HomeMy WebLinkAbout2008-04-09
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FIN A L
APRIL 9, 2008
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
1. 2:00 p.m. - Call to Order.
2. Discussion and Adoption of FY 2008/09 Capital and Operating Budgets.
3. Discussion and Adoption of Calendar Year 2008 Tax Rates.
4. Work Session: Community Development Fees - Building Regulations and Water Protection Ordinances.
5. Discussion: Land Use Tax Deferral.
6. Recess.
6:00 P.M.
LANE AUDITORIUM
7. Call to Order.
8. Pledge of Allegiance.
9. Moment of Silence.
10. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
11. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
12. Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
13. PROJECT: SP-2005-0028. Biscuit Run #2 (Mid) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #2
(Mid), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units proposed with special use
permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcels 90-5,90-60.981 Old Lynchburg Road, 951 Forest Lodge Lane.
Between the east side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill
Creek subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
14. PROJECT: SP-2006-001. Biscuit Run #3 (Southern) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #3
(Southern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units proposed with special
use permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcel 90-60. 951 Forest Lodge Lane. Between the east side of Old
Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek subdivision, adjacent
and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
15. PROJECT: SP-2006-002. Biscuit Run Stream Crossina #1 (Northern) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow
stream crossing #1 (Northern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units
proposed with special use permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and ParceI90-A-3 and 90-A1-1. Oak Hill Drive. Between
the east side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek
subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT: Scottsville.
16. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-021. Cavalier Mini Storaae (Sian #102). PROPOSED: Rezone 2.169 acres from RA
Rural Areas zoning district which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) to
HC Highway Commercial zoning district which allows commercial and service uses; and residential use by special
use permit (15 units/ acre). PROFFERS: Yes. LOCATION: North side of Route 250 East and approximately 1/10
mile east of 1-64. Tax Map and Parcel: 78-36. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
17. PROJECT: ZMA 2007-022. Innovative Construction (Sian #103). PROPOSED: Rezone .977 acres from HC _
Highway Commercial zoning district which allows commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use
permit (15 units/acre) to LI - Light Industrial zoning district which allows industrial, office, and limited commercial
uses (no residential use) for contractor's office and storage yard. PROFFERS: Yes. LOCATION: 1811 Avon Street
Extended (Route 742) across from Reynovia Dr. Tax Map and Parcel: 90-35C. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:
Scottsville.
18. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
19. Adjourn.
CONSENT AGENDA
FOR APPROVAL:
12.1 Crozet Downtown Zoning District - Zoning Map Amendment Resolution of Intent.
FOR INFORMATION:
12.2 Former Old Crozet Elementary School Reuse Study.
12.3 Proffer Management - FY 07/08 Second Quarter Cash Proffer Report.
12.4 Status of Alternative Engineering Review Pilot Study.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TENTATIVE
APRIL 9, 2008
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
1. 2:00 p.m. - Call to Order.
2. Discussion and Adoption of FY 2008/09 Capital and Operating Budgets.
3. Discussion and Adoption of Calendar Year 2008 Tax Rates.
4. Work Session: Community Development Fees - Building Regulations and Water Protection Ordinances.
5. Discussion: Land Use Tax Deferral.
6. Recess.
6:00 P.M.
LANE AUDITORIUM
7. Call to Order.
8. Pledge of Allegiance.
9. Moment of Silence.
10. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
11. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda.
12. Consent Agenda (on next sheet).
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
13. PROJECT: SP-2005-0028. Biscuit Run #2 (Mid) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #2
(Mid), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units proposed with special use
permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcels 90-5, 90-60. 981 Old Lynchburg Road, 951 Forest Lodge Lane.
Between the east side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill
Creek subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20.
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
14. PROJECT: SP-2006-001. Biscuit Run #3 (Southern) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow stream crossing #3
(Southern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units proposed with special
use permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and Parcel 90-60. 951 Forest Lodge Lane. Between the east side of Old
Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek subdivision, adjacent
and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
15. PROJECT: SP-2006-002. Biscuit Run Stream Crossina #1 (Northern) (Sians #3.6&22). PROPOSED: Allow
stream crossing #1 (Northern), which is currently vacant to have a road crossing. There are no residential units
proposed with special use permit. LOCATION: Tax Map and ParceI90-A-3 and 90-A1-1. Oak Hill Drive. Between
the east side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek
subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT: Scottsville.
16. PROJECT: ZMA-2007 -021 Cavalier Mini Storaae (Sian #102). PROPOSED: Rezone 2.169 acres from RA
Rural Areas zoning district which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) to
HC Highway Commercial zoning district which allows commercial and service uses; and residential use by special
use permit (15 units/ acre). PROFFERS: Yes. LOCATION: North side of Route 250 East and approximately 1/10
mile east of 1-64. Tax Map and Parcel: 78-36. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville.
17. PROJECT: ZMA 2007-022/lnnovative Construction (Sian #103). PROPOSED: Rezone .977 acres from HC-
Highway Commercial zoning district which allows commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use
permit (15 units/acre) to LI - Light Industrial zoning district which allows industrial, office, and limited commercial
uses (no residential use) for contractor's office and storage yard. PROFFERS: Yes. LOCATION: 1811 Avon Street
Extended (Route 742) across from Reynovia Dr. Tax Map and Parcel: 90-35C. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT:
Scottsville.
18. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
19. Adjourn.
ACTIONS
Board of Supervisors Meeting of April 9, 2008
April 10, 2008
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT
1. Call to Order.
. Meeting was called to order at 2:00 p.m., in
Room 241, by the Chairman, Mr. Boyd. All BOS
members were present. Also present were Bob
Tucker, Larry Davis, Tom Foley, Wayne
CilimberQ, Ella Jordan and MeaQan Hoy.
2. Discussion and Adoption of FY 2008/09 Capital and Clerk: Forward adopted resolution to
Operating Budgets. Finance. (Attachment 1)
. ADOPTED the attached Resolution.
3. Discussion and Adoption of Calendar Year 2008 Tax Clerk: Forward adopted resolution to
Rates. Finance. (Attachment 2)
. ADOPTED, by a vote of 4:2 (Boyd, Dorrier) the
attached Resolution to set the real estate tax rate
at $0.71/$100 assessed valuation for real estate,
public service and mobile homes for the 2008 tax
year and at $4.28/$100 assessed value for the
personal property tax rate, including machinery
and tools, with the stipulation that one cent of the
revenue be set aside in a Revenue Shortfall
Contingency to be spent only in the event that
projected revenues are less than budgeted, and if
that proves not to be the case, the one cent go
into the CIP Fund at the end of the year.
4. Work Session: Community Development Fees- Clerk: Advertise for public hearing.
Building Regulations and Water Protection
Ordinances.
. MOVED, by a vote of 6:0, to set for public
hearing the proposed increase in building permit
and inspection fees and Water Protection
Ordinance fees.
5. Discussion: Land Use Tax Deferral. Clerk: Schedule on Agenda.
. Rescheduled for May 14, 2008.
6. Recess.
. The Board recessed at 5:35 p.m.
7. Call to Order.
. Meeting was called back to order at 6:13 p.m., by
the Chairman, Mr. Boyd.
10. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Ann Mallek:
. Notice needs to be given to area citizens when
balloons are flown for locations of cell towers.
Sally Thomas:
. Informed the Board of the situation at White
Gables on Route 250. VDoT has advised that
the warrants have not been met for a signal at
that location. Board Members agreed that Ms.
Thomas should discuss the issue with VDoT
about installing a blinking signal that could later
be converted to a red light.
Ken Boyd:
. Asked if any Board Members would be available
on Saturday, May 10 to attend the Armed Forces
Day Celebration. Ms. Thomas and Ms. Mallek
volunteered to QO.
11. From the Public: Matters not Listed on the Agenda.
. There were none.
12.1 Crozet Downtown Zoning District - Zoning Map Community Development: Proceed as
Amendment Resolution of Intent. approved. (Attachment 3)
. ADOPTED the attached Resolution.
13. PROJECT: SP-2005-0028. Biscuit Run #2 (Mid) Clerk: Set out conditions of approval.
(Sians #3.6&22). (Attachment 4)
. APPROVED SP-2005-0028, by a vote of 6:0,
subject to the nine conditions recommended by
the PlanninQ Commission.
14. PROJECT: SP-2006-001. Biscuit Run #3 Clerk: Set out conditions of approval.
(Southern) (Sians #3.6&22). (Attachment 4)
. APPROVED, SP-2006-01, by a vote of 6:0,
subject to the nine conditions recommended by
the PlanninQ Commission.
15. PROJECT: SP-2006-002. Biscuit Run Stream Clerk: Set out conditions of approval.
Crossina #1 (Northern) (Sians #3.6&22). (Attachment 4)
. APPROVED SP-2007-002, by a vote of 6:0 subject
to the nine conditions recommended by the
Planninq Commission.
16. PROJECT: ZMA-2007-021. Cavalier Mini Storaae
(Sian #102).
. DENIED ZMA-2007-021, by a vote of 6:0.
17. PROJECT: ZMA 2007-022. Innovative Clerk: Set out proffers. (Attachment 5)
Construction (Sian #103).
. APPROVED ZMA-2007 -022, by a vote of 6:0,
inclusive of proffers dated and signed March 20,
2008, including the plan described as the J.v.
Webster Property dated April 25, 2005.
18. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Sally Thomas:
. Updated the Board on her trip to Annapolis.
. Residents of Red Hill School Road do not want
the road paved.
. There is a video of what the lights in our area
look like at night from the sky.
. Asked that Rivanna look into energy saving.
. Chesapeake Forest Conservation Summit will be
held at the end of May.
Ann Mallek:
. There is a "Go Green" conference for local
governments in Lynchburg on April 29, 2008.
. Asked about the status of Mr. Clayton's
conservation check.
19. Adjourn.
. The meetinQ was adjourned at 8:14 p.m.
ewj/mrh
Attachment 1 - Resolution - FY 2008/09 Capital and Operating Budgets
Attachment 2 - Resolution - Calendar Year 2008 Tax Rates
Attachment 3 - Resolution of Intent - Crozet Downtown Zoning District - Zoning Map Amendment
Attachment 4 - Conditions of Approval - Planning Items
Attachment 5 - Proffers - ZMA 2007-022. Innovative Construction
2
Attachment 1
BUDGET RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia:
1) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 is summarized as
follows:
Administration
Judicial
Public Safety
General Services
Human Development (including PVCC)
Parks, Recreation, and Culture
Community Development
Refunds/Other
City/County Revenue Sharing
General Government Capital Projects
Stormwater Improvements
General Government Debt Service
Education - Capital Projects
Education - Debt Service
Education - School Operations
Education - Self-Sustaining Funds
Revenue Shortfall Contingency
Board Reserves
TOTAL
FY 08/09 Adopted
$10,608,896
3,887,331
30,323,179
4,664,740
23,962,283
6,444,495
10,324,699
438,500
13,633,950
15,576,476
800,000
2,213,822
32,867,000
13,137,712
147,587,033
16,125,489
1,614,072
447,118
$334,656,795
2) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 as described in 1)
above be approved.
3
Attachment 2
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby set
the County Levy for the Calendar Year 2008 for general County purposes at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71)
on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of real estate; at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every
One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of manufactured homes; at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every
One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of public service assessments; at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight
Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of personal property; and at Four Dollars
and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of machinery and
tools; and
FURTHER orders that the Director of Finance of Albemarle County assess and collect the taxes
on all taxable real estate and all taxable personal property.
4
Attachment 3
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Crozet Master Plan describes downtown Crozet as the historical focal point for
cultural and commercial activities in Crozet and the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, one of the findings and recommendations of the Crozet Master Plan is to focus on
the redevelopment and invigoration of the downtown area; and
WHEREAS, the lands within downtown Crozet are currently within various zoning districts, and
the regulations within those districts have been identified as imposing a number of impediments to the
development and redevelopment of downtown Crozet in a manner consistent with the Crozet Master
Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Board adopted a resolution of intent to amend the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to establish a zoning district for downtown Crozet having regulations
specifically designed to be consistent with the Crozet Master Plan, and those regulations are currently
being prepared; and
WHEREAS, after several public work sessions conducted by the Planning Commission and the
Board, and with input from several committees comprised of members of the Crozet community, the
boundaries of the proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District have been identified; and
WHEREAS, it is desired to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries
of the proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good zoning practices, the Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent
to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the Crozet Downtown Zoning
District as depicted as the "Proposed Downtown Zoning District" on the attached map entitled "Crozet
Downtown Zoning * Recommended Boundary," dated January 2008, prepared by Ty Chambers,
Albemarle County GDS.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the
zoning map amendment proposed by this resolution of intent, and make its recommendation to the Board
of Supervisors, at the earliest possible date.
5
Attachment 4
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
PROJECT: SP-2005-0028. Biscuit Run #2 (Mid) (Sians #3.6&22).
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence;
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state
and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application
plan, as determined by the County Engineer;
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer;
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate;
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards; and
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of
the Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
PROJECT: SP-2006-001. Biscuit Run #3 (Southern) (Sians #3.6&22).
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence;
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state
and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application
plan, as determined by the County Engineer;
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer;
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate;
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards; and
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of
the Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
6
PROJECT: SP-2006-002. Biscuit Run Stream CrossinQ #1 (Northern) (SiQns #3.6&22).
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required
from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all
correspondence;
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary
state and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application
plan, as determined by the County Engineer;
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a
grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches;
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes
reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer;
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate;
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges
meet VDOT standards; and
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision of
the Code of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
7
Attachment 5
Proffers - ZMA 2007-022. Innovative Construction
PROFFER FORM
Original Proffer X
Amendment
Date of Proffer Signature: March _, 2008
ZMA # 2007 -00022
Tax Map and Parcel Number: Tax Map 90, Parcel 35C
0.977 Acres to be rezoned from HC to LI
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby
voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to Tax Map 90 Parcel 35C
(the "Property"), if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning
and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable.
1. The by right use of the Property shall be limited to those uses allowed under Section 27.2.1
(2), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (11). (12). (13), (14), (15), (16). (18) and (19), of the Zoning
Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia as Section 27.2.1 is in effect on April 9, 2008, a copy
of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. The portion of the Property that may be used as a contractor's equipment storage yard shall be
limited to the area behind the main building, as shown on the plat attached hereto as Exhibit B
(the "Plat"). The area outlined in blue and labeled S 1 on the Plat shall be limited to storage of
equipment not exceeding eight feet in height; the area outlined in blue and labeled S2 on the Plat
shall be limited to storage of equipment not exceeding twelve feet in height.
3. A screening fence shall be constructed at issuance of zoning clearance and maintained in the
location shown on the Plat, in a line which is an extension of the plane formed by the rear wall of
the main building on the site. The fence shall be six feet in height, constructed of 1" x 6"
pressure treated vertical boards, installed flush with one another to form a solid fence. The wood
shall not be stained or painted, but left to weather naturally.
4. The Owner shall connect the Property to public water and sewer within one year after each of
these services becomes available either along the Avon Street Extended frontage of the Property
or within a public easement adjacent to the Property. Until the connection to public water and
sewer is made, the use of the Property shall be limited to a single use permitted by Proffer 1.
5. Until the Owner connects the Property to public water and sewer, there shall be no changes to
the Property from what is depicted on the Plat, except that the Owner shall remove the structures
shown thereon as "10' x 13' Metal BId.", "8' x 12' Frame BId.", and 8' x 18' Truck Bed".
Owner: Woolen Mills Self Storage, LLC
Date: g~4J"
I
Attachment 11
8
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does
hereby set the County Levy for the Calendar Year 2008 for general County purposes at Seventy-
One Cents ($0.71) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of real estate; at Seventy-
One Cents ($0.71) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of manufactured homes; at
Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of public service
assessments; at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars of
assessed value of personal property; and at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on
every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of machinery and tools; and
FURTHER orders that the Director of Finance of Albemarle County assess and collect
the taxes on all taxable real estate and all taxable personal property.
***************
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of four to two,
as recorded below, at a meeting held on April 9, 2008.
Aye Nay
Mr. Boyd y
Mr. Dorrier y
Ms. Mallek Y
Mr. Rooker y
Mr. Slutzky y
Ms. Thomas y
Attachment A
BUDGET RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia:
1) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 is summarized as
follows:
Administration
Judicial
Public Safety
General Services
Human Development (including PVCC)
Parks, Recreation, and Culture
Community Development
Refunds/Other
City/County Revenue Sharing
General Government Capital Projects
Stormwater Improvements
General Government Debt Service
Education - Capital Projects
Education - Debt Service
Education - School Operations
Education - Self-Sustaining Funds
Revenue Shortfall Contingency
Board Reserves
TOTAL
FY 08/09 Adopted
$10,608,896
3,887,331
30,323,179
4,664,740
23,962,283
6,444,495
10,324,699
438,500
13,633,950
15,576,476
800,000
2,213,822
32,867,000
13,137,712
147,587,033
16,125,489
1,614,072
447,118
$334,656,795
2) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 as described in 1)
above be approved.
****************
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of _ to _'
as recorded below, at a meeting held on April 9, 2008.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Aye
Nay
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
RECEIVED AT 80S MEETING
Date:_ t. q 'O~
Agendallem ,: ~
Clerk.. 1n1tlaJs=- ~ "R JL
BUDGET RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia:
1) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 is summarized as
follows:
Administration
Judicial
Public Safety
General Services
Human Development (including PVCC)
Parks, Recreation, and Culture
Community Development
Refunds/Other
City/County Revenue Sharing
General Government Capital Projects
Stormwater Improvements
General Government Debt Service
Education - Capital Projects
Education - Debt Service
Education - School Operations
Education - Self-Sustaining Funds
Revenue Shortfall Contingency
Board Reserves
TOTAL
FY 08/09 Adopted
$10,608,896
3,887,331
30,323,179
4,664,740
23,962,283
6,444,495
10,324,699
438,500
13,633,950
15,576,476
800,000
2,213,822
32,867,000
13,137,712
147,587,033
16,125,489
1,614,072
447,118
$334,656,795
2) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 as described in 1)
above be approved.
****************
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle Coun by a vote of six to zero, as recorded below, at
a meeting held on April 9, 2008.
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
Aye
y
y
y
y
y
y
Nay
FY 08/09 Budget Adjustments Worksheet
t'roposea tsuagel Final Board Action
BEGINNING BOARD RESERVE 300,000 923,072
REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS
EMS Revenue Recovery (1,000,000)
State Revenue Reduction (600,000)
Tax Rate Adjustment (local share) 1,845,908
Subtotal -- Revenue Adjustments 245,908 -
Available Revenue for Expenditure Adiustments 545,908 923,072
POTENTIAL EXPENDITURE ADJUSTMENTS
Proposed Reductions
2 Police Officers (232,958)
Pantops Personnel (April 2009 - 12 FF/ALS) (470,000)
Save the Fireworks (10,000)
Subtotal -- Proposed Reductions (712,958) -
Proposed Additions
Registrar funding request 19,620
Support for Domestic Violence Coord. 6,000
Sheriff LiveScan Maintenance 2,373
Enhanced Median Mowing 45,269
Recycling (1/2 year) 75,000
Library - Bookmobile 16,727
Volunteer F/R Incentive Program (1/2 year) 157,000
Piedmont Workforce Network 13,805
Subtotal -- Proposed Additions 335,794 -
Other Items for Consideration
APS Social Worker (net cost)
Affordable Housing
Restore 1 cent to CIP
Frozen Positions
Subtotal -- Other Items - -
Potential Expenditure Adjustments (377,164) -
Final Board Reserve 923,072 923,072
Date:
RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING
J..!;-9-b'l
d
Agenda Item #:
CIerk's Inhlals~
4/9/2008 1: 1 0 PM
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Adoption of the FY 08/09 Operating and Capital
Budgets
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request Board Adoption of the FY 08/09 Operating
and Capital Budgets
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, and Wiggans
REVIEWED BY:
~
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
BACKGROUND:
On April 2nd, a public hearing was held on the Board of Supervisors' Proposed FY 08/09 Operating and Capital
Budgets.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
5.1 Develop a comprehensive funding strategy/plan to address the County's growing needs.
DISCUSSION:
The FY 08/09 Operating and Capital budgets total $334,656,795. This amount reflects the County Executive's
Recommended Budget plus changes made during the Board's Work Sessions. The attached resolution (Attachment
A) formally approves the total proposed expenditures of $334,656,795 for FY 08/09. Attachment B details the
adjustments made to the County Executive's Recommended Budget.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Not applicable
RECOMMENDATIONS:
If the Board has no additions or deletions, staff requests adoption of the FY 08/09 Operating and Capital budgets.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Budget Resolution
Attachment B - Summary of Chanqes
Attachment A
BUDGET RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia:
1) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 is made up of the
County Executive's Recommended Budget document and the amendments made by the Board of
Supervisors as detailed in Attachment B of this Executive Summary.
2) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1,2008 is summarized as
follows:
Administration
Judicial
Public Safety
General Services
Human Development (including PVCC)
Parks, Recreation, and Culture
Community Development
Refunds/Other
City/County Revenue Sharing
General Government Capital Projects
Stormwater Improvements
General Government Debt Service
Education - Capital Projects
Education - Debt Service
Education - School Operations
Education - Self-Sustaining Funds
Board Reserves
TOTAL
FY 08/09 Adopted
$10,608,896
3,887,331
30,323,179
4,785,009
23,945,107
6,451,222
10,324,699
452,305
13,633,950
15,691,600
800,000
2,213,822
32,867,000
13,137,712
148,486,402
16,125,489
923,072
$334,656,795
3) That the budget for the County for the Fiscal Year beginning July 1, 2008 as described in 1) and
2) above be approved.
****************
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a resolution duly
adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of _ to _,
as recorded below, at a meeting held on April 9, 2008.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Aye Nay
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
Board of Supervisors' FY 08/09 Operating and Capital Budgets
Changes from Recommended Budget
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
General Government Operations
Subtotal, General Government Operations
General Government Initiatives
Eliminate funding for Pantops Fire Station
Reduce Police Officers to 2 new FTEs
Eliminate funding for Save the Fireworks
Voter Registration - Presidential Election Costs
Sheriff - LiveScan Maintenance
Commonwealth's Attorney - Domestic Violence Coord.
Volunteer Recruitment & Retention Programs
Recycling
Enhanced Median Mowing & Landscaping
Piedmont Workforce Network
Bookmobile
Subtotal, General Government Initiatives
Refunds
Subtotal, Refunds
City Revenue Sharing
Subtotal, Revenue Sharing
Capital Improvement & Debt Service Transfers
Adjustment based on revised revenue estimates
Subtotal, Capital & Debt Transfers
Transfer for School Operations
Adjustment based on revised revenue estimates
Subtotal, Transfer for School Operations
Conti ngency/Other
Board Reserve Adjustment
Subtotal, Contingency/Other
GENERAL FUND - REVENUES & FUNDING SOURCES
COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S RECOMMENDED BUDGET
REVENUE ADJUSTMENTS
Increase Tax Rate to $0.71
Elimination of EMS Revenue Recovery
State Revenue Reduction
TOTAL, Revenue & Fund Balance Adjustments
FY 08/09 Recommended FY 08/09 Adopted
Budget Budget
81,525,789
81,525,789
935,917
-470,000
-232,958
-10,000
19,620
2,373
6,000
157,000
75,000
45,269
13,805
16,727
242,579
169,500
169,500
13,633,950
13,633,950
24,959,387
227,446
25,186,833
99,355,566
2,768,862
102,124,428
569,000
623,072
1,192,072
School Fund Operations
Increase Transfer from General Fund
State Revenue Reduction
Subtotal, School Fund Operations
2,768,862
-98,928
153,113,008
Self-Sustaining Fund Operations
Subtotal, School Self-Sustaining
16,525,489
16,525,489
General Government Projects
Increase Contingency Reserves
Subtotal, General Government Projects
227,446
15,691,600
Storm Water Projects
Subtotal, Storm Water Projects
800,000
800,000
School Division Projects
Subtotal, School Division Projects
32,867,000
32,867,000
Debt Service
Subtotal, Debt Service
15,351,534
15,351,534
Bright Stars
Increased revenues for program at Cale
Subtotal, Bright Stars
1,144,999
70,992
1,144,999
Other Special Revenue Funds
Subtotal, Other Special Revenue Funds
12,953,293
12,953,293
SUMMARY OF ALL FUNDS
General Fund
School Fund/School Self-Sustaining
Capital and Debt Service Funds
Special Revenue Funds
221,149,109
166,968,563
64,482,688
14,098,292
224,391,325
169,638,497
64,710,134
14,169,284
SUBTOTAL-ALL FUNDS
LESS INTERFUND TRANSFERS
TOTAL COUNTY BUDGET. ALL FUNDS
466,698,652
(135,256,138)
331.442,414
472,909,240
(138,252,445)
334,656,184
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Calendar Year 2008 Tax Levy Resolution
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request Board Approval of the Calendar Year 2008
Tax Rates
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
REVIEWED BY:
/
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, and Wiggans
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
BACKGROUND:
On April 2, 2008, a public hearing was held on the Board of Supervisors' proposed budget for FY 08/09. A public hearing
also was held on the 2008 calendar year tax rates.
The attached resolution to set the 2008 tax year or calendar year tax rates must be approved at the April 9, 2008 meeting
in order that the printing and mailing of the tax bills can occur in a timely manner.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
5.1 Develop a comprehensive funding strategy/plan to address the County's growing needs.
DISCUSSION:
The attached resolution sets the tax levy for calendar year 2008. The proposed rates are set at $0.71/$100 assessed
valuation for real estate, public service and mobile homes for the 2008 tax year and at $4.28 /$100 assessed value for
the personal property tax rate, including machinery and tools.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends approval of the proposed tax rates.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Resolution
Attachment A
RESOLUTION
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby set the
County Levy for the Calendar Year 2008 for general County purposes at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every
One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of real estate; at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every One Hundred
Dollars of assessed value of manufactured homes; at Seventy-One Cents ($0.71) on every One Hundred
Dollars of assessed value of public service assessments; at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight Cents ($4.28) on
every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of personal property; and at Four Dollars and Twenty-Eight
Cents ($4.28) on every One Hundred Dollars of assessed value of machinery and tools; and
FURTHER orders that the Director of Finance of Albemarle County assess and collect the taxes on all
taxable real estate and all taxable personal property.
***************
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true and correct copy of a
resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of _ to _,
as recorded below, at a meeting held on April 9, 2008.
Clerk, Board of Supervisors
Ave Nav
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Community Development Fees - Building
Regulations and Water Protection Ordinances
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Proposed increase in building permit and inspection
fees and Water Protection Ordinance fees;
establishment of a fee policy
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham,
and Schlothauer
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this worksession is to receive Board direction on staff recommended fee increases for fees
established in the Building Regulations and Water Protection ordinances and to establish a policy for future updates.
At the December 5, 2007 Board meeting, staff presented a Community Development Fee Study and a
recommendation for a policy on updating fees in the future. (Attachment A) Given the limited amount of time for
discussion and the complexity, it was not possible for the Board to give specific direction on revised fees. This
executive summary attempts to simplify this by limiting consideration, for now, to only the fees set forth in these two
ordinances and a policy for use in establishing future fee increases.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal Three: Develop a comprehensive funding strategy/plan to address the County's growing needs.
DISCUSSION:
The discussion is divided into three specific topics: fees in the Water Protection Ordinance, permit and inspection fees
in the Building Regulations Ordinance, and a policy for future update of fees in both ordinances.
Water Protection Ordinance (WPO)
Fees in the WPO have received more recent attention than fees in other ordinances administered by Community
Development, but have lagged behind cost of services in recent years. To assist the Board in understanding how
Albemarle County fees compare to other localities, staff has provided a fee comparison in Attachments Band C. This
recommendation is for fees that provide close to full cost recovery while remaining comparable to other localities. As
discussed with the Board during consideration of the recent Rural Areas ordinance amendments and budget process,
these proposed fee increases would provide funding for an additional reviewer/inspector. Staff found the fees
comparable to other localities, but notes every locality appears to have unique characteristics with their fee structure.
The most important fee difference is associated with plan reviews and inspections for plans. (Attachment B: Fee ID#
69 & 70) Instead of calculating this fee by the acre, staff has recognized that the cost is better correlated to required
reviews and inspections, with a plan renewal fee to address the second year cost of inspections. It is noted this
structure provides an incentive for the developer to complete the grading activity as quickly as possible, which also
reduces the staff effort needed on the site. Finally, it should be noted this recommendation does not include Water
Protection Ordinance requirements where the fees are listed in the Subdivision or Zoning Ordinances (e.g.
groundwater assessment). Those proposed fee changes will be addressed at a future date.
Building Regulations
A comparison of recommended building fees with those in neighboring localities is provided in Attachment D, which
demonstrates the revised fees are comparable to those localities. Staff notes there is one significant change to
consider. For single family houses, new construction and additions (Fee 10 #107), staff is recommending revising the
AGENDA TITLE: Community Development Fees - Building Regulations and Water Protection Ordinances
April 9, 2008
Page 2
current fee structure, which currently requires the owner/contractor to obtain a building permit and numerous sub-
permits. Staff is recommending this be simplified to one permit with all of the costs for the various sub-permits
wrapped into one permit. This is explained in Attachment E. This greatly improves both the permit processing and
understanding of costs for owners/applicants. It also removes an obstacle to online processing of permits, where the
complexity of the sub-permits has made it almost impossible to calculate the fees without a discussion with the
applicant. Staff is interested in expanding this concept to other building permits, but recognizes permit complexities
present unique challenges for many of the situations with commercial uses. As such, staff is only recommending this
approach for single family housing at this time, but will continue to investigate how it can be done with other building
permits. Again, these proposed fees target fees that provide close to full cost recovery but remain comparable to
other localities.
Automatic Fee Adjustment Policy
Staff believes the reason fees have failed to keep current is the County has never established a policy for automatic
adjustment of fees associated with the development ordinances. To assure Community Development administered
programs are properly managed, staff believes it is critical to establish a fee adjustment policy in the future. When
proposed adjustments to the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances are reviewed with the Board in a future work session,
a proposed fee adjustment policy will be reviewed and proposed as well.
BUDGET IMPACT:
Historically, the County has seen revenues of approximately $940,000 in fees per year from these two ordinances.
With the recommended changes, the fees collected are estimated to increase to $1,420,000 in a typical year.
Under the County Executive's proposed FY 08-09 budget, it was anticipated that revised Community Development
fees would increase revenues by approximately $260,000 in the next fiscal year. The fees in this recommendation
are estimated to generate an additional $380,000 in the next fiscal year and $480,000 in a typical year. The
additional $120,000 projected increase in funding from these proposed fee increases would offset the cost of the
two currently frozen positions in Community Development, including the inspector needed to enforce the recently
amended Rural Areas ordinances.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff offers the following recommendations:
1. Direct staff to bring forward changes to the Water Protection Ordinance fees as proposed in Attachment
B, with any other changes the Board determines appropriate.
2. Direct staff to bring forward changes to the Building Regulations Ordinance fees as proposed in
Attachment 0, with any other changes the Board determines appropriate.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - December 5. 2007 Executive Summary. Community Development Fee Study
Attachment B - Water Protection Ordinance recommended fees and comparisons
Attachment C - Additional Comparisons of WPO fees to neiqhborinq localities
Attachment 0 - Buildinq Requlation Ordinance recommended fees and comparisons
Attachment E - Buildinq Official memo on chanqes to fees structure for sinqle family houses
ATTACHMENT A
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Community Development Fee Policy
AGENDA DATE:
December 5,2007
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Establish County Policy for Development Related
Fees
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACTlS):
Tucker, Foley, Davis, Graham, Schlothauer
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The purpose of this report is to review the findings of a Community Development Fee Study and to receive Board direction
on the development of a County policy for cost recovery with these fee based programs. Recognizing the Board's interest
in having development review and inspection fees recover all or part of the costs associated with those programs, the
County contracted a study with The PFM Group (PFM) to evaluate Community Development's fee based programs.
(Attachment A) PFM will present its report to the Board at this meeting. (Attachment B) Following that presentation, staff
will discuss PFM's recommendations and provide a recommendation on phasing in fee increases over time. Based on
Board input and discussion, staff will follow up at a future meeting with a final policy and proposed ordinance amendments
regarding cost recovery.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Effectively Manage Growth and Development
DISCUSSION:
While the PFM study provides a significant amount of detailed information with respect to program costs and revenues, it
will be difficult to effectively utilize this information without establishing a policy for cost recovery through development fees.
PFM has provided six policy recommendations, which start on page 4 of their report. Staff's perspective on those
recommendations is provided below.
1. Improve data quality for fees. Specifically, PFM indicates the complexity of the current fee structure makes it difficult
to use, suggesting a need to create unique identifiers for each permit. Staff concurs with this recommendation and believes
this can be accomplished as part of consideration of ordinance amendments to revise fees.
2. Reduce the number of fee titles in the schedule. PFM provided a consolidated fee schedule with their report (Table
ES-4 starting on page 38). Staff concurs with the need to reduce the number of fee titles and believes this can be
accomplished as part of amending the fees in the ordinances.
3. Develop a Board Approved Cost Recovery Policy. PFM has recommended the County implement a policy for cost
recovery that 1) identifies the County's costs; 2) establishes the portion of costs to be recovered through associated fees;
3) establishes the frequency with which such fees would be reviewed; and 4) establishes the process for obtaining public
input related to fees. In reviewing the minutes of past Board meetings, it appears there was considerable discussion on a
fee policy in 1991, but no clear policy was established. (Attachments C & D) Following the 1991 discussions, there has
only been one comprehensive fee adjustment, but no further policy consideration. As a result, County fees have not
maintained the relationship to costs anticipated in 1991. Staff concurs with the PFM recommendation and believes this
policy can assure fees are being implemented in a fair and consistent manner. Within other parts of this discussion, staff
is providing recommendations for the issues of identifying the County's costs and the frequency of reviewing the fees. As
part of a cost recovery policy with development fees, the Board will also need to consider the following two issues:
ATTACHMENT A
· Establishing the portion of the costs to be recovered through fees. In general, staff supports the concept of
full cost recovery through fees, but notes there are some services with community benefits that may justify
reduced fees and there are other services where full cost recovery would require fees that are significantly higher
than any of the comparison localities. For example, the fee associated with an Official Determination of
Development Rights is currently $40, the highest comparable fee was $100, and the County's cost associated with
this determination is estimated at $2,560. (Fee Study, 10 #52, pages 11 & 20). The Board may feel this letter
provides a significant community benefit that justifies a lower fee when the determination is done for property being
placed in a conservation easement, but might consider a lower fee inconsistent with the County's goals when the
letter is used to market the development potential of a Rural Area property. Staff proposes a policy that assumes
full cost recovery where fees would be comparable to similar localities, but recognizes the Board may need to
provide guidance for the remaining services. Staff will develop further information on this in the future. Finally,
recognizing fees have not kept in step with cost increases since 1991, staff believes it is appropriate to phase in
some fee increases.
· Establishing the process for consideration of fee revisions. As the fees are established in County ordinances,
the formal process for revising the fees requires public hearings. Beyond this, staff believes that some fee
changes could prove controversial and it is desirable to have all concerns with fees identified prior to consideration
by the Planning Commission or Board. Staff recommends the process for fee changes include opportunities for
public comment before the ordinance amendments are drafted.
4. Adjust fees based on budget growth each year. PFM has recommended an annual adjustment based on a two step
process of reviewing work changes and inflation. While staff agrees the fees should be regularly adjusted, staff notes the
fee changes require amending ordinances and reprinting of guidance and documents to reflect the new fees. Given the
cost / benefit associated with the fee adjustments, staff recommends the policy have fees adjusted every other year, rather
than every year, and the adjustment be based on a simple-to-implement inflation factor.
5. Actual time spent providing the services related to each fee should be captured. PFM is recommending
Community Development implement a time keeping system to accurately track work time associated with each fee. If fees
are to be set at or near full cost recovery, staff agrees this is important. It must be noted that development and
implementation of this time keeping system will be a major undertaking. If it is the Board's desire to set fees at or near
costs, staff recommends implementation of a fee specific time keeping system as part of Community Development's work
program next year. Staff has already started investigating how this may be done and will need to further discuss with the
Board the impact of this type of system on the work program.
6. A time period should be established for comprehensive review of development related fees. PFM has
recommended this review occur every four or five years with implementation of a time keeping system. Assuming a time
keeping system is implemented in FY 08-09, staff recommends the next comprehensive review should be planned for FY
11-12 and the interval for future comprehensive reviews should be established as part of that first review.
BUDGET IMPACT:
A cost recovery policy allows the County to establish the expectation for development funding versus County funding of
County administered permits. This provides for fair and consistent treatment of permits and simplifies budget preparation.
It is noted that there are costs associated with implementing and operating a time keeping system, but those cost can be
largely recovered as part of the fees.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board approve the attached 'Implementation Plan for Development Fee Policy' (Attachment E)
as the general direction for moving forward in implementing fee increases. In addition, staff recommends the Board
provide direction regarding the points discussed above that can be used in the development of a policy for consideration at
a future meeting. Both of these issues will be covered in greater detail through a presentation at Wednesday's Board
meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A- Albemarle County Development Fee Studv 2007
Attachment B - PFM Presentation Outline
Attachment C - June 12. 1991 Board Minutes on Development Ordinance's Fee Schedules
Attachment 0 - AUQust 14. 1991 Board Minutes on Development Ordinance's Fee Schedules
Attachment E - Implementation Plan for Development Fee Policy
a:l
-
C
1II
E
..c
u
l'lI
:t:
<(
.
.
.
II
en
w
W
LL
o
a..
==
I-
Z
w
:E
a..
o
-'
w
>
w
c
>
!:::
z
::)
:E
:E
o
()
l'Il
~
Ql
e:
l':'
LO 1I)
I"-.s::
....C
+ 0
o E
LO ~
*~
LO
I"-
....
o
LO
*
o
o
o
o
Ii
:5
...
....
o
C\J
....
o
o
o
.;-
0>
~
~
o
>-
EC
~ ~
0.
Ql 0
c,Q5
e: >
~~
c:~
l'Il-
- e:
CL Ql
m:2
15 ~
",0:
Ql l'Il
:.J c
.5 :c
- Ql
~~
E 0
Ql-l
~:g
<(::J
~
':;
U
<(
0>
e:
~'"
- e:
.!!? ::J
o Ql
-g-g>
l'Il .-
-lCJ)
'"
<0
l'Il
~
Ql
e:
l':'
LO 1I)
I"-.s::
....-
e:
+ 0
o E
LO ~
- Ql
.... 0.
