 40 to 64 children.
• They have provided a traffic study. The engineering manual that staff appeared
to rely upon in their determination that there would be 200 trips for 40 students
and 320 trips for 64 students is the same source that is cited by their engineer.
Their engineer was more specific in terms of the source. In the report it notes
that it is a day care center of 565 trips. It finds that there would be 34 morning
trips and 34 evening trips for the 40 students. There would be 51 trips for the
a.m. and 51 trips for the p.m. students. He felt that was more in accord with
common sense in that they are not going to have every one of the children driven
separately and individually in a car. Often there are a number of siblings that
attend the same day care.
• They have a traffic study showing the 64 trips for the 40 students versus the
staff's 200 per day. For the requested amount of 64 children they have 102 trips
from their traffic assessment and 320 trips by the county staff. That is a huge
different. One is less than two trips per child per day and the other is 5 trips per
child per day. Since that is the basis of staff's primary objection they would
submit that it is basically pretty arbitrary.
• He noted that his client had a parking assessment done, which was provided to
county staff. What the parking assessment showed was an actual count of the
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —JUNE 24, 2008 3
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
vehicles as they entered the property dropped off children and picked up children
throughout the day. That is in attachment two to the parking assessment. Every
time a child was dropped off it was counted as two trips. But, the total of visits
was consistent with the number from their traffic assessment of a total of 80 per
day. In the first page of attachment two it notes that the drop offs and pick ups
are spread out during the day. It is not a situation where 40 parents and children
descent upon the property within a half an hour or an hour period of time. It is
spread out over almost four hours. The most drop offs or pick ups that occur
during any 15 minute period are six. Therefore, they have a rate of one pick up
or drop off every 2.5 minutes. Clearly staff is way off with respect to their traffic
analysis.
• The other conflicts that are raised have to do with some sort of conflict or danger.
Other than just saying it, there is no objective basis for that concern. There have
been no accidents in this area throughout the entire operation of this daycare
center.
• VDOT has approved the sight lines for the entrance that was installed on the
property. It is a 25 miles per hour speed limit. There is no rush of cars bringing
the children and dropping them off. As the actual assessment showed the pick
ups and drop offs area was relatively a gradual spread out process.
• The parking issue is addressed in the parking assessment. VDOT has said that
the spaces on the street are available. The parking study shows that there is
more than adequate parking available.
• The last objective deals with a more intensive use. This brings up an issue that
they have some concern with in terms of disparity or discriminatory treatment
towards the day care center. A year ago the Charlottesville Day School was
approved for an increase in its enrollment from 85 to 250 students. For purposes
of orientation the Charlottesville Day School is in the old ACAC facility, which is
almost adjacent to this particular property. There are many townhouses,
apartments and residences that abut the Charlottesville Day School property.
Here they are asking for an increase from 40 to 64 students, which is a relatively
small number. Last year the Charlottesville Day School added 165 students,
which was a three -fold increase.
• He asked to go through the staff report for the day school just to compare. With
respect to the character of the district, by increasing the intensity of daycare use
at this location by 24 students and the associated traffic would likely affect the
character. For the Charlottesville Day School staff stated that the area has been
a school since the early 1980's beginning as a daycare facility and the proposed
number of students would only continue this use. Under the public health, safety
and general welfare issues staff mentioned traffic as the big concern. For the
day school staff indicated that the applicant indicates that some of the students
and teachers were dropped off with their siblings, and therefore they were not
looking at 250 vehicles. They would submit that there is no reason to deny the
application because the staff report is arbitrary and is bias against his clients.
Parking is not an issue and neither is the increase that involves the traffic.
Mr. Strucko asked if his clients agree with the conditions as outlined on pages six and
seven of the staff report if the Planning Commission approves the application.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 4
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
Mr. Simpson agreed that there are already conditions on the existing site plan that
address the use of the property for the day care. They are not asking to add onto the
building, change any of the structures or make any improvements to the property. The
report indicates that the current building is sufficient to more than satisfy State
requirements in terms of the number of children that they would like to be able to
handle.
Ms. Joseph asked if they agree with the staff report where it talks about the Virginia
Department of Social Services and that certain regulations have changed so that if they
came in currently with the existing square footage they would only be allowed 51
students.
Mr. Simpson agreed if they were dealing with a different situation such as this school
had not existed before, but that is not what they are dealing with.
Ms. Joseph asked if they were dealing with the square footage is this a correct
statement in the staff report.
Mr. Simpson replied that his understanding of the law was that it would apply if it was a
brand new school, but that does not apply to them. It was irrelevant because they were
not dealing with that situation.
