HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200900006 Staff Report 2009-07-15ALSEMARLE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF COM MUNITY 1) EVELOPMEN
STAFF RE =PORT
Proposal: SP 2009 -006 Kenddge Staff: Claudette Grant
Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervlsors Hearing: To be
Judy 1- 2009 determines.
Owners: Kenridge, LLC Appticant: Kerridge, LLC
Acreage; Approximalely 2,06 acres
Special Use Permit for Residential R -15 by
special use permit in Car COMMerCjal Office
districts.
TMP. TIM: 60K P 61 $ A2
By-right Uw@: CO, Commercial office -micas,
supponing commercial and service uses,, and
Location: Route 250 West across Rom
residential use by special use parmil. - 15
Birdwood Golf Course (Attachments A & B)
unitVacre;
Section 23- 2.2(9) R -15 residential -15
units1BCre of the Zoning Ordinance, which
allow for residential uses.
Magist,erial District Samuel Miller
Conditions. Yes EC: Yes
Approved # of OweFtings: 57
Proposal: Amendmenl to SP2004 -52 to
change the plan approved with the special use
permit. iMtodifiication consists of revised location
of access road and parking for the office
building and the elimiriatiari of one of the single
Family attached units. Appfaved residential use
remains unchanged. (Auarhment )
DA (Deveioprneiit Area) Neighborhoud 7
Comp. Plan Designation: Office Somme -
of i.ce uses, regional scale research, limited
production and marketing activities, supporting
commercal, lodging and conference facilities,
and residential (6,41 -34 unitsiacre) and Rural
Arear, - preserve and protect agricultural,
Waslal, open space, and natural, historic and
scenic resourcesf density ( -5 uniVacre in
development lots).
Character of Property: This development is
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single and
currently udder con atru Jtion. Kenndge is made
multi - family residences. office uses, Birdwood
up primarily of newly constructed single family
Golf course is located across the street.
residences_ The original manor house remains
as a single family residence along with the
original =riage house which provides an office
use on the site.
Futons Favorable;
Factors Unfavorable,
1- The factors supporting approval of the
None
original special use permit have nol
changed-
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of SP 2D09-006, Kenndge prrnnded the
applicant makes minor revisions to the plan,
PC Pubibc Hawlrp 7;21 M
STAFF PERSON: Claudette Grant
PLANNING, COMMISSION, July 21, 2009
BOARD or SUPERVISORS:
SP2009 -006: KENRIDGE
Petition:
PROJECT- SP200900006 Kenridge
PROPOSED Amendment to SP2004 -52 to change the plan approved with the special use permit.
Modification consists of revised location for access road and parking for the commercial building and
the elimination of one of the single family attached units. Approved uses remain unchanged.
ZONING ATE ORYI ENERAL USAGE- CO Commercial Office - offices, supporting coi'nmerclal and
service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 unitslacre)
SECTION 23.2.2(9) R -15 residential -15 unitslacre
OOMPREHEI SI E PLAN LAND USE)DEN ITY; Office Service - office uses, regional scale research,
limited production and marketing activities, supporting commercial, lodging and conference facilities,
and residential (6.01-34 units/acre) and Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open
space, and natural, historic and scenic resaurces� density (_6 unitlacre in development lots) in
Neighborhood 7
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
LOCATION Borth side of Ivy Road (Route 250 West across from Birdwood Golf Course)
Approximately 112 mile west of the intersection of Ivy Road and the 291250 By -pass
TAX MAPIPARCELS- 6OK-51 & 6OK -A2
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT- Samuel Miller
Character of the Area and Adioining properties;
Kenridge is currently under construction This development is primarily made up of newly constructed
residential units with the exception of the existing manor house. which is a single family residence, and
a carriage house used for office purposes_ Adjacent to the site on the east is the White Oabies
residential development which is also currently under construction and on the west side of Kenridge is a
single family residence and business, The Birdwood Golf Course is located to the south and across
Route 250. A rail line for the OSX railway is at the rear of the site
Specifics of Proposal:
The applicant would like approval for a change in the location of the access road and parking for the
office building and elimination of a single family attached dwelling unit The applicant has graded out an
entrance and parking area for the office building that is in a different Location than whet is shown on the
currently approved plan_ The location of these elements was conditioned with SP2004 -052 The
applicant states that this new road was Installed during construction in order to provide access to the
office building from Marsh Lane while it was being used as the sales center for the project. The
applicant also states that this new road was improved to county standards and drainage improvements
were installed to collect any run -off from the roadway. This new road provided access to the building
while the remaining portion of the site was under construction. The applicant is now requesting
approval of the newly relocated entrance and parking for the office building.
A portion of the road that curves around the office building and leads to a dead end is narrow and steep
and would not be adequate for commercial use The applicant has noted on the plan that this portion of
the roars will be eliminated, which will allow the site plan to be approved.
One of the proposed single family attached homes will also be eliminated with this revised plan. (See
Attachment )
PC Pulps Hwuv 712 1109
Applicant's Justification for the Request:
The applicant has stated that the new road will provide a better access to the existing office building
that works with the topography of the site The applicant has also stated that this change will lessen the
extent of retaining walls that will be necessary. Since this access road has already been graded in, the
developer would like to keep this connection as the new access and parking for the office building.
Planning and Zoning History:
Tile history of the parcel is as follows: In 1980 this property was zoned CO, Commercial Office_ This
site was the former national headquarters for Kappa Sigma Fraternity and a non - profit foundation, The
Planning Commission reviewed Kenridge in a December 14, 2004 work session, The Planning
Commission then held a public hearing on March 29, 2005, where the applicant requested an indefinite
deferral. On July 26,. 2005, the Planning Commission held another public hearing and recommended
denial of Kenridge for the following reasons; 1) internal parking. 2) storm water management 3)
affordability issues, and 4) screening. Prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing the applicant
addressed outstanding issues and concerns from the Planning commission public hearing and on
October 5, 2005, the Board approved SP200400052 - Ken ridge with seventeen (17) conditions_
Following the special use permit approval several related site plans, subdivisions, and water protection
ordinance items were processed and approved_ (See Attachment D for Planning Commission and
Board of Supervisors minutes)
Comprehensive Plan:
The Land Use Plan designates this area as Office Service in neighborhood Seven (7), The
Comprehensive Plan supports both residential and office uses in Office Service designated areas_
A full Neighborhood Model Analysis was completed with the approved SP2004 -052 and is still
appiicable for this amendment request. (See Attachment E for Neighborhood Model Analysis)
Staff Comment:
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance below requires that special use permits be assessed as
follows..
Will the use be of substantial detriment to adjacent property'?
Relocation of the road accessing the office building 2 nd parking for the office building will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property. The proposed change is all internal to the site.
Will the character of the zoning district change with this. use?
The character of the zoning district will not change with the relocation of the road and panting area to
the office building. The residential use has already been approved in the zoning district.
Will the use be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance?
The relocated road and parking area to the office building will be in harmony with the purpose and
intent of the zoning ordinance. The relocated road and parking support a by -right use in the district.
Will the use be in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
The relocated road and parking to the office building will be in harmony with the uses permitted by right
in the district because these uses are by -right in the district.
Will the use comply with the additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance?
There are no additional regulations.
Will the pybiic health. safety and general welfare of the community be protected if the use is approved'?
As previously discussed in this report, a portion of the new road that curves around the office building
and leads to a dead end is narrow and steep and would not be adequate for commercial use. As
requested by staff, the applicant has rioted on the plan that this portion~ of the road will be eliminated
upon site plan approval. which will allow the site plan to be approved. Otherwise. changing the location
-ap
AC Puhh[ Hwing Walme
of the access road to the office building from that shown on the originaily conditioned plan sums to be
less obtrusive to the site. The location of the parking area for the office building is also Changing,
however. as shown on the revised plan_ the number of spaces remains the same as the original plan
(six (6) spaces) acrd the impact of the new location is no different than as originally shown. A condition
of the special use permit addresses the need for an amendment if additional parking is required for the
office use. (See Attachment )
Summary:
The purpose of this request is to amend Special Use Permit - P2004 -062. The applicant graded in a
road and par-king to the office building during construction of a portion of Kenridge. At the time the office
building was bung used as a sales center for the development. The location of the graded in road and
parking area was not showy} on the approved plan. The applicant is now requesting approval of this
location for the access road and parking to the office building instead of the approved access road and
parking to the office building that is shown on the approved plan.
Staff finis the following factors favorable to this request:
1. The factors supporting approval of the original special use permit have not changed.
Staff finds no factors unfavorable to this request.
Recommended Action:
Before this request goes to the Board of S upervisors, staff he requested that the applicant make mirror
revisions tc the plan that include things like labeling the setback lines, railroad, the housing types with
locations, etc. These were shown on the original approved plan, which the applicant submitted as part
of the revised plans_ Staff has recently made this request of the applicant in order to avoid confusion.
Staff recommends conditional approval of SP 2009 -006, Kenridge provided the applicant makes minor
revisions to the conceptual plan prior to submitting the plan for the Board of Supervisors public hearing.
The conditions are the same as the ones previously approved, except for the plan.
I. The approved final site plan shall be to general accord with the revised Conceptual Plan
prepared by Collins Enginee ring MsF ee , dated june 6-.2006 f Aarch_16, 2009 .
revision To be determined: 2009 4LCensep aW;14anj {See Attachment). Parking for the office
use shall be limited to the area and number of spaces shown on the Conceptual Plan if
additional parking is required for the office use, an amendment of this special permit shall be
required,
2. There shall be a minimum front yard of two hundred seventy Five (275) feet between the
southern -most structure (the "Main kfouse -j and the property line adjacent to Route 250 as
shown on the Conceptual plan. side and rear yards shall be as shown on the Conceptual
Plan
3. All streets on the property connecting to adjacent properties as shown on the Conceptual
Plan shall be constructed by the applicant to an urban section with the intent that such streets
on the property connecting to adjacent properties will be built to a standard consistent with
the connecting street on the White Cables property, All streets and pedestrian accesses shall
be constructed to a standard acceptable to the County Engineer in accordance with the
highlighted sections of Attachment A, reviser and dated August 30, 2005 and initialed as
TG;
4 The connecting road extending from the former ITT property (Tax Map 60, Parcel 8) and
across the Itenridge property to its entrance at Ivy Read, as shown an the Conceptual Plan,
shall be established as a private street in conjunction with the final sub - division plat or site
plan As a condition of hrtal subdivision plat or site plan approval, the applicant shall grant all
easements deemed necessary by the Director of Community Cevelopment to assure the
public's right to use the connecting road for purposes of ingress to and egress from Tax Map
60, Parcel 2$.
5. The appkcant shall comply with all requirements of the VDOT related to design and
construction of the entrance to the property, as shown on the Conreptual Plan, and shall pay
K9n". ),n
P-' Puy. -= -q
its pro rata share of the cost for sigrializahon of this infrastructure contributed by traffic from
the development as follows;
(a) Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall place funds in escrow or
provide other security ("security ") acceptable to the County in an amount equal to its pro
rata share of the cost of the signal which amount shall be calculated by the Director of
Community Development in the year in which the security is provided. The security shall
continue so that it is availat}le to pay far tha cost of the signal until ten (10) years after the
date of approval of this special use permit; security provided that is not in an interest -
bearing account shall be annually renewed, and the amount of the security shall be
adjusted each year acrding to the consumer price Index, as determined by the Director
of Community Development: and
(b) If, at any time until fen (10) years after the dote of approval of this special use permit,
DOT authorizes in writing the installation of the signal, and VDQT and the County's
Engineer approve the signal's installation before the applicant has obtained a building
permit, the County may demand payment of the applicant's pro rata share of the cost of
the traffic signal. and the applicant shall pay its pro rata share of the cost to the County
within thirty (30) [lays of that demand.
6. Screening adjacent to the railroad right -of -way and along the west and east sides of the
project shall be provided and maintained as depicted on the Conceptual Diagram of
Perimeter Screen and privacy Planting, dated May 12. 2005, by Charles J. Stick, attached as
Attachment B_ The continuous evergreen trees noted as Leyland Cypress Hedge along the
north, east and west sides of the project shall be installed at ter: (10) feet to twelve (12) feet
in height after lot grading but prior to issuance of a building permit for ally dwelling unit
construction. The Leyland Cypress Hedge also shall be paanted on eight (8) foot centers.
Underground irrigation shall be provided for all the pfenting areas. Srreening deemed
acceptable to the Director of Community Development shall be provided adjacent to the
railroad to mitigate the impact of this development on adjacent property and the impact of the
railroad on this development;
7. Prior to any alteration or demolition of any building, a reconnaissance level documentation to
Include black and white photographs and a brief architectural description shall be provided to
the satisfaction of the County's Historic Preservation Planner,
8. Regardless of the ownership of the open space and amenities, they shall be made available
for use by all residential and commercial units in the development;
9. Except for those attached single family buildings located in Zone (A) the exteriors of blocks of
attached single family buildings shall be either reef brick, or white pairited bNck. with gable
roofs. The exteriors of attached single family buildings in Zone (A} shall be red brick with
gable roofs. The features in Zone (A) shall be reviewed and approved by the AR during its
review of the site plan for these buildings. The exteriors of detached residences shall be
either red brick or painted white brick. These materials shalt be reviewed and approved by
the Design Planner before the issuance of a building permit for the buildings (See Attachment
O ):
10. E=xterior roof surfaces shall be constructed of either capper or synthetic slate;
11. The new villa and town home units shall include garden i mprovern a rits, generally as depicted
on the Front Garden Diagram dated August 24. 2005, by Charles J. Stick, landscape
Architect (See Attachment D)- Maintenance of these areas shall be provided fair and required
by the Homeowner's Association which shall be set forth in the Covenants for this
development The decorative walls, steps and walks shall be Constructed of either brick or
stone,
12. To ensure the retention of the majority of the existing trees in the two hundred seventy -five
(275) foot front yard setback described in Condition[ 2 (located between the main house and
the Route 250 West Entrance Corridor), the applicant shall submit for review and approval by
the County's Design Planner a tree conservation plan prepared by a slate certified arborist
that meets the requirements of Section 32,7.9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, Thls plan shall be
required for all erosion and sediment control planks, site planks, and subdivision plats:
13_ The site wall immediately adjacent to Route 250 West shall be included on all drawings that
include its context. All grading, road alignments, turning lanes. and other Improvements shall
be adjusted to insure that impacts to the wall only Include closing the existing entrance and
adding a single entrance. Notes shall be included on the grading, site }glans and subdivision
plats that state; "The existing site wall shall remain. Disturbance shall be limited to the closure
V�-t d"
PC polic FCMrog 7r2 1M*
of the existing entrance and the opening of the proposed entrance into the site." Any changes
to the wall shall be minimal and articulated to blend with the character of the existing wall to
the satisfaction of the Arch itectu ra I Review Board, Prior to the issuance of any building
permits in the final block, the stane pillars shall be replaced at the new entrance from Route
250;
14. The design of all single family detached residences, including but not limited to colors,
roofing, siding and foundation material selections, shall be coordinated with the Architecwrai
Review Board - approved designs of the attached residential units, as determined by the
Design Planner;
15. The owner agrees to voluntarily contribute a sum of three thousand dollars (53,000) cash per
new dwelling unit to the County for funding affordable housing programs [including the
Housing Trust Fund]. The cash contribution shall be paid at the time of the Issuance of the
Building Permit for such new unit_ The acceptance of this special use permit by the owner
shall obligate the owner to make this contribution;
16, Pedestrian aocess deemed acoeptable by the Director of Community Development shall be
provided to the Manor Home and the Carriage House: and
17. With the exception of the entrance road, all streets within the development shall conform to
the neighborhood model matrix deemed appropriate by the Director of Community
Development
ATTACHMENT
Attachment A — Tax Map
Attachment B — Vicinity Map
Attachment C — t enridge Special Use Permit Amendment Plan, dated March 15, 2009, revised 6-24-
09
Attachment D — Planning Commission Minutes dated July 26, 2005 and Board of Supervisors minutes
dated October 5, 2005
Attachment lE — Planning Ccmmissian Staff Report dated March 29, 2005
Attachment F — Board of Supervisors' Action letter to Steven Blaine. dated October 13. 2005
KKWKIPO
PC PubiK Fiowhp NQ 1fB
r
A
sokm
GE PARK
IO'ContDur Streams
Roads Water Body
driveways paroels
30
13 uildi ngs Parcel of Interest
.ne_
0-
4 k
x
�",
pride
.Y� \Z/-
601
Ll
I+-
i
Reads Parcels
Streams parcel of Interest
JFW Water
AN
M
G
c,�
SP 2004- 052 KENRIDGE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
APPROVED BY ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 1 0- 5- 05
1. THE APPROVED FINAL SITE PLAN SHALL BE IN GENERAL ACCORD WITH THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN
PREPARED BY MCKEE CARSON, DATED JUNE 16, 2005 REVISION ("CONCEPTUAL PLAN"). (SEE
ATTACHMENT A). PARKING FOR THE OFFICE USE SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA AND NUA46ER OF
SPACES SHOWN ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, IF ADDITIONAL PARKING IS REQUIRED FOR ' THE OFFICE USE,
AN AMENDMENT OF THIS SP SHALL BE REQUIRED.
2. THERE SHALL_ BE A MINIMUM FRONT YARD OF TWO HUNDRED SEVENTY FIVE (275) FEET BETWEEN
THE SOUTHERN -MOST STRUCTURE (THE "MAIN HOUSE') AND THE PROPERTY LINE ADJACENT TO ROUTE
250 AS SHOWN ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, SIDE AND REAR YARDS SHALL BE AS SHOWN ON THE
CONCEPTUAL PLAN.
J. ALL STREETS ON THE PROPERTY CONNECTING TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AS SHOWN ON THE
CONCEPTUAL PLAN SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED BY THE APPLICANT TO AN URBAN SECTION WITH THE
INTENT THAT SUCH STREETS ON THE PROPERTY CONNECTING TO ADJACENT PROPERTIES WI''.L BE BUILT
TO A STANDARD CONSISTENT WITH THE CONNECTING STREET ON THE WHITE GABLES PROPERTY. ALL
STREETS AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESSES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED TO A STANDARD ACCEPTABLE TO THE
COUNTY ENGINEER IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE HIGHLIGHTED SECTIONS OF ATTACHMENT A, REVISED AND
DATED AUGUST 301 2005 AND INITIALED AS CTG.