LO
I"-
....
o
LO
~
o
II>
N.
...
~
o
II>
...
<It
~ .E l!!
'S; ...2 0
Ql >- ~ II>
.!:: Q ~
rilliilU)
;~.5
o
'"
....
o
tri
I"-
0>
~
~
o
~
E
'"
u._
Ql e:
- Ql
g>E
,- 0.
en 0
~a:;
e: >
l'Il Ql
-0
CL_
eo .S!
- e:
o Ql
"''0
.~ "00
-l Ql
e:0:
.;: cu
e:'O
Ql 'iij
E"S
Ql 0
~'E
<(::J
~
:~
t5
<(
0>
e:
~'"
- e:
,!!? ::J
o Ql
-g-g
l'Il ,-
-lCJ)
.;-
<0
o ~
C e:
Ql Ql
~ ~
u U
l'Il l!?~ l!?
~~~~
OJowo
JlEVlE
~ ~
Ql Ql
~ ~
u u
:m~~~
<(~i'l=~
\V 15 <1>0
~.e~.E
~ .~
l'Il e: 0
Ln ~ ~
C\Jl'Ilo.
"'00
~>t?
ob 0
o ftl LO
a...~
o
II>
N
t;;
o
'"
~
o
tri
C\J
Ql
e:
o
e:
l'Il
:5
1I)
1I)
.J!1
C;
'c
::J
0>
~
~
o
~
'E
'" c
u. 0
~ TI
.~~ ~
en -e :g
ro.a 'Q)
.E:6 a:
e: Ql
~ t;
CL l'Il
~
I "S
~tl
.:; <(
u=
<( ~
g>en
:e C;
:J :t:
- e:
,!!? ::J
o Ql
-g~
l'Il ,-
-lCJ)
o
o
"!.
~
o
'"
....
o
<Xi
~
~
0.
.s
1I)
C;
e:
.Q
0;
o
':;
0>
e:
'~
.Q
:E
.s:: ~
U Ql
"'"E
w 0
o
25
:2
+
o
o
LO
....
Ql
t;
'"
o
o
~
+
o
o
'"
....
l':'
u
~
LO
C\J
*
+
o
o
.;-
....
o
II>
~
o
II>
...
<It
o
'"
~
CJ
e:
'"
c::
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
o
II>
~
o
II>
...
<It
o
'"
....
CJ
~
~
0.
.s
1I)
C;
e:
o
'aj
o
.:;
0>
e:
'~
.Q
:E
c
.Q
t5
Ql
0.
1I)
e:
'0;
0:
~~
W C;
~ ~~ ~~ ~-g
"S: "s:.a "S: 2 "S; j
'U ~~ ~~ ~~
~ C3J 0>0, O>~
~ ~<( C<( c:J
-e -e 0. :e 0. :e.g
.'3'2.'3E .'3E .'3<(9
00 W Q) ~ IV 00
o~oJj oJj as
-g~-gc:-g-gc:-g-g~
.:'i~~~j~~jj~
10
<0
<0
<0
I"-
<0
co
<0
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
... ii ~
...... 0 e!
.!!! It n u
t ~ ~ ~
..!::: - en Q
g:3.5 ;
~0!;.
C
Ql
l::: Ql
'" Ql
ou.
o
Z
.0
QlO
+ ~ 0
u .
Ol'll'"
C\Jln~
~C\Jw
"'f-
....z
CJ
...
e:
l'Il
c::
o
'"
~
.s
~1I)~
~:5~
+ 5 + E
8E~c
LOCO 0
....... E
~
,E
C;
~ ~
l'Il U
o~
~~~
8 ~+ ~
'" co
.... ...
p
Qle:
t; QlE
~
~~ ~
+ i'l= .s::
Owo
~.~ C;
....~'-
i
N
:8
...
<It
o
r-.:
I"-
Ql
e:
o
e:
'"
:5
~
0;
Ql
C;,
ui
e:
o
i
1I)
.s
~
~
t)
...
'0
e:
~~
"S; .a
Ql 1I)
0:'5
e: Ql
'" ~
- u
CL l'Il
~
:~
t5
<(
0>
e:
:e
'"
t)
a ~
'0 Ql
e:.s::
50
en
<0
o
o
o
'"
...
~
o
C\J
'"
....
o
o
.;-
...
e:
o
U
~
1I)
.s
1I)
'-
'"
~
'0
e:
l'Il
~
Ql
e:
Ql
0:
(ij
'"
e:
e:
<(
~
:~
t5
<(
0>
e:
:e
'"
t)
a ~
'0 Ql
e:.s::
j5
o
I"-
o
C
Ql
E
.s::
~ l!?
~~
:Eo
UJ,E
o
C
Ql
E
.s::
~ ~
~~
QlO
Ql ~ <(
CJ),E z
o
LO
~ .~
~ ~
'" 0.
o 0
s: 1ii
~~
:,,~
~
~
o
~
<It
o
LO
~
o
<ri
e:
l'Il
c::
'0
C
Ql
E
'0
e:
Ql
E
<(
C;
'm
::i:
<(
z
o
o
II>
'"
...
<It
o
II>
N
<It
o
I"-
....
o
o
10
~
o
~
0.
o
ii5
C;
e:
,Q
0;
o
:>
Ql
t;
l'Il
Ql
e:
o
e:
l'Il
:5
-5 Q)
';: 0;
e: l':'
.2 0)
~ ~
a. "en
~ Q) c~
"w"E ro
0: 0 c::
'0
Ql
,!.!
o
Z
<(
z
<(
z
o
o
a
o
'"
DO
ui
~
~
~
o
'"
~
o
o
<0
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
o
LO
~
<(
z
o
o
~
I
i
N
<It
i
...
<It
i
N
<It
o
o
~
o
.;-
C\J
....
o
M
CJ
e:
l'Il
c::
'0
C
Ql
E
'0
e:
Ql
E
<(
C;
'm
::i:
~ e:
.E .2
~~
Ql~
:s m
Cll'5
ECll
~ ~
en ~
l'Ilii5
-~ '0
~ .2
e: E 0;
o 0. u
a O:E
Q) Q)"'C
~ ~ ~ 5
WCl~ 15
E E ~ ~
~ ~.~;:: ~
:J :J:J N ..c
0- C'""CC"') U
~ ~~~ ~
~
':;
13
<(
0>
e:
:e
'"
t)
(5 '-
'0 Ql
e:.s::
50
~ ~ ~ ~
:2: c:: c:: c::
t5 CL CL CL
<( ::i:::i:::i:
0> Cll Cll Cll
e: :;:,:;:,:;:,
:e (ua3QjffiCi>55
~ o;Eo;Eo;E
o ~~~~~~
-gJ1~~!P~~~
50ii5~ii5~ii5~
r:::..
C\J
I"-
'"
I"-
.;-
I"-
LO
I"-
<( <(
z z
<( <(
z z
o
o
~
g>'O
~ ~
~~
",8
II>
N
...
'"
<It
i
o
I"-
....
o
tri
C\J
e:
l'Il
c::
CL
::i:
Cll
~
(jj ~
- E
~ &
E '"
.e ~
CJ)::i:
e:
l'Il
c::
CL
::i:
Cll
:;:,
Q; ffi
0; E
~ ~
E l'Il
~ e:
~~
<0
I"-
o
o
o
&f
o
1i
o
<0
....
o
o
10
co
I"-
<(
z
o
~I
'"
'"
'"
~I
"
"
"""
<(
z
<(
z
<(
z
o
LO
~
<(
z
o
lD
II>
;i
o
o
N
,..:
~
o
lD
.....
<It
o
lD
~
Ql
If
~
z
Ql
Ql
U.
~
Ql
Z
~
'"
o
<ri
o
o
C\J
Ql
U
e:
l'Il
.~
>
e
c
o
o
C
Ql
E
~
CJ)
'0
e:
l'Il
e:
o
'iij
e
UJ
e:
l'Il
a:
e:
o
.~
0>
'';::;
~
e: e:
o 0
U 'u
Ql ~
(5 e
ct CL
.S:! Q;
'" 0;
~Ql~Ql
CD g Q) g
~~~~
~~~~
zozo
Attachment C
E & S Fees (2007)
Nelson:
Plan Review Fee: $500/plan
Land Disturbing Fee (12 month permit): $450
Agreements in Lieu of Plan, up to 2 acres (12 month permit):
Inspection Frequency (alt. inspection schedule) Fee
beginning & end of project $35
once every 8 weeks $100
once every 4 weeks $225
once every 2 weeks $450
Agreements in Lieu of Plan, greater than 2 acres (12 month permit: $450
Louisa:
Commercial/Industrial/Subdivisions $1000 + $50/acre
(E&S fee is in addition to Site Plan Review fee of $500 + $25/acre)
Single family $50
Fluvanna:
Com m ercial/I ndustrial/Su bdivisions
Single family
Goochland:
Residential & Subdivision Clearing
Commercial
Powhatan:
Residential
Commercial
Existing business expansion (<10,000)
Agricultural
Plan Resubmittals (2nd & subsequent)
Single family homes
Greene:
Subdivision and Trailer Parks
Commercial/Industrial
Single-Family Dwelling
Augusta:
Base fee
Sediment Basins
Stormwater Conveyance Channels
Impacting Live Watercourse
Storm water Detention Facilities
Re-submittal of Plans
Re-Inspection of Site
$300 plus $100/acre for 6 month;
Additional $250 for 12-month permit
Additional $250 + $50/acre for 18-months
Additional $250 for every 6 months after 18 months
$75 for 6 months; $25 for each additional 6 months
$600
2 acres or less = $600
2-5 acres = $1000
Over 5 acres = $1500
$300 for first acre plus $75 each additional acre
$750 for first acre plus $150 each additional acre
$200 for stormwater analysis
$150 for first acre plus $25 each additional acre
$150
$25
18 month permit
$500, plus $50/lot
$250+ $25/lot to renew 6 months
$500, + $25/acre disturbed (round up)
$250 + $25/acre to renew
$150/lot
$75 to renew 6 months
18 month permit
12 month permit
$500 up to one acre + $200 each additional acre
$100/basin
$50/channel
$100
$250/facility
$50
$100 each time
Document Source: Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District, 2008
Q)
::>
.......meCD
(/) > 0 >
~g:3~
_0....
8g~~
...~ Ol
fFft:17 + >
o
o
o
cri
C'1
...,
....
!..C"@>.O
~ ~ g ~ 'c
~ ~"g ~ :J
a () ro Q.)
W.S Q.
u..
00
ill
ci
....
u..
00
25
ci
....
Q)
::>
-moQ.l
(/)>0>
000
.E8~~
gg~~
...~ Ol
fhOO+>
o
o
"'.
W
Ol
U)~mE
L?5 gg'E~
dc/) o'c w
fJ7~EE
0,
E "" , E
ro ~ELC,g-~ ~ ~Etn
~ 5- a .c ~ 23 ~ 6- "0 'c ~
"'2:2: ~ "'2:2:
o
ci
o
...,
Q)
C "'
Ol~
0.<::
- <.J
~5::g~
~(5~:g~
::>Q)O<(""
o en UJ
c!; ~ ~ ~.~
~'Q;~S~
:::J1...Q).....a
::J !: 0 (J
.S: g Cl .rE E
~.:=~~CJ)
~ ~ '~ ~ ~
(.) OJ LL .... C
EZ6~~
en..c ~ U"US
-<.Jf-Q)Q)
~Jj-gc.:a:
Q) 0 'Fl ~.~
:2-WCOti::J
~ ~ C m .x e
a:u..Q.(')UJ(')
.l!l
'E
Q;
c-
O>
C
:g
':;
CD
"-
o
o
oi
'"
0"0 0
-Q).;
Q)'<::u..
~$&
1?~~
f- . Q)
en 2>~
~ 1... (J
13<3&
2"C "-
- Q) 0
~-5-a
.~ .$ Q)
~<(Cl
:9mo
~~-o
o:~~
,="'00 00
o Q) .
m~ g,~
~~m~
<(UJ(')....J
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
":;
CD
to
o
u..g-9
00 f-Ol
N g c%
g ~o
U')
C'1
....
u..
00
25
ci
....
o
...,
C'1
""'
....
o
...,
....
...,
(\j
....
o
,..;
<D
~
a.
00
"0
C
Ol
en
.0
::>
f-
e
I
'"
o
o
C-
O>
C
'E
E
'~
00
n;
E
Q)
"0
'00
Q)
a:
.l!l
E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
':;
CD
'"
o
u..
00
ill
ci
....
U')
(\j
w
Q)
::>
-CtiOQ)
(/)>0>
~gS~
_0....
gg~~
...~ Ol
Y7f:A.+>
...,
'"
C'1.
W
o
o
o
0"
..".
....
oo~.2 m
-owu.. c
~ ~ .S ~ ~ ..2 ~
~U)E_~Q)~
i:4~~~ co
" "'
~g..~gg5(])Q)E
LO g~=g-u1~rof?E
~ ~ ~ 0- 00 CD ~ 5- 0 'c
~~Ul~5g-UlE~
...,
...
....
o
;;;
o
6
(\j
"'
Q)
E
o
I
"0
Q)
1;5
.S<
~
a;
d:
"0
C
Ol
en
Q)
E
o
I
.S1
:0
o
~
::E"..,..-
Li"d:
~ af ",-
~'fci:~
::J <x: C\r ~
.g ""' en ~
~~,,:,~g-
.s: ":J (f) () e
"'<(C\i0>(')
~'7-ci:~ ~
g~'7-]~
~a.a:c(J
(ij~~~JS
'0 CJ _.... ~
Q;Q),?~<(
E:g~.+= C
~ ,~:g'~
O~':<(2
~6~~g
~~Io~
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
:g
':;
CD
.l!l
E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
':;
CD
o
:;::
u..
00
<0
ci
....
u..
00
;;r
ci
....
IT(/) ~ ~~C) If)
~ ~ ~ ~ !9 .S l1") ~
~ o,g~~fJ7
o
<D
....
...,
o
C'1
....
o
N
en
o
o
C-
O>
C
'E
E
.~
00
n;
.~
Q)
E
E
o
o
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
':;
CD
(\j
:;::
"-
(\j
...,
"-
....
o
ro
ro
N
....
o
..".
(\j
....
o
(\j
en
.t:
:.:J
"0
C
Ol
~
o
1;5
n;
<.J
en
UJ
'"
o
1;5
>
Q)
UJ
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
':;
CD
C'1
:;::
...,
w
...,
~
...,
(\j
....
...,
(\j
....
...,
(\j
....
o
en
.<::
8
CD
0>
C
';;'
~
a.
00
"E
"(ij
c-
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
fj
':;
CD
...
:;::
o
(\j
....
...,
"-
w
o
o
W
o
"-
w
...,
..".
....
...,
(\j
....
o
cO
(\j
.l!l
'e
~
~
::>
t5
ctl
'S
C
ctl
E
Q)
d:
"0
C
ctl
en
Ol
<.J
iE
o
.S1
:0
o
~
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
32
':;
CD
...,
:;::
o
W
o
U')
....
Q)
::>
-mom
00>0>
og~~
_0....
gg~~
...~ ctl
ffifh+>
o
o
0)
....
o
...,
....
u.. E
~E~
'-'c fA-
<hE
...,
N
....
.i:c'E
$E~
o "c fA-
~:2:
o
cO
en
"E
Q)
f-
.l!l
'E
Q;
c-
O>
C
:g
':;
CD
<D
:;::
o
o
o
""'
..".
....
o
.n
ro
C'1
en
Q)
:;
t5
2
Ci5
a
~
'~
Q)
a:
"0
C
ctl
C
,Q
1;50.
(i) 5
~(5
n; Q)
~ C/)
c~
~U')
.~ ci:
a: C
.l!l
'E
Q;
c-
O>
C
fj
':;
CD
"-
u..
00
ill
ci
....
u..
00
25
ci
....
Q)
::>
......."'ffiOQ)
00>0>
~g:3~
_0....
gg~~
...~ ctl
'fR-fR-+>
u.. E
~ E~'
"c Yo
<hE
- E
g E K
O"c fF."
~:2:
en
Q)
:;
t5
2
Ci5
a
~
'(ij
a.
Q)
a:
"0
C
ctl
C
,Q
~ en
,Slo.
<: g
n;(5
.~ Q)
~:g
~~
o C
u..
00
<0
ci
....
u..
00
;;r
ci
....
o
o
0,
W
"00>
Ol C
TIio gE
g e-E Q3
000..
.~ .s
o
cO
(\j
ch~o>a.
c: ctl c ::)
o(ij+=e
:;('),~ (')
d:~~~
Cl)ctlcc=>
g. -E .E -5
~ ~.~ ~
~O:5~
~Cii"~""
.~ ~ c ~
en =:;; co._
~~.9~
g';.og
c75E-5c75
~~&~
~~o~
~1-~:2
~-g~~
a:ctlCla:
.l!l
'E
Q;
C-
O>
C
:2
':;
CD
~~
~ .~
- Q)
UJC-
(\j
o
C'1
to
+
"'"
00
~;:o
.Eoq
oo~
oo_~
(\jU')<D
............
o
...,
....
o
<D
...,
...,
.~
A
~I
E
J5
:<
I
<l
"0
o
u..
00
<0
o
ci
....
u..
00
M
o
ci
....
u..
00
M
o
ci
....
+
"'"
00
~ ;: 0
Soq
oo~
oq~
(\j""<D
............
o
(\j
..".
""'
....
o
C'1
....
...,
(\j
....
~
.,f
0"0 0
-Q)-
Q)'<::u..
~$o-
Q)Q)OO
.<::Clc
f- . Q)
r.ri &1-
Olctl'<::
~ ~ <.J
::> Ol ~
t5(')~
2"'0 L...
- Q) 0
~-5~
.~.l!l &l
c:~o
~(ijo
C/) -.;::; ~
Q)C"O
a:Q)Q)
"0.<::
'=" '00 00
o Q) .
~ ~ ~Ci5
8 ~ (ij (ij
<(UJ(')....J
~$
~ '~
- Q)
UJC-
'"
+
~
00
~ ;: 0
oo~
oo~
0'"
uiw
'" '"
L{)
N
'"
+
~
00
~;:O
.EOO~
OO~
o O~~
NL{)<O
'" '" '"
o
c
o
<0
<h
w
o
(")
'"
lL E
~J.{)~
",,,-E
o fA- 'c
gE
L{)
N
'"
-oE
rr l,{) ~
<fl iF; E
N -g 'c
~ "'1'"
o
"-
(")
o
LCi
L{)
<fl
0>
E
o
::c
'0
0>
0;
.2
~
Q;
ct
'0
c
Ol
<fl
0>
E
o
::c
.Q1
15
o
~
~- '1"-
-0:
0> lL _
<fl _(")
~(lJ_d:]!
:J "r ('S ~
,g <I: ciJ ~
Ol C'i . E
><1:'70
.S _ en () e
<fl C)l C\i 0lC)
~~d:~~
u ~ T"""~'x::>
:J <( , LlJ J::
~g-C:_~g
a;e~oUl
'~ C) C'i ~ C
0>0>' 0<1:
E CI.l T"""_:;::: c::
E => C)l '6 ';j;
8 ~:=-~.2
~ ::J I C ()
>o""'ca:J
~(5I-o~
~2a
U .~
.Q1 0>
wo.
o
N
N
lL
Ul
(0
o
o
'"
lL
Ul
?i
o
o
'"
~
.a
~~
~'"
'" '"
+
~
00
~;:o
000_
o~
0'"
ui<:o
'" '"
o
a;
'"
o
(")
'"
u: E
C!2 Lr) ~ l,{)
'" "- E '"
o fFt'c fFt
gE
cn~ =0 E
~~~giZE ~
c f:/7 N "'O'c fA-
as ~ ~ @ "E
iF;
o
,..;
N
<fl
Ol
a.
Ul
'0
C
Ol
<fl
.0
::>
I-
a
::c
iii
o
o
a.
Ol
c
'1'"
E
';:
Ul
~jg
~.~
- 0>
wo.
N
N
0>
<fl
=>
<(
,s
<fl
~
::>
U
2
Ui
'0
~
'(ij
a.
0>
0:
'0
c
Ol
c
.~ ~
$ e
<(C)
a;
.~ ~
U'E
0> ~
- 0>
wo.
o
o
N.
;:;:;
'"
o
N
cr>
L{)
(")
N
lL
Ul
?i
o
o
'"
o
N
L{)
C\i
'"
o
ill
L{)
<fl
C
Ol
Ui
.~ J!3 ~ J!3.~ J!3
U '1'" U '1'" U '1'"
~Q;~QjJ!2Qj
wo.wo.wo.
'"
N
"-
'"
L{)
(")
cr>
LCi
N
'"
L{)
'"
iF;
L{)
N
iF;
o
co1
"-
N
0>
u
'~
0>
Ul
c:-
~
8.
E
0>
I-
L{)
N
"- "-
'" '"
o
ro
L{)
w
o
<D
iF;
i:i
L{) S ~
~ -'3- ffi
L{)
'"
o
co1 0
'" N
0>
U
'~
0>
Ul
>.
~
L.U
<D
N
L{)
"-
'"
ci
w c
~E
+
~
o
<D
'"
o
(")
'"
lL-
f.J2L.{)
"'''-
a '"
o
'"
E '" L{) E
:J cr (\j :J
E<fl"'E
~ ~ ~'c
E <fi OlE
<fl
a.
E
::>
a.
Ol
c
'0;
c
&
<fl
is
a;
::>
lL
~J!3
~ '~
- 0>
wo.
"-
N
U:c
(!! '1'"
"'0
~o
o~
'" '"
o
o
o
W
'OCJ)
~ ~ ~
E o~~E
'c fJ7 t:-.Q ill
"E 8 .9 a..
S S
o
L{)
iF;
o
L{)
o
"-
L{)
<fl
E
0>
in
>.
Ul
E
c;;
<(
cbo..c
c - u
o c::>
~oUl
l.():e.....
,'00>
0:'0'<::
<I: ."!:
~cL.U
::> Ol c
o ~ ,-
Ci.E~
(]) 0 n
~ en ~
c CJ)Ul
._ c
oo=m
0>0>+::
~ ;: c
20~
g~.Cii
..... .- Q)
Ui~o:
~~~g
~ ~ .~ C;
'00"'0 L.U Q.)
Q) C C en
O:OlOl=>
~J!3
U '~
.Q1 0>
wo.
CJ)
.5 en
..c:t::
E E
:::J ~
- 0>
0.0.
ro
N
g)
0>
:;
+:B
L{)!!:::
~'"
'" '"
L{)
"-
'"
o
'"
w
L{)
"-
'"
o
'"
ro
'"
oj E
g ~ ~ E ~
f:F!t ;.;= f:F?t'c f::A-
~E
~ E
~ ~ K1 E ~
fF)- ;.;:: fA-'c fFj-
~E
o
cO
N
<fl
0>
E
o
::c
-g
0;
u
:g
Ol
Q;
ct
'0
C
Ol
<fl
0>
E
o
::c
.Q1
15
o
~
CJ)
.5 en
~ 'E
::> ~
- 0>
0.0.
CJ)
.5 en
~ 'E
:::J ~
- 0>
0.0.
o
(")
ID
5 c
11'E
!!:::L{)
L{),,-
'" '"
~
::>
+ .~
L{)!!:::
~'"
'" '"
0>
:;
x
u:
'"
'"
o
o
"-
0"
N
'"
o
,..;
o
'"
0>
<fl
=>
<(
.s
<fl
0>
:;
U
2
Ui
'0
~
'(ij
a.
0>
0:
'0
C
Ol
c
,2 (/)
o;g.
2 e
<(C)
c;:;
"-
'"
o
C\J
cO
iF;
o
ill
o
'"
<fl
0>
c
::J
(,;
0;
~
CJ) Ol
.5 (/).5 (f)
~E~E
-=w-=Qs
0.0.0.0.
C\J
(")
"-
'"
o
L{)
'"
'"
'"
L{)
C\J
'"
L{)
C\J
'"
o
ill
ro
(")
<fl
a;
(,;
0;
--'
(,;
;:
0>
Ul
(")
(")
-g E
~~E
2 W"e
01'"
'"
i:i
Ol E
~~E
~ fA 'c
ciE
fF)-
L{)
w
o
ro
N
'"
o
L{)
'"
0>
:::J
caoQ)
> 0 >
08;3~
_OfF)-
~g~~
(")~ Ol
fFtW+>
o
ro
"-
fF)-
o
o
o
N
iF;
~ E
~~E
;.;:: fh'c
~E
oj E
~~E
;.;:: f:I7'c
~E
o
,..;
o
o
'"
u
u
5
u
u'
"C
E
u
.D
<
I
v
-0
o
~
l!!"
:J .S
11 E
!!:::L{)
L{),,-
'" fF)-
o
L{)
'"
L{)
N
'"
~
::>
+ ."E
L{)!!:::
~'"
'" '"
L{)
"-
'"
L{)
"-
'"
o
;:;:;
fF)-
'OCJ)
0> C
~ ~"E 0
~'e-EQ; ~
o 0
~ .s
o
L{)
iF;
L{)
C\J
fF)-
N
o
o
<D
L{)
~
C'..
o
,..;
~o..c::
'::f.'"f o-u
o>u:a: -565
(f) - '" Lri :e .....
;cc_ci:_~ ci::g~ ~
::> '1" C\J ~ <I: ,"!: E
.g<(ch~ g.~~ ~
~ c? T"""~ g ~ ~ 0 .~ -c
.S: ~ ch () ~ ~ ::: 2 ~
~';JN~CJ(I)~g u
:J~d:~ ~~ ~iJ) ~
t5 ~ T"""~ 'x :J .;;; ~ '"ffi Q)
2<( I lJJ.c mID-:+: a:
U5 a.a: cUI..... ~ C
a;5'::f.~65f5Cl~ -g
.~ (5 C")~ ~ c E ~ ~ ~
o>o>'o<l:Ul~O: 0>
~ ~ ~- ~ .S: ~ Lt g> g
Ocri~_~~C~~~ :r:
() a.T""" 2~I-'xC!J ~
~ 5~ ~ g.Cii-cUJ <1> :c
~(5:r:-o~~ ~ ffi:g ~
<fl
E
0>
in
>.
rJl
c
o
'0;
<fl
0>
a.
a.
:::J
Ul
~
u:
CJ)
.S: (I)
~ 'E
::> ~
- 0>
0..0.
CJ)
.S: (I)
~E
.2 Q)
0..0.
'"
(")
o
o
(")
a;
u
.c en
ctl :=:
"5 E
0> 0>
~o.
a;
u
.~ ~
.<:: E
u ~
0> 0>
~o.
L{)
(")
<D
(")
~
,"
8
~ I
1j
E
lS
~I
"tJ
0
;;:;
0 0 0 0 0 0 <;} C\J ... ....
u: c u: c <;} <;} <;} <;} <;} <;} ~ ~ ~
~E ~ 'E
<no <no
C!o 00
o~ o~
~~ ~~
0
co
C\J
u: LL- N"
oo .s oo ,s ~
(;j E (;j E
C!o C!o
Olll Olll
~~ ~~
III III 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
.... .... III III <;} <;} <;} III III III III 0
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ <;}
o
o
III
M
~
u: E
~L{)::J
.". r-- E
o ifl 'c
gE
"" E
0- 0 ::J
<JJlllE
N f:F7.c
~E
o
Lei
'"
<(OO
u.i O-N- a.
a.::l, ::J
~oc: e
e (5 - ~
~:ll~ :ll
:g:J -g':J
(J).~~:mfj
.Q ~ ~ ~ c75
rnTI,....~~~
~.s:c_o<(
.~ CI) :E ~ .E
~~u:g~
U~Clf:gU
.5~'Y~~.5
OOLJ.J<(ellOO
~.Ec?o~
tfia.><(Nm
EtfN"ciJ E
8~.o:o8
Of-"':~O
OJ
u
"r:: U}
co:!:::
.r= E
u ~
'" '"
:::Ec..
....
'"
o
o
0.
i\i
<h
o 0
<n 0
o .".
M N
<h <h
o
co
"',
C\J
<h
o
co
r--
~
o
o
'"
~
u: E
'!2 l.()::J 0 0 L.{') l.() LD 0
...;;tr---Et--.. 0 M CD N ("')
o W'c fA. ~ f:F7 f:F7 tF.t f:F7
gE
""
o-lll
~~
o
",;
o
r--
o
.".
'"
<JJ
:J
<{
.E
<JJ
2:'
::l
tl
2
Ui
'5
~
'Cij
a.
'"
a:
"0
c
ell
C
.~ ~
2 e
<{~
E
::l 0
E III
'c fFt
E
o
cO
Ol
c
'0.
i:i:
"0
C
ell
.>::
c
ell
t::.
(/)
.>::
c
ell
f-
"0
C
::l
o
C,
Q;
"0
C
:J
III
C\J
<h
o
~
C\J
Q)
c
'0.
i:i:
"0
C
ell
.>::
c
ell
t::.
(/)
.>::
c
ell
f-
"0
C
::l
e
~
'"
>
.8
<(
III
C\J
<h
o
cO
C\J
<n
<JJ
'"
c
:::;
(5
"0
c
ell
(/)
ell
~
III
C\J
<h
III
C\J
<h
o
co
<;}
o
o
'"
~
o
o
III
~
o
o
co
~
o
.".
<h
o
.".
<h
o
c::i
N
(/)
'"
"0
a:
0;
"S
u
ell
tl
8.
oo
U'l
N
'"
M
~
o
co
N
N"
<h
'"
<JJ
:J
'5
'"
0>
C
ell
.r=
o
'"
"0
o
o
0>
C
:g
'3
CO
o
N
o
N
U'l
<;}
U'l
C\J
<h
U'l
'"
<h
o
'"
'"
(/)
E
'"
Cii
>-
oo
0>
o
...J
gj
~
-g
ell
(/)
'"
15
Ui
"0
o
o
3:
(/)
"0
8
I
'"
0>
c
ell
a:
U'l
C\J
<h
U'l
'"
U'l
N
<h
U'l
C\J
~
'"
'"
LL
~
'"
z
'"
ul
'"
U
ell
E
::l
LL
o
<ri
o
c::i
N
o
c::i
N
o
Lei
'"
o
N
1f
p.
(/)
E
'"
~
oo
c
o
.00
(/)
2:'
a.
a.
::l
oo
"0
o
o
I
(/)
'"
"0
a:
'"
'6
"0
S2
(/)
'"
"0
a:
o
'Cij'
:::E
!!l
'E
Q;
c..
c
~
"0
E
'"
Cl
m m m m m m C C C ~
.~U}.~U}-~U}.~U}~U}~U}~(J)~(J)~(J)~U}
ro:!:::rn:!:::ro:!:::ro:!:::ro:!:::m:!:::~~~~~~o:!:::
~~~~fj~fj~fj~fj~~';::l';::l';E~
~&~&~&~&~&~&~~~~~~~&
'" :ll
"O:J
0;8'5
'" 0> '"
LL C
15 c
~ = ell
"'::l.r=
ZCOO
OJ
u
'c CIJ
ell ,"",
.r= E
~ (p
:::Ec..
<Xl
'"
'"
'"
o
...
;0:
C\J
...
'"
...
...
...
III
...
<n
.".
r--
...
co
...
Attachment E
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
Inspections Division
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296 - 5832
Fax (434) 972 - 4126
MEMORANDUM
To: Mark Graham - Director of Community Development
From: Jay Schlothauer - Director of Inspections
Date: March 24, 2008
Re: Recommended Revision of Permit Fees for Single-Family Houses
Type of Permit Current Suggested by PFM
Building .14/ sq. ft. 160.00
Electrical 50.00 65.00
Temporary service 25.00 60.00
Earl y service 25.00 95.00
Plumbing 50.00 65.00
Water line 25.00 20.00
Sewer line 25.00 25.00
Mechanical 50.00 60.00
Underground storage tank 50.00 170.00
Aboveground storage tank 25.00 100.00
Gas/oil lines 25.00 35.00
Zoning 20.00 30.00
The table above enumerates the current and suggested fees for all of the various permits typically
associated with the construction of a new single-family house (including townhouses). The
current fees appear in Chapter 5 of the Albemarle County Code, and are described as "residential
structures in use groups R-3 and R-4". (The R-3 and R-4 designations are building code
descriptors that were pertinent when the fee schedule was last modified. Although the R-3 label
is still accurate, the R -4 label will be changed to reflect the newer building code designation of
R-5.) The suggested fees are from Table ES-I of the 2007 Report for Albemarle County
Attachment E
Community Development Fee Study, which was developed by Public Financial Management
(PFM).
It is recommended that one, unified fee be established to cover all of the costs incurred in
processing the paperwork and performing the field inspections related to building a new single-
family dwelling. Now, separate permits are required for each of the items listed in the table
above.
Currently, the electrical. plumbing and mechanical permits cover all of the aspects of those
trades that are common, and necessary, in a new house. The other permits, described in the
following four paragraphs, can be considered as ancillary permits.
The temporary service permit is for the temporary electrical service pole and plug-in that are
needed to provide electricity to a site with no building, which is very typical for a new house.
The early service permit is for energizing certain circuits of the house's electrical panel before
the electrical system is complete. This allows for painting, floor finishing, etc. to proceed in a
well-lit, climate-controlled environment. This is also very typical in new house construction.
Water line and sewer line permits are only required for connection to the public (ACSA) water
and sewer system. They are not required for houses utilizing wells and septic systems (these
elements are regulated by the Health Department).
Underground storage tanks (UST) and aboveground storage tanks (AST) are for propane storage
for houses where gas service from Charlottesville Gas is not available. A new house will not
have both types of tanks; just one or the other. Regardless of the source, gas is being provided in
the vast majority of new houses. Currently the gas/oil line permit is not a part of the overall
mechanical permit.
Two zoning inspections, a preliminary zoning inspection and a final zoning inspection are
performed on all new houses.
In the table above, it is noted that the current fee for the building permit is based on a per-square-
foot formula. PFM has recommended a flat rate of $160. All of the comparable jurisdictions
surveyed by PFM charged for building permits using a per-square-foot formula. It is
recommended that Albemarle continue with a per-square-foot formula for computing a unified
fee.
Currently, the sum of all the ancillary fees is $320. (Since houses are not built with both an AST
and a UST, the $320 sum is based on the lower of the two tank fees.) Using the same AST/UST
assumption. the sum of the recommended ancillary fees is $555. The difference between the two
sums indicates that Albemarle's fee collection is only offsetting 58% of the total costs.
Increasing the current $320 sum by 73% will achieve the $555 figure for recommended ancillary
fees.
County real estate assessors have informally indicated that the average new house size in
Albemarle County is 2,200 sq. ft. (This does not include residential condominiums, which are
Attachment E
not single-family houses for the purposes of this report.) Based on the current fee schedule. the
total permit fee for a 2,200 sq. ft. house, including the ancillary fees described in the paragraph
above, would be $628 (0.14 x 2200 + 320 = 628). Increasing that fee by 73%, for full recovery
of costs, results in a total fee of $1086. Converting that total to a per-square-foot unit cost equals
$0.49 (1086 7 2200 = 0.494).
It is understood, that in this conversion of set fees to per-square-foot unit fees, the 73% increased
recovery factor will only pertain perfectly to the 2,200 square foot example used in the exercise.
The percentage figure will be less for square footages below 2,200 and greater for square
footages above 2,200. However, by using the average square footage for the starting point, it is
anticipated that overall fee recovery, for single-family houses, will accurately offset the expenses
incurred in delivering permit processing and field inspection activities. A review of building
permit records over a recent four-month period indicates that 138 permits for single-family
houses, totaling $97,405 in fees (including ancillary fees) were processed. Assuming the 73%
fee increase, this total figure would have been $168,511.
The preceding assessment has been based on "new" single-family dwellings. However, it is felt
that the findings can be equivalently applied to additions to single-family dwellings. Although
all of the ancillary permits are not typically utilized in the construction of an addition to a house
(i.e. temporary service, early service, water line, sewer line, underground / aboveground storage
tanks and gas / oil lines), the major ancillary permits (i.e. electrical, plumbing, mechanical and
zoning) are. Despite not utilizing all of the ancillary permits, as was the assumption in the new
house calculations, the fee recovery percentage figure will be less than 73% because the typical
square footage of an addition is less than that for the average new house (2,200 sq. ft.).
Equivalency between new house costs and addition costs is expected because both the County's
cost to service the addition permits and the lower recovery percentage will balance each other.
Changing from the current system of one main building permit and numerous ancillary permits
to a single permit for new house and residential addition construction will expedite the
paperwork processing aspect of permit issuance. It will make no difference to the field
inspection process. Recently, the county initiated a program where field inspections can be
scheduled by individual citizens and contractors by way of the internet. Currently, effort is
expended in determining whether or not the required ancillary permits have been issued prior to
setting up field inspections for new houses and residential additions. The proposed unified
permit system will alleviate this effort; it will only be necessary to verify that the unified permit
has been issued.
It is recommended that the current building permit fee schedule be amended to include the
unified permit for new single-family dwellings and additions to single-family dwellings. The
recommended fee is $0.49 per square foot.
JS/js
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Review of Land Use Taxation Program
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT /PROPOSALlREQU EST:
Decision regarding appointment of study committee
and/or re-validation of the Land Use Taxation
Program
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Graham, and
Wiggans
REVIEWED BY:
~
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Supervisors recently requested that staff bring the County's Land Use Taxation Program to it for discussion
earlier than currently scheduled in the Community Development Work Plan. Review of this program was included among
the numerous strategies identified in the most recent amendment to the Comprehensive Plan regarding the Rural Areas.
.taff is in the process of preparing information for the Board's consideration regarding whether to implement are-validation
rogram in order to eliminate potential abuse. This item was scheduled for Board review in May. Re-validation has been
discussed a number of times over the past several years, with no clear conclusion from the Board on whether or not to
proceed.
Both the broader policy issue of potential changes to the Land Use Taxation Program and the narrower issue of assuring
the quality of the current program through re-validation was previously discussed by the Board in 2001. The attached
executive summary and minutes from that meeting (Attachments A and B) provide a good overview of various alternatives
that may be considered in bringing about potential changes to the program, as well as covering the re-validation process.