Ms. Porterfield asked if the 40 students were the same people all day or do they have
40 students at any one time.
Mr. Simpson replied that it was the same 40 students, which was the maximum number
of children.
Ms. Porterfield asked where the staff members park.
Krzysztof Sliwinski replied that the employees park off the site on property that touches
the day care and there are two parking spaces in the site.
Mr. Morris invited other public comment
Jan Sprinkle, a former staff member and owner/resident of 271 Lakeview Drive for 21
years, spoke for herself and her husband, Jim Sprinkle. As neighbors they definitely
agree with the staff report. They think that the increase that has been requested by the
Learning Center does not meet three of the findings in the ordinance. First, it is a
substantial detriment to adjacent property. It has always had some detrimental effect
such as noise, parking, traffic and the fact that it is not maintained as a residence. It
does not have quite the curb appeal that those who live there like if the special use
permit is approved and their enrollment is permitted to double from the 32 children that
were permitted for the last 33 years up to 64 children. If the daycare goes up to 64
children, then that is double. That is a substantial detriment to the entire Four Seasons
neighborhood, particularly to the Lakeview Drive houses. The traffic on their cul-de-sac
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 5
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
3�
would increase dramatically. They are not anti -growth or anti -commercial. This is a
Planned Unit Development - PUD that they chose to live in. There is plenty of
commercial property in use there. But, they love their neighborhood and want to retain
the residential look and feel of Lakeview Drive so that the property value of their homes
won't be damaged to accommodate this one single business.
Ms. Sprinkle further noted that she asked Community Development for statistics on how
many other daycare centers have been approved in similar residential situations. The
answer came out to be two. There is one for eight children on Dominion Drive and
another for 44 children on Reservoir Road. That is discounting churches and
commercial sites and things like that. Those are the only two that were close to similar.
Secondly, the character of the district will be changed. Staff covered that well in the
staff report. It is just simply that the traffic is out of scale with their residential cul-de-
sac. Third, the additional enrollment is not in harmony with public safety. This is a
dangerous intersection and the congestion caused by the day care right at the
intersection of Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive really gets complicated when
there are people coming and going. Many people don't pull into the day care, but stop
on the street or drive down to the cul-de-sac to turn around or pull into somebody else's
driveway to back up and turn around. They think that the request is not in harmony with
public safety. If the Planning Commission decides to approve the request they ask that
they stick with the conditions and require a site plan.
Mr. Morris invited other public comment.
Martha Wood, resident of 264 Lakeview Drive, presented a power point presentation.
She asked to express three concerns about the increase in the numbers and that the
Planning Commission denies the petition. She was concerned about the amount of
traffic generated by additional children being dropped off and picked up at this location.
It is on a corner of a residential area and a busy street used by many as a cut through.
Lakeview Drive is a cul-de-sac and the traffic at the Learning Center is already a cause
for concern among many who have observed clients using the street to turn around
before leaving. They believe that the request would generate additional traffic with the
study presented by the attorney notwithstanding. Secondly, there are nine parking
spaces on the property. She understands that the study says that there are four on the
street, but she could only find three. It was her understanding that regulations for a
facility serving pre-school children require that there is one teacher for every four
children or one adult. Sixty-four children would call for 16 adults. This does not include
other staff at the center. There are, therefore, insufficient parking places just for the
staff. If they would all park on the property there would still not be enough spaces for all
of them if there were indeed 64 children and they met the 4:1 ratio. They already have
problems with parking on the street in front of other properties. One neighbor has
posted a sign asking that her mail box not be blocked. This is a motorized mail delivery
route. On occasion parents have been seen parking on the street and taking children
across the street and up the drive way. The enclosed play area is small and often full of
children. There does not appear to be sufficient space for additional children to play
outside. For these reasons, she asked that they deny the petition to increase the
number of children allowed at the learning center.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —JUNE 24, 2008 6
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
39
Sherry Zack, resident of 263 Lake View Drive, agreed with the other two speakers.
The area is very residential. To add more traffic and students to the daycare it would
change everything. When the ACAC daycare was approved that also increased
everything. She questioned why they need the increase. It is just not fair for the
residents that live in the neighborhood. It is dangerous in the morning and other pick up
times particularly at the intersection.
Mary Hackett, Treasurer of the Four Season's Homeowner Association and a member
of the board, reaffirmed that they have heard numerous comments or concern from
residents in that area. She asked to reinforce staff's comments about parents and how
they drive when picking up and dropping off children. She lived on Monterey Drive,
which was on the corner. At one time there were two small in home day centers on
Monterey Drive. There is now one. For the last 20 years she had seen parents come
down and whip around this corner because they were running late for work and needed
to drop their children off. She felt it would be a serious concern if they raised the
number of children to 64. Because of the growth on both sides of the street along Four
Seasons Drive where Lakeview Drive comes out and because of the curb it differs
substantially from the ACAC situation, which is a straight way along Four Seasons.