4. THE CONNECTING ROAD EXTENDING FROM THE FORMER ITT PROPERTY (TAX MAP 60, PARCEL 28)
AND ACROSS THE KENRIDGE PROPERTY TO ITS ENTRANCE AT IVY ROAD, AS SHOWN ON THE CONCEPTUAL
PLAN, SHALL BE ESTABLISHED AS A PRIVATE STREET IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE FINAL S1,0DI VISION
PLAT OR SITE PLAN. AS A CONDITION OF F.WAL SUBDIVISION PLAT OR SITE PLAN APPROV4L, THE
APPLICANT SHALL GRANT ALL EASEMENTS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT TO ASSURE THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO USE THE CONNECTING ROAD FOR PURPOSES OF
INGRESS TO AND EGRESS FROM TAX MAP 60, PARCEL 28.
5. THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL REQUIREMENTS OF THE VDOT RELATED TO DESIGN AND
CONSTRUCTION OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE PROPERTY, AS SHOWN ON THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, AND
SHALL PAY ITS PRO RATA SHARE OF THE COST FOR SIGNALIZA TION OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE
CONTRIBUTED BY' TRAFFIC FROM THE DEVELOPMENT AS FOLLOWS.•
(A) PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT, THE APPLICANT SHALL PLACE FUNDS IN
ESCROW OR PROVIDE OTHER SECURITY ("SECURITY') ACCEPTABLE TO THE COUNTY IN AN AMOUNT EQUAL
TO ITS PRO RATA SHARE OF THE COST OF THE SIGNAL WHICH AMOUNT SHALL BE CALCULATED BY THE
DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT IN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE SECURITY IS PROVIDED. THE
SECURITY SHALL CONTINUE SO THAT IT IS AVAILABLE TO PAY FOR THE COST OF THE SIGNAL UNTIL TEN
(10) YEARS AFTER THE DATE OF APPROVAL OF THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT; SECURITY PROVIDED THAT IS
NOT IN AN INTEREST -BEARING ACCOUNT SHALL BE ANNUALLY RENEWED, AND THE AMOUNT OF THE
SECURITY SHALL BE ADJUSTED EACH YEAR ACCORDING TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX, AS DETERMINED
BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT,•
(B) IF, A T ANY TIME UNTIL TEN (10) YEARS AFTER THE DA TE OF APPROVAL OF THIS SPECIAL USE
PERMIT, VDOT AUTHORIZES IN WRITING THE INSTALLATION OF THE SIGNAL, AND VDOT AND THE COUNTY's
ENGINEER APPROVE THE SIGNAL'S INSTALLATION BEFORE THE APPLICANT HAS OBTAINED A 'BUILDING
PERMIT, THE COUNTY MAY DEMAND PAYMENT OF THE APPLICANT'S PRO RATA SHARE OF THE COST OF
THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL, AND THE APPLICANT SHALL PAY ITS PRO RATA SHARE OF THE COST TO THE
COUNTY WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS OF THAT DEMAND.
6. SCREENING ADJACENT TO THE RAILROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND ALONG THE WEST AND EAST
SIDES OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE PROVIDED AND MAINTAINED AS DEPICTED ON THE CONCEPTUAL
DIAGRAM OF PERIMETER SCREEN AND PRIVACY PLANTING, DATED MAY 12, 2005, BY CHARLES J. STICK,
ATTACHED AS ATTACHMENT B. THE CONTINUOUS EVERGREEN TREES NOTED AS LEYLAND CYPRESS
HEDGE ALONG THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROJECT SHALL BE INSTALLED AT 10' TO 12'
IN HEIGHT AFTER LOT GRADING BUT PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR ANY DWELLING
UNIT CONSTRUCTION. THE LEYLAND CYPRESS HEDGE ALSO SHALL BE PLANTED ON EIGHT (8) FOOT
CENTERS. UNDERGROUND IRRIGATION SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL THE PLANTING AREAS SCREENING
DEEMED ACCEPTABLE ; TO THE -DIRECTOR -OF COMMUNITY- pL/ELOPMENT SHALL BE PROL'IJED ADJACENT TO
THE RAILROAD TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ON ADJACENT -PROPERTY AND THE
IMPACT OF THE RAILROAD ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.
7. PRIOR TO ANY AL TERA TION OR DEMOLITION OF ANY BUILDING, A RECONNAISSANCE LEVEL
DOCUMENTATION. TO INCLUDE BLACK AND WHITE PHOTOGRAPHS AND A BRIEF ARCHI TECTUR,I L
DESCRIPTION SHALL BE PROVIDED TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE COUNTY'S HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PLANNER.
8. REGARDLESS OF. THE OWNERSHIP OF THE OPEN SPACE AND AMENITIES, THEY SHALL BE MADE
AVAILABLE FOR USE BY ALL RESIDEN77AL AND COMMERCIAL UNITS IN THE, DEVELOPMENT.
9. EXCEPT FOR THOSE ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS LOCATED IN ZONE A., THE EXTERIORS OF
- ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS SHALL BE EITHER RED BRICK, OR WHITE PAINTED BRICK, WITH
GABLE ROOFS. THE EXTERIORS OF BLOCKS OF ATTACHED SINGLE FAMILY BUILDINGS IN ZONE A. SHALL
BE EITHER RED BRICK WITH GABLE ROOFS. THE FEATURES IN ZONE A. SHALL BE REVIEWED AND
T APPROVED BY THE ARB DURING ITS REVIEW OF THE SITE PLAN FOR THESE BUILDINGS. THE EXTERIORS
OF DETACHED RESIDENCES SHALL BE EITHER RED BRICK OR PAINTED WHITE BRICK. THESE MATERIALS
SHALL BE REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY THE DESIGN PLANNER BEFORE THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING
PERMIT FOR THE BUILDINGS. (SEE A TTACHMENT C).
10. EXTERIOR ROOF SURFACES SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF EITHER COPPER OR SYNTHETIC SLATE.
11. THE NEW VILLA AND TOWN HOME UNITS SHALL INCLUDE GARDEN IMPROVEMENTS, GENERALLY AS
DEPICTED ON THE FRONT GARDEN DIAGRAM, DATED AUGUST 24, 2005, BY CHARLES J. STICK,
LANDSCAPE ARCHI rECT. (SEE ATTACHMENT D). MAINTENANCE OF THESE AREAS SHALL BE PROVIDED
FOR AND REQUIRED BY THE HOMEOWNER'S ASSOCIATION WHICH SHALL BE SET FORTH IN TrlE COVENANTS
FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT. THE DECORATIVE WALLS, STEPS AND WALKS SHALL BE CONS7RUCTED OF
EITHER BRICK OR STONE.
' 12. TO ENSURE THE RETENTION OF THE MAJORITY OF THE EXISTING TREES IN THE 275 FOOT FRONT
YARD SETBACK DESCRIBED IN CONDITION 2 (LOCATED BETWEEN THE MAIN HOUSE AND THE ROUTE 250
WEST ENTRANCE CORRIDOR), THE APPLICANT SHALL SUBMIT FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL BY THE
COUNTY'S DESIGN PLANNER A TREE CONSERVATION PLAN PREPARED BY A STATE CERTIFIED ARBORIST
THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 32. Z 9. 4 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE. THIS PLAN SHALL BE
REQUIRED FOR ALL EROSION AND SEDIMENT CONTROL PLANS, SITE PLANS, AND SUBDIVISION PLATS
13. THE SITE WALL IMMEDIA TEL Y ADJACENT TO ROUTE 250 WEST SHALL BE INCLUDED ON ALL
DRAWINGS THAT INCLUDE ITS CONTEXT. ALL GRADING, ROAD ALIGNMENTS, TURNING LANES, AND OTHER
IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE ADJUSTED TO INSURE THAT IMPACTS TO THE WALL ONLY INCLUDE- CLOSING
THE EXISTING ENTRANCE AND ADDING A SINGLE ENTRANCE. NOTES SHALL BE INCLUDED ON THE
GRADING, SITE PLANS AND SUBDIVISION PLATS THAT STATE: "THE EXISTING SITE WALL SMALL REMAIN.
DISTURBANCE SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE CLOSURE OF THE EXISTING ENTRANCE AND THE OPENING OF
THE PROPOSED ENTRANCE INTO THE SITE." ANY CHANGES TO THE WALL SHALL BE MINIMAL AND
ARTICULATED TO BLEND WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE EXISTING WALL TO THE SATISFACTION OF THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD. PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY BUILDING PERMITS IN TkE FINAL
BLOCK, THE STONE PILLARS SHALL BE REPLACED AT THE NEW ENTRANCE FROM ROUTE 250.
14. THE DESIGN OF ALL SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED RESIDENCES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO COLORS,
ROOFING, SIDING AND FOUNDA 77ON MATERIAL SELEC RONS, SHALL BE COORDINATED WITH THE
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD -APPROVED DESIGNS OF THE ATTACHED RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AS
DETERMINED BY THE DESIGN PLANNER.
15. THE OWNER AGREES TO VOLUNTARILY CONTRIBUTE A SUM OF $J,000 CASH PER NEW DWELLING UNIT
TO THE COUNTY FOR FUNDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAMS [INCLUDING THE HOUSING TRUST FUND]
THE CASH CONTRIBUTION SHALL BE PAID AT THE TIME OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE BUILDING PERMIT FOR
SUCH NEW UNIT. THE ACCEPTANCE OF THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT BY THE OWNER SHALL OBLIGATE THE
OWNER TO MAKE THIS CONTRIBUTION.
16. PEDESTRIAN ACCESS DEEMED ACCEPTABLE BY THE DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SHALL
BE PROVIDED TO THE MANOR HOME AND THE CARRIAGE HOUSE.
17. WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE ENTRANCE ROAD, ALL STREETS WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL
CONFORM TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD MODEL MATRIX DEEMED APPROPRIATE BY THE DIRECTOR OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT.
51C
521,
53A
- !n^EIEfESD)
,,4A
15111-0-A Era
AMP
'AlTalrulm
SAMUEL MILLER DISTRIC
ALBEMARLE COUNTY VIRGINI,
I I
TMP 6oE2-1
FARMINGTON
COUNTRY CLUB
ZONE: RA
\
x
(n. 23P.
W)
` ,
\\ `\ `x
t 36D
35C 34B 33A
\
19B
18A t
\
\
F
24C
`
%\ 21D
F
t
I
F r
\ TMP60
.,-
`\1. 44A
TMP 6OK-44
I ,
1 i
I i
I t--
T
i6A
I
15A
TMP 60K I
- TMP 60K
TMP'(50K-61
4_B \\
\\ TMP60K-05%1' nENRIDGE �. TMP60K 3
t\ ti aNElel ZONIN NCO
\ Rif c6 2 DI3 i 9'
PG 38,7
TMP 60K / \ l z �S
TMP-46 \
47D 1 gP. 6 , I
\ TMP 60K-47
TMP 60-28
\
o
IVY ROAD �' ERSED) /� (, `--------
TMP 6
PROPERTIES
ZONING: CO - �\ / /" /' IKENRI GEL C j
DB 2554, PG 400 SPA ZONIN �i �:� '
TMP 60K- DR 3109 P 8
� 60D
\ 1 MP6pK60 \/ /\ ---_
275' FRONT YARD BUILDING SETBACK LINE
- r =,� - — — — TMP ------- -- —
'�✓ TMP 60K-A1 *T�
k�
60K-A
PAYNE, LF OR SUSAN
ZONING: CO ; TMP 60K-Ali , * DB 3109, PG 387 ,
-Y-^`-
TMP 60K-Al
PARCELS INVOLVED
IN THIS APPLICATION
I
BIRD WOOD GOLF COURSE
I
I c`g0 R41ZR0,40
i!A
)C
TMP 6o-26A
-' WHITE GABLES
CONDOMINIUMS
ZONE: CO
BOUNDARY OF
KENRIDGE
DEVELOPMENT
AP 60K-
1A
(RE:E4s:'c)
ARB REVIEW
ZONE A
I
�I I
ntf*_.`iYi751a1�
SCALE: 1" = 100'
MARCH 16, 2009
THIS AMENDMENT TO THE SP-2004-52 IS FOR THE FOLLOWING CHANGES TO THE APPLICATION PLAN:
1. ONE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED UNIT HAS BEEN ELIMINATED ALONG THE MARSH LANE.
2. THE ACCESS ROAD ENTRANCE FOR THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING HAS BEEN RELOCATED FROM
COLRIDGE DRIVE TO MARSH LANE, WHERE THE SINGLE FAMILY UNIT WAS ELIMINATED.
3. THE PARKING CONFIGURATION FOR THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING HAS CHANGED.
4. THE AREA RESERVED FOR SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED HOUSES HAS INCREASED WITH THE CHANGE OF
LOCATION FOR THE ACCESS ROAD,
5. ELIMINATED SEVERAL RETAINING WALLS NECESSARY FOR THE ORIGINAL ACCESS ROAD ENTRANCE AND
PARKING FOR THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING.
LEGEND S 1 :s �1 H 0
ROADS C,
SC T R. LLINS�,
------------------------------- --- -= EXISTING CULVERT
F--
U Lic. No. 035791
CUL VER T Ci
Q DROP INLET & STRUCTURE NO.IONAL
CURB
CURB & GUTTER
"""-"""••""•""""""""""""""" PROPOSED PAVEMENT 6yn e-, ryx,6
- EC-3A DITCH
6" DEPTH OF EC-3A DITCH
EC-2 DITCH
z
6" DEPTH OF EC-2 DITCH c? , �
o 0
••• ••°---- EARTH DITCH U ca z z
o Ln
0 0
DRIVEWAY CULVERT ® a w w
z a a
BENCH MARK � `?' U w
w w
aCie
•°°- ••°° •••° •'°• •°•• CLEARING LIMITS
Uu
VDOT STANDARD STOP SIGN
---------zoo----- EXISTING CONTOUR
200 PROPOSED CONTOUR
240.55 PROPOSED SPOT ELEVATION
TBC DENOTES TOP/BACK OF CURB
T/B DENO TES TOP OF BOX
M n %D
GENERAL
NOTES
APPLICANT-
KENRIDGE LLC
PO BOX 5509
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22905
ENGINEER:
COLLINS ENGINEERING
800 E. JEFFERSON STREET
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902
TELEPHONE. • (434) 293-3719
FAX:434 245- 0300
COiJTACT MR. SCOTT COLLINS, P.E.
Ek4,tL: scott@w1lins-engineering.com
PARCELS INVOLVED
IN THIS APPLICATION:
TMl7 60K-61
KENRIDGE LLiC
PO,BOX 5509
CH'iRLOTTESVILLE, VA 22905
ACREAGE: 1. 34 ACRES
TMP 60K-A2
KENRIDGE LLC
PO BOX 5509
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22905
ACREAGE: 0. 72 ACRES
ZONE:
CO (COMMERCIAL OFFICE)
SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SP-2004-052) APPROVED BY BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS 10-5-05
TO ,ALLOW MULTI -FAMILY RESIDENCES
USE:
SIN( LE FAMILY ATTACHED VILLAS & COMMERCIAL OFFICE
TOPO & SURVEY-
UPDATED TOPOGRAPHY PROVIDED BY LICENSED LAND SURVEYOR
COMMONWEAL-TH LAND SURVEYING IN FEBRUARY, 2009.
ADJACENT OWNERS:
KENRIDGE, LLC: 60K-A 1, 60K-27 TO 32, 60K-43 TO 47
CANNON PROPERTIES LTD: 60K-12 TO 15, 60K37-42
RIC'HARD OR MARY C HEWITT: 60K-59&60
SETBACKS (PROPERTY):
FR)N T°• 275'
SIDES: 30'
REAR: 50'
UTILI TIES. • SEWER: COUNTY SEWER - AVAILABLE ON THE SITE
WA E'ER: COUNTY WATER - AVAILABLE ON THE SITE
SUBDIVISION STREETS: CURB & GUTTER (PUBLIC ROADS)
WA TERSHED: S. RI VANNA RESERVOIR - WATER SUPPLY PROTECTION AREA
NOTE:
1. LANDSCAPING SHALL BE SHOWN ON THE FINAL SITE PLAN TO SCREEN THE FUTURE PARKING AREA
AND COMMERCIAL USE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS WILL REQUIRE THE
INSTALLATION OF SIGNIFICANT LANDSCAPING ON ALL SIDES OF THE PARKING AND BUILDING.
2. SIDEWALKS TO THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SHALL BE INCLUDED WITH THE FINAL SITE PLAN.
3. THE FINAL SITE PLAN FOR THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING SHALL MEET ALL REQUIREMENTS OF
FIRE RESCUE. THIS SHALL It!rLUDE A FIRE SUPPRESSION SYSTEM, AS NECESSARY, AND ACCESS TO
FIRE HYDRANTS WITHIN 400' OF THE STRUCTURE.
Sheet List Table
Sheet Number
Sheet Title
1
COVER
2
APPROVED SP APPLICATION PLAN
3
APPROVED SITE PLAN LAYOUT
4
PROPOSED LAYOUT PLAN AMENDMENT
0.1
L9
N z
m LJ
I
hl z L
® LILJ W 06
`z
N
�� �w
�w
N �z
�z
w
�z
� J
H No
U
p N
W �0
+� o
U
L
O a
Uj
LLB J
O �^ L
U ) Q
U U
O�
a' Q
Lo
U CL a�
W p p
C
pUl
V
w z�
W�
L, o
z "
{ � L
) W G O
� W -p
p
J �
J �
J0/) H
L
!Z U
L L
Q �
w LLB N 0
w a
•� U
►� 2 U
x -0
�0
IV
i O
p �
00
E
w E
O �>
w o�
JOB NO.
22816
O
SCALE
AS NOTED
O V
SHEET NO. a
a> a.