At the conclusion of the Board's discussion in 2001, a majority of the Board decided not to consider changes to the Land
Use Taxation Program, but agreed to further review re-validation. However, when this item was brought back to the Board
for consideration, the Board decided not to pursue re-validation. In 2005, the Board again asked for a review of re-
validation and once again decided not to pursue it. Finally, in 2007, the Board requested staff to bring forward information
to reconsider re-validation and subsequently asked for a review of the entire program for various reasons, including the fact
that the program was identified as a potential strategy in the Rural Areas section of the Comprehensive Plan.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Objective: "By June 30, 2010 increase the protection of the County's rural areas by implementing the key strategies in the
Rural Areas Plan."
DISCUSSION:
Given the numerous discussions the Board has had since 2001 regarding the Land Use Taxation Program, clarification of
the Board's objectives for reconsidering the program is needed to determine how to effectively move forward. If the
Board's objective is to ensure that only truly qualified land is included in the program in order to eliminate potential abuse,
re-validation is an appropriate option to pursue. However, if the Board's objective is focused on reconsidering eligibility for
end to be placed under land use taxation, the length of time land is restricted from development, or another broader policy
sue, there are a number of options that could be pursued. The advantages and disadvantages of re-validation and these
other options regarding the eligibility length of time land is restricted from development, etc. are addressed in the 2001
executive summary (Attachment A). Based on the Board's discussion and clarification of its objectives for addressing this
program, staff will be able to better assist the Board in moving forward on the issues of policy changes and/or a re-
validation program.
AGENDA TITLE: Review of Land Use Taxation Program
April 9, 2008
Page 2
Staff is prepared to proceed with an evaluation of the entire program or re-validation, depending on the Board's direction.
As previously indicated, reconsideration of the land use program is among many strategies for protection of the Rural
Areas. In order to evaluate this program, this strategy calls for the establishment a committee, whose charge and
membership would need to be determined by the Board. While the Finance Department is prepared to move forward with
re-validation, the much more extensive evaluation involved with reconsideration of the Land Use Taxation Program overall
will have a more significant impact on staff and will require balancing this initiative with other previously approved work
priorities.
In considering whether to reevaluate the program through the creation of a committee, the Board should prioritize this effort
alongside the work of an already stretched staff. A work session on prioritizing rural area strategies was previously
requested by the Board and is scheduled after the conclusion of the budget process. If the Board wishes to proceed with
the formation of a committee today, it will effectively prioritize this review over other rural area strategies due to the staff
time and effort needed to examine the program through a committee process. Furthermore, in considering whether to
create a committee, the Board should consider whether proceeding is appropriate given the advantages and disadvantages
outlined in Attachment A. In particular, the Board will need to carefully consider the potential consequences to rural area
development with any potential change and also its potential of having the opposite consequence regarding rural area
development, as is outlined in the attached analysis.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The budget impact of this item depends on the direction provided by the Board on how to proceed. However, unless
consultant services are required, staff anticipates a minimal budget impact with either direction the Board may pursue.
RECOMMENDATION:
Given the current staffing levels in Community Development and the fact that re-validation is a step that would address the
issue of potential abuse of the land use program, staff recommends that the formation of a committee be reconsidered
after re-validation is implemented and its impact can be evaluated. If the Board approves this recommendation, a review of
re-validation will be brought before the Board at the first meeting in May.
Should the Board decide to move forward with the formation of a committee to evaluate the Land Use Taxation Program,
staff will need clarification regarding the Board's objectives so that a clear charge can be developed for the committee's
work. If this is the direction the Board chooses, staff will also bring the Community Development Work Plan back to the
Board for re-prioritization and to determine the committee's membership.
ATTACHMENTS
A - September 5,2001 Executive Summary
B - September 5, 2001 Board Minutes
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Land Use Taxation Program
AGENDA DATE:
September 5, 2001
ITEM NUMBER:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Update on Albemarle County's Land Use Value Taxation
Program/Options for Changing Land Use Policy and
Implementation
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
STAFF CONT ACT(S):
Mr. Tucker, Ms. White & Mr. Breeden
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The attached report on the Land Use Value Taxation Program is brought to the Board in response to several
questions on program implementation, as well as a request for more information on the Sliding Scale Roll-Back
legislation. This report includes a brief summary of the enabling legislation, the general policies and procedures
and updated figures on the size and deferred value of the program. A separate section discusses some of the
same alternatives to the current land-use taxation program that were presented to the Board in a 1994 report, as
well as a discussion of an annual revalidation process and the Sliding Scale Rollback legislation.
.ISCUSSION:
Under the current land-use value taxation policy, the County has approximately 310,319 acres under land use,
approximately 65% of the County's total acreage. The annual tax deferral to the County is approximately $7.2
million dollars, a deferral that has been exacerbated over the past 10 years by rapidly declining SLEAC values in
horticulture and agriculture.
Following the program overview, the second part of the report is divided into three sections to address several
policy or implementation options:
The first section updates the three options for changing land use eligibility that were discussed in the 1994 Board
report. Those three options were:
· Eliminate all categories of use value taxation (only eligible land within agricultural forestal districts would
qualify for land use).
· Use value taxation for open space classification only.
· Eliminate use value on forest land only.
The second section offers two options for tightening land use value taxation eligibility requirements:
· Require periodic revalidation of land use properties.
· Expanded review of parcels in the land use program by County staff.
The third section provides an analysis of the new Sliding Scale Roll-Back provision:
· Allows a longer roll-back period in exchange for a higher tax deferment.
RECOMMEN DATION:
_hiS report is brought to the Board for information purposes only and does not require any action at this time.
Should the Board be interested in pursuing any of these options, staff would be prepared to come back to the Board
with a more in-depth analysis of the cost, impact, timeframe, etc. of that specific option.
ATTACHMENT A
Land U se Value Taxation
statutory Provisions for Land Use
Under the provisions of Title 58.1-3230 of the Code of Virginia, a county, city, or town may
adopt an ordinance that provides for use-value assessment under four categories: real
estate devoted to agricultural use, horticultural use, forest use and open space use. Land
used in agricultural and forestal production in an agricultural district, a forestal district, or an
agricultural/forestal district is eligible for use value assessment in the absence of a local
ordinance. The State Land Use Advisory Council (SLEAC) was created in 1973 to estimate
the use value of eligible land for each locality participating in a use-value taxation program.
Once a local land use ordinance is adopted for a land use classification, any parcel that
meets the state criteria for that category must be granted use value taxation. The County
does not have the authority to impose additional eligibility requirements based on zoning
restrictions or on the owner's future intentions for the use of the land.
The enabling legislation further states that before use-value assessment is granted, the local
assessing officer must determine that the land meets the uniform standards for agricultural
and horticultural use as defined by the Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services,
for forest use as defined by the State Forester, or for open-space use by the Department of
Conservation and Recreation.
The County adopted all four categories of land use in 1975. Each category of land use must
meet prescribed standards and minimum acreage requirements:
. Aqriculture Use: Land used for agricultural use must consist of a minimum of five acres
and must meet prescribed standards for a bona fide production for sale of crops and/or
livestock or be in an approved soil conservation program.
. Horticulture Use: Land used for horticulture use must consist of a minimum of five acres
and must meet prescribed standards for bona fide production for sale of fruits,
vegetables, ornamental plants and/or ornamental products.
. Forest Use: Land used for forestal use must be a minimum of twenty acres and must
include standing timber and trees devoted to tree growth in such quantity and so
spaced and maintained as to constitute a forest area.
. Open Space: Land in open space must be at least five acres or such greater minimum
acreage, set by local ordinance, and be used to provide or preserve the land for park or
recreational purposes, conservation of land or other natural resources, floodways,
historic or scenic purposes or to assist in the shaping of the character, direction, or timing
of community development, or for the public interest and consistent with the local land
use plan. In 1990, the Board set the minimum acreage for open space at 20 acres.
Application Process
A property owner must submit an application for taxation on the basis of use assessment at
least sixty days prior to the tax year for which the reduced taxation is sought. Anyone
receiving use value taxation must submit a reapplication whenever a change in acreage or
Land Use Report
2
04/04/08
.
.
.
a change in land use occurs. Albemarle County charges a fee of $15 per parcel plus 15
cents for each acre over one hundred acres for initial applications and reapplications.
A. In order to qualify a property owner must certify on the application that the
property meets the standards of classification prescribed by the Commissioner
of Agriculture, the Director of Conservation and Recreation, or the state
Forester.
Land use guidelines provide that the following items may be helpful in determining eligibility for
land use:
1. The assigned USDA/ ASCS farm number.
2. Federal tax forms (1040F) Farm Expenses and Income, (4835) Farm Rental Income
and Expenses, or (1040E) Cash rent for Agricultural land.
3. A conservation Farm Management and/or Forest Management plan prepared
by a professional or a letter of intent stating that the land will be forested.
4. Evidence that gross sales averaged more than $1,000 annually over the previous
three years.
Although a number of localities require these items, the County requests these documents only
if a physical review of the property is insufficient to determine eligibility. It should be kept in
mind that most of the property in the land use program originally qualified in the mid 1970s and
no revalidation has been done since that time.
During the biennial reassessment, the County's real estate division does its best to ensure that
land use properties continue to meet the classification standards set by the state. If
continued eligibility of the property is suspect, the Assessor will require the landowner to
submit proof that the land is either being farmed or forested. If the County Assessor
determines that the property no longer meets the classification standards, the property is
removed from land use and roll-back tax is assessed. Any property owner denied use value
assessment may appeal the County Assessor's decision to the local Land Use Advisory
Board.
Roll-back
When land changes to a non-qualifying use, the property is then subject to roll-back taxes
for the year of the change and for five years preceding the change, including 10% simple
interest. In the years 1991-2000, Albemarle County collected $1250,627 in roll-back taxes on
7,187 acres (see Exhibit A). Legislative attempts to increase the roll-back period from 5 years
to 10 years have repeatedly failed in the General Assembly.
State-Wide Utilization of the Land Use ProQram
There are 95 counties in the Commonwealth of Virginia, 69 of them allowed land use value
taxation in 2001. Of this number, 42 counties allow for agriculture, horticulture, forestry, and
open space use. Twenty counties allow for only three uses with the major excluded
category being open space. Six counties allow only agriculture and horticulture as
qualifying uses: Amelia, Floyd, Lancaster, Orange, Prince Edward and Wythe. Only Amelia
County has changed the status of its land use program (eliminating all categories except
agriculture/horticulture) since the program's inception in 1973.
Land Use Report
3
04/04/08
Current status of Land Use in Albemarle County
Based on current real estate assessment data, Albemarle County has 310,319 acres under
land use, approximately 65% of the County's 473,600 acres. Agriculture accounts for 103,087
of the County's land use acres (33%),204,719 acres (66%) are in forestry and the remaining
2,513 acres (1 %) is in horticulture and open space. Of the total amount of acres under land
use, 21 % (66,100 acres) are currently enrolled in agricultural/forestal districts. Since 1994, the
acreage enrolled in the land use program has declined 7%.
Tax Implications of Land Use in Albemarle County
Exhibit A. below shows the deferred assessment, the deferred tax and the roll-back taxes
collected since 1991. Assuming 2001 deferred tax revenues of $7.2 million, the FY2000/2001
real estate tax revenue at $686,700 per penny, and a tax rate of $0.76, the additional cost to
ineligible properties is approximately 10.5 cents on the tax rate.
Exhibit A.
Number Numb Tax
Calend of er of Rat Deferred Deferred Roll-back
arYear Parcels Acres e Assessment Tax Collected Acres
1991 4,388 329,84 0.72 583,345,0 4,192,884 111 ,407 1,931
1992 4,417 * 0.72 581,014,0 4,183,301 119,111 665
1993 4,550 331 ,14 0.72 751,753,7 5,412,627 139,016 783
1994 4,611 * 0.72 741 ,335,9 5,337,619 200,901 814
1995 4,613 332,47 0.72 764,241,6 5,502,540 105,755 797
1996 4,680 * 0.72 763,538,5 5,497,4 78 99,822 547
1997 4,784 321 ,19 0.72 759,462,5 5,468,131 99,097 648
1998 4,841 * 0.72 761,253,8 5,481 ,028 108,493 509
1999 4,743 315,30 0.72 761,784,4 5,484,848 176,061 656
2000 4,953 * 0.76 781,041,4 5,935,915 90,964 437
2001 4,983 310,31 0.72 950,530,6 7,222,437 ** **
* Acreage report is done in reassessment years only.
Exacerbating the burden on ineligible properties in the past few years, particularly 1999 and
2001, has been the increasing disparity between the rising fair market values on rural land
and the decreasing SLEAC land use values. Attachment A shows SLEAC values for land use
properties in Albemarle County over the last ten years. The suggested 2002 SLEAC values
when compared to 2001 values indicate an average decrease of 13% in the agricultural
rates, a 31 % decrease in horticulture rates, and a 10% increase in forestry rates. The 2002
suggested SLEAC rates are being furnished for comparison purposes only, as new SLEAC
rates in Albemarle County will not take effect until 2003, the next general reassessment.
Factors driving the decline include continued low negative returns, a 7% decline in
government payments from TY 2001 to TY 2002, an increase in long-term interest rates (SLEAC
rates are determined using data that is at least two years old) and increased machinery
costs in some counties where producers are switching tillage types in an effort to increase
yields. Orchard values are experiencing extreme declines - on average nearly 50%, due to
Land Use Report 4 04/04/08
.
.
.
continued losses resulting in net zero returns. A large number of orchards are going out of
business in Virginia as market preferences change. The varieties of apples grown in Virginia
are no longer in demand and most apples in Virginia are being processed or used forjuice.
Orchards that are staying in business are deriving their income from real estate transactions
or retail"niche" stores. Exhibit B. below summarizes SLEAC value trends in the preceding
decade.
Exhibit B. Average SLEAC Values in
Albemarle County
III 700
~ 600
o 500
C 400
s::
_ 300
5 200
E 100
<( 0
___Avg. Agriculture
A vg. f-brticulture
~Avg. Forestry
Q; ~ ~ !O ~ ~
~Oj ~Oj ~Oj ~ fJ pyt;;;5 ~'0
OJ OJ Q) OJ Q) '0
Year
As stated above, properties ineligible for use value taxation bear a greater share of the
property tax as a result of the land use program. It is implicit in the concept of land use
taxation that the tax burden is shifted to other taxpayers, as well as implicit in the program
intent that the redistribution of the tax burden is in the public interest both to the direct
beneficiaries of land use and to the other taxpayers who derive indirect benefits from land
preservation. Whether one can demonstrate that land will ultimately be preserved or
protected for the long run benefit of the community is a separate question.
Land Use Value Taxation Policy and Implementation Options
This part of the report is divided into three sections: the first section presents three options for
changing categories of land eligible for land use. The second section offers options for
tightening eligibility requirements - one through an annual revalidation and the other
through a dedicated staff person to monitor land use. The third section provides an analysis
of new legislation that allows a longer roll-back period in exchange for a higher deferment.
Land Use Eligibility
Option 1: Eliminate all categories of use value taxation
Result: Only eligible land that meets the SLEAC criteria within agricultural/forestal
districts would qualify for land use.
Advantages:
· Eliminating all categories of land use would have a large impact on County revenues.
With only 66,100 acres currently enrolled in agricultural/forestal districts with $1.3 million in
deferred taxes, the immediate benefit to the County could be approximately $5.9 million
annually. Roll-back taxes would continue to be collected on parcels that were
previously in land use, but not in the agricultural/forestal districts, for up to five years, if
the use changed to a non-qualifying use. Realized revenues may be substantially lower,
Land Use Report 5 04/04/08
since some rural properties would likely join an agricultural/forestal district. (Since this
would have such an immediate and negative impact on the farming community, it is
assumed that the effective date of such a policy change would be deferred to allow
rural parcels to either join an existing agricultural/forestal district or create a new one.)
. Since agricultural/forestal districts are permitted only in the rural areas, land use in the
growth areas would be eliminated. Currently there are 4,371 acres in growth areas with
deferred tax revenues of $334,160 (see Exhibit C.). Of land use acreage in growth areas,
2117 acres are in the urban ring, 797 acres are near airport road, 1269 acres are in Crozet
and 188 acres are east of town, near Boyd's tavern.
Exhibit C.
Zonina AcreaQe
Ra 1,500
R1 1,923
R2 273
R4 361
R6 190
R15 97
prd 27
These properties are still in the program because they were rezoned by governmental
action where the property owner had no decision in the rezoning. The vast majority were
zoned during the original zoning process, which went into effect in the late 1960s.
Although this option would eliminate land use in the growth areas, targeted properties
over 25 acres with environmental, recreational, scenic or historical benefit to the County
could receive land use by being designated a mini-agricultural/forestal district within the
growth area.
. Requires a 4 to 10 year commitment from bona fide agricultural/forestal parcels and
ultimately gives local government more control over the location and extent of land use
taxation.
Disadvantages:
. Eliminating all categories of land use may have a destabilizing and devastating effect
on the bona fide agricultural community, because uncertainty will be created around
long-term investment r.eturn. The impact on the small farmer may be devastating,
since tax increases may rise to levels exceeding a farmer's annual income.
. Potential loss of important natural resources.
. Property owners no longer qualifying for land use may pose the threat of opening up
their land to immediate development. Although some support this view, others argue
that development is linked to demand and that the rate of growth would not change
significantly.
. Administrative problem to rapidly organize and implement new agricultural/forestal
districts.
Land Use Report
6
04/04/08
.
.
.
Option 2: Use Value Taxation for Open Space Classification Only
Result: This option would eliminate use value taxation for agricultural, forestal
and horticultural classifications and allow only the open space designation. Based on
a 1989 amendment to the use-value taxation law, a locality may authorize use-value
for open space only. This option could achieve a similar effect as Option 1, which
would eliminate use value except for eligible parcels within the agricultural/forestal
districts. It may also encourage property owners to grant an easement to a public
body in return for the benefit of use value taxation and the assurance that the
property will be preserved as open space.
If this option is chosen, the property must meet one of the following three requirements:
1. be within an agricultural, a forestal, or an agricultural/forestal district;
2. be subject to a recorded perpetual easement that is held by a public body,
and promotes the open space use classification;
3. be subject to a recorded commitment entered into by the landowners with
the local governing body not to change the use to a non-qualifying use for a
time period stated in the commitment of not less than four years nor more
than ten years. The withdrawal procedures for this commitment are similar to
those of the ag/forestal districts.
Advantages:
· May be best alternative from a planning perspective, because it increases local
government's capability of directing land use taxation toward the goals of the
comprehensive plan.
· Involves governing body in decisions about land to be included in
agricultural/forestal districts or subject to a contractual agreement. Allows more
Board control over the range and extent of use value taxation through the contract
option.
· Requires a commitment from the property owner to preserve the land for a specific
period of time in exchange for the tax benefits of land use.
Disadvantages:
· Would require current recipients of land use to make a commitment not to develop
their land for a specified period of time. However, length of commitment could be
based on proximity to the path of development with a minimum agreement period
of 4 years.
· Administrative problems to either enroll current eligible properties into
agricultural/forestal districts or develop individual contracts for Board approval.
Option 3: Eliminate Use Value on Forest Land Only
Result: In Albemarle County, this would eliminate more than 64% of the land
currently enrolled in land use (199,436 acres).
Land Use Report
7
04/04/08
Advantages:
. Would have initial large increase in revenues. Although it is not possible to break out
the deferred taxes on forest land only, assuming the value of forest land at half that
of agricultural land, the realized revenues could be as much as $3.3 million. However,
since much of the forestland might eventually be incorporated into an
agricultural/forestal district, recovered revenues could be significantly less.
. Parcels in agricultural/forestal districts could still qualify for land use taxation, if eligible
under the forest classification.
Disadvantages:
. Forestland provides non-market benefits to the community, i.e. temperature
moderation, reductions in non-point source pollution, critical slopes, natural beauty
and animal habitat.
. The comprehensive plan purposefully established the 21-acre rural lot size in order to
qualify for all types of use value taxation, including forestal.
Land Use Eligibility Standards
Option 4: Require periodic revalidation of land use properties
Once the property has qualified, the governing body may require any property owner to
revalidate annually on any land previously approved for taxation on the basis of land use.
The code also allows a locality to impose a revalidation fee every six years. The revalidation
fee cannot exceed the original application fee. Currently in Albemarle County there is no
revalidation requirement or revalidation fee.
The four types of documentation listed in the application section could be required in a
periodic revalidation process. Currently appraisal staff visits all properties on a biennial basis,
and the parcels are field checked at the time of the appraisal review for compliance to
state standards. Thus, receipt of these documents has never been strictly enforced, and the
need to revalidate land use parcels on an annual basis has never been required.
It has been the policy of the County Assessor's office to monitor all parcels in the land use
program to ensure they meet and maintain all State and local land use standards.
However, it is becoming more difficult for appraisal staff to provide the ongoing supervision
required by the program.
Advantages of requiring revalidation:
. May ensure that necessary qualifying information concerning land use parcels is
accurate on an annual basis.
. Revalidation fee would be a source of revenue. (The current fee would produce
approximately $72,000 every sixth year.)
. Process would notify all property owners (especially new owners) on an annual
basis that they are enrolled in a tax deferral program.
. Proof could be required from the land use participants of a
farming/forestry/horticulture operation (i.e., Schedule F, income receipts, farm
numbers, etc.)
. Acts as an annual reminder of the standards of qualifying uses.
Land Use Report 8 04/04/08
Disadvantages of requiring revalidation:
· Revalidation fee can only be charged every sixth year.
· Additional cost to administer the program (i.e., increased staff. office space,
storage space). At a minimum this expense is estimated to be $55,000 per year,
compared to $72,000 in revenue every sixth year.
· Appraisal staff currently visits land use parcels on a biennial basis, which makes
revalidation seem redundant.
· Possible confusion resulting from filing land use application and revalidation form
in the same year, if property is subdivided after revalidation.
· Failure to meet deadline(s) would result in parcel being removed from the
program, resulting in taxpayer complaints.
.
Option 5: Ongoing review of parcels in the land use program by a County staff
person devoted solely to assuring program compliance
Currently, County real estate assessors do their best to make sure properties enrolled in
the land use program continue to meet classification standards. County personnel
devoted solely to the land use program were phased out approximately twenty years
ago as the number of new land use program applications declined.
Advantages of specialized land use compliance inspections:
· Increased expertise of inspectors and increased effectiveness of inspections (e.g.
scheduling inspections of agricultural tracts during growing season) could be more
effective in identifying non-complying parcels.
· More cost effective than annual revalidation.
· Places a lesser burden on landowners than revalidation.
.
Disadvantages:
· Additional cost to administer the program (i.e., hiring an assessor dedicated to
land use compliance).
· Possible redundancy with assessor staff visits.
Additional costs that would be incurred by implementing Option 4 or 5 could be partially
offset by raising the County's land use program application and/or reapplication fee.
Albemarle County currently charges an initial application and reapplication fee of $15
per parcel plus 15 cents for each acre over one hundred acres. This fee has not been
changed since the County adopted the land use program in 1975. The table below
compares the application fee in Albemarle with those of surrounding jurisdictions.
Exhibit D.
Localit
.
Land Use Report
A lication Fee
$1 5 er acre over 100 acres
$12 er acre over 100 acres
$10 er acre over 100 acres
$15
$10
$50
9 04/04/08
Exhibit E. below indicates the amount of fees received by Albemarle County for land use
applications and reapplications for the past five years. Relatively few new parcels come
into the land use program because most eligible parcels are already enrolled in the
program.
Exhibit E.
Number of Application Fees Total
Year Applications Collected
New Reaoolv New Reaoolv # of Aoos. Fees
1996 27 252 $ 405 $ 279 $
3,783 4,188
1997 89 174 263
1,335 2,608 3,943
1998 30 251 281
585 3,772 . 4,357
1999 41 162 203
685 2,435 3,120
2000 32 254 286
480 3,809 4,289
Total 219 1,093 1,312 $19,89
$3,490 $16,407 7
Legislative Option
Option 6: Sliding Scale Roll-back Legislation
In recent years the majority of urban localities have experienced rapid growth and have
looked at additional methods of containing sprawl. In 2000 a bill was introduced in the
General Assembly and ultimately signed into law that allows localities, upon adoption of
a local ordinance, to provide for a Sliding Scale Roll-back. The Sliding Scale Roll-back
extends the roll-back from 5 years up to 20 years. In conjunction with this extension, the
deferment is also increased up to 99% of the current use value. To participate, a property
owner must enter into an agreement with the locality and by doing so, gives up their right
to change the use of the property for up to 20 years.
There are several options available for setting the contractual time frame. The deferment
ca n be increased at a rate of 5% each year up to the 20th year where it would be increased
4% and the deferment held at 99% thereafter. The scale could be set up to give a 50%
reduction for the first 10 years of a 20-year contract and increased to 99% for the last 10
years or the scale could be set up to give 99% reduction every year during the 20-year
contract. It could also be set at a fractional part of the 20-year period, for example 10 or 15
years, with a prorated reduction in the deferment.
To date, only Loudoun County has adopted the Sliding Scale Ordinance. They chose to set
their scale at 50% reduction for 10 years and 99% reduction for the next 10 years. A copy of
Loudoun County's ordinance is attached accompanied by some of their statistical
information regarding program participation (Attachment B). At this time only 9 % of the
eligible applicants have signed up for the program. This equates to about 11 % of the land
available for the program. On average, each applicant saves an additional $246 annually.
Land Use Report
10
04/04/08
Albemarle County would need to conduct its own analysis to determine the costs of
implementing the Sliding Scale Roll-back.
Advantages of the Sliding Scale Roll-back:
. Properties under this agreement might not be developed for up to 20 years.
. The additional tax deferment could be insignificant to the locality.
. The roll-back could be up to 20 years versus the current 5 years, thus a source of
additional revenue.
Disadvantages of the scale:
. Data will have to be maintained for up to 20 years, as opposed to the current five
years.
. The current sliding scale roll-back legislation does not require a participant to
continue in the land use program for the entire 20-year period. The sliding scale
agreement is revocable on the part of the landowner at anytime during the entire
agreement period. For example, if the owner chose to change the use of the
property to a non-qualifying use, the parcel would have to be removed from the
program and a roll-back bill issued.
Land Use Report
11
04/04/08
September 5,2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 1)
Agenda Item No. 13. Land Use Taxation Program, Presentation.
Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, said this report on the Land Use Value Taxation Program is
in response to several questions from the Board on program implementation, as well as a request for more
information about Sliding Scale Roll-Back legislation. Staff included in its report a brief summary of the
enabling legislation, general policies and procedures, and updated figures on the size and deferred value of
the program. A separate section discusses some of the same alternatives to the current land use taxation
program that were presented to the Board in a 1994 report, as well as a discussion of an annual revalidation
process and the Sliding Scale Roll-back legislation.
Mr. Breeden said the County currently has approximately 310,319 acres in the land use program, or
approximately 65 percent of the County's total acreage. The annual tax deferral is approximately $7.2 million,
a deferral that has been exacerbated over the past ten years by rapidly declining SLEAC values in
horticulture and agriculture.
Currently, a property owner must submit an application for taxation on the basis of use assessment
at least sixty days prior to the tax year for which the reduced taxation is sought. Anyone receiving use value
taxation must submit a reapplication whenever a change in acreage or a change in land use occurs.
Albemarle County charges a fee of $15 per parcel plus 15 cents for each acre over one hundred acres for
initial applications and reapplication. This does not provide a lot of revenue. In order to quality, a property
owner must certify on the application that the property meets the standards of classification prescribed by the
State Commissioner of Agriculture, the State Director of Conservation and Recreation, or the State Forester.
Mr. Breeden said the County can require certain items to help in determining eligibility for land use:
USDAlASCS farm number; Federal tax forms (1040F), (4835) or (1040E); a conservation Farm Management
and/or Forest Management plan; or evidence that gross sales averaged more than $1000 annually over the
previous three years. He said the County requests these documents only if a physical review of the property
is insufficient to determine eligibility. It should be kept in mind that most of the
property in the land use program originally qualified in the mid-1970s and there has been no
revalidation of that information since then. (Note: Mr. Dorrier returned to the meeting at 3:51 p.m.)
Mr. Breeden said the major part of the program is the roll-back when land changes to a non-
qualifying use. Between 1991 and 2000, there were 7787 acres on which there was a roll-back and the
County collected $1,250,627 in roll-back taxes. He said that for the year 2001, the deferral was $7.2 million.
On a 76 cent tax rate ($676,000 per penny), that equates to 10.5 cents, so the tax rate could be reduced by
that much if there were not land use taxation.
Mr. Perkins asked if there is a committee which works on the application process. Mr.
Breeden said it only deals with some of the equalization and appeal processes. If it is determined that a
parcel will be disqualified, the property owner can appeal to that board. Mr. Davis said it is an advisory board,
and has no legal status. It was created to provide a citizen review of decisions in regard to land use
valuation.
Mr. Breeden said the amount of the deferred tax over the years has increased from $4.0 million in
1991 to $7.2 million currently. Fair market values are steadily increasing, but SLEAC values have continually
gone down. The decreases have at times been as much as 50 to 60 percent.
Mr. Perkins said the change from $4.0 million to $7.2 million may look alarming, but in looking at the
County's current budget and the current assessment of property, it is really right in line. Mr. Breeden said the
amount of the deferral will continue to increase. SLEAC values are only used each two years because of the
biennial assessment cycle. If the County was using the 2002 SLEAC values, it would be looking at a 13
percent decrease on agricultural and a 31 percent decrease on horticultural values, with a small increase in
forestry. He does not think the 2003 values will be much different.
ATTACHMENT B
.
September 5, 2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
Mr. Dorrier asked if these values are the same throughout Virginia and across the country. Mr.
Breeden said they are consistent. It is hard to compare Albemarle County with others on forestry land
because a lot of the SLEAC values are based on crop values. He said there are counties which have a lot of
commercial crops, but there is not much of that in Albemarle County.
Mr. Breeden said staff also listed some options the Board can consider for the land use program.
Staff does not recommend any of them, but did it only for the Board's information. Option One would be to
eliminate the Land Use Ordinance. Under State law, any land currently part of an agricultural/forestal district
would qualify for land use taxation, but that is all the acreage that would qualify. Of the 310,000 acres in the
land use program, only 66,000 acres are currently in those districts. The County would save about $5.2
million in deferred taxes, but, if the Board did this, there would probably be requests to put more land in
agricultural/forestal districts.
Ms. Thomas asked if there are any properties that could not be in an agricultural/forestal district that
are included in the 310,000 acres currently getting land use taxation. Mr. Breeden said he is not totally
familiar with district requirements, but he believes there are some which would not qualify, lands in growth
areas would not. Mr. Davis said that in the Rural Areas there are some basic size requirements that have to
be met, and there need to be contiguous parcels. It is possible there could be some isolated parcels where
land around it could not be in an agricultural/forestal district. Ms. Sherry Buttrick said the land has to be
within two miles of the core of the district.
Mr. Breeden said Option Two would be to allow use value taxation only for the Open Space
Classification. He said it would probably give the Board the most control because it would be able to approve
or disapprove those applications. There would need to be a signed agreement by the property owner not to
develop or change the use of the property for a specified period of time. This option could achieve a similar
effect as Option 1, which would eliminate use value except for eligible parcels within the agricultural/forestal
districts. It might also encourage property owners to grant an easement to a public body in return for the
benefit of use value taxation and the assurance that the property will be preserved as open space.
Option Three is to eliminate use value on Forest Land only. In Albemarle County, this would
eliminate more than 64 percent of the land currently enrolled in land use (199,436 acres). The realized
revenues from this change could be as much as $3.3 million in deferred taxes. However, the land in an
agricultural/forestal district would continue to qualify for that option no matter what the local ordinance says.
Option Four is to require a periodic revalidation of land use properties. Albemarle County has never
done this. By State law, a fee could be charged for doing a revalidation every sixth year.
Ms. Thomas asked if there is a fee which can be charged other than a revalidation fee because she
had been told that Fauquier has an annual fee. Mr. Breeden said he does not know of any such fee. The
Code allows a revalidation every year, but a fee can be charged only each six years, and it can be no more
than the amount of the original fee. He said this would require more staff and place burdens on taxpayers to
comply. Staff thinks it would cost a minimum of $50,000 to do that every year, and only $72,000 of that cost
would be recovered each six years.
Option Five is an on-going review of parcels in the land use program by a County staff person
devoted solely to assuring program compliance. That person would be monitoring (make sure properties
enrolled in the land use program continue to meet classification standards) the parcels currently in the
program. The property owner would have no new requirements placed on him. If this were done, the County
might try to raise some of the original application fees to recover some of the costs. There have not been
changes in the fee since the program was adopted in the mid-1970s.
Option Six would be to ask for information on the Sliding Scale Roll-back Legislation. He said that in
2000 a bill was introduced in the General Assembly and ultimately signed into law that allows localities, upon
adoption of a local ordinance, to provide for a Sliding Scale Roll-back. The Sliding Scale Roll-back extends
the roll-back from five years up to 20 years. In conjunction with this extension, the deferment is also
increased up to 99 percent of the current use value. To participate, a property owner must enter into an
ATTACHMENT B
September 5, 2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 3)
agreement with the locality and by doing so, gives up the right to change the use of the property for up to 20
years. So far there has not been a lot of interpretation of this new legislation. Loudoun County has adopted
something, but has not had much participation in the program. The program looks good, but about the only
person who would take advantage of the option is the person who is not going to develop their land.
Mr. Dorrier asked the idea behind the legislation. Mr. Breeden said there are several options
available for setting the contractual time frame. The deferment can be increased at a rate of five percent
each year up to the twentieth year where it would be increased four percent and the deferment held at 99
percent thereafter. The scale could be set up to give a 50 percent reduction for the first 10 years of a 20-year
contract and increased to 99 percent for the last 10 years, or the scale could be set up to give 99 percent
reduction every year during the 20-year contract. It could also be set at a fraction of the 20-year period, for
example 10 or 15 years, with a prorated reduction in the deferment.
Mr. Dorrier asked why that legislation would not be good for Albemarle County. Mr. Breeden said he
thinks it is good for the taxpayer if he gets a reduced tax, but he does not think it will stop development if that
is the Board's concern. The person who will develop property, once in the program for six years, if he stayed
in the program for one additional year, would immediately wipe out any savings during the first six years with
the additional deferment. He would have to pay six years of roll-back, plus an extra year of the full roll-back
from fair market value down to the land use value.
Mr. Dorrier asked why Loudoun adopted an ordinance. Mr. Breeden said they have been trying
everything possible to slow down growth. They have said that the only parcels applying are those in the part
of the County where there is little growth going on at this time. He does not think it would work as a growth
tool.
Mr. Davis said the statute does not set out a time frame. It just says there can be a longer period of
time for a lower assessed value. Loudoun chose the eight to 20-year provision in their ordinance. That
ordinance sets out one rate for the first ten years, and another rate for the second ten years. They did not do
a true sliding scale, but a step scale. It is not a widely-used piece of enabling legislation. It has not been
found to be very useful.
Mr. Perkins said if someone is going to sign up for the program, they will probably choose the twenty-
year period. If someone is thinking about development, he does not believe they would sign up for the
program at all. Mr. Breeden said the time periods can be set for different commitment periods. If someone
adheres to the period they signed up for, then it goes to a five-year roll-back after they have met their
commitment.
Mr. Bruce Woodzell said if someone in the program decided to stop farming within that time frame,
the County has no choice but to apply the roll-back, and then the agreement is void.
Mr. Breeden said they still have to meet the classification standards and guidelines. If someone
decided to sign up for agricultural use, and then decided to stop farming, the property is automatically
disqualified and out of the program. He does not know if this information helps the Board, but staff will be
glad to do further research on any of the options. He offered to answer questions.
Ms. Thomas said it bothers her that a lot of people are getting a tax break on 20 of their 21 acres
which they cannot develop anyway because they have no more development rights on the property. There is
not a land use planning tool in that sense, and they are not farming their land. To her, farming is a minimum
of putting fertilizer on the land, keeping up the fences, and getting some produce off of the land, or letting
someone else get produce off of the land. There are no incentives for the owner to do anything other than
bale the weeds they mow, rather than bush hog the weeds they mow down. Because they are not putting
any investment in their land, a farmer who rents pastures for his cows finds the pastures getting worse year
by year because the landowner probably is not putting fertilizer on the land. Even a farmer who truly wants to
farm in the old straight-forward way is having a hard time despite the fact that there is a lot of land getting the
use value tax break.
ATTACHMENT B
.
September 5,2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
Mr. Breeden said staff looked at that situation, but it is hard coming to any conclusions on parcels
that are less than 21 acres. Of the parcels in the program, there are about 2000 parcels which contain less
than 21 acres. This is less than 10 percent of the total acreage in the program. Of those parcels, about 500
contain less than five acres, and they qualify because they are contiguous to a larger tract. There are 15,000
acres (1400 parcels) in the program which range from five to 20 acres each.
Mr. Perkins said in reference to the 21-acre parcels, one acre is taxed at market value, but in the
Rural Area there must be two acres for a lot. If a person has an undeveloped parcel and wants to create five,
two-acre lots, the Health Department requires two acres, so why does the County allow one acre parcels. Mr.
Breeden said the land use guidelines say that basically all land is eligible. Anything not used for personal use
in the house/yard area would be eligible for the program. He said of the 21-acre lots, there are only 131
parcels of this size in the program.
Mr. Perkins asked if a person bought a parcel of 21 acres for $200,000 and could only use two acres
of that parcel, what are the other 19 acres worth withqut a development right? Mr. Woodzell said that
normally staff considers two acres as the site, and puts the majority of the value on those two acres. If the
property sold for $200,000, the assessment on the site might be $125,000 with the rest being excess land.
The remaining 19 acres would carry the other $75,000. Mr. Breeden said those 21-acre sites are a small part
of the issue. If all of them were eliminated, it would not amount to many dollars.
Ms. Thomas asked if there is any way to use this as a tool to increase the agricultural activity going
on in the community. Since 65 percent of the program is in forestry, there is only 35 percent in agriculture.
She does not like people getting a generous tax break for claiming their land is in an agriculture use, when it
is not. Mr. Breeden said in the 1970s, land use was tried as a farmer's tax break, and it never passed until it
became more of an environmental issue. He said the actual number of legitimate farmers in Albemarle
County is very small.
Mr. Dorrier asked if Mr. Kluge got tax breaks on the 10,000 acres he gave to the University of
Virginia. Mr. Breeden said he did. Ms. Thomas said he was actually farming a lot of that land. Mr. Breeden
said he had one of the most legitimate farming operations in the County.
