The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2008-03-19 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FIN A L MARCH 19, 2008 COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 1. 1 :00 p.m. Call to Order. 2. Work Session: FY 200a Og Count'! Budnet: (if noodod) (Remove from agenda) 3. 3:15 p.m. Recess. 6:00 P.M. LANE AUDITORIUM 4. Call to Order. 5. Pledge of Allegiance. 6. Moment of Silence. 7. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 8. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda. 9. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10. Community Development Block Grant. Proposed submission of Block Grant Applications. 11. PROJECT: ZMA-2004-018. Fontana Phase 4C (Siems #37,45). PROPOSAL: Rezone 17.146 acres from RA Rural Areas which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre), R-4 Residential zoning district (4 units/acre) and R-1 Residential zoning district (1 unit/acre) to R-4 Residential zoning district which allows residential uses at 4 units per acre for 34 dwelling units at a gross density of 1.98 units/acre. PROFFERS: Yes. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential - (3-6 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses in Neighborhood 3 - Pantops. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: At the intersection of Fontana Dr (Rt 1765) and Via Florence approximately 0.5 miles from the intersection of Fontana Dr and Stony Point Rd (Rt 20 North). TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78E-A. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna. 12. PROJECT: ZMA 2006-14. Professional Office Buildina at Hvdraulic & Georaetown Rds. (Sians #58&65). PROPOSAL: Rezone f051 acres from C-1 Commercial zoning district which allows retail sales and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre) to NMD Neighborhood Model District zoning district which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. Approx. 20,000 sq ft building. PROFFERS: Yes. 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. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Georgetown/Hydraulic Roads intersection. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 60F/3. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett. 13. PROJECT: SP-2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment (Sian #4). PROPOSAL: site re-organization including expanded parking, future office/education building, columbarium, memorial garden ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre). SECTION: 10.2.2(35). 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. LOCATION: 7599 Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt 250), Greenwood. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 70/12,13&13A. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 14. PROJECT: ZMA 2007- 011 Patterson Subdivision. (Sians #43&61). PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 unit/acre). to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 10 dwelling units. PROFFERS: Yes. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT-3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: Between Lanetown Rd and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Rd, Lanetown Rd, and Railroad Ave. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 55/63. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 15. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 16. Adjourn. CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 9.1 Approval of Minutes: August 1 and August S, 2007. FOR INFORMATION: 9.2 Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund Annual Report. 9.3 Copy of letter dated February 29, 2008, from John Shepherd, Manager of Zoning ^dministr3tion, to David Collins, John McNair ^ssociates, re: OFFICIAL DETERMINA TION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS Tax Map 118, Parcel 17 (property of Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas Calhoun, David Calhoun, j\.n~re'N Calhoun, Jonathan Calhoun, Henry 'N. Calhoun, etal) an~ Tax Map 118, Parcel18^ (property of Mitchell O. Carr, Trustee) Scottsville Magisterial District. (Remove from agenda) 9.4 Copy of letter dated March 3, 200S, from Ronald L. Higgins, Chief of Zoning, re: OFFICIAL DETERMINA TION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - Tax Map 79, Parcel 10 (property of Albemarle Edgehill Farm LLC) - Rivanna Magisterial District. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TENTATIVE MARCH 19, 2008 COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 1. 1 :00 p.m. - Call to Order. 2. Work Session: FY 2008-09 County Budaet: (if needed) 3. 3:15 p.m. - Recess. 6:00 P.M. LANE AUDITORIUM 4. Call to Order. 5. Pledge of Allegiance. 6. Moment of Silence. 7. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 8. From the Public: Matters Not Listed for Public Hearing on the Agenda. 9. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). PUBLIC HEARINGS: 10. Community Development Block Grant. Proposed submission of Block Grant Applications. 11. PROJECT: ZMA-2004-018. Fontana Phase 4C (Sians #37.45). PROPOSAL: Rezone 17.146 acres from RA Rural Areas which allows agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre), R-4 Residential zoning district (4 units/acre) and R-1 Residential zoning district (1 unit/acre) to R-4 Residential zoning district which allows residential uses at 4 units per acre for 34 dwelling units at a gross density of 1.98 units/acre. PROFFERS: Yes. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neighborhood Density Residential - (3-6 units/acre) and supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses in Neighborhood 3 - Pantops. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: At the intersection of Fontana Dr (Rt 1765) and Via Florence approximately 0.5 miles from the intersection of Fontana Dr and Stony Point Rd (Rt 20 North). TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78E-A. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna. 12. PROJECT: ZMA 2006-14. Professional Office Buildina at Hvdraulic & Georaetown Rds. (Sians #58&65). PROPOSAL: Rezone 1.051acres from C-1 Commercial zoning district which allows retail sales and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/ acre) to NMD Neighborhood Model District zoning district which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. Approx. 20,000 sq ft building. PROFFERS: Yes. 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. LOCATION: Southwest corner of Georgetown/Hydraulic Roads intersection. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 60F/3. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett. 13. PROJECT: SP-2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment (Sian #4). PROPOSAL: site re-organization including expanded parking, future office/education building, columbarium, memorial garden ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre). SECTION: 10.2.2(35). 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. LOCATION: 7599 Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt 250), Greenwood. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 70/12,13&13A. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 14. PROJECT: ZMA 2007 - 00011 Patterson Subdivision. (Sians #43&61). PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 unit/acre). to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 10 dwelling units. PROFFERS: Yes. EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT-3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3.5-6.5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses. ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: Between Lanetown Rd and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Rd, Lanetown Rd, and Railroad Ave. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 55/63. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall. 15. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. 16. Adjourn. . CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 9.1 Approval of Minutes: August 1 and August 8, 2007. FOR INFORMATION: 9.2 Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund Annual Report. 9.3 Copy of letter dated February 29, 2008, from John Shepherd, Manager of Zoning Administration, to David Collins, John McNair Associates, re: OFFICIAL DETERMINA TION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - Tax Map 118, Parcel 17 (property of Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas Calhoun, David Calhoun, Andrew Calhoun, Jonathan Calhoun, Henry W. Calhoun, etal) and Tax Map 118, Parcel18A (property of Mitchell O. Carr, Trustee) - Scottsville Magisterial District. 9.4 Copy of letter dated March 3, 2008, from Ronald L. Higgins, Chief of Zoning, re: OFFICIAL DETERMINA TION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS - Tax Map 79, Parcel 1 0 (property of Albemarle Edgehill Farm LLC) - Rivanna Magisterial District. ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meetina of March 19, 2008 March 20, 2008 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT 4. Call to Order. . Meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m. by the Chairman, Mr. Boyd. All BOS members were present. Also present were Bryan Elliott, Larry Davis, Wayne Cilimberq, and Meaqan Hoy. 7. From the Board: Matters not listed on the Agenda. Ann Mallek: . Updated the Board on her recent Town Hall meetings. Sally Thomas: . She would like a summary of the General Assembly actions that will specifically affect Albemarle County. Ken Boyd: . The Board would like to leave the fireworks in the proposed budget for further discussion. . No decisions made at this time regarding the EMS Revenue Recovery Fees. Mr. Boyd and Ms. Mallek will attend a meeting on Monday March 24 for further discussion with the task force. . Matthew Tucker of the Department on Rail and Public Transportation expressed to Mr. Boyd that he would be happy to meet with the Board to discuss rail enhancement funds in the County. There was a CONSENSUS of the Board to have staff arrange for Mr. Tucker to come to a future meetinq. 8. From the Public: Matters not Listed on the Agenda. . Paul Accad addressed the Board, and suggested that a task force be formed to review Revenue SharinQ and Land Use Taxation. 10. Community Development Block Grant. (Attachments 1 and 2) . APPROVED, by a vote of 6:0, the two attached resolutions approving submission of the Clerk: Forward signed resolutions to Ron applications, and authorized the County White. Executive to execute the applications and required certifications and assurances for both proposals. 11. PROJECT: ZMA-2004-018. Fontana Phase 4C (Attachment 3) (Sians #37.45). . APPROVED ZMA-2004-018, by a vote of 6:0, the Clerk: Set out proffers. rezoning with proffered plan dated July 30, 2007 and proffers dated February 24, 2008 and signed March 13, 2008. 12. PROJECT: ZMA-2006-014. Professional Office (Attachment 4 and 5) Buildina at HYdraulic & Georaetown Rds. (SiQns #58&65). Clerk: Set out proffers and waivers. . APPROVED ZMA-2006-014, by a vote of 6:0, inclusive of proffers dated and signed March 18, 2008, code of development dated February 25, 2008, and Qeneral development plan dated January 19, 2007, reyised February 25,2008. . APPROVED, by a vote of 6:0, the five waivers. 13. PROJECT: SP-2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal (Attachment 6) Church Amendment (Sian #4). . APPROVED, by a vote of 6:0, the ten conditions Clerk: Set out conditions of approval. with one modification made at the Board Meetina. 14. PROJECT: ZMA 2007- 011 Patterson Subdivision. (Attachment 7) (Sians #43&61 ). . APPROVED, by a vote of 5:1 (Mallek) inclusive Clerk: Set out proffers. of the proffers dated February 19, 2008 and signed March 18, 2008, which include the proffered conceot olan. 15. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Sally Thomas: . Updated the Board on Chesapeake Bay issues. . WINA will give a time slot to each Board Member for 10 minutes after each Board meeting on a rotating basis. Ann Mallek: . She hopes to get a response to her inquiry about accessory apartments. . Updated the Board on the burial of the asphalt in the rural area. . The Board discussed the cell phone tower policy, and Mr. Cilimberg informed the Board that the Planning Commission will have a work session on the tower policy, and they will include the Board as invitees. . Western Park will have a Community Kick Off Tuesday March 25th at 7:00 p.m. Ken Boyd: . Discussed the potential uses for Evergreen Church, a historic Church on Proffit Road. Board Members were invited to attend the Historic Preservation Committee meeting on Monday March 24th to discuss the Church. 16. Adjourn. . The meetinq was adiourned at 9:14 O.m. /mrh Attachment 1 - CDBG Resolution Attachment 2 - CDBG Resolution Attachment 3 - Proffers - ZMA-2004-018. Fontana Phase 4C Attachment 4 - Proffers - ZMA-2006-014. Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Attachment 5 - Waivers - ZMA-2006-014. Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Attachment 6 - Conditions of Approval - SP-2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment Attachment 7 - Proffers - ZMA 2007- 011 Patterson Subdivision 2 Attachment 1 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19, 2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a ninety (90) unit rental development known as Treesdale Park; and WHEREAS, other resources estimated in excess of $20,000,000 including, but not limited to, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, HOME funds, Federal Home Loan Bank, the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund, and VHDA loans will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Treesdale Park Apartments will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing twenty-one (21) project-based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: ~ Development of ninety (90) affordable rental units benefiting approximately 250 persons annually, one-third of whom are expected to be children; ~ Construction of a community center; and ~ Provision of services including afterschool school programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Treesdale Park Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. 3 Attachment 2 RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19, 2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a thirty-eight (38) unit senior rental development known as Crozet Meadows; and WHEREAS, other resources include Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Crozet Meadows will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing eight (8) project-based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: y Development of thirty-eight (38) new affordable rental units benefiting approximately 50 senior persons annually; and y Rehabilitation of twenty-eight (28) existing senior rental units benefiting approximately 36 persons annually. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Crozet Meadows Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. 4 Attachment 3 Original Proffer Amended Proffer (Amendment # I to ZMA 94-06 ) PROFFER FORM FOR FONTANA PHASE 4C Date: February 24, 2008 ZMA#04-18 Tax Map and Parcel Number Tax MaD 78E. Parcel A 17.15 Acres to be rezoned from Ri. R4. RA to R4 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. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that such conditions are reasonable. 1. Conformity with Plans: Fontana Phase 4C shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Fontana - Phase 4C Rezoning Plan," prepared by Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, dated, July 30,2007, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, (the "Plan"). No more than thirty-four (34) dwelling units shall be developed in Fontana Phase 4C. 2. Final Gradina Plan: The Owner shall submit a final grading plan meeting the requirements of this section (hereinafter, the "Final Grading Plan") with the application for each subdivision of the residential units shown on the Plan identified in Proffer 1 above. The Final Grading Plan shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Final Grading Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to the approval of the first preliminary subdivision plat. The subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved Final Grading Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer has determined the lot is not graded consistent with the approved Final Grading Plan. The Final Grading Plan shall satisfy the following: A. The Final Grading Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer. B. The Final Grading Plan shall be drawn to scale not greater than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. C. All proposed grading shall be shown at contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet. D. All concentrated surface drainages over lots shall be clearly shown with the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be shown to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from flooding of dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails. Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient of three (3) feet horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3: 1). Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two (2) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2: 1), unless the County Engineer finds that the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. E. Surface drainage from one-half (1/2) acre of land or from three (3) or more lots, whichever is greater in area, shall be collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way outside of the lots. 5 F. All drainage from streets shall be carried across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site. G. The Final Grading Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if the distance is less than ten (10) feet, from the portion of the structure facing the street has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adjacent to possible entrances that shall not be served by a stairway. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. H. Any requirement of this condition may be waived by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of five hundred (500) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be waived to at least an equivalent degree. In approving a waiver, the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition would not forward the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the Project, and to the land adjacent thereto, I. The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. All amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. 3. Affordable Housina: The Owner shall contribute $2,809.00 cash per dwelling unit, up to an aggregate maximum contribution of $95,500.00 (equivalent to $19,100 cash per unit as cash in lieu of five (5) affordable dwelling units) to the County for the purpose of affordable housing. Each cash contribution shall be due and payable with each application for a building permit. Each cash contribution shall be used for the purpose of funding affordable housing programs in Albemarle County. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within ten (10) years after the last payment of the contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use serving Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 4. Trees: At least one hundred-seventy (170) trees shall be planted or retained on the subdivided lots. Trees shall be distributed among all lots with a minimum of 5 trees per lot. The five trees to be counted on each lot shall be marked in the field for inspection purposes. The owner shall not request a certificate of occupancy until a final zoning inspection is performed and all required trees are in place. Standard for trees to be retained: Deciduous trees to be retained shall be at least a 1 1/2 inch caliper d.b.h. and non-deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. All trees to be retained shall be identified on erosion and sediment control plans, final grading plans, and road plans. A tree conservation plan in accordance with Section 32.7.9.4. of the Zoning Ordinance shall be submitted and approved prior to approval of any erosion and sediment control permit for grading. Standards for trees to be planted: All trees shall be planted in accordance with either the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nurserymen's Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, or the road and bridge specifications of the Virginia Department of Transportation.. At planting, deciduous trees shall be at least a 1 1/2 inches in caliper d.b.h.; non- 6 deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. 5. Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian paths shown on the Plan shall be constructed according to the standards for Class A Type I pedestrian paths in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. The Owner shall not request that the County issue the ninth (9th) building permit until the paths have been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 6. Cash proffer: The Owner shall contribute $17,500 cash to the County for each unit constructed within the Property for the purpose of mitigating impacts from the development. Each cash contribution shall be used for improvements for schools, libraries, public safety, parks and transportation as identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contribution shall be paid in increments of $17,500 for each unit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for each unit. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within five (5) years after the date, all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use serving Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 7. Annual Adiustment of Cash Proffers: Beginning January 1, 2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index (the "MSI"). In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 8. Final Approval: The Owner shall not submit an application for an erosion and sediment control permit for grading until improvements have been completed for phases 1, 2, 3, and 4A and 4B of the Fontana Subdivision and all bonds held by the County in conjunction with subdivision, stormwater management, and erosion control for prior phases have been released by the County. 9. Architectural Standards: The Owner shall require as part of the covenants for Fontana Phase 4C that all structures be constructed using medium shaded earth-tone colors for fayade treatment of the buildings and dark, non-reflective materials for roofs. The colors for the fayade treatments and the colors and materials for the roofs shall be subject to prior approval by the Director of Planning. 10. Plan for Pedestrian Paths for Phases 1 2,3. 4A and 4B of Fontana Subdivision: The Owner shall construct pedestrian paths in accordance with the plan entitled "Fontana Pedestrian Path Plan," prepared by Glenn Brooks 2-25-08, pages 1, 2 and 3. These paths shall be completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to grading in Phase 4C. (Siqned) A. M. Nichols Signature of Owner A. M. Nichols, Trustee Fontana Land Trust 3/13/08 Date 7 Attachment 4 Original Proffer 1 Amendment PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: 03-18-2008 ZMA: #06-014 Tax Map and Parcel Number: 60F-3 1.051 Acres to be rezoned from C-I to NMD I Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, 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 it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. The Owner shall install a permanent 5-bike bicycle rack as shown on the revised plan entitled, "General Development Plan page 2 of 4", dated 1-19-07 and last revised 2-25-08, hereinafter referred to as the "Plan". Installation of the bicycle rack shall be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property. 2. The Owner shall construct one bus shelter as shown on the Plan with the dimensions as follows: nine foot (9') - wide shelter with six foot (6') all metal bench with back. Construction of the bus shelter shall be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property. If VDOT and the County transportation planner do not determine the location of the bus shelter prior to final site plan approval, then upon the subsequent determination of the shelter location by VDOT and the County transportation planner, and upon written request by the County, the Owner shall construct the shelter and metal bench in the selected location at its sole expense, but not to exceed seven thousand eight hundred dollars ($7,800). The Owner shall complete construction of the shelter and bench within 90 days after the date of the written request by the County. 3. Each building to be constructed on the property shall be rated a minimum of "Certified" (or demonstrated to the County's Director of Community Development's satisfaction to be eligible to receive such certification) under the LEED-NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations, Version 2.2 (October 2005) or the LEED Green Building Rating System for Core & Shell Development, Version 2.0 (July 2006), as applicable (collectively, the "LEED Compliant Commercial Space"). Prior to issuance of the building permit for any proposed LEED compliant space, the Owner shall provide to the County Director of Community Development a certification from a LEED certified architect that such space, if constructed in accordance with the building plans, is designed to achieve the minimum "Certified" rating under LEED provided in this Proffer 3. Before the Owner requests a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a LEED certified architect rendered such a certificate, the Owner shall submit to the County's Director of Community Development a written statement from the architect that the building was built to the plans on which the opinion was based. For each buildina containina LEED compliant space. the Owner shall provide a copy of the LEED certification to the County's Director of Community Development within one (1) year after the date the certificate of occupancy was issued for that building. 4. The preliminary and final site plan shall delineate the Conservation and Preservation Areas on the property. The Owner shall replace trees that must be removed in Conservation Areas. Replacement shall be two (2) trees of similar species or quality for each removed or destroyed tree. All tree replacement shall be in accord with the final landscape plan for the final site plan for the Property. The Owner's obligation to replace trees within the Conservation Areas shall be completed within the following planting season. The trees to be replaced must be in excess of 12" dbh and shall be replaced with trees of the same or a similar species or quality of not less than 8 2.5" dbh, as determined by the County's Director of Community Development. CKW2 LLC (Siqned) Chris Kabbach By: Chris Kabbash Its Member 03/18/2008 9 Attachment 5 Waivers - ZMA-2006-014. Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads 1. Waiver of Section 8.4 of the Zoning Ordinance allowing this Planned Development in the Rural Areas (permitted by Section 8.2); 2. Reduction of the rear setback adjacent to RA from 50' to 47.5'; 3. Critical slopes waiver; 4. Waiver of Section 20A.8 to allow one use rather than a mixture of uses and housing types; and 5. Waiver of Section 20A.9.b to allow reduction of amenities from the required 20% to 11% of the site. 10 . "''''__I-___.&. ~ Attachment 6 SP-2007 -27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment 1. There shall be no day care or private school on site without a separate special use permit; 2. Approval from the Health Department for the septic system and well shall be required prior to approval of an issuance of a building permit; 3. Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the one hundred (1 OO)-year flood plain; 4. Expansion of the mausoleum structure shall require amendment to this special use permit. Tombs inside may be added; 5. Any future expansion of the church structures and/or size of assembly area shall require amendment of this special use permit; 6. Special Use Permit SP-2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church shall be developed in general accord with the concept application plan, provided by the applicant and received December 21, 2007 (Attachment A). However, the Zoning Administrator may approve revisions to the concept application plan to allow compliance with the Zoning Ordinance; 7. Construction of the new building and columbarium, as identified on the concept site plan (Attachment A) shall commence on or before March 19, 2018, or this special use permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall be thereupon terminate; 8. Tree protection measures shall be required on the erosion and sediment control plan in accordance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and the tree protection measures shall be installed prior to any land disturbing activity; 9. The parking lot shall be paved using prime and double seal surface or, at the option of the permittee, another surface material approved by the County Engineer deemed equivalent or better than a prime and double seal surface in regard to strength, durability, sustainability and long-term maintenance; and 10. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. A lighting plan reasonably limiting the amount of adverse outdoor light pollution shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval as a condition of site plan approval. 11 Attachment 7 Original Proffer X PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: February 19. 2008 ZMA # 2007-00011 Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 3.521 Acres to be rezoned from R-1 to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-00011 known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"). 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 it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan. In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of $19,100. For example, if 15% equates to 1.8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide I Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of $15, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable Units minus 1.8 Affordable Units required equaling a 0.2 affordable overage) to Albemarle County, to meet the County's Affordable Housing Policy. A. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the 15% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below. The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the Property. The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400.00) or sixty- five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first- time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to 12 reduce the out-of- pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein. All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph for the 15% required affordable housing shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing. For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. i. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee. The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units. The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. ii. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for- rent Affordable Unit when the Unites) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office. In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph 1A(ii)(1) shall apply for a period often (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). 2. Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph 1A. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph 1A(ii). At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph IA(ii) have been satisfied. 3. Reportina of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing 13 Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. B. County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then-current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale. 2. CASH PROFFER A. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e., schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contributions shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: i. Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit ii. Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. iii. Zero Dollars ($0.00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit B. Beginning January 1, 2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer Number 2 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/k/a Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 14 3. Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types. There shall be no more than 10 dwelling units within the development. Of the 10 dwelling units permitted there shall be no more than two single- family attached units. 4. The property shall be developed in general accord with the "Concept Plan" dated February 19, 2008 attached hereto. By: (SiQned) Emile Bethanne Patterson) Emile Bethanne Patterson (Owner) Date: 3/18/08 15 Memorandum TO: FROM: Members, Board of SUP~is(rs Ella W. Jordan, CMC, ~~ March 13, 2008 DATE: SUBJECT: Reading List for March 19, 2008 August 1 , 2007 Ms. Thomas August 8, 2007 Mr. Boyd NOTE: Please remember to pull your minutes at the meeting, if they are not read. Thanks. /ewj COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund Annual Report AGENDA DATE: March 19, 2008 ACTION: INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Review and acceptance of Annual Report CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: X STAFF CONTACTCS): Messrs. Tucker, Davis, Elliott, and White ATTACHMENTS: No LEGAL REVIEW: Yes REVIEWED BY: -"" BACKGROUND: The Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund was established in 1994 by an agreement between the County of Albemarle, the Charlottesville Housing Foundation (CHF), and the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP). The purpose of the Trust Fund is to hold notes and deeds of trust on houses in Crozet Crossings and to collect and distribute funds upon the resale of the houses. The Trust Fund must meet the requirements set forth by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development under the provisions of the Community Development Block Grant Program. One of the requirements is that the collected funds must be used for housing projects that benefit low- and moderate-income households The Fund is managed by five trustees (two representing the County, two representing CHF and one representing AHIP) and is staffed by the County's Chief of Housing. The Trustees are required to submit an annual report of the Trust Fund finances and activities to the Board. STRATEGIC PLAN: Objective 1.2: By June 30, 2010, working in partnership with others, increase affordable housing opportunities for those who work and/or live in Albemarle County. DISCUSSION: The Trustees of the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund met on January 30, 2008 to review the financial status of the fund and review/approve funding requests submitted by two nonprofit applicants. The Fund is in good financial condition with cash on hand in the amount of $399,850.64 as of December 31,2007. In addition, the Fund has potential receivables representing eleven (11) loans totaling $234,420 in original subsidy amounts and the potential to recapture through shared appreciation $254,193 based on assessed values. The amount of shared appreciation is based on sales price or assessed value at the time that actions trigger repayment (sale or refinancing). There is one loan in bankruptcy that is not included in these amounts. Last year the Trustees approved, and the Board appropriated, $60,000 to Habitat for Humanity to assist in constructing two houses for households with disabled residents who were living in substandard conditions. These projects are underway. Two new applications were received in January 2008 requesting a total of $400,000 of funding. AHIP submitted an application for its proposed Treesdale Park development that will provide ninety (90) units of affordable rental housing. Jordan Development Corporation, with Piedmont Housing Alliance, requested funding for the rehabilitation of twenty-eight existing rental units for seniors and the construction of thirty-eight new rental units for seniors at Crozet Meadows. The Trustees approved $252,000 for Treesdale and $134,400 for Crozet Meadows. Once these projects receive other financial commitments and are ready to begin construction, the Trustees will request the Board to appropriate the approved funding. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no general fund budget impact, as these funds come from a restricted account required to fund housing projects. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff, on behalf of the Trustees, recommends that the Board review and accept this report on the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund. COUNTY OF ALBEMA.RLE ~.'"' Department of Community Development 401 Mclntire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 February 29, 2008 David Collins John McNair and Associates 109 S. Wayne Avenue Waynesboro, VA 22980 Fax (434) 972-4126 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS-- Tax Map 118, Parcel 17 (Property of Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas Calhoun, Dayid Calhoun, Andrew Calhoun, Jonathan Calhoun, Henry W. Calhoun et al) and Tax Map 118, Parcel18A (Property of Mitchell O. Carr, Trustee) Scottsville Magisterial District Dear Mr. Collins: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 118, Parcel 17 is comprised of three separate parcels. Each of these parcels has five (5) theoretical development rights. It is also my official determination that Tax Map 118, Parcel18A is comprised of four separate parcels. Each of these parcels has five (5) theoretical development rights. These seven parcels are further identified on this matrix. The basis for this determination follows. Key # TMP Parcel 1 T. M. 118-17 2 3 4 5 6 7 Lot NO.5 Lot NO.2 Lot No. 1 Lot No. 5 Lot NO.4 Lot No. 3 Plat Acreage Dev. Ri hts 0.8.94, 107.75 5 0.8.72, 40.75 5 0.8.72, 40.5 5 0.8.72, .131 39.25 5 0.8. 123, .60 33 5 0.8. 123, .60 25 5 0.8. 123, .60 25 5 Our records indicate Tax Map 118, Parcel 17 contains 263.25 acres and 3 dwellings. The property is not Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent recorded instrument for this property is recorded in Deed 800k 1450, page 248. (107.75 + 40.75 [Lot 5] + 40.5 [Lot 2] = 188.75) (188.75 + 36.75 [Lot 3 T.M. 118- 24] + 37.5 [Lot 4 T.M. 118-18C] = 263.25) This parcel actually contains approximately 188.75 acres. The 263.25 figure includes T.M.118- 18C & 24. The County's records will be corrected. I :\DEPT\Community DevelopmentlZoning & Current Development Division\Detenninations of Parcel\2007\ 118-17 Calhoun LOD-2007-31.doc David Collins February 29, 2008 Page 2 Our records indicate Tax Map 118, Parcel18A contains 150.180 acres and no dwellings. The property is not Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent recorded instrument for this property is recorded in Deed Book 3241, page 129. The four original tracts that comprise this parcel are calculated to contain a total of 122.25 acres. (39.25 + 33 + 25 + 25 = 122.25) The discrepancy of 27.93 acres is not explained. This analysis begins with the deed of record in Deed Book 72, page 131 that is dated March 20, 1877. The deed contains a plat showing 6 parcels described and identified as as follows: Lot NO.1 contains 39.25 acres. It is a portion of TM. 118-18A. This established Lot No.1 as a parcel of record. [Key # 4] Lot NO.2 contains 40.5 acres. It is a portion of the part ofTM. 118-17 that is located to the southeast of Parcel 18A. This established Lot No.2 as a parcel of record. [Key # 3] Lot NO.3 contains contains 36.75 acres. It is designated as T.M.118-24. It is not part of this determination. Lot NO.4 contains 37.5 acres. It is designated as T.M. 118-18C. It is not part of this determination. Lot NO.5 contains 40.75 acres. It is a portion of the part of TM. 118-17 that is located southeast of T M. 118-18A. This established Lot No.5 as a parcel of record. [Key # 2] Lot No.6 contains 47.25 acres. It is designated as TM.118-18B. It is not part of this determination. Deed Book 94, page 245, dated August 29,1890, conveyed 107.75 acres from J. W. Martin and W. B. Martin to J. W. Bowen. The land is described by metes and bounds that are depicted on a sketch among the County's real estate records. The sketch, David Collins' preliminary sketch and an unrecorded plat by R. O. Snow and R. W. Ray dated April 23, 1984 all show a discrepancy with the current tax map. I find that the portion of T.M. 118-17 that is shown to be adjacent to TM. 118-27 is actually a part of Tax Map 110, Parcel 27. Mr. Collins has noted that the description in this deed does not close which accounts for the two lines on the western side of the county sketch and Area "A2" on the Collins sketch plat. This is not surprising considering the date of the deed and the mountainous terrain of the property. This deed established the 107.75 acre tract, a portion of T .M. 118-17 as a parcel of record. Its exact boundary must be determined by a modern survey. [Key # 1] Deed Book 123, page 60, contains a plat Titled Tract NO.2 Albemarle Orchard Co. on Appleberry Mountain that was recorded on May 15, 1908. The plat shows 5 tracts. 1:IDEPT\Community DevelopmentlZoning & Current Development DivisionlDeterminations of Parcel\20071118-17 Calhoun LOD-2007-31.doc David Collins February 29,2008 Page 3 Tracts 1 thru 4 each contain 25 acres. Tract 5 contains 33 acres. Tracts 3, 4 and 5 are currently shown as part of Tax Map 118, Parcel 18A. This deed established tracts 3, 4 & 5, which are portions of T.M. 118-18A, as parcels of record. [Key #s 5, 6 & 7] Deed Book 213, page 308, dated June 10,1931, conveyed two tracts from Anna Powell, John L. Powell and Virgie M. Powell to P. M. Jones Sarah H. Jones and W. R. Moore. The first is described as containing 107.75 acres and the second containing 70 acres. Both of these parcels are described by reference to Deed Book 170, page 342. The deed also conveyed two tracts from John L. Powell and Virgie M. Powell to P. M. Jones, Sarah H. Jones and W. R. Moore. The first contains 40.5 acres and is described by reference to Deed Book 170, page 152 and the second containing 48 acres and described by reference to Deed Book 72, page 131. This has no effect on development rights of the 107 .5-acre parcel. Deed Book 231, page 5, dated July 12,1935, conveyed two parcels from H. W. Walsh and Lyttleton Waddell, Trustees to P. M. Jones. The parcels are described as 107.74 acres and 70 acres, respectively, and further described by reference to Deed Book 213, page 308. This has no effect on development rights of the 107.5-acre parcel. Deed Book 427, page 224, dated October 18,1966, conveyed 5 parcels from P. M. Jones and Sarah H. Jones to Henry W. Calhoun and Katherine J. Calhoun. The parcels ae described in part as follows: Parcels Nos. 1 and 2: (a) That certain tract on Appleberry Mountain containing 107-3/4 acres; and This had no effect on development rights of the parcel. (b) That certain tract adjoining the tract above described containing 70 acres. These are further described as being the same property conveyed to the grantors by the deeds of record in Deed Book 213, page 308 and Deed Book 231, page 5. Parcel Nos. 3 and 4: (a) That certain parcel containing 40-1/2 acres, more or less; and On the basis of this deed, this parcel, a portion ofT.M.118-17 and designated as Lot 2 is determined to be a parcel of record with five development rights. [Key #3] (b) That certain parcel containing 48 acres. There is no parcel containing 48 acres on the survey recorded in Deed Book 72, page 131. It is assumed this is Lot No.5 that contains 40.75 acres. On the basis of this deed, this parcel, a portion of T .M. 118-17 and designated as Lot 5 is determined to be a parcel of record with five 1:\DEPT\Community Development\Zoning & Current Development Division\Determinations of Parcel\200?\118-1? Calhoun LOD-200? -31.doc David Collins February 29,2008 Page 4 development rights. The sketch showing this property in the real estate records identify Parcels 2 and 5 as belonging to P. M. Jones. [Key # 2] These are further described as being shown on the plat of record in Deed Book 72, page 131. Lot NO.5: The parcel is described as being that certain tract situated on the upper branches of Green's Creek, being Lot NO.3 on the subdivision of record in Deed Book 72, page 131. Lot 3 is designated as T.M. 118-24. It is not part of this determination. The most recent deed for the below parcels, recorded prior to the date of the adoption of this ordinance, December 10, 1980, is Deed Book 589 page 359, that is dated July 11, 1975. This deed conveyed three parcels from Martha B. Churn, Robert Gordon Churn, Grace Douglas Sprunt, Charles Worth Sprunt, Lucretia Woods Wyckoff, J. Barnard Wyckoff, Margaret Woods Gillette, Anne Woods Guzzardi, Walter Peter Guzzadri, William S. D. Woods, Jr, Lisbeth Male Woods, Montgomery Bird Woods, Theodore K. Woods, Dorothy S. Woods, Anna Burwell Woods, Page Bird Woods, First and Merchants National Bank, Julia Grayson Woods to Maria C. Woods, Lucretia D. Woods, and Anne E. Woods. The land is described as follows: First - Two tracts of land shown on the tax maps as 119-1 and the north east portion of 118-21. This being 108 acres being the same land as shown in Deed Book 123, page 60 except for lot number 2. On the basis of this deed, Lot 3, containing 25 acres, Lot 4 containing 25 acres and Lot 5 containing 33 acres are parcels of record that each contain five (5) development rights. These parcels are a portion ofT.M. 118- 18A. [Key #s 5, 6 & 7] Second - Three tracts designated as Parcels containing 139 acres being lots 1, 4 and 6 as shown in Deed Book 72, page 131 plus some additional 10 acres more or less adjoining lot 4 (The acreage of the 3 lots from Deed Book 72, page 131 is 124 acres, plus 10 acres equals 134 acres.) Lots 4 and 6 are not part of this determination. On the basis of this deed Lot 1, the 39.25 portion of T.M. 118-18A is a parcel of record with five (5) development rights. [Key # 4] Third - 25 acres shown as Tax Map 89, Parcel 17 near Arrowhead Station. This parcel is not part of this determination. Deed Book 1280, page 428, dated December 22, 1992, conveyed 20% interests in five parcels from Henry W. Calhoun & Katherine J. Calhoun to Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas A. Calhoun, David A. Calhoun, Andrew R. Calhoun and Jonathan C. Calhoun as tenants in common. The property is described as being the same property conveyed to the grantors by the deed dated October 18, 1966, Deed Book 427, page 224. This transaction had no effect on development rights. 1:\DEPT\Communily Development\Zoning & Current Development Division\Delerminations of Parcel\2007\118-17 Calhoun LOD-2007-31.doc David Collins February 29, 2008 Page 5 Deed Book 1283, page 437, dated January 4,1993, conveyed 20% interests in five parcels from Henry W. Calhoun & Katherine J. Calhoun to Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas A. Calhoun, David A. Calhoun, Andrew R. Calhoun and Jonathan C. Calhoun as tenants in common. The property is described as being the same property conveyed to the grantors by the deed dated October 18, 1966, Deed Book 427, page 224. This transaction had no effect on developme~t rights. Deed Book 1448, page 412, dated December 16, 1994, conveyed 20% interests in five parcels from Henry W. Calhoun & Katherine J. Calhoun to Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas A. Calhoun, David A. Calhoun, Andrew R. Calhoun and Jonathan C. Calhoun as tenants in common. The property is described as being the same property conveyed to the grantors by the deed dated October 18, 1966, Deed Book 427, page 224. This transaction had no effect on development rights. Deed Book 1450, page 248, dated January 2, 1995, conveyed 20% interests in five parcels from Henry W. Calhoun & Katherine J. Calhoun to Philip H. Calhoun, Thomas A. Calhoun, David A. Calhoun, Andrew R. Calhoun and Jonathan C. Calhoun as tenants in common. The property is described as being the same property conveyed to the grantors by the deed dated October 18, 1966, Deed Book 427, page 224. This transaction had no effect on development rights. Deed Book 3241 page 129, dated June 29th, 2006, conveyed three parcels from Arrowhead Corporation of Virginia to Mitchell O. Carr. One of the parcels, containing 123.7 acres is described as Tax Map 118, Parcel 18A. This deed had no effect on the parcels comprising T.M. 118-18A or their development rights. The parcels are entitled to the noted development rights if all other applicable regulations can be met. These development rights may only be utilized within the bounds of the original parcel with which they are associated. These development rights are theoretical in nature but do represent the maximum number of lots containing less than twenty one acres allowed to be created by right. In addition to the development right lots, the parcel may create as many smaller parcels containing a minimum of twenty-one acres as it has land to make. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $120. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. I :\DEPT\Community DevelopmentlZoning & Current Development Division\Determinations of Parcel\2007\ 118-17 Calhoun LOD-2007-31.doc David Collins February 29,2008 Page 6 Sincerely, John Shepherd Manager of Zoning Administration Copy: Gay Carver, Real Estate Supervisor Ella Jordan, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Philip H. Calhoun etal 4195 Innesbrook Road Glen Allen, VA 23060 Mitchell O. Carr, Trustee 567 North Charlotte Ave. Waynesboro, VA 22980 Enclosed: Tax Map 109, 110, 118 & 119 (Portions) Parcel Key John McNair & Associates Preliminary Sketch Deed Book 71, page 72 plat Deed Book 123, page 60 Sketch from County Real Estate Records I :\DEPT\Community Development\Zoning & Current Development Division\Determinations of Parcel\2007\ 118-17 Calhoun LOD-2007 -31.doc E 7 ... ... 00 \ o. '---------1 /--1 ~ ~;,,---- ... l """" ~ / ~ ( '. v\ /!~ / . ,,/ / ,..0 ) / / 10 . ..:./ ... o \0 I ... II J I I ! L ~ " ... ... 00 I to.) .... o \D I 01 o .... o \D I 01 .... I::: o I t>J '-J ~ w =)- Gl =', l ~ ~ 'u ~i{ . 0 ~ ~ ,,~ ~? 0 ro [] Zi ~it , , [ ~ " .. , ~ f g ~ j ~ i s .[ ~ " Q '" - .. - .. I-' I-' ...... Cf.I 1-' , e,) ~J , \.... ~ 1-" 0) '" () '''... ::: ... i):l I , - ..... ) -.....J - --...J , ,. / / I / I I .'- ~""',I ,~. ::', I J '. 1 i .~ II ,~:", i \ _l '------- ~ ----------. ./ [-- 1 0": C1 ) ~./"~,r'- ,.... ----" 'v....i I-' f-" e,) / , t,..) // o )/ '-' ()j I I-' 0, 0- ....J OQ I ....J \11 -J P ('> it ~ I-' o \.D , 0, I-' I-' I-" o I ',J "'-I I-" I-" '->, un (J) " -J- ...... I-' (. ~ . / ~ / / ~ '\/ l m / /-"~~~ I I-' ~...~ I-' \D I 01 " { I-" I.... t-' t-' en / ' :;; 1/,' "'--, ..:. 11 "'--: ///~ ~j//'/// i / . // ,~ I ,,/ r- . :;; '".... / i ::: L /:;; a /' ,~ / lAJ I ...,j '-" I LI: ;0 I I I L_i [' _I G ~ 2 -" .5) ~ ;; i: " ~. " 1 U' (J :-J ... " r', CJ ,() n ~. :1 ~ ;'; Iv I f_; ~ f_' ~ tL 0: (L l~. C. ::J :0 .v ~ ~ CD n o " ~. " ;,.- ~ ~ t:~II~ II , ~. 'l.'J i. CJ i'l; 0- - ' =r :J 0' V .. C' =~ fTI - ~1 1 tV:-l ~ ~ (~ L I....., I r~> -. ;" ~, 01 rls o n ~ Z c ~ ~ ~. ~~ rn:J :J CL ~)> n, V\ n> V\ ~ 0 VI C!, ~ ..... ro V\ N ... o 0. ..~..~~.. . '.... .- .. /. ..,... 41 .. o' f:.- .--- . ~t.' ("r _'. . . .. VI .. · r.. : 0- ~~:'.: ': ~ ~;f" if., :- . " " ...~~ O~--l cDSo;~ ;:j~o;-U Ll 0 " - I - at ::- I ~ r " -'- Ii, - ). ,. ,. IT, r: ::r J' t. (J) ). ~, I' II ,- m ::r I' J' " -I II [J ( ", J' ~. rTl m .I' !.: ). ~ " "I' If, I - IT> I, , ro ~ IT"' ", :r~ - :.Ai :;. ;::< rr' ,,, I" ~ :":1 -< -< 'ii ;C' -rJ -=1 -< 9 ~J IT' - ~ C n -I U fli -j ., :=' (I (, C " ). .. iT< ~ 0; [[) -< ~) T' w c ", 1I1 7' CI - W CJ ( <X. C lj C " ~ :;c !] ~ ~ ;0 ~' (f) .I' m -'- 0 -< m c; m " m 0 0 0' " 0 OJ " "I, , m u. m " ;u I m I' I' -< -'- -I J) :() "tJ u' ~ -< -j )- -< , I " 0~ ' [I 0 (I r -< ~~ I 'C g " -< C> 0 \ '/~ .,. lj [JJ " ::! () \0' ;0 ~ [I m ;;! .I' 1',' ''/_ ::J 1i ::u \'" '\, m '[] [JJ ~ :1- 'U ~I 0 ~ ..J I 0 \ [JJ 'v U (') c' -< -< '{' -'0 ~ III '!' 10> :n '() 0 .J c: '" (JJ I W -< '" -< r m 0 m 'U ..., _J n, ..., ). 0 c- O rom:g~ ~~;E~ .w t;. r "'U:: 00 Ic;o ~-o ()~ '0 ~ F:- ,,,x> :r w 9 Z ~o~~i -J-l.....c::"O r',H." t;; \J :; "U Ona: ""OP':"- (...) ~I-...J ~2 'n-,:)).()~;:< - ;{/ ~O[Dr"=_ ...... [II-i..... ~c~ r:; / ~N~ ~"Ui? ~.;?,S ~ ~ .~ ~ /f.;;'- CD -1 /'"' \J ;:0 m r :s: z )> ;:0 -< rt I~\~~~ tjt~~ ~/lJ?u ~ r+-.10; ~.~ ), , ::u c 1/ ':: m m co n...,o )>O)>CVl b;::jxz^ rT1V1S:Om S:~)>)>-l :t>r";::on OAJr~-"Z"TI n rn DC/:t> ~ ~ C Vi:A1 m-o ... ~ ;:;:1 ~ )>0;::00 ,,, N -< :A1 r ~ 2,-<~r~CO-o '.D ,. ;;0 0 00 L-J Vl C/-:t>-'m z~""~O ~AJ~rn n--...JZ ..., -1 '\ \ \ '"',"--. "U \ ) \ l [ ::: U' 'v ". ""---, " \~ '\, \, "'':.''''!' \\ .'---. - '11 ~ \ ,r_hl \ i-r:".A, ~o; , .--- ~-~--------- -------- \ \ \ \ \ \ OQ~::J (DOJ~t ;;~~:: WO~o; "U-U~~ ::~~ :20;;0 :P :: -i ), - (J> () ~ 9 z "', )> ""', ~~ ~ ~~ ~~ c:r:-=::+ rou:rr,~ ~o~~ t' ~ g ~ ~ ~ /, t: -m ~Vl -..... ~, / [10::: :::j ~ ~~ ~ =u 2~ i: :r :: . ~ () 0 ,J .C ,r. ,:..' o::;i;--J 0,/" , / I I I I }J ,. ., .., ;U C ~ m OJ '-----, J ~---. "~I . I I , ! -.::: n (f) -j m / 7 ~= --1~ Vl :- s: )> " \ \ \ \ \ I ~~ ( . .i I \ / I ,I / / ( ! J / ,/ / I ! \ , \r' "'~ ., \ / / 1/;''' , , ! 111u 11, I J ,,~.! 'I ' ! '/ ! ~ I. ,,' 1/" D B 72/~31 / .~/ .j 1/ ,., \0' ," r i1{'1\ " . \ /. .\ F V;' < \ ,\\ () "'t,,, I ~ ' I (I (LIJ ~ .I ',. 1...-, '~;, r \11 \,' e " ~ ' \~-.::.. ! ~/...(l.- (J r,r " j r' ...~) "'"'~:-C~ -It......' ,./1,,,,, i\\ " ".., .", , c .', <.:"- II ~Ll' l. l/{)/7. ".> tliF1\",:,. .~\- d ~/r"\", , ()101) '1' ' I r l' 1\. J~'J/!J t'L I lJ.....\ ,,() I'I . /1 o ,<~'~ IS" l Q'~l \~' 0--;(.( if 1\ "'" f ? ~~,' r! lY . l -r;: t I , f' ;0;,~ '''', !;";r./{.,,,~~t;,,,,? ... ';;"0/;"'1./ /,~"j~'l('.~.J tZ.-../t. ~.' /!..J (!,,,, ('f r/. //:4",,,, "jt/ ~ / ,r.'~L"V' ..... IL' L.lu.- !. a./J:EoTmt !. '0 L/~w ;I ./' .I" p' , ) ., n ( /) / U "" ........<-..,,-....... ~tDo<..oI!.t(J...~ _~~"z-t.4t. ~(II"(. 1-'" el~~"J ':""",,7' ..... ...~. ;;"".,(",/ /" /~ c.ntt 'l/,(.' (., ("Iv.-, I/~ J~...'~ ,"-'I~L-<~'-<"-' r_<<. <'2t7--' .,-i.~_/'. ,P{,:~,."L.. Q,'{r,61/{ ,1;"(,(,,,11:,, , /1.,,/,," v;. '//'<<~Ieq', ...! ),,'w ,/J~il.:, ~..~"--: "((~'l .h~""'J );:....I,'v ~ /4 fI.......1 ,,/ ;..,,,,,., //~ I.~./ /.'~ I~..... ~-<<?, _"",- ,_ (.I j Q ), u i.f 'j'J ,/L a. -j/ "( \,., " ,/ ;; t../ c../~ t ~ 'u ~C / ' ~,,; tZtj ~b,//. 'I rF t. ('\, ClUJ I hI C-l L~/ ,);~ {if 1{ Ctj {/:'.4.<,,'t-'~ ".' .~:... -', " //./""-7 ,I ILl' (, " - ~- ....., ,,';:;,-uLLI' t'~f.J""'" /..~ n w':-/ -"L' .- ,(0 "'1. ,I) i' ... u" f \ I' ~ ,I ql~ .Iii j., it;: 0, <"r. ',- -[et-/ {'; I,t('" {. " (\.:1 /",(r_-H''') J:"/I/,"II.. :/:/I"o} ("La, J ,,,, (-, 1.1 21 0 2 )/tf(/(~.' Y,!:7;o j LI /701,0 {Z;" t",,,, ".J C.'I...", '/ .L I j "... ",0 < /.. ....1: '"of ("/ Jl.-t'.~ / jl.~ ( f. '. ;:{}, . V <I.IJ J./ / /</'(, . v. '" I~, I /L...I. .r1L4/ &.-t........~..... G~.....IC'''''''J''''/ ;<,Y-/I; ;, n'/ ,,, LI Jr,,{ ~~,j~... '"f -0tiLi I /{/ /;0 / Jfl)~ fltw (1P4 "I'", If...' J;utdr<d-l.) I /'/0;""",,/ n/ a I'},,,,,/ It,;;:,< C'A/( a. (i~,,~..!. t/.~ (.'JdL 1:""'"'1 , /) I r;; ,//,;; Hi-, I,~ I." ,I" /u. .. (.'.." '" /. ~~.... 'I/'" d/~';' Z..d'...& /,C",,) 7'lL' / . .: , I ,5/, tJ .,. /; J' jr- /;J (., ,. r;/'J" ,,/ (3" /{ I ,.. " ,,,~,' (;, "I.. l t. "" ,~~, ,)'''1 <e UA.I!.. (._/t;-t'-"':Jj' ._. J ;J.~,.'.-~.~' , _ ~ ~/u..,_) 1/,,,,,, :")6./ I,' 17:J 1,,',0 L. n JJ.;.('~ .>< 0ULI<' 12.Ii.,. ~ r;,.....,. I. IJ , Y'" L. I ' /,..i I:,,,,,, ",I,~ ,I "e" r.',..~ <1<......' ,fc", f!:uk 2 I' I..G- l ~~ t'/'~~".J OnA'(.~ A'''''t-~ _ / '(";:, ,-.:0 2 I;;t",~. l..j.J} f" F';f ).?t'-LJ (", fl..c-' hr'.........~::;. O~ .'... /,. (.. -/ L.,,-, '7../,,,.,i..- I /!". j 1'.'7' 7:7~ (,..9 {o'....I,,,,,;;;- I,.", ('q_~ " /" 13-;...."...;/.., (', , , ". /., /e I , ,.: ( )' I,.'/, , t,t', ",.,..~ . I,. ,0: . ',-/- // .' J_,- J\,)~, 74(. -,.),(;, /, j:,...,,,, (.~6dd (:''') IL...., 5.?:!/- /7' P4J . //, f? ./.- , I, I' H-" ", (, ~~.-"'" //'''../1-7' ",/.. /,{; f?.._k ! t" /' /.7/"",':7' ~~u. &-1: c. J L So... J I ,/ ( l ( e (J t:( /;tl' ( f ~ ( /~!e.",:,._,,.., ",./,.,. (, .1:/ ')1' (II~'I II'ft! t"lrl/{,t:Jft,/ /J~, ,,/ /J 7", // _~, / 7' t/... .. /r" ,'.' ,;,1.", L.' . , I,". 1(", ('~ , , It ~'lfI /,, /f (".1 I. (,/1. " ({, (, //."../ ('I.. "" " ,( /.' /" ..-:..,' N:'("tfHt~ ..,.(. UA'I'L'~ ;;J ') j. it. ~ i'r1 0 L..... or /u.- L4.3 I ,,-,,,,, 01-1(,....,-.::..) /dl,7L .JI)", J)){ 40 JI.:. / J I ..' .J ' ./; (J ft (( 'eM ( ;'"Ll.. I.V', 72- 1]1 /' . -.~~ ...." a,....,' (l7t:._o_A!,):~f:- i , .' ,,1 ' " c. qw I , I I , ~, , l (. \ u.. (~ r:; v ,I r '!'rn~' ,/ .~, . ,i .";:.-",.....-./ ;' ~/'''\j ,L-v.',..U~;~ .J. ~".......j.,......~ / " ' ~ 1 ~ t' ~' \ \ I! l, I , ~ \. I, I !:./"I!; G'rV( 'v ?",j //."1' ':.. '. I: \) II -\ ~,I' "\'") \.' \ ! 1< .;, .. JS I. " ~ (.. l> .- ~ ~ >.).~ (, ..1, -' r ,'-0 ,~ ; t'l' - " " ,.,,"" r ) r-, /. ") , {l. " :> D ) I' 'J ' ~ I, 'IS ,\J " ~ 'L)' 'l~ II' 1/ ~: I( A I'v I 'i'\.~:'" ".,:"". ~-.! l , ..', , I' }J , (,' , 7 lr' ~ / ') _T/j'.'\CT N!:'. iJ. II /~ )11 i'vl ~ 1\ L. F: / 0 T( CI / /1'f\ ~LJ CO, Oli 'I: ,h ! I. ! C. 11 r_'J' r 1/ /n. c. u. I"l,); (J I -- \1/1 ,j'{I'-{h Jr,' -,,' c' ~ ~,~ f "( .\,' 1 (~I' I 'j ~. '-." J 'Y\ / .' .i ~~ I , \, " I-l ') ',. V' / ,f ( I ' P' '-,- '-, "- )1 \ ,. " "-, " \ I 'vI) - -:::- C> / " " ,:" "'""1 , I ~/""'/~'\,',,.i.... ", ,;.,1 I . ,,' I, I ( ,,'" , j :j"-;~~":c ~ /..-; ~'. 'I ;.tJ 1./ (l I ;' / .;>) ",' ~.' ' ? . . ...../ (:.....,jJ (-.~.< ...~. jr) , , \ ~\ \. 1-' ;,l(2', " 1 -r \ ~ /0 . 'I '~i \ \ 'l \\ (,," .'\ \ {(:; 'J J / i,. ~' ',,- " ~, 1 '4(" " , 1'1 IJ ''''''-, )' ,.' I \_) o"} '\ 'J, 'Ii ,;; ;(~;I,Q , Q " ' ~, l' ,v," J / j,}",i" /; ~x: <I' I . ;;>.~ .:;0' ~..,' (;'1__-<-.13-/,/0;::'- t Iv v' / (, ,';:' ?I,r- \.- 4 (vI' ,~_~~ tY ~!,l "-... ]( :l 1------:......-' I-~-^ ,/-',.'.:.- ,,( 11,1./~-I/ J (~/ ........ .', I" '. ,J. r 1 . ..-' 5" 7;,,, p" r..r '-.' :' ........ I ,n 5 IL Ij, I/J V 'i.. ~., .~._._,..,". ......;;. .:' ,:',~'::::..,".." .<>....::;;~~ ;,'3( ~0 I.!i 1fj;4t"" . )/cL,~(.;::;.....J- ;>-",-Jc. . 1\ ~ A "I: c.:) l " . ~ "S ,i. ~ 1 . rvV '1' I "'~ ,> /f '. ;I,.~/ . v \" S ,y X{ "1,(00 ,; ~l:.~:..--!,-,,--_f "'~ 2'; ,.~:~ /J J ( ,,-.i 0. C r; )I~~, ":",~'(Jr~~ \ 0 ,? ,~I,' ........ / ,','; )' . (c1..-,.."/~"..c"", ,." ! ~~........'........... .' ,/~"",,", "LJ~.. -1_ ..",C - i.' '\:L., ~ / ~ ?y I~' , '''~r. 0 CJ~ /1 " ~ "., :___ I, .J1~<';"'r"C CA:..,L"'J-C-~~/.' /_.,...Ir: - ~~., /.,:">---- :, . 1 '3 ~r ,..>. I'i- ':",. ,1-" . ~ '''<.::.(~ ~/9."u ~ r? .s I J J (/~"vJ - ;)'./.-: u /> . 11_ ('.v- ;t~ i~{r 1(;"'- I_<'.-L t '~'-(-' '~;l 0C./':' ?-(,..-c,J<:~":- V>.~ 't..;<. Iii ;;-n.,".'~- :/'.c ,_...:. ;<._,L;, r.L..,(-~' ..!l''':'~' ,,~.~I__L.4'- r_,_:;/;; c___I, "h'v; )S": 1'1 II ~~ - I '. ,,{..;.. /J..../ ,...., i---" cTJ> ",,~:... ....'.G .;,1,;' "".., .J". ju, ;~, ..,.. '" . II y..;tc' : t ,}. :~. ~ ,. ,.../'" , , " ' ..20'- ~J Q' ,.O-</...~-,~ ,/. 1.-L- " .'- , .' "r!1 '1 ;.) . Iv: ? ., /1 ir" ( ] { 10, 8> 0 I: t'l ! .1.1 '\ \ l23 - GO . ,.., ~ -" :3 co/e j- /'..... P ~ tMv' y' i- c 1... / - . 1'.h#<l~"" 0-- /Vw ,':' 5'7 ~, ~?,o ~ ,- 'If'- Ii t 47'3 '7?- ____~ r~/ 3>/ / (.-/',," __---r 0 f+~f. J ~ ....~')) .,.. r'~ ~ .,,-...'-.. :? '1~"r - r ~- I 11/;" ____ '7' ~ ;fo . 5'"~ _ " ~ Cc ' ?. 'P.-', ~1'1": ;f~' 1:/ .~! ./ ,. - ",. 1 . ?- J 'J r} rf J l.J~l -~ ,fi ~ " '~ .1'( CA.. I \s 'u"J ~ '1' vi {J 611 ~ <Y ....-....,--....-.. 'PCIT7'~ rJrr1-f;; ,!'f/ I C/cp j;; '" +- Fr,.I('-'- 11 _i~ '~ .. \. " ~~~.~ ~..~..~~-<~-~,~ """'o..'..-"._.,.:....,..~ .~ ~,.- " ~! , "-. I . w~ i2"~ /~.J. . ~ . r ""t.- .t U '" &.: .t... ~.J~ C . , . . -r.i~r-c.-- '1J1. I -j ,C1I1"'" ,....., 'r.' rra...' r.o"v....' .~ ''''''1>'- "'......', .( cc'/(-c. (;.,11 ;;;~r.::;; ,7~~-"- .. rl~ 2.~Iz;J:-Ja ::.~~"~' ..., _ r_~ ," . '---", /j.:,..\" . " " ~-' -,-,~~~~--- -" .",".. ,:;.~~:"~]:;;L'/;":,;~,,,::,::, .; . , _ ~ ,~: :~".,;};~'<~~~r:'1~~1~f~ ~~~{,l,,-!~~th""~.'~~~~~,,:~,~;,;:, 'f! '" .~;~;,.,:;r~:;:':{ ''','" .0t.~. ,.~.'~:, "~:.~< . , - ~'I . .,.,o+_...._.~~ .,.... . :";,;~.;t.~~~i.~ill;!~ ~ ,J~', .,;' ;';':":"~..;.'.' "", '::'.'.j',l{:j.:;~:';:c:i;,i....;::,;., " '~.':~':""i_':~~"::'~ . '-.,... :-"l~ ., j :: '. .)-" . ,-"..' ..'.~.__ I ':':: ~ .:: :- '~:~:-~"'~;.'~.~~~;-~:;:~~; ..:~~: ': :,;~. ": :;":':~',,"?T/-; ~~ ;}.::..:~ ,~~::",,: ;t;:.'~ " . ,:!.,:~.. '. '", .':'::~'~::~::~~}y:~:~r:.:~~~-~::::';:'."': -. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Phone (434) 296-5832 Fax (434) 972-4126 March 3, 2008 J. Alden English, Esquire c/o McGuireWoods LLP P. O. Box 1288 Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF PARCELS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS-- Tax Map 79, Parcel 10 (Property of Albemarle Edgehill Farm LLC) Rivanna Magisterial District Dear Mr. English: The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information for the above-noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination that Tax Map 79, Parcel 10 is three parcels of record with a total of eleven (11) theoretical development rights, as summarized in the table below. The basis for this determination follows the table. Our records indicate Tax Map 79, Parcel 1 0 contains 866. 167acres and four dwellings. The property is not within an Agricultural and Forestal District. The most recent recorded instrument for this property is recorded in Deed Book 3364, page 522. Tax Ma -Parcel, Tract # Tax Ma 79-10, Tract #1 Tax Ma 79-10, Tract #2 Tax Map 79-10, Tract #3 Acrea e 715.00 Acres 1 & 1/30 Acres 172.58 Acres 888.61 Acres Develo This analysis begins with the deed of record in Deed Book 185, page 85, dated November 30,1923, as amended by correction deed in Deed Book 186, page 455, dated March 29, 1924. Both deeds conveyed 715 acres, more or less, from Norvin T. Harris & wife to Edward Dickinson Tayloe. This deed established the first tract as a parcel of record with five (5) theoretical development rights. Deed Book 202, page 444, dated June 1, 1928, conveyed 1 1/30th acres, more or less, from Willie M. Smith and others to Edward Dickinson Tayloe. This deed established the second tract as a parcel of record with one (1) theoretical development right. 1:\DEPT\Community Development\Zoning & Current Development Division\Determinations of Parcel\2007\79-1 0 LOD2007 -54, 1 Alb. Edgehill Farm .doc Deed Book 234, page 392, dated February 5, 1937, conveyed 173.8 acres, more or less, from W. D. Haden & wife to Edward Dickinson Tayloe. This deed established the third tract as a parcel of record with five (5) theoretical development rights. Deed Book 329, page 120, dated December 28, 1956, conveyed 889 acres, more or less, from the Executors under the will of Edward Dickinson Tayloe and Edward Thornton Tayloe & Virginia Baird Tayloe, his wife, to Ray A. Graham, III. This deed describes the land known as "Edgehill" containing 889 acres more or less as being composed of the same three tracts described in Deed Book 185, page 85, Deed Book 186, page 455, Deed Book 202, page 444 and Deed Book 234, page 392. This is the most recent instrument for this parcel recorded prior to the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance, December 10,1980. Based on this deed, Tax Map 79, Parcel 10 is determined to be three parcels of record with a total of eleven (11) theoretical development rights. Deed Book 3364, page 522, dated February 7,2007, conveyed 866.07 acres from Ray A. Graham, III to Albemarle Edgehill Farm, LLC. The property is described as being the same as the "899 acres" that was conveyed by Deed Book 329, page 120. The difference in acreage is due to conveyances, through condemnation, to the State of Virginia for road construction. This transaction had no effect on the parcels or the development rights. The parcels are entitled to the noted development rights if all other applicable regulations can be met. These development rights may only be utilized within the bounds of the original parcel with which they are associated. These development rights are theoretical in nature but do represent the maximum number of lots containing less than twenty one acres allowed to be created by right. In addition to the development right lots, the parcel may create as many smaller parcels containing a minimum of twenty-one acres as it has land to make. If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty days of the date notice of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $120. The date notice of this determination was given is the same as the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me. Ronald L. Higgins, AIC Chief of Zoning Copy: Gay Carver, Real Estate Supervisor Ella Jordan, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors 1:\DEPT\Community Development\Zoning & Current Development Division\Determinations of Parcel\2007\79-1 0 LOD2007-54. 2 Alb. Edgehill Farm .doc 063 064 .~../ ~~2B .. 79-12A o ex> o Scale 800 1,600 2,400 Albemarle County II Feet Note: This map is for display purposes only and shows parcels as of 121311200f. See Map Book Introduction for additional details. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19, 2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a ninety (90) unit rental development known as Treesdale Park; and WHEREAS, other resources estimated in excess of $20,000,000 including, but not limited to, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, HOME funds, Federal Home Loan Bank, the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund, and VHDA loans will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Treesdale Park Apartments will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing twenty-one (21) project-based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: >- Development of ninety (90) affordable rental units benefiting approximately 250 persons annually, one-third of whom are expected to be children; >- Construction of a community center; and >- Provision of services including afterschool school programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Treesdale Park Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. ********** I, Ella W. Jordon, do hereby certif that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board f S e isors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held March 19, 2008. Mr. Boyd Mr. Dorrier Ms. Mallek Mr. Rooker Mr. Slutzky Ms. Thomas Ave Nav y y y y y y RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19, 2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a thirty-eight (38) unit senior rental development known as Crozet Meadows; and WHEREAS, other resources include Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Crozet Meadows will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing eight (8) project-based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: )0> Development of thirty-eight (38) new affordable rental units benefiting approximately 50 senior persons annually; and )0> Rehabilitation of twenty-eight (28) existing senior rental units benefiting approximately 36 persons annually. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Crozet Meadows Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. ********** I, Ella W. Jordon, do hereby certifYt t the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board 0 Su erv'sors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held March 19, 2008. Mr. Boyd Mr. Dorrier Ms. Mallek Mr. Rooker Mr. Slutzky Ms. Thomas Ave Nav y. y. y. y. y. y. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Community Development Block Grant Program AGENDA DATE: March 19, 2008 ACTION: X INFORMATION: SU BJECT/PROPOSALlREQUEST: Public Hearing for Proposed Submission of Block Grant Applications CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Davis, Elliott, White ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: /~ r LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: The Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) is a federally-funded grant program administered by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD). Since 1982, the DHCD has provided funding to eligible units of local government (non-entitlement communities only) for projects which address critical community needs including housing, infrastructure, and economic development. Albemarle County has received numerous grants in previous years to support housing and community improvement initiatives. The VCDBG application process requires that two local public hearings be conducted. The first public hearing was held on February 6, 2008 at which time information was provided on eligible activities that may be funded by VCDBG, the amount of funding estimated to be available, past activities undertaken with VCDBG funds and the process for applying for funding. There was no public comment tendered at that hearing. The purpose of this public hearing is to provide information on proposed project applications and to accept public comment on the applications. Applications are submitted by the County to DHCD; however, the proposed activities may be undertaken by other agencies. Albemarle County can submit one or more applications but is limited to awards totaling no more than $2.5 million. STRATEGIC PLAN: Objective 1.2 By June 30, 2010, working in partnership with others, increase affordable housing opportunities for those who work and/or live in Albemarle County. DISCUSSION: Two project applications with eligible activities under VCDBG guidelines were submitted for consideration by the Board. Both projects are requesting $700,000, the maximum allowed for the proposed activity of providing funding for on-site infrastructure associated with housing production projects. A detailed project description and proposed development budget are included in the two attachments. Following is a brief summary of each proposal: Treesdale Park Apartments (Attachment A) is a proposed ninety (90) unit rental development on Rio Road to be undertaken by the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP). VCDBG funds would be used for site development, roads, sidewalks, and installation of water and sewer lines. AHIP's development budget includes over $9 million in equity financing through the federal low-income housing tax credit program for which an application was submitted in February. AHIP is proposing that the County seek VCDBG funds in the form of a grant that would become a deferred loan to the project with repayment at the end of the tax credit compliance period at which time AHIP will have first right-of-refusal to purchase the property. Crozet Meadows Senior Housinq (Attachment B) involves the renovation of twenty-eight (28) existing rental units and the development of thirty-eight (38) new rental units in Crozet. The project is a joint venture between Jordan Development Corporation, the current owner, and the Piedmont Housing Alliance. VCDBG funds would be used for site work, roads, and AGENDA TITLE: Community Development Block Grant Program March 19, 2008 Page 2 installation of water and sewer lines. Crozet Meadows has also submitted an application for federal low-income housing tax credits. As with Treesdale, VCDBG funds for Crozet Meadows will be requested in the form of a grant and deferred loan. It is important to the financial feasibility of both proposed developments that VCDBG funds be awarded to the County as a grant so that the County can provide deferred loans to the developments. DHCD's program guidelines indicate that funding for on-site infrastructure would be repayable at the completion and occupancy of the development. Such a funding structure could result in an increase in rents of $20 to $50 per month. County staff has met with DHCD staff to emphasize the importance of using VCDBG funding as long-term deferred financing and the Housing Committee followed up with a letter (Attachment C) to stress the need for a grant to the County so that the County can make a deferred loans to the proposed developments. DHCD staff encouraged the County to proceed with the applications making a case for the need for deferred loans to both developments. If one or both proposals are awarded VCDBG funds, there will be additional opportunities to address this issue, if it still exists, prior to executing a contract with DHCD. BUDGET IMPACT: There is no budgetary impact unless or until an application is made and approved for a funded project. Fifty-six thousand dollars is included in each application to cover administrative and project management costs for the funded activities. Projects applying for VCDBG generally require some level of local financial support. Albemarle County has been successful in the past using some of its annual contributions to affordable housing as local support for projects. In addition, the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund has approved awards to Treesdale Park for $252,000 and Crozet Meadows in the amount of $134,400. The Board of Supervisors will be requested to appropriate these funds, currently available in a restricted account, as the projects move forward. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends that the Board, after receiving information on the proposed VCDBG applications and taking public comment on the proposals, adopt the two resolutions (Attachments E and F) approving submission of the applications, and authorize the County Executive to execute the applications and required certifications and assurances for both proposals (Attachments F through H). ATTACHMENTS A. Treesdale Park Proposal B. Crozet Meadows Proposal C. Housinq Committee Letter to DHCD D. Treesdale Resolution E. Crozet Meadows Resolution F. General Assurances G. Public Participation H. Druq-free Workplace iAPPLICANT:1 2008 COBG COMPETITIVE GRANTS Albemarle County DUNS 06-602-2047 !LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADDRESS / CONTACT PERSON:I 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Ron White, Chief of Housing [pHONE/FAX/EMAIL:1 434-296-5839 ext. 3407 R white2@albemarle.org ICHIEF ELECTED OFFICIAL:I Kenneth C. Boyd, Chairman, Board of Supervisors [pROJECT NAME:I IPROJECT TYPE:I Treesdale Park Housing Production 'ROJECT DESCRIPTION :1 Albemarle County is requesting CDBG funding to support the development of ninety (90) units of affordable rental housing. CDBG funds will be used specifically for the installation of necessary on-site infrastructure to support the development including site work, paving, sidewalks, curbs and gutter, water and sewer lines. The Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP) currently owns the land for the proposed development. They will also act as developers and manage the property upon completion. AHIP has applied for federal low-income housing tax credits which will provide over $9 million in equity financing. More importantly, using tax credits, 100% of the units must house families with incomes at or below 60% of the area median income for at least fifteen years. An estimated 200 persons will initially benefit from the proposed 90-unit development. AHIP has experience in developing and managing multifamily property as evidenced by the acquisition and renovation of96 units at Park's Edge Apartments, formally Whitewood Road Apartments. Since the completion of the renovation, Park's Edge has seen improved occupancy rates and the addition of tenant services including a successful after-schoold program. This service-enriched model is also proposed for Treesdale Park. Attachment A-I !PROJECT COST:I Source CDBG State Federal ( Grant) Federal (Loan) Private Local TOTAL Amount $ 700,000 $ $ 150,000 $ $18,667,401 $ 3,580,657 $23,098,058 !ACTIVE CDBG PROJECTS:I Name Year Awarded Amount of Award 1) 2) 3) Attachment A-2 !NATIONAL OBJECTIVES:I Please note the approximate amount of funds proposed in this project which can be attributed to each of the listed National Objectives (amount may be $0). National Objective LMI Benefit Proposed Activity Housing Production Amount $700,000 Slum/Blight $0 Urgent Need $0 [pOPULATION:1 Please indicate the population of the applicant locality: 93,601 [pREP ARER:I Provide the name, phone number, and emai1 of the person who actually prepared this application: Joyce Dudek, Albemarle Housing Improvement Program; 434-817-2447; joyce@AHIPVA.org By checking these boxes the applicant is affirming the following statements: X Applicant is currently eligible to receive the full amount that is being requested and ifthis project is awarded, this would not cause the applicant to exceed the multi-contract limitation of$2.5 million in open, active contracts. X Applicant agrees to send responsible parties, to include any relevant subcontractors, to all mandatory DHCD-sponsored training events, to include the Construction Management and Grant Management workshops, and to provide representation at all management team meetings ICERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURE:I To the best of my knowledge and belief, the information included in this proposal is true and correct, the proposal has been duly authorized by the governing body of the applicant, citizen participation requirements have been met, and the proposal has been submitted for Planning District Commission review. Name: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Title: County Executive Signature: (Include Local Government Resolution in A TT ACHMENT # 7) Attachment A-3 I NATIONAL OBJECTIVE - Low- and Moderate-Income Benefit:1 For all low- and moderate-income projects: SURVEY RESULTS Total in Project / Service Area - PROPOSED LMI in Proj ect / Service Area LMI Percentage in Project / Service Area Total Surveyed Total Responding LMI Responding (Include a copy of the survey and supporting documentation in ATTACHMENT # 4) Households 90 90 100% See market study Persons 200 200 100% See market study For Comprehensive, Community Facility, Housing, and some Economic Development projects: Product # #LMI # #LMI %LMI Households Households Persons Persons Persons Served Served Served Served Served Housing 90 90 200 200 100% Water Sewer Streets Drainage Jobs Other For Community Service Facility and similar projects: Product # #LMI # #LMI %LMI (specify service) Households Households Persons Persons Persons Served Served Served Served Served Attachment A-4 ICOMPLIANCE CHART (for Comprehensive, Housin~, or Community Facility projects):1 NOTE: These locality numbers are taken from the initial 2000 U.S. Census. The total population was corrected to approximately 84,000 upon appeal but subsets were not adjusted with the correction. Also, although the estimates from the Weldon Cooper Center at UVa indicate a population of 93,601 in 2007, there is no breakdown of that total. An assumption could be made that the percentage of subsets remains relatively the same as in 2000. Since this is a housing production proposal, no specific information is available for the proposed project. Units will be available on the open market but income restrictions apply. ETHNICITY Population Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Not Latino TOTAL Population Locality 3,029 76,207 79,236 Proj ect Area RACE Population White Black / Asian American Indian / TOTAL African American Alaskan Native Population Locality 67,474 7,650 2,268 135 79236 Project Area Population Native American Indian Asian Black / American Indian / TOTAL Hawaiian / Alaskan Native and African Alaskan Native Population Other Pacific and White White American and Black! African Islander and White American Locality 9 67,609 69,742 75,124 7,785 79,236 Proj ect Area Population Other TOTAL Multi-racial Population Locality 1,019 79,236 Project Area Households Female-Headed Elderly With TOTAL Handicap Households Locality 11,736 9,920 9,772 31,876 Proj ect Area Attachment A-5 INA TIONAL OBJECTIVE - Slum and Bli~ht Elimination:l Structure Type Number in Number Number Number % Blighted (as Project Area Currently Currently Blighted total of ALL Occupied Unoccupied structures in project area) Commercial Residential Publicly-owned Industrial Non-profit Vacant Structure Vacant Land (in blocks) N/A N/A Other: Other: TOTAL Blight Assessment: 1) Was a thorough physical assessment completed for the project area? YES NO 2) Will CDBG funds for physical improvements target blighted elements? _ YES _ NO 3) Was a Master Plan developed to guide improvements? YES NO 4) Will the locality pursue blight removal in accordance with the Code? YES NO 5) Are there significant infrastructure deficiencies that will be addressed (water, sewer, sidewalks, drainage, etc...? Briefly describe in quantitative and qualitative terms. 6) Will the physical improvements remove all blighting elements? YES NO 7) How many businesses are located in the project area? 8) How many businesses (actual number and percentage of total businesses) have closed within the past three years? Approximately how many employees (actual number and percentage of total employees) have been displaced as a result of these closings? Attachment A-6 9) How many businesses have located (actual number and percentage of total businesses this represents) within the past three years? a. How many jobs (actual number and percentage of total jobs) have been created as a result? 10) Are there any housing units in the project area? If so, how many TOTAL and how many are occupied? (Include copies of assessment tools in ATTACHMENT # 4; provide 3 copies of a Master Plan or similar document with the proposal copies; include other documents in ATTACHMENT #5; and, acknowledge blight in Resolution in ATTACHMENT # 7) Additional narrative responses to these questions may be included in the Project Type Proposal Elements section. ICENSUS INFORMATION :1 Census Place Code Census Tract(s) 106 Blocks / Block Groups 4 PROPOSAL SUMMARY Albemarle County respectfully requests $700,000 in Housing Production CDBG funds to enable the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP) to perform on-site improvements for the Treesdale Park project. Treesdale Park will provide 90 new affordable rental units to households in the Charlottesville MSA at or below 60% AMI. The project's Attachment A-7 location, in Albemarle County just north of the Charlottesville City line, will allow Treesdale Park to link housing, services, and jobs for residents in our community. Along with 90 units of housing, AHIP will build a separate multilevel community center building, which will include an 800-square foot multiuse gathering space and additional space for a computer lab, classes, both daycare and aftercare programs, and the Treesdale leasing office. Upon completion, the Treesdale Park will serve as a national model for high-quality, innovative and sustainable affordable housing-housing that will provide long-term benefit for our environment, our community, and each and every resident who calls it home. The site of the Treesdale development has significant slope and access issues. Land in Albemarle County that is both close to services and within the development area is limited, topographically challenging and expensive. Although the property is expensive to develop, no other options exist in the development area of Albemarle County. Additionally housing, both owner-occupied and rental, competes with two other major needs - transportation and environmental initiatives. Treesdale Park not only addresses affordable housing needs, but includes transportation upgrades and several green features. Provision of CDBG grant money is critical to the success of the Treesdale project. Not only will funds enable AHIP to reduce out-of-pocket site development costs thus allowing AHIP to provide some lower price point rents than would be possible without subsidy, but the project can only sustain an acceptable debt-service ratio with CDBG grant money. When the CDBG funds are factored into the project proforma as a deferred payment loan, our Debt Service Coverage is 110% as required by VHDA for their Taxable Bond Financing. When the $700,000 is included as a permanent loan, the Debt Service Coverage is just 99%, thereby making the project infeasible. Thus CDBG grant money is essential to making the Treesdale Park project achievable. Albemarle County has committed 21 Section 8 vouchers toward funding of affordable units at Treesdale. Albemarle County has also committed $252,000 from the Crozet Crossing Fund. The Kresge and Charlottesville Community Foundation have committed $125,000 in funding. The Albemarle Housing Improvement Program will submit competitive applications for additional funding to the following organizations: Albemarle County CDBG Kresge/Community Foundation' $3,500,000 $700,000 TJPDC FHLB AHP (committed) $125,000 $150,000 $500,000 Additionally, AHIP will be applying for $5,400,000 in VHDA taxable bond financing and a $950,000 SP ARC loan. COMMON PROPOSAL ELEMENTS Project Service Area: Attachment A-8 The Treesdale Park Apartment development will be located on 6.6 acres in Albemarle County at 640 E. Rio Road. The property is located in the Rio Magisterial District and includes Parcels 182, 183, and 183A of Albemarle County Tax Map 61. The property is located one mile north of the City of Charlottesville and the Rt. 250 By Pass, and two miles from the Rt. 29 North Corridor. The property has 450 feet of frontage along Rio Road. The property slopes downhill away from Rio Road. Roughly 350 feet from Rio Road the slope increases significantly. The rear of the property consists of a narrow strip 6O'wide and 650' long that will be dedicated to the future greenway trail along the Meadow Creek Parkway. According to the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan the property is located in Neighborhood 2 and contains an Urban Density Designation. This designation provides a residential density of 6-34 units per acre. The Treesdale Park Apartment development proposes 14 units per acre and is zoned Planned Residential Development. The surrounding neighborhood includes a mix of single family homes, town homes, duplexes, triplexes, two schools and a large park. Rio Road is a heavily traveled roadway but that condition will be improved by the construction of the Meadow Creek Parkway starting February, 2008. Project Needs/Opportunities and Demand: Where does this project fit within the locality's overall community development needs? As a high cost community, Albemarle County has significant affordable housing challenges. Affordable housing production is likely to be the major community development need and initiative over the next several years in Albemarle County. Housing preservation and rehabilitation opportunities, although still among the most important community needs, exist on scattered sites rather than a community level improvement basis. The County has recognized affordable housing as a top priority in its Strategic Plan. In recognition of this growing problem, the county has instituted an affordable housing policy. Although meant to address the range oflow- to moderate-income housing needs, the policy has only begun to address the needs of households at 80% AMI through private development proffers. With the exception of two developments that exclusively serve senior citizens, there has been no new construction of units affordable for non-elderly individuals or families at or below 50 percent of AMI. What is the need/opportunity associated with this project? The Treesdale Park Project will serve households whose needs have not been adequately met through Albemarle County policy by creating 90 new affordable rental units for those earning at or below 60% AMI. A total of 9 units are proposed to be rent restricted to 40% of AMI; a total of 12 units are proposed to be rent restricted to 50% of AMI; a total of 69 units are proposed to be rent restricted to 60% of AMI; no units are proposed to be set aside as a market rate units; a total of 21 units are proposed to benefit from project-based rental assistance. Rental units available to individuals utilizing vouchers are in great demand. According to Albemarle County Office of Housing data, out of all the applicants on the waiting list, only about 50% actually complete the application process. Once the applicants receive the voucher, only about 12-15% of those successfully find a rental within their means. Success of this project is contingent on CDBG grant funding. AHIP's most recent pro-forma anticipates $700,000 in a deferred payment loan from Albemarle County using CDBG grant funding, and the maximum amount feasible to request from the LlHTC program ($9.7M). Additional sources offering either reduced interest loans or grants were factored in. When the CDBG funds are considered in the project proforma as a deferred payment loan, our Debt Service Coverage is 110% as required by VHDA for their Taxable Bond Financing. When the $700,000 is factored in as a permanent loan, the Debt Service Coverage is just 99%, thereby making the project infeasible. It is critical to the project that CDBG funds be structured so that additional debt service is not required. Per LlHTC guidelines, the developer of this project would be eligible to claim a developer's fee of $2 million. To keep the LlHTC proposal competitive in the cost category, AHIP has chosen to invest the majority of that fee back into the project. Of that amount, we are deferring approximately $1,400,000 of the developer's fee and $450,000 of the land Attachment A-9 value. The only return AHIP hopes to recover from this project is out-of-pocket investment in order to develop new projects in the future. How were the project needs identified and quantified? Project needs were quantified and identified through an independent market analysis provided by Allen & Associates Consulting and the State of Housing Report of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Information from the Albemarle County Office of Housing waiting list was used to determine need and unit mix. Despite plummeting real estate values across the country, Albemarle County continues to be one of the most expensive areas for both buyers and renters in the state. Increase in area housing costs has increased the cost of rental housing and constant pressure exerted on the market by student renters continues to drive up the cost of rental housing. Additionally the current housing crisis has led many who may have considered ownership to seek rental opportunities, further constricting rental supply. The 2005 Metropolitan Statistical Area median monthly gross rent establishes the Charlottesville MSA as the second most expensive area for renters in the Commonwealth just behind Northern Virginia. Housing is not only expensive, but in short supply especially for those in the target population. The State of Housing Report, which details the housing situation in the entire Thomas Jefferson Planning District, indicates a gross deficit in rental units of3,9l7 for those earning below 30% AMI and a 745 unit deficit for those earning up to 50% AMI. This shortfall is confirmed by the Albemarle County housing waitlist. In 2006-2007 665 people applied for housing assistance, 577 of those who applied were at or below 30% AMI. 74% of applicants were seeking two bedroom housing. It is important to note that Albemarle County, with Charlottesville City, account for the majority of the population, jobs, services, and housing in the Planning District. Need for affordable rental housing is commonly indicated by the vacancy rate. A five percent vacancy rate is generally accepted as the minimum level below which a shortfall in rental housing is noted. In the Charlottesville MSA, rental housing is in short supply with renter vacancy rates recorded at 3.9% in 2005. Vacancy rates are even lower for units serving households with incomes at or below 60% AMI. According to the Allen & Associates Market Study commissioned by AHIP, vacancy rates for low income housing (below 60% AMI) are at 2%. Demand is further illustrated in this market analysis. The analysis includes the three different measures of demand typically defined by affordable multifamily industry participants. The first definition is based on the number of income- qualified renter households in the primary market area; the second focuses on the number of income-qualified overburdened and substandard renter households; the third looks at income-qualified renter movership and renter household growth. These three measures project demand between 1388 and 449 qualified households. Demand for affordable units will likely increase in the future. The average household income for the market area increased from $36,135 in 1990 to $57,762 in 2006. Average household income is forecasted to increase 1.9 percent annually through 2011. This compares with a projected consumer price index growth of 3.1 percent, suggesting that erosion in real disposable income is taking place in the market area. This most affects households with low median incomes who have little disposable income. How are stakeholders involved in this project and do they demand a solution? The Albemarle Housing Improvement Program is a Community Housing Development Organization. As such, the board is governed by members of the community with its Board of Directors consisting of at least one-third low-income representatives. Board members have been involved in guiding the direction of the project throughout the rezoning process and numerous meetings between stakeholders and AHIP. As part of the rezoning process, several neighborhood meetings have been conducted to gather concerns and suggestions from the neighborhood. In addition, public comments were taken at Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors meetings. These suggestions and comments were then used in the revisions made to our apartment design and site plan, which were then re-submitted and presented to the neighborhood and County staff for review. AHIP received a $50,000 grant from the Kresge Foundation to be used for pre-development and design of the green, sustainable features for the project. As part of this process AHIP created a "Green Team" of professionals, staff, volunteers, and neighborhood representatives. Several charettes and neighborhood meetings were conducted to provide input, and research into the design of the site and the buildings. (See Treesdale Park Timeline in Attachment #4) Attachment A-IO Project Products: This application will be for infrastructure associated with the site work on the project. Project products include the following: Earthwork: Cut/fill/grade Pavement: Roadway, asphalt & paving Walkway markings at pavement Striping HC symbols Concrete: Walks Gravel walks HC Ramps Curb & gutter Pads Stair risers and treads Dumpster pads/enclosures Water System: DIP 8" valves fittings Copper piping valves fittings 2" Water meters 2" Taping Tee/valve Fire Hydrants/Control valve Sanitary System: DIP 8" valves fittings Manhole Basin Boxes Tie in to existing Clean outs Storm System: RCP Piping 12" RCP Piping 15" RCP Piping 18" RCP Piping 24" RCP ES -I 18" BMP Bio Filter - Y. acre Discharge Control Measures Manhole basin boxes Drop inlets Project Outcomes: 174,240 SF 4,633 SY 140 LF 1,223 LF lea 11,400 SF 5,000 SF 10 ea 2,500 LF 400 SF 33 RI I LS 500 LF 80 LF 4 ea lea 3 ea 720 LF 4 ea I LS 5 ea 210 LF 290 LF 18 LF 350 LF 1 ea 10,890 SF 500 SF 4 ea 7 ea Treesdale Park will provide 90 units of rental housing available to families at or below 60% of area median income. Albemarle County will provide 21 project based vouchers for qualified families with incomes at or below 50% of area median income. Attachment A-II Over the next 30 years an estimated 900 families will be provided affordable rental housing In Albemarle County. Capacity: As Chief of Housing for Albemarle County, Ron White will be responsible for oversight and administration of the Community Development Block Grant for Treesdale Park Apartments. This application for CDBG funds is being submitted by The County of Albemarle on behalf of the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP) which will develop, own, and manage the project, Treesdale Park Apartments. Albemarle County and AHIP have a long history of working together to address the housing needs or our low income residents. Since its inception in 1977 AHIP has received on-going operating support from the County of Albemarle. Since 1995, AHIP has received on-going operating support from the City of Charlottesville. In addition, AHIP has successfully administered the following sources of funding to the benefit of thousands of Albemarle County and City of Charlottesville residents: · A 1978 Small Cities HUD CDBG Grant for installation of indoor plumbing and site development of a Self Help Housing Project. · Four Community Development Block Grants for Albemarle County for housing rehabilitation. · One Community Development Block Grant for Albemarle County to provide infrastructure for Crozet Crossing, a 30 unit subdivision for sale to first time homebuyers. · Marketed, sold and arranged financing for above 30 homebuyers for Crozet Crossing Subdivision utilizing funds from the Virginia Housing Partnership Program, the Virginia Housing Development Authority, and the Rural Development Service. · Three Department of Health and Human Services, Discretionary Grants for Housing Rehabilitation. · AHIP has administered the City of Charlottesville entitlement CDBG funds for Housing Rehabilitation since 1995. · One Section 523 Self Help Housing Technical Assistance Grant from the Rural Development Service (FmHA) · Five Rural Development Section 533 Housing Preservation Grants · Over 100 Rural Development Section 504 Grants and Loans. · Developed 12 Rent-to-Own units utilizing funds from HOME, CDBG, CHDO HOME, VHDA, and the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. · AHIP has administered the State of Virginia's Indoor Plumbing Rehabilitation Program in Albemarle County since its inception in 1991. · Provided Housing Rehabilitation component for Porter-Yancey Community Development Block Grant in Albemarle County 2000. · Community Development Block Grant for Park's Edge Apartments Community Building in 2003 (formerly Whitewood Village). This included acquisition and rehab using the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program for 96 units. · In 2005 AHIP completed the design, construction, and sale of 5 green, sustainable, single family homes at the Camp Springs Subdivision in Esmont. These homes were sold to low income, first time buyers, and included Insulated Concrete Form Construction, Rainwater Harvesting Systems, Hardi Plank siding, Eco-Shakes (100% recycled with 50 year