Also, ACAC has an enormous parking lot that parents can pull into, drop off their
children and turn around without interfering in any way with the neighborhood. The
secondary concern about the traffic relates to the area going in on Dominion Drive down
from the shopping center. She felt that is going to increase the traffic as people come
along Four Seasons Drive from there eventually to get out to Rio Road. So they are
going to have these parents trying to come out against a flow of traffic that is going both
ways along there. She asked to stress and reinforce what staff had to say about the
traffic issues and how serious they are.
There being no further public comment, Mr. Morris closed the public hearing to bring the
matter before the Planning Commission.
Mr. Edgerton asked for a response from staff about the suggested disparity between the
calculations and the increase in traffic
Ms. Echols replied that when she reviewed the ITE Manual there were three different
methods that could be used to calculate the traffic generation impacts. There was one
based on the number of students that incorporated in its numbers the number of
employees as while. There was another way to do it based on the number of
employees. The third way was based on the square footage of the facility, which did not
seem appropriate in this case. In her estimation and calculations she used information
from what she recalled from taking her own children to day care, which has not changed
substantially over the years, and put all three together. The applicant was not
increasing the square footage and there was additional capacity in the building
according to social services. She chose the ITE one because there were three different
numbers. She has not had a chance to look at what the applicant provided to see if
something was different about the way the trips were calculated. With 64 students she
felt that there were four vehicle trips a day. Each time someone went one direction it
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 7
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center]
was a single trip. By multiplying 64 times 4 it gives 256 vehicle trips per day. There is
probably a factor in there for siblings. If they make that 80 percent it comes up to 205
vehicle trips per day. But, 80 percent may or may not be the right number. Then they
need to add the number of staff members, which make two trips per day. That really did
not accommodate any additional staff members who might be part-time who might
come and relieve somebody else. But, she was not sure if their numbers are wildly off.
She asked for time to look at what the applicant submitted and compare it with their
engineers to see if there is something there that they have missed. If staff has done it
incorrectly, she would want the Commission to have the correct information before
making a decision.
Mr. Strucko asked if it was fair to say that staff's numbers are probably the most
intensive use scenario.
Ms. Echols replied that she did not think so.
Mr. Strucko said that according to the staff report on site parking they need to provide
one space per ten children plus one space per employee.
Ms. Echols agreed.
Mr. Strucko said that would bring the parking requirement up to 13. He asked what it is
now with 40 children.
Ms. Echols replied that it is five employees there right now. She spent a lot of time
talking with Social Services about this because their regulations require some
interpretation. She asked them to give what the staff requirements would be. They
could not do it because it depends on the make up of the children. There is a different
staffing requirement for infants than for preschoolers and for toddlers. Social Services
said that the daycare has a sufficient number of staff. It looks like they might even have
more, which would be telling them that they had a good number of staff members to
take care of the children. It is not substantially more. The numbers given staff may or
may not have been correct according to the applicant. The bottom line is that the
applicant has told staff that they will need six people with this additional number of
students. That is in keeping with the kinds of things Social Services said. So she did
not have any qualms with the number of teachers or employees that they said that they
need.
Mr. Strucko asked if the existing site has nine parking spaces.
Ms. Echols replied that was correct on site, but referred specific questions to Ron
Higgins of zoning.
Mr. Strucko said that basically that meets the requirement. If they were to park staff
plus this requirement of one space per ten children on average, can they accommodate
that on site today with 40 students?
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 8
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
41
Ms. Echols replied not with the number of employees they have. So they have to use
some of the on -street parking. But, zoning has said that is okay. There is no issue
about that particular item. She noted that Ron Higgins of zoning was present if there
were any questions.
Mr. Strucko asked what the parking requirement was for 40 students and what will it be
with the additional students proposed here.
Ms. Echols said that the parking requirement for 40 students depends on how many
employees they have. They don't set the number of employees. If they had four
employees, then they could meet their parking requirements on site. But, if they have
six employees with the additional students they have to have off-site parking.
Mr. Strucko asked if this is a public road and on -street parking is permissible.
Ms. Echols replied that it is a public road. The zoning administrator could allow on -
street parking on Lakeview Drive, but not on Four Seasons Drive.
Ms. Porterfield questioned if they don't have enough parking on site would the zoning
administrator allow on -street parking on Lakeview Drive even though they have heard a
lot of people say it was a bad deal.