Mr. Davis said if there is a legitimate agricultural, horticultural or forestry activity on the 21-acre lot,
the State Code does not allow the minimum acreage to be changed. Five acres is the set minimum. The
only category the County can increase acreage on is open space. Albemarle set that at 20 acres, but State
Code minimum is five acres.
Ms. Thomas said she has heard farmers who make a business of farming, say that Fauquier focuses
on getting an annual report to be sure a person is actually farming the land. Farmers don't have any
problems doing that because they have other reports for their business, so it does not add a layer of
reporting. For the people who are getting a tax break but barely farming, she would like the Board to think
about whether this would impress on them that there are responsibilities for calling their land a farm. Mr.
Breeden said he believes that most of the smaller parcels qualify because someone is already farming the
property. Most of the parcels in the low twenties qualify as forestry, not as agriculture. In the current
economy and farming environment, he does not believe there is anything that can be done from a tax
standpoint to encourage farming.
Ms. Thomas said she was not saying the County should encourage someone to go into farming, but
that they do something more responsible with the land. She thinks a lot of land is growing up into trees, while
the remainder is being baled even though it is hardly edible as hay. Mr. Perkins said low use agriculture
might be better environmentally than intensive agriculture. He wondered the intent of the General Assembly
when the law was enacted. He thinks they expected valuable products to come off of the land, as well as
other benefits; clean air, clean water, etc. He said the County might use Option 5 and select 25 parcels for
an inspection. In the audit which Westvaco does of its forestry practices, they do not look at everything, but
visit different job sites to see of their standards of sustainability have been met. The County might try doing
the same thing. If it was found that one of 25 did not meet the criteria for land use, that probably means that
one out of every 25 probably does not meet the criteria either. Mr. Breeden said the Board needs to keep in
mind its philosophy of the program. If it is intended to encourage agriculture, it's a losing battle. If it's to
ATTACHMENT B
.
September 5, 2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5)
encourage open space, whether a person is farming or not farming, it is still not being developed. The
question is, how strict does the Board want to be about farming. The guidelines are set up for Abarely
farming in order to meet the criteria.
Mr. Perkins said the Board has to forget that there are $7.2 million which could be collected. If there
was no land use program, what would happen with that land? Also, the Board needs to look at the services
the land requires, which are not many. In that regard, the land is more than paying its fair share. He has a
concern that there were a number of parcels created in subdivisions of 21 acres, and they are getting land
use taxation under forestry. But, individual regulations in these subdivisions do not allow them to cut the
trees. He thinks that from a forestry standpoint, if there are trees which are dying and falling down because
they don't want to cut them, that does not seem to be the intent of the General Assembly. They expected
people to practice forestry and in order to do that, trees have to be cut every now and then. If that person is
not following a forestry management plan, maybe they should not be accorded land use taxation.
Mr. Breeden said he agrees to an extent. However, staff has seen some plans which are as simple
as a one-line statement approved by the Forestry Department that said Atrees should be grown on this
property to avoid soil erosion. That would make it a legitimate, qualified use.
Mr. Perkins said Miller School planted 107 acres in trees this past year on some of the most
productive acres in the County. They will be planting another 100+ acres in trees this coming year because
they are tired of trying to find someone to farm their acreage. They can get more out of trees than renting the
land to a farmer. He hates to see doing away with forest land taxation because he thinks the County gets the
most environmental benefits from forest lands.
Ms. Thomas said she has no interest in removing the forestry category.
Mr. Woodzell said he agrees with Ms. Thomas. If a person has given up all of their development
rights, so what more can they do with the property than what it is designed to do. There is nothing in State
legislation that prohibits the County from not allowing them land use. If the program was written to prohibit
people from developing their property, if the development rights are gone, what are they deferring?
Mr. Perkins said that was not the only intent. Mr. Woodzell said he believes the major intent, the
second time the legislation was presented, was to make sure things remained in an open atmosphere, and to
protect water and air.
Ms. Thomas asked if it is possible to distinguish between those parcels that no longer have any
development rights. Could those parcels be checked to see if there are agricultural or forestal activities
taking place? Mr. Breeden said those parcels could be targeted as the ones to look at, but as long as they
meet the guidelines, there is nothing to be done. Ms. Thomas said the County could change its enforcement
of the ordinance in some way. Mr. Breeden said staff is willing to investigate anything it becomes aware of.
Occasionally, people do call in and ask questions.
Mr. Perkins asked about doing a selective audit; what would that cost? He suggested using the
members of the Land Use Evaluation Advisory Board to do this. Mr. Woodzell said they could certainly go
out with him to view the properties. Mr. Breeden said he thinks staff might conduct the review, and on the
ones which were questionable, then use the Land Use Board.
Ms. Thomas said that before doing that, a package of information should be sent to each person in
the program letting them know the review is about to take place, and explain the steps the property owner
might take to be sure they still qualify for the program. She said the County has not communicated to the
property owners that they have responsibilities if they want this tax break. Mr. Breeden said staff can look at
what it would take to do that. He said that farm management plans are one way to show that a person is in a
farming operation, but if the owner meets the other minimum requirements of the SLEAC Committee, they
would probably qualify without a farm management plan.
Mr. Martin suggested putting together a strategy to do some minor education, and do some checking,
and see what happens.
ATTACHMENT B
.
September 5,2001 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
Mr. Woodzell said the appraisers are on the property every 18 months, and they do try to monitor
land use. However, if they are on the property in the winter, there is no way to tell what goes on in the
summer. If they feel there is a neglect of proper use, they do notify that person and give them an opportunity
to correct that situation.
Mr. Tucker asked if the Board wants another report on what staff decides to do. He said a report can
be put on the consent agenda in the near future.
Ms. Thomas asked if other Board members had problems with this program.
Ms. Humphris said she has always had a basic problem with the program. She has felt that it all
worked to the benefit of the landowner when they had no obligation because there is no contract. They can
go in and out of the program at will. She always felt there should be something. She realizes it is to the
benefit of everybody in the County that these properties be kept undeveloped, but a lot of them do not have
development rights anyway.
ATTACHMENT B
.1 ,1
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Crozet Master Plan describes downtown Crozet as the historical focal point for
cultural and commercial activities in Crozet and the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, one of the findings and recommendations of the Crozet Master Plan is to focus on the
redevelopment and invigoration of the downtown area; and
WHEREAS, the lands within downtown Crozet are currently within various zoning districts, and the
regulations within those districts have been identified as imposing a number of impediments to the
development and redevelopment of downtown Crozet in a manner consistent with the Crozet Master Plan;
and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Board adopted a resolution of intent to amend the
Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to establish a zoning district for downtown Crozet having regulations
specifically designed to be consistent with the Crozet Master Plan, and those regulations are currently
being prepared; and
WHEREAS, after several public work sessions conducted by the Planning Commission and the
Board, and with input from several committees comprised of members of the Crozet community, the
boundaries of the proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District have been identified; and
WHEREAS, it is desired to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries
of the proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good zoning practices, the Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent
to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the Crozet Downtown Zoning
District as depicted as the "Proposed Downtown Zoning District" on the attached map entitled "Crozet
Downtown Zoning * Recommended Boundary," dated January 2008, prepared by Ty Chambers,
Albemarle County GDS.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the
zoning map amendment proposed by this resolution of intent, and make its recommendation to the Board
of Supervisors, at the earliest possible date.
* * * * *
I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution
duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of six to zero, as
recorded below, at a regular meeting held on A ri 008.
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
Ave Nav
y
y
y
y
y
y
DO. I 101 I iO I{
t I ~ ~ I [ [ W ~ I~ l!'
..I~ .~~" ill
i' I'll ~f
. 8
~
! j
. ~
t
".
I
.1
f
f
I
"
ii aJ.. ....
iIl-g.Ci)
i~~ ~ I .i ~ i l f . .
. j l I I
~6ig. . ~ j ~ ~ I
~(Jl ! ~
~ ~. g g g I
4> g I I I ~
~ ! ~ l i
~ ~ ! 1
j 9
...
i ·
i i
~ f
. 0
. .
.
\..
,
II!!!
/{;)
. ..
)7'
,1
l l
I j
i i
. ~
f I
I
...
:!! 3! ill f i?3
.oi"1
II.i.
i
I
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Crozet Downtown Zoning District - Zoning Map
Amendment Resolution of Intent
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Adoption of a Resolution of Intent to amend the
zoning map and establish the Crozet Downtown
Zoning District
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACTlS):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham,
and Cilimberg, and Ms. Ragsdale
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
BACKGROUND:
The Crozet Master Plan identifies the need for zoning changes in downtown Crozet in order to fully implement the Plan's
land use recommendations and goal of economic vitality for downtown Crozet. On March 17,2008, after numerous Crozet
community meetings and County Planning Commission work sessions, the Board held a work session to discuss the draft
outline of zoning regulations for the new Crozet Downtown Zoning District, as well as the boundaries for the proposed
County-initiated zoning map amendment as recommended by the Planning Commission. The Board provided feedback to
staff regarding the recommendations, and directed staff to draft the zoning text amendment for the Crozet Downtown
Zoning District and to schedule a joint public hearing of the Board and the Planning Commission to receive public comment
on the proposed zoning text amendment and zoning map amendment. Please see background information provided to the
Board at its March 5, 2008 and March 17,2008 meetings at
http://www.albemarle. orQ/uoload/imaQes/Forms Center/Departments/Board of Suoervisors/F orms/ Aqenda/2008Files
/20080305/CrozetDowntownExecSummarv.htm and
http://www.albemarle.orq/uoload/imaqes/Forms Center/Departments/Board of Su pervisors/Forms/ Aqenda/2008Files
/20080317/CrozetDowtownExecSummarv.htm
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 1: Enhance the Quality of Life for all Albemarle County Residents. (Economic Vitality)
Goal 4: Effectively Manage the County's Growth and Development.
DISCUSSION:
The Board must adopt a resolution of intent to initiate the recommended comprehensive zoning map amendment for
portions of downtown Crozet. The Resolution of Intent is attached as Attachment A and a map setting forth the boundaries
of the proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District are attached as Attachment B.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The Fiscal Impact Planners' analysis concluded that the County-initiated zoning text and zoning map amendments for the
Crozet Downtown Zoning District would have a positive impact to County revenues over a 20-year time frame in the
amount of $11,900,200. The Board received additional budget impact information as part of its March 17, 2008 staff
report.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution of Intent to initiate the zoning map amendment discussed
herein (Attachment A).
ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution of Intent-Zonino Map Amendment for rezoninq portions of Downtown Crozet
B. Recommended Zoninq District Boundaries for County-initiated Zoninq Map Amendment
Attachment A
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Crozet Master Plan describes downtown Crozet as the historical focal point for cultural
and commercial activities in Crozet and the surrounding areas; and
WHEREAS, one of the findings and recommendations of the Crozet Master Plan is to focus on the
redevelopment and invigoration of the downtown area; and
WHEREAS, the lands within downtown Crozet are currently within various zoning districts, and the
regulations within those districts have been identified as imposing a number of impediments to the development
and redevelopment of downtown Crozet in a manner consistent with the Crozet Master Plan; and
WHEREAS, on September 6, 2006, the Board adopted a resolution of intent to amend the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance to establish a zoning district for downtown Crozet having regulations specifically
designed to be consistent with the Crozet Master Plan, and those regulations are currently being prepared; and
WHEREAS, after several public work sessions conducted by the Planning Commission and the Board,
and with input from several committees comprised of members of the Crozet community, the boundaries of the
proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District have been identified; and
WHEREAS, it is desired to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the
proposed Crozet Downtown Zoning District.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience,
general welfare and good zoning practices, the Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to
amend the Albemarle County Zoning Map to establish the boundaries of the Crozet Downtown Zoning District as
depicted as the "Proposed Downtown Zoning District" on the attached map entitled "Crozet Downtown Zoning *
Recommended Boundary," dated January 2008, prepared by Ty Chambers, Albemarle County GDS.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on the
zoning map amendment proposed by this resolution of intent, and make its recommendation to the Board of
Supervisors, at the earliest possible date.
*****
I, Ella W. Jordan, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted
by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of _ to _, as recorded below, at a
regular meeting held on
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Aye Nay
Mr. Boyd
Mr. Dorrier
Ms. Mallek
Mr. Rooker
Mr. Slutzky
Ms. Thomas
ji
. 0:
.li c5
J ~
11' ~
1j l
j "
" ~
,.s C5
j ~ ~ ~
" '" g.
J ~ "] 1 "] "] l CJ J " ~
j j .. ] .. <I <I -;
~ . ~ '2 '2 ."
J J "31 "31 '. ~ . ~ 1 ..!I
1 1 J ~ ~ E ~
11' 0 0:: E E
~ . 1il &! ~ ill :l c5 c5 .
'S 0:: IS:: :::
10 1011 II III e
co
0
0
N
t
~
c
-f(
'"
C
\:1
~
<:
"
o
u
ClI
-e
Itl
E
~
<f
1'-<
;'1::
-<
~~
~;J'
f'-.<
~
~
{~
~rJ
f'~
~--?
f'-.<
~rJ
~
~
Q
t ~
~d
~-rJ
A,-.P
>-".~
~
~
t--7'
f'-.<
~-<
~.;J'
f'.
Q
t..;J
~
:::>
f:
~j
E~
:::>
Q
-=-
t--;!
L~
W
N
Q
A,-.P
>-"~
t~J
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Former Crozet School Reuse Study
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To provide information to the Board regarding the
Reuse Study for the Former Crozet Elementary
School
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
x
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis and Shadman; and
Ms. Catlin.
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
BACKGROUND:
The former Crozet Elementary School was built in 1924 and was used as a public school until 1990. From 1991 through
2007 the Charlottesville Waldorf School leased the facility. In 1997 an adaptive reuse study was conducted by UVA
engineering graduate students. A recent review of that study revealed that the information is dated and also lacked citizen
input. More recently, during the process of selecting a site for the Crozet library, several sites were considered and much
discussion was generated between County staff and the Crozet community. Members of the community expressed their
desire to consider the former Crozet Elementary School for other potential uses. Many felt that the old school has a
genuine connection to the history of the community and that the County has an obligation to examine the feasibility of
identifying potential uses for the former school as part of the overall Crozet revitalization effort.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4: Effectively Manage the County's Growth and Development
Master Planning Directional Statement: "Adapts and reuses sites rather than abandoning them".
DISCUSSION:
A staff committee was formed with individuals from the County Executive Office, Community Development, and General
Services to plan a process to engage members of the community to identify and evaluate potential alternative uses for the
elementary school. Crozet residents and staff served on a committee to select a professional firm to manage a public
engagement process in order to create a list of potential uses for the school and to conduct research and analysis of
identified uses. The committee selected PMA Inc., a planning and engineering firm that has extensive experience in public
engagement and in revitalizing old buildings into useful community facilities. The public engagement process is underway.
Attachment A details the scope of work for the Reuse Study process and Attachment B details the charge and role of the
Reuse Study Committee consisting of stakeholders from the Crozet community. The role of the committee is to ensure
community engagement in the process of considering various potential uses for the old school. An updated report to
include the project status and an analysis of each identified use will be provided to the Board for its review and direction at
a future meeting in time to include any approved projects in the 2009-2018 Capital Improvement Project process.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The cost of the study is $26,980 with an in-house added contingency of 10% for a total project budget of $29,678.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
No Board action is necessary at this time. This Executive Summary is for information only.
ATTACHMENTS
A- AlE Scope of Work
B- Old School Reuse Study Committee Charqe and Role
ATTACHMENT A
Revised Scope of Work
Old Crozet School Re-use Study
Task 1
Assessment of the Existing Facility: PMA will conduct a familiarization assessment of
the existing building and review the various reports provided by the County.
1.1 Kick-off meeting: PMA and the Re-use Committee will formalize the project goals
and objectives and establish a project strategy and schedule for a community
charrette. A brief meeting with the County staff will precede the meeting with the
Re-use Committee to discuss pertinent logistics and methods of including absentee
citizens in the process.
Deliverable: Provide, based on County input, a memo summarizing goals and objectives
and a project schedule in Microsoft Project format.
1.2 Architectural and Structural Analysis: PMA will review the reports and
evaluations that have previously been prepared to become familiar with the current
structure without conducting a comprehensive study. The County recognizes that this
will leave a broad interpretation of conditions. PMA will make recommendations in
Step 4 of necessary comprehensive studies that should be included in any future
designs phase.
1.3 Site Inventory: The County will provide to PMA property plats, topographical
information and aerial photos to enable PMA to become familiar with the site and
existing conditions of the property. Evaluation of utilities, water, sewer, electric,
sprinkler, HV AC will be a conducted outside of this study as a part of any future
design phase.
1.4 Environmental Conditions: PMA will have a basic knowledge of the current
environmental conditions of the Old Crozet School by reviewing the most recent
asbestos and lead paint inventory conducted by the County's Environmental
Compliance Manager and the site visit. Recommendations for additional
inspection/analysis will be listed in PMA's Step 4, final report as a future task, not
included in this phase.
1.5 Historic District Review: Any historic review deemed necessary will be completed
during future design phases. However, PMA may offer recommendations of potential
benefits and limitations that a historic preservation program may have on the design
of a reuse.
1.6 Zoning Review: This property is Zoned R-2. PMA will become familiar with the
restrictions this may bring to the re-use of the property. The County's Zoning
Ordinance can be accessed on its website.
1. 7 Crozet Master Plan: PMA will review and be familiar with the Crozet Master Plan.
The master plan can be accessed on the County's website.
Deliverables:
1. A written narrative evaluation of the existing building based on the iriformation
provided by the County and one site visit.
2. P MA will prepare for the charrette informational boards of aerial photos of the
property and enlarged plats for each break-out group, if necessary.
Task 2
Development of Alternatives: During this task, PMA will provide leadership in
developing a range of potential re-use options for the building through a community
charrette involving the local citizens in exploring and prioritizing re-use options.
2.1 Public Re-use Charrette: The scheduling, content and logistical layout of the
charrette will be discussed at the initial kick-off meeting as outlined in Task 1. The
Office of Community Relations will have ultimate approval of the format and agenda of
the charrette. PMA will conduct a public charrette to solicit the opinions of the citizens
of Crozet by exploring the potential re-uses of the school building. A meeting prior to
the charrette will be scheduled with the Re-use Committee to review the charrette process
and coordinate responsibilities and levels of participation. The charrette will be
structured to occur over a two day period. PMA will arrive on site and set up on the first
day. The public will be invited to a brief presentation that evening where examples of
schools that have been adapted to new programs will be presented by PMA. The
presentation will be followed by a discussion of potential new uses for the school and
concluded with a ranking of the ideas presented. Day two of the charrette will involve
another opportunity for active discussion and the prioritizing of ideas that were identified
the first evening. There will also be an "open house" scheduled at the Old Crozet School
where the public can tour the facility. The public will be invited to attend and participate
in the final prioritizing of the ranked suggestions. PMA will prepare all supporting
materials for the charrette event. The County will arrange the meeting in a suitable
facility and place and pay for any advertisements and public notices.
2.2 Preliminary Re-use Options: Based on ideas developed in the charrette by the
public and the public's prioritization of these ideas, PMA will identify a range of
preliminary re-use options for the building which respond to the ideas expressed in the
charrette. PMA will present in a report package the top 3-5 most popular and logistically
viable concepts.
Deliverables:
1. Two day charrette event including an open house at the School
2. Six copies of a summary narrative report summarizing the process, illustrations
and concepts identified in the charrette and priorities established by the
attendees.
3. Follow up meeting with the County representatives, if deemed necessary
2
Task 3
Evaluation of Alternatives: PMA will prepare an evaluation of alternative concepts
which were identified in the preceding charrette. Each concept will be evaluated in
general terms to address feasibility, requirements, facility implications and costs based on
the limited information provided by the County and experience of the PMA organization.
Evaluate Re-use Options: PMA will evaluate each concept from the charrette to
identify general planning requirements and needs which are typically required by the
particular re-use scenario, based on PMA's experience. Detailed space needs studies,
identification of detailed site plan requirements, utility requirement evaluations,
sustainability evaluations, structural evaluations and mechanical system evaluations will
be performed in future phases:
· General building space requirements
. Site requirements (parking, circulation, etc)
. Utility requirements
· Special program/construction requirements
· Compatibility with zoning ordinance
Deliverable: Written narrative incorporating illustrations prepared in Task 1 and 2 to be
provided in draft form to the Re-use Committee.
Probable Re-use Conversion Costs: PMA will evaluate the probable cost for each
option. Costs will be developed from historical cost experience by PMA and other
applicable cost information available. Contingencies will be included based on the
professional judgment:
. Planning contingency
· Building construction contingency
· Site contingency
· Utilities contingency
· Escalation forecast
Deliverable: Table of probable budgets for each option
Meeting with Re-use Committee: PMA will meet with the Re-use Committee to
review the report and analysis. There will also be an open public meeting, scheduled the
same day, in Crozet to present to interested citizens a review of the process and the final
package that will be presented to the BOS.
Task 4:
Final Report: PMA will prepare a final report incorporating the narrative components of
the earlier tasks and illustrations to summarize the evolution of the project process and
the preferred alternatives identified by the citizens of Crozet.
3
De/iverables:
1. Six copies of the Final Report
2. All de/iverables to include a PDF formatted submittal suitable to post on County
website.
4
ATTACHMENT B
Old School Reuse Study Committee Charge and Role:
Committee Charge
· Work with staff and consultant on appropriate ways to engage the general Crozet
community in the Old School Reuse Study /serve as an important link with the
community
· Respond to study results, give feedback as requested
· Communicate with and share perspectives from the groups they represent and/or
reflect concerns and issues of the community and affected stakeholders
· Work with staff and the consultant on providing guidance for the final
recommendations staff and the consultant will be making to the Board of
Supervisors
Roles and Responsibilities
· Read, learn and absorb information as requested
· Attend meetings regularly
· Articulate interests, concerns and perspectives on issues being addressed
· Maintain an open mind regarding other views
· Focus on the "big picture" of the project
. Work as a team member
· Participate collaboratively in group decision making
· Constructively manage conflict between themselves and others in the group
· Communicate with the Board of Supervisors through existing defined channels
Committee Membership:
I Citizen members from the CCA, CCAC, at-large community members.
2 County staff members General Services, Community Relations and Community
Development
Basic Groundrules:
· Listen carefully and speak honestly
· Respect the views of others
. Keep an open mind
· Critique issues, not people
· Allow everyone to speak without dominating the discussion
· Take shared responsibility for the success of meetings and the team in general
Committee Duration:
The Old School Reuse Study Committee will continue actively meeting until the study is
completed and is presented to the Board of Supervisors for the start of the official
process. The Old Reuse Study Committee will have completed its charge at this point.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Proffer Management - FY 07/08 Second Quarter
Cash Proffer Report
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Report on cash proffer revenues and expenditures
for October - December of FY 07/08
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION: X
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham,
and Higgins; and Ms. Baldwin
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
BACKGROUND:
On January 3, 2007, the Board requested that it be provided a cash proffer activity report on a quarterly basis. This FY
07/08 Second Quarter Report reflects all cash proffer activity from October to December of the current fiscal year. For the
purposes of this report, cash proffer activity refers to all cash proffer revenue received or expended and cash proffers
accepted in approved rezonings.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 3: Develop Infrastructure Improvements to Address the County's Growing Needs
Goal 5: Fund the County's Future Needs
DISCUSSION:
A. Revenue: From October to December of 2007, the County received a total of $54,440.04 in proffered funds for Capital
Improvement Projects. The contributions include $19,354.86 from Wickham Pond (ZMA 2004-17), and $35,085.18 from
Hollymead Town Center Area 0 (ZMA 2002-02).
B. Expenditure: During this quarter, the County expended $300,000 for homebuyers' down payment assistance. The
cash was received from North Point (ZMA 2000-09) and proffered for affordable housing initiatives.
C. Proffered: During this quarter, five rezonings were approved containing a total of $39,844,473.80 in cash proffers. Of
these funds, $19,367,358.80 was proffered for general Capital Improvement Funds pursuant to the County's Cash Proffer
Policy. Other proffers were received for specific impacts: $17,671,800 for Roads and Other Transportation Improvements;
$30,000.00 for Stormwater Management; $439,315.00 for Affordable Housing; $550,000.00 for Community & Library;
$911,000 for Parks and Recreation; and $875,000.00 for Fire and Rescue. A more detailed description of cash proffer
activity is provided in Attachment A.
D. Total Obligated Cash Proffers: As of December 2007, the total obligated cash proffer amount exceeds $49,000,000,
assuming proffer density is achieved. Staff is currently calculating required escalation amounts to provide a more complete
update. The update on this total will be provided for the Board's review with the cash proffer activity report for the 3rd
quarter.
BUDGET IMPACT:
The County continues to see an increase in rezonings that include substantial cash proffers that will contribute toward the
funding for many capital improvement projects necessary to address the impacts of new development.
AGENDA TITLE: Proffer Management - FY 07/08 Second Quarter Cash Proffer Report
April 9, 2008
Page 2
RECOMMENDATIONS:
This report is provided for informational purposes and no action is required. Staff continues to welcome Board feedback
for ways to improve how this report is constructed.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A, Cash Proffer Activitv - Second Quarter, FY2007 -2008.
..
><
...
~
~
!
o
o
o
o
o
o
~
<Xl '"
<Xl
~ i..
o '"
~~
8
o
o
o
'"
....
00
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
M
o
o
o
o
o
~
o
o
o
o
o
;;i
8
o
o
o
o
o
....
N
~ g g g
~ g g g
00 V'l 0'\ 00
~Nv"~
~ ~ g a::
~ - N
o 0
o 0
~ ci
'" N
'" ....
;~
()
il
fg~a~f;ggg
Q.~Q~~~N~N
~~~~-~~'I""::..~
~~~t::~i\~'~
"
Q
-
..
'"
e ; g
" co co
;z: g: g
:; '" co
;;j - ...
N ~ :-. lI'l
g g g ~
N "It It} Q
o 0000
o 0 Q N
... ... ...
i Q -=
:!~elU~~8~'C 5
o~:. ;'s1~!:(~~G
[Xl ~ g~ .~ ~ ~ i ~ .~ ] 3 ~
...~~.t ;z:~~= ~
U;;> :I:
:0-
~
""
""
o
cc
<{ ~
ell
-(
U
'-
..
"
~ ...
&: ~
~
~ ~
..
~
:s:
-
>
l
~
~
t!::
.,--1 NC"')-.::tLO(Or--a:>cn~;:
-
:::>
~
~
c !
~
~
..
.. ...
" .ll
~ ~
~ a
.>C
..
~
=- ...
~
~
t!::
-
I-
-
U)
-
~
...
~
~
!
-
a
...
.ll
"
~
~
-
c..
a ~
~
t!::
-
o ~
u
~
...,
-0
cc
...
Z ~
~
~
-0
cc
~ ~
~
...
-~
U
...
~
~
~
.~ !oJ
"
.. ...
= .ll
.. "
:E ~
~ a
..
~
...:
l
~
t!::
--l
~
~
! !
e
:
c ...
~ .ll
~ ~
t ~
-= ~
~
e
..
.. ...
~ ~
~
t!::
'-
~
-
...,
-
II
c ...
'" {l
~ ~
[ !
!
c
..
.., ...
" .ll
1:: "
.. ~
~ a
"
~
..
'"
s ]
olJ ~
i ~
..
cc
'-
I
-
c.:>
-
u.
~
~
~
fl'
!oJ
'-
w
~
g ~-~
f
~ a
'"
"
-
o
...
~
~
~
Q
Z
...
-
~ ~
co co
'" '"
= =
= =
... ...
c
~ ... :::
~<~
~~d:
a c i5
~u<
:I:
o
o
o
8
o
o
- -
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
q
j~l- "
~
o
--~-
~
,
~
'"
~ I
..,. ,
I
,
~ i
o
o
o
!
,
o .-
o
o
o
o
o
---< -----j-------- . ----
~
o
o
"'l.
;:::
'"
i
~
o
o
"'l.
....
'"
s:
!
i
I
o
o
o
..,.
o
o
;j:
i,
o
o
o
o
<Xl
o
..,.
g ~
g ~
N '"
...c ~
~ ~
0:
.... ....
= =
= =
!::! ...
~ ~
~ ~ ~
;!;;:;;_ l g
.:l ~
'"
Dii _I...-
.~
"
..
:I: ... ~
o ...J ~ =
u ~ ~ "It
lI,l ~ :! "It..
.: 0 a ;j,
ii!'" '"
'"
"
=
.
::..
=
=
....
=
=
...
=
..
~ ] ~
s ~ ~
~ .t ~
'"
M
'"
OIl
=
=
....
=
=
...
I
-- -
t -- .... -- .-
i
-
, L____
- t--
t-
-- --
. - -
I -- t- ,--1- -- j-
1-- L____
I
I ~-
'<t I/) co I'- <Xl en 0 ~ N ('") '<t 1/)1 co I'-
T""" "If"'"" "If"'"""-- "If"'"" "If"'"" N N N N N C'iIN N
I
!
I
:
:
- ------- .
:
~Jd
c '2
"2 :::J
o _
N 0
~ CD
"C .Q
i!! E
~ E
~ 5 I
c: E
o 'j(
t:: '"
8. E
~ ~
-0 c:
c: 0
"C C.
:0 :::J
~ ~
t:: ..
'" '"
:0 .Q
~.~ i
"C I
Q) '"
:5 e .
~.e I
.~ ~
~ K
'" J::
:0 ..
~i ~
:.c::~
- <(
,5;
"C .e
~ ~---
13 c:
.5; ~
.!Q ~
c: "C
:0 '"
0:: Q)
-= E I
:0. >-
~~!
N('")
~ ~
- --.
I
I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Alternative Engineering Review Pilot Study
AGENDA DATE:
April 9,2008
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Decision to end pilot study six months before two
year study is complete
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
LEGAL REVIEW: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
INFORMATION: '/
f
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Graham, and Brooks
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
BACKGROUND:
On September 13, 2006, the Board, at the recommendation of the Development Review Process Task Force, agreed that
Community Development staff should conduct a two year pilot program designed to simplify staff review and approval of
final engineering plans. (Attachment A) To address concerns that the pilot program have well-defined criteria, the review
checklist developed for the pilot was made very detailed, with a strict format of plan content and certification. Additionally, it
was agreed that six month updates would be provided to the Board throughout the pilot program to verify it was working as
planned. The pilot program was initiated on the County website on October 3, 2006. The first six month update was
provided on April 4, 2007. This is the third update, one and a half years since the program's inception.
STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal Four: Effectively Manage Growth and Development.
DISCUSSION:
This pilot program was originally proposed by staff as a way to improve consistency and reduce staff workload by reducing
the need for numerous resubmissions as applicants sought to meet requirements. For the development community, this
program was seen as a way to reduce costs by reducing the time required to gain plan approval. As with the previous six
month review period, the development community has shown limited interest in this program. Below is a summary of
submissions under this pilot study:
15 Six Month Period 2na Six Month Period 3m Six Month Period
10/3/2006 - 3/8/2007 3/9/2007 - 9/5/2007 9/5/2007 - 2/5/2007
Submissions as part of pilot study 3 3 4
Submissions for reQular review 241 220 298
In each case, plans have undergone at least 3 revisions with multiple comments and submissions. None of the 4 plans
have been approved for this six month period.
There have been no public comments on the program this period. The few previous comments can be seen on the
website forum (http://exprevprocess.bloQspot.com/).
The board raised concerns in its previous discussions about compliance with regulations during inspection and
construction in addition to design. Birchwood Place in Crozet is the first approved plan under the program and the first to
reach the construction stage. There has been no measurable difference in the construction process, nor any plan related
issues.
Based on this information, the pilot study has failed in its objective to improve the quality of submissions and staff plans to
end the program now rather than wait until the two year study is complete. Rather than decreasing the time and effort
spent on plan review, the pilot study has increased review times, created issues with prioritization of reviews and impacted
staff moral. Staff has also seen a detrimental affect on other applicants, whose plans are put aside in favor of those
claiming this alternative engineering review. Staff is now considering whether charging the full cost of review for each
submission can improve plan quality. Staff intends to present this option to the Board as part of future consideration of
ordinance fee changes.
-
AGENDA TITLE: Alternative Engineering Review Pilot Study
April 9, 2008
Page 2
BUDGET IMPACT:
Not estimated. It is noted that the County has not charged separate fees for engineering reviews. Thus, while it may cost
the County more to have a plan receive three or four reviews, no additional fee is currently paid by the applicant for those
reviews. As noted above, whether additional fees should be charged will be considered with future ordinance fee changes.
RECOMMENDATIONS:
No action needed. As noted in Attachment A, this pilot study is administrative and was initiated by staff. Assuming the
Board expresses no objection to staff ending the study at this time, staff will notify the development community the pilot
program will be discontinued.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - September 13. 2006 Pilot Study Outline
Alternative Engineering Review
Pilot Program
Purpose/Outcome: The program's goal is to require fewer reviews with equal or better plan
quality through use of detailed checklists, while making submitting design professionals more
responsible for quality control of their plans. This effort will also allow County staff to focus
more time on preliminary plans and plats, documentation of processes and training private
engineers on County processes, and field inspections to verify proper construction.
Length of pilot program: 2 years pilot study, with 6 month reports to the Board on number of
plans submitted for the pilot program, number of plans not included in the pilot program, number
of plans pulled from the pilot program due to noted problems, and number of mistakes found in
the field. At end of 2 year pilot program, there will be a decision by the Board on whether to
continue the program as part of the plan review process.
Eligibility for pilot program: Design professionals holding a current Virginia license.
(Architects, Engineers, Landscape Architects, and 3B Surveyors)
Staff's Obligations with Process:
Collect data on number of plans using the process, number of plans not using the
process, number of plans pulled from the process for noted problems, and number of
problems found in the field after approval for both plans using the process and those
not using the process.
Prepare and distribute detailed checklists for engineers using the process (as well as
those not using the process)
Cursory reviews of certified plans to verify work complies with checklists. Plans found
to not comply with checklists may be removed from the pilot program at staff's
discretion.
Prepare reports to the Board on the pilot program status at six month intervals.
Staff will assure design professional are notified of eligibility to submit under the pilot
program with approval of preliminary plans or plats. Staff will also provide a list of
requirements for final approval, checklists for final approval, and submittal forms for
final approval as part of the preliminary approval.
Design Professional's Obligation with Process
· Familiarize themselves with County ordinances, design standards and checklists.
· Submit plans that fully comply with checklists. Whenever questions arise as to
complying with the checklist, the design professional will seek guidance from staff and
incorporate their recommendations into submitted plans.
· Assure owner understands improvements must be built as shown on approved plans
and changes from the approved plan must be approved by the County. .
Property Owner's Obligation with Process
· Assure design professional is given adequate time to assure quality of certified plans.
· Construct improvements as shown on the approved plans
How will the program work?
A: Staff will provide certification forms and courtesy checklists at the front desk and through the
department's web page. Engineers will review their plans against the items on the applicable
certification statement and when they are confident they have addressed all of the items, place
the certification on the plan. When a plan is submitted, staff will see if a certification is on the
plan. If so, staff will give the plan a quick check to verify selected items. If staff doesn't find
significant issues with this check, the plan will be approved. If staff finds significant issues have
not been addressed, the plan will be put in the review queue and receive the normal review in
the order received. In the latter case, the engineer will be notified their plan is receiving the
normal review. With this process, the engineer who properly prepares a certified plan can
expect approval in about a week. Conversely, the plan that follows the normal process will
receive the same review as currently done. A resubmitted plan may also use the certification
process, provided the engineering reviewer finds the number and extent of changes is not
excessive.
What plans are eligible for this program?
A: Certifications are available for engineering plans associated with final site plans (where a
preliminary plan has been approved), private road plans (where a preliminary plat has been
approved), stormwater management plans, erosion control (grading) plans, and mitigation
plans.
What plans are not eligible for this program?
A: Preliminary plans and plats will not be eligible for this program. Public road plans will not be
eligible for this program, as VDOT approval of those plans is necessary. Waiver requests will
not be eligible for this program. Special plans, such as an early grading plan in a planned
development, will be considered on a case by case basis.
What happens if the engineer is uncertain of an ordinance or policy requirement?
A: County staff will still be available to assist designers with any questions they may have prior
to certifying a submission. As many of you already know, the engineering reviewers have a
regularly scheduled time on Thursday afternoons, starting at 2:00pm, when designers and
developers can discuss applications and reviews. Staff does ask that the engineer call and set
up an appointment in advance of the meeting.
What happens if errors are found after approval?
A: Staff will treat errors the same as currently happens when errors are found after approval or
we find the project has not been built to the approved plan. In those cases, staff will review and
determine what corrections are needed to comply with County ordinances. As part of this pilot
program, staff will report all errors and resolutions to the County Board.
What happens if you find the process needs to be changed?
A: As this process is totally administrative, staff can easily modify the program or even abandon
the process if it doesn't work. If there are major program changes, we will send out a notice
similar to this notice. For minor changes, we anticipate keeping an emaillist of engineers using
this program and they will be notified of those changes.
.
.
.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832
Fax (434) 972-4012
March 7, 2008
Scott Collins
Collins Engineering
800 East Jefferson Street, Suite 300
Charlottesville, V A 22902
RE: PROJECT: SP 2005-00028 / Biscuit Run #2 (Mid) - Sign # 3, 6, and 22.
TAX MAPIP ARCEL: 90-5, 90-60
AND
PROJECT: SP 2006-00001 / Biscuit Run #3 (Southern) - Sign # 3, 6, and 22
TAX MAPIPARCEL: 90-60
AND
PROJECT: SP 2006-00002 / Biscuit Run Stream Crossing #1 (Northern) - Sign # 3, 6, and
22
TAX MAPIPARCEL: 90-A-3 and 90-Al-l
Dear Mr. Collins:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 26, 2008, recommended
approval of the above-noted petitions to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
Action on SP.2005-28 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Middle):
1. The applicant must obtain a map r~vision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state and
federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction of the new
stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a grading
permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction ofthe new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge. Changes in
final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes reduce impacts to the
floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
7. Construction ofthe new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges meet
VDOT standards.
9. The approval ofthis special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision ofthe Code
of Development related to ZMA-200S-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0.