warranty), Solartubes, high efficiency appliances and HV AC systems, and BioDiffuser Septic Chamber Systems. As the Executive Director of AHIP, Theresa Tapscott is responsible for the overall management of the corporation and compliance with all funding regulations. With over thirty years of experience in affordable housing and the administration of numerous state and federal funding programs, Ms. Tapscott will oversee the development of Treesdale Park Apartments and the administration of all funding sources. The Associate Director for Real Estate Development, Joyce Dudek, is responsible for the development and implementation of all rental property development for AHIP. As the primary staff person for the Treesdale project she is responsible for the day to day management of the project as it moves forward. This includes coordination of the development team, coordination with the County of Albemarle, and management of funding sources including Low Income Housing Tax Credits, HOME, CDBG, and other private or public grants and loans. Ms. Dudek has extensive experience in the affordable housing field and has worked with CDBG programs, HOME, VHDA, DHCD, and the Low Income Housing Tax Credit program. The AHIP Board of Directors and the AHIP Real Estate Committee provide oversight and advisory consultation. Our board includes four real estate developers who are extremely knowledgeable about the real estate development process for housing and commercial activities. The AHIP Board and committees meet monthly and on an as needed basis to monitor the progress of Trees dale Park. BRW Architects will provide construction management services during the construction phase of the project. Once our funding sources are secured we will procure a contractor to provide construction services. Attachment A-12 Jeffrey Michael Meyer from the Virginia Community Development Corporation will provide on-going assistance and consultation regarding the allocation of tax credits for the project through the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. In 2006 AHIP began the process of rezoning the Treesdale Park property to maximize density and provide a significant number of affordable units. As part of this process we procured Architectural and Engineering services to complete the rezoning and provide the necessary level of design for final site plan approval. BRW Architects of Charlottesville was chosen to provide design services for the project. The Cox Company is providing planning and engineering services. As part of our design for the Treesdale Park Apartments we are committed to providing a green, sustainable, energy efficient product for our future residents. Our residential buildings will be constructed as EarthCraft certified and our Community Building will be built with green, sustainable design methods. AHIP was awarded a $50,000 grant from the Kresge Foundation to pay for planning and development of our sustainable activities. As part of that process, AHIP created our project development team. For this pre-development and estimating phase it was very important to us to have the most accurate cost estimates, especially for our green building components. According to the green building community of experts, the Earth Craft process should, at most, increase the cost of construction by 2-3%. However, in most cases, that increase is off set by cost reductions in other areas. And, over the life of the project, the operating expenses for the owner and the tenants are significantly reduced. In addition to our green consultants, architect, and engineers, we felt it was extremely important to partner with a contractor for the pre-development phase of the project. After interviewing four very knowledgeable and experienced contractors we chose Artisan Construction to provide estimating and consulting services for this phase of the project. We were very specific in our discussions with all four contractors that this would not be a contract for construction services but rather an agreement to provide estimating services and expertise on green building methods. Artisan Construction has been one of the leading residential and commercial contractors in Charlottesville dedicated to providing green, energy efficient, sustainable products. Doug Lowe, President and founder of Artisan Construction, is a LEED professional. LEED stands for Leader in Energy and Environmental Design and is the certification program run by the u.s. Green Building Council. Doug is also very familiar with the EarthCraft Certification Program. In 2006, Doug Lowe and Artisan Construction built one of the first LEED certified homes in the United States. Artisan Construction has worked on projects that include insulated concrete foundations, super high efficiency HV AC systems, geothermal systems, passive solar and active solar hot water, rain gardens, exterior shading systems, reclaimed wood flooring, fresh air intake, deliberate recycling of construction waste, grey water recovery, and rain water harvesting systems. AHIP has brought together a highly experienced, professional team for our Treesdale Park development. Karl Bren Chuk Bowles Bill Edgerton Bruce Wardell Mark Humbertson Galen Staengl Mike Fenner Doug Lowe Ben Sojka David Hazlip Joyce Dudek Theresa Tapscott Ron White Jeffrey Michael Meyer Green Visions (LEED Professional) The Energy Consortium Green Champion (LEED Professional) BRW Architects BRW Architects (LEED Professional) Staengl Engineering (LEED Professional, MEP) The Cox Company (civil engineer and planning) Artisan Construction Rainwater Management Solutions Neighborhood representative - Village Square AHIP AHIP County of Albemarle Virginia Community Development Corp. Readiness: Affordable housing production in Albemarle County is most likely to be the major community development need and initiative over the next several years. These initiatives should include on going support for owner-occupied housing and increased emphasis on the need for affordable rental housing. This crisis of affordable housing competes with transportation issues and environmental initiatives in the County. The Treesdale Park project addresses the need for affordable rentals, sustainable development practices, and the issue of traffic concerns in this area of Albemarle County. Attachment A-13 Treesdale Park will provide 90 units of affordable, sustainable, energy efficient rental housing for families at or below 60% of area median income. Twenty one units will be targeted for families at or below 50%. The Treesdale Park Apartment development is located at 640 East Rio Road, which is significantly impacted by local and regional traffic. In 2005 the VDOT traffic count showed that 26,000 vehicles travel the road per day. Usually, a road with this degree of traffic would be evaluated by VDOT for upgrades and widening. Due to the plan to construct the Meadow Creek Parkway, Rio Road has not been widened. VDOT projects that the Treesdale Park Apartment development would add an additional 585 Vehicle Trips per day to Rio Road. The construction of the Parkway is designed to reduce the volume of traffic on Rio Road and give drivers a more direct route into downtown Charlottesville. The Meadow Creek Parkway is now scheduled to begin construction in 2008 with a projected completion in Spring 2010. Assuming that all funding is in place for the Treesdale Park project in 2008, then the completion of the Parkway would coincide with our project completion. As part of the process to rezone the Treesdale Park property, which was approved on December 12,2007, AHIP agreed to off site improvement of Rio Road and the Pen Park Lane intersection. Through negotiations with the adjacent property owner, we have gained a second access to our property which would allow our residents access to a traffic signal at the intersection of Rio Road and Pen Park Lane at the entrance to the Stonewater development. AHIP has agreed to share in the cost of the road improvement and installation of the traffic signal and VDOT has approved this plan. These improvements along with the completion of the Meadow Creek Parkway will have a significant, positive impact on the traffic issues of the neighborhood. Much has been done to bring the Treesdale Park project to the point of construction. In order to expend CDBG funding, there is some remaining work to be done. On December 12, 2007 the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved our rezoning application to rezone the property to a Planned Residential Development. This approval allows up to 90 units of rental housing. Proffers attached to this approval included a stipulation that we provide 100% affordable housing and that the residential units be EarthCraft certified. The last outstanding regulatory issue is to obtain our final site plan approval. We are working through that process now and expect to have the final site plan approval by Fall, 2008. Our final design work is scheduled to begin July, 2008. AHIP currently owns the site and no additional acquisitions are required. All utilities are available to the site and user agreements are not required as this is rental property. AHIP has completed a Phase I Environmental Assessment of each of the three parcels that comprise the 6.6 acre site. The County of Albemarle will publish the required environmental notices once the application for funds has been approved. Our ability to start construction is dependant on financing. On February 15, 2008 AHIP submitted an application to VHDA for the Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. This represents a significant source of equity into the project. Assuming we are awarded the Tax Credits in this round then construction could begin in Spring, 2009. Other funding applications must be successful, including this CDBG application, but the Tax Credit funding is absolutely critical to this project and we are bound by that time frame. In the event that we are not awarded tax credits in this round it is our intention to continue our efforts to ready the project, and re-apply in 2009 for the Tax Credit program. The Development Team for this project was created in order to move the project through the extension rezoning process in Albemarle County. As a result of that process much has been done to ready the project for construction as soon as funding is available. HOUSING PRODUCTION PROPOSAL ELEMENTS Housing Production Table Unit Size # Units I BR-40% 9 I BR - 50% 9 I BR - 60% 0 2 BR-40% 0 2 BR - 50% 3 Type multi-family rental multi-family rental multi-family rental multi-family rental Attachment A-14 2 BR-60% 51 multi-family rental 3 BR-60% 18 multi-family rental Total Units 90 Housing Demand: Allen & Associates, the company engaged to produce the Market Study, conducted a series of property management interviews to better understand market areas and resident moving patterns for affordable multifamily properties. The market analysis determines the number of house holds that desire and can afford the new housing units at the projected cost. The analysis includes the three different measures of demand typically defined by affordable multifamily industry participants. The first definition is based on the number of income-qualified renter households in the primary market area; the second focuses on the number of income-qualified overburdened and substandard renter households; the third looks at income- qualified renter movership and renter household growth. Results of each of these analyses are presented below. Qualified Renters: Demand Estimate Subsidized Restricted Market Rate Total o Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Total 648 616 124 648 616 124 1,388 1,388 Overburdened Renters: Demand Estimate Subsidized Restricted Market Rate Total o Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Total 289 274 55 289 274 55 618 618 Growth and Movership: Demand Estimate Subsidized Restricted Market Rate Total o Bedroom 1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom Total 141 237 71 141 237 71 449 449 In each of the three demand estimates the following factors were considered to accurately Attachment A-I5 segment demand: (1) Minimum Qualifying Income (using a 35% qualifying ratio); (2) Maximum Allowable Income; and (3) Unit Type. In the income-qualified overburdened and substandard household demand estimate the following additional factors were considered: (4) Overburdened Households; and (5) Substandard Households. Finally, in the income-qualified renter movership and renter household growth demand estimate the following additional factors were considered: (6) Owner to Renter Movership; and (7) Renter to Renter Movership. Capture rates (the number of subject property units / demand) are provided for each measure. Inclusive capture rates ([the number of subject property units + competing and pipeline units] / demand) are also provided thereby accounting for similar projects that may be developed concurrently. Only one other 2 bedroom unit is being developed currently projected to meet demand addressed by Treesdale Park. The market analysis projects a 97% occupancy at stabilization. An inventory of comparable properties indicates a 98% occupancy rate in the market area. The properties included in the market inventory are included on the map below. Properties identified with red pushpins have 100 percent market rate units (market rate properties), properties identified with yellow pushpins have a mixture of market rate / restricted / subsidized units (restricted properties), and properties identified with blue pushpins have 100 Percent project-based rental assistance (subsidized properties). Attachment A-16 l50 Rental Property Inventory 4- ~~rama l~ 'l\~" :}/... "-.,_...--... Ii ---'" - it, .-.. '1 .~~ ,-' ","_...~, <0 ~-r.,"l )" //.1, /x~ /7 __:::::;>;;,?;.r "'. ~c_.P, 19A-Z1Oi_QlPGlln.......-s. "',.1Hmd .~WMt.ft'DlliDl____ -'Cl----~....__C1llltl_IMl_IlObC2lll_!lJ__...llttI.._lIc.....___....__c......_ _CHlr_.._...tI_C__..~._"'00WTm"'1OMll"'_II"'I/TmC2lllT"'___""'",,_ T'*'_"'T..___.. .......1fT. -. .,. 0.. The following properties include rent restricted housing available to households earning 60% and below AMI: Property 221 Ninth Street 1316 Early Street Friendship Court Hearthwood Apartments Monticello Vista Virnita Court Apartments Park's Edge Wilton Farm Apartments Rio Hill Apartments Occupancy 100% 100% 97% 100% 92% 75% 96% 96% 94% Units 1 6 150 199 12 16 88 144 139 Attachment A-17 Market Study: Please see above information under "Housing Demand" and Market Study in Attachment #5. Cost to Beneficiaries: The subsidy of CDBG funds to the project must be used to the benefit of the LMI individual and not the developer. Provide the projected cost of the proposed units to occupants. How will lower income individuals (those making as low as 60% of median) be served? Are any units designatedfor sale at market rate? DHCD encourages mixed-income development for housing production projects. Up to 20 percent of the new units can be slated for sale at the market rate. If the units will be for sale, give the selling price for each unit. If the units will be rental, give the monthly rent. Show how the costfigure(s) was derived. INCLUDE COST DERIVATIONS IN ATTACHMENT #5. The analysis should include operation, maintenance, debt service, vacancy adjustments, developer fees, contingencies, and other costs included in proposals/loan applications to other sources of funding. Developer's fees must be disclosed. Proposed uses of the CDBG funds must clearly be shown. For example, if CDBG funds are to be used for acquisition, present current assessment information and methodology for determining fair market value. If CDBG funds are to be used for soft costs, document how the costs for these activities were determined. All CDBG funds must clearly be accounted for. The Treesdale Park project is financially designed to provide rental housing that is affordable to a range offamilies and individuals earning 60%, 50% and 40% of the Area Median Income and below who do not have the benefit of Section 8 Rental Assistance. It is well documented that the demand for Section 8 Rental Assistance in Albemarle County by far exceeds the availability. Therefore this project seeks to provide rental housing that is affordable to those families and individuals who pay 100% of their rent. To accomplish this in the expensive Albemarle County market will require a creative mix of subsidy including Low Income Housing Tax Credits, DeferredIForgivable Loans, Grants, unit based rental subsidy, direct developer investment (reduced and deferred developer fees) and pennanent VHDA SPARC and Taxable Bond loans. Included as Attachment #5 is the Treesdale Park development Pro-fonna which spells out in detail the estimated cost to construct the project as well as the sources to which the developer has/will apply. Also included is the post-construction operating budget for Treesdale Park. The key to making this development successful and affordable to the target population is to secure enough subsidy to insure the VHDA Loan underwriting requirements are met. To qualify for VHDA pennanent loans the developer must show in its post construction operating budget the ability to cover the debt service at a rate of 110%. In reviewing the Treesdale Sources and Uses Worksheet that includes CDBG funding and the Operating Budget, you will see that the 110% requirement is just met. To accomplish this, AHIP will need to secure each of the financial resources listed under the terms cited. To see the impact on the overall project affordability to the intended beneficiaries, one need only subtract the projected CDBG contribution from the proposed sources. The immediate impact can be seen in that the required VHDA Debt Service Coverage is reduced to 99% from the required 110%. To make up this difference it would be necessary for the owner to increase monthly rents an average of$55 per month across all bedroom types. On first glance, $55 per month may not sound like a lot of money, but to low, and very low-income individuals it may mean the difference between qualifying to rent safe, decent housing or not. For example: CALCULA TION OF AFFORDABLE RENT FOR A 2 PERSON (1 BEDROOM APr.) HOUSEHOLD EARNING 40% AMI- Attachment A-I8 . 40% AMIfor 2 Person Household- Charlottesville MSA = 21,360 · 30% (Allowance for Rent and Utilities) times 21,360 divided by 12 months = $534 . Less $49 Utility Allowance = $485 . Rent @ Treesdale with CDBG = $450 . Rent @ Treesdale WITHOUT CDBG = $505 As a family's percent AMI goes down, the affordability gap grows even wider. And, as it is AHIP's intention to target low, very-low and extremely low-income families for residency at Treesdale, the absence ofCDBG funding would be devastating to that effort. The project developer, AHIP, is a private, non-profit Community Housing Development Organization that has a 30 year history of providing safe, decent and affordable housing to Albemarle County's neediest families. It is AHIP's intention to continue to seek grant and deferred financing for this project that will enable them to reduce rents even further while still maintaining their obligation to the permanent financier, VHDA. To this end, AHIP has chosen not to claim the maximum Developer Fee allowable under the LIHTC program. And of the fees claimed AHIP will defer all but a small amount necessary to recover its predevelopment investment in the project. Additionally, AHIP will defer some $450,000 of the value of the property. (Under the LIHTC Program AHIP is entitled to claim a Developer Fee of up to $3.3 million. To have claimed the maximum fee would have driven the costs of an already expensive development even higher, and thus made the application for those funds un-competitive). Development and Administration: AHIP, as the owner and developer of the project will oversee the construction activities. Joyce Dudek, AHIP Associate Director, will act as the owner's representative for the project. AHIP's architectural firm, BRW Architects, will provide construction management services. A general contractor will be hired for construction services once our funding sources are in place. For purposes of estimating in the pre-development phase of this project, Artisan Construction was engaged by AHIP to provide estimating and consulting services. The Albemarle County Office of Housing will provide oversight of the CDBG funding and any other County related funding sources. Ron White, Chief of Housing for Albemarle County, estimates that potential administrative and project management costs associated with the Treesdale Park CDBG infrastructure will be a maximum of 8% or $56,000. The County may consider appropriating any unused administrative funds to cover development costs. The Treesdale Park Apartment project will provide 90 units of affordable rental units for Albemarle County residents. Over the last ten years AHIP has developed, owned, and managed 108 rental units. AHIP currently owns and manages 98 units of rental housing. Ten of the single family rental units have been sold to first time home buyers. In 2002, AHIP purchased a 96 unit apartment community known as Whitewood Village Apartments. Whitewood was a BUD Mod Rehab project and the subsidy for these units was about to expire. The County of Albemarle encouraged AHIP to purchase and renovate this project to insure that these units would remain affordable and prevent the existing tenants from losing their homes. At the time of acquisition of the property, the average income of the Whitewood Village tenant population was $11,000 per year. Currently, the project serves families at or below 50% of area median income with a significant number of tenants below 30% AMI. With an absolute commitment from the AHIP Board and staff, and the County of Albemarle, AHIP purchased and renovated the ailing 96 rental units and built a new community center building. The total development cost for Whitewood Village, now known as Park's Edge Apartments, was over $10,000,000 and included funding from the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program, VHDA, DHCD, HOME and CDBG. The new community center building at Park's Edge was built with a Community Development Block Grant from DHCD. AHIP continues to own, operate, and manage Park's Edge Apartments and employs a Property Manager, a Maintenance Technician, and an office assistant on site. In 2000 AHIP was approved as a Qualified Management Agent by VHDA. We have recently applied to become a Certified Management Agent through VHDA's new updated program. AHIP intends to own, operate, and manage Treesdale Park upon the completion. AHIP is also a Class A Contractor and employs a staff of carpenters, plumber! electrician, and helpers. AHIP does not plan to use our staff in the construction of Treesda1e Park, however, the construction staff is available to assist with maintenance issues on an as needed basis at Park's Edge and Treesdale Park. When Treesdale Park is nearing completion AHIP will hire a property manager to evaluate applications, lease up the units, collect rent, and maintain compliance for the Tax Credit program and other funding sources. This person will Attachment A-19 be required to complete necessary training regarding the Tax Credit Program, Fair Housing, and other funding regulations as needed. In addition to the Community Development Block Grant at Park's Edge Apartments, AHIP has completed five Community Development Block Grants for Housing Rehabilitation with Albemarle County, and one Community Development Block Grant for infrastructure improvements at the Crozet Crossing Subdivision with Albemarle County. Also, AHIP has administered the City of Charlottesville entitlement CDBG funds for Housing Rehabilitation since 1995. Please see the Treesdale Park Management Plan and Treesdale Park Marketing Plan in Attachment #5 Project Site: The Treesdale Park Apartment development will be located on 6.6 acres in Albemarle County at 640 E. Rio Road. The property is located in the Rio Magisterial District and includes Parcels 182, 183, and 183A of Albemarle County Tax Map 61. The property is located one mile north of the City of Charlottesville and the Rt. 250 By Pass, and two miles from the Rt. 29 North Corridor. The property has 450 feet of frontage along Rio Road. The property slopes downhill away from Rio Road. Roughly 350 feet from Rio Road the slope increases significantly. The rear of the property consists of a narrow strip 60'wide and 650' long that will be dedicated to the future greenway trail along the Meadow Creek Parkway. According to the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan the property is located in Neighborhood 2 and contains an Urban Density Designation. This designation provides a residential density of 6-34 units per acre. The Treesdale Park Apartment development proposes a density 14 units per acre and is zoned Planned Residential Development. The surrounding neighborhood includes a mix of single family homes, town homes, duplexes, triplexes, two schools and a large park. Rio Road is a heavily traveled roadway but that condition will be improved by the construction of the Meadow Creek Parkway starting February, 2008. In 1998, AHIP purchased a parcel of land containing 2.86 acres at 640 E. Rio Road known as "Treesdale". The property included a large, old home and was purchased for $172,000. At that time it was AHIP's intention to build a by-right development of ten townhouses, and to renovate the existing house. After several months of working through the site plan approval process with Albemarle County, we were informed by VDOT that in order to approve this development a new left turn lane on Rio Road would be required to be constructed at our expense. The estimate for the construction of this road work deemed the project infeasible at that time. Since the house on the property was an income producing property AHIP was able to hold the property and continue planning the project. In the meantime, two adjacent properties became available for sale at a cost of $300,000. With the purchase of those properties AHIP now owned 6.6 acres with two houses which were zoned R-4. After months of investigations and discussions it became clear that in order to maximize our efforts, the property should be re-zoned to allow for higher density. On December 12, 2007, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved the rezoning of this property to a Planned Residential Development. In November, 2004, the Pape and Company Appraisers estimated the value of the property at the proposed zoning (to PUD) to be $785,000. The 2008 Albemarle County assessment of the property totals $948,100. This does not take into account the recent rezoning of the property. As part of our rezoning application and our plans to demolish two existing houses on the Treesdale Park property, an Historic Resources Review was completed. Albemarle County required a reconnaissance-level architectural survey be done for the property. AHIP contracted with TEC, Inc. to provide this assessment. The conclusion of this report indicated no impact and no additional work was needed regarding historic review. Please see report in Attachment #4. This site is a difficult and expensive site to develop due to the slope that exists and the necessary road improvements that are required. However, land in the urban area of Albemarle County is extremely expensive. It is highly unlikely that an "easier" site could be located and be affordable for AHIP to purchase. This site is in an excellent location close to schools, shopping, and employment. The best site for building on this property is the front of the property at Rio Road. Because the buildable area is so tight, our current plan includes parking under each building and some additional surface parking. This structured parking is a logical but expensive solution. The surface parking requires substantial retaining walls due to the slopes involved. Because of the traffic issues in the area, additional expense must be incurred to allow development. The major concern of the neighborhood surrounding the Treesdale Park development has been the potential for increased traffic on Rio Road. Through negotiations with the adjacent property owner, AHIP has created a second access from our property, across the adjoining property, and leading to the proposed intersection at Pen Park Lane. The adjoining property owner and AHIP will share the expense of road improvements and signalization for the Attachment A-20 intersection to provide a safer entrance to both developments. The estimates for the cost of structured parking and site and road improvements are $3,000,000. Financing: On February 15, 2008 applied for funding for the Treesdale Park project through the Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program. This program will provide essential equity into the project to allow lower rents to be charged and less debt service will be needed. On April 15, 2008, the Tax Credit Program will announce the preliminary rankings of the application submitted. Other funding will include loans from the Virginia Housing Development Authority through the Taxable Bond fund and the SP ARC program. The County of Albemarle has committed twenty one project based vouchers for housing assistance to be used for families at or below 50% of area median income. The estimated value of these vouchers over a ten year period is $1,000,000. Albemarle County has also approved $252,000 from the Crozet Crossing Trust Fund to be used for the Treesdale Park project. In December, 2007 AHIP was chosen as the recipient of the Charlottesville Area Community Foundation Catalyst Grant in the amount of$75,000 to address the urgent need of affordable housing in our community. In June, 2007 AHIP was approved for a grant of $50,000 from the Kresge Foundation. These funds are being used to cover the costs associated with designing the green, sustainable features for Treesdale Park. AHIP will be submitting an additional funding request to the Kresge Foundation to cover the cost of implementing the sustainable items and construction methods that are included in the final design plans for the project. AHIP will also be applying to the Home Depot Foundation for affordable green building initiatives and the Oak Hill Fund. The Oak Hill Fund's Environmentally Sustainable Affordable Design (ESAD) Program supports initiatives in non-profits that primarily focus on the incorporation of the principles of sustainability in the design and construction of affordable residential housing. AHIP has received grant funding from the Oak Hill Fund in the past for our Camp Springs Subdivision and also for our volunteer program. These three funding sources are available specifically for green building projects. We are confidant in our ability to secure funding for our sustainable activities. CDBG funds are being requested to cover the cost of site improvement only and will not be used for any of our potential green, sustainable features. Public/Private Investment: The infusion of Low Income Housing Tax Credits will be the largest single source of private financing for the Treesdale Park project. The projected amount of Tax Credits needed is estimated to be $9.7 million. Once our application for tax credits is approved the Virginia Community Development Corporation will syndicate the credits and sell them to their investors. The investors will take advantage of the tax credits and Treesdale Park will have an infusion of equity into the project. The Tax Credit Program allows a significant developer's fee of$2,000,000. HOWEVER, in order to make this project work financially, AHIP will be deferring approximately three quarters of that developer's fee or an estimated $1,453,380. In addition, AHIP will hold a note for $450,000 of the land cost when the property is transferred to the Limited Partnership. The total estimated infusion of private dollars into this project is approximately $12,000,000. The rate of return on the private investment is expected to be a market rate return in financial terms, plus the public purpose benefits to the community in the form oflong-term affordability, reduced rents, energy efficiency, and access to quality affordable housing for marginalized populations. Public funds proposed for this project include loan funds from the Virginia Housing Development Authority, funds from County of Albemarle, CDBG and HOME monies, and funding from the Federal Home Loan Bank. These public funds are estimated to total $11,000,000. This project will be underwritten by the Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) in conjunction with the allocation of the Low Income Housing Tax Credits, and it will also be underwritten by VHDA during our application for loan financing. The potential for HOME funding from the DHCD also will require an underwriting process to be completed. In addition, the Virginia Community Development Corporation, which acts as our consultant for the Tax Credit program and will syndicate the tax credits, has extensive underwriting requirements prior to the allocation and syndication of credits. The Federal Low Income Housing Tax Credit Program is very specific about the population to be served. Once the tax credits are in place, compliance is strictly monitored and enforced with significant financial impacts for failure to comply. The Virginia Community Development Corporation provides training and compliance monitoring throughout the life of the project as does VHDA. This compliance will be enforced for a period of 15 years. In the case of Attachment A-21 Treesdale Park, AHIP has agreed to extend the period of affordability for an additional 15 years so that benefits to LMI persons will be in place for the next 30 years. In addition to the safeguards in place through the Tax Credit Program, VHDA and the Virginia Community Development Corporation, Albemarle County has committed 21 project based vouchers for housing assistance to families with income at or below 50% of area median income. As part of the rezoning approval for the Treesdale Park property, it is required by Albemarle County that 100 % of the units be affordable to LMI persons. Attachment A-22 ~ ~ ~ Q ~ = rJl ~ U ~ ~ o rJl ~ CJ .. = o 00 ~ :a = = ~ j~ - = = o 0 e 0 < g o r--- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~ .... tJ '-"' > (l) o e= 1$ l:: ::c ~ < (l) 0_ ~~ ~o rolf) a:l~ ~e ~ ~ Vl ....:l ro 'i:l (l)..s:: ~ c ~ 0 8;::l a:l ::c~ ~ 'i:l 1:: ~ (l) (l) ro ~ g. Eo-< 'i:l~ ~~ P:: < ~ ~ U'i:l 0 "<::' ;::l < (l) ::c ~ ~ U l:: > o ti (l)~~ ::c 2 OJ)(l)u u U Eo-< Vl 0 Eo-< ~ o ,~~::c < 0-. U ~ ~ - 0-. U ~....:l r/) .... ..s 1:: o 0... 0... ;::l r/) >. ...... ~ ;::l o U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 .- .- .- .- O '-o~O ~ ~ ~'- N r--- 0 ~ N ~ r--- 0 o If) 00 o 10 M o 0 00 o 00 N If) If) If) .- M N ~ ~ ~ .- 0 00 N 0 If) 000 0'\ 0 00 00 If) 0'\ r--- M 0 0'\ 10 M ~ ~1S:i. - ~ o ....:l '-"' Vl ~ o ....:l ....:l ~ CJ .. := r'" ............ _ v f:! ro (l) 00a:l (l) (l) [5ca ~ o ~ 'i:l 'i:l u > U Vi ~ ~ :3 J: t...., o 8] .... ...... ;::l .... 55..s ..s:: ~ u 0 ~ ~ t...., (l) o 0... ...... c~ ..... ...... :-;:::: ~ ,..0 0 ro u .- '(; ro ~ ~ 'i:l:::: ~ ~ ...... Vl ~ ro B 8 Os .~ 815 o (l) u 8 t...., ;::l o u o (l)'i:l > .... (l) ro ...... ...... ...... ..... ~ 8 (l) ..... l:: Vl 8 8 (l) <If ..s::...... ...... u 4-< f:! o ...... >.~ .... 0 ro u 8 Vl~ 8 [5 ;::l ;:: Vl~ ro...... (l) ~ 'i:l (l) 'S: B t'l o ..... =It: P::8E-- C'-. ~ Z OJ)u~ .5 (l) ~ 'i:l'i:l= ~ ..... r.85U r'" .... < vO-.E-- a:lQjE-- 0> = 55 00 t:a (l) ...... u ro (l) 'i:l 'S: 2 0... ......~ o ~ o 'i:l >. (l) ..s:: ...... 4-< - Qj > o ~ 'i:l (l) ...... ~ Vl (l) .... ;::l OJ) t.;:1 (l) ..s:: ...... o ...... >. ...... ...... u ro ~ (l) (l) ~ ...... (l) l:: o u ~ o ..... ...... ro ...... = (l) ~ u o 'i:l 'i:l = ro Vl .... (l) ...... ...... ~ (l) ..s:: ...... ~ ..... ~ o ..... ...... ro .....: a g ..s~ = ro ..... (l) (l) .... ..s::,..o ......'i:l ~ ~ .;3 ~ ~ 0 '(; .~ 1:: = (l) ro u ...... (l) 0... a:l ~ ~ .c E-- o Z >- < ~ Oil = :a = ~ r,} ~-e -= = -~ -=~ ~ ~ ::; -:~~ ~-e t:i ~ _ CJ o .. = 0 ~.. .. Oil = = ~ .- -e- = ~ ~-; 10-. > o (l) ~-e CJ = .. = = ~ o Oil ~ = .. .. ~ ~ -= > o~ -= Oil CJ = = .- ~~ 10-.:; o CJ - - = = ~ CJ e ~ - .. '5 = e ~ 8 ~ -e .- = > = ~ ..,j~ .au .5= ~~ :3= = ~ 15i e-e = ~ ~-e -= = -t:i =: .S M N I < ...... ~ (l) ] u ro ...... < .. ~ - o Z ~ ~ = ~ ~ '<:t N < ...... = I]) ] ~ ...... < 00 00. ~ 00. o U ~ o z o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I 00 o o ('l ...c <.) ~ ~ ~ (oJ .. = o 00 0...... ...... ::: Q) CI:l ~o S d .~ 's ~"'d Q)~ '"g S Q) ,D < --- ...... Q) OJ) "'d ;::l o:l ~ ~ t"- lI'l \0 o CO fA Co-' = ~ U I = o Z fA Co-' = ~ U o o o o t"- ..... '" o U ...;l < Eo-< o Eo-< t"- II) \C Q II) ,...., .... ..... .... j;. .... ..... ~ < z o ...... Eo-< ~ Eo-< 00 ...... 2; ~ o ~ --- ..... ~ = 'e o .. =-- 00 o o ('l ...c ~ ~ rJ) ...... rJ) o <.) >.. ~ <.) rJ) ;::l -a ...... rJ) o U '"@ ;::l ...... <.) ~ o o o o o 0'1 o Q Q Q Q Q Q'I z o ...... Eo-< ...... 00 ...... ~ C/ U ~ 00 o o ('l ...c ~ ~ ::: o ...... ...... <.) e ...... rJ) ::: o U 1a ~ rJ) ...... <.) Q) ...... :E <.) < ~ 0::: o:l t"- 0'1 0'1 M 0'1 CO M - o t"- Q'I Q'I M Q'I QC) M ,...., z o ...... Eo-<';;' 0:::'-" 000 rJ'J'" 002; ~O U.....:l U...... ~~ o:l 00 o o ('l ...c <.) ~ ~ ::: o ...... ...... <.) e ...... rJ) ::: o U 1a rJ) '-2 ~ --- rJ) ...... <.) Q) ...... :E ~ ~ 0::: o:l 0'1 "<:t' \0 - o t"- - o Q'I ~ \C ,...., Q t"- ,...., "'~ 2;'" ~~ ~'" 0.., Cl ~ ~ Eo-< U ~ t:': Eo-< rJ'J 00 o o ('l ...c ~ ~ ::: o ...... ...... <.) e ...... rJ) ::: o U 1a ~ rJ) ...... <.) Q) ...... :E <.) < ~ t:': o:l lI'l M - "<:t' CO t"- o o o o M \0 II) N ,...., ~ ,...., ~ ,...., 00 o o ('l ...c <.) ~ ~ If) ('l I ~ ...... ::: Q) ] <.) CI:l ...... < '"@ <.) .~ "t) ~vi' ...... Q) I:: ~ O~ '0 rJ) Q) Q) rJ)~ CI:l ,D rJ) Q) ~ .5 ...... rJ) ~ a<.l - CI:l ;::l ...... <.) ~ CO M \0 "<:t' M M M o QC) M \C ~ N N N .....:l ~ Eo-< o Eo-< ~ o ~ ~ Eo-< ...... 00 rJ'J Eo-< rJ'J o U rJ'J ~ ~ ~ o /APPLICANT:I 2008 CDSG COMPETITIVE GRANTS Albemarle County DUNS 06-602-2047 !LOCAL GOVERNMENT ADDRESS / CONTACT PERSON:I 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Ron White, Chief of Housing IPHONEIFAXlEMAIL:1 434-296-5839 ext. 3407 Rwhite2@albemarle.org ICHIEF ELECTED OFFICIAL:I Kenneth C. Boyd, Chairman, Board of Supervisors IPROJECT NAME:1 jpROJECT TYPE:I Crozet Meadows Housing Production 'ROJECT DESCRIPTION :1 Albemarle County is requesting financial support for the preservation and production of affordable rental housing to serve disadvantaged elderly households. The Crozet Meadows Project will rehabilitate 28 existing apartments, and construct 38 new units, for occupancy by very low-income and extremely low-income elderly residents. All units will be one-story, one-bedroom, combined in 13 quadplexes and 7 duplexes, meeting Universal Design and EarthCraft accessibility and sustainability standards. The existing 28 units were built in 1979 for elderly residents with support from USDA's Rural Development rental housing program. The units need to be rehabilitated and upgraded to improve their durability, accessibility and comfort, and to increase their energy efficiency and sustainability. Additionally, the non-profit property owner, Jordan Development Corporation (JDC), received zoning approval in 2004 to build up to 38 new units, and the site plan will be approved in Spring 2008. mc has applied for Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) from the Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) to carry out the rehabilitation and new construction work, and preserve and produce affordable housing for 30 more years. In terms of the project timeline, with the approval of LIHTC, construction can proceed in the Winter/Spring 2008-2009. The buildings will be completed and placed in service at the end of calendar year 2009 and beginning of calendar year 2010. None of the current residents in the existing 28 apartments will be permanently displaced. Community/Project Importance According to the recently-released State of Housing Report of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District produced by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission and researched by the Center for Housing Research at Virginia Tech, there is a "gross deficit of about 4,660 affordable rental units for renters with incomes below 50% of the area median family income" in the Planning District. Thousands of low income households find rental housing but have to pay half or more of their montWy income on rent. The proposed Project will help tackle this problem, especially among the elderly in Albemarle County and in the Crozet community. Attachment B-1 Ten units will be reserved for households under 40% AMI, and 56 units for households under 50% AMI. Net rent levels in year one for those under 40% AMI will be approximately $467 per month, and for those in the 40% AMI to 50% AMI range the net rent will be approximately $561. A market study already completed indicates more than sufficient demand for these kind of units for elderly at these rent levels and with related subsidies. Moreover, with the rapidly rising numbers of retiring "baby boomers," demand will continue to increase. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved the assignment of up to eight project-based rental vouchers for the development (targeted to those under 40% AMI), which would bring the total number of rental-subsidized units to 35 (including the Rural Development subsidies) out of 66. The County's Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund has also approved funding for the Project. Renovations and Construction at Crozet Meadows While JDC is committed to preserving affordable housing, the agency also holds a core belief that affordable developments need to be brought up to 21st Century standards for energy efficiency, sustainability and livability. The preservation and production of multifamily rental properties is an important part of this effort. All the units will be accessible in compliance with VHDA Universal Design standards. All kitchen ranges will have front controls, all units will have an emergency call system, all bathrooms will have an independent or supplemental heat source, and all entrance doors will have two eye viewers, one at 48 inches and the other at standard height. JDC intends to make this development a role model in the County for multi-family green building, by achieving EarthCraft certification on both the rehabilitation and new construction. This will reduce the impact on the environment of the materials used, provide safer and more comfortable residences, and reduce utility costs to the residents and utility usage for the County. In pursuit of an EarthCraft certification, design elements will reduce air infiltration through the building's envelope by 30-40 percent versus typical construction. To gain such improvements, all windows will be Energy Star rated, low-E thermal-pane units. Additional insulation will be added to achieve high R-values. Outdated air conditioning units will be replaced with new 14 SEER heat pumps and variable speed air handlers, which will be standard in the new units. Jordan Development Corporation JDC is a 501(c)(3) non-profit created in 1970, as an affiliate of the Charlottesville Housing Foundation, for the purpose of developing and operating housing for low-income elderly and disabled persons in Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia. JDC has no members or paid staff, and is controlled and operated entirely through a volunteer Board of Directors. JDC has directly developed 92 units of elderly rent-assisted housing in Albemarle County, at The Meadows, The Meadowlands and The Scottsville School Apartments, and has participated with other non-profits in the creation of 69 additional low-income rental units not owned by JDe. Since its inception, JDC has been involved in the creation of over 200 housing unit for low-income persons in Virginia. For the implementation of this Project, JDC has partnered with Piedmont Housing Alliance and its staff. Funding Request To support the rehabilitation and production costs of 66 affordable, Universal Design and EarthCraft units, Albemarle County is requesting $700,000, including a 10% administrative fee, for site infrastructure. Site infrastructure, including water, sewer and streets, will cost approximately $1,001,592. Of this, $301,592 will come from private and local sources, and $700,000 from CDBG funds. The overall project has a development budget of over $9.1 million including acquisition. The majority of the funds needed for this Project are either already existing (as equity and through Rural Development) or pending approval through the LIHTC program and related permanent financing from federal and state funds associated with LIHTC projects. These existing and federal/state funds, including $134,000 approved from the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund, total approximately $8.15 million. The remaining gap is the focus this CDBG application and local fundraising efforts. Attachment B-2 IPROJECT COST:I Source CDBG State Federal (Grant) Federal (Loan) Private Local TOTAL Amount $700,000 $ $ $ $167,192 $134,400 $1,001,592 ~CTIVE CDBG PROJECTS:I Name Year Awarded Amount of Award 1) 2) 3) ~ATIONAL OBJECTIVES:I Please note the approximate amount of funds proposed in this project which can be attributed to each of the listed National Objectives (amount may be $0). National Objective LMI Benefit Proposed Activity Housing Production Amount $700,000 Slum/Blight $0 Urgent Need $0 iPOPULATION:1 Please indicate the population of the applicant locality: 93,601 Attachment B-3 !PREP ARER:I Provide the name, phone number, and email of the person who actually prepared this application: Peter Loach, Piedmont Housing Alliance; 434-817-2436; peterl@piedmonthousing.org By checking these boxes the applicant is affirming the following statements: X Applicant is currently eligible to receive the full amount that is being requested and if this project is awarded, this would not cause the applicant to exceed the multi-contract limitation of$2.5 million in open, active contracts. X Applicant agrees to send responsible parties, to include any relevant subcontractors, to all mandatory DHCD-sponsored training events, to include the Construction Management and Grant Management workshops, and to provide representation at all management team meetings ICERTIFICATION AND SIGNATURE:I To the best of my knowledge and belief, the information included in this proposal is true and correct, the proposal has been duly author by the governing body of the applicant, citizen participation requirements have been met, and the proposal has been submitted for Plam District Commission review. Name: Robert W. Tucker. Jr. Title: County Executive Signature: (Include Local Government Resolution in A TT ACHMENT # 7) Attachment B-4 I INATIONAL OBJECTIVE - Low- and Moderate-Income Benefit:1 For all low- and moderate-income projects: SURVEY RESULTS Total in Project / Service Area LMI in Project / Service Area LMI Percentage in Pro' ect / Service Area Total Surveyed Total Responding LMI Responding (Include a copy of the survey and supporting documentation in ATTACHMENT # 4) Households 66 66 100% See market study Persons 83 83 100% See market study F C h C . F T H d E 'D or ompre enSlve, ommumty aCl lty, ousmg, an some conomlC eve opment projects: Product # #LMI # #LMI %LMI Households Households Persons Persons Persons Served Served Served Served Served Housing 66 66 83 83 100% Water Sewer Streets Drainage Jobs Other For Community Service Facility and similar projects: Product # #LMI # #LMI %LMI (specify service) Households Households Persons Persons Persons Served Served Served Served Served Attachment B-5 ICOMPLIANCE CHART (for Comprehensive, Housin2, or Community Facility projects):1 NOTE: These numbers are taken from the initial 2000 U.S. Census. The total population was corrected to approximately 84,000 upon appeal but subsets were not adjusted with the correction. Also, although the estimates from the Weldon Cooper Center at UVa indicate a population of 93,601 in 2007, there is no breakdown of that total. An assumption could be made that the percentage of subsets remain relatively the same as in 2000. ETHNICITY Population Hispanic or Latino Not Hispanic or Not Latino TOTAL Population Locality 3,029 76,207 79,236 Proj ect Area 106 4,435 4,541 RACE Population White Black / Asian American Indian / TOTAL African American Alaskan Native Population Locality 67,474 7,650 2,268 135 79236 Proj ect Area 4,112 272 47 4 4,541 Population Native American Indian Asian Black / American Indian / TOTAL Hawaiian / Alaskan Native and African Alaskan Native Population Other Pacific and White White American and Black! African Islander and White American Locality 9 67,609 69,742 75,124 7,785 79,236 Project Area 0 4,116 4,159 4,384 276 4,541 Population Other TOTAL Multi-racial Population Locality 1,019 79,236 Project Area 62 4,541 Households Female-Headed Elderly With TOTAL Handicap Households Locality 11,736 9,920 9,772 31,876 Project Area 639 673 742 1,723 Attachment B-6 INA TIONAL OBJECTIVE - Slum and Bli~ht Elimination:1 Structure Type Number in Number Number Number % Blighted (as Project Area Currently Currently Blighted total of ALL Occupied Unoccupied structures in project area) Commercial Residential Publicly-owned Industrial Non-profit Vacant Structure Vacant Land (in blocks) N/A N/A Other: Other: TOTAL Blight Assessment: 1) Was a thorough physical assessment completed for the project area? YES NO 2) Will CDBG funds for physical improvements target blighted elements? _ YES _ NO 3) Was a Master Plan developed to guide improvements? YES NO 4) Will the locality pursue blight removal in accordance with the Code? YES NO 5) Are there significant infrastructure deficiencies that will be addressed (water, sewer, sidewalks, drainage, etc...? Briefly describe in quantitative and qualitative terms. 