Ron Higgins, Chief of Zoning, noted that it was not a matter of what he said, but a
matter of what the Code says. The Code allows you to count parking on the street.
Their parking study did a study of all parking on Lakeview Drive, which was not part of
the mix. One is only allowed to count those spaces that immediately abut your
property. He went out and measured 18' strips and 20' strips to try to see if he could fit
the parking spaces. The applicant showed five, but he could only get four parking
spaces. So they have four on -street spaces abutting their property plus nine on site, for
a total of 13 spaces. That means if they only have six staff they meet the parking
requirements. If more than six, then they have a problem. Their study was based on
four staff with 40 students and 64 students. But, he was told in the process that they
were going to have six staff with the increase.
Ms. Porterfield questioned how one staff would be sufficient for an increase of 24
students.
Ms. Sliwinski pointed out the declaration says one staff per ten children and five for the
staff. They have four plus one extra on Lakeview Drive for the 24 children. So there
would be two parking spaces for the 20 children and the rest for the employees if they
need it. Therefore, it is more parking spaces than they need.
Ms. Porterfield noted trouble knowing that they have five current staff for 40 children,
which is essentially one per every eight. Now they are going to add 24 children and
only need one more staff person.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 9
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
Z/Z-
Ms. Sliwinski said that they need two staff persons. They need seven spaces for the
employees and six spaces for the 60 children. The total is 13 spaces. They have one
extra, which makes it 14 parking spaces. Therefore, they have one extra parking space
as needed.
Mr. Morris closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Planning
Commission.
Mr. Kamptner pointed out that a question was raised about the Charlottesville Day
School approval. He asked if staff has any comment on the analysis that went into that
particular application and how it differs from this application.
Ms. Echols said that ACAC is a very large facility that has a lot of parking related to it.
Also, the traffic does not go down Lakeview Drive. The entrances and exits are a totally
different arrangement. It is a different school. It is definitely in the same center. At that
time there were some residents who were very concerned about it, particularly with the
noise of the buses and such. There were also some fencing problems. But, by and
large it was a different animal because it was at a different location.
Ms. Joseph asked if those buses were to take children on field trips or buses who were
actually picking up children and bringing them to the facility.
Ms. Echols replied that she thought both.
Mr. Strucko noted that the complaint was that the buses set idling. He asked staff if the
recommendation for denial was based on the impact of the use would be a detriment to
adjacent properties.
Ms. Echols replied yes. But, she did not mind taking an opportunity to have a look at
what they provided in terms of the traffic study to see if there is anything that is
substantial that needs to be reviewed before the Commission takes an action. It would
require a deferral.
Mr. Edgerton suggested that they ask the applicant if they would consider a deferral.
Ms. Joseph pointed out that she did not like receiving information at the meeting that
staff has not had an opportunity to review. She counts on staff's review. The traffic
study may be great and they may have paid a fair amount of money for it, but it was
worthless to her when it comes in at this point in time. She felt it was extremely
generous of staff to offer to take a look at this. But, it would require a deferral.
Ms. Echols noted that it was a 2007 request and the time allowance was well over.
Therefore, the applicant would have to request the deferral.
Mr. Loach asked if the intensity staff was referring to for denial is one of traffic and not
usage of the school. Staff had said that Social Services had said putting 64 students in
the physical building and grounds is not a problem.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 10
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
�3
Ms. Echols replied no, because they are grandfathered. She asked Social Services at
length for the answers to those questions. They sent a section out of their new
regulations that has a one student per 35 square feet requirement. She asked them
how that relates to an existing building. After consultation the representative came back
and said that would be the requirement if they were building a brand new building today.
If the building exists, then the one student for 25 square feet is the standard that they
would use.
Mr. Loach asked if Social Services regulate day care centers.
Ms. Echols replied yes.
Mr. Loach asked if the inspection for the 64 students has already passed based on the
grandfather clause, and Ms. Echols replied yes.
Mr. Morris asked if the applicant would like to ask for a deferral so that they can analysis
the data.
Mr. Simpson replied that they would prefer to move forward. He pointed out that the
traffic assessment was not requested by county staff. They asked for the parking
assessment. They had no idea that these figures of 200 trips per day for the children
were going to be coming up. There is a huge disparity between the 34 that their
engineer cited using the very same source that county staff indicated they used. It is a
big problem. They would ask that the Commission just use common sense in terms of
what the actual impact will be. The county did have the parking assessment which did
contain one day of actual review and survey of the trips to the site on an actual day
rather than an engineering study based upon some sort of assumption. So they do
know that the county when they came up with the 200 or 320 figure had the actual
figures showing that it was 80. They are concerned with looking for every reason to
possibly stop the increase in use that they are asking for. It is clear that it really does
not have to do with the objective facts, but with people who don't want to see this in
their neighborhood. They have not liked it. There is a long history in this case with the
neighbors trying to shut this use down. If they review the letter from Ms. Sprinkle, which
was part of the file, it is clear that she wants this shut down. That is what is going on
here. He asked that the Planning Commission base their decision upon actual objective
facts rather than complaints about dangers and those sorts of things.