Action on SP-2006-00001 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Southern):
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state and
federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction of the new
stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a grading
permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge. Changes in
final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable ifthe changes reduce impacts to the
floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer. ~
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use permit
shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges meet
VDOT standards.
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modify any proffer or provision ofthe Code
of Development related to ZMA-200S-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0.
Action on SP-2006-00002 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Northern):
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as required from the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the County Engineer on all correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary state and
federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for construction of the new
stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the application plan, as
determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a grading
permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge. Changes in
final design ofthe bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the changes reduce impacts to the
floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
.
.
.
7. Construction of the new crossing shall commence on or before April 9, 2013, or this special use
permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall thereupon
terminate.
8. VDOT approval shall be required for the stream crossing to ensure that the roads and the bridges meet
VDOT standards.
9. The approval of this special use permit does not supersede or modifY any proffer or provision of the Code
of Development related to ZMA-2005-00017 or any subsequent amendments thereto.
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on April 9, 2008.
\f
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296-5832.
Sincerely,
Tamara Ambler
Natural Resources Manager
Planning Division
TA/SM
Cc: Forest Lodge LLC
POBox 5509 Charlottesville, Va 22905
POLICY
SUBMISSION OF MATERIALS
FOR ZONING APPLICATIONS
It is the Board's preference that a public hearing should not be advertised until all of the final materials
. for a zoning application have been received by the County and are available for public review. To achieve this
preference, applicants should provide final plans, final codes of development, final proffers, and any other
documents deemed necessary by the Director of Community Development, to the County no later than two
days prior to the County's deadline for submitting the public hearing advertisement to the newspaper. Staff
will advise applicants of this date by including it in annual schedules for applications and by providing each
applicant a minimum of two weeks advance notice ofthe deadline.
If the applicant does not submit the required materials by this date, the public hearing shall not be
advertised unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that
good cause exists for the public hearing to be advertised. Ifnot advertised, a new public hearing date will be
scheduled. If the public hearing is held without final materials being available for review throughout the
advertisement period due to a late submittal of documents, or because substantial revisions or amendments are
made to the submitted materials after the public hearing has been advertised, it will be the policy of the Board
to either defer action and schedule a second public hearing that provides this opportunity to the public or to
deny the application, unless the Board finds that the deferral would not be in the public interest or not forward
the purposes of this policy.
Final signed proffers shall be submitted to the County no later than nine days prior to the date of the
advertised public hearing. This policy is not intended to prevent changes made in proffers at the public hearing
resulting from comments received from the public or from Board members at the public hearing.
This Zoning Policy will be included in the Board's Rules of Procedure for adoption each year, so that
the policy can be re-examined annually.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP 2005-28 Biscuit Run Stream
Crossing (Middle)
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
February 26, 2008
Owners: Forest Lodge L.L.C.
Acreage: 1,086.883 total
TMP: 90-5,90-60
Location: Overall project is located between the east
side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route
20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek
subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection
of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. This crossing is
located at the middle portion of the project,
approximately 0.67 mile east of Route 631 (Old
Lynchburg Road)
Existing Zoning and By-right use: NMD-
Neighborhood Model District; FH Flood Hazard Overlay
District - agricultural, recreational, and utility location
uses which will not pose a danger to life or property in
the event of a flood; EC Entrance Corridor Overlay
District - overlay to protect properties of historic,
architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts
of development along routes of tourist access; all uses
permitted by right in the underlying districts
Requested # of Dwelling Units: N/A
Proposal: The applicant proposes to install a span
crossing within the floodplain to serve as a connection
within the proposed Biscuit Run Community (ZMA 2005-
17).
Character of Property: The immediate vicinity of the
project area is currently wooded and undeveloped.
Factors Favorable:
1. No impact to neighboring properties is expected as a
result of this special use permit
2. No significant increase in flood levels will result from
the installation of the new crossing.
Staff: Tamara Jo Ambler
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
April 9, 2008
Applicant: Forest Lodge L.L.C. c/o Steve Blaine,
LeClair Ryan
Special Use Permit for: Request for fill in the
floodplain for road crossing in accordance with
Section 30.3.05.2.1 (2) of the Zoning ordinance
Conditions: Yes
Magisterial District: Scottsville
DA (Development Area): X
RA (Rural Area):
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
Neiahborhood Density Residential- residential
(3-6 units/acre) and supporting uses such as
religious institutions and schools and other small-
scale non-residential uses.
Use of Surrounding Properties: Single family
residential, mobile home complex, school,
recreation, and farm land/open space.
Factors Unfavorable:
Staff has not identified any factors which are
unfavorable to this request.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends a roval with conditions.
1
PETITION:
PROJECT: SP 2005-28 Biscuit Run Stream Crossing (Middle)
PROPOSED: The applicant proposes to install a span crossing within the floodplain to serve as a
connection within the proposed Biscuit Run Community (ZMA 2005-17).
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: NMD - Neighborhood Model District; FH Flood Hazard
Overlay District - agricultural, recreational, and utility location uses which will not pose a danger to life
or property in the event of a flood; EC Entrance Corridor Overlay District - overlay to protect
properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of development along
routes of tourist access; all uses permitted by right in the underlying districts
SECTION: Section 30.3.05.2.1 (2) of the Zoning ordinance
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential - residential (3-6
units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-
residential uses.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes_X_No_ Location: Overall project is located between the east
side of Old Lynchburg Road and the west side of Route 20; adjacent and to the south of the Mill Creek
subdivision, adjacent and to the west of the intersection of Avon Street, Extended and Route 20. This
crossing is located at the middle portion of the project, approximately 0.67 mile east of Route 631 (Old
Lynchburg Road)
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 90-5 and 90-60
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
CHARACTER OF THE AREA: The site is undeveloped and wooded.
SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL: A special use permit is being requested for fill in the floodplain to
install a new stream crossing of Biscuit Run. The new stream crossing will serve as a connection within
the new development. The new crossing will utilize a bridge span to minimize impacts to the stream
channel (see Attachment 0 for photo of stream crossing area).
The 2005 FEMA Flood Study and Maps included this stream in the "detailed study" and the Base Flood
Elevations were determined. According to this study the 1 OO-year flood elevation at the location of the
crossing is base flood elevation 403.8. With the addition of the new span crossing and fill the new base
flood elevation will be 403.9. This increase of 0.10 foot is not significant.
The new crossing will be located within the vegetative stream buffer for Biscuit Run required by Section
17 -317 of the Water Protection Ordinance. The applicant has proposed to mitigate these impacts as
required under Section of 17-322 of the Water Protection Ordinance through restoration of riparian
areas along a tributary to Biscuit Run, where County staff identified the need for buffer restoration.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
On September 12, 2007 the Board of Supervisors approved a rezoning request for the proposed Biscuit
Run Community. The concept plan associated with this rezoning illustrates this crossing of Biscuit Run
to serve as the middle of three crossings to serve the proposed Biscuit Run development (see Figure 1
- crossing locations circled in red).
Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan:
The Open Space and Critical Resources Plan, a component of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies
many important resources located on the entire Biscuit Run property. In addition, the Stormwater
Master Plan, also a component of the Comprehensive Plan, identifies this portion of Biscuit Run as
"pocket natural area" which is the highest County stream ranking, indicating that the area has high
habitat and natural aesthetic values. The expectation by the Open Space Plan and the Stormwater
Master Plan is that the stream corridor should be protected to preserve these values. By utilizing a
span bridge crossing, impacts to the stream channel and adjacent wetlands will be minimized.
2
.
-~--~-~--,---.----_.~-
.
LEGEND
T3
T4
_ 1$
BUFFER
_ PARKS
_ PASSIVE RECREATION
GREENWAY AREA
ROADS/STREETS
....-_ BLOCK BOUNDARIES
~l_~~~~_(~~ r ',S\ND P\Rl "R~I~'F.J.
MIU. CllEl!K
SOUIHWOO()
MOIIft F
HOlE p.wc,'
~ !
Gi ~,'
'f. ~
. #
If:
t"
I
I
I,
" II
..u. '
, ,/..1 . /' .i(j;J - u. '1- l' CCL"N:~'
.~A)/.I"('YI/. -tr-]UI/I , 'J0, RYAN
GENERAL DISTRICT BLOCK PI.AN '":,;:,., ... .'" " .
- -------------------------
iA";"I,ud_f.t t)i',.;H
Figure 1
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
31.2.4.1: Special Use Permits provided for in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the
Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property,
The County Engineer and engineering staff have reviewed the applicant's proposal, and concur with the
applicant's conclusion that the installation of the new span crossing will not result in a significant
increase in the 1 DO-year flood elevation and will not detrimentally affect adjacent properties, existing
development, or planned development.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and
The proposed stream crossing is interior to the project site and is not expected to be visible from the
entrance corridor.
that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
The Flood Hazard zoning has the purpose and intent of restricting development in the floodplain which
.ay result in danger to life and property, public costs for flood control measures, public costs for rescue
and relief efforts, soil erosion and sedimentation, pollution of water resources, and general degradation
3
of the natural and man-made environment. The span crossing's minimal impact to the 1 DO-year flood
elevation is in harmony with the Flood Hazard overlay zoning.
with uses permitted by right in the district,
The installation of a stream crossing to provide access to a planned development would appear to be in
harmony with the other uses permitted by right in the district.
with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance,
There are no supplementary regulations relating to the placement of fill in the floodplain for a stream
crossing in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The installation of a new span crossing will not significantly raise the 1 DO-year flood elevation and will
not detrimentally affect adjacent properties.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request:
1. No impact to neighboring properties is expected as a result of this special use permit
2. No significant increase in flood levels will result from installation of the new crossing.
Staff has not identified any factors which are unfavorable to this request.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of the request with the following conditions:
1. The applicant must obtain a map revision, letter of revision, or letter of amendment as
required from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and copy the Co~nty
Engineer on all correspondence.
2. Army Corp of Engineers, Virginia Department of Environmental Quality, and other necessary
state and federal agency approvals must be obtained prior to issuance of grading permits for
construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
3. County approval of road and bridge plans for the crossing to be in accord with the
application plan, as determined by the County Engineer.
4. County approval of a grading and an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance
of a grading permit for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
5. County approval of a stream buffer mitigation plan prior to the issuance of a grading permit
for construction of the new stream crossing and approaches.
6. Grading within floodplain shall be confined to the minimum necessary to construct the bridge.
Changes in final design of the bridge, such as use of a longer span, are acceptable if the
changes reduce impacts to the floodplain, in the opinion of the County Engineer.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment A - Location Map
Attachment B - Proposal from applicant
Attachment C - Cross Section for middle crossing
Attachment D - Photo of stream crossing area
4
Attachment A
075
----.-;:4 ~
',,,.' .....,'''-. ,/
. "'" ;7
~ ...._.".17
p~'
.' I
r
$"'
/
/"
::>J..
....~ '"
\\.f--...-.,
/
,/J
/ /
" /
,/ /
( 1..
: q;/
I<~ )k'
~.etl'lJl
Iii:
)
"
103-1
800
1,600
2.400
Albemarle County
Tax Map:
090
~r
Seal.
Feot
Note: This map is for display purposes only
and shows parcels as of 12/31/2008.
S.. Map Book InlrrxIuction for additional dotsil..
Attachment B
OFFICE USE ONLY /'J. '/.. , /.:. .~, _ .
SP#"C05.000c9f!- T1'1P ~ ~ c) II 0 -.1::2 Q- 0 Q -il L l C) 6
g.~ L-IVlfi ~5D n <1. p '--(. C' .(.[) 0... C) D ~ L.-) D- C) D (o~) c)
Sign # Magisterial District: -----t:.o-1b<.! I I ~ Staff: Date: ,
I
.
Application for Special Use Permit
Please See the List at the bottom of page 4 for the Appropriate Fee
(staff will assist you with this item)
Project Name (how should we ,'efer to this application?): BISCUIT RUN STREAM CROSSING #2 (MID)
*Existing Use: VACANT Proposed Use: ROAD CROSSING
Zoning Ordinance Section number requested:-l8 30.5.5.2 d. _
3t"-:;,, (:6 ..~Z , (2)
Number of acres to be covered by Special Use Permit (if a portion it must be delineated on a plat): 1223.1
* Zoning District: R-1, RA
(*staffwill assist you with this item)
Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit?
Are you submitting a preliminary site plan with this application?
BYES
YES
[ZjNO
[Z]NO
Contact Person (Who should we call/write concerning this project?) SCOTT COLLINS, TIMMONS GROUP
Address 800 E. JEFFERSON ST
Daytime Phone (434) 295-5624
City Charlottesville
State V A
Zip 22902
.
Fax # 295-8317
E-mail scott.collins@timmons.com
Owner of Record FOREST LODGE L.L.c.
Address PO BOX 5509
City CHARLOTTESVILLJ State V A
Zip 22905
Daytime Phone (~
Fax #
E-mail
Applicant (Who is the Contact person representing? Who is requesting th~ rezoning?): FOREST LODGE, LLC c/o Scott Collins
Address 800 E. JEFFERSON ST
Daytime Phone (434) 295-5624
Tax map and parcel: 90-5, 90-6D
City Charlottesville
State V A
Zip 22902
Fax # 295-8317
E-mail scott.collins@timmons.com
Physical Street Address (if assigned): 981 Old Lynchburg Road, 951 Forest lodge Lane
Location of property (landmarks, intersections, or other): Between Route 20 and Old Lvnchburg Road: iust south of
MIll creeK SUOQIVlSlOn
Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting property? If yes, please list those tax map and parcel numbers
yes - 90-17D, 90A1-1, 90A1-1E, 90-15A, 90A-1A, 90A-1B, 90A-1C, 90A-3
OF 0.
Fee amount $ Receipt #5'1oaI3Y,
ZMAs & Proffers:
o Special Use Penmts
.
o Variances
o Letter of Authorization
DYES DNO RECEI\II;D
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (4M}..97,2~"41?!~Jfj
--rr<G . y'OC /)D(O-~ ~ /
~ ~" ~~OL.'~~ --(0 S~.l:j COMMUNITY Dt.-? 1/04 PCl~.Jt~ift
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan?
\~+oW h
(6 '~ n
A t fi"
Section 3 I .2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors hereby
reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for
uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors that such use
will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be
changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with
the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this
ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare."
The items that follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete this
form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of you request. If you
need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? Neighborhood Density
How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property?
The proposed stream crossing will provide interconnectivity for automobile and pedestrian
transportation modes between neighborhoods on opposites sides of the stream. It will relieve traffic
demands on surrounding streets and provide more efficient access to destinations in Charlottesville and
Albemarle Countv.destinations to the north and east ofthe orooertv.
How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district(s) surrounding the property?
The proposed stream crossing is proposed at the most feasible location along the section of
Biscuit Run located within the subject property. The crossing will not compromise the existing
character of the surrounding district. Development is proposed for the surrounding property
which is in keeping with the principles for development contained in the Neighborhood Model.
How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance?
Interconnectivity is a principle promoted by section 18-20A of the Zoning Ordinance. The
crossing will provide a means of access on opposite sides of the stream, without impacting its
natural character.
How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
Uses pennitted by right in the surrounding districts include low-density residential development.
As the development planned for in the Comprehensive Plan is realized, the crossing will become
an essential feature to provide emergency access and convenience to its residents.
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 ofthe Zoning Ordinance apply to this use?
No additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance are applicable to this
use.
How will this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community?
Providing a crossing at the location requested will improve emergency response times within the
area.
07/1/04 Page 2 of 4
Describe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the number of persons involved in
the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use:
.
The proposed use involves a two-lane road crossing of Biscuit Run stream at the location indicated on the
attached plan. A Neighborhood Model District (see ZMA-2005-017) is proposed for the surrounding vacant
parcels, to accommodate residential development and supporting commercial uses. The crossing will enable
the future residents of this area to readily travel to the north and west sides of Albemarle County, and the City
of Charlottesville. The crossing will be an element of a main public thoroughfare which willlin1( existing
thoroughfares which surround the development area.
ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two (2) copies of each
o
1. Recorded plat or recorded boundary survey of the property requested for the permit. Ifthere is no
recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book
and page number or Plat Book and page number.
o
2. Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type oflegal entity or
organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in
the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted
certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so.
.
lfthe applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted
containing the owner's written consent to the application.
lfthe applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that
is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
o 3. Provide 16 copies of any drawings or conceptual plans.
o 4. Additional Information, ifany. (16 copies)
Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign
I hereby certifY that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application.
I also certify that the information provided on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true, and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
;;:"'051 ~v
B~
Sign ure of Owner
~ au.. /~/ Lr r:!
4/
Date
ifU47 z / 2 t5Job
c.{sc(. Zq~~. ScfZ 3
S6U!1-i(./
Print Name
.
M (]L-1fAJ1i
r,f
Daytime phone number of Signatory
7/1/04 Page 3 of 4
D Ruml ,,,a d;v;,;on foc tho pucpo," of "f,,"Hy d;v;,;on" :~~~ m;glnal 1980 d,v,lopm,n! ",ht, hav, boon oxhau""" und" I
"family division" as defined under section 14-106 (15) of the subdivision ordinance = $220
D Rural area divisions = $1,240
D Commercial use = $980
D Industrial use = $1,020
D Private club/recreational facility = $1,020
D Mobile home park or subdivision = $980
D Public utilities = $1,020
D Grade/fill in the flood plain = $870
D Minor amendment to valid special use permit or a special use permit to allow minor expansion of a non-conforming use = $110
D Extending special use permits = $70
D Home Occupation-Class B = $440
D For day care centers - six (6) to nine (9) children = $490
D For day care centers - ten (10) or more children = $980
D All other uses except signs = $980
7/1/04 Page 4 of 4
VI C
~ ~
\Jt1l.1-
~+-t
t:~
~ ~ ~
--
"'~
~ ~
~+
4<(
~
\.f~
~ 'Il
t
~
o
~
~
'-
~
~
.~
o
\...
c.J
E
~
;t
~ I ~ ~ ;,[ ~ ~ I} l-
i Ii hi Iii Ii dllllllll illlllll f . ;'J.~it~o~~~,~~_..)!
III! i ! ! I hi I I Ii II III! ililllilnli l.im^t~P', i:l%~~~~' '
~ ~ ~ ! ~ ~ ui ~ I I ~~ ~ ~ d~~lof~~~ ~~I~~!~~~ ,-1 /~"<'(f,41L~ 1 ~' ~ .. ".~IJt"f:',,-~_\
S i ~ ~ ~ I ~u ~ ~ ~ ~! ~i ~ ~~h ~h ~~ ~~~ !~ ~l _I 1J I" ~ \
~ ;/ ~ ~ U ~ ~ I U It ~ ~ ~ rmmn ~ )]' r I.,!
: i ur--! D...... \ I ~~ f"l: ul~I~~'I~il~nnl~h!" ',"OT/ ',',
; i '...' i?::: ~~ ~ i ~ ~I~j!~ It~
I ~' ..... (' '" L.J: ~~lls ~ ~j!~ ~~i ~~~
~~0~~~~ ~~~ I~ ~i~
'-;.'
"'
-y
..Vl
;~
.- Vi
Vl
li!
: u
J:
'i1i ~
I!:~
~~
~ .~
.. J: ~
'. ffi .~
~~
VlJS
;:)
..J
<
tl
~
Vl
:,~,,\"",I<'_~\j..{.<t," I .. <~""',::'''''\
,c-") I .y..,~ ,~." '.
~il::/:t~.~;~~~~}~; /~'"
;<>"i~,.1CL1L:Ul.;lhJP,'i": - i
:Q;),r}~~f:{"L:ij
t
i r
l'
\
\.
/, ~
c.l<
~I~I
:~:,~
,,,,
/:
[i:.I.'...'
~ 'i,.
.,,-,~'
.~
.~
y
\ ;,'
~, I,\:)
\;',;,' .,
\,",
B
.... .. II
~'i
~ i~
j ~~
... ~.
er
~i
z
~l
;' ~ ~ I
W.
..J
,
,
in ;
in ~
i t t: t: t: t:
di ; : ~ ~
~ , $I $I ... ~
~ t: t: t: t: t:
~ ~I~ g g g g
~ ;~! a 2 ~ ~ Ii
~i . i~~
~ ~ t; t: t: t: Ilsili
~ 2' Ii! g g g ~i5
1Il ~It~ l ~ ~ i ~Ig
b ill g ~ t B~2
ig 9~~, . ,
~ig ~ ~ ~ ~I~~. J<:
~Ils ~"'! ".' j:
'I I I dl!: ~'\
~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~:I:\{": "'~ "'>.
- - - ~ ~~ \~\\~\\,
. Ii;!!:::,;.:, '::1 "
\\':, -..~
./
, r
\
>j:
',' (i
'<...,,~.,.. -~,
,,-' ,,'s .\-
I'. <)\' fl.,.,)
. ,../. -,<~", .l
~~"
"".,\,>"
I,
~
~
~
~
o
~
~t'
'. . :J'~
.~. ..">'~~
~~ ..' .'-..... ','x 8
'~._" "', ";"// 0.....
{ .: ' :'" ./ '-!v' 10--4 0
../ j'" -, ~.,Ji- t-< tJ
r-';'_... I .... " ~ "
.' i' '. '.'.r.'. -, .'1' . ',/""" ~.l:l
:'v.... .1;/ ,\ o:.a
,,\ / ., . ~
,!.,.,,~...-...- t-<<
:""/,: ,':!,'.
I
I l!
tt
n I
E
if
r' ),
Sl!l
In I --
tt
n
II
. I ! I
1-----
.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
,
~
~
~
'-,;
r:
.,.,.
'"""~~
'/.
.~
,
}
~
c
!ill
I Uj I . I
II I ,I !i ~ I II !
: I: D.... ~I
:' I: . t,..
: I: . to.",
I I. . .
.
c
;
Q
~
! i
II
~
~
~~ ~ I
U,,1l 0...:
V"l_ V"ll
t91
251
VII
gjl
ell
I :El
\J U5'
~I
11
. II
'~~I
~~I
VII
i
lO!l1:!1
<(~
o .
U")
~
~ I
~~ I
~~
0; ,
~~ I
~;; I
~! I
r"
u i~ I
00 : I
D
CJ~III
j I
u I
~'I
Vl
ex::
~
~
0...
Cl
~
~l
~j
""
_0
E-t;
ex::~
O~
E-~
~
I
Attachment C
0
0
~'~rv +
'" "
'"
............ v'~Zv
............ v +9 ViS ~ ..:l.:1n8 VN.3 is
---
-- 0
0
0 0
u.. 0 0
0 r'v~v +
Q: -' <0
<{ u..
W r-. ~<<J
>-'"
It<)
00 w .
>-1")
O-r 0
v'Q6s.:
~
I- a
LL a
~'L6s.: +
It)
a ::l
N (/)
---l G:
C> I.J.... 1'0 w
N VI L'96r
z 0
D...
(f) 0 "'<:t 0
>- f'. Q:
(f) '---" D...
0
0::: a
U UW a L{)
I- L'96r + II
w aU -r
~
C> L{)<{
0 "'<:to...
~
ill N >
U rL6s.: '---"
<{ W
.....J
0 <{
f'. 0
a (j)
a
L'L6r +
I")
Z'Q6r
a
a
~'Q6r +
N
0
Z
0 6'Q6r
Q:
Cl
Cl
Z
;::
!Q 0
w 0
Q'66r +
vTOV
o
:;;:
o
o
..;-
o
'"
....,
Z'Ht
a
o
+
a
...
Attachment D
.
/'
Y
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, North Wing
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Phone (434) 296-5832
Fax (434) 972-4012
February 26, 2008
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
420 Park Street
Charlottesville, Va 22902
RE: ZMA2007-00021 Cavalier Mini Storage
Tax Map 78, Parcel 36
Dear Mr. Bain:
On February 5, 2008, the Albemarle County Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend
denial of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors by a vote of 4: 1. This recommendation of
denial was based on the following staff recommendations:
. 1. The proposed zoning classification is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed zoning classification would generate traffic above that normally anticipated in the
Rural Areas.
3. There is no indentified public need for additional Highway Commercial in this area.
4. The property is located at the gateway to the Southern Albemarle Historic District and is across the
street from properties that have been placed under easement and are also important historic resources.
5. The proffered eliminations of by-right uses in the Highway Commercial District do not mitigate the
potential negative impacts of this rezoning.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on March 12, 2008. It is the Board of Supervisor's preference that a
public hearing not be advertised until all of the final materials for a zoning application have been received
by the County and are available for public review. The proffer you offered with your application is
included in the information sent to the Board of Supervisors. Please review the attached proffer policy
established by the Board of Supervisors on December 7,2005.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296-5832.
.
Sincerely,
J~welr:'~
Principal Planner
Planning Division
JM/SM
cc: John & Meenakshi Chavan
113 7 East Keswick
Keswick V A 22947
.
.
.
POLICY
SUBMISSION OF MATERIALS
FOR ZONING APPLICATIONS
It is the Board's preference that a public hearing should not be advertised until all of the final materials
for a zoning application have been received by the County and are available for public review. To achieve this
preference, applicants should provide final plans, final codes of development, final proffers, and any other
documents deemed necessary by the Director of Community Development, to the County no later than two
days prior to the County's deadline for submitting the public hearing advertisement to the newspaper. Staff
will advise applicants of this date by including it in annual schedules for applications and by providing each
applicant a minimum of two weeks advance notice of the deadline.
If the applicant does not submit the required materials by this date, the public hearing shall not be
advertised unless the applicant demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Director of Community Development that
good cause exists for the public hearing to be advertised. Ifnot advertised, a new public hearing date will be
scheduled. If the public hearing is held without final materials being available for review throughout the
advertisement period due to a late submittal of documents, or because substantial revisions or amendments are
made to the submitted materials after the public hearing has been advertised, it will be the policy ofthe Board
to either defer action and schedule a second public hearing that provides this opportunity to the public or to
deny the application, unless the Board finds that the deferral would not be in the public interest or not forward
the purposes of this policy.
Pinal signed proffers shall be submitted to the County no later than nine days prior to the date of the
advertised public hearing. This policy is not intended to prevent changes made in proffers at the public hearing
resulting from comments received from the public or from Board members at the public hearing.
This Zoning Policy will be included in the Board's Rules of Procedure for adoption each year, so that
the policy can be re-examined annually.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZMA 2007-21 Cavalier Mini Storage
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Rezone zoning district from Rural Areas (RA) to
Highway Commercial (HC)
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Cilimberg, McDowell
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
LEGAL REVIEW: No
REVIEWED BY: Cilimberg
BACKGROUND:
On March 12,2008, at the applicant's request, the Board of Supervisors deferred ZMA 2007-21 until April 9, 2008 in
order to consider a revised proffer. The Planning Commission previously had recommended denial of this application
on February 5, 2008.
STRATEGIC PLAN:
Goal 4 - Effectively Manage Growth and Development:
DISCUSSION:
The applicant has submitted a revised proffer for the Board's consideration which limits uses allowed by-right on the
property (Attachment I). The applicant's initial proffer proposed to limit many of the by-right uses allowed in a
Highway Commercial (HC) District (see Specifics of the Proposal section in the staff report - Attachment IV). The
revised proffer would further limit the by-right uses permitted on this property to the following:
(21) LiQht WarehousinQ (the use that includes mini-storage facilities)
(35) Electric. qas. oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including poles,
lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and
owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
(36) Public uses and buildinqs including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-89)
HC uses allowed by special use permit would not be limited on this property.
While the proffer has been reviewed by the County Attorney's office and is legally acceptable, staff's opinion
remains that the requested re-zoning in this location is not consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the
proffer does not mitigate the inconsistency sited by staff and the Planning Commission in the recommendation
for denial.
BUDGET IMPACT:
There is no budget impact anticipated,
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend denial of ZMA 2007-21 Cavalier Mini Storage, based on the findings
contained in the staff report and noted in the Planning Commission's action letter (Attachment II). Should the Board
choose to approve this re-zoning, its approval should be inclusive of proffers dated March 27, 2008, and signed March
27,2008.
eTTACHMENTS
I. Revised Proffer dated March 27, 2008
II. Planning Commission Action Letter dated February 26,2008
III. Planning Commission Minutes (Draft)
IV. Staff report with Attachments A-G
.
.
Original Proffer
Amendment
PROFFER FORM
Date of Proffer Signature:
ZMA # 2007-00021
Tax Map and Parcel Number(s)
07800-00-00-03600
2.169
Acres to be rezoned from
RA
to
He
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below
which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a
part of the requested rezoning and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable.
The use of the property shall be limited to those uses allowed by right under Section
24.2.1 (21) (35) and (36) of the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia as
Section 24.2 is in effect on April 9, 2008, a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A.
Printed Names of All Owners
John Chavan
Meenakshi Chavan
.3
OR
Signature of Attorney-in-Fact
Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact
Date
Attachment I
(Attach Proper Power of Attorney)
10/1/07 Page 1 of 2
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
CHAPTER 18
ZONING
SECTION 24
HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL - HC
Sections:
24.1
24.2
24.2.1
24.2.2
24.3
24.4
INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
MINIMUM FRONT AGE, SHAPE OF DISTRICT
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
24.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
.
HC districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map
to permit development of commercial establishments, other than shopping centers, primarily
oriented to highway locations rather than to central business concentrations. It is intended that HC
districts be established on major highways within the urban area and communities in the
comprehensive plan. It is further intended that this district shall be for the purpose of limiting
sprawling strip commercial development by providing sites with adequate frontage and depth to
permit controlled access to public streets.
24.2 PERMITTED USES
24.2.1 BY RIGHT
The following uses shall be permitted in any HC district subject to the requirements and
limitations of these regulations. The zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of
planning and other appropriate officials, may permit, as a use by right, a use not specifically
permitted; provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by right in general character,
and more specifically, similar in terms of locational requirements, operational characteristics,
visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning administrator's decision shall be as
generally provided in section 34.0.
1. Automobile laundries.
2. Automobile, truck repair shops.
3. Automobile service stations (reference 5.1.20).
4. Building materials sales.
5. Churches, cemeteries.
6. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference 5.1.2).
.
7. Convenience stores.
18-24-1
Attachment I
Exhibit A
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
8. Educational, technical and trade schools.
9. Factory outlet sales - clothing and fabric.
10. Feed and seed stores (reference 5.1.22).
11. Financial institutions.
12. Fire extinguisher and security products, sales and service.
13. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.09).
14. Funeral homes.
15. Furniture stores.
16. Food and grocery stores including such specialty shops as bakery, candy, milk dispensary and
wine and cheese shops.
17. Home and business services such as grounds care, cleaning, exterminators, landscaping and
other repair and maintenance services.
18. Hardware.
19. (Repealed 6-3-81)
20. Hotels, motels and inns.
21. Light warehousing.
22. Machinery and equipment sales, service and rental.
23. Mobile home and trailer sales and service.
24. Modular building sales.
25. Motor vehicle sales, service and rental.
26. New automotive parts sales.
27. Newspaper publishing.
28. Administrative, business and professional offices.
29. Office and business machines sales and service.
30. Eating establishment; fast food restaurants.
31. Retail nurseries and greenhouses.
32. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles.
33. Wayside stands - vegetables and agricultural produce (reference 5.1.19).
34. Wholesale distribution.
18-24-2
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
35. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including poles,
lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and
owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
36. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-89)
37. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
38. Indoor theaters.
39. Heating oil sales and distribution (reference 5.1.20).
40. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8). (Added 3-5-86)
41. Uses permitted by right pursuant to subsection 22.2.1 of section 22.1, commercial, C-1.
(Added 6-19-91; Amended 9-9-92)
42. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93)
.
43. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95)
44. Stormwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision plat.
(Added 10-9-02)
45. Tier I and Tier II personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
(~20-24.2.1, 12-10-80; 6-3-81; 3-5-86; 11-1-89; 6-19-91; 9-9-92; 5-12-93; 9-15-93; 10-11-95; Ord. 02-
18(6),10-9-02; Ord. 04-18(2),10-13-04)
24.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 31.2.4:
I. Commercial recreation establishment including but not limited to amusement centers, bowling
alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83)
2. Septic tank sales and related service.
3. Livestock sales.
4. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11).
5. Drive-in theaters (reference 5.1.08).
6. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers, micro-
.
18-24-3
Zoning Supplement #30, 10-13-04
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances (reference
5.1.12).
7. Hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent homes (reference 5.1.13).
8. Contractors' office and equipment storage yard.
9. Auction houses.
10. Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in section 18.0,
residential - R-15, in compliance with regulations set forth therein, and such conditions as
may be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4.
11. Commercial kennels - indoor only (reference 5.1.11). (Added 1- 1-83)
12. Stand alone parking and parking structures (reference 4.12,5.1.41). (Added 11-7-84;
Amended 2-5-03)
13. Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses. (Added 11-7-84; Amended 9-9-
92)
14. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding
four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by
public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added
6-14-89)
15. Warehouse facilities not permitted under section 24.2.1 (reference 9.0). (Added 6-19-91)
16. Animal shelter (reference 5.1.11). (Added 6-16-99)
17. Tier III personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
(~20-24.2.2, 12-10-80; 1-1-83; 11-7-84; 6-14-89; 6-19-91; 9-9-92; 6-16-99; Ord. 03-18(1), 2-5-03; Ord.
04-18(2), 10-13-04)
24.3 MINIMUM FRONTAGE, SHAPE OF DISTRICT
Minimum frontage required on a public street for the establishment of an HC district shall be one
hundred and fifty (150) feet. Frontage of an HC district shall not exceed depth. This section shall
not apply to HC districts established at the adoption of the zoning map.
24.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
In addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section 21.0, commercial
districts, generally, shall apply within all HC districts.
18- 24-4
Zoning Supplement #30,10-13-04
.
.
.
Phone (434) 296-5832
Fax (434) 972-4012
February 26, 2008
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
420 Park Street
Charlottesville, Va 22902
RE: ZMA2007-00021 Cavalier Mini Storage
Tax Map 78, Parcel 36
Dear Mr. Bain:
On February 5, 2008, the Albemarle County Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend
denial of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors by a vote of 4: 1. This recommendation of
denial was based on the following staff recommendations:
1. The proposed zoning classification is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed zoning classification would generate traffic above that normally anticipated in the
Rural Areas.
3. There is no indentified public need for additional Highway Commercial in this area.
4. The property is located at the gateway to the Southern Albemarle Historic District and is across the
street from properties that have been placed under easement and are also important historic resources.
5. The proffered eliminations of by-right uses in the Highway Commercial District do not mitigate the
potential negative impacts of this rezoning.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on March 12, 2008. It is the Board of Supervisor's preference that a
public hearing not be advertised until all of the final materials for a zoning application have been received
by the County and are available for public review. The proffers you offered with your application is
included in the information sent to the Board of Supervisors. Please review the attached proffer policy
established by the Board of Supervisors on December 7,2005.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296-5832.
Sincerely,
Joan McDowell
Principal Planner
Planning Division
JM/SM
Attachment If
.
.
Project Name: ZMA 2007-21 Cavalier Mini- Staff: Joan McDowell, Principal Planner, Rural
storage Areas
Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
February 5, 2008 March 12,2008
Owner: John and Meenakshi Chavan Applicant: Edward H. Bain, Jr.
Acreae:e: 2.169 acres Soecial Use Permit: N/A
TMP: 78 - 36 Existing Zoning and By-right use:
Location: North side of Route 250 East RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and
approximately 1110 mile east of! 64 fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre
Magisterial District: Scottsville Proffer: Yes
DA (Development Area): Requested # of Dwelling Units: NA
RA (Rural Areas): X
Proposal: Change zoning district from Rural Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural Areas
Areas (RA) to Highway Commercial (He), to - preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open
allow a mini-storage development on the property space, and natural, historic and scenic resources.
Property on entrance Entrance Corridor
Character of Property: Contains one single Use of Surrounding Properties: Comfort Inn
family residence, mostly cleared but with trees is between subject property and I 64; other
around house, property sloping up from the street Highway Commercial property on Rt. 250
level approximately 1,200 feet south and directly
across Rt. 250t; Southern Albemarle Historic
District / Monticello Historic District / Historic
Preservation Easement property (Shadwell)
approximately 650 feet south (across Rt. 250).
Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable:
There are no factors favorable to this 1. The proposed zoning classification is
application. inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed zoning classification would
generate traffic above that normally
anticipated in the Rural Areas.
3. There is no indentified public need for
additional Highway Commercial in this
area.
4. The property is located at the gateway to
the Southern Albemarle Historic District
and is across the street from properties
that have been placed under easement and
are also important historic resources.
5. The proffered eliminations of by-right
uses in the Highway Commercial District
do not mitigate the potential negative
impacts of this rezoning.
RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends denial of this Zoning Map Amendment.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
.
ZMA 2007 21 Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2 5 08
Page I of7
Attachment IV
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Joan McDowell, Principal Planner Rural Areas
February 5, 2008
March 12,2008
ZMA 2007-21 Cavalier Mini-Storae:e
Petition:
PROJECT: ZMA 2007-21 Cavalier Mini Storage
PROPOSAL: Rezone 2.169 acres from RA Rural Areas zoning district which
allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit!acre) to
HC Highway Commercial zoning district which allows commercial and service
uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre)
PROFFERS: Yes x
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas-
preserve and protect agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and
scenic resources/ density (.5 unit! acre)
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes X
--
LOCATION: North side of Route 250 East and approximately 1/10 mile east of 164
TAX MAP/P ARCEL: TMP 78-36
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
Character of the Area: The area is a mixture of commercial, rural and residential
uses. Over 1,200 acres ofland to the south of the subject parcel has been protected
by easements (Attachment B). This area is also the entrance into the Southern
Albemarle Historic District and it is on an Entrance Corridor.
Specifics of the Proposal: The applicant has requested a rezoning of a 2.169 acre property
from Rural Areas (RA) to Highway Commercial (HC), in order to construct a mini-storage
facility. A mini-storage facility is not allowed in the RA District. The following excerpt
from the HD District provides the uses allowed both by-right and by special use permit. The
applicant has offered a proffer that would remove some of the by-right uses. The uses the
applicant has offered to eliminate are shown with strikethroughs. The full text of the Highway
Commercial District is included as Attachment C. The Rural Areas District is included as
Attachment D. A copy of the existing zoning map for this area is included as Attachment E.
It should be noted that although the applicant has indicated that he would like to have a mini-
storage on the property, all HC uses that have not been eliminated by proffer would be
allowed in this District either by-right or potentially by special use permit.
HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL - HC
24.2 PERMITTED USES
24.2.1 BY RIGHT
The following uses shall be permitted in any HC district subject to the requirements and
limitations of these regulations. The zoning administrator, after consultation with the director
of planning and other appropriate officials, may permit, as a use by right, a use not
specifically permitted; provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by right in
general character, and more specifically, similar in terms of locational requirements,
ZMA 2007 21 Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2508
Page 2 of7
.
operational characteristics, visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning
administrator's decision shall be as generally provided in section 34.0.
1. :\utomobile lauFldries.
2. Automobile, truck repair shops.
3. :\utomobile service statioFls (refereFlE:e 5.1.20).
1. BuildiFlg materials sales.
5. Churches, cemeteries.
6. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference 5.1.2).
7. Convenience stores.
8. Educational, technical and trade schools.
9. Factory outlet sales clothing aFld fabric.
10. Feed aFld seed stores (ref-erenee 5.1.22).
11. Financial institutions.
12. Fire extiFlguisher and security products, sales and service.
13. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.09).
14. Funeral homes.
IS. Furniture stores.
16. Food and grocery stores incIudiflg such specialty shops as bakery, candy, milk dispeflsaI)'
afld wino and oheese shops.
17. Home and business services such as grounds care, cleaning, exterminators, landscaping
and other repair and maintenance services.
18. Hardv,'are.
1 9. (Repealed 6 3 8 1 )
20. HotoIs, motels and iflns.
21. Light warehousing.
22. Machinery and eql:lipment sales, sen'ice and rental.
23. Mobile home and trailer sales and service.
21. Modul!H' building sales.
25. Motor vehicle sales, service afld rental.
26. Ne'.\' automotive parts sales.
27. Newspaper publishing.
28. Administrative, business and professional offices.
29. Office and business machines sales and service.
30. Eatiflg establishment; fast food restaurants.
31. Retail flurseries afld greenhouses.
32. Sale of m~or recreational equipment aFld ';ehicles.
33. Wayside stands - vegetables and agricultural prod~ce (reference 5.] .19).
34. Wholesale distribution.
35. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including
poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service
and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter] 6 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
36. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencil(s
(reference 3] .2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended] 1-]-89)
37. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
.
.
ZMA 2007 2 J Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2508
Page 3 of7
38. Indoor theaters.
39. Heating oil sales and distribution (reference 5.1.20).
10. Temporary Floaresidential mOBile homes (refereRee 5.8). V.dded 3 5 86)
11. Uses permitted BY right p1:lrSl:laRt to s\:lesection 22.2.1 of seetion 22.1,
commereial, C 1.
(f.dded (; 19 91; ,A.mended 9 9 92)
12. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9 15 93)
43. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95)
44. Stormwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision
plat.
(Added 10-9-02)
45. Tier I aRd Tier II personal wireless sen'ice facilities (reference 5.1.19). (Added 10 13 01)
(~20-24.2.1, 12-10-80; 6-3-81; 3-5-86; 11-1-89; 6-19-91; 9-9-92; 5-12-93; 9-15-93; 10-11-
95; Ord. 02-
18(6),10-9-02; Ord. 04-18(2),10-13-04)
24.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 31.2.4:
1. Commercial recreation establishment including but not limited to amusement centers,
bowling alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83)
2. Septic tank sales and related service.
3. Livestock sales.
4. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11).
5. Drive-in theaters (reference 5.1.08).
6. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers, wave and
radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances (reference 5.1.12).
7. Hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent homes (reference 5.1.13).
8. Contractors' office and equipment storage yard.
9. Auction houses.
10. Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in section 18.0,
residential - R-15, in compliance with regulations set forth therein, and such conditions as
may be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4.
11. Commercial kennels - indoor only (reference 5.1.11). (Added 1- 1-83)
12. Stand alone parking and parking structures (reference 4.12, 5.1.41). (Added 11-7-84;
Amended 2-5-03)
13. Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses. (Added 11-7-84; Amended
9-9-92)
14. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption
exceeding four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not
served by public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic
wastes. (Added 6-14-89)
15. Warehouse facilities not permitted under section 24.2.] (reference 9.0). (Added 6-19-91)
16. Animal shelter (reference 5.1.11). (Added 6-16-99)
17. Tier III personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40).
Staffs opinion is that the elimination of certain by-right uses allowed in the HC district does not
mitigate the potential negative impacts of this rezoning.
Applicant's Justification for the Request: "Will allow for the development of mini storage
units for residents of the northeast, east and southern sections of Albemarle County; also adds
ZMA 2007 21 Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2 5 08
Page4of7
.
additional commercial tax base to the County." A letter sent in response to review comments
from Edward Bain, the attorney for the applicant, provides additional information regarding the
applicant's justification (Attachment F).
Bv-rie:ht Use of the Property: Under the Rural Area zoning, a single family dwelling was
constructed on this property. The single family dwelling is consistent with other residential
dwellings in the immediate area.
Anticipated impact on public facilities and services:
Transportation - Under the existing RA District, the one residential dwelling permitted
by-right would generate approximately 10 vehicle trips per day (9.57 vpd). With a mini-
storage facility, the site will generate approximately 100 vpd. Typically, however, this,type of
use generates most of its traffic in the off-peak hours. An increase of about 10 trips in each of the
Route 250 peak hours, both AM and PM, can be expected from this use. The Virginia
Department of Transportation has also commented that the access to the site should be through
the existing North Hill Road. In addition, VDOT as advised that the entrance from Route 250 to
North Hill Road should be addressed for adequacy as a commercial entrance.
.
It should also be noted that with the development of the Gazebo Plaza, located in the
Development Area just west and north of the I 64 / Rt. 250 interchange, the existing median
cross-over at Route 240 and Hansens Mountain Road will be closed. Thus, traffic traveling east
on Route 250 will have to go beyond Gazebo Plaza and make a U-turn further east to come back
to Hansens Mountain Road and access Gazebo Plaza. One of the intersections where this would
take place would be at the Route 250/ North Hill Road interchange.
Water and Sewer - The parcel is not in the Albemarle Charlottesville Service Authority
Jurisdictional Area (ACSA) for water and sewer service. However, water service is available to
the properties to the north (adjacent to 1-64). Although an extension of the jurisdictional area
has not been requested, a Highway Commercial zoning district may produce a demand for water
and lor service to this property in the Rural Areas. According to the Comprehensive Plan, "Water
and sewer service jurisdictional areas provide the implementing measure for directing utilities
according to the land use plan and overall growth management policies." The Plan recommends
that public water and sewer be provided only to areas within the ACSAjurisdictional area and
should follow the boundaries of the designated Development Areas. In addition, the
Comprehensive Plan discourages central sewer systems in the RA, except to address health and
safety problems.
Public need and iustification for the chane:e: The applicant has included in his justification
that there is a need for a mini-storage in this area and that it would provide additional taxes. The
Pantops Master Plan, the master plan under consideration for the nearby area within the
Development Areas north of 164 does not include this as an area to be considered for inclusion in
the Development Areas. In addition, there has been no indication as a result of the studies that
have taken place in the as part of the Pantops Master Plan's development that indicate any
compelling reasons that additional commercial zoning is necessary to supply an unmet need for
mini-storage or for other HC uses.
.
Although there are other, non-RA, zoning districts in this area, they are non-conforming and they
are inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the Rural Areas District. Uses allowed in the
Highway Commercial District are suitable for providing the of services compatible with zoning
ZMA 2007 21 Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2508
Page 5 of7
districts that are found in the Development Areas. Expanding non-compatible zoning in the Rural
Areas contradicts the purpose of establishment of two distinct areas designated by the
Comprehensive Plan, the Development Areas and Rural Areas, and exacerbates conflicts with
permitted uses in the Rural Areas.
The intent of the Highway Commercial Zoning District states, "It is intended that HC districts be
established on major highways within the urban area and communities in the comprehensive
plan." This request conflicts with the intent of the HC zoning district.
An email from an owner of two adjacent properties has indicated that she is not in favor ofthe
proposed rezoning (Attachment G).
Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan: As previously noted, the Comprehensive Plan
designates the subject property as Rural Areas emphasizing the preservation and protection of
agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources as land use options.
As such, is located in the Rural Areas land use designation of the Comprehensive Plan and the
existing zoning of the Rural Areas is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. In addition, the
proposal to create a Highway Commercial zoning district would be inconsistent with the
following section of the Comprehensive Plan:
. The Land Use Plan for Interstate Interchange Development Because Interstate 64 is a limited
access highway, its interchanges may be a focus for development activities. To accommodate
appropriate land uses in the vicinity of interstate interchanges, while maintaining the safety
and functional and aesthetic integrity of such interchanges, the standards and policies set forth
below are recommended. Urban Area land at the following interchanges should be developed
in accordance with the standards set forth below:
Route 250 East (Shadwell) (Urban Area side only)
Anticipated impact on natural. cultural. and historic resources: The Historic Resources's
chapter ofthe Comprehensive Plan's Natural Resources and Cultural Assets section states that the
County is to protect its historic and cultural resources by identifying and recognizing their value
and pursing protection measures to preserve these resources. Further, the Plan calls for the
County to consider the impact of proposed land use regulations and decisions on Monticello's
viewshed.
This site is within the Monticello viewshed. The property is also across the street from Shadwell,
the site of Thomas Jefferson's birthplace. It is also at the entrance to the Southern Albemarle
Historic District. The change of a zoning district from Rural Areas to a district that permits uses
more suited to the Development Areas would allow additional commercial intrusion that would
create further conflict with these important resources in the Rural Areas.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application:
There are no factors favorable to this application.
Staff has identified the following factors unfavorable to this application:
1. The proposed zoning classification is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The proposed zoning classification would generate traffic above that normally
anticipated in the Rural Areas.
ZMA 2007 21 Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2 5 08
Page 6 of7
.
.
.
3. There is no indentified public need for additional Highway Commercial in this area.
4. The property is located at the gateway to the Southern Albemarle Historic District and is
across the street from properties that have been placed under easement and are also
important historic resources.
5. The proffered eliminations of by-right uses in the Highway Commercial District do not
mitigate the potential negative impacts of this rezoning.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends denial of ZMA
2007-2] Cavalier Mini Storage.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A -
Attachment B -
Attachment C -
Attachment D -
Attachment E -
Attachment F -
Attachment G -
ZMA 2007 2 J Cavalier
Staff Report PC 2 5 08
Page 7 of7
Application, proffer and concept plan
Monticello and Shadwell Conservation Easements map
Highway Commercial District Ordinance Text
Rural Areas District Ordinance Text
Zoning Map Tax Map 78
Letter from Edward H. Bain, Jr. dated January 4,2008
Email from Dolores Wallace dated January 3, 2008
.
Application for
Zoning Map Amendment
"<....~
~ Under 50 acres =$1020
o 50 acres or more = $1570
o Minor amendment to previous request = $220
- Cavalier Mini
PROJECf NAME: (how should we refer to this application?): Storage
PROPOSAL: REZONE 2.169 ACRES FROM RA ZONING TO HC ZONING
EXISTING COMP PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Rural Areas
LOCATION: North side of Route 250 East approx 1/10 of a mile east of I64
TAX MAP PARCEL(s): 07800-00-00~O3600
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
Is this an amendment to an existing Planned District? DYES ~ NO
Is this an amendment to existing proffers? DYES iii NO
Are you submitting a preliminary site plan with this application? DYES iii NO
Are you submitting a preliminary subdivision plat with this application? DYES [i] NO
Are vou Drofferinl! a Dlan with this application? llil YES D NO
.
Contact Person (Who should we caIJJwrite concerning this project?):
Address 420 Park street
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
City Charlottesville
State VA
Zip 22902
DaytimePhone~ 977 6155
Fax # (434) 293 5017
E-mail ed.bain@bbrs.net
Owner of Record
John and Meenakshi Chavan
Address
1137 East Keswick Drive
City Keswick
. State VA
Zip
22947
Daytime Phone ~ 245 0639
Fax#~ 245 0639
E-mail iohnchavan@hotmail.com
Applicant (Who is the Contact person representing?): John and Meenakshi Cha van
Address
1137 East Keswick
City Keswick State VA Zip
Fax # (434) 245 0639 E_mailjohnchavan@hotmail.com
22947
Daytime Phone ~ 245 0639
Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting property? If yes, please list those tax map and parcel numbers
No
D Variances:
History:
D ZMA's & Proffers:
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
ZMA#
D YES D NO
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
o Special Use Permits: M
o Letter of Authorization
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan?
.
/
FeeArnount$ '''4'I.~~ Date Paid '1hljq By who? ,,;r;,/AI L4gVAd Receipt # t'/'''~I Ck" / P/P n... 01/. # ,.._
County of Albemarle Department of Community Devel Attachment A
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax L '/
. Page of~
Section 15.2-2284 ofthe Code of Virginia states that, "Zoning ordinances aill.l districts shall be drawn and
applied with reasonable consideration for the existing use and character of property, the comprehensive
plan, the suitability of property for various uses, the trends of growth or change, the current and future
requirements of the community as to land for various purposes as determined by population and economic
studies and other studies, the transportation requirements of the community, the requirements for airports,
housing, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation areas and other public services, the conservation of natural
resources, the preservation of flood plains, the preservation of agricultural and forestal land, the
conservation of properties and their values and the 'encouragement of the most appropriate use of land
throughout the locality."
The items that follow will be reviewed by the staff in their anCilysis of your request. Please complete this
form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of you request. If you
need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property?
What public need or benefit does this rezoning serve? Will) allow for the development
Rural Areas
of mini storage units for residents of the northeast, east and southern
sections of Albemarle County; also adds additional commercial tax base to the
County.
Are public water, sewer, and roads available to serve this site? Will there be any impact on these facilities?
Public water & sewer is not available and not needed. Route 250 East will
serve the site. No impact is noted as the site will serve those residents
in the northeast, east and southeast sections of the County.
What impact will there be on the County's natural, scenic, and historic resources?
No ~mPCl:ct, the site will be developed in a manner that is consistent
with the recent development along Route 250 in the Pantops area.
OPTIONAL: Do you have plans to develop the property if the rezoning is approved? If so please describe:
The site will be developed with mini storage units
If you would like to proffer any restrictions on the development of the property, please list these proffers on the
following optional attachment entitled, "PROFFER FORM". Proffers are voluntary offers to use property in a more
restrictive way than the overall zoning district classification would allow.
By State Code, proffers must have a reasOliablerelationship to the rezoning and are not mandatory. The rezoning
must give rise to the need for the proffers; the proffers must be related to the physical development or physical
operation ofthe property; and the proffers must be in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan.
Attachment ~
Page~ of 1
Describe your request in detail including why you are requesting this particular zoning district.
. The highway commercial zoning will allow mini storage as a by-right
ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two (2) copies of each
0 1. Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is no
recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description ofthe property and the Deed Book
and page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requesting a rezoning for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or
delineation on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing"
0 2. Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity
or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in
the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted
. certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted
containing the owner's written consent to the application.
Ifthe.applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that
is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
o 3. Provide 16 copies of any drawings or conceptual plans.
y( 4. Proffer Form signed by owner(s).
o 5. Additional Information, ifany. (16 copies)
Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign
I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application.
I also certify that the information provided on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true, and correct to
the best of my knowledge.
/0 ///6/fJ '7
Date I I
. Sig ~'e of Owner, Contract Purchaser
John Chavan
P~' t N. ~Fe
/.'{~
~nakshi Chavan
Daytime phone numbt Attachment L
Page 30fL
\
PROFFER FORM
Date of Proffer Signature:
10/26/2007
ZMA#
07800-00-00-03600
Original Proffer
Amendment
,\
HC
Tax Map and ParceI Number(s)
2 .169
RA
Acres to be rezoned from
to
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below
which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a
part of the requested rezoning and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable.
We will proffer out the following HC uses under Albemarle County Code Section 24.2.1
By Right: 1-4, 7, 9, 10-12, 15-16, 18-20,)9-32,38,40-42, and 45.
~~ 22-26,
Printed Names of All Owners
JohnChavan
Meenakshi Chavan
OR
Signature of Attorney-in-Fact
Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact
(Attach Proper power of Attorney)
, Date
_ j()/U If) 1
10/ /1"610 1
I I
['-'-
Attachment ;t-
o Page -f of-2
Attachment ~
Page .:;- of 2
~
~
J
...--:--....:: .... ...
-==.-..=--..::.
;:',.::,.- -::: =
..;:::-,. -:.:..-
.... -.. ...
--
~
SHL
IlT1cI &US
n 'n1IAaUD1ImI:l
..., Il1'AYB:l IDIOt
IWollU enIOoL1
-IIlDl lIIIIOcI*
-
~
x
:!:
I-
Z
:J
r---
II. .Bt,ISo[ S ,8B'O~~
~l
1IO't'llL3S
,os
.~ . tII~
...-
...- ...-
l ~-(f . 110'..(( . tI-4' oAIll ~"E" -.
.
. ,
- ,
~ ...-
.~ .~
"-
'$/-4' . 110'..(( . tI-" GA&f IlUIlJlINO "ll' -.
1 '
~ 110"..(( . tI -rf fI.llOR lO f\.lICIII ·
..=: 'C:: nm ~
81 \ 1 I
w =~~
. ~
~ ,
i ~ ~ "Vi
~ ~ .- it
= ~ ~ II
H VI
.. .~ ~ ~ ~
CI .~ l-.
~ ~ 1 ;,i
~ '10'..(( . tI-rf f\.lICIII 'IV f\.lICIII ll;
." f1IlS'I' n.OCI!
~'l \ T
~ ~~
...-
t::
........
H
.~ fJ- ~
.~
1 ~. 319'-CI" . ..4 f\.lICIIIlO f\.lICIII 1
Q"fIIlS'I~
~, 1\\
r ~~ I-
...-
IV.<< Ufr HL ~
....r
fII~
....., -- $J' st.19~Cl'- '"
1; -1..- ----
\
'1.'1.\.01. It \4"13'2.4' 'll
~~J.tlC:f.'
.
~
01
~
~
I
~
z
c
I!IMI
.1~1I11
~ I!IIM I
s 111111- 1
~ ,:Iqlll
!ll!!i! I
!
*
~~
- -
C 0
j~
o Q)
ro Ol
~ ~
.J
\
,
o ,
CU-+-'
OJ.- CJ) -+--' \
E~~ai
-+-' ~ ~ ClJ E
~ ClJowQ..::> ,
oo...uClJ25
~-ga:;Q..o~25::::;;; '\
::<::;O:::VlI- LLf--
i::q ClJ ClJ I- 0..0
~ C:= ~ Q"lClJ ClJ
i::qoOOu>Qi52
>-:l~ZQ..wOf--
VlQ..Q..WQ..c
~ZQ..WOf--~
o
C\1
......
o
CO
o
.q<
0
.q<
0
1\
~
......:l
~
U
Cfl
U
>-:l
>-:l :;:::-.:;:::-.
;:3)"t .g t!
......-a..-->
.... 1..r.l '-..;.. 0...
~d I O')~
1:';lC\l0')~
~ f}- ~ C\l
t--.o"t"t I
~:::t:t\.l_~
h......Q:l1..r.l_
~~ ~
~ r-. Q:l
0) ...... ~
~
~
I
I
--- - - -\
------ I
--- ~ 1
o
~ :;:::-.:;:::-. \
.~ 1..r.l t! t!
-CO')-->-->
l()CI]l().e::..~
C"J~IC\l_
I <:o_~
Q:J 1..r.l t--. C\l
t--. '-) 1..r.l I I
-"to
~..c C'"J~
e-;1;;Q:l0')-
..o~
t! Q:lCl:l
.~ ~ ~
~
:>..:
~
~
V)
~
>-:l
~
k.,
h
:<;
~
0::
~ ~
t..J ~
...; ~
:<; ::>...
a ~
~ ~
~ ~:<:;
~ ~~
::<::; V)~
a at..J
~ ~
0:: ~
~ ~~
~ ~~
~ ~~l()
V:l ......."'O:C"J
.e::: C"J
::>"'~a~1
~:::t: ...;C\l
V:lV:l Q:l
~......e-.:<:;;;
V:l~~~~
::>...~~-.~-----
0:: V)..
"'<l::e-.-.;r:V:l
~~klO::
::::Ja ~
a~~~
~O::"'<l::c
~~V:lh
~~~~
e::......o::
'. ~ :::::"l 0::
V:l;:t:ah~
~e-;~~u
S2--.......................::::-
"",-t\.l<=,?y
---
--
~
o
......
0) --. ...........
.~ l() tj tj
..c0')-->......
"'I-CI]1..r.l~~
C'"J~IC\l-
I <:0 _ Q:J
~ 1..r.l t--. t\.l
t--.'-)l() I I
-"to
~..c C'"JQ:J
hC;lQ:lO')-
..ol:::l
t! Q:l Q:l
.~ ~ ~
~
--
66Z d
HUJON
,
\0)
T~
\
\
I
\
\
\
i
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\ClJ
i~
\
I~
r
r
\
\
\
\
_--I
I
\
\
Vl
\
"..q-
LO
r---
LO
..q-
W
01
..q-
\
\
I\.()
I
\ ~
I~
I~
\t
'0...
I
\ -~
l""d
, d
\~
.c-:>
I';J:::
I
\t
,':.2;
,
vlS 80
OClOJ3Cl
...........
~
. 0
l-- ....
-. ......
R..
......-0 "~
t\.l ~C'"J ?;l
"t ;3 I ~
1 V:l 0') q
~ 0') '-..;..
t--.~,....~
~ ~ C>':l
hllJ I
~ 0')
~ C"J
t! C>':l
-.
----l
3=
"-<:t r--. c
NOO
i-rJN~
::-00
-<:tt"l-+-'
Z
a
aV
aV
aV
Cl:l
~
........ \
-.r;}~\ A rl"'~" I
-,,~ \Y- ..
_ .::::... Q)' 0...,
_~ ~r-- ,,~_\
. :r: -eJ ~~ ? &:'
~; ~ u: ~~: ~
_ v> .~ ~ ~~ _
.. ~,p Cl ~~ '?-_
"Ofy '\....~'v_
"... fV 0 J .-
, ,96 'OZZ M,,6v, Lc;.ros ........
Fence ~~
"
C/)
c.o Q..)
CVJ ~
I U
CQ~
l'.-~
~~
h.
C\1
1..r.l0')C'"Jt--.
C'"JC1..r.l"to
C>':l"'l-C\l-C'"J
1 I I I t\.l
C\l1..r.ll()C>':l1
~O')1..r.lOl()
-C\l~t--.~
C>':lC\l--
Q:lQ:lQ:lQ:l~
~~q~
-----,
,
,- ,
\ )
\ I
\ I
\ I
\ )
\ /
\ /
\ //
, /
I /
I /
I /
I f
I CJ'11
ISI
.;:,(.1
15\
\ 0.. I
1 "'0 I
I C I
101
I ClJ 1
I>
\";:: I
\ Cl I
I Q) I
I> 1
I ~ I
101
I I
1 I
I I
I I
I ,
, ,
I I
I I
I I
I I
I I
/ /
/ /
/ /
/ /
/
oQi
3:
if
~I "I
'+-
c 0
~ "I
-5 Q)
m t'J)
- m
:< a..
ClJ
U
C
ClJ
l.L-
...........
;3 tj
t! t\.l ......
_ ..c C'"J ~
"t~1..r.lt")
I~IC'"J
~l--0')1..r.l
t--. t..J "t I
C\l0')
~ ~,.... "t
hc".......t\.l
~~
...., ~
r---
....-
co
(j)
r-'J
5:
(j)
..q-
"0
~
.;:,(.
u
.::s
~
~
Q:;:
:;:
t--.
o
o
t\.l
~
a :::....- 1..r.l-"
~ E-., ___ ...--\;:.),1
~ 3::......., E--.
:::,: '-.J 0 V:l
g;~8-~
V:l>-:l~h::::J
>-.~>-:l~"'<l::
~ Q:;: Q:;: f:tj ".
~~:;jV:l~
:<; ~ ~
::::J C!::l -.
a ~~_
Cl:lt--.~o
,.., -"<l-
e..')....... E--. Ii
:<; ~ t..J ~ C-:l
~-<;I:t:-iS:
,-...'-<h ""~
'-' '"" V:l i::q .
::r:::~..........:j<:O
V:l ~:"l:~
h k:lua
"'<l:: >-:lV)Q:J
>-...::l >-:l t--.
0... :;:
~
h
a
u
V:l
.J.:.
~
~
~
---
---
61..r.l
t--.~1..r.l
C'"J~~
I ~ 1..r.l
~l--<:O
t--.u1..r.l
~tj-
h~Q:l
~~
..
..
/
..
..
W
--<:t C
N" 0
i-rJ~2
r~o
-<:t -+-'
Ui
() "--;;:''''''E
.J ~a;--8
0"1-- .
.J ~N~~:;;
O<CoO-o.!
+J (/) ~>~<ria)8
r::: Q) ~J1S;S;
Q) o~~..,:..,:
E L. 011""'''"'
:J lJ) '0 ... ...
C. ON"'C
c: 0 U)~~
o Q) Q) U
'c >~
._ Q) 1.10.
~C
C
\.-?
250 6
o~te p../~ ~ .- 20
US. p.. ~1,d.t\l. ~021p.. ~5
. :fo,'ote A .-002'- 5'- ~ 3.
\]0; 006~ pU
~ o. . \I.'\Po,'\j
. ct 1J'\,g
D'fo1e !e P
r S to.."
\/I \ , II) II)
III "" \ ' '''''
""6) 0.,:, <;:011I Ill"
6)<- :"'~IJ~--~ \ ~c.~'~
'6",* at ,.
VOF Conservation Easement ALB-VOF-1561
1,059.85 acres
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation &
Thomas Jefferson Foundation Inc.
1\ . <S>
s,~ ~
.~~ r (l
IS'D~
/~
~
i~
~
Q ~
~ d>
,....
0 ~ ~
It) ~ ~ ~ ~
~ Q ~ ~
<Xl 1P '-0
......
-...a
0>
r:.,
o
'!:
~8'311
{i?
~
<0
o
i
"
ZMA 2007-21
Cavalier Mini Storage
ENS.M0UN.7'...q ._ -rg-2A (
11v~
U
LO
d>
,....
LO
d>
,....
78-50
78-20M 1
<Xl
"i
~
-...a
CI>
~
-...a
'P
01
~
<J:>
1..>
~
-...a
0>
~
Virginia Department of Historic Resources
Conservation Easement - "Shadwell"
215 acres
Thomas Jefferson Memorial Foundation
_....\\:'(,.0 ..,
~,\ /~
~c.:
~
d
13
\S'u~
.9~ ~~J?.s
7> .~
()
ZMA 07-21 - Monticello & Shadwell Conservation Easements
.0 625 1,250 2,500 Feet
I I I
N
~ Prepared by Albemarle County Community Development Dept.
Map created by Scott Clark, January 2007.
~ Note: The map elements depicted are graphic representations and are not
to be construed or used as a legal description. This map is for display purposes only.
~ Parcel boundaries reflect most recent available data.
ATTACHMENT B
.
Sections:
10.1
10.2
10.2.1
10.2.2
10.3
10.3.1
10.3.3
10.3.3.1
10.3.3.2
10.3.3.3
10.4
10.5.2
10.5.2.2
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 18
ZONING
SECTION 10
RURAL AREAS DISTRICT, RA
INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED (Amended 11-8-89; 10-3-01)
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT
CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Amended 11-8-89)
RURAL PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT (Added 11-8-89)
DEFINITIONS (Added 11-8-89)
INTENT; DESIGN STANDARDS (Added 11-8-89)
SPECIAL PROVISIONS (Added 11-8-89)
AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS
WHERE PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
10.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
.
This district (hereafter referred to as RA) is hereby created and may hereafter be established by
amendment ofthe zoning map for the following purposes: (Amended 11-8-89)
-Preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities;
- Water supply protection;
-Limited service delivery to the rural areas; and
-Conservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources. (Amended 11-8-89)
Residential development not related to bona fide agricultural/forestal use shall be encouraged to
locate in the urban area, communities and villages as designated in the comprehensive plan where
services and utilities are available and where such development will not conflict with the
agricultural/forestal or other rural objective. Where development does occur, rural residents
should expect to receive a lower level of service delivery than will be provided to residential
developments in designated growth areas. In relation to residential development,
agricultural/forestal activities shall be regulated only to the extent necessary to protect public
health and safety. (Added 11-8- 89; Amended 10-3-01)
In regard to agricultural preservation, this district is intended to preserve the county's active farms
and best agricultural and forestal lands by providing lot areas designed to insure the continued
availability of such lands for preferential land use tax assessment in order to enhance the economy,
and maintain employment and lifestyle opportunities. In addition, the continuation and
establishment of agriculture and agriculturally-related uses will be encouraged, and landowners
will be encouraged to employ Virginia State Water Control Board best management practices.
(Amended 11-8- 89)
.
(910.1,12-10-80,11-8-89; Ord. 01-18(6),10-3-01)
18-10-1
Attachment {!..,
Page L of /1
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
It is intended that pennitted development be restricted to land which is of marginal utility for
agricultural/forestal purposes, provided that such development be carried out in a manner which is
compatible with other purposes of this district. Roadside strip development is to be discouraged
through the various design requirements contained herein. (Amended 11-8-89)
10.2 PERMITTED USES
10.2.1 BY RIGHT
The following uses shall be permitted in any RA district subject to the requirements and
limitations of these regulations:
1. Detached single-family dwellings, including guest cottages and rental of the same; provided
that yard, area and other requirements of section lOA, conventional development by right,
shall be met for each such use whether or not such use is on an individual lot subject to
section 10.3.
2. Side-by-side duplexes subject to the provisions of section lOA; provided that density is
maintained and provided that buildings are located so that each unit could be provided with a
lot meeting all other requirements for detached single-family dwellings except for side yards
at the common wall. Other two-family dwellings shall be pennitted provided density is
maintained.
3. Agriculture, forestry, and fishery uses except as otherwise expressly provided.
4. Game preserves, wildlife sanctuaries and fishery uses.
5. Wayside stands for display and sale of agricultural products produced on the premises
(reference 5.1.19).
6. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including poles,
lines, transfonners, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and
owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
7. Accessory uses and buildings including home occupation, Class A (reference 5.2) and storage
buildings.
8. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
9. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-89)
10. Temporary sawmill (reference 5.1.15 and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
11. Veterinary services - off-site treatment only.
12. Agricultural service occupation (subject to perfonnance standards in 4.14).
13. Divisions ofland in accordance with section 10.3.
18-10-2
Attachment C.
PageL of II
ALBEMARLE COUNTY COnE
.
14. Tourist lodging (reference 5.1.17).
15. Mobile homes, individual, qualifying under the following requirements (reference 5.6):
a. A property owner residing on the premises in a permanent home wishes to place a mobile
home on such property in order to maintain a full-time agricultural employee.
b. Due to the destruction of a permanent home an emergency exists. A permit can be issued
in this event not to exceed twelve (12) months. The zoning administrator shall be
authorized to issue permits in accordance with the intent of this ordinance and shall be
authorized to require or seek any information which he may determine necessary in
making a determination of cases "a" and "b" of the aforementioned uses.
16. Temporary mobile home in accordance with section 5.7. (Amended 11-8-89)
17. Farm winery (reference 5.1.25). (Added 12-16-81)
18. Borrow area, borrow pit, not exceeding an aggregate volume of fifty thousa'ld (50,000) cubic
yards including all borrow pits and borrow areas on anyone parcel of record on the adoption
date of this provision (reference 5.1.28). (Added 7-6-83)
19. Mobile homes on individual lots (reference 5.6). (Added 11- 11-92)
20. Commercial stable (reference 5.1.03). (Added 11-15-95)
21. Stormwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision plat.
(Added 10-9-02)
.
22. Tier I and Tier 11 personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
23. Farm worker housing, Class A (up to ten occupants and up to two sleeping structures)
(reference 5.1.44). (Added 12-13-06)
(~20-10.2.1, 12-10-80; 12-16-81; 7-6-83; 11-1-89; 11-8-89; 11-11-92; 5-12-93; Ord. 95-20(5),11-15-95;
Ord. 98-A(1), ~ 18-10.2.1,8-5-98; Ord. 02-18(6),10-9-02; Ord 04-18(2),10-13-04; Ord. 06-18(2),12-13..
06)
10.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 31.2.4: (Added 10-9-02)
I. Community center (reference 5.1.04).
2. Clubs, lodges, civic, patriotic, fraternal (reference 5.1.02).
3. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.09).
4. Swim, golf, tennis or similar athletic facilities (reference 5.1.16).
5. Private schools.
6. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances, unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-
wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances.
.
18-10-3
Attachment G
Page 3 ofL
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
7. Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference 5.1.06).
8. (Repealed 3-5-86)
9. Mobile home subdivisions (reference 5.5).
10. (Repealed 11-11-92)
11. (Repealed 3-15-95)
12. Horse show grounds, permanent.
13. Custom slaughterhouse.
14. Sawmills, planing mills and woodyards (reference 5.1.15 and subject to performance
standards in 4.14).
15. Group homes and homes for developmentally disabled persons as described in section 15.1-
486.2 ofthe Code (reference 5.1.07).
16. (Repealed 11-15-95)
17. Commercial kennel (reference 5.1.11 and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
18. Veterinary services, animal hospital (reference 5.1.11 and subject to performance standards in
4.14).
19. Private airport, helistop, heliport, flight strip (reference 5.1.01).
20. Day camp, boarding camp (reference 5.1.05).
21. Sanitary landfill (reference 5.1.14).
22. Country store.
23. Commercial fruit or agricultural produce packing plants. (Amended 11-8-89)
24. (Repealed 11-8-89)
25. Flood control dams and impoundments.
26. (Repealed 11-8-89)
27. Restaurants and inns that are:
a. Located within an historic landmark as designated in the comprehensive plan, provided:
(i) the structure has been used as a restaurant, tavern or inn; and (ii) the structure shall be
restored as faithfully as possible to the architectural character of the period and shall be
maintained consistent therewith; or
b. Nonconforming uses, provided the restaurant or inn is served by existing water and
sewerage systems having adequate capacity for both the existing and proposed uses and
facilities without expansion of either system. (Amended 11-8-89; 10-18-00)
28. Divisions of land as provided in section 10.5.2.1. (Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04)
18-10-4
Attachment C-
Page Cf of ~
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
29. Boat landings and canoe livery.
30. Permitted residential uses as provided in section 10.5.2.1. (Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04)
31. Home occupation, Class B (reference 5.2).
32. Cemetery.
33. Crematorium.
34. (Repealed 3-21-01)
35. Church building and adjunct cemetery.
36. Gift, craft and antique shops.
37. Public garage. (Added 3-18-81)
38. Exploratory drilling. (Added 2-10-82)
39. Hydroelectric power generation (reference 5.1.26). (Added 4- 28-82)
40. Borrow area, borrow pit not permitted under section 10.2.1.18. (Added 7-6-83)
41. Convent, Monastery (reference 5.1.29). (Added 1-1-87)
.
42. Temporary events sponsored by local nonprofit organizations which are related to, and
supportive of the RA, rural areas, district (reference 5.1.27). (Added 12-2-87)
43. Agricultural Museum (reference 5.1.30). (Added 12-2-87)
44. Theatre, outdoor drama. (Added 6-10-92)
45. Farm sales (reference 5.1.35). (Added 10-11-95)
46. Off-site parking for historic structures or sites (reference 5.1.38) or off-site employee parking
for an industrial use in an industrial zoning district (reference 5.1.39).
47. Animal shelter (reference 5.1.11). (Added 6-16-99).
48. Tier 1lI personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
49. Historical centers, historical center special events, historical center festivals (reference
5.1.42). (Added 6-8-05)
50. Special events (reference 5.1.43). (Added 7-13-05)
51. Farm worker housing, Class B (more than ten occupants or more than two sleeping structures)
(reference 5.1.44). (Added 12-13-06)
(s 20-10.2.2,12-10-80; 3-18-81; 2-10-82; 4-28-82; 7-6-83; 3-5-86; 1-1-87; 12-2-87; 11-8-89; 6-10-92; 11-
11-92; Ord. 95-20(1), 3-15-95; Ord. 95-20(3),10-11-95; Ord. 95-20(5),11-15-95; Ord. 98-A(I), S 18-
10.2.2,8-5-98; Ord. 99-18(4),6-16-99; Ord. 00-18(6),10-18-00; Ord. 01-18(2), 3-21-01; Ord. 02-18(6),
10-9-02; Ord. 04-18(1), 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04; Ord,04-18(2), 10-13-04; Ord. 05-18(7), 6-8-05; Ord. 05-
18(8),7-13-05; Ord. 06-18(2),12-13-06)
.
18-10-5
Attachment C
Page S of !!-.-
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
10.3 APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT
The following provisions shall apply to any parcel of record at 5: 15 p.m., the tenth day of
December, 1980 (reference 6.5). (Amended 11- 8-89)
10.3.1 CONVENTIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Amended 11-8-89; 6-14-00)
Regulations in section 10.5 governing development by right shall apply to the division of a parcel
into five (5) or fewer lots of less than twenty-one (21) acres in area and to the location of five (5)
or fewer dwelling units on any parcel in existence at the time of adoption of this ordinance
(reference section 1.3). The aggregate acreage devoted to such lots or development shall not
exceed thirty-one (31) acres, except in such case where this aggregate acreage limitation is
precluded by other provisions of this ordinance. The second sentence of this provision shall not be
applicable to land divided between the effective date of this ordinance (reference section 1.3) and
November 8, 1989. (Amended 11-8-89; 9-9-92; 6-14-00)
10.3.2 In addition to the foregoing, there shall be permitted by right any division ofland into parcels each
of which shall be twenty-one (21) acres or more in area. No such parcel shall be included in
determining the number of parcels which may be created by right pursuant to section 10.3.1;
provided that (a) no such division shall affect the number of parcels which may be divided
pursuant to section 10.3.1; (b) there may be located not more than one (1) dwelling unit on any
parcel created pursuant to this section; (c) at the time of any such division, the owner of the parcel
so divided shall designate the number of parcels into which each parcel so divided may be further
divided pursuant to section 10.3.1 together with aggregate acreage limitations in accordance with
section 10.3.1; and (d) no such division shall increase the number of parcels which may be created
pursuant to section 10.3.1. (Amended 9-9-92)
10.3.3 RURAL PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENT (Added 11-8-89)
10.3.3.1 DEFINITIONS
The following definitions shall apply to any rural preservation development created under section
10.3.3: (Amended 10-3-01)
a. Development Lot: A lot within a rural preservation development, other than a rural
preservation tract, created for the purpose of residential or other permitted usage.
b. Rural Preservation Development: A subdivision of land consisting of development lots
together with a rural preservation tract.
c. Rural Preservation Tract: A lot, the usage and diminishment of which is restricted and
protected by legal arrangements to insure its maintenance and preservation for the purpose of:
preservation of agricultural and forestal land and activity; water supply protection; and/or
conservation of natural, scenic or historic resources.