6) Will the physical improvements remove all blighting elements? YES NO 7) How many businesses are located in the project area? 8) How many businesses (actual number and percentage of total businesses) have closed within the past three years? Approximately how many employees (actual number and percentage of total employees) have been displaced as a result of these closings? Attachment B- 7 9) How many businesses have located (actual number and percentage of total businesses this represents) within the past three years? a. How many jobs (actual number and percentage of total jobs) have been created as a result? 10) Are there any housing units in the project area? If so, how many TOTAL and how many are occupied? (Include copies of assessment tools in ATTACHMENT # 4; provide 3 copies of a Master Plan or similar document with the proposal copies; include other documents in ATTACHMENT #5; and, acknowledge blight in Resolution in ATTACHMENT # 7) Additional narrative responses to these questions may be included in the Project Type Proposal Elements section. ICENSUS INFORMATION :1 Census Place Code Census Tract(s) 111 Blocks / Block Groups 3009 Group 3 Attachment B-8 FINANCIAL SUMMARY TOTAL CDBG NON-CDBG NON-CDBG ACTIVITY AND LINE ITEM BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET SOURCE A ADMINISTRATION 56,000 56,000 0 nJa SUBTOTAL 56,000.00 56,000.00 0.00 B INTERIM ASSISTANCE 0.00 0.00 0.00 C PERMANENT RELOCATION Owner-occupied households 0.00 0.00 0.00 Renter-occupied households 0.00 0.00 0.00 Relocation specialist 0.00 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 D ACQUISITION (land/improvements, not easements) 0.00 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 E CLEARANCE & DEMOLITION 0.00 0.00 0.00 E HOUSING REHABILITATION Owner-occupied construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 Renter-occupied construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rehabilitation specialist 0.00 0.00 0.00 Temporary relocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 HMEP 0.00 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 F SUBSTANTIAL RECONSTRUCTION Clearance & demolition 0.00 0.00 0.00 Owner-occupied construction 0.00 0.00 0.00 Rehabilitation specialist 0.00 0.00 0.00 Temporary relocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 HMEP 0.00 0.00 0.00 SUBTOTAL 0.00 0.00 0.00 2008 CDBG PROJECT BUDGET LOCALITY: Albemarle County, Crozet Meadows Attachment B-9 FINANCIAL SUMMARY TOTAL CDBG NON-CDBG NON-CDBG ACTIVITY AND LINE ITEM BUDGET BUDGET BUDGET SOURCE G HOMEOWNERSHIP 0.00 0.00 0.00 CREATION H SEWER Architect! engineer/design 0.00 0.00 0.00 Inspection 0.00 0.00 0.00 Acquisition (easements only) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Temporary relocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 Construction/ imorovements 330,957.00 225,400.00 105,557.00 LIHTC/CCTF SUBTOTAL 330,957.00 225,400.00 105,557.00 I WATER Architect! enl?:ineer/ design 0.00 0.00 0.00 Inspection 0.00 0.00 0.00 Acquisition (easements only) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Temporary relocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 Construction/improvements 236,398.00 161,000.00 75,398.00 SUBTOTAL 236,398.00 161,000.00 75,398.00 LIHTC/CCTF J STREETS 0.00 0.00 0.00 Architect! enl?:ineer/ design 0.00 0.00 0.00 Inspection 0.00 0.00 0.00 Acquisition (easements only) 0.00 0.00 0.00 Temporary relocation 0.00 0.00 0.00 Construction/improvements $378,237.00 257,600.00 120,637.00 LIHTC/CCTF SUBTOTAL 378,237.00 257,600.00 120,637.00 TOTAL 1,001,592.00 700,000.00 301,592.00 LIHTC/CCTF Attachment B-1 0 ~ <C ~ ~ ::) U) ..... <C ..... U Z <C Z ..... LL. .. ~ ~ ~ Q ~ = 00. ~ U ~ ~ o 00. ~ ~ E--- r:/) Q,j ~ ~ - E--- = 0 0 r:/) U r:/) o:l 0 E--- ~ Q ;?i ::r: ....., ..... U r:/) .....:l 'C r:/) = 0 = ~ ~ U E--- ~ N 0 ~ U J ~ ~ ~ ~ = 0 0 co 0 ~ ~ ~ M r--- r--- ...... ...... - ...... = = 0 8 0 N < 0 0 N 0\ 0 0 0\ l.r) O~ '<:t ...... ...... '<:t~ ~ 0 0 O~ r--- M \.0 ...... ...... ...... V7 V7 V7 V7 Q,j -.. ....:l ~ ..... -.. < - ~ ~ = "'"' 0 E-- 0 0 0 00 .....:l '-' '-' E-- 0 ~ ...... (l) Cd o:l (l) "'"' "'"' ~ ~ ..... (l) (l) ;;. Q Cd "'0 "'0 u IU 105 (l) (l) 0 'C 1 I~ I~ l.....:ll~ I ...... o (l) (l) u...!:: "'"'..... ::l "'"' ~t8 ...!:: ::: u 0 ~ ~ ...... (l) o 0.. ;;.-..15 ..... Cd ..... ..... :;:: d ~ g ...... '8 Cd ~ gj "'0:::: ::: (l) Cd ::: 1:: gj (l) B 8 .s .~ S 1:: o (l) u S ...... ::l o u ...... 0 (l)"'O ;;. "'"' (l) Cd ...... ...... 1:: 's (l) ....... !:: '" ::l "'"' u 0 (l) 00- ...!::..... ..... u ...... ~ o ..... ;;.-..::: "'"' 0 Cd U S 00- S ~ ::l t: '" (l) Cd:: (l) ::: :'E ~ . ;;. ~ M o .';::: =1:1: ~SE-- Sz ~o~ ::: u ~ ;.a~~ ::: ..... .... cB6U r,., "'"' < ""~E-- o:l 'E-- Q~< U 0 ::: 6 ~....... c.:l@"'08 z...... (l)..... ....o~~ ~ ~'-E E ~~~t8 ~ tl....... ::: N 01)....... ~.....:::..... ~ ~..... u =!::"O,::l Eo-< :::::: 08cBg ~(l)o"'O OoSo:l~ rFJ .~ Q (l) ~,;;::u$J Eo-<"".... <~8::l Eo-<;>:::~ rFJ ~ (l) u Cd (l) "'0 .;; 2 0.. .....~ o ::: o "'0 ;;.-.. (l) ...!:: ..... ...... ....., (l) ;;. o ~ "'0 (l) ..... '" ..... ...... '" (l) "'"' ::l 01) ~ (l) ...!:: ..... o ..... b ..... u Cd :><: (l) (l) ..... Cd ~ !:: o u ::: o .~ ..... ::: (l) S ::l u o "'0 "'0 ~ '" "'"' (l) ..... ..... .Q (l) ...!:: ..... .S ::: .9 ..... Cd,....; E g t8~ ::: Cd ....... (l) (l) "'"' ...!::..o ....."0 ~ ~ oS ::: ::: 0 oa 0,0 1::: Cd (l) ~ u ...... (l) 0.. o:l ~ Q,j ,.Q E-- o Z ;;;.. < ~ ell = :a = ~ r,i Q,j'C .= = ......~ -QQ,j ~ ~ :!j; 1- ~ Q,j'C ~ f: ...... ~ o _ = 0 Q,j~ - ell = = CI.l ..... 'C~ = = ~-; ... ;;. o Q,j Q,j'C ~ = - = = Q,j o ell CI.l = - - Q,j Q,j .= ;;. ...... Q,j 0- .=eIl ~ = = ..... Q,j~ ... - o = ......~ = = Q,j ~ e Q,j ...... - ..... = e CI.l e - o Q,j ~ ~ 'C ..... = ;;. = f: r,i'~ au .;s= CI.l~ r,i'= ...... Q,j =.= ~ =: e'C = Cl.l Q,j'C .= = ......~ ... = ..... ..... ...... ...... I o:l ..... ::: (l) ] u ,Cd it:: -< Q,j ...... o Z Q,j CI.l = Q,j ~ ~ c( :I: :I: ::) U) .... c( ..... u z c( z ..... u. 00 ~I 0 0 ('l --- ~ ,......, --- ('l u .s d' 0 <I) "'0 Q,j 0 0 tJ ~ l. = = Vl Vl ~ ('l 0\ trl - .. ,......, 00 0 ~ M {A 00 fA 0 I-' U ~ ~ ~ U 0 I = Q Z :z 0 ""'"I ~ 0 < 0 0 > fA ~~ ~~ ~ \0 {A !e .... ~ '" Q U ....l -< E-o 0 E-o ~Vl I ~t-< I .e ~~ ~~ ... ... ~t-< ... .... ~ o{Vl -< --- ~ .... ~ ~ = ~ "Cl Vl Q - ~ ('l ,......, I CO ..... l:: <l) ] U c;j ..... ..... < February 28, 2008 Denise Ambrose Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development 501 North Second St. Richmond, Virginia 23219 Dear Ms. Ambrose: For almost thirty years, residents of Albemarle County have benefited from community improvement activities that have been supported in part through the state's Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG). Most of this activity has involved the rehabilitation of owner-occupied houses so that the homeowners could remain in safe, decent, and affordable units. Although we continue to have scattered sites that can use this assistance, we have a much more pressing community development need as identified in recent studies. That need is for the creation of more affordable rental housing and we see this being addressed by nonprofit, for- profit, and public partnerships. Over the past few years, County staff has been working with two particular projects which will add 128 new affordable rental units. Treesdale Park is a 90-unit development proposed by the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program and Crozet Meadows, a partnership between Jordan Development Corp. and the Piedmont Housing Alliance, will add 38 new senior rental units to an existing 28 units that will be renovated. Both projects have applied for low-income housing tax credits and plan to request the County to apply for CDBG to help address on-site infrastructure needs. These funds are necessary to keep the financing costs as low as possible so that rents are not negatively affected. Staff reported at our last Housing Committee meeting that the rules put in place by DHCD may impact the County's decision to apply for COSG funds and, if we do apply and receive funds, there may be limited benefits to the proposed developments. This specifically is the rule that funds used for on-site infrastructure must be repaid at the completion of the development. Both projects have the ability to access construction funds. The real impact of CDBG would be in the form of a deferred loan without interest for at least ten, and possibly fifteen, years. For Treesdale Park, a deferred loan is worth between $20 and $50 per month in rent on each of the ninety proposed units. Translated into income, this means anything other than a deferred loan would require annual household incomes to be $800 to $2000 higher to maintain the same level of affordability. As Chairman of, and on behalf of, the Albemarle County Housing Committee, which is appointed by the Board of Supervisors to provide advice and guidance to the Board, I am asking that DHCD reconsider this rule in its CDBG Program Design. Understanding that it is too late to make such a Attachment C-l Denise Ambrose Page Two change for this year, I encourage you to consider being open to flexibility and negotiation if one or both of these projects receive an award of CDBG funds. We believe that housing production is an important community development need and the way to achieve that is through the commitment and willingness of all partners to compromise when necessary so that the eventual beneficiaries, residents and citizens of the County, are served well. Thank you and your staff for their continued commitment in working with Albemarle County. We look forward to a continued and successful partnership with DHCD. Sincerely, Leonard Winslow III Chairman Albemarle County Housing Committee Copies: Nancy O'Brien Bill Shelton Todd Christensen Bob Tucker Bryan Elliott Attachment C-2 Attachment D RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19, 2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a ninety (90) unit rental development known as Treesdale Park; and WHEREAS, other resources estimated in excess of $20,000,000 including, but not limited to, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits, HOME funds, Federal Home Loan Bank, the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund, and VHDA loans will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Treesdale Park Apartments will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing twenty-one (21) project-based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: ~ Development of ninety (90) affordable rental units benefiting approximately 250 persons annually, one-third of whom are expected to be children; ~ Construction of a community center; and ~ Provision of services including afterschool school programs. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Treesdale Park Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. ********** I, Ella W. Jordon, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held March 19, 2008. Clerk, County Board of Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Boyd Mr. Dorrier Ms. Mallek Mr. Rooker Mr. Slutzky Ms. Thomas Attachment E RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents and improving the livability of all neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 6, 2008 and March 19,2008 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $700,000 in Community Development Block Grant funds to support the production of a thirty-eight (38) unit senior rental development known as CrozetMeadows;and WHEREAS, other resources include Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and the Crozet Crossings Housing Trust Fund will be invested in the project; and WHEREAS, one hundred percent (100%) of the population residing at Crozet Meadows will be very-low and extremely-low income as required by the Internal Revenue Service for federal low-income housing tax credits; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has committed to providing eight (8) project- based Housing Choice Vouchers; and WHEREAS, the projected benefits of the project include: ~ Development of thirty-eight (38) new affordable rental units benefiting approximately 50 senior persons annually; and ~ Rehabilitation of twenty-eight (28) existing senior rental units benefiting approximately 36 persons annually. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit all necessary and appropriate documents for the Crozet Meadows Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. ********** I, Ella W. Jordon, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held March 19, 2008. Clerk, County Board of Supervisors Aye Nay Mr. Boyd Mr. Dorrier Ms. Mallek Mr. Rooker Mr. Slutzky Ms. Thomas GENERAL ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATION Original copy in original proposal; photocopies in other copies The applicant hereby assures and certifies that: (a) It possesses legal authority to apply for the grant, and to execute the proposed program. (b) Its governing body has duly adopted or passed as an official act a resolution, motion, or similar action authorizing the filing of the application including all understandings and assurances contained therein, and directing and authorizing the person identified as the official representative of the applicant to act in connection with the application and to provide such additional information as may be required. ( c) Its chief executive officer or other officer of applicant who has been approved by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development: 1. Consents to assume the status of a responsible Federal official under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEP A) and other provisions of Federal law, as specified at 24 CFR 58.5(a) through (h) which serve to further the purposes ofNEPA insofar as the provisions of such Federal law apply to this Program; 11. Is authorized and consents on behalf of the applicant and himself to accept the jurisdiction of the Federal and Commonwealth of Virginia courts for the purpose of enforcement of his responsibilities as such an official. (d) It will comply with the regulations, policies, guidelines and requirements of the Code of Federal Regulations (24 CFR Part 85), OMB Circular A-128 and Circular A-87 as they relate to the application, acceptance, and use of Federal funds under this Program; and, as applicable, all State laws and administrative requirements which may supersede them (by virtue of being more stringent). (e) It will comply with the provisions of Executive Order 11988, relating to evaluation of flood hazards and Executive Order 12088 relating to the prevention, control and abatement of water pollution. (f) It will require buildings or facilities designed, constructed, or altered with funds provided under this Program to comply with the "American Standard Specifications for Making Buildings and Facilities Accessible to, and Usable by, the Physically Handicapped," Number A-117.1-R 1980, or Uniform Federal Accessibility Standards (UFAS) in accordance with the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code. The applicant will be responsible for conducting inspections to insure compliance with these specifications by the contractor. (g) It will not recover the capital costs for public improvements financed in whole or in part with CDBG funds through assessments against properties owned and occupied by low- and Attachment F-1 moderate-income persons nor will fees or assessments be charged to such persons as a condition of obtaining access to the public improvements. (Per section I 04(b)( 5) of Title I of Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended). (h) It will comply with: 1. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L 88-352), and the regulations issued pursuant thereto (24 CFR Part 1), which provides that no person in the United States shall on the grounds ofrace, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected to discrimination under any program or activity for which the applicant receives Federal financial assistance. A recipient, in determining the types of housing, accommodations, facilities, services, financial aid, or other benefits which will be provided under any such program or activity, or the class of persons to whom, or the situations in which, such housing, accommodations, facilities, services, financial aid, or other benefits will be provided under any such program or activity, or the class of persons to be afforded an opportunity to participate in any such program or activity, may not, directly or through contractual or other arrangements, utilize criteria or methods of administration which have the effect of subjecting persons to discrimination because of their race, color, or national origin, or have the effect of defeating or substantially impairing accomplishment of the objectives of the program or activity as respect to persons of a particular race, color, or national origin. The project service area shall not be selected in such a manner as to provide services to a population in which the proportion of minority and other protected population groups is substantially lower than the proportion of those groups throughout the jurisdiction of the locality unless: . the areas of disproportionate concentrations of minority and other protected population groups has already been served, or · there are definite plans for the imminent provision of similar services to those areas, or . there is reasonable justification for the provision of services to the selected area notwithstanding the substantially lower proportion of minority and other protected population groups. 11. Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968 (Pub. L. 90-284), as amended, administering all programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing; and will take action to affirmatively further fair housing in the sale or rental of housing, the financing of housing, and the provision of brokerage servIces. 111. Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto (24 CFR Part 570.602), which provides that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds ofrace, color, national origin, or sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under, any program or activity funded in whole or part with funds provided under this Program. Any prohibition against discrimination on the basis of age under Discrimination Act of 1975 or with respect to an otherwise qualified handicapped individual as provided in Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended shall also apply to this Program. Attachment F-2 IV. Executive Order 11063 on equal opportunity in housing and nondiscrimination in the sale or rental of housing built with Federal assistance. v. Executive Order 11246, and the regulations issued pursuant thereto 41 CFR Chapter 60), which provides that no person shall be discriminated against on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin in all phases of employment during the performance of Federal or federally assisted construction contracts. Contractors and subcontractors on Federal and federally assisted construction contracts shall take affirmative action to insure fair treatment in employment, upgrading, demotion, or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination, rates of pay or other forms of compensation and selection for training and apprenticeship. (i) It will comply with Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, requiring that to the greatest extent feasible opportunities for training and employment be given to lower-income residents of the project area and contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to eligible business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by, persons residing in the area of the project. (j) It will: 1. In acquiring real property be guided, to the greatest extent practicable under State law, by the land acquisition policies in Sections 301 and 302 of the Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970; and 11. Payor reimburse property owners for necessary expenses as specified in Section 303 and 304 of the Uniform Act; and 111. Comply with the applicable Sections (202 through 205) of Title II (relocation assistance) of the Uniform Act in providing relocation payments and relocation assistance; and IV. Comply with DOT regulations at 49 CFR Part 24 in implementing the requirements, it will: 1) Carry out the policies and procedures of Part 24 in a manner that insures that the acquisition and relocation processes do not result in different or separate treatment to persons on account of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or source of income; and 2) Assure that, within a reasonable period of time prior to displacement, comparable decent, safe and sanitary replacement dwellings will be available to all displaced families and individuals and that the range of choices available to such persons will not vary on account of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, or source of income; and 3) Inform affected persons of their rights under the policies and procedures set forth under the regulations in Part 24, including their rights under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Title VIII ofthe Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended. (k) It will establish safeguards to prohibit employees from using positions for a purpose that is or gives the appearance of being motivated by a desire for private gain for themselves or others, particularly those with whom they have family, business, or other ties. (1) It will comply with the provisions of the Hatch Act which limits the political activity of employees. Attachment F-3 (m)It will comply with the provisions ofthe Davis-Bacon Act as amended and the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act as determined by the Secretary of Labor. This section shall apply to rehabilitation of residential property only if such property is designed for residential use of eight or more families. (n) It will give the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development and the Comptroller General through any authorized representatives access to and the right to examine all records, books, papers, or documents related to the grant. (0) It will insure that facilities under its ownership, lease or supervision which shall be utilized in the accomplishment of the program are not listed on the Environmental Protection Agency's (EP A) list of Violating Facilities and that it will notify the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development of the receipt of any communication from the Director of the EP A Office of Federal Activities indicating that a facility to be used in the project is under consideration for listing by the EP A. (p) It will comply with the flood insurance purchase requirements of Section 102 (a) of the Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973, Pub. L. 93-234,87 Stat. 975, approved December 31, 1973. Section 103 (a) required, on and after March 2, 1974, the purchase of flood insurance in communities where such insurance is available as a condition for the receipt of any Federal financial assistance for construction or acquisition purposes for use in any area, that has been identified by the Secretary of the Department of Housing and Urban Development as an area having special flood hazards. The phrase "Federal financial assistance" includes any form of loan, grant, guaranty, insurance payment, rebate, subsidy, disaster assistance loan or grant, or any other form of direct or indirect Federal assistance. (q) It will in connection with its performance of environmental assessments under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, comply with Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (16 U.S.C. 470), Executive Order 11593, and the Preservation of Archeological and Historical Data Act of 1966 (16 U.S.c. 469a-1, et. Seq.) by: i. Consulting with the State Historic Preservation Officer to identify properties listed in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places that are subject to adverse effects (see 36 CFR Part 800.8) by the proposed activity, and 11. Complying with all requirements established by HUD and the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development to avoid or mitigate adverse effects upon such properties. (r) Assure upon funding, it will implement a "residential anti-displacement and relocation assistance plan," pursuant to Section 570.496a(b). (s) It will implement all required actions to ensure compliance pursuant to 24 CFR Part 8, Nondiscrimination Based on Handicap in Federally Assisted Programs and Activities. (t) The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee Attachment F-4 or any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 11. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee or any agency, Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, "Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying," in accordance with its instructions. 111. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all subawards at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grants, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. (u) Any survey information submitted with the application is a true representation of the data and has not been altered or fabricated. The survey was conducted and analyzed in strict accordance with the methodology stated. (v) The certification set out below is a material representation upon which reliance is placed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in awarding the grant. Ifit is later determined that the grantee knowingly rendered a false certification, or othelWise violates the requirements ofthe Drug-Free Workplace Act, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, in addition to any other remedies available to the Federal Government, take action authorized under the Drug-Free Workplace Act. Chief Administrative Official: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Name County Executive Title Signature Date Attachment F-5 CITIZEN PARTICIPATION ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATION The applicant assures and certifies that it has provided its citizens adequate opportunities to participate in the development of this proposal by: . Holding at least two public hearings in the locality prior to the submission of the proposal, the first one for the purpose of obtaining the views of citizens on community development and housing needs and the second (held at least 7 days after the first) for the purpose of informing the public on the proposed CDBG project. Participation by low- and moderate-income residents and stakeholders in the project or service area and the community at large was encouraged. The hearings were held at times and locations convenient to potential beneficiaries and with accommodation for the disabled. Public input into the development of this proposal was obtained at hearings held on: February 6,2008 AND March 19,2008 (date) (date) . Publishing a notice to advertise the public hearings and availability of proposal information at least 7 days prior to the dates of the hearings in the non-legal section of a NEWSPAPER of local general circulation and AT LEAST ONE OTHER TYPE OF ANNOUNCEMENT. The advertisements ran on: January 21 & 28, 2008 AND March 3 & 10,2008 ; ( date) ( date) Advertisements for the two public hearing must be published separately. Applicants may not only publish one advertisement that includes information on both public hearings. · Maintaining files which contain documentary evidence that the hearings were held. These files must contain proof of publication of the hearing notices, written and/or recorded minutes of the hearings, and lists of citizens attending the hearings; · Making CDBG program and proposal documentation available to the public for comment during regular office hours. This documentation should include the range of proposed activities, the estimated amounts of funding which will benefit low- and moderate-income persons, the plans to minimize displacement and provide displacement assistance where applicable, and a summary of the proposed application. This documentation should also include public information on any other CDBG project undertaken within the last 5 years; Attachment G-1 . Providing technical assistance to groups representative of persons of low- and moderate-income that request such assistance in developing proposals for the use of CDBG funds, with the level and type of assistance determined by the locality; . Providing timely written responses to written complaints and grievances, within 15 working days where practicable; . Accommodating the needs of non-English speaking residents at public hearings where more than 5% of the attendees can be reasonably expected not to speak English; and, . Adhering to the CDBG Citizen Participation Plan per the 2008 CDBG Program Design. Chief Administrative Official Robert W. Tucker. Ir Name County Executive Title Signature Date Attach original copies of all newspaper Public Hearing notices. Original notice copies should be clipped from the appropriate newspapers and attached with clear tape to 8 'l'2-inch x II-inch white paper with the date of publication clearly visible. Photocopies should be made for other proposal copies In Regional proposals, each participating locality must conduct two public hearings and the proposal must contain, from each participating locality, a signed copy of this page and copies of all newspaper advertisements. Again, originals in original copy and photocopies in other copies. Attachment G-2 DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ASSURANCES AND CERTIFICATION The grantee certifies that it will provide a drug-free workplace by: (a) Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee's workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; (b) Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about- 1. The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace; 11. The grantee's policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace; iii. Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs; and IV. The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug abuse violations occurring in the workplace; (c) Making it a requirement that each employee to be engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph (a); (d) Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph (a) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will - 1. Abide by the terms of the statement; and 11. Notify the employer of any criminal drug statue conVIctIOn for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after such conviction; (e) Notifying the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development within ten days after receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such condition; (1) Taking one of the following actions, within 30 days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any employee who is so convicted - 1. Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination; or Attachment H-1 11. Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency; (g) Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of paragraphs (a), (b), (c), (d), (e) and (t). Chief Administrative Official: Robert W. Tucker. Jr. Name County Executive Title Signature Date Original copies in original proposal; photocopies in other proposal copies Attachment H-2 I ZMA 2004-0018 Fontana Phase 4C -RA, R 1, R4 to R4 with proffered plan .34 single family lots on approx 17 ac .Density slightly < 2 du/ac .15% affordable housing in form of cash . Jn~ert Il}'lqge or map -$17,500 per unit IO mmgate Impacts ZMA2004-018 . , FontaNl Pha.. 4C 1 '" " Fontana Phase 4C "'O~UXOR , SW""BAS'N Background · BOS Public Hearing August 8, 2007 · Public requested completed, repaired, standard paths in existing phases of development · Applicant agreed to work with staff and neighborhood to come up with plan · Staff prepared plan that applicant has proffered Tl:~,!{A ; ~ i_/. ~ ; @ . ~ 8 - ~ ~ 0....:.... .. .. 2 2 , Pedestrian Path Plan, prepared by County Engineer, contains locations for paths and standards Proffer will ensure that path system is installed prior to any grading for Phase 4C ~"-... Recommendation Staff recommends approval of rezoning with proffered plan dated July 30, 2007 and proffers dated February 24, 2008 and signed March 13, 2008. Proffers include pedestrian path plan. Waivers for interconnections to the east; curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street trees on three of the new streets instead of just one of the new streets; and critical slopes disturbance were not granted by the Planning Commission. Therefore, the applicant will need to meet subdivision and zoning requirements or request the waivers with subdivision approval. 3 ( t Original Proffer Amended Proffer ."j (Amendment # 1 to ZMA 94-06 ) PROFFER FORM FOR FONT ANA PHASE 4C Date: February 24, 2008 ZMA# 04-18 Tax Map and Parcel Number Tax Map 78E. Parcel A 17.15 Acres to be rezoned from RL R4. RA to R4 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. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that such conditions are reasonable. 1. Conformity with Plans: Fontana Phase 4C shall be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Fontana - Phase 4C Rezoning Plan," prepared by Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, dated, July 30, 2007, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, (the "Plan"). No more than thirty-four (34) dwelling units shall be developed in Fontana Phase 4C. 2. Final Gradine: Plan: The Owner shall submit a final grading plan meeting the requirements of this section (hereinafter, the "Final Grading Plan") with the application for each subdivision of the residential units shown on the Plan identified in Proffer 1 above. The Final Grading Plan shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Final Grading Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to the approval of the first preliminary subdivision plat. The subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved Final Grading Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer has determined the lot is not graded consistent with the approved Final Grading Plan. The Final Grading Plan shall satisfy the following: A. The Final Grading Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer. B. The Final Grading Plan shall be drawn to scale not greater than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. C. All proposed grading shall be shown at contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet. 1 RECEIVED AT 80S MEETING Date: 3'1<:1J'~ Agendn Ii,,;)) #:.. r I Clerk's Initials: ttYl '-R.U-'- ( D. All concentrated surface drainages over lots shall be clearly shown with the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be shown to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from flooding of dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails. Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted with turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient of three (3) feet horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3:1). Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient of two (2) feet of horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2: 1), unless the County Engineer finds that the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. E. Surface drainage from one-half (1/2) acre ofland or from three (3) or more lots, whichever is greater in area, shall be collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way outside of the lots. F. All drainage from streets shall be carried across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site. G. The Final Grading Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if the distance is less than ten (10) feet, from the portion of the structure facing the street has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adjacent to possible entrances that shall not be served by a stairway. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. H. Any requirement of this condition may be waived by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual plan at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of five hundred (500) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams, stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses, and location of parking, as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be waived to at least an equivalent degree. In approving a waiver, the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition would not forward the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would 2 ~ not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development ofthe Project, and to the land adjacent thereto. 1. The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. All amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. 3. Affordable Housine:: The Owner shall contribute $2,809.00 cash per dwelling unit, up to an aggregate maximum contribution of $95,500.00 (equivalent to $19,100 cash per unit as cash in lieu of five (5) affordable dwelling units) to the County for the purpose of affordable housing. Each cash contribution shall be due and payable with each application for a building permit. Each cash contribution shall be used for the purpose of funding affordable housing programs in Albemarle County. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within ten (10) years after the last payment of the contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use serving Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 4. Trees: At least one hundred-seventy (170) trees shall be planted or retained on the subdivided lots. Trees shall be distributed among all lots with a minimum of 5 trees per lot. The five trees to be counted on each lot shall be marked in the field for inspection purposes. The owner shall not request a certificate of occupancy until a final zoning inspection is performed and all required trees are in place. Standard for trees to be retained: Deciduous trees to be retained shall be at least a 1 ~ inch caliper d.b.h. and non-deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. All trees to be retained shall be identified on erosion and sediment control plans, fmal grading plans, and road plans. A tree conservation plan in accordance with Section 32.7.9.4. of the Zoning Ordinance shall be submitted and approved prior to approval of any erosion and sediment control permit for grading. Standards for trees to be planted: All trees shall be planted in accordance with either the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nurserymen's Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, or the road and bridge specifications of the Virginia Department of Transportation. At planting, deciduous trees shall be at least a 1 1Iz inches in caliper d.b.h.; non-deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. 5. Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian paths shown on the Plan shall be constructed according to the standards for Class A Type 1 pedestrian paths in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. The Owner shall not request that the County issue the ninth (9th) building permit until the paths have been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 6. Cash proffer: The Owner shall contribute $17,500 cash to the County for each unit constructed within the Property for the purpose of mitigating impacts from the development. Each cash contribution shall be used for improvements for schools, libraries, public safety, parks and transportation as identified in the County's Capital 3 ( Improvements Program. The cash contribution shall be paid in increments of $17,500 for each unit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for each unit. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within five (5) years after the date, all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use serving Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 7. Annual Adiustment of Cash Proffers: Beginning January 1, 2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index (the "MSI"). In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 8. Final Approval: The Owner shall not submit an application for an erosion and sediment control permit for grading until improvements have been completed for phases 1, 2, 3, and 4A and 4B of the Fontana Subdivision and all bonds held by the County in conjunction with subdivision, stormwater management, and erosion control for prior phases have been released by the County. 9. Architectural Standards: The Owner shall require as part of the covenants for Fontana Phase 4C that all structures be constructed using medium shaded earth-tone colors for f~ade treatment of the buildings and dark, non~reflective materials for roofs. The colors for the fac;ade treatments and the colors and materials for the roofs shall be subject to prior approval by the Director of Planning. 10. Plan for Pedestrian Paths for Phases 1. 2.3. 4A and 4B of Fontana Subdivision: The Owner shall construct pedestrian paths in accordance with the plan entitled "Fontana Pedestrian Path Plan," prepared by Glenn Brooks 2-25-08, pages 1,2 and 3. These paths shall be completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to grading in Phase 4C. .J~~~ A. M. Nichols, Trustee Fontana Land Trust 3/'~/t:)p Date ' 4 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2004-0018 Fontana Phase 4C AGENDA DATE: March 19, 2008 SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request to rezone approximately 17.10 acres from RA, R-1, and R-4 (existing zoning) to R-4 with proffered plan and other proffers ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Kamptner, Graham, and Cilimberg; and Ms. Echols ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: ~ ( LEGAL REVIEW: Yes BACKGROUND: On August 8,2007, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing on this project which had been recommended for denial by the Planning Commission on March 17, 2007. The Board's August 8 report can be found at http://www .albemarle.orq/upload/imaqes/Forms Center/Departments/Board of Supervisors/Forms/ Aqenda/2007Files/2 0070808/FontanaExecSummarv.htm. An excerpt from the Board's minutes concerning this item is Attachment A. At its August 8, 2007 meeting the Board of Supervisors heard concerns from residents within the existing Fontana subdivision about unfinished pedestrian paths, drainage and erosion problems, and the safety of existing pedestrian paths. The applicant agreed to defer action on the rezoning until he had addressed these issues to the satisfaction of the staff. The expectation was for the applicant to proffer a plan for pedestrian paths in prior phases of Fontana. The plan would represent how the applicant would correct the drainage, erosion, and safety problems, apply the standard for construction which had been used in the last two phases of the development, and complete the pathway system. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 4: Effectively Manage the County's Growth and Development. DISCUSSION: Since the Board meeting in August 2007, the applicant has provided a pathways plan and modified it twice in an attempt to respond to staff comments. Staff and the applicant have met twice to discuss the plan and modifications and several homeowners were present at both meetings. It was staff's opinion that the path plan that was being provided by the applicant could not be implemented and, after numerous discussions, staff decided to prepare a plan for the applicant's consideration. This plan, which has now been proffered (Attachment B, Proffer 10), relies on the County Engineer, the applicant, and affected property owners to work out completion of the system in the field. The standard to be used is a four-foot wide asphalt path. Drainage and erosion problems are to be corrected. Attachment C contains the proffered plan of development (Proffer 1). BUDGET IMPACT: This is a residential development which would provide cash contributions in accord with the Board of Supervisors' policy to address the proposal's impact to public facilities. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff believes that, with the proffer for construction and completion of the Fontana path system and other proffer modifications to address County policies and make the proffers legally acceptable, the applicant has appropriately addressed the Board's expectations. Staff recommends approval of the ZMA 2004-008, inclusive of proffers dated February 24, 2008 and signed March 12, 2008. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - Excerpt from Auqust 8. 2007 Board of Supervisor's Meetinq Attachment B - Proffers including Pedestrian path Plan dated 2-25-08 Attachment C - Rezoninq Plan (proffered) dated July 30, 2007 ATTACHMENT A Excerpt from August 8, 2007 Board of Supervisors Minutes ZMA 04-18 Fontana Phase 4C Agenda Item No. 13. PUBLIC HEARING: PROJECT: ZMA-2004-018. Fontana Phase 4C (Signs #37,45). PROPOSAL: Rezone 17.146 acres from RA Rural Areas which allows aqricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre), R-4 Residential zoninq district (4 units/acre) and R-1 Residential zoninq district (1 unit/acre) to R-4 Residential zoninq district which allows residential uses at 4 units per acre for 34 dwellinq units at a qross density of 1.98 units/acre. PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Neiqhborhood Density Residential - (3-6 units/acre) and supportinq uses such as reliqious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses in Neiqhborhood 3 - Pantops ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No. LOCATION: At the intersection of Fontana Drive (Rt. 1765) and Via Florence approximately 0.5 miles from the intersection of Fontana Drive and Stony Point Road (Route 20 North) TAX MAP/PARCEL: 78E-A. MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Rivanna. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on July 23 and July 30,2007.) Mr. Benish reported that this is a proposal to rezone approximately 17 acres from RA to R-1, and R-4 to R-4 with a proffered plan. He explained that the rezoning consists of 34 single- family lots on 17 acres, with a density of just under two dwelling units per acre, and the property is located in the Pantops Development Area with recommendations of three to six dwelling units per acre. Mr. Benish noted that the property is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District, and it received designations in 1994 with contemplation of an intensive development similar to Fontana, a lower-density development for future plans, and an RA area because of limited water availability that has been alleviated now. Mr. Benish noted that the Planning Commission did not recommend approval, listing six reasons including consistency with the Neighborhood Model and lower density than called for in the Land Use Plan, although it was consistent with other Fontana development. He said that they also cited issues with offsite drainage improvements and other improvements within Fontana not being completed as well as Monticello view shed issues and concerns about the cross-section of Fontana Drive from Route 20 to the terminus of the road. Mr. Benish said that many of the issues have been addressed, and the applicant has now proffered all improvements in other phases of development within Fontana to be completed prior to submittal and approval of a grading plan for erosion and sedimentation control measures. He added that there may be ways that the Zoning Administrator requires stabilization through erosion control measures although some of the sections can not really be required to be upgraded. Mr. Benish said that the trails were established on subdivision plats as improvements to be made so there is a requirement to implement them as shown on the plans. Ms. Thomas added that they were shown to prospective homeowners on plats as part of the value or expectations for that subdivision although they were not proffered per se. Mr. Benish said that the proffer ensures that those improvements get completed prior to any other Fontana development. He explained that Ms. McCulley has been trying to enforce those improvements shown on the subdivision plats, although they do not dictate a weighty standard. Mr. Benish noted that the later phases do require a standard of development related to grading and paving. Ms. Thomas commented that people were led to believe there would be a trail system. Mr. Benish agreed. Mr. Rooker said that those improvements would be picked up before development goes forward on this parcel. ATTACHMENT A Mr. Benish confirmed this, adding that the maintenance of trails is up to the homeowners association, but there were fairly limited standards established early-on. Mr. Benish reported that the proffers call for conformity to a particular plan, overlot grading, trees on site, cash proffers in lieu of affordable housing, and cash proffers to meet the proffer policy. He said that the remaining substantive issue is the amount of the cash proffers. Mr. Benish also added that pedestrian paths, building colors, and Monticello view shed issues have been addressed. He confirmed that the primary issue is the cash proffer policy as it relates to by-right development, as the amount was supposed to be based on the total number of units. Mr. Benish noted that in this case the proffers are based on 25 units minus the nine by-right units. He said that staff cannot recommend approval at this time because of the shortfall in proffer amounts. Mr. Benish clarified some typographical items in the staff report as well as language that is no longer necessary because of changes in legislation. Mr. Benish said that the concept plan shows the same note used for Cascadia, which requires dedication of right of way and interconnection. Mr. Boyd asked for clarification of what road that is. Mr. Benish replied that road runs toward Montessori School. Ms. Thomas said that it would be helpful to have a larger area shown on a map so there is some context. Mr. Benish showed where the existing Fontana development is, as well as Montessori and Cascadia. He noted the location of the interconnecting road into Cascadia as well as Verona Drive, which goes into Luxor. Mr. Benish explained that Fontana Drive also serves the Lakeridge development, which is property that is recently approved for development to the north. In response to Mr. Boyd's question about Fontana Drive, Mr. Benish said it would be curb and gutter with sidewalks on both sides and a treed lawn into Lakeside, and it would also pick up a rural section based on the original Fontana approval. He stated that staff had determined that it would be difficult to retrofit a cross-section with the new sections of Fontana, adding that the topography is a steep incline that results in a lot of cut and fill on adjacent lots. Mr. Benish said that with that rural section, the drainage would need to be changed to be picked up with inverts in specific locations and that might mean more grading on lots. Mr. Boyd commented that some of those lots might even need retaining walls. Mr. Benish said he would not be surprised although staff has not looked at this in that level of detail. He stated that the applicant has not addressed this in this application, noting that a roadway would be going from a rural section into a side-walked road. Mr. Benish added that staff has felt it is better to get some of the road with some of the improvements than nothing at all, adding that without a completed pedestrian system there is a disconnect. Ms. Thomas said that the trail system does not connect with the roads and sidewalks. Mr. Benish explained that the Commission requested curb and gutter to provide pedestrian accommodations, and that is the standard typically applied for urban development. He added that the attachment B shows the cross-sections with five-foot sidewalks and six-foot tree lawns. Mr. Benish said that given the topography, pedestrian access should be accommodated in the long run as part of the road cross-section as opposed to off-road trails. He said that the Planning Commission had concerns about offsite drainage, but the County engineer has reviewed the plans and is comfortable with the plan given an urban section design. Mr. Boyd commented that he is eager to hear from the public what they think of this type of design as other developments nearby would have this type of road system. 2 ATTACHMENT A At this time the Chairman opened the public hearing. The applicant's representative, Steve Driver, of Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, addressed the Board. Mr. Driver explained that the applicant has been working extensively to address Commission concerns, and is proposing a full urban road section for Fontana Drive Extended including curb and gutter on both sides of the road, a planting strip for trees and sidewalks on both sides, and a cross-section that matches what is proposed for Lakeridge. He said that the road was originally proposed as rural, but staff requested urban section to match Lakeridge's and Cascadia's road design aspects. Mr. Driver noted that the applicant has agreed to provide an offsite pipe system extension from the eleven lots in the eastern corner of the development to bring the drainage to the rear of the lots at the end of the cul-de-sac at the end of Florence via underground pipe per County drainage standards. Mr. Driver stated that the applicant has also agreed to complete all phases with bonds being released by the County prior to submitting application for a grading permit for Phase 4-C, including pedestrian pathway work in the previous phases. He added that the applicant has agreed to provide architectural standards regarding the view shed, building facades, and ten-foot width on all the Phase 4-C pedestrian pathways. Mr. Driver said that the only other item was retrofitting the road standards to the existing Fontana Drive, and the applicant did not offer to make these changes because of the difficulty in retrofitting an urban section to a rural section. He said that the road met VDOT and County standards at the time, noting that the right of way for Fontana is 50 feet, with the current standard at 57 feet. Mr. Driver stated that access to private lots would become a pretty significant issue. Mr. Driver added that the cash proffers for affordable housing and public services could be answered by the applicant, and approval of this petition would provide the link between Cascadia and Lakeridge. Mr. Boyd commented that he would like the applicant to proffer the appropriate amount for affordable housing and the total number of units being requested. The applicant, Mr. A. M. Nichols, agreed to change the proffer amount to $595,000 as well as $95,500 for affordable housing. He explained that Dominion Virginia Power allowed an easement for two lots, lots 38 and 39, but he also needs to get an easement from Dr. Hurt. Mr. Nichols also explained that Ashcroft has agreed to give an easement and Avemore on the very right-hand side of the entry. He added that the pedestrian pathway is a work in progress. Mr. Nichols noted that he needs to get those easements and that is reflected in his proffers. Ms. Thomas asked about the disconnect between the trail system and the new sidewalks. Mr. Nichols responded that the pedestrian pathways are in rural section but the curb, gutter, and sidewalk on the Fontana Drive extension will connect with Cascadia and will connect on the upper right hand side with Lakeridge. He explained that the Ashcroft homeowners will also be able to use the pathway. Ms. Thomas explained that she is concerned about the sidewalks connecting with the rural cross-section, and she noted that the trail system within the former development could be connected to the new sidewalk system. Mr. Driver noted that any pedestrian pathways built within a public right of way must meet VDOT standards and other than that they would have to be outside of the right of way. He said that the applicant worked with staff to move the pathway out of the right of way. Mr. Benish asked about any possible connection to link the sidewalks to the trails. 3 ATTACHMENT A Mr. Driver replied that there are two lots there, so a trail would need to go in the right of way or an easement would need to be obtained from those two property owners. . Ms. Sharon Baiocco addressed the Board on behalf of the Fontana Homeowners Association. She stated that the pedestrian trailways are a constant problem as the County has decided that sidewalks are desirable in urban areas. Ms. Baiocco added that pedestrian paths were traditionally a substitute for sidewalks. She noted that her trail was started in November then finished in the spring, but it has now eroded dramatically. Ms. Baiocco said that not requiring a standard has been a serious problem, and the pedestrian paths are now becoming an eyesore and are dangerous and detracting from property values. She presented pictures of the paths, noting that there are many children in the neighborhood who use the roads because the paths are not standard and are now deeply rutted. Ms. Baiocco said that the standard should be like the Monticello Trail path, which has eight inches of stone versus the two and a half inches of stone with the Fontana paths. She added that adding this many more houses is not what we bargained for nor did Fontana residents vote in favor of a connection to Cascadia. Ms. Nancy Grable addressed the Board, noting that some of the trails end on one of the rural roads, and there is at least one incident where the trail ends in someone's garden. She also said that the rural roads in Fontana have caused concern because they are narrow and must carry school busses, and now more traffic is going to be put on these roads from developments with a more urban atmosphere. Ms. Thomas asked what the homeowners' assumption is as to who would maintain the trails. Ms. Grable replied that she assumes the trails would be made good, but she does not know who would do that. Mr. Rooker asked staff for clarification as to maintenance of those trails. Mr. Benish said that the homeowners association usually takes care of them. Mr. Lewis Martin, representing Mr. Nichols, said that the Fontana covenants and restrictions stipulate it is the homeowners association's responsibility to maintain those trails. Mr. Benish stated that he does not know if those pictures shown demonstrate that the trails have not met the expected standard, as some sections do require a sub-base and surfacing and some sections do not. Mr. Davis said that a lot of the improvements were bonded. Ms. Vickie Valente addressed the Board, noting that the trails end in rip raps and continue onto the other side with no bridges across. She said that it is very dangerous. She sees all sorts of issues there. Ms. Valente added that lots of people walk to the pool and tennis courts, and having people driving through the area at 35 plus miles per hour could create serious problems. Ms. Patty Williams addressed the Board, stating that once the trails are complete, the homeowners association has to maintain them. She expressed concern about liability for that. Ms. Williams emphasized that the trails are dangerous and not in good shape at all, and there is no place for people in wheelchairs or kids on bikes. Mr. Slutzky said that it seems a potential disaster is being created here, with country roads and more urban roads together with strollers being pushed because residents can not get on the trails. He asked if it would be possible to work with the applicant to adhere to standards that make the trails functional so that the entire network would work. 4 ATTACHMENT A Mr. Benish responded that Phases III and IV have more stringent standards for compacted sub-grade trails and paving of roads over seven percent grade, but for Phases I and II the only standards that can be found are those on the plans that call for five-foot mowed paths, with no grade requirements. Mr. Davis said that there is no way to require a condition for those offsite trail improvements, but the developer could voluntarily proffer that if he could work within the existing easement area. He noted that one of the impacts to be considered would be how it impacts adjacent property and whether the increase in density creates pedestrian and traffic safety issues, and one way to do that may be improving the trails. Mr. Rooker stated that in order for him to vote for approval, the trails need to be brought to a standard that complies with what was originally offered. He noted that Fontana Drive goes to Route 20 with no pedestrian facilities and is not a safe place to walk as it does not meet reasonable standards. Mr. Rooker said that to approve the additional density, the residents, both current and future, need a safe place to walk. Mr. Boyd noted that there is a proffer there already to complete the trail system through the older neighborhoods, and the County would like to see that proffer extended to meet those standards. Mr. Davis mentioned that there are things that can be done to make it more workable, although the paths may not be able to meet the larger widths because of right of way issues. Mr. Rooker commented that the concern seems to be the condition of the surface of the paths, more so than the width. Mr. Benish cautioned that some of the trails may just not be developable because of the nature of the topography. Ms. Thomas said that the Rivanna Trails people have installed stairways, although that is not the preferred method of design. She said that the old standards were inadequate, and that brings into question the rationale of bringing the trails up to those standards when all of them could be brought up to an explicit standard of today. Mr. Rooker stated that is what he thought staff was trying to do. Mr. Benish clarified that the Phase I and II standard is fairly limited, but the Board could accept a proffer to bring those up to the higher standard required of Phases III and IV. Mr. Rooker added that they are talking about a new proffer. Mr. Benish noted that there are limitations to what can be done within easement areas, and alternative sites for paths might need to be identified through field work and evaluation. He added that it may require property owners' agreement to make those adjustments. Mr. Davis said that to address a new cash proffer amount, it would have to be re- advertised for another public hearing. He explained that an amended proffer would also require the application to be re-advertised for another public hearing. Mr. Boyd expressed concern that the connecting road through Cascadia is opposed by residents, and he asked for clarification of what that road would be. Mr. Davis replied that in Cascadia there were no proffers for the connection, but the Code of Development showed reservation of right of way up to the property line of Fontana and said it would be improved at the request of the County. He explained that the Subdivision Ordinance requires that those improvements be made in both Cascadia and Fontana once the plats are 5 ATTACHMENT A approved unless a waiver is requested and approved by the Planning Commission. Mr. Davis said that the expectation is that there will be an interconnection here. It has been reserved in Cascadia and would be required in this subdivision. Mr. Rooker asked if the traffic would be taken off and spread out instead of going through the existing neighborhood. Mr. Boyd said that the Cascadia connection was established after Fontana. Mr. Davis emphasized that staff believes traffic would be taken off of Fontana as people in the new section would divert to Cascadia because it is a better road. Mr. Rooker mentioned that this is required for the subdivision. Mr. Davis explained that Cascadia has a requirement to provide that connection, and the ordinance does require that interconnection, with each development building up to their property line. He said that under the Subdivision Ordinance, they would have to build or bond it at the time of platting. Mr. Benish said that this plan allows for use of the road for emergency purposes until the subdivision is built, and at that point the interconnection is required. Mr. Boyd said that traffic would go into Fontana (Franklin Drive) to get to work, and this would create a real safety situation unless there is a signal put in front of Cascadia. Mr. Rooker stated that if there is enough traffic, they will get a light. Mr. Boyd said they will all go through Fontana. Mr. Rooker responded that he would be surprised if people chose that route, as he had an office at Pantops for 25 years. Mr. Boyd said that he has lived in Key West for 26 years, and the Pantops situation would encourage people to cut through Fontana. Mr. Tucker noted that it might be difficult, once again, to get this back in time for September. Mr. Davis stated that if a proffer for the pathway is going to be on the table, then staff and engineering need to weigh in on that prior to the proffer being written. He also said that the Board could defer the item, unless the applicant does not want to amend the proffers. Mr. Driver said that the applicant is willing to bring the pedestrian path standards in Phase I and II up to the standards of Phase III and IV. He asked if it would be possible for the Board to approve the rezoning with that as a note on the plat. Mr. Davis replied that the law requires re-advertising of a public hearing to accept the proffer changes. (Note: At this time, the applicant and his attorney stepped out of the meeting to discuss how to proceed.) Mr. Martin, representing Mr. Nichols, said that the applicant is requesting deferral. Mr. Davis stated that once there are final proffers and plans, the item would be re- advertised 20 days prior to public hearing. 6 A TT ACHMENT A Mr. Rooker then moved to indefinitely defer ZMA 2004-018 Fontana Phase IV-C. Mr. Slutzky seconded the motion. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Boyd, Mr. Dorrier, Mr. Rooker, Mr. Slutzky, Ms. Thomas, and Mr. Wyant. NAYS: None. 7 Mar 12 08 10:31a p.2 Attachment B Original Proffer Amended Proffer -:r- (Amendment # 1 ta ZMA 94-06 ) PROFFER FORM FOR FONTANA PHASE 4C Date: ~h t1.:~QS ~. .~, _. . .... - -.. ZMA#04-18 Tax Map and Parcel Number Tax Mal) 7gE. Parcel A 17.15 Acres to be rezoned from RI. R4. RA to R4 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 1he property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that such conditions are reasonable. I. Conformitv with Plans: Fontana Phase 4C will be developed in general accord with the plans entitled, "Fontana - Phase 4C Rezoning Plan," prepared by Terra Engineering and Land Solutions, dated, July 30, 2007, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, (the "Plan'j. No more than thirty-four (34) dwelling units shall be developed in Fontana Phase 4C. 2. Final Gradine Plan: The Owner shall submit a final grading plan meeting the requirements oftbis section (hereinafter, the ''Final Grading Plan") with the application far each subdhl'ision of the residential units shown on the Plan. identified in Proffer 1 above. The Final Grading Plan shall show existing and proposed topographic features to be considered in the development of the proposed subdivision. The Final Grading Plan shall be approved by the County Engineer prior to the approval of the first preliminary subdivision plat. The subdivision shall be graded as shown on the approved Final Grading Plan. No certificate of occupancy shall be issued for any dwelling on a lot where the County Engineer has determined the lot is not graded consistent with the approved Final Grading Plan. The Final Grading Plan shall satisfy the following: A. The Final Grading Plan shall show all proposed streets, building sites, surface drainage, driveways, trails, and other features the County Engineer determines are needed to verify that the Plan satisfies the requirements of this proffer. B. The Final Grading Plan shall be drawn to scale not greater than one (1) inch equals fifty (50) feet. C. All proposed grading shall be shown at contour intervals not greater than two (2) feet 1 Mar 12 08 10:31a p.3 D. All concentrated surface drainages over lots shall be clearly shown with 'the proposed grading. All proposed grading shall be shown to assure that surface drainage can provide adequate relief from flooding of dwellings in the event a storm sewer fails. Graded slopes on lots proposed to be planted "'lith turf grasses (lawns) shall not exceed a gradient of three (3) feet horizontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (3:1). Steeper slopes shall be vegetated with low maintenance vegetation as determined to be appropriate by the County's program authority in its approval of an erosion and sediment control plan for the land disturbing activity. These steeper slopes shall not exceed a gradient ortwo (2) feet ofhonzontal distance for each one (1) foot of vertical rise or fall (2:1). unless the County Engineer :finds that the grading recommendations for steeper slopes have adequately addressed the impacts. E. Surface drainage from one-half (112) acre ofland or from three (3) or more, whichever is greater in area. shall be collected in a storm sewer or directed to a drainage way outside of the lots. F. All drainage from streets shall be carried. across lots in a storm sewer to a point beyond the rear of the building site. G. The Final Grading Plan shall demonstrate that an area at least ten (10) feet in width, or to the lot line if the distance is less than ten (10) feet. from the portion of the structure facing the street has grades no steeper than ten (10) percent adjacent to possible entrances that will not be served by a stairway. This graded area also shall extend from the entrances to the driveways or walkways connecting the dwelling to the street. H. Any requirement of this condition may be waived. by the County Engineer by submitting a waiver request with the preliminary plat. If such a request is made, it shall include: (i) a justification for the request contained in a certified engineer's report; (ii) a vicinity map showing a larger street network: at a scale no smaller than one (1) inch equals six hundred (600) feet; (iii) a conceptual plan at a scale no smaller'than one (1) inch equals two hundred (200) feet showing surveyed boundaries of the property; (iv) topography of the property at five (5) foot intervals for the property being subdivided and on abutting lands to a distance of five hundred. (500) feet from the boundary line or a lesser distance determined to be sufficient by the agent; (v) the locations of streams. stream buffers, steep slopes, floodplains, known wetlands; and (vi) the proposed layout of streets and lots, unit types, uses. and location of parking. as applicable. In reviewing a waiver request, the County Engineer shall consider whether the alternative proposed by the Owner satisfies the purpose of the requirement to be 'waived to at least an equivalent degree. In appro\>ing a v.raiver. the County Engineer shall find that requiring compliance with the requirement of this condition would not f01"\Vard the purposes of the County's Subdivision and Water Protection Ordinances or otherwise serve the public interest; and granting the waiver would 2 Mar 12 08 10:31a p.4 not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. to the orderly development of the Project. and to the land adjacent thereto. I. The Owner may request that the Plan be amended at any time. AU amendments shall be subject to the review and approval by the County Engineer. 3. Affordable Bousine:: The Owner shall contribute $2,809.00 cash per dwelling unit, up to an aggregate maximum contribution of$95,500.00 (equivalent to $19.100 cash per unit as cash in lieu of five (5) affordable dwelling units) to the County for the purpose of affordable housing. Each cash contribution shall be due and payable with each application for a building permit. Each cash contribution shall be used for the purpose of funding affordable housing programs in Albemarle County. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within ten (10) years after the last payment of the contribution, all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use serving Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 4. Trees: At least one hundred-seventy (170) trees shall be planted or retained on the subdivided lots. Trees shall be distributed among all lots with a minimum of 5 trees per lot. The five trees to be counted on each lot shall be marked in the field for inspection purposes. The owner shall not request a certificate of occupancy until a final zoning inspection is performed and all required trees are in place. Standard for trees to be retained: Deciduous trees to be retained shall be at least a I Vz inch caliper d.b.h. and non-deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. All trees to be retained shall be identified on erosion and sediment control plans, final grading plans, and road plans. A tree conservation plan in accordance with Section 32.7.9.4. of the Zoning Ordinance shall be submitted and approved prior to approval of any erosion and sediment control permit for grading. Standards Cor trees to be ulanted: All trees shall be planted in accordance with either the standardized landscape specifications jointly adopted by the Virginia Nurserymen's Association, the Virginia Society of Landscape Designers and the Virginia Chapter of the American Society of Landscape Architects, or the road and bridge specifications of the Virginia Department of Transportation. At planting. deciduous trees shall be at least a 1 112 inches in caliper d.b.h.; non-deciduous trees shall be at least four (4) feet in height. 5. Pedestrian Paths: Pedestrian paths shown on the Plan shall be constructed according to the standards for Class A Type 1 pedestrian paths in the Albemarle County Design Standards Manual. The Owner shall not request that the County issue the ninth (9th) building pennit until the paths have been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer. 6. Cash Droffer: The Owner shall contribute $17.500 cash to the County for each unit constructed within the Property for the purpose of mitigating impacts from the development. Each cash contribution shall be used for improvements fur schools, libraries, public safety, parks and transportation as identified in the County's Capital 3 Mar 12 08 10:328 p.5 Improvements Program. The cash contnoution shall be paid in increments of$17,500 for each unit prior to or at the time of issuance of a building permit for each unit. If this cash contribution has not been exhausted by the County for the stated purpose within five (5) years after the date~ all unexpended funds shall be applied to any public use senring Neighborhood 3 Pantops. 7. Annual Adiastment of Cash Proffen: Beginning January 1 ~ 2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adj usted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Marshall and Swift Building Cost Index (the "MS!''). In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be co~ondingly adjusted each year. 8. Final AUDroval: The Owner shall not submit ~ application for an erosion and sediment control permit for grading until improvements have been completed for phases 1,2, 3, and 4A and 4B oftbe Fontana Subdivision and aU bonds held by the County in conjunction with subdivision, stormwater management, and erosion control for prior phases have been released by the County. 9. Arcbitectllral Standards: The Owner shall require as part of the covenants for Fontana Phase 4C that all stroctures be constructed using medium shaded earth-tone colors for facade treatment of the buildings and dark, non-reflective materials for roofs. The colors for the ~ade treatments and the colors and materials for the roofs shall be subject to prior approval by the Director of Planning. 10. Pia. for Pedestrian Paths Cor Phases 1. Z. 3. 4A aDd 48 of Fontana Subdivision: The Owner shall construct pedestrian paths in accordance v..ith. the plan entitled "Fontana Pedestrian Path Plan," prepared by Glenn Brooks 2-25-08, pages 1, 2 and 3. These paths shall be completed 10 the satisfaction of the County Engineer prior to grading in Phase 4C. tk #~k> Sign e of Owner A. M. Nichols, Trustee Fontana Land Trust ~I to P Date , 4 IATTACHMENT B ~ Fontana Pedestrian Path l'lan Prepared by Glenn Brooks 2-25-08 Page I // ~~~j~ . ,:, tWyt. It"tfl~R. "flU/I. Tml:/lI. #':'1"iNo/ .. _ _.., AoI.. h.HJtt1 !r) '1; iLlS II ~..:t,>"'Jlt:'A-/'t15 .~('!(""'.d \\\~\J1i17 ...... ..;0'" l~"t/..J.< o fr..t:.f~"",t' /"'Iil1'f",n ,-" ""_~_"".' c::r .....,.,,.,,...J ..-...... r'''''~ n........,....".-., fYt9 o .(.,( I1-l _ t..,l,j~ .'.cC-c:lt4'r 1 This is a sclumahc line repreJall&liOl1 only. R..hpll"ls in the field are \0 be .pprov.d by the Albanarl. County Uosion Conlrol Officer or the County Eft8inoer. Pip... bridgesll1d other foolweo ore only sbown as """"'PI.. of Ollislini or proposed IOCllioos. 2. AU dich cro....s ore \0 b. coDS1nlcled as fo01llrillies identical 10 the exiJIing footbrillie (ph0l0 __) AIlematives. such as plpe culvert crossings may be CODS1l'UCled provided engineerillg ClllllpUlaliODS are _ and approved by the County Ensinoer ...l!nIsion COlIICOI Officer. 3. AU 0KisIing pip.. smaller than 12 inch diam_ are \0 b. replaced accordina iIern 2 .bov~ 4. AU t4Ws ore 10 b.buill.ccording 10 the Class A Typ.1 slllldardin lb. Albemarle CoUllly Desi8n Standards Manual, """epl t!l8l.rninimum4' widIh and a prime and double seoJ upbolI emulsioa Il1d rolled slone sudllce ..... 4" SIolle base.... pennilled 5. AU diIcbes ,,",lobe buill... reaarded 10 the typical soetion. 6. Wbaeerades "",,oed 10%. sIairs orno1ignmenlS....to be provided. subject 10 lb.approval.rtbe Erosion COIllroI Officer ortbeCOUIlIyEft8inoer. 7. AU _ed land is to b. .....dialcly fcr1iI.ized, loeded,llldlll1llcbed. Any landscaping is 10 be replaced. AU s1op..llld diIcbes...to bemaltod wilb EC.21D1ll1ing ... boner. 8. TnlI!poSllIlld sips ormarlan or. to b.us.dalaU....d crossings and slart8l1d ondpoinls. 9. Proporlylin......to be slakecl8l1d easemenlS o__cnoc..sarypsior 10 construclion. 10. Atthe....._. shown below, tbe....._is 10 hemov"" or1hell8ilroutod fords MI width to one side after eastmenlS.....bl&inod. Photo orbridge: Ph.los .f ""'_1._ c:l f- Z w ::;: I U <( f- f- <( c .... .!!! 8, Q..Ul III .J::;.>L Q. _0 "- tIlO .E 0.... cCO 1: .~ ~ ~ CS.9!N ::l Gl (!) ~ ~ al~.. Q..'CQ.. Gl ~l!!co " 5i .!9 [S2 .2! l5l!!~ l u...Q..N ~ -.J' l ,I /' /1. .0 //1 // rOt /,/ ./ I;~'" 1// ;/Ih/ , , , 'If,"" . ,/ .lI, :f;? /" /: /I.F....l /.l.N~'" ,fl'/I.I'<: 'I . "f'~/,j' ..-,"'; I / t I ' I j / l '"", / / .J ,;'!; ~'f ,.:', ~ I " .. /' ~, / ~C-.. .'-~ .~ / <#(, /'~ 1'1 // 11/ .- OJ. . , "lj".i~ {'M". /j~'1. . ,,~/ / 'oJ ,,'''1)',( t. . ", ~i)- . "~ " " P.f~<~" q,/ " ('\ J .... '0 " c: Q) .!l1 Cl <if z 0. II) ." Co :5 ~8 .... Z;,l , i1'.;.1 to iii .2 <1 I .i 0..... p.., I au,: f- ro E a: r.t;:, Z C <:..:) ~m w .!! e ~ E-' u.;,; i;~ m ::;; z l;~ ;, ~.I!P') a ; . I ::l ;!.l U -8C!)Q) 0 - I: nl' <{ .g ~ J s ~I; ~ f- Q)~~ Hhi; i:i:W HHi ~~H 1 f- 0.'00. Q) ~ i 5i <{ ~ ::I: <lIl!!co .!1lIS2 l!! p.., g ~:!3 ~ Q) 4.Q..N IX: C t;jml.Hi~~ ~;;~;!~;j~aitiiJlil; ; milii;liiill~,I~iljj;!itl}iJimt ~ ';;H!:,~,' I, I! t, ~:~, ~;HJ, ,,~: ::~~i~;~ ~ t'":_.~ ,.J'\, .~,,"" \ "~" oJ._\ ." hebE~;'\ }\ ; /~ \ h..'~'.;'~'."".'.' \.. ;;';l;,l~y,}~1 / ,- '..f.. ". ~.;J.UHjlitij~ii;iHiimmm;imi,; [ .iJliil'AUlllliRllill!liillilli.li ~ '~H"IHH!t~~!:~:~!~Ht1th!!H!{!:!~! ~ / " . :" / -,..:/ ~~ Ie . I .' .' .' \ ~~?\ " ,I, .: I <. j' ., ~ * .t if ""''-.! . ,. .t W/ i " ,~; .: -;.',,!:. . " , . ..1. .' ~'l~l' !~.r/ 'il ~; '" ~t ,i . i .,. ,. , >, ... ~;. ,. I' I.: ~ ; r ii!1 g:~ ~i: 'r . ;;"'1, :!~;\l ~.,;.:!I!i.;;, ji,lm 1 i ~dt ~ i .h' !: .~:j ~~j ~fIU; . I ~14f ;,- ;h~f: !; .1'1:,I,';,;j, ,. ~:Ji ;l!; ilw~ li!l !111 ilL ~,l ' ;:I! r; . ~;~i ~i~t; j,' ~i~ ;~~j t iH'i HH .. li!i ~:,i~:il~~:i!i'! ~iil[ j!j~ ~ " () - c: Ql E .c: u III - -'~ 5 ,~Wj ~I ~ I ~~~~..~ i 'I {..J 0... ui z :2 ~~ ~ ~~ ....:l ~5 ........0 ffi~~ ~cr; ~~~ ~ ~~~ :ig~ d. ~...~"~, U; : ~~ ~u~ ~ ~,,~~~ 0 z ~ffi~ ;: wI: ~ ~~ z ;; G ~ i~.! m! m m!! ~ ~ ~i ! Z' 0, f=i 0' wi GOj 01 ~I ..JI ~I "-' ~' .1 >-' . ~I 1 II r- , ., I I ~ n~ ~ !N: 3 ~ i i ~~ ~, . .~I. . ,~i!" ,U! I · 31~! 'IiI! ~.. ~ ~;! .1l1 !iI' ! ~il ~!!~ ~d.~'.1 · ..., ." g zi 0' F' ~I ~' 1i ..J <( () ~ li:' 81 0' ..J' ..J ~ ::l c: ., '" n.mm._~.. , . ' I ~iJi ~l n.~ I IJt' 'L' '~~~ II ~! _.1-_.....; 1,1 !~" z ~ - - ",,, "."!; o .UQ~~~lO."l; rJ:i ~~;~~~N~~~ !.""1_>~~~-'jX;:t;"'c '- ~ ~ ~ 5 ; ~ ~ ~ ~~ , , I ~ . ' n! PI! nl! ~ d ! ~. ; i t I c... ~ dl c' . q ~l r ~ s' Iq 7:.1 nllg "" ! , -I . :fJ P '! I dh~ ~ nil' z i' " ~ ..,. . k !I ' ~ "II! ?i;, I . !~ i ~~ ~~ f-~ I'"iil I~ I! I ! j xli ~ o! ZI ~_.IJE.. ~ :;:e:ta en;J ffi Im~"~' ;:'g s~ ,... ~ [j) ! I ~~ ~ r I, ,ti, ~ i! n ~ !. 'r · .!' , ;Il.!h,. dt,:!~ ~ps~c'p.~~~t., !~ f~HHinal~Hh;i ~R~~ ..........~. (\ ...i!~la;:;f! \ S il:l:t~3 ~~5~~~~~E~ ! i i .~ it H H ,. I I" ! ! .1 \;; ~ ~ ~i !! ~ ~ r . H ',!n~ ~ ~tP ~ Ei'!~~il~il'~li~~ z ~~d~!i!..~dhi!i.d ~ '''U,bh'~, '.. ~ ~. ~ 'Ii "~ f~ .... d d. '.1 n 1~ q ~. ." II" g I '.' ". ~. I ~,:,~!'l;i ~'. d"~ I ~8 ~~ ~@@ I: <E ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~'~ ~ '~ ~n o ~ !~ ~~t m .I~ 8liieJ H l' 'j 9 -.: ~lld~~~f2~ ~ c- 8g~~~~~j~~ >;ii ~t~~~~~~~~ ~ z 5~~tHi~1H!~~ ~~nmm~m lxV'~d DNINOZffiI VINl:)lll^ 'AJ.,NilO;.l fI"l)fVJ'Uftrl)." DNINOZ3:'d ;)t 3:S'VHd - Vlx'V ~NOd [^n~_~' N ~) ~-~ '" :;] , . ?is i~ ~ I .... ,I ::1- .. '" - li I g g ! " I ~ .' ~ ~ z ~ i ~ f I j ,l---- i~ ~ / ~ 91 l 0:::, wi <~ \ '\ <, \ \ \ \ 1 i \. en , 1 .... \": '\ ;; > ~jth !i:~"'~~ B@H H~". ~H~~ <::=~i~ hH~ ." <t~ ~ih. ~E~a "88': L~h I A! f-/ ~5 ,// ~~g / d~ l c.~S , "'~U ~~~::' ~~~~ 0::::1: 000 X<( :;)ll'.l -':2 O~ ....00 Original Protter ~ Amendment PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: 03-18-2008 ZMA: # 06-014 Tax Map and Parcel Number: 60F-3 1.051 Acres to be rezoned from C-1 to NMD Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, ifrezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. ], The Owner shaH install a permanent 5-bike bicycle rack as shown on the revised plan entitled, "General Development Plan page 2 of 4", dated] -] 9-07 and last revised 2-25-08, hereinafter referred to as the "Plan", Installation of the bicycle rack shall be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property. 2, The Owner shaH construct one bus shelter as shown on the Plan with the dimensions as follows: nine foot (9') - wide shelter with six foot (6') all metal bench with back. Construction of the bus shelter shaH be completed prim' to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property. IfVDOT and the County transportation planner do not determine the location of the bus shelter prior to final site plan approval, then upon the subsequent determination of the shelter location by VDOT and the County transportation planner, and upon written request by the County, the Owner shall construct the shelter and metal bench in the selected location at its sole expense, but not to exceed seven thousand eight hundred dollars ($7,800). The Owner shaH complete construction of the shelter and bench within 90 days after the date of the written request by the County. 3. Each building to be constructed on the property shaJl be rated a minimum of "Certified" (or demonstrated to the County's Director of Community Development's satisfaction to be eligible to receive such certification) under the LEED- NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations, Version 2.2 (October 2005) or the LEED Green Building Rating System for Core & Shell Development, Version 2,0 (July 2006), as applicable (collectively, the "LEED Compliant Commercial Space"). Prior to issuance ofthe building permit for any proposed LEED compliant space, the Owner shall provide to the County Director of Community Development a certification from a LEED certified architect that such space, if constructed in accordance with the building plans, is designed to achieve the minimum "Certified" rating under LEED provided in this Proffer 3. Before the Owner requests a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a LEED certified architect rendered such a certificate, the Owner shaH submit to the County's Director of Community Development a written statement from the architect that the building was built to the plans on which the opinion was based. For each building containing LEED compliant space, the Owner shaH provide a copy ohhe LEED certification to the County's Director of Community Development within one (l) year after the date the certificate of occupancy was issued for that building. 4. The preliminary and final site plan shall delineate the Conservation and Preservation Areas on the property. The Owner shall replace trees that must be removed in Conservation Areas, Replacement shall be two (2) trees of similar species or quality for each removed or destroyed tree, AH tree replacement shaH be in accord with the final landscape plan for the final site plan for the Property, The Owner's obligation to replace trees within the Conservation Areas shaH be completed within the follnwing planting season, The trees to be replaced must be in excess of ]2" dbh and shall be replaced with trees of the same or a similar species or quality of not less than 2,5" dbh, as determined by the County's Director of Community Development, CKW2 LLC (~)\ cJfJ/0 By:Chris Kabbash Its Member 03/ / ~/2 c57Jf: HECelVED AT 80S MEEftWG' I Date: 3 '1" '0 S Agenda Item ,:-La - +h",a ( Q.lJ. \ (. 9- ~.Q..o d1QfoLLUY'-- Clerk's 'nitia/s:~ ~ '~- , ~ _.~~ ! "---- w-\ l ,~~I mllll 'Ii II . r.!~..';,I'1 1::1;,1,] .-- -- bl - ~g~ -~ i'~1 ~-"",II;:1111 -'1';'-:-;- q;.c, I..il.n. ~:;;;:, -:-;.-~ II '0= ,,1.____ ~_,'~ - . .- '..... -;;,. --- :fl ~~-- I~ - ". . '. "jr-<___:n , ~;\~eorglllown & HydraUIi~Roads property.____j i ~> ';?>'<.'., . : /~--:... /'-' 'I Y.' / "-. n'" ( '-- , ' ';:.-":;i' / / /J,' -:..--/ "'--,) ~ r-' -~ - f---- /--. J' I ;' /--~ ,.- ~~- . ~~~ .-dh('<- 11<'. , I', f "", ""--_/-,~ -" .'; n_L') 'I.,) t."7- ~__ / r I I I -'-:~~-c II I i r- --.--- i/ ''1~~j I-r~) i'l ! I~;~~. .C]f'".... ",!"I',.\I,_:I~, ,n';, ". \ / \ \-1__1 II \__L__~ ~~_ - \,.c'c--'" ! ' '..... " .... ') .- I;; \ /~, I '\\ \ ___~ \, r- \ \i / i \ \\ ~~/~_/,; -/'\ \ ',\ \ ,>/~ \' \ " \,//// I r--~,\ - /' /' i \\ :// ,//- \ \/'. / ' / '\ ',/ /.- /;/\~~1]... '_~- J. ::::d;:::.- n//// // 1/ ./ "// ! 1 '. 2 -mll I ,11m] !jlJ1I" I ,"-- "'II ~ !II~I , l:i;,:~:11 ' I' !I!!.II,'" T"',.II "iJl~! 1~11 ~ "'=" IIIUI!'I ~-~'"C::: C' . ,1':11 .. _ ""..-:1 v~ I ill _":'>l:_~. 'I ~ I ~~ICtl! - ~hJ--,=- I ~.'..''1 . I ~:~ ---'1".';:'-1 ----- ::, - -I ~ * II ----'--- '- ...~' _,.. 1 ~ , i l i: " I 11il~i II 11-.1 I ~I r.il1flji II '! I 1 !WII , .! llill!..! [Wi ~< il;ll~ -.:.,.. ~~\~]I f~;~' -- ____ ----.l ~Y::. I I L .fi.'.........,....,1 I ~,I ,- 'I . }~, " ' ' 3 ~ ...."",,'" !t~, .:;.;.~,~:~.., :..",~,/ : ~;....~ -,...- ,', f r:r; u j _'~_~L,~ .;1 _:~.;';:.':=>+ r.., /1.-... ill '.'!"""""""'" in -" r:1 ,;;. ~ '1 "";::"e.-':':''','' ""'f"'_... '1'1<>"<- 10WfR HtVA110N NI slm HI-VATI(lN [NORTH I BLJILDING SECTIO~ HY.ORAULlC ~;4~~til~;tj~U~~~~~~~C~~ ~~~~~6E20UN1Y PuBLIC HEAR OMMISSION ING SUBMllT AL 4 5 . . . / 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 Chris Kabbash 308 E. Market Street Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads (Signs #58, 65) Tax Map 60F Parcel 3 Dear Mr, Kabbash: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 19, 2008, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors by a vote of7:0, Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1, Conservation and preservation areas shall be delineated on the general development plan before this rezoning is presented to the Board of Supervisors. The conservation and preservation areas shall be maximized to the extent feasible given this specific plan. 2. The applicant shall demonstrate that there will be a minimal disturbance in the conservation areas. 3. Any trees in the conservation areas that are required to be removed shall be replaced with like kind of plantings. (Condition to be worked on regarding the caliper of tree). 4, The applicant shall address the technical revisions required for the proffers and the Code of Development. The motion passed by a vote of 7:0, The Albemarle County Planning Commission also approved the five (5) waivers, which include the waiver to Section 8.4, the rear setback waiver, the critical slopes waiver, and the waiver of Section 20A. 8 relating to a mixture of uses and housing types, all set forth in the staff report, as well as the waiver to Section 20A.9,b as described by staff at the meeting, The motion passed by a vote of7:0. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 19,,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, ~~ Claudette Grant Senior Planner Planning Division cc: H & H Limited Liability Company COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2006 - 014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads AGENDA DATE: March 19, 2008 ACTION: X INFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request to rezone 1.051 acres from C-1, Commercial to Neighborhood Model District, in order to develop a two-story, approximately 16,815 square foot professional office building on the site. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: YES STAFF CONTACT(S): Cilimberg, Echols, Grant LEGAL REVIEW: NO OWNER/APPLICANT PURCHASER: W. Keith Woodard, Keith O. Woodard and Christopher E. Kabbash BACKGROUND: On February 19, 2008, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on the Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads rezoning request. Staff and the Commission recommended approval of the rezoning request by .ote of 7:0 provided that the following be resolved prior to the Board public hearing: (See Attachment I) 1. Conservation and preservation areas shall be delineated on the general development plan before this rezoning is presented to the Board of Supervisors. The conservation and preservation areas shall be maximized to the extent feasible given this specific plan. 2. The applicant shall demonstrate that there will be a minimal disturbance in the conservation areas. 3. Any trees in the conservation areas that are required to be removed shall be replaced with like kind of plantings. (Condition to be worked on regarding the caliper of tree). 4. The applicant shall address the technical revisions required for the proffers and the Code of Development. DISCUSSION: The applicant has providecj the following to address the Planning Commission's recommendation: 1. Sheet 2 of 4 in the General Development Plan, dated January 19, 2007, revised February 25,2008 now delineates the conservation and preservation areas, (See Attachment III) 2. Sheet 4 of 4 in the General Development Plan shows the conservation and preservation areas overlayed with the existing conditions and trees to be removed. 3. The applicant has revised Proffer 4 to describe the replacement of trees that must be removed in the Conservation Areas. Replacement shall be two (2) trees of similar species or quality for each removed or destroyed tree. The trees to be replaced must be in excess of 12" dbh and shall be replaced with trees of the same or a similar species or quality of not less than 2.5" dbh, as determined by the County's Director of Community Development. (See Attachment IV) RECOMMENDATION: Staff and the Planning Commission recommend approval of ZMA 2006-000014 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads, inclusive of proffers dated and signed February 25, 2008, code of development dated February 25, 2008, and general development plan dated January 19, 2007, revised February 25, 2008. Staff also recommends approval of the five waivers, which are a waiver to Section 8.4 of the Zoning Ordinance which states that" A planned development district may be established in any development area identified in the comprehensive plan, and in .y rural area identifi~d i,n t~e comprehensive plan if the dist.rict is a plann~d historic district containing a .historic site and e purposes of the dlstnct Include the restoration, preservation, conservation and enhancement of the historic site, provided that its location is suitable for the character of the proposed uses and structures", the rear setback waiver, the critical slopes waiver, waiver of Section 20A.8 relating to a mixture of uses and housing types and the waiver to Section 20A.9,b" which was described by staff during the public hearing as a waiver to the amenity requirement since the applicant is providing 11 % amenities instead of the required 20%. 1 ATTACHMENTS: Attachment I: Staff Report, dated February 19, 2008 Attachment II: Code of Development, dated February 25, 2008 Attachment III: General Development Plan, dated January 19, 2007, revised February 25,2008 Attachment IV: Proffers, dated February 25; 2008 2 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA 06-14 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Planning Commission Public Hearing: February 19, 2008 Owners: H & H Limited Liability Company Acreage: 1.051 acres TMP: Tax Map 60F, Parcel 3 Location: South west corner of the intersection of Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads, (See Attachments A and B) Magisterial District: Jack Jouett Proposal: The applicant proposes to develop a two- story, approximately 20,000 square foot professional office building on the site. RA (Rural Area) Character of Property: Property fronts on the southwest corner of Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads. The site is undeveloped, wooded and has a lot of overgrown shrubs/plants. The front of the site is flat with a steep slope that drops off towards the rear. actors Favorable: 1. The proposed use of the site is less intensive than what it is currently zoned for. 2. The proposal meets most principles of the Neighborhood Model. Principles not met are the result of the peculiar characteristics of the site. 3. The applicant is proposing a preservation area at the rear of the property as a protection measure for the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir watershed. This area; however, is not delineated on the plan. 4. Proposed parking will be located under the building and to the rear of the building. Staff: Claudette Grant Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: March 19, 2008 Applicant: Chris Kabbash & W. Keith Woodard Rezone: C-1, Commercial to NMD, Neighborhood Model District. By-right use: C-1 with proffers Proffers: Yes Requested # of Dwelling Units: 0 Compo Plan Designation: Rural Area Use of Surrounding Properties: Apartments, townhouses/condominiums, office space, dentist office, and single family detached. Factors Unfavorable: 1. Property is outside of the Development Area. 2. Lack of committed delineation for conservation and preservation areas on the plan. 3. The proffers and Code of Development need technical revisions. RECOMMENDATION: Provided that the areas of conservation and preservation are delineated on the plan and technical provisions to the Code of Development and proffers are completed prior to the Board of Supervisors' meeting, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2006-000014 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads, inclusive of revised proffers, code of development and general development plan, Staff also recommends approval of the four waivers which are a waiver to Section 8.4, the rear setback waiver, critical slopes waiver, and waiver of Section 20A.8 relating to a mixture of uses and housing types. . Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 Attachment I STAFF PERSON: Claudette Grant PLANNING COMMISSION: February 19, 2008 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: March 19, 2008 ZMA 2006- 014 Professional Office Buildina at Georaetown and Hvdraulic Roads Request for approval of Modification of Development Area designation, Setback waiver, Waiver to Section 20A.8 (Mixture of dwelling types/Mixture of uses) of Zoning Ordinance and Critical slopes waiver PETITION PROPOSAL: Rezone 1.051 acres from C-1 Commercial zoning district which allows retail sales and service uses; and residential use by special use permit (15 units/acre) to NMD Neighborhood Model District zoning district which allows residential (3 - 34 units/acre) mixed with commercial, service and industrial uses. Approx, 20,000 sq. ft, building. PROFFERS: Yes 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 LOCATION: Southwest corner of Georgetown/Hydraulic Roads intersection. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 60F/3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett CHARACTER OF THE AREA The site is undeveloped, wooded and has a lot of overgrown shrubs/plants. The front portion of the site adjacent to the corner of Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads is flat. The rear portion of the site has a steep slope that drops off towards the rear, A small office building is located to the north of the site. A variety of residential uses are located to the northwest, west and south of the site, including Georgetown Green, which is adjacent and to the rear of the site. A small dentist office is located east and across Hydraulic Road from the property. Albemarle High School is located approximately 800 feet and to the north of the site. SPECIFICS OF THE PROPOSAL This site is located on the southwest corner of the intersection of Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads. (See Attachments A & B) The site is currently vacant. In 1981, the site was rezoned from RA, rural area to C-1, commercial. Although the property was in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan at that time, a portion of the property was taken from the site for the widening of Hydraulic Road. The rezoning was specific to only allow the relocation of a gas station/convenience store and no other commercial uses. An amendment to the original rezoning states the new store was not to exceed 2,579 square feet. The applicant has decided that this would not be a good location for a gas station/convenience store because it would be challenging from a general traffic standpoint for incoming and outgoing traffic, and the relatively small size of the site would be difficult for large trucks accessing the site for deliveries. The adjacent residents and the County agree that use of the property for a convenience store and gas station could create traffic problems. Instead of a gas station/convenience store, the applicant would like to develop the property with a two-story, 20,000 square foot professional office building, (See Attachment D) The applicant would like to rezone from C-1, commercial to NMD, Neighborhood Model District. The access to this development would be on Hydraulic Road. The proposed building will front the corner of Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads with parking located underneath the building and at the rear of the building. The remainder of the parcel will be open, preservation area, The applicant has also provided a Code of Development. (See Attachment C) APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST The applicant proposes to provide an office building that will be a less intensive use of the site than the currently approved use of a gas station/convenience store. The applicant has provided elements of the Neighborhood Model, such as bringing the building close to the street, pedestrian improvements, and site planning that respects the terrain and environment. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY 1. ZMA 81-7 Malcolm J. Reid - On March 18, 1981, the Board of Supervisors voted to approve the rezoning petition of 1.27 acres from RA Rural Areas to C-1 Commercial with proffers. 2 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and HydrauliC Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 2. ZMA 82-6 HOP-iN-FOOD STORE, Inc. - On June 2, 1982, the Board of Supervisors voted to amend the proffers so that the size of the building could now be 2,579 square feet instead of the original 2,300 square feet. .. SDP 97-035 Calvet VirQinia Company Preliminary Site Plan - On December 21, 1999 the Planning Commission approved a waiver to allow disturbance on critical slopes with conditions. The decision was appealed and the Board of Supervisors reaffirmed the approval of the waiver with amended conditions at its February 8, 2000 meeting. The amended waiver conditions were incorporated into the standard conditions that were set for administrative approval of the final site plan. 4. ZMA 00-004 Entrance Corridor Overlay District - On March 14, 2000, the Board of Supervisors voted to approve the designation of State Route 743 as an entrance corridor. 5. SDP 00-038 Calvet VirQinia Final Site Plan - On March 20, 2000, the applicant submitted a tentative final site plan which was subject to staff review for compliance with the conditions of the preliminary site plan and critical slopes waiver. During this review, a determination was made that the proposed development would be subject to the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness by the Architectural Review Board prior to final site plan approval. (See Attachment F) 6. ARB-F(SDP)-00-059 - H. & H. L.L. C./Hydraulic-Georqetown Convenience Store - The ARB approved a final Certificate of Appropriateness for the proposed convenience store at its meeting on February 20, 2001. However, the preliminary site plan approval period expired on February, 82001. 7. SDP 01-050 H & H LLC Final Site Plan - On July 17, 2001 the Planning Commission approved the final site plan and the critical slopes waiver with conditions. BACKGROUND On June 6, 2006, the Planning Commission held a pre-application worksession on this project. (See Attachment E) Several questions were posed and discussed during the worksession. At the worksession, the Commission ~nerallY felt the proposed use was less intensive than the permitted use for a gas station/convenience store, and ...-nsidered the proposed use to be appropriate for this location. One of the issues the Planning Commission agreed needed to be addressed was the project's location in an entrance corridor and the need for review by the Architectural Review Board (ARB). On October 16, 2006 the ARB discussed this project and had the following concerns: 1) The ARB was not able to support the request for the rezoning as presented because they felt landscaping was needed for relief between the street and the building, and 3 feet was not an adequate setback. The ARB felt ten to fifteen feet free of utilities and easements would be appropriate. 2) The ARB felt they could support the rezoning if the applicant provided a suitable building setback to allow for landscaping free of utilities and easements and reduce the building size to be more appropriately sized for the site, with minimal grading and tree clearing. The ARB agreed that the proposed office use is less intensive and more appropriate than the permitted use for a gas station/convenience store. . After the pre-application work session in June, the applicant decided to proceed with a two-story, 13,000 square foot professional office building, The applicant decided to request a rezoning for NMD primarily because of the flexibility in setback requirements. A work session with the Planning Commission was held on November 7,2006 in order for the Commission, to provide staff and the applicant guidance regarding the location of the building and the size of the building before proceeding with plans for the building. (See Attachment F) The question regarding how to balance the appropriate setback for the building and the size of the building was specifically discussed. While there was no consensus of the Commission, the following comments were made: · Mr. Edgerton wanted to see street trees and sidewalks in front of the building. · The ARB wanted the building 10' - 15' back free of utilities, which may include the sidewalk. They were looking at a planting, a sidewalk and then the building. · As long as the pedestrians are protected as they walk around the corner of Hydraulic and Georgetown and VDOT and the Service Authority are okay with the use ot their right-ot- way for plantings, the Commission had no problems with the proposed layout of the front 3 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 of the site, The applicant should explore the possibility with VDOT and County Engineering about treating the right-of-way at the front of the site as the area for planting and landscaping. In an attempt to keep the setback being proposed, the applicant needs to look a little closer at locating the proposed parking on the lower level. In looking at the utility issue, the Service Authority needs to be a part of that discussion as well as VDOT. · The Commission wanted to see minimal grading in the rear. · The Commission asked if the applicant could accommodate these restrictions and still maintain the size of the building and the number of parking spaces, · The Commission asked that the parking for the adjacent property be left out of the forested area. The parking should be minimized. · The Commission felt that if removing the lower level parking meant the building size had to be adjusted because of the parking requirements, then that is what the Commission would expect. · The Commission suggested the applicant take the discussion from this meeting and figure out how to make the location and building size work on the site. Since the work session the applicant has: . Provided street trees and sidewalks in front of the building. · Provided front setbacks that vary from 9.6' and 13.5' at the building corners, to 21.9' at the center of the building. The existing property line on Hydraulic Road is currently located 10' from the back of the sidewalk. The setbacks from the property line create a zone for widened sidewalk and landscaping. · Provided parking in the rear of the building and under the building. · Delineated a portion of the rear of the site as preservation area. · Provided a parking modification request approved by zoning staff. The parking modification request describes the square footage of the proposed building and its uses, (See Attachment J). · Provided parking for the adjacent property not in the forested area, but incorporated it within the on-site parking. Comments from VDOT, the Service Authority and Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority reflecting agreement of the proposed plan are included as Attachments G, H, and I. CONFORMITY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: The Land Use Plan shows this area as Rural Area. However, the property was rezoned to C-1 - Commercial and also has the potential to be developed residentially with a special use permit. Size, topography, and zoning make this property challenging to be developed. It could not be rezoned as Rural Area because it is less than 2 acres in size. The location of the lot at the intersection of two very busy streets means that access would have to be limited. Steep slopes at the rear of the parcel render the developable area fairly small. The topography suggests that an office or multi-family dwelling in a location as proposed would be appropriate if the land were in the Development Area. The current zoning restricts its use to C-1 Commercial with the following proffers: 1. The only entrance to the subject property shall be located on Hydraulic Road so that the northern margin of the entrance at the property line will be located 12 % feet south of the northern boundary of the subject property; 2. The subject property will be used for a relocation of the convenience store in accordance with the general lay-out of the enclosed preliminary site plan. Of course, a more definitive site plan will be presented at a later date. The new store shall not cover more than 2,579 square feet; 3. The applicant will comply with all requirements of the storm water runoff ordinance. A 50 foot buffer zone, adjacent to the residential areas, will be maintained and as many trees as possible will be retained in this area, and, if sufficient trees are not retained, the applicant will plant sufficient evergreens to provide reasonably adequate screening; 4. The applicant will install, within 60 days after rezoning, a guard rail along the boundary adjacent to the play area of Georgetown Green. The guard rail shall be constructed of 4 foot pipes planted in the ground, with horizontal pipes running between vertical posts. This installation has proved very satisfactory in other locations. 4 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 Applicable statements/goal from the Comprehensive Plan relevant to this site is protect the County's natural, scenic, and historic resources in the Rural Area and Development Area. .rinCiPles of the Neighborhood Model -- Because of the existing zoning, the property's proximity to the Development Areas across the street, and the nature of the requested re-zoning, staff has assessed the proposal for conformity with the Neighborhood Model: Pedestrian Orientation Neighborhood Friendly Streets and Paths Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks Parks and Open Space Neighborhood Centers Buildings and Spaces of Human Scale Relegated Parking Mixture of Uses Mixture of Housing Types and Affordabilit Redevelo ment Site Planning that Respects Terrain Clear Boundaries with the Rural Areas Sidewalks are located adjacent to this property on both Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads. Site plan requirements will require internal pedestrian access. This rinci Ie is met. The proposed plan does not show street trees adjacent to the street because a sidewalk is already adjacent to the street. This principle is not met. While interconnections are not shown, they were considered; however, due to difficult topography and the need to preserve the rear portions of the site, interconnections were not further pursued. This principle is not met; however, staff believes it does not need to be met. As shown on the plan, a large portion of the rear of the site will be open space and no disturbance is expected in this area due to the steep slopes. A picnic area at the rear of the parking area and bike racks near the front of the building are shown on the Ian. This rinci Ie is met. Albemarle High School is located very near this site and serves as a center. Although this site is located in an area that is considered Rural Area, its' proximity to the Development Area makes it very accessible to several nearby areas that could also be considered nei hborhood centers. The applicant has worked diligently with staff and the ARB to provide a building and space that are of human scale and appropriate to the surrounding area. This rinci Ie is met. Given the size and topography of the site and the design and layout of the building, the location of parking under the building and at the rear of the building rovides reasonable rele ated arkin . This area of Albemarle County has a variety of different uses nearby making this rinci Ie not a licable. This principle is not applicable. This rinci Ie is not a licable. Keeping the building at the front/top of the property and the parking under the building and to the rear of the building allows the site to be designed with respect for the terrain, The preservation area at the rear of the site also provides of res ect for h sical characteristics of the site. This principle cannot be met because the property is in the Rural Areas. STAFF COMMENT Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district: The purpose and intent of the Neighborhood Model District (NMD) is to establish a planned development district in which traditional neighborhood development, as established in the County's Neighborhood Model, will occur. The NMD provides for compact, mixed-use developments with an urban scale, massing, density and an infrastructure configuration that integrates diversified uses within close proximity to each other within the development areas identified in the comprehensive plan. The request for a NMD outside of the Development Areas is an unusual one. This proposed NMD is for a single small parcel. It proposes no mixture or uses nor does it include housing. Normally, staff would not recommend that the NMD be used where these important features are missing. In this circumstance, however, the NMD is the only district which will allow for the design elements which are important .staff and the Commission to be accomplished. Staff notes that use of the NMD here should be considered an ception to the rule and not a precedent. 5 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 Public need and justification for the change: The County's Comprehensive Plan supports development in the designated development area that is consistent with use, density, and form recommended in the Plan, This property is located in the Rural Areas, but its' current zoning is for a specific commercial use. While the use proposed in this re-zoning is not in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan, staff believes that the less intensive use of this site proposed in this rezoning is superior to what could be developed under the current zoning, particularly considering the size and location of this property. Impact on Environmental, Cultural, and Historic Resources: The site contains wooded areas. Some of the woods would be removed in order to accomplish the proposed plan; however, the applicant also shows preservation areas on the plan, This is important considering this property's location in the watershed of the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir. There are no cultural or historic resources associated with this site. Anticipated impact on public facilities and services: Streets: The development will generate an additional 132 trips per day on Hydraulic Road and/or Georgetown Road, which provide primary access to the site. Staff and VDOT agrees that the traffic impact will be minimal. Water and Sewer: This site is located in the Rural Area but has Jurisdictional Area designation for public water and sewer. Attachment G shows that the Service Authority will want the sewer service connected to the existing man hole and the utility easements will need to be shown during the site plan stage, Schools: This type of development would not generate students, Fire, Rescue. Police: The Seminole Trail fire - rescue station serves this site, 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 ManaQement: The applicant proposes managing the entire volume of storm water from this development in a variety of ways, including a storm water retention area, and underground holding tanks to hold rain water for landscape irrigation purposes. In general, this approach is acceptable and the County Engineer has no objection with the management concepts proposed. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties: The office building aspects of this project are very much in keeping with the existing surrounding properties, which are comprised of residential and office/commercial uses. However, this property is wooded, which adds a particular characteristic and level of privacy for the adjacent properties. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD COMMENT This project was reviewed by the ARB on March 5, 2007. (See Attachment K) In summary, the ARB had no objection based on the preliminary site plan they reviewed, as long as the building and parking setbacks as illustrated and all RWSA requirements could be met without reducing the quantity or otherwise change the general character of the proposed plantings. The ARB provided several comments and suggestions for the applicant's next submittal, which are detailed in Attachment K. CODE OF DEVELOPMENT The Code of Development is included as Attachment C. It demonstrates that only two types of uses are allowed. They are retail sales and service establishments and services and public establishments. It contains the design details for the site and describes the conservation areas, preservation areas, amenities and provides other code of development standards. There are a few technical revisions needed to provide additional clarification regarding this development. The revisions will need to be completed prior to the Board of Supervisors public hearing. PROFFERS Proffers are provided as Attachment L. They are described as follows: Proffer 1. The applicant will install a permanent 5 - bike bicycle rack as shown on the plan no later than the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building. Proffer 2. The applicant agrees to construct a bus shelter, including a bench as shown on the plan. If the location of the shelter is not determined by the time of certificate of occupancy of the building, then the applicant will pay 6 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 the County up to $7,800 in cash for the installation of the shelter. An annual adjustment of the cash proffer is also provided in the proffer. .roffer 3. The applicant agrees to construct the building to be a minimum of LEED Certified (under the LEED-NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations, Version 2.2 (October 2005) or the LEED Green Building Rating System for Core & Shell Development, Version 2.0 (July 2006)). This will be verified by a licensed architect. Before a certificate of occupancy is provided for the building on the site a written statement from the architect regarding design and LEED certification of the building will be submitted to the County's Director of Community Development. Proffer 4. The conservation and preservation areas are generally delineated on the plan, but without boundaries. Therefore, the applicant needs to specify these areas on the plan with boundaries. Staff believes the proffers are substantively acceptable, except for proffer 4. They are still in need of technical and language revisions. (See Attachment L) WAIVERS The applicant has requested several waivers. The first is approval of a parking modification, which is an administrative request recommended for approval by Zoning. The Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors will need to act on the following waivers: Modification to the requirement that the Planned District designation be allowed only in the Development Areas, setback waiver, critical slopes waiver, and waiver of Section 20A.8 of the Zoning Ordinance (Mixture of dwelling types/mixture of uses). Analysis of the critical slopes waiver is in Attachment M with staffs recommendation for approval. . Regarding the request that this zoning district be allowed in the Rural Areas, staff makes the following analysis: The applicant is requesting a modification of Section 8.4 of the Zoning Ordinance which states that" A planned development district may be established in any development area identified in the comprehensive plan, and in any rural area identified in the comprehensive plan if the district is a planned historic district containing a historic eite and the purposes of the district include the restoration, preservation, conservation and enhancement of the istoric site, provided that its location is suitable for the character of the proposed uses and structures." "Section 8,2 allows an applicant to request that any requirement of sections 4, 5 and 32, or the planned development district regulations be waived or modified if it is found to be inconsistent with planned development design principles and that the waiver or modification is consistent with the intent and purposes of the planned development district under the particular circumstances." As previously mentioned in this report, although the subject project is shown as located in Rural Area on the Land Use Plan, the property's proximity to the Development Area, and the characteristic of the surrounding property's to the subject site, the desire for a more "urban design" this close to the Development Area and the need to modify the rear setback make it a candidate for this waiver. The applicant is proposing a lower intensive use of the site than what the site is currently zoned for is also a positive reason for staffs support of this modification request. Staff recommends approval of the waiver to Section 8.4 to allow the zoning to occur in the Rural Areas. . The proposed office building encroaches by 2.5' into the required 50' setback from the Rural Area on the southwest side of the property. The applicant requests a waiver to permit a 47.5' setback. The small size of this property, the challenges of keeping development away from the utility easements, and the steep topography are elements that the applicant had to deal with in order to protect some of the sensitive areas, Thus, the proposed building encroaches 2,5' into the required 50' setback from the Rural Area. Staff feels the applicant has attempted to protect the rear of the site by keeping the development out of the watershed area, preserved some of the wooded area of the site, and kept the disturbance of the critical slopes somewhat low. Staff recommends approval of this waiver. . Section 20A.8 of the Zoning Ordinance calls for Neighborhood Model Districts to have a mixture of dwelling unit types and a mixture of uses. Due to the small size of this site, the applicant does not propose residential uses or a mixture of uses. The surrounding area has a mixture of uses and a variety of housing types; therefore, in this case, staff feels that a waiver of Section 20A.8 is appropriate given the many challenges of this site as previously mentioned in this report. SUMMARY etaff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this rezoning request: 1. The proposal meets most principles of the Neighborhood Model. 7 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 2. The applicant is proposing a preservation area at the rear of the property as a protection measure for the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir watershed. This area, however, is not delineated on the plan. 3. Proposed parking will be located under the building and to the rear of the building. 4. The proposed use of the site is less intensive than what it is currently zoned for. Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this rezoning request: 1. Property is outside of the Development Area. 2. Lack of committed delineation for conservation and preservation areas on the plan, 3. The proffers and Code of Development need technical revisions. RECOMMENDATION Provided that the areas of conservation and preservation are delineated on the plan and technical provisions to the Code of Development and proffers are completed prior to the Board of Supervisors' meeting, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2006-000014 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads, inclusive of revised proffers, code of development and general development plan. Staff also recommends approval of the four waivers which are a waiver to Section 8.4, the rear setback waiver, critical slopes waiver, and waiver of Section 20A.8 relating to a mixture of uses and housing types. ATTACHMENTS ATTACHMENT A - Tax Map ATTACHMENT B - Location Map ATTACHMENT C - Code of Development, dated and revised February 12, 2008 ATTACHMENT D - General Development Plan, dated January 19,2006, revised November 30,2007 ATTACHMENT E - Planning Commission Minutes, dated June 6,2006 ATTACHMENT F - Planning Commission Minutes, dated November 7,2006 ATTACHMENT G - Electronic mail from Gary Whelan, ACSA, dated October 31,2007 ATTACHMENT H - Electronic mail from Michelle Simpson, RWSA, dated June 26,2007 ATTACHMENT 1- Electronic mail from Joel DeNunzio, VDOT, dated November 2,2007 ATTACHMENT J - Parking modification request, dated October 19, 2007 ATTACHMENT K- Letter from Brent Nelson, dated March 26,2007 ATTACHMENT L - Proffers, dated January 29,2008 ATTACHMENT M - Waivers and Analysis 8 Professional Office Building at Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads PC Public Hearing 2/19/08 Att~rhmpnt A - r~57 \) \-". ....l.. GeOrge~w-S;;:: n'- I ',. n & Hydraulic R 7 r 7 I, / -" \ I ~ ~ <:::: I -, I ids Property/ \.---Il.,. _""..1FV ~III ~ --, ____ I ' i/' /' ~? J .".: _ "'- ~ =:::::- f/ \.411 I r w: ~ ' ?'f:::, r 16S~ ~, / i ~ . r \ ,\..:r- V -<jf-., ~- J LJ 'L1~ ~-III \, I' ,. I ,~ ~ -,,- ',,- ~ ~ .-L ~, ~ i!n ~ Rij/~~ ~~ ..6 \~/~ k ~Vh\. 'df ~ D ;-"\ ~~~l I I r-' A '0 t9, 0'.& \ 1 ~~ ~ ~~.) I ',...:: '-' '- '11 ~'\ \\ rl \\'i:: \ , '--- I ""'" --'" '\ t- l,..c:l - 0.~ - ,\ ,",,~ ""' '/ =' H' ,,< - ,~~~ - ,'QPf -=..... '-./ \-'" - I~A __ ~Ff T I:. OD." ~ ' '" k'h C {4J .-.. "1- ~~;. 29 ~A~~'~ )1 ~ () 0 ~' /#v~JI \::::::: -.. I ~ ~" r;.(' "..r WJ \'. I\~ ~~ <V~ ~~ \. '~'P'I'.~ "'-, ...A ~ .; ,~A.J ,~ ~&,'R;.xi\ I .j5..'- ';,'" .." ~~~\\l) ;)!'-"""'r") , _ ". ___ ~ ,w; ~ ^ / _ ~ ...... / ~ Roo" .. - gO 200 400 f.~ ~ 'Iii ~ SIre,m,'--' ,^",,, Body "!.~ ~8!I!""y~1~__. 1:::i:::'Oflnt : I ~ .~ erest ' ~ Attachment R .....-d ... tro\~ TTVX ~ JP~ :..->>I' "1,..l. , 0\. ~ ,)J[852 J'"\ ' ~~ " 866 ,; \ -t f--/'" 11----= "-- II l/ . APPLICATION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Planning Comm. Revision #3 Revision #2 Revision #1 Final Submittal First Submittal FEB 12,2008 JAN 29,2008 NOV 30, 2007 OCT 19,2007 AUG 18, 2006 JULY 31,2006 PROPERTY: TMP 60F-3B (1.051 acres) HYDRAULIC & GEORGETOWN ROADS ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA OWNER/ APPLICANT: CHRIS KABBASH P.O, BOX 496 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902 A TTN: CHRIS KABBASH NARRATIVE: . The site is currently zoned C 1. The current zoning classification results from a 1981 rezoning from RA Rural Area, to C 1, Commercial, which occurred when a portion of the site was taken for the widening of Hydraulic Road, The 1981 C 1 rezoning was established specifically to allow for the location of a gas station / convenience store only, and no other commercial uses, An amendment to the original rezoning states that the new store would not exceed 2,579sf, An existing plan for a gas station/convenience store was developed, submitted and approved, The current Property Owner purchased the approved site-plan and retains this as a default "by-right". Upon reviewing the approved site plan for the Gas Station / Convenience store the applicant has concluded that for a number of reasons, this is not the best development scenario for this site. Access to and from the site is problematic, and the gas/convenience store would require and generate a high volume of troffic. The site borders the County's Urban Growth area, and is better suited to a traditional commercial or residential development. The applicant has presented a preliminary concept for a 2-story commercial building with relegated parking to the Planning Commission, and received endorsement for the concept. The applicant is requesting rezoning from C 1 to NMD in order to develop the site in a manner more consistent with Albemarle County's Neighborhood Model of Development. The Applicant proposes to develop a 2-story, professional office building, located close to the sidewalk, with relegated parking. This strategy provides lesser impacts with regards to generating traffic and noise, and is more compatible with the surrounding residential and commercial properties, The . l I M E H 0 USE ARC HIT E C T S, l C 946 GRADY AVENUE #27 CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22903 ph: 434-293-8537 Ix: 434-295-3536 e: limehs@earthlinknet Attachment C building is 17,017gsf. This breaks down into 9,558sf of net office and 7,459sf of common/utility/non-usable space and 3,491 sf of tenants' basement storage, 1). Existing Site Conditions Site is located on South-West corner of intersection of Georgetown & Hydraulic Roads, currently with no buildings, development or improvements, Property was formerly in rural area, but was rezoned to C l-Commercial in the 1980's during VDOT widening of Hydraulic Road. Rezoning was to permit a Gas Station/Convenience Store only, and no other type of commercial use (ZMA 81-07, 82-08, both with proffers). The other three "corners" at this intersection are in Albemarle County's Growth area, and are zoned to permit commercial, mixed use. The site has a 100'-120' wide flat area for development that parallels Hydraulic Road. Past this flat area, the site drops off, sloping down to the back property line, Adjacent properties are zoned Residential RA, R6 and commercial. 2), Existing Approved Site Plan - Convenience Store/Gas Station Building: Parking: 1-story 2,400sf Convenience Store w / Canopy & (2) Gas Pumps 18 spaces Per rezoning described above, current Site plan was developed and approved to permit construction of a Gas Station/Convenience Store. Drawings, prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, are dated from 3/31/97 - 1/24/01, with final approval signatures dated 7/31/01. Three additional dedicated parking spaces are provided for adjacent property as negotiated per rezoning approval. 3). Proposed Site Plan - 2-Story Office Building, NMD Zoning Parking: 2-story professional office building. 9,558sf office, 7,459sf common & 3,491 gsf storage. Provided: 51 spaces (ind, 2 HC) Required: 51 spaces = 48 spaces + 3 dedicated for adjacent property. Building: Site plan proposes that building front Hydraulic and Georgetown roads, wi parking relegated behind building. Building wraps corner of Hydraulic and Georgetown, facing both streets. Front setback varies from 9.6' & 13.5' at building corners, to 21.9' at center. Note that existing property line on Hydraulic Road is currently located 10' from the back of sidewalk, setbacks from property line creates zone for widened sidewalk and landscaping. Rezoning from C 1 to NMD would permit professional office building instead of convenience store and would permit creation of "urban street edge" and landscaped street frontage. A single access point to the site will be from the far north corner, on Hydraulic Road, at the optimal location from a traffic engineering standpoint. :2 . Note: This Application for Zoning Map Amendment was first submitted August 1, 2006, Per Planning Commission direction, the project was further submitted for review by the Architectural Review Board. As a result of A.R,B. Advisory Review, and further Planning Commission Review, significant Architectural and Engineering work was completed, addressing all comments. Preliminary approval of the concept was obtained. 20A.3 - NEIGHBORHOOD MODEL OF DEVELOPMENT - APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS 20A.3.a - statement of Consistency with NMD Principles . The proposed development alone does not meet all NMD principles. However combined with adjacent properties the project contributes to NMD principles. The following is a brief overview of the proposed development's contribution to NMD principles: 1, Pedestrian Orientation - The development is adjacent to Albemarle County's Urban Growth Area. The development is located such that access is easily achieved by transit, bike or foot, The development is close to other existing and developing commercial buildings, further contributing to a growing density and variety of commercial options convenient for pedestrians. The project is convenient to numerous residences within easy walking distance. 2, Neighborhood Friendly Streets and Paths - The minimal setback and relegated parking provide a more pleasant, and interesting streetscape, further encouraging pedestrian activity, The project includes widened sidewalks on Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads, and pedestrian paths surrounding the building, 3. Interconnected street & transportation networks - The project is a single building, and is interconnected by county sidewalk systems. Sidewalk will be widened and landscaped, encouraging and improving pedestrian activity. Project is also on bus route. Connectivity to adjacent residential properties was researched but was not sought by residents for privacy and environmental protection. Interconnectivity to adjacent commercial property was investigated, but was not encouraged due to issues with preservirg critical slopes and wooded areas of site. Pedestrian interconnectivity is planned to adjacent commercial property for the purpose of shared parking. A bus stop is proffered. 4. Parks and Open Space as Amenities - The project proposes to leave an existing wooded buffer of mature trees intact. Additionally, the proposed landscaping in the front and around the building will enhance the overall look of the site contributing to street-scaping on Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads. There is also a picnic area provided as on amenity. . 3 5. Neighborhood Centers - The project contributes towards creating a future neighborhood Center at the intersection of Hydraulic & Georgetown by providing office space for professional businesses that may be of service to surrounding residents, 6. Buildings and Spaces of a Human Scale - The project proposes a 2-Story building, with minimal setback, relegated parking and street landscaping. This approach establishes a model for a pleasing urban streetscape on Hydraulic Road. The architecture of the building is traditional/classical. proportioned and detailed at a comfortable human scale, 7. Releqated Parking - The project proposes that the parking shall be relegated behind, and partially "tucked-under" the building. The tuck-under parking allows minimal impact to wooded critical slopes. 8. Mixture of Uses and Use Types - This project is for a single commercial building, designed to provide 9,558 net sf of office space to multiple professional businesses, Per NMD variances permitted, project is an infill project, and is within 1/4 mile of two or more housing types as well as other mixed uses. The list of approved uses has been expanded to include additional commercial, retail and residential uses. 9. Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability - This project is for a single commercial building, designed to provide 9,558sf of office space to multiple professional businesses. Per NMD variances permitted, project is an infill project, and is within 1/4 mile of two or more housing types as well as other mixed uses. 10. Redevelopment - This project is located on an Infill Site, adjacent to the Urban Growth area. It is not located on undeveloped farmland. 11. Site Planning that Respects Terrain - The proposed location of the building and parking minimizes retaining walls and foundations. The building and tuck-under parking areas are efficiently sited on the flat. upper area of the site, Disturbance to the sloped and lower areas of the site are kept to a minimum. 12, Clear Boundaries with the Rural Area - This site is located in the County's Rural Area, however it is also located adjacent to the growth area. The zoning is currently C 1, permitting a convenience store & gas station. The rezoning to NMD permits a project more compatible in design and siting, that properly complements the surrounding growth area properties, and provides a lesser impact on the adjacent and nearby residential properties, The buffer at the rear of the site will remain untouched and therefore be considered a preservation area. The existing vegetation, which includes pine, poplar, hickory, maple and oak trees, will remain. The buffer at the Georgetown Road side of the property is, and will remain, a utility easement and therefore a conservation area, maintained by the utility company to their standards. 4 . This project alone, does not meet all criteria of the Neighborhood Model District as stated in Section 20A. Overall the site is too small to be able to accommodate most of the requirements of the NMD district, However, the project itself contributes to the mixture of use requirement, in addition to providing open space as amenities and relegated parking. The project is located in close proximity to a school complex, is within quarter of a mile of a residential area, is adjacent to a bus stop and is immediately adjacent to Albemarle County's growth area, 20A.3.b - Parking and Loading Needs Study: Parking for the proposed project has been calculated by using the Albemarle County Zoning Code as it would apply to the proposed professional office building. The project proposes 9,558 net sf of commercial office space. Parking needs are calculated at 1 parking space per 200sf. Total parking needs are calculated to be 48 spaces max, to include handicapped accessible parking. Additionally, (1 ) loading space and dumpster location will be provided. The existing site plan requires provision of three spaces for an adjacent business. These spaces are provided in addition to required parking. . 20A.3.c - Storm water: The project will handle all storm water on site, as typically required by code, This will be accomplished through a variety of strategies, including storm water retention area, and underground holding tanks to hold rainwater for landscape irrigation purposes. 20A.3,d -General Development Plan: See Attached 20A.3.e - Code of Development: See Attached . 5 20A.4 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN See accompanying submittal drawings 20A.4.a - Gross Square Footage Non-Residential & Residential: Non - Residential-17,017gsf (9,558sf office & 7,459sf common/lobby) & 3,OOOgsf basement storage. Residential - Ogsf 20A.4,b - General Allocation: This project contains one parcel, to be used for commercial office space, 20A.4,c - Green Spaces, amenities, Conservation areas, Preservation Areas: This project proposes to leave an existing wooded buffer of mature trees undeveloped and undisturbed. This is accomplished by developing the flat, upper area of the site, and leaving the lower area undeveloped. 20A.4.d - Building Footprints: See accompanying submittal drawings. 6 - -) r (-- ~ ~ <J ISo .i - ~ ~,\~ ~ ~ 4;, \. f-~-~ :~ '\l ',) ;"'1 'l J is::! r ,I y D ;:D I' li \\ 'C '\' ~ 8~. --, ~, ~ L .l,._:::::' ::1 :z:! ~ D CL.i 'CL 0 ~ I ='< g,; il.1 t;::, ID >1 ~, \l.l 'u is CL ~ :z. '-.\ I -=:, \f\ y (L cJ. CL :{ u ~ ~ ): ~ ,,') '2 .:1. . , () {\'\ - r; ~Ql~\ l :=; /, ~' ',:I ,\> - J1 '-- ? L t'-l '" :;" ~__ J..1..\ ill \":\' ~ G 0.-' ~, \2 :;.' :5 {\ ttl ~~~'~+~ \S)X"tu~ ~ ll.l ~~"'- iI: If) .C, ,,:--\ ! -l,.\ I l~ _~! 0\'-~ ~..; ~ ~\~~ Jll ,', -:-)~ C;; &: :-1 '"" () f?- ;tr --<:-i ~~ ~ .=:;:- ,:i. ~~ ~~. Q ili 2" -:::l Z '.1 '" , ~, \:' ~ ~ ."" \t, ts Ii \1\ '-l is: ~' ;- f,- -. ''"-' ~. .::;: 4" ;;;; {- --"- ,}- Belt ~ 't' '\~I~ * i"- - ,C 13'_ -c,- i'~: ~ iU ~ ii ~ _., I,.: ,- 11 ~...!~ I" I,.-)'~ - I," ..:0- 1-, ~,' .L k SZ ~ ~ d- ~ ..... ,) '\ c. "Y -s:. ~_.__..- i! '\ ~ >l:'l z * .2 ~ li\g. <tl!\~::Iir> iE~:::!gl:-iC, ~~~~~ l~:% J II' I J ..) .,. -:-_~.~~.-:-::-.~--~~'~_. __ __-::::-,,:~:,:-:-::-:-~::'.'"::::':"'::--:::.-::-::r_~ t- -----;c;;~~~----------=t------ I-;;;Dt--~Q;"+;;"i' r .~;. _ I I ' ,I I i'! '-' I Xl 0, ~i >1 III I -1~ ill! Iii - U}I ililll II t,i.-~ , ._~__.._~i!;f. i-=-!~ I .' II'i i II . ' " , I '! ;J___ ---'It ,--f/l I ) 1$ ~,~ 1/-- ___L______~- ___ ~ I ~ ~-;,..; --- .If-.;o.u l' Uil/li "o~Jt,. I i~~~;1S ::J.!I! ,~ <) ':3 ,~ -----ti tot. ~ ~ m'l 111 Ii 12,',' I ~ I~' ! lJ R:>! Illl :Ji1 Il,\\i"O-l ~ !II ~ ~ ~ ~ <l I ~ -..- >-' ~ e. i ,trL~j; ~ ~ '"~ Il' " :'f -a ;{ III It; '3 -' -Il, Z ~ I ;; -5~ g. ~.' 'I' J;L ":1:.. u'\ .s.. ~~~\d 1d'$:il- III , I Ii I ' I ' I l ~ , " ////l l~- ~'" Eij' ~ ", it' ,"-- '> - I~}:", ,... ~ ~II ~ '-~~ ~ ~itl 10 ~IFj ~I !/\ ~ ~ " ILl ~ ~,~ ~'~ ~.~ SL._"", &i ~~ Il'lL J ~!~ ~ ~i-;- ~ '~,' 2 ::z i!- =>~, " j "I'" ~ i ~ l)i\if:L ,'>-, - ~-t~-v' -.J " ~i L~~ f-~-!,~I .... ~- ------ 1_,,07//_ .:s '2 ii I~I t- ,I i~ t 1: ~ It I I I I I I i I I: I: ,nr 01" ~f- I, i: I' ii o 0::: <C o iXl.....l ;::;:S ~f- .~ ~ :E Zo:::iXl ;:J.....l~ O<CZ UO:::<C ~;:J.....l .....If-c.. O:::Uf- <C~c.. ;2!::~ ~:I::U iXlUZ .....l0:::0 <C<CU OIl OIl Of- O:::U Z~ ;::!:: O:I:: f-U ~o::: 0<C o:::~ 00ll '" ~;:J :5 00 N o"dffi .,-; U;2r-O::: ::3:Jr;:;~ ~o"d;A;2 0::: ('I 0\ UJ o;::":'t 5:0~~ ci <l: o ~ u :::; => <l: ~ o >- I ~ o ~ u... UJ ~ <./) u... o S: UJ '> o <l: o ~ Z S: o 0- UJ 19 ~ o UJ 19 ~ o ~ u... UJ 0- V; u... o S: UJ '> W 19 ~ 0 UJ 19 06 U :::; => <l: ~ 0 >- 0 I <l: u... 0 0 ~ z u 0 :::; ;::: ::> U <l: UJ ~ <./) 0 ~ >- UJ I 0- ~ ~ ~ 0 0 ~ u... ~ UJ u...v; 0- . UJO V; ~<l: u... <./)0 0 u...~ Oz S: S:s: UJ ~O '> >0- ~ ... ... o ... Cl Cl z 9 :; ...~ ~ ;;: ::;: -' ;:;:\0 ~;~~ J- '" - "'... <(V> wZ 0<0 <(;= 0:5 Z:::> i5~ ==<( ii5u ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I~ "1U")lX) "ot C"')c-) u..~('t'>r-r- ~ V">-- .. tj e; u ;;: <5 <\ :;( _w _ ~ ~ ;c ~ ~ ~19 ~ D 8 .. o ~ ~ ~ ~ B; ~ ~ ~ ~ ~I::: u..:IN N N 8 8 <<:l co 0-. - ..~ cn___NNC"l .......N ~ ~ e; <a:I ~ ~ ~~~ 00:::1 :E ooo_",QQ < :E <Iu U U ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :< 8~~~~~~8898g ~ ...............I~ "" enc.n '" ___C"") 0-.......... -.:t '" " 0- M~..a~ ..... u...... V> V> '" <( ~ ~I~ _('0')("')000 z~-.i~ ~ '" lU z Cl z 9 :; ... "" ~""O t.&.IctJOg u~9u...< u::::~L.L..O..... LL....:r::t::;zo Oce_N..... ~tt' _B;d <w~ u.... i:C~ 0-= L.L.. u.. LL. LL.. V') V') en "" -............." o-.--N ...q- -.;t .. C"') <""iNNeD N Lr) 0"<1" <(CO? ON 0::< u~> ::::U:C Nu.JU 3:&i< ~....Ju.J Ul=a:l :::;~ C:>Z gG - 0:: :> '" V> 0 U~~ ~ ~~~ ~ O~~~~ ~;:~~~ ~Q~~~ 5155~~ iE::2c2 :I:: ::;:0:. < ~ :=i :x:: ~ U CC) <z 0- ao:C u= -~ .....m ~..... -.... :J:O "" %1-1::.:::0 Od:;Oo ==::E9u::..... :E~u..Cl~ UO<(t;;~o '" }.".... ~ " ~ " o w U " <t;: Ne;~ <w.,- ~~ 0- "- ,,-\... V> V') on 0::80: ~o.... ri~ w U <( a... V') Z wI o 0 ~>-<(..... ...c::coa:::<( 0..,0.... UO>-O ..... V>.... z ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ z ~ o ~ ~~ a5g ~== . . . <-' Z 0::: <( LLJ I U ~ <( 0::: <-' ~ <( ::J o a... Z [:3 0 I- _ Z>-~ LLJI-- ~Z~ <(::J~ ,00 UUU <(~<-,-1 a...O:::Z<( V)<(_I= Z~Z_ LLJLLJZ~ LLJ CO <(co O:::--l--l:::> <-'<(a..."" V) OV) 0:::1- U ZLLJ ~t:: OI I-U LLJO::: <-'<( O:::LLJ OV) LLJ::J <-,0 I 06LLJI'-... U~~ ---lCO --l , ::J06C") <(No-.. O:::~~ O~~ >-UC") I ~ ~~ ~- ;:;:-u.. V) V) ",CO N'" N~ ''0 L.t) .. .. V) [:3LLJ i=t:: -Z ZLLJ LLJ~ ~<( <(LLJ ~t:: UJV)t.( I-Iu.. 00 Zo u.. Z . :APPLlCATlON FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Planning Comm. Revision #3 Revision #2 Revision #1 Final Submittal First Submittal PROPERTY: TMP 60F-3B (1.051 acres) HYDRAULIC & GEORGETOWN ROADS ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA OWNER/ APPLICANT: CHRIS KABBASH P,O. BOX 496 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902 ATTN: CHRIS KABBASH . CODE OF DEVELOPMENT: 20A.5.a - Uses Permitted: See Section 20A.6.a FEB 12, 2008 JAN 29, 2008 NOV 30, 2007 OCT 19, 2007 AUG 18, 2006 JULY 31,2006 20A.5.b - Amount of Developed Square Footaoe: 17,017gsf 2-story commercial office building over basement and parking storage SITE: 1.051 ac (45,782sf) Consisting of: 6A95sf building coverage 20,319sf impervious coverage 20,069sf green space (44% of site) 5,227sf amenities on site (11 % of site) 6,678sf amenities off site (15% of site, additional) 20A.5.c - Maximum Residential Densities: Not Applicable. ~ 20A.5.d - Green Space & Amenities: Undisturbed green buffer of 40' -80' at back of property, entire length of property (210'-260'), Area = 10,000sf +, and 20' grading and buffer setback at south side (166'), .07ac, Project also provides widened sidewalk +/- 14' with str~et trees and entry plaza, jJ . L I M E H 0 U 5 EAR CHI TEe T 5, L C 946 GRADY AVENUE #27 CHARLOtTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22903 ph: 434-293-8537 fx 434-295-3536 e: limehs@eorthlink,net 20A.5,f - Uses expressly prohibited: Any uses not listed in Section 20,A6,a. 20A.5.g - Architectural & Landscape Standards: 1. Form, Massing & Proportion: 2-story, vertically proportioned doors & punched windows. 2. Architectural Style: Jeffersonian Classical/ Traditional. 3. Materials, colors, textures: Brick Masonry w/ cast stone trim. 4. Roof Form & Pitch: hipped or gable pitched roof, 4/12 - 9/12 range. 5. Architectural Ornamentation: Classically detailed trim, eaves, railings, Lobby, Metal roof at tower. 6. Fa~ade Treatment: Brick w / regular spacing for punched windows/doors, 7. Landscape Treatments: Trees, Shrubs and Beds to surround building & parking areas, 8. Preservation of Historic Structures/Sites: Not applicable, none existing, 20A.5.h - Preliminary Lot Layout: See accompanying submittal drawings. 20A.5.i - Blocks: Note: Parcel is one block, Most of these items do not apply, or are duplicates from 20A.5.g. 1, Range of Uses Permitted: Professional Office Building and other uses per 20,A.5.g 2. Requirements/Restrictions of Uses: See 20.A.5,f. 3. Build-To Lines: varies - 9.6' to 21.9' (see plan) 4. Minimum/Maximum Yard Dimensions: The lot size is 1.056 acres 5. Maximum Building Height: 2-stories, 50' . 6, Sidewalk & Pedestrian Paths: Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads. Widened landscaped sidewalk. 7, Green Space & Amenities: Wooded Buffer at rear (60'-80') and side (20') of property. Widened landscaped sidewalk, entry plaza and picnic tables 8. Conservation/Preservation Areas: 20' side & rear grading/buffer setbacks at South and West Property lines, 9. Parking Areas: Relegated behind, and tucked under, building 10. Civic Spaces: Not Applicable. None included in commercial building. Widened Landscaped sidewalks provided, 20A.6 - PERMITTED USES: 20A.6.a - By Right: :2 . . . Similar to uses listed in Section 22,2.1 (C-l Commercial), the following uses sholl be allowed by-right: These uses will be subject to adequate provision of parking and 011 other code requirements. Retail soles and service establishments: antique, gift, jewelry, notion and croft shops, clothing, apparel and shoe shops, florist, food grocery stores, furniture and home appliances (soles and service), musical instruments, newsstands (magazine, pipe and tobacco shops), optical goods, photographic goods, visual and audio appliances, sporting goods; Services and public establishments: administrative, professional offices. barber/beauty shops, clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic, financial institutions, libraries, museums, nurseries/daycare centers, tailor/seamstress, medical center, tier I and tier II personal wireless service facilities. 8vvt:;llirlgs: In-06dition to E~~ Additional permitted uses: utilities, accessory uses, temporary construction uses, public uses, and tier I and tier /I personal wireless service facilities. 20A.7 - RESIDENTIAL DENSITY: See 20.A.5.c, Not applicable - no residential planned, 20A.8 - MIXTURE OF USES: a. Mix of use permitted, but not planned. Project is on infi" project, and is relatively small compared to developed abutting or nearby parcels, Two or more housing types exist within one-quarter mile of the project, b, Waiver for different uses requested. Varying uses occur within one-quarter mile, accomplishing mixture sought, 20A.9 - GREEN SPACES, AMENITITES, and CONSERVATION/PRESERVATION AREAS: 0, Green Space: 15,805sf 35% of site. b. Amenities: Retention of wooded buffer, natural area. Addition of picnic area c. Additional Amenity Requirements: Not Applicable 20A.l0 - STREETS: Not Applicable, No Streets proposed for parcel. 