Ms. Porterfield said that if the applicant wants the Commission to base it on fact they
need to defer and allow staff to analyze the traffic study. At this point they can not take
the traffic study into consideration because they have not had time to look at it. It is to
their benefit to defer and let staff take a look at the parking study and come back and let
them know how this impacts it. Personally she understands exactly what was said
about the number of trips because she takes children to daycare and there is a trip
there, get back in the car and leave and then come back again and leave. So she
would be in and out of the neighborhood four times. She would like to see them defer
because they were not giving them an opportunity to be able to understand their data.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 11
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center l/.
�t
Mr. Simpson asked for a moment to talk to his clients.
Mr. Morris agreed.
Mr. Strucko agreed with everything Ms. Porterfield said
Mr. Loach agreed, but also realized the need for daycare in the community is
increasing. He wondered if the applicant might want to consider a compromise.
Mr. Simpson asked that the Planning Commission proceed.
Ms. Joseph noted that the Planning Commission was being asked for something
special. It is a special use permit. Her expectation when someone is asking for
something special is that the community gains something in return. She did not hear
that the community is gaining something in return in this. She heard that it is disrupting
a neighborhood. It is a big neighborhood. ACAC is a whole different animal. It has a
separate entrance and a very large parking area. It is an enormous structure. She felt
that it was totally different. She felt that the additional children in the proposal would be
a detriment to this neighborhood. Therefore, she could not support the request.
Mr. Strucko agreed generally, but felt that the community was gaining something, which
is the capacity for additional daycare. However, he felt that there was a detriment to
adjacent parcels here. This might not be the correct location for this kind of use. He
was going over the minutes of the 2002 Planning Commission meeting. He thought
there was concern at that point with looking at the number of students at 40. He felt that
maybe 40 students is where they are in terms of what this particular parcel can handle
and this particular neighborhood can support. So he would not be in favor of increasing
the number of students to 64 on those grounds.
Mr. Loach suggested going back to the applicant and asking if there is any room to
rethink and compromise on the number of students. There is a need for day care. But,
he also sees the problem with some of the on -street parking and the trips in that. He
asked if there was some room for compromise here.
Ms. Monteith said she would also advocate for some kind of a compromise.
Mr. Edgerton said he was troubled by the disparity between the applicant's
representations about traffic impact and the staff's representations. Staff was very
honest in responding to his questions. He could not support going ahead with the
request based on that. If the applicant were willing to let staff analyze the traffic study
that is different, and he would like to think that the Commission could consider that.
But, he was hearing loud and clear that the applicant is not going to allow that.
Therefore, he could not support the request.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JUNE 24, 2008 12
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES — SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center
y�
Mr. Simpson noted that the expressions have caused his clients to want to at least
consider deferring it. It would give them an opportunity to look at the traffic assessment,
a chance to look at some compromise and to discuss some alternatives to bring back.
Motion: Mr. Strucko moved, Mr. Loach seconded, for approval of the applicant's
request for deferral of SP -2007-00001, Four Seasons Learning Center, to the earliest
available date after the analysis of the traffic study submitted by the applicant at the
meeting.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Mr. Cannon was absent.)
Mr. Morris stated that SP -2007-00001, Four Seasons Learning Center was deferred to
the earliest date available based upon the analysis by staff.
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon C. Taylor, Clerk to Planning Commission &
Planning Boards)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 24, 2008 13
DRAFT PARTIAL MINUTES - SP -2007-00001 Four Seasons Learning Center al�
y7
Project #: Name
SP -2007-001 — Four Seasons Learning Center Amendment
Parcel Identification
Tax Map 61X1, Parcels 5
Location
At the southeast corner of the intersection of Four Seasons Drive
and Lakeview Drive
Zoned
Planned Unit Development (PUD -R6)
Owner
Krysztof and Barbara Sliwinski
Applicant
Four Seasons Learning Center
Magisterial District
Rio
Proposal
Request to increase maximum number of children in daycare from
40 students to 64 students
Date
June 16, 2008
Contact
Krzysztof Sliwinski
Executive Summary
Hurt & Proffitt, Inc. has conducted this Traffic Analysis report in accordance with the
methodology and standards developed under VDOT's Chapter 527. The purpose
of this report is to determine whether the increase of 24 students at the Four
Seasons Learning Center would adversely affect the traffic on Lakeview Drive and
Four Seasons Drive. The report will document, analyze and synthesize the findings
of the project to date in terms of the current and historical characteristics of traffic
associated with the existing Four Seasons Learning Center located off Lakeview
Drive.