(~ 10.3.3.1, 11-8-89; Ord. 01-18(6),10-3-01)
10.3.3.2 INTENT; DESIGN STANDARDS (Added 11-8-89)
The rural preservation development option is intended to encourage more effective land usage in
terms of the goals and objectives for the rural areas as set forth in the comprehensive plan than can
be achieved under conventional development. To this end, application for rural preservation
development shall be reviewed for:
a. Preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities;
b. Water supply protection; and/or
1 8-10-6
Attachment C-
Page L of -LL
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
c. Conservation of natural, scenic or historic resources.
More specifically, in accordance with design standards of the comprehensive plan and where
deemed reasonably practical by the commission:
d. Development lots shall not encroach into prime, important or unique agricultural or forestal
soils as the same shall be shown on the most recent published maps of the United States
Department of Agricultural Soil Conservation Service or other source deemed of equivalent
reliability by the Soil Conservation Service;
e. Development lots shall not encroach into areas of critical slope or flood plain and shall be
situated as far as possible from public drinking water supply tributaries and public drinking
water supply impoundments;
f. Development lots shall be so situated and arranged as to preserve historic and scenic settings
deemed to be of importance to the general public and natural resource areas whether such
features are on the parcel to be developed or adjacent to such parcel;
.
.
18-10-6.1
Attachment
C!-
Page 7 of II
- -
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
g. Development lots shaH be confined to one area of the parcel and shaH be situated so that no
portion of the rural preservation tract shaH intrude between any development lots;
h. AH development lots shaH have access restricted to an internal street in accordance with
Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle;
1. Nothing stated herein shaH be deemed to obligate the commission to approve a rural
preservation development upon finding in a particular case that such proposal does not
forward the purposes of rural preservation development as set forth hereinabove and that the
public purpose to be served would be equaHy or better served by conventional development.
10.3.3.3 SPECIAL PROVISIONS (Added 11-8-89)
In addition to design standards as set forth in section 10.3.3.2 and other regulation, the foHowing
special provisions shaH apply to any rural preservation development:
a. The maximum number of lots within a rural preservation development shaH be the same as
may be achievable pursuant to section 10.3.1 and section 10.3.2 and other applicable law.
Each rural preservation tract shaH count as one (1) lot. In the case of any parcel of land
which, prior to application for rural preservation development, has been made subject to a
conservation, open space or other similar easement which restricts development on the parcel,
the total number of lots available for rural preservation development shaH not exceed the
number available for conventional development as limited by any such previously imposed
easement or easements;
b. Section 1O.3.3.3.a notwithstanding, no rural preservation development shaH contain more than
twenty (20) development lots (Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04);
c. Provisions of section 10.3.3, rural preservation development, shaH be applied to the entire
parcel. Combination of conventional and rural preservation development within the parcel
shaH not be permitted, provided that the total number of lots achievable under section 10.3.1
and section 10.3.2 shall be permitted by authorization of more than one (1) rural preservation
tract. Nothing contained herein shaH be deemed to preclude the director of current
development and zoning from approving a rural preservation development for multiple tracts
of adjoining land, or on land divided or otherwise altered prior to the effective date of this
provision; provided that, in either case, the provisions of section 10.3.3 shaH be applicable
(Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04);
d. The area devoted to development lots together with the area of roadway necessary to provide
access to such lots shaH not exceed the number of development lots multiplied by a factor of
six (6) expressed in acres;
e. No rural preservation development shaH contain less than one (1) rural preservation tract. The
director of current development and zoning may authorize more than one (1) rural
preservation tract in a particular case pursuant to the various purposes of rural preservation
development as set forth in section 10.3.3.2 or in accord with section 10.3.3.3.c, as the case
may be (Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04);
f. No rural preservation tract shaH consist of less than forty (40) acres. Except as specificaHy
permitted by the director of current development and zoning at time of establishment, not
more than one (1) dweHing unit shaH be located on any rural preservation tract or
development lot. No rural preservation tract shaH be diminished in area. These restrictions
shaH be guaranteed by perpetual easement accruable to the County of Albemarle and the
public recreational facility authority of Albemarle County in a form acceptable to the board.
In accordance with Chapter 14 of the Code of Albemarle, the director of planning and
18-10- 7
Attachment ~
PageLof~
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
community development shall serve as agent for the board of supervisors to accept such
easement. Thereafter, such easement may be modified or abandoned only by mutual
agreement of the grantees to the original agreement (Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04);
g.
Each application for a rural preservation development is subject to the review and approval of
the director of current development and zoning (Added 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04).
(~ 20-10.3.3.3, 11-8-89; ~ 18-10.3.3.3, Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 04-18(1), 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04)
10.4 AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS
.
REQUIREMENTS DIVISIONS BY DIVISIONS BY SPECIAL USE
RIGHT PERMIT
(Amended 8-14- (Amended 8-14-85)
85)
Gross density 0.5 du/ac 0.5 du/ac
Minimum lot size 2.0 acres 2.0 acres
Minimum frontage
existing public
roads 250 feet 250 feet
Minimum frontage
internal public
or private roads 150 feet 150 feet
Yards, minimum:
Front (existing public roads) 75 feet 75 feet
Front (internal public or
private road)(Amended 11-13-91) 25 feet 25 feet
Side 25 feet 25 feet
Rear 35 feet 35 feet
Maximum
structure
height 35 feet 35 feet
10.5 SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR MULTIPLE SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS
10.5.1 LIMITATIONS ON DIVISIONS PERMITTED BY RIGHT
Divisions of land shall be permitted as provided hereinabove; except that no parcel of land of
record on the date of the adoption of this ordinance may be divided into an aggregate of more than
five (5) parcels except as provided in section 10.3.2 and section 10.5.2 hereof nor shall there be
constructed on any such parcel an aggregate of more than five (5) units. (Amended 11-8-89)
10.5.2 WHERE PERMITTED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
10.5.2.1 The board of supervisors may authorize the issuance ofa special use permit for more lots than the
total number permitted under section 10.3.1 and section 10.3.2; provided that no such permit shall
be issued for property within the boundaries for the watershed of any public drinking water supply
impoundment, and further provided that no such permit shall be issued to allow more development
lots within a proposed rural preservation development than that permitted by right under section
1O.3.3.3(b). (Added 11-8-89; Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04)
The board of supervisors shall determine that such division is compatible with the neighborhood
as set forth in section 31.2.4.1 of this chapter with reference to the goals and objectives of the
.
18-10-8
Attachment (!.,.
Page~of II
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
comprehensive plan relating to rural areas including the type of division proposed and specifically,
as to this section only, with reference to the following: (Amended 11-8-89)
1. The size, shape, topography and existing vegetation of the property in relation to its suitability
for agricultural or forestal production as evaluated by the United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service or the Virginia Department of Forestry.
2. The actual suitability of the soil for agricultural or forestal production as the same shall be
shown on the most recent published maps of the United States Department of Agriculture Soil
Conservation Service or other source deemed of equivalent reliability by the Soil
Conservation Service.
3. The historic commercial agricultural or forestal uses of the property since 1950, to the extent
that is reasonably available.
4. If located in an agricultural or forestal area, the probable effect of the proposed development
on the character of the area. For the purposes of this section, a property shall be deemed to be
in an agricultural or forestal area if fifty (50) percent or more of the land within one (I) mile
of the border of such property has been in commercial agricultural or forestal use within five
(5) years of the date of the application for special use permit. In making this determination,
mountain ridges, major streams and other physical barriers which detract from the
cohesiveness of an area shall be considered.
5. The relationship of the property in regard to developed rural areas. For the purposes of this
section, a property shall be deemed to be located in a developed rural area if fifty (50) percent
or more of the land within one (1) mile of the boundary of such property was in parcels of
record of five (5) acres or less on the adoption date of this ordinance. In making this
determination, mountain ridges, major streams and other physical barriers which detract from
the cohesiveness of an area shall be considered.
6. The relationship of the proposed development to existing and proposed population centers,
services and employment centers. A property within areas described below shall be deemed in
proximity to the area or use described:
a. Within one mile roadway distance of the urban area boundary as described in the
comprehensive plan; (Amended 11-8-89)
b. Within one-half mile roadway distance of a community boundary as described in the
comprehensive plan; (Amended 11-8-89)
c. Within one-half mile roadway distance of a village as described in the comprehensive
plan. (Amended 11-8-89)
7. The probable effect of the proposed development on capital improvements programming in
regard to increased provision of services.
8. The traffic generated from the proposed development would not, in the opinion of the
Virginia Department of Transportation: (Amended 11-8-89)
a. Occasion the need for road improvement;
b. Cause a tolerable road to become a nontolerable road;
c. Increase traffic on an existing nontolerable road.
18-10-9
Attachment ~
Page/(? of /'/
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
9. With respect to applications for special use permits for land lying wholly or partially within
the boundaries for the watershed of any public drinking water impoundment, the following
additional factors shall be considered:
a. The amount and quality of existing vegetative cover as related to filtration of sediment,
phosphorous, heavy metals, nitrogen and other substances determined harmful to water
quality for human consumption;
b. The extent to which existing vegetative cover would be removed or disturbed during the
construction phase of any development;
c. The amount of impervious cover which will exist after development;
d. The proximity of any paved (pervious or impervious) area, structure, or drain field to any
perennial or intermittent stream or impoundment; or during the construction phase, the
proximity of any disturbed area to any such stream or impoundment;
e. The type and characteristics of soils including suitability for septic fields and erodability;
f. The percentage and length of all slopes subject to disturbance during construction or
upon which any structure, paved area (pervious or impervious) or active recreational area
shall exist after development;
g. The estimated duration and timing of the construction phase of any proposed
development and extent to which such duration and timing are unpredictable;
.
h. The degree to which original topography or vegetative cover have been altered in
anticipation of filing for any permit hereunder;
i. The extent to which the standards of Chapter 17 et seq. of the Code of Albemarle can
only be met through the creation of artificial devices, which devices will:
1. Require periodic inspection and/or maintenance;
2, Are susceptible to failure or overflow for run-off associated with anyone hundred
year or more intense storm.
(g 20-10.5.2.1,12-10-80; 11-8-89; g18-1O.5.2.1, Ord. 98-A(l), 8-5-98; Ord. 04-18(1), 5-5-04 effective 7-1-
04)
1 0.5.2.2 MATERIALS TO BE SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT
The commission and the board of supervisors may require the applicant to submit such
information as deemed necessary for the adequate review of such application provided that such
information shall be directly related to items 1, 2, 3 and 9 of section 10.5.2.1.
.
1 8-10-10
Attachment
e
Page /1 of....LL
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
CHAPTER 18
ZONING
SECTION 24
HIGHW A Y COMMERCIAL - HC
Sections:
24.1
24.2
24.2.1
24.2.2
24.3
24.4
INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
MINIMUM FRONT AGE, SHAPE OF DISTRICT
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
24.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
.
HC districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map
to permit development of commercial establishments, other than shopping centers, primarily
oriented to highway locations rather than to central business concentrations. It is intended that HC
districts be established on major highways within the urban area and communities in the
comprehensive plan. It is further intended that this district shall be for the purpose of limiting
sprawling strip commercial development by providing sites with adequate frontage and depth to
permit controlled access to public streets.
24.2 PERMITTED USES
24.2.1 BY RIGHT
The following uses shall be permitted in any HC district subject to the requirements and
. limitations of these regulations. The zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of
planning and other appropriate officials, may permit, as a use by right, a use not specifically
permitted; provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by right in general character,
and more specifically, similar in terms of locational requirements, operational characteristics,
visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning administrator's decision shall be as
generally provided in section 34.0.
I. Automobile laundries.
2. Automobile, truck repair shops.
3. Automobile service stations (reference 5.1.20).
4. Building materials sales.
5. Churches, cemeteries.
6. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference 5.1.2).
.
7. Convenience stores.
18-24-1
Attachment ~
Page .-L of --.!:L
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
8. Educational, technical and trade schools.
9. Factory outlet sales - clothing and fabric.
10. Feed and seed stores (reference 5.1.22).
11. Financial institutions.
12. Fire extinguisher and security products, sales and service.
13. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.09).
14. Funeral homes.
15. Furniture stores.
16. Food and grocery stores including such specialty shops as bakery, candy, milk dispensary and
wine and cheese shops.
17. Home and business services such as grounds care, cleaning, exterminators, landscaping and
other repair and maintenance services.
18. Hardware.
19. (Repealed 6-3-81)
20. Hotels, motels and inns.
21. Light warehousing.
22. Machinery and equipment sales, service and rental.
23. Mobile home and trailer sales and service.
24. Modular building sales.
25. Motor vehicle sales, service and rental.
26. New automotive parts sales.
27. Newspaper publishing.
28. Administrative, business and professional offices.
29. Office and business machines sales and service.
30. Eating establishment; fast food restaurants.
31. Retail nurseries and greenhouses.
32. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles.
33. Wayside stands - vegetables and agricultural produce (reference 5.1.19).
34. Wholesale distribution.
18-24-2
Attachment ~
Page J..., of ~
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
.
35. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including poles,
lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and
owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
36. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-89)
37. Temporary construction uses (reference 5, I.l8),
38. Indoor theaters.
39. Heating oil sales and distribution (reference 5.1.20).
40. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8). (Added 3-5-86)
41. Uses permitted by right pursuant to subsection 22.2.1 of section 22.1, commercial, C-1.
(Added 6-19-91; Amended 9-9-92)
42. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93)
.
43. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95)
44. Stormwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision plat.
(Added 10-9-02)
45. Tier 1 and Tier II personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
(~20-24.2.1, 12-10-80; 6-3-81; 3-5-86; 11-1-89; 6-19-91; 9-9-92; 5-12-93; 9-15-93; 10-11-95; Ord. 02-
18(6),10-9-02; Ord. 04-18(2),10-13-04)
24.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 31.2.4:
1. Commercial recreation establishment including but not limited to amusement centers, bowling
alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83)
2. Septic tank sales and related service.
3. Livestock sales.
4. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11).
5. Drive-in theaters (reference 5.1.08).
.
6. Electrical power substations, transmission Jines and related towers; gas or oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers, micro-
18-24-3
, Attachment ~
Page 3 of~
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances (reference
5.1.12).
7. Hospitals, nursing homes, convalescent homes (reference 5.1.13).
8. Contractors' office and equipment storage yard.
9. Auction houses.
10. Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in section 18.0,
residential - R-15, in compliance with regulations set forth therein, and such conditions as
may be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4.
11. Commercial kennels - indoor only (reference 5.1.11). (Added 1- 1-83)
12. Stand alone parking and parking structures (reference 4.12, 5.1.41). (Added 11-7-84;
Amended 2-5-03)
13. Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses. (Added 11-7-84; Amended 9-9-
92)
14. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding
four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by
public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added
6-14-89)
15. Warehouse facilities not permitted under section 24.2.1 (reference 9.0). (Added 6-19-91)
16. Animal shelter (reference 5.1.11). (Added 6-16-99)
17. Tier III personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
(s 20-24.2.2,12-10-80; 1-1-83; 11-7-84; 6-14-89; 6-19-91; 9-9-92; 6-16-99; Ord. 03-18(1), 2-5-03; Ord.
04-18(2), 10-13-04)
24.3 MINIMUM FRONTAGE, SHAPE OF DISTRICT
Minimum frontage required on a public street for the establishment of an HC district shall be one
hundred and fifty (150) feet. Frontage of an HC district shall not exceed depth. This section shall
not apply to HC districts established at the adoption of the zoning map.
24.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
In addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section 21.0, commercial
districts, generally, shall apply within all HC districts.
18-24-4
Attachment -D-
Page !:L of .E..-
Note: This map is fordispJay purposes only and
shows parcel and zoning information as of 12/31/2006.
ZOning informa6on updatecl: !il23f2O(JT
Sos M.p Book Introduction for ._ionsl dalails,
091
1
Scale
720
Fool
;J>
-l
-l
;J>
(J
::r::
~
tTJ
Z
-l
tT1
Rural Areas
Village Residential
R1 Residential
_ R2 Residential
R4 Residential
R6 Residential
_ R10 Residential
_ R15 Residential
-
./
:r----....._.._..'
/".../'
0'
"\
~,
Ql'
't !
0:
~/
~:
';J
/'
. \.
\
i
,..-)
......./
/'
./
/
092
1,""
Albemarle County
w
2,160
Tax Map:
078
Planned Unit Development
_ Planned Residential Development
_ Neighborhood Model District
_ Monticello Historic District
Commercial
_ Planned Development Mixed Commercial
Light Industry
_ Heavy Industry
_ Planned Development Industrial Park
Natural Resource Extraction Overlay
Commercial Office Town of Scottsville
- Highway Commercial 0 Proffers
Planned Development Shopping Center ***** Entrance Corridors
.
.
.
BOYLE, BAIN, REBACK & SLAYTON
Forbes R. Reback
Edward H. Bain, Jr.
Marshall M. Slayton
Timothy 1. Kelsey
C. Connor Crook
Attorneys and Counsellors at Law
420 Park Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Telephone (434) 977-6155
Facsimile (434) 977-3298
. Robert P. Boyle
(1930-1992)
Jack N. Kegley,
Retired
January 4, 2008
Ms. Joan McDowell, Principal Planner Rural Areas
Albemarle County Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
RE: ZMA 2007-21 Chavan MiniStorage
Dear Ms. McDowell:
The items you requested from the applicant in your December 13, 2007 letter are
required as part of site plan submittal. This is not a site plan submittal and there isno
requirement under the ordinance that we submit it until the rezoning has been granted.
My client is not a large landowner who intends to develop many acres of property. All he
has is this 2~acres parcel. At such time as a rezoning of the property has been obtained
my client will submit all necessary site plans, architectural review board data,
engineering data, run-off data, whatever information is required before development can
begin on a specific property. My client doesn't have $25-35,000 to spend on site plans,
etc. until such time as he knows that the use that he requests is going to be permitted on
this property.
The setbacks, the buffers, engineering information, and "current development"
data as set out in paragraph 2 of your letter on zoning will be submitted as part of a site
plan.
My client recognizes that the architectural review board will have a significant
say in how this property is developed for the ministorage use. He will submit those plans
once a rezoning has been accomplished. Under paragraph 3 of the architectural review
board comments reference is made to the fact that the "site plan is difficult to read". The
submittal is simply a picture of what the ministorage facility could look like.
We think staffcIearly needs to look at this area of U.S. Route 250 as not being a
RA zoning district in fact. You have it in the comprehensive plan listed as such.
However, you will certainly remember the granting of two recent church specialperrnits
east of this property, both in the RA district which have been approved by the Board of
Supervisors. The proposed use on this property is miniscule when compared to the high
Attachment ~
Page L of .....2.--
Ms. Joan McDowell, Principal Planner Rural Areas
January 4, 2007
Page 2
traffic generation for those two large church facilities that you recommended in the rural
areas. You cannot give preferential treatment to churches when you are dealing with land
use issues. It is my clients' belief that the staff needs to re-examine the uses that they
have permitted in the rural areas, specifically churches and other uses. In your staff
report of the church at Route 22/231 and US Route 250 you argued for the applicant that
their proposed use was adjacent to and across from the heavy industrial plant. You
cannot make the argument both ways! You are either in the rural areas or you are not in
the rural areC),s and for you to argue that my clients' property is rural area is simply not
factual even~hough it is identified as such in the comprehensive plan.
We have already indicated to you in our application that we will neither need nor
request Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdiction for either water or sewer
services. There is a fire hydrant very close to the entrance to this property. Under the
land use plan for interstate/interchange development you mention that our proposed use is
not compatible. A mini storage facility is equivalent to warehousing. What people do
with their storage that they put in these facilities is warehousing. It is not industrial
warehousing but is nonetheless warehousing for individuals and/or small businesses. In
the land use plans for interstate/interchange development your argument seems to be if '
we don't have thirty (30) acres to develop that we should not bother the County for any
submittal for development. That is not fair. They are simply not the facts in our case. We
have a little over two (2) acres and unless we were to attempt to buy-up all the properties
around there would not be enough to satisfy your language in the comprehensive plan.
You already have in excess of 40,000 vehicle trips on this stretch of road. Our traffic
generation is insignificant -- probably no more than 1,500 vehicle trips per year in and
out of this pJ:operty.
FinaUy, we will certainly entertain an opportunity to meet with the Planning
Commission in a work session provided only that our time frame is not extended for our
public hearing before the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
\-
...~~.:.cerelY'_./.:.~? ?
. ,.::"-j,.i ",/ / .,.'
~>;>l/ i/ .-
Edward H. Bain, Jr., Attorney for John J.
Chavan and Meenakshi J. Chavan
EHBjr/1rk
cc: John). Chavan and Meenakshi 1. Chavan
JohriGrady
Attachment ,.r
Page 2- of 2
- -
Joan McDowell
.rom:
ent:
To:
Subject:
Wallace. Dolores@epamail.epa.gov
Thursday, January 03,2008 10:42 AM
Joan McDowell
Cavalier Mini Storage
Attachments:
pic02813.jpg
!iI
piC02813.jpg (16
KB)
Happy New Year - This email is in reference to ZMA2007-00021 Cavalier MIni Storage, Tax
Map 78, Parcel 36. I am a homowner of two lots(Parcel
34/35} and I am NOT in favor you building a Mini Storage on Parcel 36.
My reason being is that it will lower the residential area. And not good for the
neighbors. If you have any other questions please feel free to call. I will not be able
to attend the meeting on February 5, 2008. But my vote will be NO. Dolores R. Wallace
(Embedded image moved to file: pic02813.jpg)
.
.
1
A TT ACHMENT G
.
.
(
Phone (434) 296-5832
Fax (434) 972-4012
March 28, 2008
Catherine J. Womack
530 E. Main St
Charlottesville, Va 22902
RE: ZMA2007-00022 Innovative Construction
Tax Map 90, Parcel 35C
LETTER OF CORRECTION, CLARIFIED CONDITIONS AND EXPLAINED MOTION ON
WAIVERS
Dear Ms. Womack:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 11, 2008, recommended approval,
by a vote of 6:0, ofthe above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors.
Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions:
· The recommendations by staff in the staff report including the applicant's agreement to hook up to
water and/or sewer when either he expands his use or the water and/or sewer is brought to any edge of
the property.
· The existing proffers are substantively acceptable, but are still in need oftechnical and language
reVISIOns.
Motion on Waiver Request:
The motion passed by a vote of 6:0, for a waiver to Section 26.10.3, to allow the fence in the proffer to be
constructed in the buffer.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on April 9, 2008.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to
contact me at (434) 296-5832.
Sincerely,
{!'(~l&utl[ ~/]tI--
Claudette Grant
Senior Planner
'Ianning Division
'8M
Innovative Construction Concepts Inc
P.O. Box 561
Palmyra, Va 22963
Woolen Mills Self Storage Llc
13 I Franklin St
Charlottesville, Va 22902
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZMA 2007 - 022 Innovative Construction
AGENDA DATE:
April 9, 2008
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Request to rezone 0.977 acres from HC, Highway
Commercial to L1, Light Industrial, in order to use the
existing building on site for a contractor's office and
storage yard.
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACTIS):
Cilimberg, Echols, Grant
ATTACHMENTS: YES
LEGAL REVIEW: NO
OWNER/APPLICANT PURCHASER:
Woolen Mills Self Storage, LLC
BACKGROUND:
On March 11, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Innovative Construction rezoning request.
Staff and the Commission recommended approval of the rezoning request provided that the following be resolved prior
to the Board public hearing: (See Attachment I)
.
1. The applicant provides an agreement/proffer to hook up to water and/or sewer when either he expands his use or the
water and/or sewer is brought to any edge of the property.
2. The plan and uses should be proffered.
3. Technical and language revisions to the proffers.
DISCUSSION:
The applicant has provided the following to address the Planning Commission's recommendations (See Attachment II):
1. Proffer 4, describes that the Owner shall connect the property to public water and sewer within one year after each of
these services becomes available either along the Avon Street Extended frontage of the property or within a public
easement adjacent to the property. Until the connection to public water and sewer is made, the use of the property shall be
limited to a single use permitted by Proffer 1. Furthermore, proffer 5 addresses the concern regarding the intensification of
the site by stating that "until the Owner connects the Property to public water and sewer, there shall be no changes to the
Property from what is depicted on the Plat... . . . "
2. Proffer 1 describes the allowable uses and proffers 2, 3 and 5 describe the plan and what is allowed by the plan.
3. Proffers have been appropriately revised to address technical and language needs.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of ZMA 2007-000022 Innovative Construction, inclusive of
proffers dated and signed March 20, 2008, including the plan described as the J.v. Webster Property dated April 25,
2005.
ATTACHMENTS:
Attachment I: Planning Commission Staff Report, dated March 11, 2008
Attachment II: Proffers dated and signed March 20, 2008
1
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: ZMA 07-22 Innovative
Construction
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
March 11, 2008
Owners: Woolen Mills Self Storage, LLC
Acreage: 0.977 acres
TMP: Tax Map 90, Parcel 35C
Location: 1811 Avon Street Extended (Route
742) across from Reynovia Dr. (See
Attachments A and B)
Magisterial District: Scottsville
Proposal: The applicant proposes to use the
existing building on site for a contractor's office
and storage yard.
DA (Development Area): Neighborhood 4
Character of Property: Property fronts on Avon
treet Extended. The site is developed with a
one-story building, three (3) out buildings, and
an outdoor storage area. There is a gentle
incline onto the property towards the building at
which point the property levels off. The property
then slopes down to the rear of the site.
Factors Favorable:
1. The proposal makes the property more
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The rezoning forms a logical extension of
the LI district from the adjacent property.
3. There are no proposed changes to the
site.
4. The rezoning to light industrial zoning will
accommodate a small business which is
an identified need in the County.
Staff: Claudette Grant
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: April 9,
2008
Applicant: Innovative Construction Concepts,
Inc.
Rezone: HC, Highway Commercial to L1, Light
Industrial.
By-right use: HC, Highway Commercial with
proffers
Proffers: Yes
Requested # of Dwelling Units: 0
Compo Plan Designation: Industrial Service
Use of Surrounding Properties: The
Southside Church of God and Dixon Trash
Disposal are adjacent to Innovative
Construction. The surrounding properties to the
south of Innovative Construction are primarily
light industry type uses. The Lake Reynovia
residential subdivision is located across the
street.
Factors Unfavorable:
1. The proffers are in need of technical and
substantive language revisions.
2. The existing well and septic system are
proposed to remain because of the cost
for connections to public water and
sewer.
RECOMMENDATION: Provided that the technical and substantive provisions to the proffers are
completed prior to the Board of Supervisor's meeting, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2007-
022, Innovative Construction, inclusive of revised proffers. Staff also recommends approval of the
'aiver request to Section 26.10.3 to allow the fence described in the proffer to be constructed in
buffer.
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3/11/08
Attachment I
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
ZMA 2007- 022 Innovative Construction
Request for approval of Modification of Section 26.10.3 regarding installation of a fence in the required
buffer.
Claudette Grant
March 11, 2008
April 9, 2008
PETITION
PROPOSAL: Rezone .977 acres from HC - Highway Commercial zoning district which allows
commercial and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/acre) to LI - Light
Industrial zoning district which allows industrial, office, and limited commercial uses (no residential use)
for contractor's office and storage yard.
PROFFERS: Yes
EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Industrial Service - warehousing, light
industry, heavy industry, heavy industry, research, office uses, regional scale research, limited
production and marketing activities, supporting commercial, lodging and conference facilities, and
residential (6.01-34 units/acre) in Neighborhood 4.
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes
LOCATION: 1811 Avon Street Extended (Route 742) across from Reynovia Dr.
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 90/35C
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Scottsville
CHARACTER OF THE AREA
The site is developed with a one story building, three (3) outbuildings and an outdoor storage area.
There are a few trees on the site, most of which form a buffer at the north and rear sides of the site.
The front portion of the site gently slopes up a hill toward the building and the site slopes down toward
the rear of the site. Southside Church of God, Dixon Trash Disposal and some residential uses are
adjacent to Innovative Construction. The Lake Reynovia residential subdivision is located across the
street from the site and many of the uses located towards the south of Innovative Construction are
industrial.
SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL
This site is located at 1811 Avon Street Extended (Route 742) across from Reynovia Dr., which is the
access to the Lake Reynovia residential subdivision. (See Attachments A & B) The property is currently
approved for machinery and equipment sale, service and rental. However, the applicant would like to
purchase the property and use it for a contractor's office and storage yard, which is permitted by-right in
the L1, Light Industrial zoning district and requires a special use permit in the HC, Highway Commercial
zoning district. The current proffers for this property restrict the HC to machinery and equipment sales,
service, and rental; and uses in HC zone that are permitted under C-1 as they may be established
under C-1 regulations. A contractor's office and storage yard is not a permitted use in the C-1 district.
The applicant plans to use the property as-is with no physical changes to the buildings or site, outside
of what the County may require.
APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST
The applicant proposes to utilize the existing buildings and site for a contractor's office and storage
yard. As previously mentioned in this report, the proffer for this property restricts the proposed use,
making a rezoning or special use permit necessary in order to use the property for a contractor's office
and storage yard. This site represents the only Highway Commercial district in the surrounding area.
The applicant preferred to request a rezoning to extend the Light Industrial district to this property rather
than request both a rezoning for a proffer change and a special use permit with this rezoning.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY
2
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3/11/08
1. ZMA 82-05 J. V. Webster - On May 19, 1982, the Board of Supervisors voted to approve the
rezoning request of approximately 1 acre from R-1 Residential to HC Highway Commercial with
.roffers. (See Attachment C)
2. SOP 82-025 J.V. Farm Equipment - This site plan followed the rezoning request.
3. The following three (3) variances occurred: VA 82-010 was approved on March 17, 1982 for road
frontage, VA 82-063 was approved on October 13, 1982 for sign setback, and VA 84-007 was
approved with conditions on January 30 1984 for setback.
No additional detail is available on the variances at this time.
NONCONFORMITY WITH THE ZONING
This use is non-conforming based on minimum yard requirements as follows: Section 26.10.2 of the
Zoning Ordinance states "Adjacent to residential districts: No portion of any structure, excluding signs,
shall be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any rural areas or residential district and no off-street
parking space shall be closer than thirty (30) feet to any rural areas or residential district. For the heavy
industry (HI) district, no portion of any structure, excluding signs, shall be located closer than one
hundred (100) feet to any rural areas or residential district and no off-street parking shall be closer than
thirty (30) feet to any rural areas or residential district." The current use is nonconforming due the
proximity of the structure and off-street parking to the adjacent residential district.
The Zoning staff has reviewed this situation and is okay with the existing non-conformity of the property
as well as the fact that the non-conformity will remain with this rezoning application because the use is
a pre-existing use and it is not changing. Staff notes that the setbacks between uses and districts in the
Development Areas are under consideration for reductions through the zoning amendment process.
The Commission expects to see staff proposed setback changes after completing work on the zero lot
.e amendment.
CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The Land Use Plan shows this area as Industrial Service and the applicant is requesting rezoning to an
industrial district.
The Economic Development Policy in the Comprehensive Plan provides the following objectives that
are consistent with a development like Innovative Construction. Objective II states "Plan for land and
infrastructure to accommodate future business and industrial growth. Objective V states "Provide local
business development opportunities." The Board of Supervisors in their recent work to update the
Economic Development Policy has supported at a recent work session prioritizing an increase in LI
zoning.
Neighborhood Model Analysis is not applicable for this project since it is an existing development and
does not propose re-development.
STAFF COMMENT
Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning
district: The purpose and intent of the LI district is to permit industries, offices and limited commercial
uses which are compatible with and do not detract from surrounding districts. This proposed LI is .977
acres. Section 27.3 of the Zoning Ordinance states "the minimum area required for establishment of an
LI district shall be five (5) acres. Unless otherwise provided in section 26.2, there shall be no minimum
area requirements for additions to an established LI district, provided such area to be added adjoins
.nd forms a logical addition to the existing LI district." In this circumstance, staff feels it is appropriate
nd logical to add this property to the adjacent existing LI district.
3
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3/11/08
Public need and justification for the change: The County's Comprehensive Plan supports
development in the designated development area. As previously mentioned in this report the Board of
Supervisors supports prioritizing an increase in Light Industrial zoning. The rezoning request will permit
the property and proposed use to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
Impact on Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Resources: The applicant does not propose
changes to the site or existing building; therefore, there are no environmental impacts anticipated.
There are no cultural or historic resources associated with this site.
Anticipated impact on public facilities and services
Streets: VDOT had previously been concerned with the dimensions of the entrance to the site not
being adequate; however, VDOT has been working with the applicant and this issue has been resolved.
(See Attachment E) The development will generate an additional 16 trips per day on Avon Street
Extended, which provides primary access to the site. A majority of the employees for this business are
the field crew who work primarily in the field and typically do not come to the office. Staff and VDOT
agree that the traffic impact will be minimal.
Water and Sewer: This site is currently served by a well and septic field. In the Development Areas
public water and sewer are expected to serve all development. An inspection report from Intrastate
Pest Control, verifies that there is no leakage or seepage in the drain field. (See Attachment F) Contour
Construction has estimated the cost to connect water and sewer to public lines at $28,250.00. (See
Attachment G) Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) has quoted connection fees of $5,670.00
for water and $6,320.00 for sewer. Contour Construction, which conducted an on-site inspection, also
states that gravity sewer is not currently an option for this site. Contour's estimate does not include
bonds, rock excavation, engineering, meters, or electrical service to a grinder pump and lift station.
Furthermore, easements do not currently exist to permit the necessary crossing of two neighboring
parcels. Staff believes that at present, the cost of over $40,000 to connect to municipal water and
sewer is prohibitive for the applicant. Staff suggests the applicant revise proffers that state the applicant
will connect to public water and sewer within one year after each of these services becomes available.
Staff also suggests the applicant proffer the drawing showing existing improvements and proposed
storage areas and uses in order to provide assurance that future development of the site is not done in
a manner that intensifies impacts on the existing water and sewer.
Schools: This type of development would not generate students.
Fire. Rescue. Police: The Monticello Fire-Rescue station has been constructed off of Mill Creek Drive
Extended and provides service to this site. Monticello station meets response time standards.
Albemarle County 5th Street Office Building contains the County's Police Department, although the
police patrol all areas of the County. Current policy for police service recommends an average
response time of 10 minutes for all Development Areas.
Stormwater Manaaement: As there are no physical changes proposed for this site, the County Engineer
only recommends stormwater management be provided if the Planning Commission or Board of
Supervisors would like to see more provided on this site than would otherwise be required by the
ordinance.
Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties
The contractor's office and storage yard are very much in keeping with some of the existing
surrounding properties, which are comprised of trash disposal, roof and construction businesses. Since
the site will remain as-is, staff anticipates very little impact, if any on nearby and surrounding properties.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD COMMENT
This project was reviewed by the ARB staff. In summary, staff requested the addition of a screening
4
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3/11/06
fence that would screen the front of the site. The applicant has provided the screening fence by way of
a proffer, which is satisfactory to the ARB staff.
eROFFERS
Proffers are provided as Attachment F. They are described as follows:
Proffer 1. The applicant has agreed to proffer certain permitted uses of the property and/or uses
authorized by special use permit. This proffer describes the uses allowed and not allowed on this
property. Staff believes this proffer is appropriate.
Proffer 2. The applicant agrees to limit the use of the Contractor's equipment storage yard to specific
areas delineated on the plan provided with the rezoning and further limited by certain height
restrictions. (See Attachment D)
Proffer 3. The applicant agrees to construct a screening fence as described in the proffer and location
delineated on the plan provided with the rezoning. (See Attachment D)
Additional Proffer Needs
While Staff believes the existing proffers are substantively acceptable, they are still in need of technical
and language revisions and additional proffers are needed to address the water and sewer concerns.
Staff believes additional proffers should be added that address the future connection of public water
and sewer at whatever point these utilities become available along Avon Street Extended in front of the
subject site or within a public easement adjacent to the subject property. As previously mentioned the
plan and uses should also be proffered.
WAIVERS
_he applicant has requested a waiver of Section 26.10.3 to allow installation of a fence in the required
uffer from a residential district. (See Attachment I) Granting this waiver would permit the fence, which
is recommended by the Design Planner for the Entrance Corridor.
Section 26.10.3 of the Zoning Ordinance states: "Buffer zone adjacent to residential and rural
areas districts: No construction activity including grading or clearing of vegetation shall occur
closer than thirty (30) feet to any residential or rural areas district. Screening shall be provided
as required in section 32.7.9. (Amended 9-9-92) Except, the commission may waive this
requirement in a particular case where it has been demonstrated that grading or clearing is
necessary or would result in an improved site design, provided that:
Staff recommends approval of the waiver request to Section 26.10.3.
SUMMARY
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request:
1. The proposal makes the property more consistent with the Comprehensive Plan.
2. The rezoning forms a logical extension of the LI district from the adjacent property.
3. There are no proposed changes to the site.
4. The rezoning to light industrial zoning will accommodate a small business which is an
identified need in the County.
Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this rezoning request:
1. The proffers are in need of technical and substantive language revisions.
. 2. The existing well and septic system are proposed to remain because of the cost for
connections to public water and sewer.
5
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3/11/08
~
RECOMMENDATION
Provided that the technical and substantive provisions to the proffers are completed prior to the Board
of Supervisor's meeting, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2007-022, Innovative Construction,
inclusive of revised proffers. Staff also recommends approval of the waiver request to Section 26.10.3
to allow the fence described in the proffer to be constructed in the buffer.