3 Albemarle County Planning Commission June 6, 2006 The Albemarle County Planning Commission met on Tuesday, June 6, 2006 and held a meeting and a public hearing at 6:00 p.m" at the County Office Building, Room 241, Second Floor, 401 Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. Members attending were Eric Strucko, Bill Edgerton, Jo Higgins, Jon Cannon, Marcia Joseph, Chairman and Calvin Morris, Vice-Chairman, Absent was Pete Craddock. Julia Monteith, Senior Land Use Planner for the University of Virginia, representative for David J. Neuman, FAIA, Architect for University of Virginia, was absent. Other officials present were Elaine Echols, Principal Planner; Bill Fritz, Development Review Manager; Keith Lancaster, Senior Planner; Claudette Grant, Senior Planner; Judy Wiegand, Senior Planner; David Pennock, Principal Planner and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney. Call to Order and Establish Quorum: Ms. Joseph called the regular meeting to order at 6:00 p.m, and established a quorum. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public: Ms. Joseph invited comment from the public on other matters not listed on the agenda. There being none, the meeting moved on to the next item. Consent Agenda: a. SDP 2006-038 Korean Community Church - Critical Slopes Waiver Request: Request for waiver of Sec. 4.2 building site requirements in order to construct portions of parking and drive aisles, as well as associated grading on critical slopes. The property, described as Tax Map 59, Parcel 23G, is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District 350 feet from Ivy Road (Route #250) approximately 0.28 miles from its intersection with Broomley Road (Route #677). The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 1. (David Pennock) b. SUB 2006-104 West End at Western Ridge Open Space Appropriateness Determination: Request for approval of open space for a 16 lot subdivision in accordance with Section 4.7 of the Zoning Ordinance. The property is zoned R4, Residential. The property, described as Tax Map 56E, Section 1, Parcel A is located in the White Hall Magisterial District off of Lake Tree Lane [SR #1251] in the Western Ridge development which is located off of Three Notch'd Road [Route #240] approximately 1.5 miles east of its intersection with Crozet Avenue [SR #810]. The Crozet Master Plan of the Comprehensive Plan designates these properties as District CT3 Urban Edge. (Francis MacCall) Ms. Joseph asked if any Commissioner wanted to pull an item from the consent agenda, She asked to pull SDP-2006-038, Korean Community Church - Critical Slopes Waiver Request so that staff could explain the discrepancy between the executive summary and the body of the staff report. Mr. Pennock stated that SDP-2006-038, Korean Community Church was a request for a waiver to allow critical slopes disturbance associated with the construction of the church. The original staff report that went out included an incorrect executive summary with an incorrect background. The correct background site is that the site is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District about 250' off of Ivy Road just west of the city. There is an existing Volvo Dealership in front of the site. Just west of this property is the Korean Community Church and Christian Aid Mission. There has been no activity on this parcel previously. The proposal is for the construction of a new church. The applicant has submitted a request for a waiver in accordance with Section 4.2 of the zoning ordinance. The disturbance is for the construction of drive isles, a dumpster pad and associated grading for the construction of this site. Staff analyzed the requests in two parts in an engineering and planning review. From a planning perspective the identified critical slopes were not identified as aesthetic resources in the critical resources plan. In the ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 6, 2006 Attachment E / Gary Fern, Director of the Albemarle County Service Authority, introduced himself as Bill Brent's replacement. For the last 25 years he has been in consulting engineering and is a professional engineer and has sat through numerous Planning Commission meetings. Mr. Morris asked what he thought about the three entrances. He asked if all three entrances were needed. Mr. Fern said that he had been to the site twice, which was not in regards to this application. In looking at it he would note that one of the entrances was solely dedicated to the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority in order to get their trucks back to the loading dock for chemical and other equipment. So that entrance is necessary. The middle entrance is for the lawn mower service. The far entrance is used very sporadically by our own trucks in order to get to equipment that they might store from time to time in that third area. What they don't want to do is to be driving through the space that Paul's Lawnmower is renting. So they sometimes take that third route. But, he would certainly look at that a little closer. Mr. Edgerton noted that the Commission is always asking people to limit the number of entrances. Ms. Higgins noted that the activity when there is peak traffic she has never seen any tractor trailers. There is a new fence up and it is gated. So it is not like people are driving in and out of that one without somebody going in and opening that gate. So that entrance to the far right is not used very often. There is good site distance. There is not a lot of activity on the far entrance. It is the center entrance that is used most and she has never seen anyone sitting and waiting to pull out. She drives through that area to Crozet possibly two times a day. There being no further questions, Ms. Joseph invited public comment. There being none, she closed the public hearing to bring the matter before the Commission. Motion: Mr. Morris moved, Mr. Cannon seconded, to recommend approval of ZMA-2006-04, Albemarle County Service Authority - Crozet property to extend the sunset date from 2006 to 2016, for use of a contractor's equipment storage yard and warehouse facilities at the site, The motion passed by a vote of 6:0. (Commissioner Craddock was absent.) Ms. Joseph stated that ZMA-2006-04, Albemarle County Service Authority - Crozet would go before the Board of Supervisors on July 5, 2006 with a recommendation for approval. Work Session: Georgetown/Hydraulic Road Office Pre-application Work Session PROJECT: Development at southwest corner of Georgetown/Hydraulic Roads intersection PROPOSAL: Rezone 1.051 acres from C-1 zoning district which allows Retail sales and service uses; and residential uses by special use permit (15 units/acre) to a commercial designation with a change in proffers. The applicant proposes to develop a two-story, 12,250 sq. ft. professional office building on the site. Request to review for general conformity with Comprehensive Plan and site development comment. PROFFERS: No EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, forestall, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/density (.5 unit/acre) ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes LOCATION: Southwest corner of Georgetown/Hydraulic Roads intersection. TAX MAP/PARCEL: 60F/3 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Jack Jouett STAFF: Claudette Grant ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 6, 2006 16 Ms. Grant presented a power point presentation and summarized the staff report. She pointed out that one of the issues mentioned in the staff report was the 12" water line. At the conclusion of the power point presentation, she offered to answer any questions. Ms. Echols pointed out that part of the problems with this site is that it is in the designated rural areas and not the development areas, That puts a lot of emphasis on the need for this work session. The property was in the rural areas and rezoned for the convenience store. The staff report has the history. The by right use right now would be the convenience store that the applicant really does not want to use it for. There are a lot of difficulties to use the property for a convenience store use. So the applicant is looking at alternative uses. There are several versions of how the property can be developed. Because of its location staff has done a review based on the development areas and not the rural areas. It is a little bit of a unique circumstance, Keith Woodard, contract purchaser, and John Grady, representative for the seller were present. In summary, the Planning Commission held a pre-application work session on Georgetown/Hydraulic Road Office to review the request for general conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and site plan comments. Staff provided direction and guidance on several topic areas and questions to guide discussion. The Commission reviewed and discussed the proposal with staff and the applicant and then responded to the preliminary questions posed by staff. The Commission provided the following feedback on the issues mentioned in the staff report as follows: Is the proposed development sufficiently in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan? Generally, the Commission felt that the proposed development is basically not in keeping with the Comprehensive Plan, but the proposed use is better than the use for which the applicant is now entitled and is okay. Is the proposed use appropriate? Generally, the Commission considers that the proposed use is appropriate, The proposed use is less intensive than the permitted use for a gas station/convenience store. Therefore, it is better than the use that the applicant is now entitled. Generally, the Commission has no problem with the size or proposed use. Is the design and layout of the building and site appropriate? Generally, the Commission liked the design and layout of the building and site in plan view a. with the relegated parking in the rear and bringing the building close to the road with the understanding that the proposal would be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board who would have some input on those things. The Commission did not have any problem with the proposed size of the building (12,000 square feet), Where should interconnections take place? Generally, the Commission felt that pedestrian connectivity should be made to the next door neighbor (OFM Building) and not with Georgetown Green. The buffer to the rear should be left intact. Is the access to the site appropriate? Generally, the Commission felt that the access to the site is appropriate acknowledging the fact that the engineering department says that the access shown on Georgetown Road can not happen because of the distance between the intersection and that entrance, The access approval needs to be coordinated with VDOT. The Commission acknowledged that there is going to be a right turn and left turn out at the entrance on Hydraulic Road. Old Business: ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - JUNE 6, 2006 17 Attachment F will be emailed to you by Friday 2-15-2008. If you have any questions please feel free to call me at 296-5832 x: 3250, Attachment F ZMA :2006-00014 Prfessional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Road .,audette Grant Page 1 of 1 ----.-------...----.--.---.-- --------------.--------------- -- From: Gary Whelan 19whelan@serviceauthority.org) Sent: Wednesday, october 31, 2007 10:42 AM To: Claudette Grant Cc: Michelle S. Simpson, PE subject: ZMA 2006-00014 Prlessional Office Building al Hydraulic & Georgelown Road Attachments: 20071031092817999 .pdf Claudette, These comments don't concern the ZMA, but will be relevant to site plan: 1. Connect the sewer service to the existing MH. 2. Show the utility easements. -Gary <<...>> G M. Whelan, LS . Civil Engineer Albemarle County Service Authority 168 Spotnap Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 (434) 977-4511 Fax: (434) 979-0698 . Attachment G : I \ ~\ I \ \ \ I I \ \ \--- / I I I i I '\ \ \ \ \ \: I, " 1 \ 1 I \ I \ \ I I I I I \ I I" \ I I , I I \ I I I I I I \ '/ I " / I \ I / II I / \ 1//1111 \ I / / I / 1T'f I I (I I ' I / I I / , I }'l / / / ( I (, I g '/ ( / 0 I / I I lfl 0/ { , \ I ( / I <a { { ' \ 'I I I I I I I I ~ , " I <D I \ { / I I I I I l ',1,' I ~ I I I I I ~I I I \ \ I II I I ill \ \1 I ' I I \ \ \ I 1 1 . " i / \ \ \ \ \, \ 'I 1_'>, 1 I tf I \ \ \ \ \ \ ~~m'r . (f ,/ ,,\ 1113~1 I / I I I -<..8 I I OJ / (, I I I ~"I I / I fi / / / , I I I 2i, I \ IS / (I I I I I 0 I I ~ I I <l \ 'f~ ~ - / / 1 1 I I : I I I I I I I I I I I , { I I I I / I I I I I , I I ___" \ I "I I I ' I I 1 I : / / / r I, ," I I 1~' \ ,/ I J.' I, I , I / I I 1 I I" I I 1 I I I \ I \ \ \' __ / I \ ~ I I \ \ \ _ ,,/' ,/ \''-1 ,TW\&O'v \ , ~ / I"" I " ___ I 1 \ i '\ I -' \t \~ SITE !lENCHMARK \ TOP OF MANHOLE ELEVATION - 611.69 GEORGETOWN ROAD \ ~\ HYDRAULIC ROAD INTERSECTION 200' ~ , \ '6' "":>, ,. ADOITIONAL C;ONCR~ T~ \WALK ltypl \ ~ """,\ OPTIONAL un ~~ 0:;, t....s~.!%. ~~')IoP ~ s~ ~~' !+INA(}.r. \ ~!'/ \\ Ii I I \ \; \ T"'P l>OF-1 NA""C 'NVr.S,.",r.NT pi, AL E.N,r.RPRISt:S ZONt:D, C-l ,...t:: OFFICf. lWlLDING ." 8 /, / , N 86/44 00_ :..~J _ ~E.I2!.-1l9 w I TW" \ \ ,\ \ \ \ / / 11 I I II : I I \ \ \ / y I ~'CI)';::c;fJ '6'L'~,,~ \ , "" " '\ t "~/~1 ~ -to Attachment G Page 1 of 1 .~_I~,~~e~=_~~~_~~____ ,". '_'__~'___'_'___"""_H.___'_,_~_,,,,_ "'~'"__H__'__.">~'__'__'____'._"__,__,~___"_,,,,~,___ From: Michelle Simpson [msimpson@rivanna.org] Tuesday, June 26,20072:58 PM ch riska bbash@summitcos.com jwhitaker@rivanna.org; 'Jeremy Lynn'; 'Tom Garrison'; 'Gary Whelan'; 'Roger Zieg'; 'Glen Recknagel'; 'Travis Goode'; Claudette Grant Subject: Georgetown/Hydraulic Professional Offices Sent: To: Cc: Chris, Per our conversation, RWSA has reviewed only Plan Sheet 3 of 4 (revision date 5/22/07) for the above subject project and is preliminarily agreeable to the proposed location of street trees, the entrance sign, and light posts relative to our water line as shown. RWSA will need to review a complete set of final plans and the written water line easement prior to final approval of the plans. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you, Michelle Simpson Michelle S. Simpson, PE .ivanna Water & Sewer Authority ~S Moores Creek Lane Charlottesville, VA 22902 (434) 977-2970 ext. 202 (434) 295-1146 (fax) msimpsDll@d'laona.org . Attachment H . . . ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road c... Page 10f2 Claudette Grant From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. [JoeI.Denunzio@VDOT.virginia.gov] Sent: Friday, November 02,20072:07 PM To: Claudette Grant Subject: ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road code of development ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road code of development Claudette, I have reviewed the above rezoning code of development and have no additional comments. The comments below will need to be addressed at the site plan phase. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. . Staff Engineer 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 ioel,denunzio@lvdot,virqlnia.qov From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. Sent: Friday, September 21, 20074:05 PM To: 'Claudette Grant' Subject: FW: ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road Claudette, The layout appears to have addressed the first comment that we previously sent after we met them in the field and talked with Jack Kelsey. The plan does not address the other three previous comments. However, these are more comments for the design stages of a project. The only comment I really have is that the access point on a turn lane is undesirable. The problem is that it is probably the best location for a commercial entrance on this corner. Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Staff Engineer 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 i oel.denu nzlo@lVirqiniaDOT.orq Attachment I ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road c... Page 2 of2 From: Denunzio, Joel D., P.E. Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 20072:58 PM To: 'Claudette Grant' Cc: 'Jack Kelsey' Subject: ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road ZMA-2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic Road and Georgetown Road Claudette, I have reviewed the above plan and have the following comments: 1. It is very undesirable to have an entrance on the taper section of a turn lane, The turn lane should be extended to Georgetown Green as in the previously approved plan. 2. The plan needs to show the intersection of 656 and 743 and show details of turn movements, lane widths, storage lengths, etc, All projected and existing traffic needs to be shown on the plan. 3. Sight lines need to be shown for the entrance to the sight and also for the existing intersection of 656 and 743. 4. Vehicles heading northbound trying to take a left into the site will cause a dangerous condition. This needs to be addressed in the design of the site. If you have any questions or comments, please let me know, Thanks, Joel Joel DeNunzio, P.E. Residency Program Manager 434-293-0011 Ext. 120 joel. denu nzio@lVirainiaDOT, 0 rQ . October 19, 2007 Ron Higgins Department of Community Development 401 Mcintire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, VA 22903 Re: Parking Modification Request - ZMA-06-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads Dear Ron, Please consider this letter as a formal request for a modification of parking requirements for the above mentioned development project. The code suggests that one method of calculating the required number of parking spaces is: 15,675 GSF x 0.8 = 12,540 SF net. At 1 space per 200 SF = 63 spaces. (Note: 12,000 GSF office space + 1,675 GSF lobby + 2,000 GSF storage = 15,675 GSF) . However, we propose to use a calculation of 80% of total leasable space (12,000gsf) and at 1 space per 200sf, which more accurately represents the way building will be used. Per our calculations, 80% of total leasable office space is 9,600sf and at 1 space per 200sf will require 48 parking spaces. The plan provides the required 48 spaces arid 3 additional spaces required for an adjacent property for a total of 51 spaces. As designed, the basement is not habitable, or separately leasable space and it is strictly assigned to tenants, and as such would not require additional parking. Although code requires 2 spaces minimum for warehouse space, we can design the space in a manner where ceiling height/dimensions would be such that the building code would not permit it to be leased or occupied separately, eliminating the need for parking beyond the office square footage. . Please note that the basement space is a result of accommodating the A.R.B. 's request for tuck-under parking in order to minimize the impact on the slope and vegetation at the back of the site, as well as to hide the view of parking from the street. Also, the number of parking spaces decreased when the parking was relegated. The wedge shape of the site forced a decrease in parking. Attachment J Finally, we would like to present some additional factors. The site is adjacent to County's Urban Growth area, there is a bus stop immediately adjacent to Georgetown Road, bike racks will be provided. Our Code of Development envisions the possibility of residential use which could alleviate some of the parking requirements by providing shared parking in the future. As a developer who has a key interest in making sure that the tenants are properly served, I am satisfied that this proposed parking will be adequate. Thank you for the consideration of this request. Sincerely, l1J\~U>>- Chris Kabbash CKW2 Attachment J . . . Phone (434) 296-5832 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Community Development 401 Mcintire Road, North Wing Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Fax (434) 972-4012 March 26, 2007 Chris Kabbash PO Box 496 Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ARB-2007-08: Hvdraulic Georeetown Office Buildine (2 StOry Professional Duildin!!:: Preliminary Review of a Site Development Plan, Advisory Review for a Rezoning (Tax Map 60F, Parcel 03) Dear Mr. Kabbash: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on March 5, 2007, completed a preliminary review of the above-noted request. The Board took the following actions, Regarding the Request for the Rezoning, the Board by a vote of 4:0, forwarded the following recommendation to the Planning Commission: The ARB has no objection based on the preliminary site plan "GeorgetownlHydraulic Professional Offices" dated January 19, 2007 and the building elevation "Two Story Office Building at Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads" dated January 22, 2007 if the building and parking setbacks as illustrated and all R WSA requirements can be met without reducing the quantity or otherwise changing the general character of the proposed planting. Regarding the Preliminary Site Plan, the Board made the following comments and suggestions for the benefit of the applicant's next submittal. 1, Provide, in writing, all authorization from R WSA regarding proposed building, tree and shrub locations as they relate to the existing 12" water line, Move the Ginkgo Biloba "Princeton Sentry ", at the southeast comer of the Georgetown Building, out of the power easement, or provide documentation that it is permitted and will be allowed to reach mature height, with topping of the tree prohibited and only minimal pruning permitted to support its overall health. 2, The cast stone Dark Buff Limestone sample is acceptable. Provide a mortar color that is similar to it. 3. Revise the site plan to show the proposed height and material of the retaining walls. Provide a sample of the retaining wall material for review. Revise the site plan to show the proposed location and method of screening for all mechanical equipment; details, including method of construction and A TT ACHMENT K ARB-07-08 Hydraulic Georgetown Office Building Page 2 of3 March 26, 2007 proposed color, for the dumpster enclosure (masonry enclosure preferred); and proposed building and parking setbacks. Revise the site plan layout so that the parking space next to the site entrance does not violate the 10' parking setback. Revise the parking schedule to include the three parking spaces that are required for the adjoining parcel to the north. 4. Revise the site layout so that buildings do not violate the existing 50' side setback along the southeast property line, and the retaining wall can be constructed without disturbing the 20' non-disturb buffer adjacent to the same property line. Consider relocating the two proposed parking spaces at the south end of the parking lot so that the proposed retaining wall behind the Georgetown Building can be moved farther from the non-disturb buffer. 5. Revise the site and landscape plans to clearly show the location of all existing and proposed utilities with the boundary of their respective easements clearly drafted and labeled. Revise the grading plan to keep all proposed grading and site improvements (including retaining walls), a minimum offive feet from all buffers and outside of all utility easements. Revise the site and landscape plans to show the location of all existing and proposed tree lines. Revise the Existing Conditions sheet so that all existing conditions that are to be removed are so labeled. 6. Provide a landscape schedule on the landscape plan with all proposed planting sizes clearly noted. Revise the landscape plan to show existing trees to remain, five trees, 2.5" caliper, in interior parking lot islands, and trees 2.5" in caliper, 40' on center, along the perimeter of the parking lot. 7. Provide a lighting photometric plan showing the location of all proposed site, building and decorative lighting, Provide a luminaire schedule of all proposed exterior lighting. Indicate in the schedule all lighting options chosen, and the colors proposed for the fixtures and poles. All proposed lighting exceeding the 3,000 lumens threshold must be a full cutoff design. Lighting values can not exceed Y2 foot candle at a public right-of-way line or at a property line adjoining a residential or rural area district. 8. Revise the tower elevations to allow the walls ofthe tower to rise higher above the cornice of the main building roofline. Consider reducing the roof slope of the tower. The Hunter Green Benjamin Moore 204110 is currently approved for the tower roof. Charcoal gray would also be an appropriate color. Onyz black is acceptable for the shingles of the main roof. 9. Revise the drawings to specify exactly which cast stone product is proposed for the sign panels and provide a sample. Provide all ARB signage checklist items with the next submission. 10. Relocate the dumpster so that it is not visible from the EC. 11. Provide sections of the south end of the site to illustrate the visibility of the southeast comer of the parking lot. 12. Show more of the Hydraulic Road EC on the site plan so that visibility from the EC of the building can be better determined. 13, Indicate that female gender Ginkgo trees will not be used, 14. If a half-round window is used over the main entrance, it should be a true half-round window [with the glass beginning at the radius, with the frame and sill below that radius, so as not to foreshorten the half-circle into an ellipse or flattened circle]. 15. Provide details of the proposed cornice line, Note: The ARB was split on the color ofthe downspouts. Mr. Wright preferred bronze, Ms. Smith and Mr. . . . ARB-07-08 Hydraulic Georgetown Office Building Page 3 of3 March 26, 2007 Lebo preferred white. The applicant needs to submit a sample for review, You may submit your application for continued ARB review at your earliest convenience. Application forms, checklists and schedules are available on-line at www,albemarle.org/planning. Revised drawings addressing the comments listed above are required. Include updated ARB revision dates on each drawing. Please provide a memo including detailed responses indicating how each comment has been addressed, If changes other than those requested have been made, identifY those changes in the memo also. Highlighting the changes in the drawing with "clouding" or by other means will facilitate review and approval. If you have any questions concerning any of the above, please feel free to call me. Sincerely, Brent W. Nelson Landscape Planner Planning Division BWN/aer Cc: CKW 2 LLC 1300 West Little Neck Rd, Virginia Beach VA 23452 Limehouse Architects (Gate Pratt) 946 Grady Ave, Suite 27, Charlottesville, V A 22903 Claudette Grant File Original Proffer XXX Amendment -Date of Proffer Signature: 01-29-2008 ZMA: # 06-014 Tax Map and Parcel Number: 60F-3 PROFFER FORM 1.051 Acres to be rezoned from C-I to NMD Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, 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 it is agreed that the conditions are reasonable. .. -,-p ........-'.....~i.r"',....~ 1. Install permanent 5- ike bicycle rack as shown on the revised plan submittal to you on(~)ctob~r.p{9, 2007 to be constructed no late then he issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be 'erected on the property. ~ ' 2. Construct bus shelter as shown on the submitted revised plan with the dimensions as follows: nine foot (9') shelter with six foot (6') all metal bench with back, to be constructed no later than the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property, Applicant will pay for the shelter costs, installation and bench up to $7800. In the event that actual construction costs are less, applicant will.pay the actual costs of construction; Annual Adiustment of Cash Proffers: Beginning January 1, 2008, the amount of each cash contribution required herein shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect any increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southwest Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Services(a/k/a Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash .ontribution adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially estimated by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the index as of December 1 in the year preceding calendar year most recently ended For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 3. The building to be constructed on the property shall be rated a minimum of "Certified" (or demonstrated to the County's Director of Community Development's satisfaction to be eligible to receive such certification) under the LEED- NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations, Version 2.2 (October 2005) or the LEED Green Building Rating System for Core & Shell Development, Version 2.0 (July 2006), as applicable (collectively, the "LEED Compliant Commercial Space, the Owner shall provide to the County Director of Community Development the opinion of a licensed architect that such space if constructed in accordance with the building plans, is designed to achieve the minimum "Certified" rating. Before the owner requests that a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a licensed architect rendered such an opinion, the owner shall submit to the County's Director of Community Development a written statement from the architect that the building was built to the plans on which the opinion was based. n 4. During Site Plan procl~s the Conservation and Preservation areas will be marked on the plan. 1/ ('! N:=>~~.~ JJ:J:~OWJr rs wr~-YJ-~ "') --, . ,--. I J " -"':.(-6- ,j~ Date OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact ATTACHMENT L . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Facilities Development MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Claudette Grant, Senior Planner Jack M. Kelsey, PE - Transportation Engineer 26 November 2007 ZMA 2006-014 Professional Office Building at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Application Plan The application plan for this zoning map amendment has been reviewed. My previous comments have been adequately addressed. And approval of the Application Plan is recommended. Critical Slope Waiver Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: From the southern property line to the northern property line, the middle portion of this site is traversed by a variable width strip of existing critical slopes. This strip contains approximately 9580 square feet (0,22 acres) of critical slopes and represents about 21 % of the total parcel area. These critical slopes are to be disturbed predominantly to construct the site improvements, which include the retaining walls, portions of the parking . lot, and the drainage/stormwater management system, The table below summarizes the critical slope data. Areas Total site Critical slopes Critical slopes disturbed Acres 1.051 9580 sf (0.22 acs) 5902 sf (0.14 acs) 21 % of site 62% of critical slopes Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18-4.2: "movement of soil and rock": Installation of the Red-Rock retaining wall system, control of drainage during and after construction, and vegetative stabilization will prevent any movement of soil. "excessive stormwater runoff': Storm water runoff will be managed by the storm water management facilities designed and approved in accordance with the Water Protection Ordinance. "siltation": Erosion control measures design and installed in accordance with County standards, bonding to assure compliance, and inspection by the County will ensure siltation control during construction. Proper stabilization and maintenance will ensure long term stability. . "loss of aesthetic resource": A portion of impacted critical slopes are wooded. The bulk ofthe existing trees that screen Georgetown Green are within an existing 20 foot vegetative buffer and the 50 foot rear building setback and will not be impacted by the improvements shown on the Application Plan (refer to Sheet 4 of 4 Existing Conditions). "septic effluent": This site will be served by public sewer so this is not a concern. ATTACHMENT M ZMA 2006-014 POB at Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Page 2 of2 The commission may modify or waive any requirement of section 4.2 in a particular case upon finding that: (Amended 11-15-89) 1. Strict application of the requirements of section 4.2 would not forward the purposes of this chapter or otherwise serve the public health, safety or welfare, or that alternatives proposed by the developer would satisfy the purposes of section 4.2 to at least an equivalent degree; or (Added 11-15-89) The current zoning limits this use to a Gas Station/Convenience Store, which has a greater impact on the existing critical slopes and screening trees due to the access and site circulation needs for the fuel deliverv trucks. As such the previously approved Gas Station/Convenience Store site plan allowed a retaining/building wall (5' to 12' high) facing Georgetown Green as well as the site cleared and a 2: 1 slope graded down to the 20 foot buffer adjacent to Georgetown Green. Modification/waiver of this provision will allow for a use and a "form" of development that will have significantly less impact on both the critical slopes and the existing trees. 2. Due to its unusual size, topography, shape of the property, location of the property or other unusual conditions, excluding the proprietary interest of the developer, the requirements of section 4.2 would effectively prohibit or unreasonably restrict the use of the property or would result in significant degradation of the site or adjacent properties. Such modification or waiver shall not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, to the orderly development of the area, or to adjacent properties, or be contrary to sound engineering practices; or (Added 11-15-89) This provision applies for all of the reasons stated in #1 above. Approval of the request would not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare. Factors favorable to approval of a modification to allow activity on critical slopes: . Approval of the request would not result in negative effects identified in Section 4.2. . The critical slopes on this property are not identified in the Open Space Plan. . Approval of this request will have less impact on the critical slopes and the existing screening trees than the Gas Station/Convenience Store use to which this site is limited and the site plan previously approved for this site. . Approval of this request will allow a more Neighborhood Model form of site development than the previously approved Gas Station/Convenience Store site plan. Factors unfavorable to approval of a modification to allow activity on critical slopes: . Construction of retaining walls that face Georgetown Green are necessary to minimize impacts to the critical slopes and the existing trees, for the site to be developed as illustrated on the Application Plan. Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns for the disturbance of the critical slopes anticipated with this development. Therefore, I recommend Commission approval of this modification of Section 4.2.3. JK\ File: E5_zma~mk]OB at Hydraulic-Georgetown.doc 172 South Pantops Drive ianottesvil,e , VA 22911 . . Dominion D evelopmerit Resources, LLC 434.979.8121 {p) 434.979.1681 (f) DDRV A.com October 11, 2007 Mr. Allan Schuck Department of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, V A 22902-4596 Re: Georgetown/Hydraulic Professional Offices Dear Mr. Schuck: I am requesting a waiver of section 18-4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance regarding critical slopes. Approximately 5,902 sf (0.13 ac) in critical slopes (59% of 0.22 ac on site) will be affected by the proposed construction. The approved site plan impacts more critical slopes. The Ordinance states that "These provisions are created to implement the comprehensive plan by protecting and conserving steep hillsides together with public drinking water sllPplies and flood plain areas and in recognition of increased potential for soil erosio~ water pollution and septic disposal problems associated with the development of those areas described in the comprehensive plan as critical slopes." Rapid and/or large scale movement of soil and rock Proper construction of slopes and control of drainage will prevent movement of soil and rock. Excessive storm-water run-off There will not be excessive storm-water run-off as storm-water detention is required. Detention will be accomplished using underground storage. Siltation.of natural and man-made bodies of water County inspection and bonding of erosion control measures will address excessive siltation during construction. Proper vegetative stabilization will prevent long term siltation. Loss of aesthetic resource There is no loss of aesthetic resource in this case. A greater travel distance of septic effluent This project will utilize public sanitary sewer and no septic fields. Section 18-4.2.5.2 allows the Planning Commission to grant a wai'Verif"StricLapplication of the requirements would not forward the purposes of this ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest or that alternatives proposed by the developer would satisfy the purposes of section 18-4.2 to at least an equivalent degree". lv. W. Thomas Mum',aster, Jf., P,E. . Date: October 19, 2007 County of Albemarle Zoning Department 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, V A 22902 Re: TM 60F-3 request for a setback waiver This letter is to serve as a formal request for a setback waiver for a pending rezoning request ZMA-06-014. The property is currently zoned to C-l and it is adjacent to a Rural Area district, therefore a 50' setback is required. The proposed office building encroaches by 2.5' into the required 50' setback from the Rural Area on the southwest side ofthe property. The physical conditions of the site (critical slopes) limit the number of site designs we were able to create in order to provide the proposed square footage with the size of parking required to accommodate the building. Shifting the building in turn will disturb the sidewalk, parking and entrance into the building complex, . Based on the infomlation above, a waiver to pemlit a 47.5' setback is requested. [X~ Chris Kabbash . . August 17, 2007 Ms. Claudette Grant, Senior Planner Department of Community Development County of Albemarle 401 Mcintire Road, Room 227 Charlottesville, V A 22903 Re: TMP60F-3B [1.051 acres) Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads Albemarle County, Virginia Dear Ms. Grant, . This letter is written to accompany the Zoning Map Amendment submittal for the above referenced property. Per the accompanying submittal, the applicant is requesting rezoning from C 1 to NMD in order to develop the site in a manner more consistent with Albemarle County's Neighborhood Model of Development. The submittal illustrates how this project will meet the various requirements of the NMD requirements, with the exception of a mixed-use/residential component. The applicant is requesting a waiver to the requirement for mixed-use/ residential component for the following reasons, as permitted by the NMD code; 1. Project is an infill project, and is within 1/4 mile of two or more housing types as well as other mixed uses. 2. In addition to meeting the requirements permitted for waiver, the building is designed in a manner that would permit future conversion to residential if desired. Thank you for your time and attention to this issue. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or comments. Si~~ Gate Pratt Limehouse Architects Cc: Keith Woodard, CK2 Chris Kabbash, CK2 . L I M E H 0 USE ARC HIT E C T S, L C 946 GRADY A VENUE #27 CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22903 ph: 434-293-8537 fx: 434-295-3536 e: Iimehs@earthlink.net . , . . . APPLICATION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Board of Super. Planning Comm. Revision #3 Revision #2 Revision #1 Final Submittal First Submittal PROPERTY: TMP 60F-3B (1.051 acres) HYDRAULIC & GEORGETOWN ROADS ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA OWNER/ APPLICANT: CHRIS KABBASH P.O. BOX 496 CHARLOTTESVILLE, V A 22902 A TTN: CHRIS KABBASH NARRATIVE: FEB 25, 2008 FEB 12, 2008 JAN 29, 2008 NOV 30, 2007 OCT 19, 2007 AUG 18, 2006 JULY 31,2006 The site is currently zoned C 1, The current zoning classification results from a 1981 rezoning from RA Rural Area, to C 1, Commercial, which occurred when a portion of the site was taken for the widening of Hydraulic Road. The 1981 C 1 rezoning was established specifically to allow for the location of a gas station / convenience store only, and no other commercial uses. An amendment to the original rezoning states that the new store would not exceed 2,579sf. An existing plan for a gas station/convenience store was developed, submitted and approved. The current Property Owner purchased the approved site-plan and retains this as a default "by-right". Upon reviewing the approved site plan for the Gas Station / Convenience store the applicant has concluded that for a number of reasons, this is not the best development scenario for this site. Access to and from the site is problematic and the gas/convenience store would require and generate a high volume of traffic. The site borders the County's Urban Growth area, and is better suited to a traditional commercial or residential development, The applicant has presented a preliminary concept for a 2-story commercial building with relegated parking to the Planning Commission, and received endorsement for the concept. The applicant is requesting rezoning from C 1 to NMD in order to develop the site in a manner more consistent with Albemarle County's Neighborhood Mocel of Development. The Applicant proposes to develop a 2-story, professional office building, located close to the sidewalk, with relegated parking. This strategy provides lesser impacts with regards to generating traffic and noise, and is more compatible with the surrounding residential and commercial properties. The L I M E H 0 USE ARC HIT E C T S, L C 9~6 CRADY AVINUt'2! Clli\Rllllll WIIU VIf<CINIA 7/)1)., ph: ~3~2938531 Ix ~J~ 29:,3536 e: lilllel1s (l eUlttllilikllet Attachment II ~ . . . building is 16,815gsf. This breaks down into 9,516sf of net office and 3,808sf of common/utility/non-usable space and 3,491 sf of tenants' basement storage. 1). Existing Site Conditions Site is located on South-West corner of intersection of Georgetown & Hydraulic Roads, currently with no buildings, development or improvements. Property was formerly in rural area, but was rezoned to C l-Commercial in the 1980's during VDOT widening of Hydraulic Road. Rezoning was to permit a Gas Station/Convenience Store only, and no other type of commercial use (ZMA 81-07, 82-08, both with proffers). The other three "corners" at this intersection are in Albemarle County's Growth area, and are zoned to permit commercial, mixed use. The site has a 100'-120' wide flat area for development that parallels Hydraulic Road, Past this flat area, the site drops off, sloping down to the back property line. Adjacent properties are zoned Residential RA, R6 and commercial. 2). Existing Approved Site Plan - Convenience Store/Gas Station Building: Parking: 1-story 2,400sf Convenience Store w / Canopy & (2) Gas Pumps 18 spaces Per rezoning described above, current Site plan was developed and approved to permit construction of a Gas Station/Convenience Store, Drawings, prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, are dated from 3/31/97 - 1/24/01, with final approval signatures dated 7/31/01. Three additional dedicated parking spaces are provided for adjacent property as negotiated per rezoning approval, 3), Proposed Site Plan - 2-Story Office Building, NMD Zoning Building: 2-story professional office building. 9,516sf office, 3,808sf common & 3,491 gsf storage. Provided: 51 spaces (ind, 2 He) Required: 51 spaces = 48 spaces + 3 dedicated for adjacent property. Parking: Site plan proposes that building front Hydraulic and Georgetown roads, w/ parking relegated behind building, Building wraps corner of Hydraulic and Georgetown, facing both streets. Front setback varies from 9.6' & 13.5' at building corners, to 21.9' at center, Note that existing property line on Hydraulic Road is currently located 10' from the back of sidewalk, setbacks from property line creates zone for widened sidewalk and landscaping, Rezoning from C 1 to NMD would permit professional office building instead of convenience store and would permit creation of "urban street edge" and landscaped street frontage. A single access point to the site will be from the far north corner, on Hydraulic Road, at the optimal location from a traffic engineering standpoint. , . Note: This Application for Zoning Map Amendment was first submitted August 1, 2006. Per Planning Commission direction, the project was further submitted for review by the Architectural Review Board. As a result of A.R.B. Advisory Review, and further Planning Commission Review, significant Architectural and Engineering work was completed, addressing all comments, Preliminary approval of the concept was obtained. 20A.3 - NEIGHBORHOOD MODEl OF DEVElOPMENT - APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS 20A.3,a - statement of Consistency with NMD Principles . The proposed development alone does not meet all NMD principles, However combined with adjacent properties the project contributes to NMD principles. The following is a brief overview of the proposed development's contribution to NMD principles: 1. Pedestrian Orientation - The development is adjacent to Albemarle County's Urban Growth Area. The development is located such that access is easily achieved by transit, bike or foot. The development is close to other existing and developing commercial buildings, further contributing to a growing density and variety of commercial options convenient for pedestrians. The project is convenient to numerous residences within easy walking distance. 2. Neiqhborhood Friendly Streets and Paths - The minimal setback and relegated parking provide a more pleasant, and interesting streetscape, further encouraging pedestrian activity. The project includes widened sidewalks on Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads, and pedestrian paths surrounding the building, 3. Interconnected street & transportation networks - The project is a single building, and is interconnected by county sidewalk systems. Sidewalk will be widened and landscaped, encouraging and improving pedestrian activity. Project is also on bus route. Connectivity to adjacent residential properties was researched but was not sought by residents for privacy and environmental protection. Interconnectivity to adjacent commercial property was investigated, but was not encouraged due to issues with preserving critical slopes and wooded areas of site. Pedestrian interconnectivity is planned to adjacent commercial property for the purpose of shared par'king. A bus stop is proffered. 4. Parks and Open Space as Amenities - The project proposes to leave an existing wooded buffer of mature trees intact. Additionally, the proposed landscaping in the front and around the building will enhance the overall look of the site contributing to street-scaping on Hydraulic and Georgetown Roads. There is also a picnic area provided as an amenity. . .' , . . 5. Neiqhborhood Centers - The project contributes towards creating a future neighborhood Center at the intersection of Hydraulic & Georgetown by providing office space for professional businesses that may be of service to surrounding residents. 6. Buildings and Spaces of a Human Scale - The project proposes a 2-Story building, with minimal setback, relegated parking and street landscaping. This approach establishes a model for a pleasing urban streetscape on Hydraulic Road. The architecture of the building is traditional/classical, proportioned and detailed at a comfortable human scale. 7. Relegated Parking - The project proposes that the parking shall be relegated behind, and partially "tucked-under" the building, The tuck-under parking allows minimal impact to wooded critical slopes. 8. Mixture of Uses and Use Types - This project is for a single commercial building, designed to provide 9,516 net sf of office space to multiple professional businesses. Per NMD variances permitted, project is an infill project, and is within 1/4 mile of two or more housing types as well as other mixed uses. The list of approved uses has been expanded to include additional commercal, retail and residential uses. 9. Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability - This project is for a single commercial building, designed to provide 9,516sf of office space to multiple professional businesses. Per NMD variances permitted, project is an infill project, and is within 1/4 mile of two or more housing types as well as other mixed uses. 10. Redevelopment - This project is located on an Infill Site, adjacent to the Urban Growth area. It is not located on undeveloped farmland. 11, Site Planning that Respects Terrain - The proposed location of the building and parking minimizes retaining walls and foundations. The building and tuck-under parking areas are efficiently sited on the flat, upper area of the site. Disturbance to the sloped and lower areas of the site are kept to 0 minimum. 