I- p
Attachment C
yv)
B
/
-R), V RITE GA13Lr5 CONDOMINIUM5
/ _
V'ERTICA �HORIZOt TAL ALIGNMENT
/ /, / / � / , � " d � ` _� `_� �\\�\�� `�✓y,�: \�\\ \ \ \TO (,ONFQRM O{TH VDOT 5Y5DIV1510N
AD\5T4pARD5 FOk LANEE,
PR0 ?� 05�D 3� 51PEYATP 5dT5ACK
/'ll
V LA5 (N�W)
Moll
V4 //,�=zZall
el
KEVIN
r
01
24
04
MAN
Raw wi
Q ,
r A I. I � 1
fill
r A '' • } O"
VA
PROP. r OTORM WA7gR,/ t/p'�✓', I♦/•,.'/// . r
MANAGEMENT AREA/
► /.,
.� #g
0__
c�r it a
• l
gg
• \, � //'�q��i r . , ram►,.�I' •►
ew
FR
+y� •' • i
Ir
FA
frw-i WEBB' p
01
TYPICAL BOTH D 5 OF OT / 11` //I II I l 1 \ )I I \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 / / / / / / / \ / I I \ v I I \ _ i / PeOP05ED QEN5ITY — RE51
R / �� 1 / / �/ / 11 l III \ ,, � � !
I ) 1 \ x 51DEI/+lR�LK /` � / ! � / ! f f � // IM NEW DETACHED HOUSE
'� / ` / / / !`° �� I �o► , / °�o I I� \ q I I I 4 J ! I ` / I / / / /! // 1 NEW 24' WIDE TOWNHOME5
w \ ! NEW 42 WIDE ',il LLAS
/
IS z
' /'r / t I �� , \ \ ► �� \ , \\) `° ;/ TOTAL
�
X4TI R - LLINSZ
Lic, No. 035791,2�
".�`�1�ONAL Elm
z
V
o
O
�
D
S
Q
r�
M1
?
a
z
W
;NTiAL DEVELOPMENT
SINGLE FAMILY 5 UNIT5
ATTACHED 12 UNIT5
ATTACHED, 45 UNITS
66 UNIT
I
/ f / \ / �_��/ / // /1 I /i/// \ Ii /I / �'� NJT 1 I�OPOaED DENSITY OTHER _ —
\ I -
\I EXISTING MAN510N (5000 5F
CARRIAGE HOU5E
I f � x / ' I I / " a•—.a�.�...w.. �_ r._ ._- \/ /' / / / / / l l l �/ / ' / � .� '' / �/ / ••`. / 1 f f x •... ,_- ..... -+. .. ' � l '•_...� � ly ��PrI /' �_i �' / •.....�^^�_. - � II / / /'' / ' -� —. -� I ^( � �//
Pi -G&ED-" 3& _at)tLfI1VGo5
.. �-'.�1 _ _� �.--- L---- -_ �----- -� _ _ _,/ 1f1Pf�'OV,E'ExlaT`fNG/'DRIVA/(/'T /'20�" 1N(DTH �.,.
! IN
IC5 �Ifc[. �� - �-�.� , _ — 1 � I � — _ , I -- - /
_ \ , �.---- � J f�.----_-�-' / � l � �-- / ,, �� / � �'' �'� �•�-�'_ ^,-'� W 'S1DE'V/�ALK ON ON � 4E,/i�l CONNECTORl'',.
\VILLAS (NiV) (�2) VIL�Av� (NEW) , ONE, �r r
\\ \ ! I I 1 I \ 1 1 II I / / ,_ •--__ __- _____-) j ! I I /' �'' ��' �,' /:' FRONTAL ROAD5/tO/�(A�/�, HORIZ TAB.
\ I I i t f ; \ I I 1 / / / /' /' �' ��� - - - _ _ _ / , i I I ► ! % / / ALIGNMENT T4-'CO 0PAM/,V � / VDOn- 5 / 1 11
\ I,' �'�, / 1 � I l / / / � ,/ .� � r. U� UBl�IVI ION
In 1 ti ROAP _STA. DARD5 FOR A TRAFFIC
�__.__.� N.__FI C Or 1501— 2000 ;
FORMER ITT H EP\DQUARTF,5 —FUTURE CONNECTOR ROAD TO 3E DE5I6NED TO VDOT
PU3LIC 5TANDARD5, FINAL LOCATION T5D,
N RIDGF
STALE: 1" 50'-0" JUKE 160 2005
el
ARCHITECTS PC
c�
`� uj
"1
z
W ° _Z
aLq
,W
z Z
W CD
Z
w
► cz
�> ar o -'
�> W Q = U
c� CLL9 U L c
o �
[-4 W c 't
--� V) CL
✓J\ < a a
U�
�
G ,j °
0
1---!
U >
T .Y
W 0
IL
�o
a U
Gil Na
Ld Fii ! Z U
rCF L
1_{ Z 1Z1� uj w -v
V_
F7 i� z v
( J O�
o
jh�.i� /■�.Tw � o
QCL U
N
(� > O
•� U
7
M� 0 41
41
4�
(� a U
c
cyo � •�
w ��
w E
w = �'
ce Z $ •N
ta. (n v
JOB NO. c
22816 2
U >
0 U
SCALE ° v
1 "=50' � 3
cN
c °
a
SHEET NO. a
� a
2 N T
� v
GRAPHIC SCALE
50 0 25 50 100
r 1
IN FEET )
1 inch = 50 ft.
•
Cd
Z
r,
fl
19e9
200
1
I / , //// /I / , , / , / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / ' 1. /.• ./,�.. � / / /AQ
/ / __ .__ _ V l ..-. Zg 'a .�•� \ 4 , I ,1 \ \ , 1 ! r� .— .— -- - ,,I/ / ,
I / / / / / / / ! ' ( ( f i l ! l / / .�, •� / I 'i a `. `� \ •\ \ .V:•. - i C l ( I j / / •�/%:. .� -.// `\ 594 I_
/ /' / /// // / / / / / ,, \ 1 \ �' \ I � I ! 1 I i ( I : (°• ;�` ' / ; / � l / i \ '- � — -,- - / 9�s \ \ \ i j ) I i ( I i l l // /.:-...-,.: ;'--r / •'' / ( , ' � \ / _ / / / /
/ // / / / / / I 1 } I , I ! ' , I: :d`• •/ � i I ,I 1 �' - / .Ob , \ 't I ( I I / I 'r:%.:'•i /�' j / / \, I / I / l +I.
i 4
/ -- i / / I / / / / / / i �-\ j ( I 1 t I i � Of I I 1 / - - _ / o _/ \ I I I j , •:,: ; r•• i %/ / /. \ ( / / re � � / o � !
/ / // / /,' / / / / / // I } i 1 + 1 i I 1 1 1 ! P, �9: r .° I ti I , \ 1 %� _ --- \ \ i \ 1 1 I i t I _ •; . j , " I ,\' I ; r 1 `' / �� , /"� / o� �? I t 1
/ \
/
/ t /
/ / ., / I / / / t' 1, I I i � ,I ''. .•.:•''\ , I `'-7 \// I .�. 1 ..wsr.v..ur.. .. \.®.m\ su mwi.. \ 1 \ " t , 1 _ /Q '/C / (V_ �t
_ � ./ / / / / i 1 I, •i. .;1. � r V / 1 ( ��., � -- _ -_ ,\ �- � � ®°i. \; \ \ \ t . 1 \ J \ \ /1 j \ / / /� ��; -\ 1/ `
/ // /j / r / / / / / 1 1 i }. i ( 1 4. } 1 { , I t i - =,' -✓ "s \ \ \ i \ \ \ \ ;';?' ' t ✓ \ \ �� \ / / / %i
I ✓ / / / / / / ( ! 1 j ( I j I I , O I ! / I I j 1 ; ! _._.,-=-�-� \ \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 � � i �o \ \ / !� � � I
1
I r
/ I 1 t r,
i
1 1
1
/ —J / / ( l r / / / / ' I i ! I I � I I I i 11•'•''1 . ••. � : I ! .da '�. • n ! i � � 1 1, \ \ \ \ /\ \ \ \ \ \ \ '1 :.,� / \ \ \ \ \ ( \ \ \ / / j \
\'
.
-- -' / / / , ! I 1 1 ;\� � �-• �� I 1 '. t - - - / h -��- I r I 1 1 '� t \ ', �a, - t\- -
/o \
�l
I I I1 I 4 I !I \ �j,�
301 �r� mil_
l J � � ' 1 i -11 ` \ ( 1 I /l , 1 1 , l ► 4 `
��..: I t i .•.:.C..�,1;°,°� -; \.9.'\:a',��•'.,. � \ \ � ( \ \ 1 (' / i1 1 / 1 rr• \ I tl / -
/
/ / I l / :: I::�:� 3 \ v I !•:... \ •.� ,\ .. •. \ . \ \ � \ \ I \ \ 1 I I i I 1 } i ' 9 I i /
Qom.... I
/ ! / :;:::.(y/.. :::.;/:::::::::::/; 1 ! I � \ •..\ '.• .. ...• \ � \ CV' _ , I , I t -~ • i 1 1 I I 1 1 1 4 1� i 11 \ / "'�11 L
v
/ / / / / / / / ''''' '. � I r I I I , \ t � \ a , � . •\ . j \ \ \ \ \ \ \ I ' t: 1..--� ' t / ( \ I I 1 , �• 1 I •. i i ( I I I _, 1 / / / / ', \T � r �I /
/ / / 1 / , / t / / t 9 .. .� . \ : \ \ \ \ \ •\ \ 1� � \ \ \ \ • _ _`__ � / I I j \ .t t, \ 1, 1 I ; -- - _- , _ '--; - /� l / , f /� / �`
/Iw"
\
`��\`n; \ � \\O�'
� \ \ ` \ \ \ `- \: \ ,, \�'\ \ • t \ \ \ \ / / � I I j �'��� i j / / � 1 \ 1 �'/ I I 1 ' , /�°�'!� �, /
/ `oo�
1
\
/ I
i l i
I
I •� \ 1 t
�.n
\ 1 1 I r \
5
} (
r
I
t
1 / r
t.: r r / ! I
I r
\ I , \ \ \ \ \ - I t r \ / j /f /i ` / // JI /j/ (Ililr \\ , v '
/ w
� cv 1 - ,
J
t i
/ r
0
1 I
/
1 / �
l l f pI
•� i
l f 1
•"_'tom jnnj``II
�lu
j.
f' -
I 1 /
b / /
� t / Via•. y. /
P
P✓ I
I
/ I• I /V / r
I
/
I
(
{
1 ,
°
/ I
i
/
/�wo. - v
�' IV ko// // / /� / / -- - _ -� // CD�/
g
/
1A /(n 1 (IT
� Ri if L'�\T
9
I SC T R. COLLINS`Z
Lic. No. 035791 rl
o��`S'SJONAL E�r'�
z
z
O
¢
w
�
V
CL
V
v)
O
0
Z
O
JV
L
cc
H
W
�
H
a
Ld
V)
>
w
W
c
ko 00
M �
J
61
Arm
C)
w
Q
C,
w
�
H
U
o
Ulwillill
'
�.,
W
CL
�
V /
W
e
V
�d
w
P�9
0
`
r
V
uj
'-'
a
LU
JOB NO.
22816
SCALE
1 "=50'
SHEET NO.
3
GRAPHIC SCALE H 0��
50 0 25 50 100 200 Q ��
J
SC TT R. OLLINS
(1N FEET) U Lic. No. 035791,2�
1 inch = 50 ft. 1
LIMITS OF ZONE (A)
PER ORIGINAL SP APPLICATION
C) All
CQO
O O
0 0
`vuj
im
ZONE A REVIEW /ce
--,----,,-ZONE
I AREA FOR ARB \ i
Al) i � � LIMITS OF ZONE (A)
APPLICATION PER ORIGINAL /
1
/ /l5 // i — • Cp --1 9 4 rn rn rn
/ ! /
_ o00
/
J \
�
- / \ / \ tD o0 d'
NOTE: IS THE .,- / THIS PORTION DRIVEWAY ACCESS
TO THE EXISTING BUILDING SHALL BE REMOVED
DURING THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL PROCESS FOR THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL BUILDING OR THE
i'
ROAD SHALL BE BROUGHT UP TO STANDARDS OF
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE.
V1 j / O / — - I ARB ZONING
LINE
I
/ j - 1 J
REMOVE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED �6
AD ACCESS ROAD & ADJUST WIDTHS�-
//// OF LOTS 62-65
o
\ COS
I I �
/ 4
1.. \ /
�y 1
/ 1
/
LIMITS OF ZONE A
PER ORIGINAL SP APPLICATION
FUTURE
:•::�:' COMMERCIAL LOCATION OF FUTURE 6 PARKING SPACESd—
/ :. I \ \
i .®I i
I
1
Q I
w
II III <
I Ik{
--/ i--THE FUTURE COMMERCIAL RCIAL BUILDING. G.ql
BUILDING. AND A TURN AROUND AREA FOR \ 1 \ 1 ,
A 4 RETAINING WALL SHALL BE INSTALLED
\ \ \ \
—
cal ,—
// m i I , t I 1 TO CREATE THE PERPENDICULAR SPACES. O
, �; i
NOTE: UPON CONVERSION OF THE EXISTING I/ , ;
/ CCESS THE A PRACCESS 0 AL USE PROVIDE ROAD BUILDING TO A COMMERCIAL 1
y� ,
ROAD SHALL END AT THIS POINT. ! I I I ) ALONG ALIGNMENT OF ) { I I ('' uml
uj
i \ I o
� DRIVEWAY ALONG i j 1 i r .. \
1
i i
i
/
IEU
0
II I I
II ,
1 ,
1
11 EXISTING
GRADE
/D E OF T1H
TOPOG A H Y
o E \
I i
iI
Ii 1 fI I
I r: r
� r
,
\
.,
,
,r
\
/
/o r
,
-
1
zw
w
I / :I o /
/ I
r
,
/ 1 , / o I
,
1 �
1
I ^_
I
W EXITING
I \ \ o __ -
I /
I I , / t I Q \ I
i L% 1 a�VI \ T� f I O I
J
1
1
OU E
I -
111,
H � I
I I
I �
,I I at ,
/
1 f
I \ w
1 �
[ I �
� I 1
is Li
I /
/ v
1
r_
1 \ I I A I
1 O I
I / Q
1 •
1 �-
/
I 1
w
rrl
V SI ::::::::r.::::::::::::::.:::::::::::::::::: Uf�ON APPRO �L OF A T� .� r / /. , \ � NO � \ J.
I ,
I \ 4
V I r
I / /
J
I _
� � H
/ � >`.::: \ 1 PLAN THE EXISTING BUILDING SHALL
---is/.:-.-�:-�:::..>•--::'
C� I E USED FOR COMMERCIAL USES AND { / / _ s
_ I
5 i—
/ r'7 o �c
1 I \ G ACCESS ROAD SHALL PROVIDE /
ui
/EXISTING AC THIS � / /
/
�F N
_ I
B \
/ � O
/ �i
I
COMMERCIAL ACCESS TO 11-IE FACILITY. ROAD , _ _ -, /) / -�' c� �
i � i ' / — -` 1 J' / (J
SHALL END AS SHOWN ON THIS DRAWING AND ' \ I ,� __ '� \ r / j ,/ / -- o n-�
THE
E EXISTING PORTION OF THE DRIVEWAY PAST
/ r � � / � /^ / ___-� / / � � [ � � % �� � � � \ •\ `- ,` E END POINT SHALL BE REMOVE
IMINATERI OG�NAL�. �L
/APPF OVED LOT , 8 TO '�D � � � ! 1 i � / 1 � l !'' ` �- //Q``�eP/ U U 0
C) �° ��9 C� o \ _ �, / AN Al GRADE ENTRANCE �-/
V_ (0 �rj� Cp '� \ \ \ \ \ �� TO E EX SI T1N CO�uIM RCIAL I 5 �. _ + f I 1 'r; / �� `� ,� i W W
l n/ �, / I 1 1 Q
n/w Al ,� \ (0\ \ I , BUILDING �, O�
_ I l
1 ,
ul
W a.
- 1
i.
I z
/
I
l/
, J 1
/
1 1
/ I
1
f /
I
I (D
7\
11
/ � 1
i
a,
,l i
J
- , I
a. .
r
r / J
I'
i
_ I
w
. 1
(a /
_ w
v
4• / Y
I r
I r^
°f
I
Y.
a a"
s
• r
/
i
1
00
LLI
r� I � / \ \ / -`"•_ ---_ 1 / � / / / / / P /�/ //// / ' O � JOB NO.�
l' I - ——.------—— / --- % _ i /j// / /// oo`/ / f: t✓7
22816 —�--
(0\ 18/6�
01 11=rJo'
- _ --- --- l--- - — —� _—loam m
c ' - — - - /- _ / / i j SHEET NO.
�T0� `44 4 60 .?� -- --- --- — f--- N O'L'38'29 4�! Jt),5.. 5 / , -- / /
Albemarle County Planning Commission
July 26. 2005
The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and a public hearing an Tuesday, July 26,
2005 at 6:00 p.m_, at the County Office Building. Roaata 241, Second Floor. 401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia, Members attending were William Rieley, Rodney Thomas, Calvin Morris, Ja
Higgins; Bill Edgerton, Chairman and Marcia Joseph, Vice- Chair. Absent was Pete Craddock and David
J_ Neuman, FAIR. Archkect for University of Virginia. Mr. Rieley arrived at 6:15 p.m.
Oth9r officials present were Wayne Cilirnberg, Planning Director; Claudette Grant. Senior Planner: Yadira
Amarante. Senior Planner. Stephen Wafer, Senior Planner; Bill Fritz, Development Review Manager and
Greg lCamptner, Assistant County Attorney.
Ca!! to Order and Estahllsh Quorum.*
Mr Edgerlon called the regular meeting to order at 6;00 p,rn. and established a quorum
Othor Marters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public.
Mr. Edgerton invited comment from the public on other matters not listetf on the agenda. There being
noire, the meeting moved on to the review of the consent agenda.
Con$enF Agenda-
CPA- 2005- 002.Growth Managenment Update T (Joan McDowell)
Mr. Edgerton asked if any Commissioner would like to pull this item off of the consent agenda for
discussion or if there was a motion.
Motion; lots, Higgins moved, Mr. Morris seconded, that the consent agenda be approved.
The motion that the consent agenda be approved passed by a vote of 5 :0. Commissioner Craddock and
Rieley were absent.