Existing Conditions
The Four Season Learning Center (61X1-5) has an approximately 2900 sqft
building which functions as a daycare for children from 6 months to 5 years old.
There are 9 existing on-site parking spaces and 5 off-street parking associated with
this land use.
Four Seasons Learning Center is located on the southeast corner of Four Seasons
Drive (VA Route 1456) and Lakeview Drive (VA Route 1458). Four Seasons Drive
and Lakeview Drive are two lane undivided highways. The studied intersection is a
two-way un -signalized intersection controlled with a stop sign on Lakeview Drive.
In the project vicinity, the highway is posted 25 mph. The existing sight distance at
the studied intersection is 280ft. The existing entrance is approximately 50 ft east
of the intersection of Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive. The project site is
zoned Planned Unit Development (PUD -R6). Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview
Drive are under the jurisdiction of the Virginia Department of Transportation.
Photos illustrate the current lane configurations along Four Seasons Drive and
Lakeview Drive:
Four Seasons Learning Center - Page I
tff
Four Seasons Drive (1456) & and Lakeview
Drive (1458) Looking South
Along Four Seasons Drive (1456) Looking North
Along Lakeview Drive (1458) Looking West
Four Seasons Learning Center - Page 2
49
Trip Generation
The estimated trips generated for the existing Four Seasons Learning Center was
based on the ITE Trip Generation Handbook 7`h edition The table below illustrates
the estimated trips for land use "Day Care Center — 565' based on the AM and PM
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic, One Hour Between 7 and 9 and One Hour
Between 4 and 6 pm according to student population.
Land Use AM Peak PM Peak
Day Care — 40 Students (Existing) 34 Tris 34 Trips
Day Care — 64 Students (Proposed) 51 Tris 51 Trips
It should be noted that generally weekday AM and PM peak hour for this land use
typically coincides with the peak hours of the adjacent street traffic.
Recommendation
According to Virginia Department of Transportation — Chapter 527 under a rezoning
condition, a commercial development shall substantially affect transportation on
state controlled highways if it meets or exceeds one or more of the following
criteria:
A. Within a jurisdiction of a VDOT maintained secondary highway system, if
proposal generates more than 250 vehicle trips per peak hour of the generator
or 2500 vehicle trips per day at the sites connection to a state controlled
highway.
B. Within a local jurisdiction which VDOT does not have maintenance
responsibility, if the proposal generates more than 250 trips per peak hour of
the generator or 2500 vehicle trips per day and whose nearest property line is
within 3000 feet, measured along public roads or streets, of a connection to a
state controlled highway.
Based on the above trip generation calculations, the introduction of 24 students will
not substantially affect transportation on Four Seasons Drive or Lakeview Drive as
this proposal does not meet the threshold set forth by the Virginia Department of
Transportation. Four Seasons Drive and Lakeview Drive will continue to operate
within an acceptable level; no measures are necessary or recommended.