ATTACHMENTS
ATTACHMENT A - Tax Map
ATTACHMENT B - Location Map
ATTACHMENT C - Letter from Stuart L. Richard, dated May 20, 1982
ATTACHMENT D - The JV. Webster Property Plat, dated April 25, 2005
ATTACHMENT E - Electronic Mail from Joel Denunzio, dated March 4, 2008
ATTACHMENT F - Letter from Intrastate Pest Control Co. Inc., dated January 25,2008
ATTACHMENT G - Proposal from Contour Construction, L.L. C., dated January 25,2008
ATTACHMENT H - Proffers, dated January 25, 2008
ATTACHMENT I - Letter from Catherine Womack, dated February 19, 2008
6
Innovative Construction
PC Public Hearing 3111108
.
.
.
/'
(~
....~\
<
....
=
~
e
.::l
C.l
~
....
<
Feet
100
~ 10' Contour Streams
/'y/ Roads .. Water Body
c=J Driveways CJ Parcels
c=J Buildings Parcel of Interest
~'--~ NK:
ZM~ ~O~017~O~2 -& /<:J K6"1~
InnQYati~e Ganstrumi)rf ~ ~ ~v (J)
'~ ~ " ~ , ..
~~ ~I
)~h ~~ jA~
~. . ~ '- Jft L ~YJ:::--I A
~ ~ ~
~ ~ ~
u ~~-->( I~~ ~ ~ ~
::-- Y\ t--J.. J?t .-
":;::-J. /. ~~
J:: )( ..{J /:.,. (
"-- -llJ' ~ ~~ '1:( 'j)/l ~
~!7 ~~ 'J; .;:u ~/f
V r-~ x ~'~ ~
-.< '::)~ ~ ~ ~
~Trl ~ v \
~~~11 ~x~~;;~
'< A 1 ~-0 .~ lJ'>. ~lt<'> ~
.> ~'\ 111 ~ '" ;r
/\t / r- \,J/J-..[ "'" ~):/;
t:.~ \.~ ('--,'4.'_7 ),'C:~ 'Z..I VI-- I..
B :l(<< .J..'JJ,' "i.-lL/111~ .rh
~fY; ~~'I",; V~ u
::>"It-... ~'~"~I-~ K-,..., "(
'( >II -lr '0-i.- r--1 I ~
"---- V "Jf--.?r H IN ~
~ ./, ~'-\ J~.,.L\y\)
'..L '( "7 rh:. )\ ),?\ -:/
~~K~
'" r~-
:( 0
...
/
0/
~..-------- -
-(t'
\
~
\ '"
~(y \
;ft. .)J~ '
/.
/
--~ '......--500' / 1,000
4l;
7'
~
,p
//
'- .I.
.,.
~
I p
~~
~~l
~
'.
.3
T/)
/"
~
~
Feet
2,000
~ Roads c=J Parcels
Streams _ Parcel of Interest
.. Water Body ~ City Boundary
...
==
~
e
-=
C.l
~
...
...
-<
.
ROBERT W. TUCKER, JR.
Director of Planning
DEPARTMENT ot PLANN ING
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22901-4596
, 804-296-5823
May 20, 1982
~tr. J. V. Webster
1719 East Market Street
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Re: ZMA.-82-5 J. V. Webster WITH PROFFER
Dear Mr. Webster:
RONALD S. KEEL.ER
Assistant Director 01 Planning
R. KEITH MASE
Principal Planner
NANCY MASON CAPERTON
Senior Planner
KATHERINE L. IMHO F F
Planner
The Albemarle COlmty Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on May 19, 1982, voted
to approve your above-referenced rezoning request on property described as 1+
acre currently zoned R-l, COl.ID.ty Tax Map 90, Parcel 35C, approved to be :onea HC,
subj ect to the following proffer:
.
H-C limited use to machinery and equipment sales, service, and
rental; and uses in H-C zone that are permitted under C-1 as
they may be established under C-l regulations.
If you should have any questions with regard to this action and notification, you
may contact Mr. Ronald S. Keeler at 296-5823.
Sincerely,
.
-).~
Stuart L. Richard
Department of Plarming
sIr
cc: Director of Inspections/Zoning Administrator
.
Attachment C
. \':=;:
:::, u
c: ...c
~ ~
:f: ~
g i'i"
:II'
=<:
...."
-' ';
~ :;;:
, ll> ..,.
Q Q
l'll
0..
.i ____
.
""t...J'"1:J " .. D:J i4.
PA'YNE:&HODOUS LLP
PAGE', 62('"''"'
9(H.~B""'(][}9 (p(1.p.) ::ilN~~'[d
IrSIO-F;96GZ 'J". 'fl'tfJJV'11frJ .'.".gJ xoil ,'O'd ~
'jN.f 'S.J.JJAliflS aNY"7 S ;Jffl7 S
6mp 'jre0006 '5
''<TTV(] '0" = 'j ::nY$$ ~
SOO'l 'BZ rmlcfY ',!h.H' . JJ ", . -<
VfNfOtIfA 'JuLNflOJ :iTtIflf{~fI7r.~:;~'.L[)~.LSI~ mIA8J.LOJ~
. A 'f :fl,1 If,L
J..J, (f Jf.d 0 'If d 'If Ja SEl Jl lid L! .
~?9F.:. 1J1:JWcl ,06 cfY.lt XY.t
,()NfIUif.lS ,("~HJ/),r; 7.mr$JIId.
l
.e 9 r
.' .
. oar
-6M~
09 O. 09
~
.40.'2: '.-:: J / loY.--
"!I~ .:r. 0 /~,,::z.. f! '("Q~
OT /- ,,>.l
~ ~~I(Q (.)
'ON 3J,'i:JI.:lIHl3'
.n
:;. ~nl 'l HJ380~ c
. ~C'l -.,/,1 ~
~ &..9 -. , ""-;;_',y'_ Q~
cf. ,P' ~
~ .....,.~ "
..Yo H.I. '\ "l ~ \"
)/
....~ "
.:~ :r'
8
"'\",
~'
~
.I,V1d r,g-Llt 80
'v6'\r-60B 80
aOOM 'M NIt\ l3Y'/
;/S;T-QS m
" ,
;;, :~:'.,
,/,
, ""
I
"
lYld rg-L~1r 80
ll1r -9r6 ~ 80
NOXIQ \ft/V8t1Y8 ~
II 'NOXIO 'n 3nOVlNOri
Ogr-06 Vi.L
"-
.~oo .:/0 3M9(,L9Sr0
,ZZ, '0 6 O~ 1108
.' .;
/:
(
,,-- ~
~
. ,
,1.Vll;! r.Sr.-S9L 80
, z:r-sr'a 80
IJO~ .:/0 30ISH1.f.JOS.
8~r.-06 Vi.!,
~ · 0 \ . ~?
'2\-;;1.::1 ;\ H 0 -z.. ~;;l ~d CJ g
'--.
p.:o /
-::./
~
./
.1
./
I
I
/
I
I
I
1
I
,I
/
1
I
I
I
OlooS O} 10l/ dD~~ '{lI\J)::)'J^ . .g~
,;;-;
~I
,~
/
~ . 0 \ ' "7. ~-;;I d
~?\fe ~$ ~""')"1~
.......
"'l.
\
liI/0d9aMod dd'
JAUJOO b~(la.:! ~.:l
puno j Itdld ~-4 .:Jd
pllno.:l'po~ u'cYJf'.:I1
l~S po~ 00.1(.. SI
(fN(UJZ7
a-OG?'Z lfA 'l77IAStiJ.J.D7'iJV'/f/)'.
'J.X.1 ,1..1urU.LS .NO"Y ,!t,rn
.'8S,'lYt1C1f' .uU:ldDUc(l
'd'p'}{ {J,YVZrN (f007J 'af] 'f{ JO,AJiiJY,f,1,Wa;[(J ~
:JH.L NO NJJ OIlS sr ..:J. ,'1NO~ NIHJ/).{ S77~:l NOJnJ:IH NAI OIi.~'1:J.U3cfOUr:f iUl.&
' ,
WiTt1 '7 ~.J,.aqotf
-"--2.~'?1 ~
.' ~t.',
~
\
. '- 'NOJU:!lf N..HOHS SSOIi.L NrH.l i'l,'!{[,.JO (]NnOUfJ ,'f.Ff,i NO
:J'JU/SJA S"NKl'fHJJTOWN,V 0 S"Nllf:iSrlI ON lIlY 3/lIJHJ; ,LYH/. aNY NO,~/l.rl{ ]y"JJOHS ssrSIM!/M
JlIU .0 -fZA/lns lJl'linJJY NY :!rTYJI/ '!iOM 'S! 1m,fr NO l'flll A.i!J1illJ OJ;. iu $IH,L
--
'S.
\
.j..
, (
\.
:~
. '~l
-
I
:i
:1
il
,;I;i
,
g,
J.ISIHX3
.
.
.
ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Page 1 of 3
Claudette Grant
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [JoeI.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2008 4:33 PM
To: Claudette Grant
Cc: Bill Scherer; BRIAN P. SMITH
Subject: FW: ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Claudette,
We have been working on this entrance with the owner over the past week and I just went out to revisit the
situation and feel that the existing entrance will adequately address the use by Innovative Construction. The
existing dimensions of the curb returns are above the minimum required for a commercial entrance and projecting
the actual turning radius on the egress results in a 25 foot radius that will accommodate the design vehicle.
If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
Thanks,
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Staff Engineer
434-293-0011 Ext. 120
joel.denunzio@vdot.virginia.gov
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 9:49 AM
To: 'Catherine J. Womack'
Cc: Baber, Charles T.; Claudette Grant
Subject: RE: ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Catherine,
I received and reviewed the fax you sent me and I have compared it with the notes I have from the site visit
Charles Baber had with Brady Scherer on this entrance. From the field visit Charles measured the entrance radii
to be 15 feet on both sides of the entrance. After speaking with you and Charles, we feel that the appropriate
design vehicle is a pickup truck with a trailer. The minimum entrance radii for a pickup truck is 24 feet. Adding a
trailer would require a diagram on the entrance to show the appropriate radius. Charles discussion on this
entrance with Brady indicated that there will be a conflict with the design vehicle moving in and out of the site and
the northern most radius needed to be adjusted to allow for safe ingress / egress from the site to the highway.
The diagram you faxed shows from the Minimum Standards of Entrances to State Highways describes variable u
as being from 12.5 feet or greater depending on the design vehicle. We do not think that 15 feet will
accommodate the design vehicle. If your engineer feels that the existing entrance will safely accommodate the
design vehicle, please have him send a scaled drawing of the entrance with the design vehicle template showing
that the entrance is appropriate.
If you have questions, please contact me.
Thanks,
Joel
Joel DeNunzio, P.E.
Attachment E
3/4/2008
ZMA-2~)07-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Page 2 of3
Staff Engineer
434-293-0011 Ext. 120
joel.denunzio@vdot.virginia.gov
From: Catherine J. Womack [mailto:cjw@fpwlaw.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 05,2008 11:38 AM
To: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E.
Subject: RE: ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Dear Joel:
After speaking with you, I talked to my client and learned that there must have been some misunderstanding
following the site visit. You told me that you expected to see an application for a permit to do the work which you
understood was agreed upon. My client told me that he understood that the person who visited the site was to
check with you and get back to him with exactly what was required. Since then, in an attempt to determine
precisely what is needed, we have researched the VDOT entrance requirements and believe that Innovative is in
compliance. Could you clarify?
This is the last item needed for our ZMA application to go forward so we are anxious to hear from you and to get
this worked out.
Thank you for your help.
Catherine J. Womack
Feil, Pettit & Williams, PLC
530 East Main Street
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone 434979 1400
Fax 434977 5109
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This communication contains confidential information which may also be legally
privileged and is intended only for the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient or the
employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
dissemination or copying of this communication or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this
information may be strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us
immediately by telephone and return the entire facsimile to us via U.S. mail.
From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [mailto:Joel.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov]
Sent: Monday, January 28,2008 1:43 PM
To: Claudette Grant
Cc: Baber, Charles T.; cjw@fpwlaw.com
Subject: ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
ZMA-2007-00022 Innovative Construction Route 742
Claudette,
We have reviewed the sight distance and existing entrance geometry for the above site. We found that there is
adequate site distance for the proposed use. Charles Baber met with Brady Scherer of Innovative Construction
and a modification of the curb and gutter on the north side of the existing entrance to better accommodate the
design vehicle for the site was determined to be needed. With this modification in place the entrance will be
adequate for the proposed use.
Attachment E
3/4/2008
B1/25/2BBB 16:36
4342953111
INTRASTATE
PAGE B2/El2
.
INTRASTATE PEST CONTROL COq INC.
January 25, 2008
To Whom It May Concern:
Intrastate Pest Control Company, Inc., having made an on. site yrSUAL inspection
;
and examination of the septic field ofInovative Construction at 1811 Avon Street
Extended, Charlottesville, Virginia on January 25,2008, hereby certify that there was no
leakage or seepage found in the drain field at the time of the inspection. This inspection
.
is indicative of the condition of the subject property(s) on the date of the inspection
only and is not to be construed as an express or implied warranty or guarantee against
latent, concealed, mechanical, or other future defects. This is a visual inspection of the
septic field only, and not a report on the mechanics of the plumbing or septic system.
Raining at time of inspection
Snow on the ground at time of inspection
House Vacant:
Jntrastate Pest Control Co., Inc.
License #91000269
.
POST OFFICE BOX 74. CHARL()'J'T&SVILLE. VIRGINJA 22902
(434) 295-6565 ORANGE/CULPEPER: (540) 672-3000 FAX (434) 295-3) J,l
Attachment F
PROPOSAL
Date
1/25/2008
Estimate #
266
Innovative Construction Concepts
P.O. Box 561 .
Palmyra, VA 22963
I
Project Name
Description Total
Installation of water and sewer to Avon Street Extended property as follows:
Install 1" water services:
30' bore under A VOD Street @ $25/ft 750.00
ConneCT to existing line 500.00
Meter vault and setter 750.00
Install sewer service
250' of 2" force main @ S25/ft 5.000.00
250' of 4" Lateral@ $25/ft 6,250.00
Grinder pump and lift station 15,000.00
Note~ Water and sewer services contingent on Albemarle County Service Authority approval-
Easements will be required as services are not currently on property. Sewer will require lift
station as gravity sewer is not cunently an option for this property. Price excludes bonds, rock
excavation, engineering, meters, and connection fees
1 Total $28,250.00
We propose hereby to furnish material and labor complete in accordance with above specificarions. All material is guamtecd to be as
specified. All work to be complet~d in a workmanlike: manner according to standard practicc6. Any alteration or deviation from the above
specifications involving extra costs will be executed only upon written orders, and will become an extra charge over and above me estimate.
Progress billings will be made monthly and payments are expected to be remitted within 30 days.
ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL: By accepting this proposal, the undersigned hereby agrees to pay all COSts, including reasonable attorney's
fees, incurred to collect moneys due: for work perforc:md or materials supplied under thi6 proposal. The undersigned funher agrees to pay .
inleresr at a 2% per month on any invoice not paid wilhin 30 days ofreeeipl.
Signature
Attachment G
1713 -1 B &. C AUittd SL Charwttesville, Jlirginia 22903 434-244-000...
.
"lDn","" "'U~f<;!TPltJ:1f'> f'ONTrl A("T,..," NO '7n1.(l~Q_'lllQA
.
.
.
Revised Attachment to Proffer Form
TM 90-35C
Innovative Construction
Permitted uses ofthe property, and/or uses authorized by special use permit, shall include
only the following sections of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance 9927.2.1 and 27.2.2 in
effect on ,2008, a copy of the sections being attached hereto, with uses proffered
out so indicated by interlineation:
See attached.
In addition, applicant proffers limiting use of the Contractor's equipment storage yard to the area
behind the main building, as sketched on the attached plat. That area outlined in blue and labeled
S 1 will be limited to storage of equipment not exceeding eight feet in height; that area 'outlined in
blue and labeled S2 will be limited to. storage of equipment not exceeding twelve feet in height.
Finally, applicant proffers the construction of a screening fence to be built as shown on the
attached plat, in a line which is an extension of the plane formed by the rear wall of the main
building on the site. The fence will be six feet in height, constructed of 1" x 6" pressure treated
vertical boards, installed flush with one another to form a solid fence. The wood will not be
stained or painted, but left to weather naturally.
Attachment H
.
.
.
Sections:
27.1
27.2
27.2.1
27.2.2
27.3
27.4
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
CHAPTER 18
ZONING
SECTION 27
LIGHT INDUSTRY - LI
INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT (Amended 10-3-01)
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
MINIMUM AREA REQUlRED FOR EST ABLlSHMENT OF DISTRICT
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
27.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
LI districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map
to permit industries, offices and limited commercial uses which are compatible with and do not
detract from surrounding districts. Uses and land previously established in industrial limited (M-
1) and research and technical manufacturing (RTM) districts, where in conformity to the
comprehensive plan, shall be encouraged to develop as active centers of employment on both
individual sites as well as within industrial parks. It is intended that LI districts may be
established in areas having all of the following characteristics:
-Areas served by water and sewer facilities or if such facilities are reasonably available;
-Areas served by major highway, rail or air service, or secondary road improved to standards
approved by the county; and
-Areas having clearly demonstrated suitability for intended uses with regard to physical
characteristics and relationship to surrounding development.
27.2 PERMITTED USES
27.2.1 BY RIGHT
Except as otherwise limited by section 27.2.2.1 0, the following uses shall be permitted in any LI
district subject to the requirements and limitations of these regulations: (Amended 2-13-85)
1. CUJJJj-JuUJJdhJe;. uf dJ U5~, ~J\.I]ud~Jo b~V]V5~""g] pJ vdu,",~, J JI"",J: ""....1 ....uJ ....].."'u..:""'~] ~.;J """,,]1 ~
flHafFflaG8yti Gal.
2. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.9).
,
3. M!m11facttlrc, preec:!!ing, feerieMioIi, 115s6Mly, c!istributioB af predHGts !lliGbas 9Yt BIN
limited te: (f.meBelea 12 2 &1; 2 29 91)
1.rt13tl' 31:1rrpl:ies lHtB e~aiJlffieftt.
18-27-1
Zoning Supplement #16,10-3-01
Attachment H
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
-Dl:I!inc.!!, oifice maehine3 1il'\8 611\:lipffiefit.
-Co3metie3, ineh:lamg l'erfume3. r-erft1mee teiletrie3 ana j3erfumeEl toilet SSB.)'I.
-Drafting 3t1pplic.! and c.ql:lipn.ent.
-EIc.(.b ielll lightmg ana WiriHg e~yiflmllBt
-Eleetrieal EmS eleetroHie eqHiflffiel'lt 1Ifl8 eSl'Hfl8lHlAts inell::leliHg rasio, telepkofle, eompffiBf,
OOffiffil::lflieBtisH etjuipHleAt, TV reeeiviAg sets, flfleBegrapAs.
-Fvvcl pludu\,IL, "n.n.,t UJ bl...:l~"'JJ 5vvd.:J, d~IJ j-Il.odl1Gb, wJlald), b5~erCi~e3) ifteluding bottling
~.
-Gifu, ft8'/eltie3 ifleltll:liflg j3sttery, figuriABS lffid siffiilBl" eeraffiie flfEldliets.
-Glass prsauets meae Elf j3\lfeRa3ea glass.
-l"dtl!trial centrols.
-Jewolrj, silverwan.
-Light machiner)' aflB meehffie l'afts, ifteh:lclffig eleaffieal heliseRels 9flfllilHlees bl:lt Hot
iJlel1:u:ling StieR t.fiiflgS liS elOtbc3 ..l!:Jhers, m}erslmd rcfrig,c.utlOJ!I.
-MU3iew msVlmIeBtli
-Flip'" pi oJa"t, ~u"l, a~ .1;" "ut paptaLui1.ld aud "i1.ldbui1.l d, :>i1.lutl:lI)' )-l<1pt:J J-llUdud:s, bl:lg::; l:IIld
CQJ+talllerli.
-PBate~ftJ'hi6 efjl1i:l'ment anB 31:1pl'li6J ineltlBing I'fOe6ssing Imd 8c.vclopn.g pllmt.
-RlHlBef, Hietal stmIpE.
-Small "k,,,tl ical parts 1Iti6h a:3 coils, condenser!, tranJform6f'3, 61') s1Bl Bels6rs.
-SuTgir.~l_ mp.ni~~1 Ann nP.T1tal in!;tmment!; and !;upplies.
_ ToYs, 3}3ertiHg Me &t:Aletie stjtii]3meHt, ems. nrellFHls, II:ffiHillJ'liti0l'i aT firewerl(s.
_ W Mellc!, docks MId similar timing seviaes.
_ VI' 80a eabiflet3 B.HS furniture, ufJftelJtery.
4. Publishing, printing, lithography and engraving, including but not limited to newspapers,
periodicals and books.
5. Preparation of printing plates including typesetting, etching and engraving.
6. Research and development activities including experimental testing.
7. Scientific or technical education facilities.
8. Assembly and fabrication of light aircraft from component parts manufactured off-site.
9. Contractor's office and equipment storage yard.
18-27-2
ZoningSupplcment#16.1P' '" A
ttachment H
.
.
.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
10. Engin~~rmg, engineering aC3i~, !t33embl~ alia f!lerifl8tie8 of ffiaehiftery aBS eOfflpofleflu,
ineh:u:liBg S\:left Elf! site aeesssery \:lSSS Il:fl ffiBelillliBg, BBBllil:ting, weldif!g aRB sheet metal worl(
a>ld excl\ldillg SIHlA 1'I88S as 81'6~ lllifflfflcriflg IlTJd fonnd,}. (.A...u...uJ",d 16-3-IH)
11. Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including
poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service
and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines,
pumping stations and appmtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and all other
applicable law. (Amended 5-12-93)
12. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices,
parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk Jines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 3] .2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 1 ]-]-89)
13. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
]4. Business and professional office buildings.
15. Dwellings (reference 5.1.21). (Added 4-17-85)
]6. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8). (Added 3-5-86)
17. W& c.lJOd!!e faGilities and ..holc3alc bMmes:!es Bet inyelyiBg stefftge of gB5s1iR8, lieros8Be or
other velatile m!lteriab, dynamite; blll3tillg cap!! and Vth~1 "^plv";v",,, p",,,L;...;dc,, ClUJ pui"UJJ:>;
8fl8 ether Btieft ffiaterials ..,AiM 66\dd be ftftZarSet:l3 t6 life irI1he e. eftt sf accident. (Aeldcd
1~
18. Storrnwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision plat.
(Added 10-9-02)
19. Tier I and Tier n personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added 10-13-04)
(927.2.1,12-10-80, ]2-2-81,2-13-85,4-17-85,3-5-86,12-2-87,11-1-89, 5-12-93; Ord. 01-18(6), 10-3-01;
Ord. 02-18(6), ] 0-9-02; Ord. 04-18(2), 10-13-04)
27.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 31.2.4:
] . Laboratories, medical or pharmaceutical.
2. Airport, helistop or heliport (reference 5.1.1).
3. Assembly of modular building units.
4. Moving businesses, including storage facilities.
5. Warehouse facilities not pennitted under section 27.2.1.17. (Amended 12-2-87)
6. Wholesale business not pennitted under section 27.2.1.17. (Amended 12-2-87)
18-27-3
Zoning Supplement #30, ]0-13-04
Attachment H
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
7. Truck terminal.
8. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-
wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances.
9. Temporary events sponsored by local nonprofit organizations (reference 5.1.27). (Added 7-7-
82)
10. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding
four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by
public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added
2-13-85)
11. Body shops (rc::ference 5.1.31). (Added 12-7-88)
12. Towing and storage of motor vehicles (reference 5.1.32). (Added 6-6-90)
13. Uses listed llilder section 27.2.1 with subordinate retail sales exceeding fifteen (15) percent of
the floor area of the main use. (Added 2-20-91)
"
14. Supporting commercial uses (reference 9.0). (Added 6-]9-91)
15. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93)
16. Stand alone parking and parking structures (reference 4.12, 5.1.41). (Added 2-5-03)
17. Tier ill personal wireless service facilities (reference 5.] .40). (Added 10-13-04)
(920-27.2.2,12-10-80; 7-7-82; 2-13-85; 12-2-87; 12-7-88; 6-6-90; 2-20-91; 6-19-91; 9-15-93; Ord. 03-
18(1),2-5-03; Ord. 04-18(2), ]0-13-04)
27.3 MINIMUM AREA REQUIRED FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF DISTRICT
Minimum area required for establishment of an LI district shall be five (5) acres. Unless
otherwise provided in section 26.2, there shall be no minirnwn area requirements for additions to
an established LI district, provided such area to be added adjoins and forms a logical addition to
the existing LI district.
27.4 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT
In addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section 26.0, industrial
districts, generally, shall apply within all LI districts.
18-27-4
Zoning Supplement #30, 10-13-04
Attachment H
.
.
.
Feb,20, 2008 12:00PM
Fei!,Pellit&Wlillams PLC
No. 1824
P, 2
FElL, PETTIT
& WILLIAMS PLC
aALl'H L. Rill
DAVID H. PBTTlT
), I'^Of wn.~5
Cf.TH2RIN1! J. lII~CK
IllctiAllD HOWAJ\J).Sloo4mi
Ci\VlD II. f\V\Nz&l
OOtoJAl..D O. LONO
M'C~ E. OEUlEYN
AITORNEYS AT LAW
530 EhST MAIN SmfEr . P.O. Box 2057 . OWUmTEsvlllE. VIRGINIA 22902
TEL. (434) 979-1400 . FAX (434) 977-5109 . WWW.PPwu.W.COM
H5ATHn HOI\HEL M.!l.!.D.
February 19, 2008
Claudette Grant, Senior Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of Community Development~Planning
401 McIntrye Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: ZMA-2007-00022
Innovative Construction Concepts, Inc. ("Innovative Construction") - Zoning Map
Amendment
Dear Claudette:
As counsel for Innovative Construction, we hereby request a waiver of the requirements
of Albemarle Code Section 26.10.3 to allow the fence recommended by the county's
Architectural Review Board to be constructed in the buffer area, as shown on the drawing
previously submitted.
Please let me know if additional information is required.
S~!/~
Catherine J. w~~
ow
cc Innovative Construction Concepts, Inc.
Donna DeLoria, Esq.
Attachment I
PROFFER FORM
Original Proffer X
Amendment
Date of Proffer Signature: March _, 2008
ZMA # 2007 -00022
Tax Map and Parcel Number: Tax Map 90, Parcel 35C
0.977 Acres to be rezoned from HC to LI
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the Owner hereby
voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to Tax Map 90 Parcel 35C
(the "Property"), if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning
and the Owner acknowledges that the conditions are reasonable.
1. The by right use of the Property shall be limited to those uses allowed under Section 27.2.1
(2), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), (9), (11), (12), (13), (14), (15), (16), (18) and (19), of the Zoning
Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia as Section 27.2.1 is in effect on April 9, 2008, a copy
of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
2. The portion of the Property that may be used as a contractor's equipment storage yard shall be
limited to the area behind the main building, as shown on the plat attached hereto as Exhibit B
(the "Plat"). The area outlined in blue and labeled S 1 on the Plat shall be limited to storage of
equipment not exceeding eight feet in height; the area outlined in blue and labeled S2 on the Plat
shall be limited to storage of equipment not exceeding twelve feet in height.
3. A screening fence shall be constructed at issuance of zoning clearance and maintained in the
location shown on the Plat, in a line which is an extension of the plane formed by the rear wall of
the main building on the site. The fence shall be six feet in height, constructed of 1" x 6"
pressure treated vertical boards, installed flush with one another to form a solid fence. The wood
shall not be stained or painted, but left to weather naturally.
4. The Owner shall connect the Property to public water and sewer within one year after each of
these services becomes available either along the Avon Street Extended frontage of the Property
or within a public easement adjacent to the Property. Until the connection to public water and
sewer is made, the use of the Property shall be limited to a single use permitted by Proffer 1.
5. Until the Owner connects the Property to public water and sewer, there shall be no changes to
the Property from what is depicted on the Plat, except that the Owner shall remove the structures
shown thereon as "10' x 13' Metal BId.", "8' x 12' Frame BId.", and 8' x 18' Truck Bed".
Owner: Woolen Mills Self Storage, LLC
~ti/?~, I~
E. Wray, Manager
Date:
~/20hri
I I
Attachment II
.
.
.
. ,.
EXHIBIT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
j
j
A
CHAPTER] 8
ZONING
SECTION 27
lJGETINDUSTRY - LI
Sections:
27.] INTENT. WHERE PERMlTTED
27.2 PERMITTED USES
27.2.1 BY RlGBT (Amended ]0-3-0])
27.2.2 IlY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
27.3 MINlMUM AREA REQUIRED FOR EST ABiJSHMENT OF DISTRlCf
27.4 ADDJTIONAL REQU1RE:MENT
27.1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED
Ll districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map
to permit industries, offices and limited commercial uses which are compatible With and do not
detract from surrounding districts. Uses and land previously established in industrial limited (M-
]) and research and technical manufacturing (R1M) districts, where in conformity to the
comprehensive plan, shall be encouraged to develop as active centers of employment on both
individual sites as well as witbiil industrial parks. It is intended that LI districts may be
established in arC8S having aD of the following characteristics:
-Areas served by water and sewer facilities or if such facilities are TCBSonably available;
-Areas served by majoT highway, rail OT air service, or secondary road improved to standards
approved by the county; and '
-Areas having clearly demonstrated suitability for intended uses with regard to pbysical
characteristics and relationship' to SUTTotmding development.
27.2 PERMI1TED USES
i7.2.l BY'RlGET
Except as otherwise limited by section 27.2.2..10, the following uses shall be permitted in any Ll
district subject to the requirements and limitations of these regulations: (Amended 2-13-85)
1. CUJJJ}luwJdhJe; UJ'" .(1) U!r~J ~J\,o]ud~u~ b;uJu&\,ou] j-JJ. UdU~Lo:J3 UI""J;....uJ uud d"'4"..;""ul ~.. "" wI] uo:a
pBaFffia~8\1Y sat
2. Fire and rescue squad stations (referCDce 5.1.9).
,
3. Maaklfactmc., pm.ec:!Mng, fIlMieatim!, BltlIemely, distfHnHieB Elf Jlf8dB6ts mUle "as gut :aM
limited t~: (lmt!lBElefl12 2 81; 2 20 91)
hrBst:l' stiPl'HeIl ee et!~IlB'l:
18-27-1
Zm1iDs Supplemmt 116, 10-3.OJ
EXHIBIT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
i
D
:I
A
-DlI.!l;J.'-3.1. office mB~J\es MIll e1f1llil'Hl!lllt.
-Cll:Jme'rie:J. inefficlin~ r-emme3, :periiimBB teilMris3 and 1"IlTffimBd teilet se~.
-Drafiil'lg 3lil'pli~ Pind C'Itli}.UJJ-.JJt.
-EJ..cb ieal ]igntmg !mil w.:mg "lJuiPJJlaJit
-:Elesa4ss] BHd e]eatr6Bie eqHi~HlBBt IIfId e8ffipsBflfl19 iflel\olai1lg TBllie, telBJlhsne, eOffifHrteT,
o6H1fflUflieatiafl Bfj13ipffiBBt, TV reeei:yiftg set:s, pBBBegrBflhs.
-Yvucl p,udu""L, .;:n......L thJ bJ".....J 6\..1uduJ du.:'J }'lueJd~~) ~t.I)a), b5.er6.~ea, meluding bottliHg
~.
-Cifb, MVElltic:! melelliHg pattery, fig1:1riHBJ IIfId siffii]ar BefBffilB J9redul!t3.
-G]aSE }lTsdl:lets malle sf p\:Hefla3ed g]lldS.
-lIJdtlJtfillJ eentrals.
-Jewell j. sil"&rV.'BrI.
-Lignt . m&~ery line maelMe 1"1!ft3. ineh~8:iBg Bleetfleal BBU:9aBeld sf!plirmses But HElt
in.eJuaiHg SliM tlsmgs .~ eletbe:! ~a3hCfi!, 0Ij'Cf'3 and Icfri~....do. ~.
-MliSiael Hlf;!;n.GeAts
-J'r.p':"1 j>>oda...b ;)u..J. .... di... ...ul y"pWJbuc1Jd IUJd "'l1JdLuwd, ,,"uiI:l1IJ }JI1JJCI }JIUdUl...t:;. Ui:lgli IWd
cMtaiRa'li.
-rhote~ll]'hie eqll;pment 11:I.11 :JtrppliC3 inoltllling :proee:J3ing m)d de. cJOfl~,g Jllnnt.
-Rueeer. metel stan:Jfl&.
-31JJ"l] ...J......b i.:.a:l ymts such Il:3 eoib, eo.>lcl~CfJ. tfll:l13former3. Oiry ~ 8eIBeJ'5.
-SUTgir:~'. mp.nir:Rl Rnn nt':TItal im;trmnfmtr; Rnd !l11Pplies.
_ Tej's, 9J'lefting !md ath!etie elf'HJ3fflBBt. Bns8j:fl firellJ'ftlB. lHIlffi'l:lJlitiEIB .eJ firewerkB.
_ W at..JJ..1>. doclu Ilnd 3imilll:l timing t1eviaB3.
-Woes eBBifls19 ME! furniture, uJ'l8ehter].
4. Publishing, printing. lithography and engraving, including but not limited to newspapers,
periodicals and books.
5. Preparation of printing plates including typesetting, etching and engraving.
6. Research and development activitieS including experimental testing.
7. Scientific or teclmical educaiion facilities.
8. Assembly and fabricatioD oflight aircraft from component parts manufactured o:ff-sne.
9. Contractm's office and equipment storage yard.
18-27-2
Zoning Suppl~t#Ui. H' ~ m
.
.
.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
j
.D
J9
EXHIBIT
A-
10. Ent.-d.ea iI.g. C1.ginccring dc~i~. a35embl) Ilnd fabrieaften ef ",sehiBe!')' &8d eempeneflts.
mehuiiBg Sl:IM 6ft site BseesllefY ltilllS as B".IIUlhining. babeitaBg. wllJBing eEl Mllet Hletel wer}[
Imd =x~NdiJlg sWlOIlllll8B as Elftlp ltammermg and found.,. (AUJo,udcd 16-3-61)
11. Electric. gas, oil. and communication facilities excluding tower structures and including
poles, ]ines, transformcrs, pipes. metcrs and related facilities for distribution of local service
and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distnoution and seweragc collection lines,
pumping stations and appm1enanccs owned and operated by the AlbemBTle County Service
Authority. Except as otherwise expressly provided, central water supplies and centra]
sewerage systems in conformance with Chl!-pter 16 of the Code of Albemarle and an other
app]icable law. (Amended 5-]2-93)
12. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools. offices.
parks. playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies
(reference 3] .2.5); public water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated by the Rivanna Water and
Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended II 0] -89)
13. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
J 4. Business and professional office buildings.
15. Dwellings (reference 5.] .2]). (Added 4-17-85)
16. Tcmpor!D}' nomcsidcntiaJ mobile honleS (rcfcrcnce 5.8). (Added 3-5-86)
]7. WGJ....hu....... fac.;liti....lIud ..hclC!alc bltllin~C! net iw;eJ:..mg stMBgIl efgaseliBll, ]tIlRlS8BIl sr
stilei'" -/sIelll mataiab, ~te blastinE e....." add o1he.. "^plu..;v..... ....o,..t;..;d.... ..uti pU;..UJJli;
ell etlter SHah materials WloHM esuld bs ~ftEftI t1Stl9 te life i1I1he e. en! of Ilccident. (:Addcd
12 2 87)
] 8. Stonnwater management facilities shown on an approved final site plan or subdivision pIaL
(Added] 0-9-02)
19. Tier 1 and Tier n persoDal wireless service facilities (refercnc::e 5.1.40). (Added] 0-13-04)
(927.2.1, 12-] 0-80. ]2-2-8].2-13-85,4-17-85.3-5-86, ]2-2-87. 11-}-89, 5-12-93; Ord. 0]-18(6), 10-3-01;
Ord. 02-]8(6), ]0-9-02; Ord. 04-18(2),10-13-04)
272.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
The following uses shall be permitted Only by special use permit approved by the board of
supervisors pursuant to section 3] .2.4:
1 . Laboratories, medica] Of phannaceutical.
2: Airport, helistop or heliport (reference 5.1.1).
3. Assembly ofmodular building \Dlits~
4. Moving.businesses, including storage facilities.
5. Warehouse faCllitics Dot permitted nildcr section 27.2.1.17. (Amended 12~2-87)
6. Wbolesale business not permitted under section 27.2.1.17. (Amended 12-2-87)
18-27-3
Zoning SupplcmCID11l30. lO-l3-04
t ~.
EXHIBIT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY COPE
~
D
a
A-
7. Truck terminal.
8. Electrical power substations. transmission lines and reJated towers; gas OT oil transmission
lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro~
wave and Tadio-wave transmission and relay towers, ~ubstations and appurtenances.
9. Temporary events spo!lsored by local nonprofit organizations (reference 5.127). (Added 7-7-
82)
10. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding
four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by
public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added
2-13-85)
11. Body shops (riference 5.1.31). (Added 12-7-88)
12. Towing and storage of motor vehicles (reference 5.1 32). (Added 6-6-90)
13. Uses listed tmder section 21'.2.1 with , subordinate retail sales exceeding fifteen (15) percent of
the floor area of the main IJse:, (:i\dded 2-20-91)
"-i",
14. Supporting commercial uses (referencc"9:0). (Added 6-19-91)
15. lndoor athletic fadlities. (Added 9-15-93)
16. Stand alone parking and p~king structures (refcren<<?C 4.12, 5.1.41). (Added 2-5-03)
17. Tier ill personal wireless service :tB.cilities (reference 5.1.40). (Added] 0-13-04)
(~ 20-27.22, ]2-10-80; 7-7-82; 2-13-,85; 12-2-87; 12-7-88; 6-6-90; 2-2(l-91; 6-19-9]; 9-15-93; Ord. 03-
18(1),2-5-03; Ord. 04-]8(2), ]0-13-04)
27.3 MINIMUM.ARJtA REQUIRED FOR ESTABlJSHMENT OF DlSTRlCI
Minimum B.Tt<a required for establishment cif an lJ district shan be five (5) acres. Unless
otherwise provided in section'262, there shall be no minimum area reqUirements for additi~s to
an established lJ district, provided such area to be added adjoins and fQrms a logical addition to
the c,osting U district.
27.4 ADDmONAL REQUIREMENT
In addition to the requirements contained, herein, the requirements of section 26.0, industrial
districts, generally, shall apply within all Ll districls_
18-27-4
Zoning Snppleml:JJttl30, ]0-]3-04