Items Being Oefernw
ZUA 004 -024 Old Trail Village (Signs #56,65,82,90) - Request to rezone approximately 257,4+ acres
from Rural Area, and Residential - RA, R1, and RB zoning districts, to Neighborhood Mode District - hlMD
for a combination of residential and commercial uses. This development includes approximately 500
single family units, 850 tawnhousWrowhouse units, 804 apartment units. and approximately 250,000
square feet of cammerciallotficeheore0orial space in the village center. The property, described as Tax
Map 55E -1 -A1 (previously identified in legal ads as Tax Map 55 Parcel(s) 55E Part i and 55E Part 2 and
Tax Map 56 Parcel(s) 55E Part 1 and 55E Part 2) is located in the WhOe Hall Magisterial District an the
north side of Route 250 West, approximately 2,000+ feet east of the intersection of Miller School Rd_ and
Route 250. The Crozet Masker Plan of the Comprehensive Plan designates this property as District, CT5,
CT4, CT3 (Edge and General) and Development Area Reserve (CT2) and Pfeserve (CT1) in the Crozet
area, General usage for Distnut is warehouses and light manufactunng in center zones. Airports,
researchiofface parks, regional parks and preserves at outer edge zones. and is recommended as
employment center which may be single use or mixed use area. If single Use, typically no more than 20%
of the neighborhood or downtown area. General usage for CTS is mixed residential and commercial uses.
Residential density i5 12 dwelling units per acre: 18 dwelling knits per acre in a mixed use setting.
General usage for CT4 is mixed residential and commercial uses, residential density is 4.5 dwelling units
per acre; 12 dwelling units per acre for townhouses and apartments; IS dwelling units par acre in mixed
use setting. General usage for CT3 (edge) is primarily single family detached #causes at 3.5-4 5 units per
acre_ (6_5 units per acre if accessory apartments are added for 50% of the residential stock,) General
usage for CT3 (general) is it supports the center with predominately residential uses, especially single -
family detached and i5 recommended for 3.5 -4.5 units per acre_ General usage for CTI and CT2 is
development area open space pfeserve or reserve with very low residential density, and is recommended
AI_BEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMW1`0IN —JULY 26, 2005 A" -
Altacht"ent 1)
Mr Edgerton stated that they had 15 additional spaces that would reduce atrno5t an entire row of parking
spaces in the front and allow for more of a planting area
Ms, Higgins stated #h at it already said that the required amount was already a reduced number.
Mr. Edgerton stated that was ccrreel and that he was suggesting that they hold them to wham the reduced
n urn ber is as opposed to allowing there to go above it.
Mr. Rieley Stated that he was not cornfortable with that because Ihat Is a minimum number and he did not
recall a case in which they had required Somebody to meet the minimum. If trey figured in the reduction
anti used that as the basis and their the 20 percent allowable was added on tap of that, then he felt lhat
reasonable. He staled that he just did not understand that
Ms. Higgins suggested so that they don't get precedent issues in the future that maybe iI be noted on the
site plan what is different about this calculation as opposed to the actual amount required without the
reduction for the drive through.
Mr. Fritz stated that staff could include that reference an the final plat
Mr. Thomas poinled out thal when he walked the property he was very surprised haw much the property
dropped off in the fear.
Action on SP-04 -455:
Motion: Mr. Rieley moved, Mr. Thomas seconded, that SP -04 -455 for Walgreens be recommended to
the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the conditions recommended by staff
1 The site shall be constructed m general accordance with the preliminary site plan entitled
-Walgreens'. issue date of 7113105 and initialed Y.Q A dated 7115145.
2 Signage and pavement markings shall be provided al the entrance and exit points of the drive - through
lane, subject to Currenl Development Division engineenng approval to ensure appropriate and safe
travel patterns.
3. Landscaping beyond that outlined in the ARB Design Guidelines is required to mitigate the impacts of
the site layout. Landscaping shall be provided to the satisfaction of the ARE.
The motion passed by a vote of 5.1 (Commission Edgerton voted nay.) (Commissioner Craddock was
absent.)
Action on Critical Slflpas Waiver
Motion Mr. Thomas moved, Mr Morris seconded to grant the critical slopes waiver to Section 4.2.5_b (2)
as requested by Walgreens,
Ms. Joseph supported the critical slopes waiver because the slopes were man -made and it was not going
into any watershed immediately She felt that it and would not cause any erosion problems Also, they
were using the site in the urban area as they like them to.
The oration passed by a vote of 6:4, (Commissioner Cfaddock was absent.)
Mr Edgerton stated that SP - -455 for Walgreens would go to the Board of Supervisors on September 7
with a recornmendatron for approval.
SP- 2004-052 Kenridge (Sign #S40) - Request for special use permit to allow development of a multifamily
complex in accordance with Section 23.2.2.9 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for R -15. Residential
use in a 00, Commercial Office district, The property, described as Tax Map 60 Parcels 27 and 278,
contains 16.5 acres, and is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on the north side of Ivy Road
(Route ##250 West] approximately 112 mile west of the inlefse•ction of Ivy Road and the 291250 By -pass.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — ,JULY 28, 2005 474
The Comprehensive Plan designates these lands as Office Service, in Neighborhood Seven. General
usage for Office Service is office parks and mixed -use planned development emphasizing office uses,
residential uses, and regional -scale research and office uses providing information and professional
services to the County 2nd the larger region. and Es recommended for 6,01 to 20 dwelling UnkRS per OGre,
With possibla densities of up to 34 dwellings per acre undef a planned development approach. General
usage of the proposed amendment (SUP request) is residential. The existing carriage end nnanor houses
have the option of being used for residential and1or office use The density of the proposed amendment is
4 dwelling units per acre. This property is also located in EC, Entrance Corridor. (Claudette Grant)
Ms Grant suenmarrzed the staff report.
■ The applicant, Kenridge, LLC, is seeking approval for 2 special use permit to allow development
of a 66 unit residential complex on 16.5 acres. The property located on Route 250 West across
from the Bifdwcod Golf Course The re5Ldential units would include 5 detached units, 48 (42 foot
wide) villas, and 12 (24 foot tdo) townhouses_ The existing 8,000 square foot manor house and
3,000 square foot carriage house have the option of being used for residential aridlor office use.
The special use permit would allow for R -15, Residential use in a CO, Commercial Office district.
The Planning Commission saw this application on December 14, 2 ()04 for a work se$$ion The
Planning Commission also saw this application for a public hearing on March 29, 2005 The
applicant at that time requested an indefinite deferral during this meeting
The applicant has made significant changes to the plan and the Architectural Review Board has
recommended favorably regarding the design with condilions,
■ However_ staff still feels that there are some tssues that still need to be resolved_ These issues
are internal parking That Could be better relegated; storm water and management need to be
canststent with each other- affordability still needs to be addressed. Staff is still working with
Zoning and the County Attorney on the conditions. The applicant is re4uasting private streets.
The critical slopes waiver was requested and reviewed There are no engineering concerns
which prohibit the disturbance of the critical slope. Action on private streets and critical slopes
should also be considered
Mr Edgerton asked if there were any questions for Ms Grant. There being none. he opened the public
hearing and invited the applicant to address the Commission.
Steve Blaine_ attorney for the applicant, stated that with him tonight was Jim Gregg, the architect, who
has been involved with them on the plan. He felt that as the staff report indicates there has been a
significant progress made since Iheir work sessions. Hopefully- the Commission can appreciate the
elements that matte up the application before thern that should be consideredf From a big picture
standpoint_ They have been able to implement the 250 Task Farce recommendations for linking this
project to the White Gables project, which is now under construction for the first phases. They have been
able to link that to reduce the number of entrances to lhis project and combine that to a combined
entrance across frorn the Birdwood Golf Course. They have been We to work with ARB staff and the
Planning staff to preserve the Historic resources in the Manor Horne and the Carriage House. In addition,
they have been aWe to work with a plan that rs sensitive to those historic resources and also inrorporate
a significant open span an amenity in what they are referring to as an edge park of approximately 4
acres. They are trying to keep it in its natural condition as they see today That explains the request for a
private road and what they envision in the front part of the project as a rural section. They intend lo
connect that area with the White Gables correction. Therefore. they would seek a road design
consistent with theirs. Currently they undefstand that their design would be a 22 foot section with
cobblestone gutter as opposed to a standard curb and gutter. That gives you kind of a flavor as to the
elements to the plan. They also found a way to preserve within that area the stone wall, which is
important to the ARB. With the redesign the 66 units include 6 single- family units. The ARB was
particularly concerned because it is not typically part of their jurisdiction, but they proffered a rondition
that would allow this to come back with the single- family homes and any changes to the Manor Home in
facl would require the ARS's approval.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION —JULY 26, 2005 475
You may recall from the prior wotk session that they are working with a tight building envelope and Some
existing challenging slopes. When you take into account all that they have tried to 1noofporate with these
various interests_ they have done really the best that they can with the conditions. He felt ihat ties into the
comment from staff about the nature of the parking. Mat they have done is relegated the parking
internal to the site. So there will not be parking to the external part of the site. There are those who may
have a personal preference to rear loaded garages as opposed to front loaded garages. But what that
design imposes is additronal infrastructure. "Oh a tight site like this they felt that with a single loop road
that was the minimum disturbance that would be needed to provide the access The internal loop road
would convert to a Neighborhood Model matrix, and would comply with the main matrix that would include
sidewalks and street trees. There is a cut away section in your staff report that gives an example of that.
In an ideal perfect world with a larger site they could have perhaps achieved all of these other objectwes
and maybe addressed the parking differently. But, they believe that this would be arr attractive design
and that the home owners will appreciate that design.
AS for the affordable housing issue, it is correct that affordable housing as they would define it that
Albemarle Cinunly is corning to gaps with is not incorporated into this site. There are constraints with the
building envelope that he has mentioned that reduced the available density They have reduced this
density from 88 units clown to 56 units. With the land and grading costs of the improvements it makes the
prohibited level of a price range of $175,400 economically enviable. But what he would like to point out is
that since they started and made this application they have had this dialogue with the staff and the
Bounty_ he knows that the Commission has been struggling with this policy as well in implementing the
affordable housing objective. the applicant has recognized that the market opportunity for affordable
housing and has since the application developed 184 affordable units in a condominium conversion
known as the Hessian Hills Condominiums Those units have all been marketed below the affordable
housing target. The initial prices on the two- bedroom units were 5129,500 The prices on the three -
bedroom were 5139.500, He stated that he was happy to report Ihat at the 18 rnorlth to 2 year proj6ction
of sales has already been met. In about 6 months they Have sold 150 units. It is important to point out
that these units are intended for ownerJOCCU pants . They sought and dust recently obtained Fanny Mae
approval, which in a condominium conversion for certain approvals for that Fannie Mae financing require
t4at you have a minimum number of owner occupied residents. They have a minimum threshold of 60
percent_ which translate to at least one affordable~ housing unit will be ownerlaccupied for each one of
these luxury townhouse units that the applicant is pursuing So there are some policy Considerations
here. They understand that the County's policy and implementation is evolving They would point out
that in a special use permit the conditions usually relate to the impacts proposed by the use that is
already contemplated in the district and they were not displacing housing units with this proposed use.
They were converting a commercial office designation or use to a residentEal use There is always the
upstream argument too wilh providing upstream housing if there are local residents who seek this option.
That makes available, hopefully. lower priced housing for affordable units. 5o they are sensitive to the
issue. They discussed this with the Dousing Director, Ran White and he agreed that what they discussed
was reasonable. They would offer that as addressing affordable housing recognizing what they have not
incorporated for affordable housing.
Regarding the issue on grading, they know they have to make the storm water management plan work.
McKee Carson is the same engineering Firm that designed the White Gables storm water syslem has
done some preliminary calculations. They have told us that they can matte it work. If there is a concern
that when they get in and address the actual grades of the storm water facilities if there is a material
change if ft is not ultimately in Roneral accord with what you approve. then they would have to come back
to the Commission. Therefore_ they have to make it work from an engineenng standpoint and they have
to honor the County's grade and specifications There are some good conditions proposed in M5. Grant's
staff report. There are some clarifications that they would recommend and it is really the Commission's
pleasure as to how they want lo do that If there is time during the deliberation, they Could come back
and address those If there are particular questions and Concerns, he and the architect would be
available for questions.
Mr. Edgerton stated that he had several questions for fair. Blaine. The staff report refers to transportation
issues on page 2 where staff is reoammending Neighborhood Model road standards be followed. They
are not shown on the plEln The applicant has noted that the interior roads will be designed to urban road
standards; however the applicant wishes the entrance road to be designed to rural standards. In the
ALEEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JULY 26. 2005 476
drawing that he fins it loo" like the entrance road has a sidewalk, which Certainly does not f)# with the
rural standards He asked for some clarification on that.
Mr Blame stated that issue was not clear in the report. The rural standard would allow a more sensitive
grade to the road within the area that they were trying to preserve. They would like to have, if it was not a
sidewalk, a pedestrian link Consistent with the 250 Task Force and other staff recommendations. So that
sloes not need to be a sidewalk if adjacent to a Curh and a gutter like an urban section. They actually are
envisioning something more like a trail. There is a plan located on the board that identifies how that might
be. The idea is to give access to the adjoining neighbors and also to make an amenity walking trail. It
Could be asphalt or a more upgrade aggregate in keeping with the other designs. They don't want to get
hung up on urban versus rural. What they want IO have is the least impact in that area. Clearly they Car)
implement the Neighborhood Model matrix when you get up to the loop road where it Connects next to
where the housing units actually begin, There they can control the grade and use that model, which they
think is appropriate.
NAr Edgerton stated that he had one other question There were some real concerns expressed on page
3 on the Iraff;c study and the vaIidity of it and whether it fit with the Site. He asked if he had a response to
that.
Mr Blaine stated that in the end this was a traf` is signal warrant in the specifications where you site down
with Chuck Procter of VOOT and when it would be done and how it would be done. What really matters
is whettler VDOT will approve a signal They did not do a signal warrant study to Show that they dLd not
have to do a signal_ They think that a signal will enhance the project. The SFgnal has already been
proffered by White Gables Therefore, it is not an )slue of tagging the development with the cost of the
signal. It has already been covered. He felt that They could take issue with the criticism with the courts at
the Birdwood Golf CIA. The signal warrant was not even close in the number of trips generated from
that 1.tse. So whether you did it on a day That was 142 degrees and 9 would be crazy to play golf or a
rainy day in October our traffic engineer does not think it would make a difference it is a criticism, bw it is
in the end VOOT has to be Convinced tflat a signal )s warranted and there are just not the trips generated
to warrant the signal. But your staff has ably covered the point in that if it is ever warranted the White
Gables developer has agreed to install that signal. He guessed that their quid pro quo is that they have
agreed to give them access and they have agreed to build the link over to allow the use of that signal
They also identified some resurfacing and Ironlage improvements. Trey have offered to put those in a
condition, but it does not appear in here. But he would suggest that If you missed any thing at the White
Gables that you might have missed the widening and the striping for the left turn signal, which they are
prepared to put in_ They might be able to do that in advance of the signal, but that would be a site plan
corisideration,
Mr Thornas asked the size of the space buffer along the CSX tracks
Mr. Blaine stated that Ihey had agreed to do a 50 foot setback to put some landscapiag in, but he was not
sure if there was a required buffer.
W. Higgins suggested that before the application was passed on that they define the front, side and rear
yard setbacks. She pointed out that there might be two different rear yard setbacks with the lots along
the railroad tracks being different than the lots along the sides.
Mr. Blaine stated that the setbacks were 36' side. 50' rear setback and 275' s4de,
There bung no further questions for the applicant, Mr Edgerton invited Comment frorn the other members
of the public.
Lynn Miailleux stated that he was a neighbor in the rear and marketing agent for the White fables, which
was located on the east side of the proposed project. He stated that he reviewad the new pram and did
not see a whole lot of changes from the previous plan that was submitted, other than going from 90 units
down to 66 units, His concerns dealt with the straight lines and straight roads with the large amount of
town homes just lined up He felt that it looked like northern Virginia. He suggested that Some work
needed to be done on the design of the project because it waS loo Linear_ With 16.5 acres he felt that
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JULY 26. 2005 477
they could work something out that would look better, particularly in this prestige area. The S"etscape
was nothing t>ut garages on the front with two in ark ing places out in front The last timid he was here he
had asked for the details of the buildings, but he did riot see any details of the buildings whatsoever_ He
asked if the buildings were brick_ still the hearty plank or what other material He asked what rnatenals
would be used for Pie roof. He pointed out that was very important because a lot of the people that would
be living in White Gables were going to be looking at roofs. In the winter time he would be looking at all
roofs from his property in the rear. which was shown in the elevations on page 18 under site elevations C.
He felt that there should be a lot more details on the plans before a decision was made In addition, he
would like to see the landscape plan As far as the drainage, he knew what they went through with the
White Cables drainage project and it was still being developed so to speak. When he looks at what they
have here, it was his understanding that 40 percerit of this property was in the Ivy Greek Watershed If
that is so he would think that the water runoff engineering of that would be a major situation thal would
have to be studied. The applicant is showing two bio- retenlion ponds and one open detention pond
Jeff Werner, representative for Piedmont Environmental Council, stated that he was not going to offer a
specific comment on this project, but he was here fulfilling a prorruse that he made to a gentleman in the
Blue Midge Homeowner's Association to completely and repeated challenge them on the affordable
housing issues First, he applauded the Hessian Hail issue and one could only hope chat the affordable
housing units that are there were acquired by people that truly deserve that have affordability problems
The fact is that really all ihey did was displace renters who are now locktog for housing. But, he missed
Cast week's meeting and he understands that once again the County was cascaded by a representative of
the Chamber of CornrnerGe and the development Community for its failure to accommodate affordability
housing in the County. The key argument as usual was that the County's policies and regulations would
a primary impediment to constructing more housing, and therefore by inference cheaper housing. That is
if Only the County woLiId let them Inuild more and Ihen the builders and dave lope r5 could charge less for
houses A few weeks ago. the Commission reviewed a revised Rtvanna Village project that now has a
range cf housing units signafrcantly less than the orrginal proposal The proposal coming to you tonight
has fiB units and previously had 80 units He realized that was an insigndicant reduction, but the fact is
overall that build out of this project is significantly than the zoning would allow which is pretty consistent
for development throughout Albemarle County, He stated that he does not offer any specific comment on
this proposal. fiat, he simply believed that the time is past due to when necessary to remind the
Commission and the public ihat while ihefe is an enormous challenge on the affordability problem one
would only need to review what has been built and what is being proposed to see that it is not County
regulations but developer Choice to construct housing projects at far less than the densities and therefore
the quantities that are allowed. He asked that the next time the affordable housing blame is placed an the
County for limiting rnaxirrium developer that the County should start asking the developer why so they
continue to build less_
There being no further public comments, Mr. Edgerton closed the public hearing to bring the matter back
before the Commission for discussion and possible action.