Four Seasons Learning Center - Page 3
5(d
F45,711U li%, I I L 111L1 ^
II 11 L 11L
11T1 ? 11N111 M 1 45-25G1
11TJ�� 11M11 M
y11 Nnn22N 45-
11p1 111 •' 1 N 1 25A1
11P 11N
_o11P1 ,
11 P, 45-25A
45-23 J
45-22
y,
61X1.2
s
S I TE
� I BTXT A
z �6 thrp3 -1
h I TXT.,3A
�as
45- 45-25B
45-25C1 25D
SCC 45-25C 45-26B5
SCC 45-
45- 26B4
26B3
45-25G
;r61X1-5����/
61 X2-1
00;•
45-26A2
f,
y�S
61M--05-11
Y
O
j i 6 �7p
-61X1 4jA1 �`b:'
61 M--05-9
Ox -cc-9 —+�*: �( f11� 61M--05-8 o
1; �1� [61 M--05-7 I °
� b 1
61X1 -4A 1vtf+bb,bUy 61M--05-6 to
61 X2-4 D
( B
:ev
of mml,m r 61 M--05-5
Scale
160 a
Z f. EE oS EI,Y
NoteThis map is for display purposes only
qIZ l t
61 M--05-4
and shows parcels as o/ 1213112007
See Map Book Introduction for additional details
00;•
45-26A2
f,
y�S
61M--05-11
Y
O
j i 6 �7p
-61X1 4jA1 �`b:'
61 M--05-9
Ox -cc-9 —+�*: �( f11� 61M--05-8 o
1; �1� [61 M--05-7 I °
� b 1
61X1 -4A 1vtf+bb,bUy 61M--05-6 to
61 X2-4 D
Albemarle County Tax Map:
061X1
Four Seasons - Westpark Plaza Condos
-
:ev
of mml,m r 61 M--05-5
Z f. EE oS EI,Y
qIZ l t
61 M--05-4
q .W q 3I
61X248
x7xx of3�.,3
�i x40,43
xx �� 0C
6
"
X
,q -T
61M--05-1
i
x
X x x
v I
o
qG
xt »oo
611;
r
`61X2-2 ; �;-
ri
- x x x x'
E 61 M-04 10 I Z
M2- E_)1 _
11
61%2-0EJ� OI ^
61 4-9
N
-
bb a P
'61 M-04-81
G
61X2 -4C40
o%
Iry
61 %-04-7 I '9��
Albemarle County Tax Map:
061X1
Four Seasons - Westpark Plaza Condos
HURT
;_PROFFITT
INCORPORATED
ENGINEERING - SURVEYING - LAND DEVELOPMENT - ENVIRONMENTAL
GEOTECHNICAL • CONSTRUCTION TESTING & INSPECTION
2524 Langhorne Road � Lynchburg, Virginia 24501
434-847-7796 - 800.2424906 - Fax: 434-847-0047
www HandP cam
JOB DAY GAC -6 - 'iK-kFFIC- Sit -by
SHEET NO _
OF
CALCULATED BY [QU�:�/ > fT DATE 7/�
CHECKED BY • DATE /(D
SCALE
Day Care Center
(565)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 7 and 9 a.m.
Number of Studies: 70
Average Number of Students: 67
Directional Distribution: 53% entering, 47% exiting
Trip Generation per Student -
Average Rate Range of Rates Standard Deviation
O/'1 n_39 - 1.78 0.92
uata riuL cmu LMuaLIW..
Trip Generation, 7th Edition 1045 Institute of Transportation Engineers
Day Care Center
(565)
Average Vehicle Trip Ends vs: Students
On a: Weekday,
Peak Hour of Adjacent Street Traffic,
One Hour Between 4 and 6 p.m.
Number of Studies: 71
Average Number of Students: 69
Directional Distribution: 47% entering, 53% exiting
Trip Generation per Student
[_::_Average Rate _
0.82 -
Data Plot and Equation
Range of Rates
n')A _ 172
Standard Deviation
0.95
Trip Generation, 7th Edition
1046 Institute of Transportation Engineers, �Z/
m
E
g
11 El t [I■■■
7� IW
L`
�•-S, �• v,
1
i
i
del 6 L+
f
.. O.il�l�je, tc� � � E �' AlIi1� • � ��•
`�� `�► 'ice.: I
fa
�• ,0*1,
tL
' V
r �
a_ a+
COMMONWEALTH ®f VIRC-jINIA
CHRISTOPHER H. FRACHER DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
VERONA LICENSING OFFICE
LICENSING ADMINISTRATOR July 29, 2008 68 DICK HUFF LANE
P. 0. BOX 350
VERONA, VIRGINIA 24482
Ms. Elaine Echols.
Principal Planner for the Development Areas
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
RE: Four Seasons Learning Center
Dear Ms. Echols:
Thank you for your letter dated July 28, 2008 regarding the required analysis of
information in order for the Albemarle County Planning Commission to make a decision
with regards to the special use request that has been made by Four Seasons Learning
Center. Having full information in writing assists me in answering your needs regarding
this facility.
Because this facility is a currently licensed facility and not a new applicant the
space allows for seventy-nine (79) children. Please be advised that the current license for
the number of children remains at forty (40) based on the current Certificate of
Occupancy issued by the County of Albemarle dated December 11, 2007. In reviewing
the renewal application received in our office July 15, 2008 the number of children
requested at this time is forty (40) which also complies with the current Certificate of
Occupancy issued by the County of Albemarle.
I have provided you information as you have requested from me regarding
square footage and standards. Please contact me in writing with any further questions.