Mr Edgerton pointed out that he was absent at the lest meeting and asked if the new plan addressed all
of the tterns listed on page 9_
Ms. Joseph stated that the sentence below that says that Mr Craddock agreed thal the requesl should be
de f erred. particularly so Ihat the view shed ffom the back of the property could be addressed She poirited
out that there were many things that needed to be addressed. Theref0fe, she agreed with fair Mailleux
that nothing really has changed except the units have been reduced_ She stated that the layout was
pretty much Pie same, which was something that they had talked about needed to respond to the
Neighborhood Model. They had talked about the garages in the front and the parking, which really has
not changed. One of the comments in the minutes was that Mr Blame said that the manor house would
be used as a residence. and what is going to become of that has not been addressed If they look at this
to terms of the Neighborhood Model, rt would be nice to have the Commercial work somehow with the
residential She felt that this plan really does not do that. If you look at the office building there is really not
sidewalk or anything that connects that to anythmg. It is really sitting out there with a couple of parking
spaces. There really has not been any atlf;mpt, except from lowering the density on this property, to make
any Changes.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JULY 26. 2005 478
Ms Higgins stated that her memory of it was that there was a parking area in the center and the use was
greater. She pornted out that her problem with the office use was that they had to have the parking to
support it. Therefore, she foil that was a positive thing since she did not look at it that way One of the
rssues they had was the significant amount of parking in relationship to the historic structure
Ms. Joseph stated that it was still not. identified othef than a verbal statement in their minutes of what they
budding was going to be used for. It is zoned commercially. This could change significantly if they are
required to have more parking if they decide to use it for a commercial use If it is a commercial use then
maybe there should be same sort of connection between ttiose two parking areas for the manor house
and that other little building. Thorn are things going on here that Could make that connection. but they
don't known what is going to happen. She noted that she was very can Cerned that there was no screening
shown in the back because they were specifically talking about the fact that they wanted some sort of
protection to the back. That has not been addressed.
Ms Higgins pointed oul that the ARE would stilt have to review this plan. She suggested that they
compare what would be allowed by right versus the special use permit issue which is before the
Commission. She felt that the proposed use was displacing office use of a possibly significant volume.
but then they don't have the i�issixisted parking and other issues_ Again, she felt that this was decreased
use She fell that the decrease from 88 units to 50 units was significant. She felt that thrs plan fits with
what is already in the area
Mr. Edgerton stated that the use of the manor house would affect what infrastructure would have to be
shown. If there was going to be a lot more parking it would really affect the plan. The proposal says the
existing 8.000 square foot manor douse and 3.000 square foot carriage house have the option of being
used for residential andfor office use. Those two items are for two different things
Mr. Cilimberg stated that staff proposed conditions if in the event the Commission was to recommend
approvaI The first of those conditions was intended to address that issue in terms of the parking aspect.
Ms. Higgins stated that would be item t that says parking is limited to what is shown on the plan, and if it
is required for office spaces_ they will need to do an amendment to the plan. Therefore, there would be a
controlling factor. Any amendment to the special use permit would have to come back before the
Commission.
Mr. Rieley felt that issue could be handled in that way. But. hts concerns were broader and go back to
their original two rewews of this proposal Last time he had said that this project had made great strides
from the previous tirne that Ihey had seen it and he looked forward to seeing it again to see rt continue to
get better. He stated that there were some changes that had been made such as the four units
encroaching on the setback area are no longer there. He felt that was a positive change. He did not
necessarily applaud the overall reduction in units_ In fact, with a different approach than This, they could
probably get a higher tolal density with less Impact by working with the slopes in a differenl way. He
agreed with staff in that there were some good things about this project, but he did not think that it
warrants approval at this stage of the game He agreed with Mr Mai Ilaux about the fact Ihat this is a very
ordinary approach on a really extraordinary piece of property So that the motion of having these drive in
garages =rnpietely aside from the fact that it is uftedy at odds with the Neighborhood Model creates a
long flat zone that brFe would expect to see in another area. It is tough to put that on this type of sloping
site. The impact can be seen in all of the grading that spreads out for about 100 feet on each side of it.
He reiterated from their Iasi review that that there needs to be another round of thought and redesign to
deal with these kinds of fundamental issues He stated that he did not feel that they have that Currently,
they have a very rninof adjustment. The other issue was that he felt that they have to deal with affordable
housing on every project. This plarx has not changed much from Iasi time and he still bas the same
concerns. He stated that he would look forward to supporting an adjusted project on this, but he could
not support this one the way it is.
Mr. Morris agreed with Mr Rieley's comments_
Mr. Thomas stated that this project was located in a very affluent area and world be scrutinized very
closely. He staled that he would tike to see the buffers increased in the rear next to the railroad tracks.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JULIA 28, 2005 479
Heu asked to see more information from Engineering on the water runoff and how it would be contain ad on
the site and leave the properly. He asked that the Commission invite Mr. Blaine back up to address the
unfavorable remarks.
Mr Edgerton invited fair. Blaine to come forward to answer Mr Thomas' question.
Mr. Thomas stated that in the minutes he had asked the question if he had addressed all of the
unfavorable comments from the staff, which was on page 30.
Mr. Blaine stated that he could refer him back to the staff reporl tonight that identifies three issues that
they have discussed.
Mr. Edgerton stated that the Commission did not have a copy of that staff report-
Mr, Blaine stated that they can rely an staff to identify the remaining issues. This application was
submitted in September of last year. It has been signficant iterations. It has been in response to the
various issues that they have heard tonight. The concem about the rear is why they reduced the density
to put a iarger puffer in. Thera is a condition that they are willing to make that will require landscaping for
screening to adequately screen the units- They may not be able to satisfy someone's desire that this is
too linear, but they can screen what is visible from the adjoining property through the buffer. Staff has
indicated that 50 feet should be adequate- Therefore, he &d not know what else they can do. They have
tried to balance the Neighborhood Model- They have a blend of Neighbor#tood Model matrix for the road
loop internal, and then yet a rural to preserve the edge park. They have hired an architectural historian to
look at the significance of the buildings and the interrelation of the new buildings to the old. He felt that
there can be as many views as tbare are persons viewing the type and style of the plan. They can
address the engineering Issues. They can address Ms. Joseph's questions and issues with the use of the
manor house. It is intended to be residential. If that use changes, then it will have to come back because
the parking requirements will rnake a material change to the plan- It says andfor because the carnage
house is intended for an office use, 'Thal would provide 2,500 square feet plus or minus of a mix of use.
They have indicated to the ARB that the townhouses will be all brick. The ARB must approve any
changes to the manor house- All of the aesthetic visual concerns that the Commission have addressed
has been vatted at the AR$. They have been before the ARB repeatedly, and they have unanimously
supported the approach. He stated that he was sorry that there was perception that it has not gone as far
as some would like, but they have taken a great deal of care in trying to balance the various issues.
Surely if affordable housing were the only issue, they would do multi- family to the maximum of the R -1 S.
Mr. Thomas thanked Mr. Blaine for answering his question.
Motoon: Ms- Higgins moved, Mr. Thomas seconded, that SP- 2OO4 -1 52 for Kenridge be recommended to
the Board of Supervisors for approval subject to the conditions recommended by staff plus additional
conditions to (1) address ttie rear buffering, (2) to clarify the use of the mansion and carriage house and
(3) incorporate into the plan some sort of pedestrian interconnection tc the 2,500 square foot of Wce
space that is the carriage house -
The motion was defeated by a vote of 4:2. ( orarnissioners Higgins, Thomas voted aye. } (Corn missioners
Joseph, Morris, Edgerton, Rieley voted nay -) (Commissioner Craddock was absent -)
Mr. Edgerton stated that the motion failed -
Mr. Kamptnar stated that if would be heJpful to have another motion citing the reasons for denial,
Motion: Mr. Rieley moved. Mr. Morris seconded, that SP- 2004 -052 for Kenridge be recommended to the
Board of Supervisors for denial used upon the staff's recommendation, speclf-icaliy: (1) internal parking,
() storm water management and (3} affordability issues, as well as the issues Mr Thomas raised about
the specificity of the screening that should be addressed at the special use permit level, which should not
be done afterwards because this is the point that the public gets the opportunity to see and comment on
it. He stated that Mr. Blaine's assurances notwithstanding, that this is such a difficult site and they are
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COM ISSION --JULY 26, 2005 480
adding so much impervious area that staff should have a reasopable comfort levee with the storm water
management before it corrres to the Planning Commisston
The motion was approved by a vote of 4.2. (Commissioners Joseph. Morns_ Edgerton, Risley voted aye.)
(Commissioners Higgins, Thomas voted nay.) (Commissioner Craddock was absent.)
Mr Edgerton stated that S P -04-052 for Ken hdge vwouId go to the Board of Supervisors on September 14
with a recommendation for denial
Old Business;
Mr Edgerton asked if there was any old business.
There bung none. the meeting proceeded
New Business:
Mr Edgerton asked if there was any now business.
Mr. Morris pointed out that he felt that they would see the area where Ashcroft is going to connect when
they review Lake Ridge. He noted that is where the road will be corning in, and then it will be further
recommended to tte into Fontana.
Mr Risley cornpirrnented Ms. grant on her staff report on such a tough project.
Mr Edgerton stated that he would be absent for the next two weeks.
Mr Cilrrnberg stated that he would also be absent next week.
Mr Morris stated that he would be absent the week after next.
There being no further new business, the meeting proceeded.
Adjournment_
With rro further items_ the meeting adjourned at 7:59 p_m to the August 2, 2005 meeting.
V. Wayne Cilrrnberg, Secretary
(Recorded and transcribed by Sharon Clayto r Taylor, Recording So uf eta ry. )
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION — JULY 2$. 2005 481
October 5- 2005 (Regular Day Meeling)
fPage t1
A regular meeling of the E.pard 01 $upeivisur$ or Albemarte County, Virginia, was held pn
October 5, 2005, al 9;46 a.m., in Rporn 2+:i. Cvunly pierce DUjilding On MClndre Road. Charfotiesvdle,
Vuginia,
PRESENT: Mr- Davirf P. Bowerman, Mr. Ken C Doyd. Mr. Lir"ay G. Dorrier, Jr., Mr, Dennis S.
Flanker, Ms. Sally H- Thomas and Mr. David C. Wyarn,
ABUNT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT- Courny ExeCOve. Roben W. Tucker, Jr.. County WlOMUYL Lamy W.
Days- Deputy Glark, Debi Moyers, and 0I1'emur Oi Planning, V. Wayne Cilimberg-
+,gerrda flom No- 1. The rlleellrrg was called la order 01 9;03 a.m.. by the Chairman, Mr. Rooker.
Agenda Item No, 2. Pletlge ai Allegiance.
Agenda Iram No. 3. WfneN of $derrCe.
Agenda Item No- 4. From the PubNc_ Maitais Not Listed on tha Agenda.
Mr. Chrigropher MIslow aWrOSSO the POaftf. Stating lhm he wanied 10 aWice55 the pyerlgl
grading retwi cement for subdnasion5, describing it as r rimat a nd long overdue He nosed Thal the SIHI
Meadows horno in which he and his Wiie reside, as well as the hornes at many of Ims nelghbars, have
been impacted by gramng anu drainage problems- Mr. Mislow said deuetapers have offorad agraernmis
to give people their monay back lar their homes to avoid lawsuits. There needs to be same lavrrl ai
5upemmion,ml a aroad level. He pllereo Ip provrpe to Board wilh lily needed inlorrnaison,
Ms. Liz Palmor, n3pfosenting tiro League of Wiarnen Valor& eongralulaied BAs- Sally Thomas an
her ap1minlment to the Cbesapeake ELay Lacs I Government Advisory Committee, a body appointed by
the governors of bay area stales She naffed that the cornmittue enhances ine parircipaunn of local
gowimmanl in the bay resloralion afforl by improving c4mmunicaiion l}elween stakeholders, by supplying
fechnical assrstarr'ce to local governmemir., and by providing a lwal government per5¢gttive on ppiir~y
development within the Chesapeake Day program. MS_ Palmer 5,wo Thal Ms Thgonaz is one of lust six
elected otliclals in Virginla to be appoirmed to the corn m illee.
Mf- John Martin of From Union r nppormd Thal (here was a rally organized In June rn Scanswllle
brawing amul 151) people opposes to a pip-B4ne being run tram lho James Riser to iwnarlolloswdle. Fie
also sw mat there was an arrest made at Shoppef's World for a person campa:gm,ng for ai Irce, adding
that 1 hop 2 inaa�06 to ba a place far cOizens la exefcisa 1heir righi 10 tree Speech.
Agentla Item No. 5a. Recognition= Landon Gregory Hatfield iar efforts roialao lo Raintran fire-
Mr. RCaker recognized 14 year old Landon Hatfielld, a IfeshMnAF4 at AitN fMZrle Higtr School, l0r hls
quCk- thinking and hamq c efforts {n helpmrV a wornein escape a burning home an August 8, 2005, He said
Mr. Hatfield helpep thg vlourn Mape 11-irou0b a garaQa wm00w born the four- alarrtt fire, MT. Rooker 41SC
commended firefighl;&S from the many slalians who responded to the blaze He asked fair, Dan
Eggleston, Director of Fts+Rescue t6 corne icrwara and rec Dgrdze Landon,
Mr. Eggleston lhenkeO L main lint has sell lei$ ael 0: herCWSM 11hel hglpeG Save d life V4 trier,
p+esPntad horn w+lh B plaque,
Agenda Item No. Sb. Retognitian. StutlarAs Make A Dftferonee pay Prmilarnalion.
Mr. RWker recognijed'Studenig Make a pHiefenrre Day' in Albemarle Counly to be honored on
Oelot]er n. PppS. He urg8d fefla+v C+tizen5 to encourage and as5+s1 sludenm for ttie benefit pt tFre
wmmuniiy, Mr. Rooker congratulated June Smith fat Community Engagement) and Kelly Cramer I
student at AJbemarlD High School) and premnmm sham writi the iollowing praciarnairnn_
STUOV "I`S MAKE A DIPPERfE HCE 13AY
Whereas, irre yaulh of our nallon are its future; and
Whereas, working tmgeiiier to help oit►ers baidges tho- t1 lerences That separate
AmgTicMIS and Sidi -V 3len the bonds lhal tie u9 toKjolh of: end
antl
Whereas, we, tha An aricarrpeople have airadilion aI plularnnfopy and vatu rile-of ism;
Attachment 1]
October 5. 2005 ( Regular Day Maeling)
i Pia" 371
Mr. Bowerman agreed Thal the item needs to be considered al next week's mami.rrp.
Mr. Ciliroberg said he understands to & afd would I *e to see clarihoalrpn of Ilia following for
next week; rhw additional evergreen planting, preservation area maintenance, and IGwer Scale Crossing
Tar pedoslrians between Blocks 1 and 2. #io agreed #lal staff would deal with sepwale pages inslead of
an ontire iiew Plan.
M:- Dougherty a5kOp Ir the irdOnl 15 10 prpleCt th2 erllire drip 11rwe of the Trees.
M.F. Bowerman replied, -Yes.'
Mr- Davis suggested Thal the public hearing he COW inuad to next week 50 shal it 15 sUII a algal
public hearing ii needed.
Mellon was aiiereti by Me- Bowerman to r:anlihua this puhlirr hearing on ZMA, ?0(�4 -067 to
Oclober 12, 2W& The m.ohoo was aftonded " Mr- Wyani. ROY was called. ana to motion carried by
the lallovnrig recordeh vote,
AYES Mr Rooker, Ms. Thomas. Mr. Wyanl, Mr. Bowerman, Mr- Boyd and Mr. Deafer
NAYS None.
_ Agenda Item No. 26. $P -Zpo4 -062. Kenridge �Sign 944), Request to allow dovalopmenr of
mkilrilamity complex in accord wrSec 73,2,2,9 Of the Zoning Grid which allows Iar R -15 Lose rrl CO dislnct.
TM 60, Ps Z7 $ 278- contelrra 16,5 acs Loc on. N Side or (RI 256 W) Ivy Rd apprpk 112 mile W 01 Inlersec
pr Ivy P4 $ Rr 24-1250 By -pass. (The Gom p Plan designaies tNme Iambs as CHI" Service in
Norghborhood 7. Garwral usaga Tor Oriice 9arvice i5 fnixed 0*06! & re5idenual uses & is rewmmarlmml
for 6 -01.20 dufac, w.possiNe 0ensAlsr. pI up Ig 34 du+dG under planned dewalopmenl approach. Genaml
usage or the proposed ,3rnendm @f1t (SUP public hearing on request) IS residential. The oxisting Carriage
8 manor hwses hive the e0 on of being used for rasimrilial andror aliice use. the &nsgy of the
proposal amirMmaml rS 4 du.ac.l This properly is atso Iocaleb in EC. Samuel Mlow J71Sr. [This public
miring w" deferred from Sept$mbei t4, 2645.1
Mr. Gifmberg raparted Thal Ilie EGard Wreirecl thig requeSI at its East hearing in ordef for
condih)ns to be provided addressing roFlarnS dig"sSed ill the pubic hearing, He said scarf has
proved" 17 conCntionr ml leoting the discussion from Thai meeling; May have betrm agt&n -o to by the
applir,am.
Mr, i3oakei asked about Condilion No- 15 which says the owner agrees 10 violunlerdy c minbute a
sum of $3,000 cash for each new dwelling unil la the County for iundmg affordable hau5ing programs but
the money would be relurnad to Iho owner if it w918 nol span) whhin 10 year$- He wpndered how it coins
be determined whose money was Spent ifom a housing bush fund. Mr- Qavis waled that language is
lakon imam proper Ianguage, and there rs no re$50m for the "Menoe rf the 5oard and applicant agree it
snoukt not tro IHCIUdM.
Ms Thomas Said Iho- patking lane was inlended for ilia piirte use, not re8idential, acrd the
appkant has agreed to that- She added tftai rnpnCem heS been expressed about the way Condilion No- g
Ls wnsded, saiggesling That ME- language Say `extedors 01 Uocks' insleais of WsT "exleriors` So there's n
chance of a - chock*fed- aftoci-
Al lhis lone, the Chairman asked for public. comments,
Ms. Diana Strickler said she is Chaerman of the Rouse 250 Wesi TgSk f=orce appointed by the
Board To advise an trallic issues relaLieo 10 111119 Rouse 250 Wesl Corridor- One a1 the posil3ve aspeels of
the Kenrrtige proposal Is Me provision or a new entrance opposkte Sirdwood, which would enaVv an
infernal atCeSS read rmvplwirg four parcels pl land -the old Tom de Inslilule, Kenrid�0, White Gables, and
the Nahunsl Legal Research property- She sirgssed ins imp6ri21r1U 01 having the internal iratlic funneled
Io a single Iraliic p-wnl. Sho notamd trial when Whde Gables was appr#ugd, line county engineer or VDOT-
were given the vuwer to require While Cables to clam ps on Tian" 10 Floule 254 or r lverl II to fight• in,
right-oil access, Of soma 01ber modiricWi-on as daTerrnined by 1 he County. S4* added that The 7asK
Farca tielievos 1 here shputd nol be a separate arnranee hero-.
Mr. Davis staled Thai when the erlrranr a 15 constructed, the County can provrda rYUnee to adtacani
pro3pmy owners iflal Ihrfy need to Comerl the entrance He aided Ihat they do haVe the option of
mairiiaming it as a righl,in. nUM-out access
Mr. Ci4mb.erj� said adher W70T or I#ue County's Direeror ni E- gineenrxg mAy rr_+quup 1 hp applic.ani
Io close the exisbn4 entrance shown an the concaplual plan, coven i1 Ip a Neil -in, nghi •out only
antranceroxti, or requim shat other rw>CldiCllri0n5 be made Io the entrance.
Mr. Jell Werner addresspd the Board. Ha finds ihtr aifering al $3,040 per unil for awardable
housing
10 Ise repulsive, Fie said that a f{rw Week; age, Mr- Carta had pliereo $20,0W per Unit for 7
Oclaher 5. 2005 rFatguler pay 1.ileelinQ f
IPage 3B)
&velopmerst. Ha amphasum that devekrpars are payrng a token tae lb buy Them bark,n[o the market.
Thos is not wtiai shwid be dmm-
Mr. RWRL%r poin[ed out that this property is maned cornmerrial. This is a request for a special use
permit, nol a rezoning. He understands itre regtiuemeni could nol be imposed an the applicam if he had
not voluntarily ollered to do il. Wilh 6b units al $3,000 each, [hefe wpuid be $200,040 put inla the
Al lordab►a Housing Trust Fund. malching what the County has put in me fund this y0ar. A Simhw
housing In.ist iund is needed ID help people wllh dawn payrnents; somehmm pnca poinIS for homes make
it impomibla la offer a Jarger per unit orfenng. He had mover heard pf a per unil cor llibulron o1 $20,000 -
M5. Thomas pointed Wl Ihel $20,000 per unit was d4sou556d for the Fonlnine raparlments, bul
rhot did not happen. She w pressed her de,'sirP In ron mnra rnniritJkJJed tWJ1 in per unri allocations and in
the provision of afiardable homes. 1301. Ih15 rs a dillerenT si[uanon because it is a special use parrnil
raiher khan a mzonrng.
Mr. Rooker said the prepared Fontaine tontrrbubon *t $ 4,pOD was inlended ro be a replacem ant
aqr dffoTcJaWe units. and Iha number worked out to Gee elmoSt rder'liCdl To 1116 number herer
There bung no iurlher public Cornmenls, the mailer was placed Mime tha Board
Ms. Thames said the applrcanl has worked to meet me cuaidihon5 anSiag put Ci 1hP ranc .ms
axprossed hn lrre applicaaian process. She has concerns aboul the lack or aiiordable unite, and the
dasagn of tese proposed units which conlTicls wilts we Cornprahenstve Pian- She hopes the rest of the
pevo4opmanl Commulvey Is W walthing artd 1hai the Board does ttol Neel it is semnp a precedent and that
rr m always "rig l0 tie J appy wllh IhrS kind Ol design, She appreciates the preseivwinn of 1he front yard
and the tree conservation plan. She said there are many goad aspecls la ahis plan She then oftered
moilon 10 approve 5 P-20134-1352 subject to the condiltons rooammended by the Pranning Commission,
bul making the fallowing changes- In Condition No 1, the secarsd sentartee, Ignguage a0d Rion - `Parking
i*r the *trice use shall bd Ii mom la the area and rsumb2t of spacg5 Shown on the Conceptu al Plan ' For
Condiirnh No. g, i,rst sp+alerke, InrQuOQe addihpn- ',., the exlenpr5 ai blocks of 611ached single iamLly
buildings shall be either red brick, or while parnred IX Ck, with gable rpOts -' For Widmon NO. 15,
Oinlnala the Iarquege ='If this USh cgnlrit)ulron has not been exhausted by The County tar 1 h stated
pugMs(! within lei f10) years born the date al the laarl contribubm, all unexpended hinds shall M
relunded to the o mer,'
Mr Bowerman socondod the molten Roll was called. and the mOlicn pawed by the rollvmng
reowded vote.
AYES. Mr. i looker, Ms, Thomas, Mr. Wpm Mr. Boworrnan, Mr. Bayd and ftdr- Dnrder.
NAYS= None.
{NWO: The condOons of approval are sel cul in lull below. )
1. Tha approved final silo plan shall he in general amord Wqh the Conceptual PLnfl prepared
by McKee Carson, tlaled June 116. 21005. revision ('ODnceplual Plan'J. (See Altachment).
PaOdrig ror the office use shall be Ii m iteil to she area and number 0 gwes shown on
The Conceptual Plan. Ii ad dilianal parking is required tar iht Ohm USe. an amendm6rt1 01
This special parmat thafl be iequrreo,
Z. There shah be a minimum from yard of two hundred saventy -live J2751 leer between Itle
saulhemmost slruciure (Iha'Main HOUae ") drrd thre properly line 2adleCenl la Route 25d
as Shown an the Conceplual Plarl; aide and rear yards sWI be as shown on the
CortpePivat Plan:
$, All 51rg e15 an the praperty connecting la adjacent propartla8 its shown on the Conceptual
Plan s#sall ho cortslrueted by 1hti applicant No an urban Secaipn wrlh the intenl Thal such
streets an 11he properly COnmetli ng to adjacenl properlies will he built tD a3 standard
ConSiSienl wnh the connecli rig street on [he While Gables properly. Alt streets and
pedeslnan accesses shall be constructed to a standard aaceplable to tilt CCUnly
Engineer to accord aiicu with ine highlighted secilons of Atlac#wnem 114 rewisep and daled
Augusl 30, 2005, and irntialod as CT ;
4. The cdnneclinp road extending from the former ITT progwy {Tax N" Fro: Forcer 222 and
a,cron the Kenridge property 10 ilS emrance at Ivy Road, as shown on Me Conceptual
Plan. sfiall be established as a privale street in canfunchon Vnth the Iin$I s>JC)diwiwon plat
or sale plan. As a condiiron a! 1irtal subdivtsipn pldl fir Site plan approval, the appli cam
shall granN all oasemenls Deemed Tr eS5;1iy by the erector pl Comm Ltnq DOVIrlopm(!nl
10 a$$LJM 1110 t)Vhlic'S righl 10 a52 the CoruaeCting road for purposes of i ngrass % and
egress from Tax Map 60- parcel 28:
5. The appI cans shall comply w+th all raqu3raman1s of Ilre YDOT i orated Ju 4CSign and
corsstruclian o1 the em ranee 1* 1 he properly, as shown on the Contepl ual Plan- and shall
pay its pro rate share of ll12 cost for 5ipatizalYW t of this inlraStructu re conbibu[ed by
IfdfflC from the dewelppmenT as followcl
(a) prior to the issuance of a bu1I1JirnJ permit- Itre applicanN shall place funds in
escrow or provide o1 her seatrrily ('securuy) accept able to 1 he County i rt an
amount equal to its pro rala share of Nhrr cost of the Sign 11 which amolins shall be
Oclaber $, M5 rFtegutsr pay Meeling €
(page 39)
cdlculaied by iha alreeiar of Corn murliiy Devalopmarnr in rho year In which the
SeWnty & brow (IM. The security shag continue so Thal ri rs available to pay for
the root of ilia signal until ten 11 M years attar the dlato or approval of trus SPWJal
use pemtil; wonty provided that is nol in an entaresi- bearing acmuni shall be
annvOy ref*wgd, and the amount of ilia mcurriy shall bte agtusled each ya &r
accordtrrg CO the COnSU(nCr VfiCe irl02x, 05 determined t}y the 0ireclor Ci
Communily Development. Bnd
(b) 11, al any 11me until ten 310) years aiicr 1 he dale o= approval of lhis special use
permit. VDOT authorizes in walling 1 h installalron ai ilia signal, and VDOT and
It* Counlys Engrnoar approve the signal`s insiallalion beloro the applicani ras
ablained 3 tau iigrng pafmit, M-0 County may deimanG payment 01 Vii? AppliUnl's
pia rgtrl Share of the cost pr the irallic signal. and the opi>liCant 5hall pay ds pro
rata share pt the c4sl to the County wilhln Min, J30) days Of Mal CEUMaTrd.
6. Scroanirlg adjacent to the rOilrOad righl -of -wad' and along the west and east Sides of the
project shall tie prffyided and mairi.Mned as depicled on the Concepival Diagram of
PL nmeler Screen and PrkvacV Planli rbg, dalod May 12- 2t7C i. by Charlas J- Slick,
aliachad as A.Uuhment B. Thu conlinuous coargreen Items rrnl ed as Leyland Cypress
Hadga along the north, east ar4 west sides 101 Me prnlKi shall be in %Called ill len (1t]J
loot to twelve X121 feet in heighl ;filler lot grading twl prow 10 rs5vance 01 a building permit
laf any dwal ling unit consiruclion, the Leyland Cypress Hedge also shall be plswed on
a0l (s) root canters. Underground Irrlgeiion shetl be provided for all the ptamimp areas
Screening deemed acceplaWe to the Direclar al Communily DeYakvmenr shall be
provided adjacam io ilia railroad to miliqale the impact of This d awelopmanl an adjacenl
property and the impUt Or 1 he railroad on lhis devalopmanl.r
7 Prior to any GAera190rr Or tlemplivan a'. any bvildirrg, a reCannawanoo Gavel
4aCUmenrafion l0 include btwCk and while php*gryph� and Et bri9i amhit"lural
dascnpi,on shal I be provided to the salisfaclion or the Cauntys HtSlonC PrC5efval,0ry
Planner,
Regardless of lhq ownership of the open space and am [dnities, Ihay shalr be m ado
availablo for use toy alt rgSidOldral and c4mmerCiol unity in the develgpmenl;
13� ExCeo ror th45a dtiached Single family bulldmgs localed In Zone (A) the exleflars of
blacks a1 anChed single fgmity buibng5 Shall ha anther red I)nCk, oe while painted t}riCk,
with gsbFe ro4is, The OxleriOrS OI altaChOd Single reality buildings ill Zo n { Al Shull to red
brick wllh gable roars. The faslures in Zone (A shag be fevrewed and approyed by the
ARB daring its review of the sits plan for lhese builaings- Ttm exierims of dolached
re5iderlcai shall be ether red brick or painted whiio brick. Thasa mworlafs shall be
revi9wkd and approwed by itla Design Planner balore the issuance of a building permil
ipr thG budGing5 JSee Allachmeol C) :
10. Exterior road surlaces shall be ConSlrucled of either Copper or 5ynlhgCic. 5lale;
a 1 The now %alia and lawn home un115 Shalt mclude garden improvements, ganerally B5
dopctod on the Front Garden Diagram, dated August 2A, 2005, by Charles J. Slick,
Landscape Archrtecl i See Artashmonl D) Maintenance of These areas shall he p-r w'ded
tar and required by the Hameownor's Assouatiori which shall be set forth in the
Cawandrrts for lhis dovelopmenl- The decorative walls- slops and walks sliall be
cunwruried or either prick or Storle;
1.2, To ensure rho retention of the majarily ai the existing trees in the two tlandred sewenly,
live 12751 loaf from yard seftck descnbed in Condllion 2 llocaied between the main
housrr and me Route 250 Wast Enlrance Coafldarl, the app,eam shall submit for review
and approval Lry IIkr CuuMy's Ovsrgik Plannvi a tree cmiservabon plan prupared by a
scale cerlifieo arborrsl that meats the mqulfements of SKtion 32 -7.9.4 of the Zonerg
OWir,ante This plan Shall pg Q%QUIFgd for all er0Srp41 and sgdrment COMI'101 p121n5, Slit•
plans, and subdivision plals=
13. Tha sire wall Immediately adjiacen[ to Rouse 250 Wesl shalt be induded an all drawings
That inclutla i S COnlex t. All grading, road a lignments. tumi ng lanes, and
giher ilnpfoyemienl5 Shalt pC adrusted to insure ilial impacls to the wall only Include
elosiug Ghe exr5ting enlrance and &Wing d single enlrance, NOtes Shall be included on
the grading, silo plans ana subdivision plats that State, "The eKisirrg silo wall shall
remain. DistumancL shall be limited to Hie closure cl the existing enlral ice and I hfr
opening W the proposed enhance I nto the site.' Any changes to fN a wall shall be minunaf
and anlculaled to blend with the rrharaCter or lha existing wall io the saiislaction pl the
Art hiieclural Rewew Board Prior To the f55iianCe at any building permits in the Imal
block, [he slone pillars shatl be replaced ar the new erruance lrom Houle 250:
14- The design of all single iamdy aoiacheta resaencos, incluchng but nut limrtea lo colars-
ipohr*, 5Htn and iorindailrrin m aterial Salactanrs, shall M coordinaled wilh the
Archiledurar Review Dowd- &pproveo desdgr,s of the allan gd r 5*enlial uridr., OS
Uelermined by 1 h Design Planne7;
15. The owner agrees to vvuntorkly conrribuW a Sum of three lhousand dollars ($0,0001 Cash
par raw dwelling mil to the Gowily for funding allordable hausing progfams including
i ire Housinq Trust Fund]. The cash canlributlon shah be pa4 ar fine lime of the 3esu ance
of ifie Budding Perm 11 for Such nLw unil. The arceplance of lhiti 5PCC341 use permil by the
owner shall obligate the owner to make lhi5 canldbufion;
16 Pedasuian access diximed acceptable by the Director of Comm u n ay Dewelopmeril shall
he provided la the Manor Home and tha Carriage House; and
QCtober 5, ?W5 { Regular day MEniing)
Page 41? M
17- Wish the exceplion of the entfanm road, all streets wnthin the dowL loprnenl sha11 ooniarm
to lire neighborhood modet malrix onme4 appropn&1e b3' lha Direclor of Community
Uevelopmenl.
Agenda harm Na. 27, Prom the hoard Matters Nol Listed on the Agenda.
Ms- Ttiornas raieranoed the letter from Peacock Hill residents noting that they are in a leash Jaw
WEN31. afxi Jhg Pine tar violation is slilt 525, and has bedEr srnce 1573- She Said s h e would be happy Togo
ip the maximum allowed pJ $250, and dSketd staff t4 Come book with an amendment Mr, Davos painted
out Ihal a judge can irnpose dny amount of fine up to 5759,
Ms. Thomas Ihen Muted motion to authorize staff io drail an amendmanl Io County Coda
Section 4 -23313 to raise itie rneximum allowed fine la $250. Mt . Bowerman seconded the mabon, which
passed by the following recorded vote;
AYES: Mr. Rooker, ids, Ttinma$, Mr. Wyenl, ?Mir. Bowerman, W- P.4yp arro Mr, Dwrier,
NAYS, None-
Ms. Thomas said +n light Gr incf@asing luel oasts, she would suggest that th a Courtly share on pis
web page or wrouo press releases. lips for fedLizing ofiargy usage. Stye said M2. Lee Catlin has
alraapy. put logelher iLva pagas on enafgy efiiciency. She also encouf aged cowlly Slaeff to look al its
opeialgng tal both pon"rvation and gii �oienl tiSe 61 Cn9rgy. Mr. Tucker said he #ias spoken tin the new
GireCtor of General Services oWul this nrdll0r.
Mr. Tuekar said a Yn1Ong dDlagata and allwriate need is the ap"Wed 10 represent the County at
VAOo's Annual Cnnterence in Novemhar. Tare VA CO business meeting is Scheduled for Novffmber 15.
and he oSked the Board 10 Choose a rrremt*r 10 serve in this role- Mr. Rooker volunleerod 10 serve as
the vaterg delegate, and Mr- dornor agreed to serve as allernate.
Ur Tucker sai=d the City is moving toward eliminaling itie regw rernent I or ar, autpmotaite deca I
efleclive naxt calendar year. Hit said County slats is Suggesting that a decd tie iurni5hW that does not
have an expiration dais, or has a 1:011"igar ettKtive p-n4d, r4ting MW Gass can be IrrkeTed in some areas
when they d isplay no decal- Mr. Dorriet stated that he ES in savor pi deCOJs with no expiration dale.
tt +vas the ponseniM of the Doard that the County has a parrnanant or long term decal rather
Ilion alEm inating the decal all Ja gelher, The Board asked that slail bring back an arnendm enf >o lira
County Cade wish a pu#Iic nearing in December
Agenda Item No- 28. Adjourn. At 5'1)3 p.m., 1tEere 'n9 nip Lurifier bLi5iness to Came before the
Sian, the mealing was a0p med.