Sincerely,
Mary Carroll
Licensing Inspector
cc: Four Seasons Learning Center
VS • Attachment �S
MAIN TELEPHONE: (540) 332-2330 S#
PEOPLE HELPING PEOPLE
Elaine Echols
From: Beverly J anderson anderson [baaj2@embargmail.com]
Sent: Tuesday, July 29, 2008 10:41 AM
To: Elaine Echols
Subject: FOUR SEASON LEARNING CENTER
I AM WRITING THIS LETTER ON BEHALF OF FOUR SEASON LEARNING CENTER WHERE MY SON IS ATTENDING.
HE HAS BEEN THEIR SINCE BIRTH. I DO NOT HAVE ANY PROBLEMS WITH PARKING GETTING IN OR OUT OF
THE PARKING LOT. I THINK THAT FOUR CENTER HAS BEEN THEIR IN THE TIME OF NEEDS FOR WORKING
PARENTS. MY SIX YEAR OLD SON WENT THEIR ALSO. FOUR SEASON HAS REASONABLE RATES COMPARE TO
THE OTHER CENTERS IN THE AREA. MRS.BARBRA HAS REALLY WORK WITH PARENTS NEED AND IS A
WONDERFUL PERSON.
BEVERLY ANDERSON
Attachment f(a
A7
Troy W. Bowie
Nancy D. Bowie
Post Office Box 104
Keswick, Virginia 22947-0104
(434) 996-0323
Ms. Echols,
July 30, 2008
Thank you for taking the time to read our e-mail regarding Four Season's Learning
Center. We wanted to let someone know how great the center is and how much our
daughter, Rebecca, loves going there. They have wonderful people working at the school
and provide a great beginning education for the children. We have never had any trouble
at the school or with parking at the school. The only time we have gone down the street
into the cul-de-sac was one afternoon in May otthis year, when the school had a
graduation program for the children that would be going to public school in the Fall. The
school was one of those that could cater to our daughters special diet needs without being a
burden financially. The rates at the school are very reasonable, however, if the school can
not expand, this could raise the rates at the school. With the rising cost of residing in
Albemarle County, this would be a great burden not only on our family, but many other
families as well. We pray that you will please take these issues into consideration before
making your judgment on the expansion of The Four Season's Learning Center.
With best re r
� / 4
Troy W. Bowie
Nancy D. Bowie
,l
Page 1 of 1
Elaine Echols
From: Mark Higgins SNL: 434-951-7629) [MHiggins@snl.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2008 3:43 PM
To: Elaine Echols
Cc: eechols@planningcommission.org
Subject: Four Seasons Daycare
Hi Elaine,
I am writing in reference to Four Seasons Daycare. I have had my son Jordan there since he was just 6 weeks old (he is
4.5 now). The facility and teachers are wonderful and my son loves it there. They have always been accommodating
and continually keep me updated on Jordan's progress. Daycare owners and centers are not huge money makers,
but the love that Barbara (the owner) shows towards children makes it a rich place. There is already a huge shortage in
this town for such facilities, so it is refreshing to me that I have my son in such a nice place. It gives me peace of mind.
I can recommend Four Seasons with great enthusiasm as I find them to be a positive influence in my sons life and to the
Charlottesville community.
Regards,
Mark C. Higgins
SNL Financial -Energy
Phone 434-951-7629
Fax 434-817-5330
P.S. My line is open should you have an additional questions.
7/30/20089
0
POO
cADi
CC;3
� o
C4./ >
aU
.' POO
P=
U�
0
l�
O
M kn
O
--
O
•--
ct N
kn
00
M
00
O
O
M
01
cl
N
o
Ar.
3
Qu
7:1
r
:1
cl
CA
CA
[4.,
CA
a`�i o
°
>,
U
CA
fx
w�
A
�GC7
�rx<au0.4
Q1
N
b
N
N
N
a
00O
..
b
..� � O
--
b4 Tt
(0=0
K
•�
�
rr
0V
.. a
:O Q" U,
3 c00
�
� M
0b 00
W
C,O, bA
•-
"C '0
> a =
6
N
�
F
cl
0
o
o
Q
w
o
Oi
N
h
'fl
C
o
0
C)
o
o
0
0
O
0
0
o
0
cc�
o
o
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
GC Ix
a
F w
o
0
0
o
0
0
0
0
CA
o
o
a
U
Ln�
o
CA
o0
0
C8
v°i
OCAU
CA
Con
c;
pa
zi
o
ti
>
00
O
s >
•L:
o
0�
3
w°��x�
w°Q
M
v1
00 00
N
O O
O
O
O
„'"�
O
\p
O\ M t-
00
O 00
\C
t�-
M
o0
00
t- 00 00
00
C1 01
O\
01
O
O
01
D\
01
C1 01
C1
ON
O
O
a
a
a
aaa
a.aa
a
a
a
a,