Chriirman
Yr�r y�.h
�r MIN=
•� t-C
STAFF PERSON: CLAUDETTE GRANT
PLANNING ING MMISSI I . MARCH 29, 005
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: APRIL 20,2005
P 2004-0052 I ENRIDGE
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant, Kenridge, LL C, is seeking approval for a special use permit to allow
development of an 80 unit residential complex on a 16.5 acre property located on Route 250 West across
from the Birdwood Golf Course. The residential units would include 4 detached units, fourteen (14) 34 foot
villas, twenty four (24) 42 foot villas, and thirty eight (3 8) 24 foot townhouses- The special use permit
would a] low for R -15, Residential use in a CO, Commercia10 ffice district. "i he site is located in are
Entrance Corridor_ The site is currently developed with a main house and 3 dependent buildings. The
buildings on the site are currently vacant. This rile was the former national lie adquarters for Kappa Sigma
Fraternity and a non - profit foundation. The building is designed for office use and includes an auditorium,
The property slopes down towards Route 250 and dawn towards the railroad tack in the rear ofthe site. The
proposed density is 4.8 dwelling LiniWacre. (See Attachment A).
An enclosed revised concept plan with a memo explains that the applicant submitted this new plait to
the County on Friday, March 18'x`, 2005. Staff has not had adequate time to review this plan prior to
Planning Commission review,
Pet itian: The petition is for approval of special use permit, in accordance with Section 23,12.9 ofthe
Zoning Ordinance to ail Dw for R -15, Residential use in a CO, Commercia] Offi ce zoning district. This
petition is requested for parcels described as flax Map 60, Parcels 27 and ?7B. The property is located in the
Samuel ]Nutter Magisterial District on the north side of Ivy Road [route 4250 West] approximately 1 �2 mile
west of the imevsectivn of ivy Road and the 291250 By -pass. The property is zoned C'O, Commercial Office,
and EC, Entrance Corridor and is designated Office Service in the Comprehensi ve Plan, in Ne ighborhood
Seven. (See Attachments B 8c Q.
Character of the Arts: The property is located on Ivy Road (Route 250) and faces the Birdwood
development. The property is bounded to the north by the C SX rail road and to the south by Route 250. 'file
site is adjacent to the former Institute for Textile Technology, which is located on the west and the White
gables residential development, which is currently being built on the east. The area in the vicinity ofthe
proposed development is largely institutional in nature. Man} office and commercial buildings are located
here. Rowcver, there are also several residential developments in the area, such as 1*arrninglen and Ednam,
I
Attachment F.
RECOMMENDATION. Staff has reviewed the proposal (as submitted prior to March t 8, 2005) for
conformity with the Comprehensive flan and the Zoning Ordinance and does not recommend approval of
the spociai use permit.
Plnnnine And Zoning Histotr : The history of the parcel is as follows; In 1980 this property was zoned Co
omm iari Office_ There is no other plarnning or zoning history on the property.
Comprehensive Purr and The Nei hhorhood Model. Requests for special use permits in the
Development Areas are assessed for confbrniity with the Neighborhood Model and the Laud Use Plan,
The Land Use Plan shows this area as Office S enicc in 1 eiehborhoad Severs. Land use in accordance with
the Comprehensive Plan would mean that Office Service uses generally include: "offrcc parks and rnixed-
we planned development emphasizing office uses, residential uses, and regional —scale research and office
uses }providing in form atIon and pro fessionaI sery ices to the County and the larger region. Limited
production activities• and marketing of products may be included." Considering the nature of the atea and
allowed uses under the office service designation, this proposal for the residentia] use in this location would
be generally consistent with the uses envisioned under this designation.
This portion of Neighborhood Seven is best known for a series of historic estates and homes, some of which
have been adapted for re -use as offices and sites for special events. A substantial amount of irrfil l residential
and office use has occurred around these older structures, generally maintaining the original character of the
area. Several relatively undeveloped University of Virginia properties are located on the south side of route
250 West, and could influence the character of the area significantly if they were developed more
intensively. The University lras not identified any spec fic plans for these properties at the present time.
One of the recot' mcndatians stated in the Comprehensive Plan for Neighborhood Seven that relates
specifically to this development is "Development plans along Route 250 West are to be sensitive to its status
as an Entrance Corridor Roadway"
The Open Space Plan shows a surveyed historic site on this property. The plan also shows this property is
located in an Entrance Corridor. Thcrc are some slopes that are greater than 25% on this property. The
neighborhood boundary for Neighborhood 7 traverses this site which is also the boundary for a water supply
watershed.
The proposed project's accordance with the twelve principles for development in the Neighborhood model
are provided below:
Pedestrian
Pedestt ion orientation and connections are not shown on the plan.
Orientation
This principle is not being met,
Neighborhood
Without seeing any pedestrian connections or a landscape plan, it is
Friendly Streets
difficult to know if this principle is being met.
and Paths
Interconnected
The applicant shows a proposed road connection to the adjacent
Streets and
White Gables development. The applicant has also created a new
Transportation
entrance that lines up with the Birdwood development across route
Networks
254. This princ i lc is beirw g met.
Parks and Open
The concept plan does not Iabellshow any parks or open space. This
Space
principle does not apRear to be met.
Neighborhood
Nearby neighborhood centers that are not located directly in
Centers
the proposed development are the Bellair Market and Bur's
Head Inn area.
Building rind
The main house located on this site is a historic resource of in1portant
Spaces of Human
significance to this corridor. The Architectural l cview Board
Scale
suggested that this building as well as others on the property should
be protected. The proposed buildings should be in beeping with the
existing buildings on the site or, i f they differ, some bisffers should be
created to differentiate the existing buildings and architecture from
the proposed new buildings on the site. Currently. the plan does not
address these issues. The Architectural Review Board staff report and
Action Memo ( Attachn,ient F) address the need for these items to be
incorporated into the plan,
Relegated Larking
Parking is not clearly delineated on the plan. It is diMeuIt to know if
all the required parking is relegated or not. it also appears as if
several of the residences would b� backing out into the road.
Mixture of Lases
There are three existing buildings on the site for which the proposed
use is unclear. It is difficult to know if this princ i pie is bein g met.
Mixture of Housing
The plan shows a mixture of tow thouses, detached single
T vpes and
family units, and villas, which addresses the mixture of
Affordability
housing adequately. No affordable units have been identified
and affordability goals do not appear to be met.
Redevelopment
The potential historic significance of this site should have
some inruence on the redevelopment of the site, This site is
being proposed for redevelopment through more intensive
developnicnt of the property. Treatment of the existing
historic s[ructures is important to redevel opmen I of this site.
Site Planning that
There are some concerns regarding critical slope which need
Respects Terrain
to be addressed. A waiver to develop on critical slopes
appears necessary. Staff has asked the applicant to provide a
critical slopes waiver request, however, the applicant has not
provided one.
Clear Sauudarles
The northern boundary of the site is the CS X railroad tract. The Dural
witlb the Rural
Area boundary traverses this site and is also the Neighborhood 7 and
Areas
water supply watershed bound
En6necriniz Analysis, The County's Engineering staff has reviewed this request for engineering issues
related to health, safety, and wet fare requirements. The reviewing engineer has said the following:
1. The storm water management concept does not appear adequate to meet the requirements of the Water
Protection Ordinance. preliminary removal rate computations should be performed For each site
drainage arm and facilities chosen to meet the target removal rates from the selections in the County
Design Standards Manual or the Virginia Stormwat er M anagernent Handbook. Preliminary sizing
computations are available for most selections. As much site area as possible should be captured.
Currently much of the site does not appear to be captured_
2. Frontage improvements on Rt. 250 should be provided, or a study provided to demonstrate that right and
left turn lanes and signal improvements on Rt. 250 will not be necessary. The plan should indicate that
existing entrances on RL. 250 are to be removed.
3. A waiver to develop on crit ical slopes appears necessary. A waiver request, with a plan detailing areas
of critical slopes and disturbances is requested with the special use permit,
4. There are additional issues related to access or the use of pri vate streets in this development which need
to be addressed.
4
5. Prmposed grading of the site has not been adequately addressed.
oninP, Co nside rations: Zoning has commented as follows:
1. There is a "275' White Gables Building SeLbarV noted on the proposed development plan_ is the
applicant suggesting that we condition this S P to rnaintain that building setback: That would ine the
only way to insure future enforcerrrcnt, [Zoning recommends coed 1tioning other setbacks as
described below.]
2. This revision makes clear the 4 single family detached harries but does not identify the uses that are
proposed for the existing structures, These uses are critically important to the development. Please
have the applicant identify,. them. On the previous plan I was able to comment on parking since
office use was identified. With no use, l cannot evaluate parking for these structures.
3. Regarding the parking for the residences, al dwellings with mare than one bedroom are required to
provide two off-street parking spaces. [Housing for the elderly is an exception,] In addition, if
parking is provided on individual home lots, rather than in parking lots or bays that are shared by all
units in the development, them one guest space per four units must be provided. As drawn, I cannot
toll if these requirements are met.
4. lfthis development is to be subdivided later, we need to know that now so that we can address issues
such as "frontage" and parking. Please have the applicant comment on the intention.
5_ On both the "existing conditions" and the "proposed developmenC' sheets, there is an unidernifaed
area of variable width from 25' to 40' immediately adjacent to the CSX tracks at the rear of this
project. On the adjacent parcel to the east, it appears that there is a 20' sewer easement, but it does
not appear to extend onto this parcel. F11 case have the applicant explain both items,
Several comments from the Zoning staffs previous memo were either not addresser) with submitted
revisions or are simply information that staff or the applicant need to keep in m1nd. Zoning staff will
repeat those here;
I , This concept plan needs to denote the following. tax map and parcel number, zoning district, existing
and proposed huilding height limit, and the acreage and density of the residential area. Jar additionz.
the 5'P le number should appear in Me nomy and a north arrow Aould be added-
1 Building heights. buildings in the CO district can be up to 35-feet without incurring any additional
setbacks — measured per the defir1ition of "building, height of in section 3 of the Zoning Ordinance_
€f a building is taller than 35 -feet, it roust be setback an additional two feet for every foot above the
35 -foot limit and in addition to the basic setback. Therefore, if any of the proposed buildings exceed
35 feet, additional setbacks may have to be imposed.
3. Setbacks. Although there are no required setbacks between the CO zoning districts on tither side of
this Parcel, you may want to consider conditioning some setbacks so that the basic planning
5
principles of light, air, convenience of access and safety can be enforced. We would recommend at
Icast setting primary structure, accessory structure and parking setbacks From the perimeter property
lines of the existing parcel. For example, you could use the l Afoot parking and 15 -foot primary
structure and the 6 -foot accessory structure setbacks c most of our residential zoning districts. If the
internal roads are to be public, you may want at a minimum, some required setback from the roads.
4. Parking: Accessory parking under any structure with a primary use such as office or residence does
riot require any additional approval. FIo cve1r, parking as the primary use in a structure does require
a separate special use permit. [Parking under u sip-moure does aat appear err this revizion. but keep
this in n end f
5, Knowing that there is a community desire to save the large trees can the parcels adjacent to lit. 254 in
this area, we hope that the applicant has considered this. if trees are to be saved, we would like to
have that noted on this plan as well as the later site plans. A tree conservation plan will be required
with the site plan review.
Anv Other A envies that .have important comatents:
Please see Attachment D for Historic Resources comments.
Please see Attachment E for Current Development Comments.
Please see Attachment F for Architectural review Board Staff Rcporl and Action Memo, dated March 7,
2005.
STAFF COMMENT:
Section 31.2.4. l of the Zoning Ordinance below requires that special use permits be assessed as foI lows:
Will the use be of substantial detriment to adjacent propene?
Currently the buildings on the site are vacant. It is ;posted for Commercial Office; however, the proposed use
is an 80 unit residential development. With a residential complex of this size, it is anticipated that there will
be an increase in traffic on Ivy+ Road. Kenni dge will be consistent with other developments along this portion
of the .Ivy road corridor in its residential use and targeted upscale market.
The applicant for the White Gables project has submitted via electronic mail a letter (Attachment C) in
support of this development. T#te Chair cfthe County- appointed Route 254 West Task. Force submitted the
Task Force's concerns (Attachment H) regarding traffic. There does not appear to be a future connection to
the former Institute for Tex tiIc Technology bui lding which would allow further interconnection oFproperties
fronting 250 West and thus enable a consolidated entrance for those properties. A potential purchaser of ont:
of the condom iniurn units in the White Cables development has sent the following concern by electronic
rnai is the purchaser hap es the Planning Commission will take into consideration the potential impact of
6
Kenridge on the wesl- facing view of the White. Gables developmenI- The purchaser suggests that a much
wider buffer area would benefit both l enridge and White Gables. However, residential uses, such as the one
described in this project and the White Gables development, do not require huffering-
Wi I I t1,e character of the zoning, district change with this use?
The character oFthe zoning district will change in that the area will be more densely developed with
residential development- Although this parcel is zoned Commercial Office (CO), residential uses are
allowed in this district with a special use permit and are cons Went with existing uses in the district. Density
created on this site appears to be similar to the Ednam development. Therefore, staff feels the residential
concept would be in keeping with the emerging character of this district. However, imensity and character
impacts have not been fully resolved at this time.
Will the use be in harmony+ with the purpose and intent ol'_ the .zoning ordinance?
`T'1ie Commercial Office District allows the development of adin i n i strative, business and professional offices
and supporting accessory uses and facilities. This district is intended as a transition between residential
districts and other more intensive commercial and industrial districts- The Commercial 0ffiice District
allows residential R -1 S by special use perntiL. The general concept of the proposal is acceptable, but
concerns are present relating to the scale and character of the proposed development.
Will the use be in harmony wiLb the uses permitted by fight in the district?
By -right uses in the Commercial Office (CO) district are offices, finapcial institutions, churches, cesnetcries,
libraries, museums, accessory uses and structures such as eating establishments, newsstands, establishments
for the sale of office supplies and service of office equipment, data processing services, central reproduction
and rnaiIing services, medicaVdental services and related businesses, sal elservice of goods, utilities such as
electric, gas, oil and carrtrrrtfnication facilities, excluding tower structures and including poles, lines,
transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service acrd owned and operated by
a public utility, public uses and buildings, temporary eonstructien uses, dwellings, temporary nonresidential
rnobiIc homes, day care, child care or nursery facility, starmwater inanagement facilities, and Tier 1 and Tier
ll personal wireless service facilities. The residential use of this proposal will be in harmony with the uses
permitted in the Commercial Office District. Residential uses are considered to be in harmony with these
arses provided there are no adverse impacts among the uses.
Will the use co mp ly with the additional regulations provided in Section 5,0 of this ordinance?
There are no additional regulations.
Will the pub I is health, safety and eu neral wel fare of the community be protected if the use is auaroved?
7
W1thout adequate in forma(lon it is very diMcult to determine if the public health, safety and general welfare
of the community is being protected should this use be approved. Critical slopes appear to be disturbed on
this site, but the applicant has not shown or stated to what extent this will occur. tormwater management
has not been adequately addressed, There are some traffic concerns relating to public safety because this
section of the Route 250 West corridor carries a high volume of traffic, has many access points, exhibits
hwizantaI and vertical curvature problems, and has three traffic signals. In spite of these, difficulties, the
applicant has agreed to provide access coaneetion to the adjacent White Gables development and nearby
National Legal Research. The ,applicant has also agreed to align the Kenridge access with the existing golf
course entrance at the Birdwood developirmcm across the street, it is anticipated that VDOT will allow a
traffic signal at this new entrance when warranted. Current Iy VDOT has found tbal a traffic signal is not
warranted at this location, When a traffic signal is warranted VDOT anticipates that the developers} of the
affected properties will share in the cost for installation. Approval of the While Gables special use pcmiit
application was conditioned on several items, including the applicant being responsible for the cost of
traffic signal and its MEtallalior# at the intersection of Route 250 West and an access point serving the
property approved by VD OT and the County's Director of Engineering. The applicant for Kenridge has not
formally agreed to participate in the cost of the signal, but through discussions has agreed that this would be
of interest as the project develops and when the traffic signal is warranted.
Fiscal impart to public facilities — A fiscal impact analysis is provided as Attachment I,
As noted in the analysis, them are many other factors to take into account when using the fiscal unpack
information.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request;
1. A shared interconnected road is being shown on the plan between two high density developments,
?. The entrance to the property will be in alignment with the Birdwood developm nt, making it easier
for a future traffic signal to be installed at this Iocalion.
3. Several of the historic resourceslbuiIdings will be retained.
4. The front setback is equal to that ofthc adjacent While Gables development.
Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this request:
Adequate information has not been provided relative to critical slopes, pedestrian connections,
amenities and open space, stormwateir management, grading and zoning.
Site design and building locations need to relate to the land form and (lie existing historic resources
s
on the property.
3. The existing trees on the site arc signi ficattt. There is a need for a tree inventory and landscape plan.
4. Affordable housing has not been addressed.
S. There is a lack of descriptian for the use of the existirig buildings on the site.
6, Lack of interconnection for the former Institute for Textile Teclnology property.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Staff is not able to recommend approval at this time because the following issues have not been addressed
and are not resolved=
1. The engineering and zoning comments prcviously noted in the staff report.
2. The attached Historic Resources, Current Dcvelopment, and Architectural Review Board comments.
3. The attached Route 250 Nest Task Farce interconnection w mnent regarding the adjacent former
Institute for Textile Technology property.
4. Pedestrian connections have not been adequately shown on the plan.
5. Amenities and open space have not been adequately shown on the plan.
b. affordable housing has not been adequately addressed_
At this time, staff is not able to offer any conditions of approval should the Planning Commission or Board
of Supervisors decide to approve this special USe permit. There are severa] unanswered issues and concerns
regarding this application that, depending on haw they are addressed, would dictate the substance of any
conditions. Staff recommends deferral of action regarding this request until the issues as noted in this report
are adequately resolved.
ATTACHMENTS-
A — Concept Plant
B — Tay, Map
— Vicinity Map
D - Memo from Julie Mahon dated February 24, 2GO5
E - Memo from Bill Fritz dated February 24, 2005
F - Architectural R eview Board StaITReport and Action Memo dated March 7, 2005
- Electronic Merno from V itto Cetta dated Dec fiber 9, 20G4
H - Electronic Letter from Diana Strickler dated December 13, 2004
I - Memo from Steven Allshouse dated March 16, 200
4
fi
��W
COUNTY OF ALBEINIARLE
1)upartmcut of Community CDevelupment
401 McIntire Road, Room 227
harlot Few ilie, Virginia 22911:4596
l "hone (434) 296-5823 Fax (434 ) 972 -4126
October 13, 2005
Stevea - Blailte, Esquire
123 East Main Street
Charlottes►+ it le, V A '' 2902
orrtrnurril Development DepartmLant
Films C} — 11, ",
Apptoved by the Berard of SuperviSors
Date
r
PLE : 5P 2004 -052 Ken ridge (Sign #40) - Tut Map 60 Pareels 27 send 2 7 B
bear Mr. Blaine_
On October S. 2005. the Albemarle County Hoard of Supervisors took action on SP 2004 -05? to allow
development of a muItifarnily complex in accordance with Section 23,119 c the Zoning Ordinance, an
Tax Map 60 )Parcels 27 and 27B in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. This special use permit was
approved based c the following conditions:
I . The approved final site plan shall be in genaral accord with the Conceptual plan prepared by
L;ec Carson, dated June 16. 2005 revision ("Conceptual Plata "). (See Attachment)-
Parking for the office use shall be Iimited to the area and number of spaces shown ort
the Conceptual Plan. If additional parking is required for the office use, an amendment of this
special permit shall be required;
?, There shall be a minimum front yard of two hundred seventy five (275) feet between tite
southcm -most structure (the "Main mouse ") and the property I ine adjacent to Route 250 as
shown on the C;oncepWai Flan; We and rear yards shall be as shown on the Conceptual Plan;
3. All streets on the property connecting to adjacent }properties as shown on the Conceptual Plan
shill be constructed by the applicant to an urban section with the intent that such streets on the
property cannecting to adjacent propenic� w ill be built to a standard consistent with the
evnnecting street on the White Gables property, All streets and pede5triEm accesses shat I be
constructed to a standard acceptable to the C:oun13� Engineer in accordance with the highlighted
sections of Attachment A. revised altd dated Augusl 30. 2005 and initialed as CTG;
4. The connecting road extending from the former ITT property Ja4 flap 60. )parce12 8) and
across the Kenridge property to its entrance at Ivy Road, as shown on the Conceptual PIan,
shall be established as a private street in conjunction with the final subdivision plat or site
plan- As a condition of final subdivision plat ar site plan approval, the applicant shall grant all
basements deemed necessary by the Director of Cornm Lin ity Development to assure the pub] 1A
right to use the cormecting road for purposes c ingress to acrd egress from Tax Map 60, Parcel
2.8;
5. The applicant shall comply with all tequiremcnts of the VDOT related to design and
construction of the entrance to the property, as shown ort the Conceptual Plan, and shall pay its
Atlachment I~
SP 204 -052 Kenrtdge
Page 2 ol-4
Oetabur 13, 2045
pro rata share oFthc cost for s i gna I i zat ion c this inFrasstructure contributed by traffic; From the
development as follows:
(a) Prior to the issuance of building permit, the applicant shall place Funds in escrow or
provide other security ( "security ") acceptable tU the County in an amount equal to its pro
rata share c the cost aF the signal which amount shall be culcuiated by the Director of
community Devejopment ire the year in which the security is provided. The security shall
continue so tbm it is available to pay for the Cost of the signal until ten (10) years after the
date of approval o f t3ris special use permit; security provided that is not in ate interest- hearing
account shall bu annuaiiy renewed, and the amount oFllie security shall be adjusted each
year according to the c nsu.—.-r pri:.e index. ar dYtVrt3tlns:d by the Director of Gomm+,l!,ity
Development, and
(b) If, at any time until ten (10) years after the date of approval of this special use permit,
VDOT authorizes in writing the installation of the signal, and V DOT and the Coll nty's
Engineer approve the signal's i nsta I lat io n he fore the applicant has obtained a building
perrtiit, the County may demand payment of the applicant's pro rata share of the Cost of the
traffic signal, and the applicant shall pay its pro rata share of the cost w the County within
thirty (3 0) days of that demand.
6. Screening adjacent to the railroad right -of - -way and along the west and east sides of the pro'Ecc1
shun be provided Arid maintained as depicted on the ConcegivaI Diagram of Perimeter Semen
and Privacy Planting, dated May 12, 2005, by Charles J. Stick, attached as Attachment B, The
continuots evergreen trees noted as Leyland Cypress Hedge along the north, east and west sides
of the project stealI be installed at ten (10) feet to twelve (12) feet in height after lot grading but
prior to issuance of a building permit for any dwelling unit construction_ The Leyland Cypress
Hedge also shall be planted on eight (8) foot Centers. Underground irrigation shale be provided
for all the planting areas. Screening deemed acceptable to the Director of Community
Development shall be provided adjacent to the railroad to mitigate the impact ofthis
development on adjacent property and the impact of the railroad on this dt;velopmt:nt;
7. Prior to any alteration or demolition of any bui Iding, a reconnaissance level documentation to
include black and white photographs and a brief architectural description shaII be provided to [lie
satisfaction of the County's Historic Preservation FIanner;
8. Regardless of the ownership of the open space and amen itiim they shall be made avai Iable for
use by all residential and coirtrnercial units in the development;
9. Except for those attached single family buildings located in Zone (A) the exteriors of blocks of
attached single family buildings shall be either red brick, or white painted brick, with gable
roofs. The exteriors of attached single family buildings in Zone (A) shall be red brick w it gable
roofs. The Features in ,'done (A) shall be reviewed and approved by the A RB during its review of
the site plan fur these building& The exteriors of detached residences shall be either red brick or
painted white brick. These materials shale be reviewed and approved by the Design Planner
before the issuance of a building permit for the bui Idings (See Attsuhntent C);
10, Exterior roof surfaces shall be constructed of either copper or synthetic slate;
i l . The new villa and town home units shall include garden improvements, generally as depicted on
the Front Garden Diagram. dated August 24, 2005, by Charles J. Stick, landscape Architect.
(Sec Attachrrlent D). Maimenance of these areas shall be provided for and required by the
Homeowner's Association which shall be set forth in the Covenants for this development. The
decorative walls, sreps and walks shah be constructed of either brick or stone;
12. To ensrsre ft retention of the rnt Ljarity of the existing trees in the two hundred seventy -five
(?75) font front yard setback described iTt Condition located lactween the main house and the
}route 250 West ERirance Corridor), the applicant shall submit for review and approval by the
County's Design Planner a tree conservation plan }prepared by a state certified arbarist that meets
SP 2004 -052 Ken ridge
Page 3 of 4
October 13, 005
the requirements of Section 32.7.9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, This plan shat l be requ ire for all
erasion and sediment control plans, site plans, and subdI%,isiuir plus;
13_ The site wa11 immcdi air ly adjaceni to Romic 250 West shall be inc Iudud on a I I drawings that
include its context. All grading, road alignments, turn ing lanes+ and other improvements s I i all be
adiu%ed to inSUM tkat hnpacts to tite wal l oitly include closing the existing entrance and adding
a single entrance_ Notes shrill be included on the grxdtng, site plans and subdivision plats
that stale, "The existing site wall shall rernain. Disturbance shall he Iimitcd to the closure of the
existing entrance and 11te opening of the propos;;d entrance info the site_" An y changes to the
wall shall hL ininimal and artic Lila lud to blettcl with the eharactct of the existttag waIi to the
sali ;lic �' ri;F.itccturl! R - -v, -- w Board. Prior to the issuance of nmy t vildin1, permits in
the final block, the stotic pillars shall be rep1=:d at the new entrance from Route 250.
14_ The design of all single family detached residences, inc Itrtiing btat not limited I colors, roofing.
siding and foundation material selections, shall be coordinated with the ArchiiecwraI Review
Board - approved designs of the attached residential units, as determined by the Design Planner:
15, The owner agrees to voluntarily contribute a sum of three thousand dollars ($3,000) cash per
new dwelling unit to the County For funding affordable housing programs Iincluding, the
Housing Trust Ftind]. The cash contribution slialI bie paid at the time of the issuance of the
Building Permit for such new unit. The acceptance of this special use perm it by the ownt:r shall
obligate the owner to make this contribution;
16. Pedestrian access deemed acceptable by the Di recta r of Community Development shall be
providad to the Manor !-come and the Cartiagr, Rouse: and
17. With the exception of the entrance road, all streets within the deveiopmenl shaII conform to the
neighborhood model matrix deemed appropriate by the Director of Community. Development,
Please be advised that although the Allaetrtarle County Board of Supervisors took action on the
project noted above, no uses on the property as approved move may lawfully begin until all
applicable approvals have been received and conditions have been met. 'rims includes:
• compliance with conditions of the SPECIAL USE PERMIT;
• approval of and compliance with SITE PLAN andfar SUBDIVISION(S), and
• approval of ZONING COMPLIANCE CLEARANCE.
Cn the event that the use. structure or activity for wh ick this special use permit is issued is not commenced
within twenty -four (24) months from the date of Board approval, it shat I be deemed abandoned and the
permit ierrninatcd. The term "commenced" means "construction of any structure accessary to the Lase of
the permit_„
If you have questions or comments regarding the above -noted action. please do not hesttOtt, to contact
Keith Lancaster at 296 -583?.
Sincerely,
4 5
Vk+ayne 0
Dirtwctor of Planning
SP 2004 -052 Kentidge
Page 4 of 4
October 13, 2005
WCYaer
Cc: Kappa Sigma h4 ern or61 Foundation C/O T F Lang Executor Director
Pmb 106 3004 S Hulen wile 124
Ft Worth, TX 76109-1918
Amelia McCulley
Tex Weaver
CF,uck Proctor
Keith Lancaster
:I-.. „tI
A'I-IA HNIL:NT
. r
Dor rnurnl Develop en! Department _
' WtfiE G1f!54'MINILA� 4
A roved by the Board of Supervisory L
Date �• r. '#Y, • +,, - _ < r�FSlbjtx ♦:f
r =may'. t'R [:P -'1"I+ K+ r
`AF4f1Rf rri �,// F , r �' ' #r�` rt*. f,k - -` .I ie'. `e,-LAz r [ ' 1P � /ir F if fr+/ AL
f +'PF rxYTr + f r "OX ]A• f # rFekJ2M ?j+ FGN G'RUNTRY :I L- 5 Sys.
.''+ •' f ,Ir hr f , -fir ' + f+� `
x'r'l�Cb-r 'J � n
+Jf7r �/ r 5 L i S•iy i � - � Y �'I - ' � I .+ �i� A.�>
ir�'•+!�i
� * � f f � # , i t I tr 'I _ � I � + � �+ hL x f F e ' � + ; I r r• QI {
i 4• I Y r JF I 4 r44 l R1'�FCIr AReF' f, �L ' I °.Ny�C41'Ej.: y * F ,f •
/ �r i •L {i t t �l� 1 ' f r' - -_ _ 1 ' 4 5 I.:t y
� I ^�a,{:�Vhu' y
Y -} L L
0 err _ F 'y 5
r r y err f . r ' -W Sw4&wS- N.:L" nGL' —- t 5 i 111 rr' 1 iY
1'r � .yyg'�►_r11`;�+iG[�VG� =r.'� Jf,
R7ut,RQ,'4p� - i iJrrJ'� } �f F Fxsrr+F3•':ARRa''"ai !'SG`,73�'.� i ;x �. 4y~x`y 'ff r:
' }J',rrrJ� {! '��lJ! ,�y!j k - . Fir � 'Alt' y'I mot' =7Y,
Wr RL� YA1� tlEl4 Y'r 1. I ' /; :*i ' /�.+/G yyy� laR rl: SJD: f
Y 5
:•
1. Y i
. Nr /+ f. II, Y5 •••�
TO
�__11 '&V - }
Jr lira' r+ l 4# O.'.E ,.[SI: . '_ . - 'i a ' .I i i •I'
frrr r r 'I 5 55 11L 'I {'• i �5 ' I� �I L y' 7l 1 }It9' ' uA�_L r r`It• _
rrrJ rr +� t ' { i i r'� 1 5 5 I .I�'
t 'i 6}5 FSz_ M .5'JSIf111
` r I t r y l{ I I y 5 v ` `4�"Y y LSy J.� ' - 5 r'__ _ . _ ,`"h'►•� '�; I a{ L + ROAD L''y r''' L�J �4 [y ,�, �+� p {�T r''
i r rF + i f r " 1 5 i i 7�S!5� - 5 " f' Y 5 r'; - ROAD CHARACTERS TIC
r - / +r,I R4'14pfA,". JL�1P1 3'L r+ f T ----
.F� r .' yx-
rl' [r \ , 4 '. _ e , .' r URBAN SECTION
rr +r ' f' 1 1 {r ~�
Sa r
I a , r I 5 4 i ' _ ;�I - -y rsrndM 14, 4� r RURAL SEC -BON
[
r
°J �JI- 4 *r l r{
fr3?nld i+fFN1i ' S''x • 5 yt X51 •t 55 1 tY 'S \xis I •^A - 4 -{'� , r �' �'k +Y ': +1.hi'! T
'�161!'A'FiL.IG 1 'l 9M h *4 -t. r Li y Y'YI Y 5 5 �� '�' { , . �,y •�J r•
5fww Ke 8T'%F p -
3" Ifi�'L L'QflS r _ I r r NOW P W.Y
TOCr r NIIM r 51NN -C FAMtr r 5 L)- t
it '{ NLW iY'M YTMr AZ mF—D 1 a UWI$
+
1II r �� •- r+ r Ff 4 �. w ' x frr 'I y_ #� r+ Nl4Y' ' Y411 SNL S J4fkCKM J6 WJUT3
r
"UTA- cc- JNIT'b
r _ � —_ � ' �� A� YF�M1W �Jq�,�t•ry ���
'I rI I _ - . I' r 18-+ aif 1r1} �T[r.• L + _ ': S I AN .�151 4N
TINi b.+�4F+4
I+ , afl,f +f -- ,__..,— �_ - -=�1 _- _ F "` — - _ j.5 ' �' f . wr+ r i ■ G}YRRIFkic" t+USEPL�-
`,% n F ,
I,[I r f
III Y s5 _� ! # r _�-- r ++ ���- D0'+ww e�•r,CJ.:"b'rfwAk TO -it �'lI:TfFS r� r f
it i i 'I Y ' �i i i3i 1 ifu,.kAJ J I/} a =�— � � ! F` # =• I - ' �r ` r - - '49 + 4% W QNB, �+i . ''+AL'rr� Jr
I I f I { Y s , I I r f r { f ' '�I:LA LM- �' � - ' [ ?} S'1t1'E New) 7h� iLL4505 �0 I#A4� AL + r
[ a 1 I { L I r - r'r� y' —� ,. _ a f ff�iM7 144w -.Y,Lr fJy: # r a
rDC i 1
RQ'Sp T { 7RJt t�JIF 'y
; i iER :� I 1F 7)C7uA yR OL,-AE 05f%+E -=P Tip St M%g4II W. VWT
PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN
Sfi Le 1" = 50'-0'
KENRU G
& GRI=TT
$c f�lGCa
,._
wlx�rtrfecrs Pe
JONE 16. 200
A -I
_ i1 �..sr 4 .' r1 ern! re,- 0 0%
ommurlitY Development Department
Pilex
�4 ed by the r�o�rcf of up�rvisO�s � r�
1)371 I
101109UN2 • Mari ter
la"WNGTON COUNTRY CLUB
#1 hUA1t Y,51LT}7C1lIMh
�grlri� xnviR v:a n r:
UANA TAV4
4
AID
Z _�
�L
R)PMEEC ll--r lfLAt- QIJAKTERS :>
P'R OP(-)SF.T) DEVELOPMENT PLAN
sr —ALE: SCALE, 1" a -w-or
Vti-IIIE GABLES CONDOMINIUMS
- -NXWAL FW WS-M H" MA MT
�IjlpAENT TID 6O 01W OW 91M
f,o D 5lAmoMMS FOR A TRAMIC Vkti.11YE ISM -20M
— FUTLPFIE COME" RWh TO E£ CEMQNU is VCVT
KftK STU161W- FWA LOCATOM TW
ti CON EMAL DIAGRAM
OF
PERIMETER SCREEN AND
PRIVACY PLANT N
PMWVXD Tx - N T
r-n NFri X TAWED 1741FSES SNplr rAYILT 'S UNITS
NEW 24" WDE TO M K& ES AT AM-1 i} 12 i1Ners
NEW 42' WYE 41LLAS ATTACHED 49 L"T5
10TAL e9 UfM75
PRCP4'M 00CM - OHM
EWSTWO MANSM 9DOO SF *%-
CARRUCE HOUSE 30M 5F
N
DArIGETT
KENTUDGE 8e Cf R I CsCi
_ 4RQ17i'Et�S PC
MAT 12. 2M5
A -1
nlixtemTmm 3LrimC ia.Aw&. lug,%•
6vaYl�Y47; i rmn lA %"vL a7iR cvplEpL
i it
p4 x NL iTl via w, Ebzmx& I*Jn
tMU3Ek %Rt FL+rLWKKrM 71UR!{T9 W1
wNTnnxxt►srixCmnRpG T1t6AMnAND
CHARLES J.". CK
LAN AAEAItC (nWT
C41huAffMVLLLti91t KA
4 L&V�I&X
PMWVXD Tx - N T
r-n NFri X TAWED 1741FSES SNplr rAYILT 'S UNITS
NEW 24" WDE TO M K& ES AT AM-1 i} 12 i1Ners
NEW 42' WYE 41LLAS ATTACHED 49 L"T5
10TAL e9 UfM75
PRCP4'M 00CM - OHM
EWSTWO MANSM 9DOO SF *%-
CARRUCE HOUSE 30M 5F
N
DArIGETT
KENTUDGE 8e Cf R I CsCi
_ 4RQ17i'Et�S PC
MAT 12. 2M5
A -1
AT rA f ?ME-NT C
Communily Develol;fnent Depar(ment
File# , - ;
Approved by the Board of Supervisors
Date
ua�� A—.
PUfVure - Planner -'
ATTACHMENT D
u
Fly t
Y� y
j
d
U
T R E S T f
Ic
Yri 4 -S
'S•
�I �
-fir
���r�
^
u
Fly t
Y� y
j
d
U
T R E S T f
Ic