12, Clear Boundaries with the Ruml Area - This site is locoted in the County s Rurol Area, however it is also located adjacent to the growth area. The zoning is currently C 1, permitting a convenience store & gas station. The rezoning to NMD permits a project more compatible in design and siting, that properly complements the surrounding growth area properties, and provides a lesser impact on the adjacent and nearby residential properties. The buffer at the rear of the site will remain untouched and therefore be considered a preservation area. The existing vegetation, which includes pine, poplar, hickory, maple and oak trees. will remain. The buffer at the Georgetown Road side of the property is, and will remain, a utility easement and therefore a conservation area, maintained by the utility company to their standards. . --l , . This project alone, does not meet all criteria of the Neighborhood Model District as stated in Section 20A. Overall the site is too small to be able to accommodate most of the requirements of the NMD district. However, the project itself contributes to the mixture of use requirement, in addition to providing open space as amenities and relegated parking. The project is located in close proximity to a school complex, is within quarter of a mile of a residential area, is adjacent to a bus stop and is immediately adjacent to Albemarle County's growth area. 20A.3.b - Parking and Loadinq Needs Study: Parking for the proposed project has been calculated by using the Albemarle County Zoning Code as it would apply to the proposed professional office building. The project proposes 9,516 net sf of commercial office space. Parking needs are calculated at 1 parking space per 200sf. Total parking needs are calculated to be 48 spaces max, to include handicapped accessible parking. Additionally, (1) loading space and dumpster location will be provided. The existing site plan requires provision of three spaces for an adjacent business. These spaces are provided in addition to required parking. . 20A,3.c - Storm water: The project will handle all storm water on site, as typically required by code. This will be accomplished through a variety of strategies, including storm water retention area, and underground holding tanks to hold rainwater for landscape irrigation purposes. 20A.3,d -General Development Plan: See Attached 20A.3.e - Code of Development: See Attached . ~ , . 20A.4 - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN See accompanying submittal drawings 20A.4.a - Gross Square Footage Non-Residential & Residential: Non - Residential-16,815gsf (9,516sf office & 3,808sf common/lobby) & 3.491 gsf basement storage. Residential - Ogsf 20A.4.b - General Allocation: This project contains one parcel. to be used for commercial office space, 20A.4.c - Green Spaces, amenities, Conservation areas, Preservation Areas: This project proposes to leave an existing wooded buffer of mature trees undeveloped and undisturbed. This is accomplished by developing the flat, upper area of the site, and leaving the lower area undeveloped, 20A.4.d - Buildinq Footprints: See accompanying submittal drawings. . . 6 .-' . APPLICATION FOR ZONING MAP AMENDMENT Board of Super. Planning Comm. Revision #3 Revision #2 Revision #1 Final Submittal First Submittal FEB 25, 2008 FEB 12, 2008 JAN 29, 2008 NOV 30, 2007 OCT 19,2007 AUG 18, 2006 JULY 31,2006 PROPERTY: TMP 60F-3B (1.051 acres) HYDRAULIC & GEORGETOWN ROADS ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA OWNER/ APPLICANT: CHRIS KABBASH P,O. BOX 496 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902 ATTN: CHRIS KABBASH . CODE OF DEVELOPMENT: 20A.5.a - Uses Permitted: See Section 20A.6,a 20A.5.b - Amount of Developed Square Footaoe: 16,815gsf 2-story commercial office building over basement and parking storage SITE: 1.051 ac (45,782sf) Consisting of: 6,77 5sf building coverage (15% of site) 14,099sf impervious coverage (31 % of site) 24,908sf green space (54% of site) 5,227sf amenities on site (11 % of site) 20A.5.c - Maximum Residential Densities: Not Applicable. . 20A.5,d - Green Space ~Amenities~ Undisturbed green buffer of 40'-80' at back of property, entire length of property (210' -260'). Area = 1 O,OOOsf +, and 20' grading and buffer setback at south side (166'), .07ac. Project also provides widened sidewalk +/- 14' with street trees and entry plaza. L I M E H 0 USE ARC HIT E C T S, L C 946 (,kN)Y A VI NUl. ,,')/ U fA !..: I I. )[ [I WILli VlkCINIA //903 p11: 4:34,}938')31 Ix: 43429~) 3')36 e lilllell\ 0 eurtlllinkrlet " . Amenities consist of enhanced pedestrian walk and plaza, with seating and landscaping. Picnic area adjacent to building and parking, 20A.5.e - Requirements & Restrictions related to Use: None. 20A.5.f - Uses expressly prohibited: Any uses not listed in Section 20.A6.a. 20A.5,g - Architectural & Landscape Standards: 1. Form, Massing & Proportion: 2-story, vertically proportioned doors & punched windows, 2. Architectural Style: Jeffersonian Classical/ Traditional. 3. Materials, colors, textures: Brick Masonry w/ cast stone trim, 4. Roof Form & Pitch: hipped or gable pitched roof, 4/12 - 9/12 range. 5. Architectural Ornamentation: Classically detailed trim, eaves, railings, Lobby, Metal roof at tower, 6. Fa<;ade Treatment: Brick w/ regular spacing for punched windows/doors, 7. Landscape Treatments: Trees, Shrubs and Beds to surround building & parking areas. . 8. Preservation of Historic Structures/Sites: Not applicable, none existing, 20A.5.h - Preliminary Lot Layout: See accompanying submittal drawings. . 20A.5.i - Blocks: Note: Parcel is one block, Most of these items do not apply, or are duplicates from 20A.5.g. 1. Range of Uses Permitted: Professional Office Building and other uses per 20,A.5,g 2, Requirements/Restrictions of Uses: See 20.A.5.f. 3. Build-To Lines: varies - 9.6' to 21.9' (see plan) 4, Minimum/Maximum Yard Dimensions: The lot size is 1.056 acres 5. Maximum Building Height: 2-stories, 50' (measured at the front fa<;ade). 3-stories, 60' (measured at the back to include basement) , 6. Sidewalk & Pedestrian Paths: Hydraulic & Georgetown Roads. Widened landscaped sidewalk. 7. Green Space & Amenities: Wooded Buffer at rear (60'-80') and side (20') of property. Widened landscaped sidewalk, entry plaza and picnic tables 8. Conservation/Preservation Areas: 20' side & rear grading/buffer setbacks at South and West Property lines. 9. Parking Areas: Relegated behind, and tucked under, building -, ,# . 10. Civic Spaces: Not Applicable. None included in commercial buildhg. Widened Landscaped sidewalks provided. 20A.6 - PERMITTED USES: 20A.6,a - By Riqht: Similar to uses listed in Section 22.2.1 (C-l Commercial), the following uses shall be allowed by-right: These uses will be subject to adequate provision of parking and all other code requirements. Retail sales and service establishments: antique, gift, jewelry, notion and craft shops, clothing, apparel and shoe shops, florist, food grocery stores, furniture and home appliances (sales and service), musical instruments, newsstands (magazine, pipe and tobacco shops), optical goods, photographic goods, visual and audio appliances, sporting goods; Services and public establishments: administrative, professional offices, barber/beauty shops, clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic, financial institutions, libraries, museums, nurseries/daycare centers, tailor/seamstress, medical center, tier I and tier II personal wireless service facilities. . Additional permitted uses: utilities, accessory uses, temporary construction uses, public uses, and tier I and tier II personal wireless service facilities, 20A.7 - RESIDENTIAL DENSITY: Not applicable - no residential planned. 20A.8 - MIXTURE OF USES: a. Mix of use permitted, but not planned. Project is an infill project, and is relatively small compared to developed abutting or nearby parcels, Two or more housing types exist within one-quarter mile of the project. b, Waiver for different uses requested. Varying uses occur within one-quarter mile, accomplishing mixture sought. 20A.9 - GREEN SPACES, AMENITITES, and CONSERVATION/PRESERVATION AREAS: a, Green Space: 24,908sf 54% of site. b. Amenities: Retention of wooded buffer, natural area. Addition of picnic area c. Additional Amenity Requirements: Not Applicable 20A.l0 - STREETS: Not Applicable. No Streets proposed for parcel. . . . ~ - J j ";', ~ ~, tJ. ~ ;<: ,i\ ,~ :~ ~iI I d~B~ I ~~<I\.h 11:,.l'~ I ' ' .. .....- -'- '- . t ,0" , ,> ::'''l.;i, f h 11 I 1/'~-~~" /', I 1;/ )1 II ~ ! ~ i I I ,~ ~ It. Ij .. ~ -0: ~ :L-. 6 ,\ ~ i~ ~ T-+---~, 0 " I 'b- :f I ~ I ~ : Iii ~9- 1. 0 -;, I.,j\i-: J' tl 8 ~ ~j~l. ~~~ 5 ~ ~-~ ro , I, .{1- -T-~ I I' i"-{ 11-1. Jl ;< 't. ~.:-li / , I / < It;1: S /.~ i ~ ~ :; t: ~ .~ ~. {;~j~ i ~ ~ · '" '~H~ .I'~~,j'~ ~~ 1U :n..1l r m ~' ~I \ c,\ In \\ ' ~ . , "-" ~ '" < w T ,J~ g~~ ~ 1 ~ -11 f P VI ; ,~~ i/11-11 - t.",' -1~ ; ! i I Y""i~,' "V . i 1rl' , I I ~ - ,4 I...!.( ...", 1 I "- :- . J ,. \~ i 01 >>~1T'- '.;,:' ~ - ~ z o ;::: < > w -' w o < o '" U ::; => < '" o ~ I .''l I"~ ..<< ;'~ ..; ~ $ . ; :'. I J .. ?-. '; ,,? ~,:? i r-r , . , . i , Ir ~ El ~~ i1 !,!-,. , i 5 t i ~ : I I ~. ,.: - r < ',,'.,~,~', i,',' Il ,. t~!:L -~ r 1 -....~ ; .0- ( i ~ L~ .. w ~ z o ;::: < > w -' w '" ~ o 0- -' < z~ 0- -~ ~"'''' I-~=> z~'" :::l~0 Ooz UuCki' ~0:;S "'ZI <- ~zu wZ:::::i "'<'" -'-,=> < a... a... '" 0'" ",0- z~ 3:1::: OI o-U w'" 0< "'w 0'" w=> 00 oIlm...... U~C") ::J:::::i::2 :::loll.ry <NO- ~3:<':l ~","<t IU':;f J: 0- '" o ~ Z o ;::: < > w -' w w o in . 0. ol. Q u.. ~ "., .:> \. c. "Y ~ . . U :J a:l ~ ~ Z ;:..Q-l 1-"'..... 5~f::; o~t: u~~ ~Oa:l -lu~ pC 0'" <(zO ..,.-z ""Z- ~ZpC a:l<(<( -l-l~ <(~::C: "'''' 510 ~t 0::C: I-U ~pC 0<( pC~ 0'" ~~ 00 ~ffi ~~::;; -l-lor) ~~oor ~N~ 0:::";' ;:..~.... ::C:U~ . o <( o O! U :::i => <( O! o >- I ~ o O! "- UJ ,... v; "- o ~ UJ 5> o <( o O! Z ~ o ,... (9 "" o UJ o ~ o O! "- UJ ,... v; "- o ~ UJ 5> , UJ 0 O! 0 UJ 0 o<l U :::i => <( "" 0 >- 0 I "- <( 0 0 O! Z U 0 :::i ;::: => U <( UJ O! '" O! 0 UJ >- ,... I ~ ~ ~ 0 0 O! O! "- "-vi UJ UJO ,... !:::<( v; . "'0 "- "-O! 0 Oz ~ ~~ UJ ~O 5> >,... U -- .~ ~ z ><Q....;l r-<CZl-"", ZCZl~ ~=;r-. O~- U;:;E;:;E Oco r.I.lU~ c2dCZl ~Zd ;:;E-Z ~~~ co~~ ~....;l~ .......,~..... CZlCZl ~t) Z~ ~~ o::C: r-.U ~~ d~ ~r.I.l OCZl ~~ dO 0(3@ U;:;Er--- --M .....l.....lon ~0(30? ~M~ Q~c;t ><~~ ::c:U~ z z ~ ~ 0 0 I-- I-- IJ.J IJ.J <.9 <.9 n::: n::: 0 0 IJ.J IJ.J <.9 <.9 06 06 U U . --I --I ::> ::> <( <( n::: n::: 0 0 >- >- :r: :r: LL LL 0 0 Z Z 0 0 I-- I-- U U IJ.J IJ.J V) V) n::: n::: IJ.J IJ.J I-- I-- Z Z ~ ~ 0 0 n::: n::: LL LL IJ.J IJ.J I-- t:: V) V) LL LL Ov> Ov> ~~ ~~ !:!:!O IJ.JO >n::: >n::: . Original Proffer XXX Amendment 2-25-08 Date of Proffer Signature: 02-25-2008 ~A: # 06-014 Wax Map and Parcel Number: 60F-3 1.051 Acres to be rezoned from C-l to NMD Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, jf rezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part ofthe requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable, PROFFER FORM 1. The Owner shall install a permanent 5-bike bicycle rack as shown on the revised plan entitled, "General Development Plan page 2 of 4", dated 1-19-07 and last revised 2-25-08, hereinafter referred to as the "Plan". Installation of the bicycle rack shall be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property; 2. The Owner shall construct one bus shelter as shown on the Plan with the dimensions as follows: nine foot (9') shelter with six foot (6') all metal bench with back. Construction of the bus shelter shall be completed prior to the issuance of the certificate of occupancy for the building to be erected on the property. IfVDOT and the County transportation planner do not determine the location of the bus shelter prior to final site plan approval, then upon the subsequent detennination of the shelter location by VDOT and the County transportation planner, and upon written request by the County, the Owner shall construct the shelter and metal bench in the selected location at its sole expense, but not to exceed seven thousand eight hundred dollars ($7,800). The Owner shall complete construction ofthe shelter and bench within 90 days after the date of the written request by the County 3. Each building to be constructed on the property shall be rated a minimum of "Certified" (or demonstrated to the County's Director of Community Development's satisfaction to be eligible to receive such certification) under the LEED- NC Green Building Rating System for New Construction and Major Renovations, Version 2.2 (October 2005) or the AEED Green Building Rating System for Core & Shell Development, Version 2:0 (July 2006), as applicable (collectively, _e "LEED Compliant Commercial Space"). Prior to issuance of the building permit for any proposed LEED compliant space, the Owner shall provide to the County Director of Community Development a certification from a LEED certified architect that such space, if constructed in accordance with the building plans, is designed to achieve the minimum "Certified" rating under LEED provided in this Proffer 3. Before the Owner requests a certificate of occupancy for any building for which a LEED certified architect rendered such a certificate, the Owner shall submit to the County's Director of Community Development a written statement from the architect that the building was built to the plans on which the opinion was based. For each building containing LEED compliant space. the Owner shall provide a copy of the LEED certification to the County's Director of Community Development within one (1) year after the date the certificate of occupancy was issued for that building 4. The preliminary and final site plan shall delineate the Conservation and Preservation Areas on the property. The Owner shall replace trees that must be removed in Conservation Areas. Replacement shall be two (2) trees of similar species or quality for each removed or destroyed tree. All tree replacement shall be in accord with the final landscape plan for the final site plan for the Property. The Owner's obligation to replace trees within the Conservation Areas shall be completed within the following planting season. The trees to be replaced must be in excess of 12" dbh and shall be replaced with trees of the same or a similar species or quality of not less than 2.5" dbh, as determined by the County's Director of Community Development. ~~~dc-rJ __ ~!.th Q,_~,,"d"lrJ -eft ~(l ~pU G t,t'xg ~ -. 2 - 'z.$"- 08 Date 'Z - ;z r--~:. 2), . 2-25-0,/ Attachment IV SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church l'(I~l'" 71-1 ---..--...-.- 1- .-- .- .J.=- :J --- . --- --~ , -- fJ;:.......'...........'..,.........'....,".... " , 1:- 1 -- .'".,~".."" 00 (1'.1' :.'.1 - ,.._.,...___...."-_......1:".... ..........._,..-......... ..~ Proposed Site reorganization expanded parking future fellowship building columbarium existing education building (bring into compliance) A waiver of the disturbance of critical slopes for the future building and a portion of the parking area was granted by the Planning Commission. 2 "'", '.... -. -'/_~ > ~,!;l ~~"-"~;"'~,-":J" ~ ~ ...~.#~"'!;~ ;-~~..... IJiJ~- ~.'lt.""i\ r~/' ':~~:~'!_')''''''.}~Ai;'l1~ ~. ," . ,.,_(;}__ ' , /,.", I .,~ ", I ...... ,j .- _ ,~' '" ~~~f:..~1:~~.,1~;?~ I .. '. .;..,f' f... "},~ 1JJ,~r '-~::N '>. " .{J*~~./ii't:;f*t =="'222_:-j~::J~~'~J' ! ~. '-:;.;:::;;?::::::::::'::~: ~ . .. '0- "'".- .,/ '" .'....r... i ! ; -..;;.;. .."",,~,~ 'j ! , , ~ .. J..,j :1, ' ~ t ': , 1."'"....,.<1 t=:~....-'P., '~d: @ i",!, :,., , *;.;1: ~~~1~~ ft .,--"....~.._ ...'''''''..~I.. ~.'.'-, . L_L4 i3 3 4 5 . . Findings Factors Favorable: 1. The location of the proposed building is sensitive to the historic surroundings and is supported by the Department of Historic Resources. 2. The reconfigured parking would provide appropriate areas for parking which avoids destruction of some mature trees, considers the historic character of the site, and provides safe parking for the congregation. 3. No changes to the historic buildings on this site. Findings (Cont'd.) Factors Unfavorable: 1. Some mature trees will be removed in order to accommodate the parking areas. 2. Some parking areas will be closer to Route 250 (in front of the cemetery and the education building). 6 I . . Recommendation: Approval with Conditions 1. There shall be no day care or private school on site without a separate special use permit. 2. Approval from the Health Department for the septic system and well shall be required prior to approval of an issuance of a building permit. 3. Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100-year flood plain. 4. Expansion of the mausoleum structure shall require amendment to this special use permit. Tombs inside may be added. 5. Any future expansion of the church structures and / or size of assembly area shall require amendment of this special use permit. 6. Special Use Permit SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church shall be developed in general accord with the concept application plan, provided by the applicant and received December 21, 2007 (Attachment A). However, the Zoning Administrator may approve revisions to the concept application plan to allow compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 7. Construction of the new building and columbarium, as identified n the concept site plan (Attachment A) shall commence on or before March 19, 2013, or this special use permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall be thereupon terminate. 8. Tree protection measures shall be required on the erosion & sediment control plan in accordance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and the tree protection measures shall be installed prior to any land disturbing activity. 9. The parking lot shall be paved using prime and double seal surface or, at the option of the permittee, another surface material approved by the County Engineer deemed equivalent or better than a prime and double seal surface in regard to strength, durability, sustainability and long-term maintenance. 10. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. A lighting plan reasonably limiting the amount of adverse outdoor light pollution shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval as a condition of site plan approval. 7 . . . 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 Mark Lieberth 310 East Main Street, Ste 200 Charlottesville, V A 22902 . RE: SP2007-00027 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment (Sign # 4) Tax Map 70, Parcels 12, 13, 13A Dear Mr, Lieberth: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 19, 2008, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: Changes from the conditions approved with the previous application SP 1999-48 (conditions 1-6) are shown with strikethroughs and underlines. Conditions 7-15 are new with SP 2007-27. 1. There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate special use permit. 2. Virginia Department of Transportation approval oftRe entranoe width and entranee radii. 2. Approval from the Health Department for the septic system and well shall be required prior to approval of an issuance of a building permit. 3, Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 1 OO-year flood plain, 4. N-e--Expansion of the mausoleum structure shall require amendment to this special use permit. €Tombs inside may be added~. 5. Any future expansion of the church structures and / or size of assembly area, ef-I:tSe-shall require amendment to this special use permit. 6., Special Use Permit SP2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church shall be developed in general accord with the concept application plan. provided by the applicant and received December 21. 2007 (Attachment A.) However. the Zoning Administrator may approve revisions to the concept application plan to allow compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 7. Construction of the new building or the columbarium, as identified on the concept site plan (Attachment A) shall commence on or before March 19,2013, or the portion ofthis special use permit authorizing the new building and the columbarium shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder related to the new building and the columbarium shall be thereupon terminate. 8. Tree protection measures shall be required on the erosion & sediment control plan in accordance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and the tree protection measures shall be installed prior to any land disturbing activity, 9. The parking lot shall be paved using prime and double seal surface or. at the option of the permittee. another surface material approved by the County Engineer deemed equivalent or better than a prime and double seal surface in regard to strength. durability, sustainability and long-term maintenance. 10. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. A lighting plan reasonably limiting the amount of adverse outdoor light pollution shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval as a condition of site plan approval. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 19, 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, Joan McDowell Principle Planner Planning Division JM/SM cc: Emmanuel Episcopal Church 7500 Rockfish Gap Turnpike Greenwood VA 22943 . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY . Project Name: SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Staff: Joan McDowell, Principal Planner Episcopal Church Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: February 19, 2008 March 19, 2008 Owner: Emmanuel Episcopal Church Applicant: Emmanuel Episcopal Church Acreage: 13.503 acres Special Use Permit: Section 10.2.2 (35) churches TMP: TMP 70-13; TMP 70-13A; TMP 70- Existing Zoning and By-right use: 12 RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and Location: South side of Route 250; fishery uses; residential density (0.5 7599 Rockfish Gap Turnpike, unit/acre) Greenwood Magisterial District: White Hall Conditions: Yes DA (Development Area): Requested # of Dwelling Units: NA RA (Rural Areas): X Proposal: site re-organization including Comprehensive Plan Designation: Rural expanded parking, future office/education Areas - preserve and protect agricultural, building, columbarium, memorial garden, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and bring education building into compliance with scenic resources/ density (0,5 unit/ acre) the special use permit Character of Property: Existing historic Use of Surrounding Properties: brick church and cemetery on crest of hill; Residential, agricultural, St. Nicholas wooded areas Orthodox Church Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1. The location of the proposed 1. Some mature trees will be building is sensitive to the historic removed in order to accommodate surroundings and is supported by the the parking areas. Department of Historic Resources. 2. Some parking areas will be closer 2. The reconfigured parking would to Route 250 (in front of the provide appropriate areas for parking cemetery and the education which avoids destruction of some building). mature trees, considers the historic character of the site, and provides safe parking for the congregation. 3. No changes to the historic buildings on this site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval ofthis Special Use Permit with conditions. . Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 1 STAFF PERSON: Joan McDowell, Principal Planner Rural Areas PLANNING COMMISSION: February 19,2008 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: March 19, 2008 SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment Petition: SP 007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church Amendment PROPOSED: site e-organization including expanded parking, future office/education building, columbarium, memorial garden ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses; residential density (0.5 unit/acre) SECTION: 10.2.2(35) 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 No - - LOCATION: 7599 Rockfish Gap Turnpike (Rt. 250), Greenwood TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 70, Parcels 12, 13, 13A MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall Character of the Area: Located in the Greenwood area on Route 250, the region around the church consists of hedgerows, heavily wooded areas, pastures, fields, historic homes and buildings, as well as scattered residential. Stockton Creek borders the property on the south. The Yellow Mountain Agricultural Forestal District and properties placed into conservation easement are in close proximity. The historic church was constructed around 1863 in the Colonial Revival style. Specifics of the Proposal: The applicant has submitted a Master Plan for the church site that includes - Existine:: . Sanctuary - 2 story brick with basement . Arcade - a double arcade and garden separates the sanctuary and the parish hall . Parish Hall - offices/kitchen/fellowship building - 1 story brick with basement . Marston/LaRue House - historic manse, 2 story frame with basement used for offices and classrooms (Sunday School) . Cemetery . Parking for approximately 100 spaces . Religious education building on TMP 70-12 that this application will bring into conformance, as it was not included in SP 1999-48; a residence is on top floor Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 2 . . . Proposed: · Office/fellowship hall/classrooms/kitchen - 2-story building (walkout basement and on~. floor above) · Reconfigured parking and vehicular circulation for 132 spaces · A pedestrian connection between the existing religious/education building/residence and the sanctuary complex . A columbarium adjacent to cemetery · No changes to the existing structures; no additional capacity in the sanctuary · Waivers have been requested for disturbance of critical slopes and parking lot standards Plannine; and Zonine; Historv: SP 1999-48 - approval of a special use to bring a non-conforming church and cemetery into conformance and, thereby, to allow expansion of the church use by allowing the old manse to be used for Sunday School rooms and offices in accordance with Section 10.2.2.35, subject to the following conditions: 1. There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate special use permit. 2. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of the entrance width and entrance radii. 3. Approval from the Health Department. 4. Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100- year flood plain. 5. No expansion of the mausoleum structure (tombs inside may be added) 6. Any future expansion of the church structures or use shall require amendment to this special use permit. Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan: Comprehensive Plan designates the subject properties as Rural Areas emphasizing the preservation and protection of agricultural, forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources as land use options. Churches are integral to the historic context of rural communities. Constructed between 1862 and 1863, Emmanuel Episcopal Church is considered to be an important historic resource in the County and is so noted in the Historic Resources section of the Comprehensive Plan. The church is listed in the Registered Historic Properties as a Virginia Landmark and it is on the National Register of Historic Places, The following description was provided by the Department of Historic Resources: Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 3 Emmanuel Episcopal Church is an outstanding example of Colonial Revival Ecclesiastical architecture in Albemarle County. Since its founding in the mid-19th century, the church has been associated with prominent county citizens, most notably the Langhorne family who lived at nearby Mirador. Nancy Langhorne, later Lady Astor, became involved with the congregation's mission work in the early 20th century and in 1911, along with her brothers and sisters, commissioned Waddy Wood to renovate the original one-room church. Wood, a popular Washington architect, was well known in Albemarle where he spent his childhood and later designed fine houses in the Ivy and Cobham areas. His work at Emmanuel Church exhibits the refinement and excellent craftsmanship associated with the best of early Colonial Revival buildings. In 1905, a bell tower was added and the front entrance was renovated. Between 1911 and 1914, the interior was renovated and a larger bell tower, arcade, and parish house were added, all according to the designs of architect Waddy Wood. Kristin Kirchen of the Department of Historic Resources has reviewed the plans and states that "the proposed project should have no detrimental impact on the historic character of the church." Ms. Kirchen's letter is attached as reference (Attachment B). The site is also located on the Route 250 West Entrance Corridor. However, as the new building will not be visible from the Entrance Corridor, it is not subject to review by the Architectural Review Board. Because of its historic importance, a condition of approval has been offered that would require review and approval of the architecture and materials by the Planning Director or designee (Condition 15). STAFF COMMENT: Staff addresses each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance: 31.2.4.1: Special Use Permits providedfor 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 proposed building, located to the rear of the existing church sanctuary, has been positioned to reduce impact on the existing buildings and to lessen its impact on critical slopes. Most of the existing landscaping and trees will remain in order to maintain the historical landscape of this site. No clearing of the existing wooded area between Stockton Creek and the proposed building has been proposed. The wooded area will help to lessen the impact of the building from view of the property to the rear (closest to the proposed building and currently an agricultural field). The existing sanctuary, double Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 4 . . . arcade and fellowship building, as well as the topology would screen the proposed building from Route 250. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and In response to staff s concerns regarding the scale and exposure of the proposed building and parking arrangement, as well as the potential loss of some mature trees, the applicant was been able to site the building and most of the parking in a way that both reduces its impact from Route 250 and lessens the impact of the modern development on this historic property. However, two parking areas would be visible from Route 250: at the edge of the cemetery and in front of the religious education building. that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Section 18, Chapter 10 of the Zoning Ordinance outlines the purpose of Rural Areas zoning: "This district (hereafter referred to as RA) is hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment of the zoning map for the following purposes: -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." Over the life of this church there have been changes that have reshaped both the site and the architecture to reflect the needs of the congregation. The applicant has been able to locate the proposed changes in a way that is sensitive to the character and history of this important resource, while addressing the needs of the current congregation. with uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed addition and parking arrangement would not affect the uses permitted by right in the RA District. with the additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, There are no additional regulations in section 5.0 of the ordinance that governs churches, and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The applicant has advised that parking along the access driveway and Route 250 creates an unsafe condition and is the primary reason the church desires to reconfigure the parking. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has already commented that they will require, at a minimum, that the entrance to the site have alSO foot turn lane and a 100 foot taper with a 35 foot radius. The County Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 5 Engineer also believes that a left turn lane will be needed on Route 250, since Route 250 is a major arterial high-speed highway with increasing traffic volumes. A copy of the County Engineer's Commentary on Turn Lanes is attached (Attachment C). The VDOT reviewer has concurred with the County Engineer to assure that adequate safety measures are required. However, if the applicant does not want to construct these safety improvements, a warrant analysis should be performed using projected traffic at build-out to establish minimum requirements. These issues will be reviewed with the site plan, therefore the condition approved with SP 1999- 48 pertaining to VDOT approval of the entrance (Condition 2) has been removed. Waivers: The applicant has requested the following waiver: Zoning Ordinance 4.2 Critical Slopes: disturbance of approximately 2,000 square feet (Attachment D). Review Comments: The County Engineer has determined that the placement of erosion and sediment control construction will necessitate additional disturbances, as shown in Attachment E. The County Engineer has not offered any concerns which prohibit the disturbance of slopes, as shown, and did not recommend any conditions. 4.2 CRITICAL SLOPES These provisions are created to implement the comprehensive plan by protecting and conserving steep hillsides together with public drinking water supplies and flood plain areas and in recognition of increased potential for soil erosion, sedimentation, water pollution and septic disposal problems associated with the development of those areas described in the comprehensive plan as critical slopes. It is hereby recognized that such development of critical slopes may result in: rapid and/or large-scale movement of soil and rock; excessive stormwater run-off; siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water; loss of aesthetic resource; and in the event of septic system failure, a greater travel distance of septic effluent, all of which constitute potential dangers to the public health, safety andlor welfare, These provisions are intended to direct building and septic system locations to terrain more suitable to development and to discourage development on critical slopes, and to supplement other regulations regarding protection of public water supplies and encroachment of development into flood plains. (Amended 11-15- 89) Where modification ofregulations is sought pursuant to section 4.2.5, such request shall address each concern specified in section 4.2. (Added 11-15-89) The applicant has relocated the proposed building and has reduced its size from the original application concept plan to avoid critical slopes as much as Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 6 . . . possible. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve a waiver from Section 4.2 Critical Slopes. The applicant has also requested approval of waivers regarding parking lot standards. These waivers will be considered with the site plan application, as they can be granted administratively by the County Engineer and Zoning Administrator. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application: 1. The location of the proposed building is sensitive to the historic surroundings and is supported by the Department of Historic Resources. 2. The reconfigured parking would provide appropriate areas for parking which avoids destruction of some mature trees, considers the historic character of the site, and provides safe parking for the congregation. 3. No changes to the historic buildings on this site. Staff has identified the following factors unfavorable to this application: 1. Some mature trees will be removed in order to accommodate the parking areas. 2. Some parking areas will be closer to Route 250 (in front of the cemetery and the education building) RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP 2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church, subject to the following conditions. Changes from the conditions approved with the previous application SP 1999-48 (conditions 1-6) are shown with strikethroughs and underlines. Conditions 7-15 are new with SP 2007-27. 1. There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate special use permit. 2. Virginia Department of Tmnsportation approval of the entrance width and entrance radii. 2,Approval from the Health Department for the septic system and well shall be required prior to approval of an issuance of a building permit. 3. Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100-year flood plain. 4. Ne-eExpansion of the mausoleum structure shall require amendment to this special use permit. ftTombs inside may be added.,. 5. Any future expansion of the church structures and / or size of assembly area, 6f l:tSe-shall require amendment to this special use permit. 6.Special Use Permit SP2007-27 Emmanuel Episcopal Church shall be developed in general accord with the concept application plan, provided by the applicant and received December 21. 2007 (Attachment A.) However. the Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 7 Zoning Administrator may approve revisions to the concept application plan to allow compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. 7.Construction of the new building and columbarium, as identified on the concept site plan (Attachment A) shall commence on or before March 9, 2013, or this special use permit shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted hereunder shall be thereupon terminate. 8.Tree protection measures shall be required on the erosion & sediment control plan in accordance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Handbook and the tree protection measures shall be installed prior to any land disturbing activity. 9.The parking lot shall be paved using prime and double seal surface or, at the option of the permittee, another surface material approved by the County Engineer deemed equivalent or better than a prime and double seal surface in regard to strength, durability, sustainability and long-term maintenance. 10. All outdoor lighting shall be arranged or shielded to reflect light away from the abutting properties. A lighting plan reasonably limiting the amount of adverse outdoor light pollution shall be submitted to the Zoning Administrator for approval as a condition of site plan approval. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - Concept application plan Attachment B - Letter from Kristin Kirchen, Department of Historic Resources, dated December 17, 2008 Attachment C - County Engineer's Commentary - Turn Lanes Attachment D - Letter from Land Planning & Design Associates Mark Lieberth, Critical Slope Waiver request, dated January 14,2008 Attachment E - Memorandum from Glenn Brooks, County Engineer critical slope review comments Attachment F - Location Map Emmanuel Episcopal PC Report Page 8 ~ z~ l:;g ~Ul 8i~ I"'.~" in J....4 ~ -< ....-: \.7_ t!!!~ ~ ~ ~'~. zu "(&5<<) ~ ::;'0 . 1 olO~N ~ m>. ~~ :q~ .~: ~~~ '0 ~ o 1 ~ Od 0- ~ :i 's. -u ;> ~ !3 . -,..c::8 ! ~ U J I~. ~ }~ a p:: la .S .s ] ~ I o~ ~ I. . 0 < .....-1 - 11 II ~ .c Q) ~ l-r ~oo ,...,. II) = ,..c:: ,0 ~ CI) CI) I S .... ~ I Q) I ;> ... I .c 0 II) U ;> ~ 0 I ~ ,...,. ,...,. < \ ... z w ~ 0 ~ . g >- ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ UJ <( 10 g ~ ~ :0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~"! ;i <l(z~ ~ ~ :;,~ ~~~ t;; ~ ~ ~o 'E~~ ~ ~ :r f? ~ ~"~j ~.:~ ;;' ~ a: "...>- "' W "!j!:o<( ltw".... z ~ ~z ~s~ !l! 0 5 !l!~~~5~~~f?~ ~ ~8 ~002~~lt ~~~ ~""~~0~O~3ww.",~ ~ 00 >-~ooooo =>5<(~0<("o:o~~:r <(ccz~o ~ ~~~~~~~~s~j~~:~~~~~~~~~e~~~~~~ 0 ~g~~g8~~~~~~~~O~~f?~~~~lli~~o~~~~ ~ o o.oooow w.. -z"&~o....~!...~~~ ~ ~~Oi~ii~~~~i~~g~~nrr~~ ~ ~~~OO':HUC)J: , , \ ~""~------ ~ '=> ..." "'4;s. ~ 1I/9j-~r+ .1 ~8~i = ""1 ~If , I I >. Q) ~ CI) Q) ..... {Zj \ \ \ \ \ \ 1 o 1t] 'll ~ l~~ <( jj " ~ J ~ :::l 'S 1 .9 .9 ~ ; .. .~- <fi~ 5 '" "M Cl] c-c- r - u ]; p ~ ~ . ~'i<fi ~ ~ 11 '> I HI :8~ ~C'S'~ ~ ..,.~~ ":......: 0 Q) ~ . ] 0.. 0 ~~ ~ otlNq CI\ ~~~~ e "" ~a ~ ~ "0 B u !i'r--- '6 ~. ~~~Sa ~ gg~I ] J <+-< 00 <( ~-l3 ::; if ~~ ~ i:il.~ 0 i $l '!! ~ ~ ::; ~~g] ] 111 1 '" I ~ orA Q ] h::; U ... jj <(<(~:G ~ Q) ~ > ~~ Ej .9 II) , > u ~ (;j l! <<<..,. (II) ..~~~~; ..... ..Cl 8 ~1 f > a .t o:! ~ :l .. ~~a~ ~ l~J <Ii CI) ~ >'!Q .H8p.. .C ........fi p.., eJSr'l ~": t "": i OilC ~ <+-< .... ~~~ 0 1"'~ t~ci"';-- ~ ~ t) ~ :;.~.~ () \2 () o cS~ 0 ~~ ~! ~~~ 0 8C1lJj~,~V;V; '" ;:; ~~8 '" > i 0 " 0 Il.l '" o <( ~ ~ ;;! ~ g i ~ ~ u Ii .... ~ E!9 ~ 0 '" '6. ... ~~~~ ~"':~r<1~~~~ .~ -;j;> 0 .. ~ ~ ! i~li 0..", ~ ~ ~:ilf'; ..0.. ....~ 'll:::l '2 jjj~::i:J..J..J 8" 00 '3 ~ a j ~ ....... ~8~1i fio ..H i ~611 '" '" - ~ 00 ...... Q) J!~ '~ ;:j I~u ;.'i ]~::;1 ; .:!Cl G '~ 0.. <<l <<l~O< J ~ 1iI J: ~ ~ ~ N ~ z~ l~ i ~I .a Od I i .......t '" - ~ ~ ~!e; ~ . '0 g. .....-1 '" Oel" ~I~ 0 ~ ;; a ~I '" :5 N p:: .a -< en ;1; 's. -5 .g," N, ~ ,. ~ ~-lii ;> ii la I~ ~ ... t 0 ~ - ;:j "I c z u -5~. II) ,..c:: 0 s :g ~u J CI) ~ ~o ~~~ ~I ~ g ] ~ ~'>~ ~ , ~ \1Q~ oi~ J I I ;; ~: Mc5~ ~ ] o '" N I, I f I" I 1" I II I I II, , II J I , I I I I I I I \ ~.,.---- <( " \ \ \ I I I I I I I I \ \ \ \ \ \ , , \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ , "' "- "' "- "- "- "- \ \ \ \ \ "- \ \"iil ~ ~~ ~ ~ ;:-", u ~ o N W f- ::0 o cr fJ) :i A "- "' , , I I I I \ I I \ \ \ \ '- ,- I \ , "<I /-- -- 1(- II , i I' /~\ II I \ III \ I I I II II I I I I \ \ I I \ \ \ \ \ I \ I I I , I I , I '\, I '\\ . ( -c.\\. \ '\ :'" '*.. \ , \~ " '\\~~\ \" ,'" \'\ \ '\ " ~ " "\ '.~ """ ,~ ' "" '\\", ""\ .~\ \ '-.:' , \, ";\~', '," '\ >r~" '. " " \ , "- .~ "- ~ ", '\ ''\ .", ~ z~ !g: \.7... 8'8.;:; 1"'.~~jH J....4 .a <( '." \.7-I!!!~ '" . ~ ~'&. ~zu'ii5 ~ ::;,~ ~ 0 _,!!~ CI)._ N ~~ ~i~ .~: ~~~ 1'Od II 0- o ~ I ~a 's. -U ~ ~ ~ 1 II) ...c:: ~ ;:l U g a " . E '" E }~ " '" 1:: ~ ;> 8 0. S .... Q) ..... {Zj ~ p:: ~. ,S S ] ~ I r, ! i " J , I , I I , I I , I I , I I I u " :> J:: o \ 1:- ( j' <( " , , \ ! ~o. o on N I ~ i ~ \) ( \ Cf) ::j I \ "", I j , i<l I.J /, 1/ J, II :, :1 l , I ! - '\ i I: : , \ :.~ I ::;~~ I I ~ i I I I I ' I \ \ \ \ \ \ I I I I 1; \ ~ ~ I ) I / I ~---- ~:; ~ ~ ~ I:) I-no. , "f I , I '\\ \ ~ z~ }! 'Od ~"'8i II> ""_ g- o Ci" ~ l u .s CIl .~ ~< l- 's. ..c ,= ~\.7_ .. ~ u ;> ~ "':5 1 ~ t z u .= ~ 0 "5 ~ ~ ~O j~ J ~~ Wi J \10 0 j: ~~ w <9 l~~ ~ IS~ ~ i!!~ 0 ~I&J ~~ I- <~ C/) ~N 0::: W h- &- I- '" ' ~ ~~ (j~ E F <ltZ -C:w m< ::E ~ o~ ;~N 0::: n~ .II !Il 0 ..L.. I- C/) 0 IIII11 z <( m => z z 0 0 0 .il ~ 0::: f= f= ~I~ I~ <9 u u If ~ ~i 0::: w w 0 rn rn ~I ~I! w w W N ~ I ~ 0 f- f- " C/) iii iii ~ .~ IJII z I- Mli => Z N (") r/ .. ~ ! r- ! ~ r I ~ 11" ~l U <c , f n u r/ ~ ! r-:~ It 3J H ~l ~ \ ~ jl I i- I: I L_ m ! I II I I I I I~ $1 "II,,!..!. I -+H -H ~, J ~ l:j S' :!! IU i iJh II 111_.. '" ...... ",I,,,, ..Ii" fll _~ ~ ~ ~ u.. ~ u.. U- II- LL. I 'I :; I: I ! ! lOt! .. I!."ft. t t ~I t fal "& I i ~- 1!1 :8 in ~ n 11~ -j ,'-'+----1 ;~!i! II II ,~!tl_lillll ,:0; L~I_ .___ ~i f' "';,;" I II ~ ~ ~ ;,; ~ ;,; ;,; ~ I_f--_._ _ _ _ ~ 11'1, Ji IIJIJlj f!~ II " 11 Jlfi" iI 1111 j I! i 1 It~ Jll'IJl)~ ,i i! 1 [ I}, i I. !,I J ,~j I I Iii illl, J ~ Il i i i!lllilll! Ii f-I- J 8 j.;; w :i!ll~. I! ~! r; II J-- f- , I I ., I J ... I )11 ~~ Ll <( u.. 10.. ..1101.,", jio w ~ ~ W Z 0 L o~ t; Ill", "'f ~ !ill N ~ !'lg '" ~8 ~ ~ ; "'0 0: ~~ W ~ O)U)(D. ~ ~ "i .. ~::> ~ ~~~ ~ ~ ~~ '" .. h *.. ....Ill oooo I ~ , ! I ~I ~oo I ~ ,....i 0 J:! . "E _ ~ ~~ ~ N :;1 a ~~Ii N " i p:: i< ~ ! .i .S!l 61 '~ . ~ ~I , ~ ,5 " Q j ] a... <( I "', 1 ' !! ; I- ~ - ~ ~ .p iii jj -,.8 ~L 2 -5 '" fl!">i -aBS j-, I: .8 i it ~ ~". III -'- ~ ~ 11 ~~ ~ ~ ~~ it Z.8i5 !l '~1ii ~ if"~ II .. i; LoaL.g 8" II ~",-,1ii! ~'O In ~H ~ ~ g.f .8'015 ~ ... ~.g~'O~ ~i! >-l5c f Vi Ell: I'" :1'0 H iU ~ i1~ '> .8 g~ ~-S ~hU ~~~ -5i5B ~ "ii ~~ 'I: ~~ :;;e~ &l .. 0 ti ~ ~ -5 10 "ii?:: ad! .!i! ~~ '5 ~ ~i >i:;;'5 ~~~ j !l ~1!l ~~ ~i'5 t: 8 5 HI '0. i~ I: 0 ~e ~ if j~ ~H B ~-;; E 1 's;,Z ~E~~i t-: I n 2 o.~ ~~~ a I: I: :E~-i~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ lIlii- d~ ~~ ~~ ....0 .~.)( 0 .... n gl !' il ~ ~~ ~~... a ~~i n<':ll i!ol .2 i~~~ g '~ :~ ~ ~"ii:! "'Uj ll, I: ::3 toe,!! i~ u 8:1 ~~c h ~U ::1'- :J~3 - .. g= c ~ ot: ~~i~~ ~i i ~n. """ ~ ,s"8 ~g .~~ ~~ UI: a~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " o ~ II 0 'e ~ i ~ ~ :g~f ~u i: _U ~j:5i~ ;~~ ~i~~ g v li7ii 'fig i~~ -~-!- u ~~ 1i.~:' ,'6 ' ',..'~ 5: . ~'~ri'~ --->-0--- E ~> ~ ~ 2~ 00. .. c E '- a.aW ~"ll -h!!~ II ,~ is 11 ~E H ~!!l II II Hlii~l ~~ .01: =~] q'" 'i~j:c >~~- ~g "'<( ~~ ":'l1~ef w i : ~! ~~ <(:I: ~lg ..d ill .c .;lS .....__"0 ,..; ~.... .o" 5 g II ll~"'~.ll E.... ~ -5 ~ ~ ~ 15 '0 .~ !l ~r ~~1i H ~ .8 ~hi i1~h1ii I E. " :i!!1> ~ 0 ~-tii1>i 1! .., .. 0. 15. f~ll~ U~lfZ ~ ~ ::~~ h ';:.8 .8 m ~]1 ]8 i~l lii Hi Ie e l> ~;; \l ~ . jfi "'il "ll. o ~ ~ h ! 0 ~i~~] H~H ~ ~~ :!I ! "il ~ \: ~ .~ ~..." - ~ ~ ~ 2!i ~H ~~ ~il '0 ~l5n[ 15.15 ~ ~ ~:: ~U~ S~ll alii ~~ ! ~ ,g,h~1! .8.51> 15.1! a a -ll ~ 'IS heu i!.~l h ~H .~ HUj d]~d Ii ~V~e fi~ ~ 0 ~ ~ HH!~ ?:: ): 1lfl5 8 a u~ ~ 1i HHl i ~~ 11~ ~H '0.8 tf.~..... ~ _ .5;0. t~O 0 i~ o....-j ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~i ~ Ii.S EF .:'O~ '.8 '0;:;.8 i ~.c liH~ n Ii. .. 5 l ~J!!i~e Ii ~ ~ ~ z ,li .8-gb ~~ :! x.1i '0 ~ ~~l>.8m ~Su~ =;i.!!S .l!'O ~l5f l ~gV>....8.!i '0 ;~~~ ~~ u ~ ~ !~:; c ~.s'Oi~ ,. 8 E .~ ~ H ~ ]~! 1!J; .c ~c~lo t~S ~ j Clfl:c ~ ~~8'c~ - iili ~ ~;;q "0. hl>~~ ~6~j~:i ~S.o u'C c ..... 1!-5!U ep .~~ h~ :E ~ ji.5, h~ i.8 ~ 0 ~~_i 0. '" j ~?::,li ~t t'H z 1!~~ 15 ~'~ 1!n ~ IH~"2.!l~ c: ~zj: ~ t.5 ':;;ii'!:i ~~j ] .8 ,,~Ij~i '5l!rl ~ii-1! 0 HH pi 1!'S. ~ g'2 ~!j~ r '~ !l~ :p lll~~ ~gi r~ j. m ~~s ij v _tl ~ ..'~ ~ >i ~ e~;:: ~ ~2 . e i~ H~ !l H .c: 6 ~ e !'-:J ui! .ug1! Q,~,li Cll ~~j'" ao t: .8 ~-~J- "'~~~I aj ~~gjl .. ~ a. ~ ~3( !~ VI ~ ~ lii .8~H gh ~ ~'" '2 g'2 1n c: li:E >-1Il 5 B ~"';;"tJ ~ I-'~ € 0 ~~~~9 g-iil .....!~!~N - " U s1~. ....."S ::: ",il H~ CIlI~:!::!iJ-= 0_" ,~'O ~ tl ~$~ U [Ii ~ H 5~~aiti.c: "ii!!ll ~ . 41 41 .c: 2 .~ IL~,E~ g~ ~ gl~'E~-!' l~.8o""G- ~q jiH~ -l!:l> :;r~ 'S~ ~ Uh ~~i lHi ~ h~~H~ l- v 0. U i~~ ~ $1!.8 ~~ a. ~ ~! Ii ul.8.., ~;:.~ W f- W cr: U z o u z o Cl z ~ Q. 5' ~ ;.- it: m h~~~ !i~~~ ~ nUl > ~~~~" x: 9 ~~~~~ J :~ U) ~~!~i 1~ ~ ------ '~ Jili! I~~...' ~~8< ~~~~ ~~~~i ~h~. li-!-~. ~~~~i ~~~~h "dl~~ '-~, ~Ujb -~ v Z z 0 f= ~ u W f- W 0 ~ u cr: Z Q. 0 W W ~ "- w (/) !:i (/) cr: f- f- f- Z iii z 0 @ <0 .... i? -d " ~ ' I : I~ -qo ,:fu ii , J~~; I ;: ,I ~' - 1 /" T--- / / ( / ~/ U Ii;~ ~~ ~ ;; ~ '"' z o " u ~ o ~ >- E ~~~ ~~o ~~~ 6~i3t oil~ ~li~ ~~ln o ~~ ~~ ...:J M ~~ ~~ OJ" "~ ~~ gu ~~ (' ~ ~ U ~ ~~ :';0 'Et? E~ !~ ,5":1 .F ~ ~~ :';0 E~ Eo 8~ c'l! ,5":1 ~F ...J ...J ~ <9 Z Z ~ W 0::: ...J ~ Z w ::E <9 C/) W I- C/) Z ~~ ~~ ~ '<t ~ z~ 19: '" .. ~ :::... 8'8.~ I"'.~--jh ~~<...,... \.7-l!!!~ "" . ~ c~. ~ Zu ';;5", . 1 ~ 0 ~.9i~ ~:. ::s~ ~II) ~i~ .0 ~o. wj: M5~ Od 0- 8 'S '6....c:: :g> ~ u ;> - !3 1 g ...c:: ~ a u t5 . S i' S ~~ a p:: la :~ ] I>.. ~ ii: ~ u ] ..... i ~:;;.~ I... ----J on f !~ ,..--, i l", I" _ _ .... 00 ! ~ ~ '" ~ r , I I I I I , I , I I I ::> 6 ~~ <(~~iiit NO....OON c( ~o .....1'\1 a: 1:1:0.......1") '0 ~:r~n:o.: ~ 0;;;00) ~ Q.(J)crig~ ~~ci~cQ \ g :x: 00 , , \, ", · 'r 'Q " " "'~" I fp-, r "I Z , , '. '--......' . " ", ,...,' . 02J!?~',;,O.',,' E';-", ,'" _, :....,,,:, ~ l " . '''--.'7< '. "" I ' I I "-~:-- " ':"h, ' . . +----7---,,'. , , ~\ ~~~~~~', ki-.....-/-_,~~" I III "', /, " · i " . i ,/. i. ! / I J./.. 11~1 I ' I ..:--_/ ~ ".t i;~~, .. ~ 1 I "-/ . .. 'I , :/' \0," II ii . ! " " " :j. 1 _------'" : . \. \ ,\, 8~ \ \ &~ , , , 'I '1 'r..............._// ~---- r~ , , , .I , . ~ ~ ~ ; o I d I I HI Hilt! ! ili '1~1~~ ji Li i J ~ l H J ,-,ft~~1i[!iihl ~.i' 1 i J ! 1lli "ji ~ J1 B~. i. ~ . ii ,It HJJ !L!!.L:5 , 00 O~. 8000" HI r:. J E ~ ~ <J) 1-"0 \ , , ", , '-'-'-,- \ \ \ \ \ \ , [J) => ! I ~ i '" I \ '" . ' i I , / 0 i I / 1& ~ 8 I / I I / ~ / 0:_ ; I ::J ~:~ ';;ti! I 0 ~, I I DC ~gx I I o. I I ON. I ".. I I I , ~DZ I ~ I , ! I I / '~~ ~ I I I I jl I / ::;:~ I I , I , l I I 0 , / z I w I i I m I I I \ ; J I \ , t _/ \ 1 , \ I 4, , \ '; f \ I ' , r I I . /" I I I g /' I \ I \ , J" "-/d: I \ , ;; /, 1..- ~ ~~ //,..~'" , I ~ / IX T ~~/ ~ .I ; I /r.i].. ,i I I / I. I /'" I ' " , I. :/ i' 'I / . I ~ II .. , I '& V ~, I I " ,i I I / " I ' i,{/. " \\ \\ " / ~ , J,' l , / '. f~ " /, ~ I '/, : J . . / , 'I -\,,', I II ',;;: I ' I I" ?.. I ., Ii ;;l 1 Ii I, ,'<1'1 ~ I, ,I, '" (1,,1 I.. oct_ ~ ,r/~fJ* " ~ '" "'\ ", , I, , , ,I,', ' , :,', I II I, , I' f Iii \ , ~Z" !j", ~PI gi~ :3 N"':i l"'.o"H~ J....4 .a -< "I." "'.~-~~~ ~ zu .i~. ~ ~o ~i~ W~jQ-<= ~U .... M't:;;; 2.. U !l1 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ if il ~ ~ ~ ~ " if ~ ~ g ~ @ ~ l'l ~ ~ ~ h8 ~a~ ~:j~ 0=><1 . 1V\,,~P':gz~:- ~ 'H: , : , , : , " o I I /1 I I , , I I I I , , I I , I d, ,j/ ~ " 'I , /1 /, .. /'/'.' , ' ~ I ; ~ I IJ..J, a I "'~' o / Mea Il) / ,~()) N // '~ti~ ~/, ~/<N , ,J :1 t I, i .Ii )- i- t II / I \ , \ , , I i&t' /1 I 'oJ -b I~ / i , , '" I 0 I ~ I ~ I . I I I I " I !, I / 1/ I / , I / / .. f- :xc Q ~ ~ :0 :xc o"'~ "'~ ; i~a.: 00.:> Oox (1)0 iii2~ ~ _J[n~ ~ci:i z <( " " w ... a o I , / I " I , I '" , / I 0 ,/ ~ ~ I ,lJl . o ~ ~ \!> . WI ~l'a, mll?,' 000 ". ill lO'T-' l , , I '" 0, ;: '" <D :. Od 0- o U .!l rIl .~ 'i5.. -5 ;;; ~ ... - ~ t ~ ...c:: I ~ u 6 E E ~ 1 I~ ,0 l/") ~'~ . 0 iii .....-1 '" I" II '~ ~~I! ~ '" 1:: Q) e Q) ;> 8 j:l.. e I-< Q) ..... en N N l' a p:: la .S .5 ] ~ W E ~ j <( ! 19i~ O!I! il~ -I ! J I ~ ~ h 'ill,' ..[.. 'i !",l' '''lI' H um ii -, l ."iP, ..ll,! iB hhit i1U1I1( l~iHHh!: IhB 1. li!l }~ w u "iT. ~!h!tl~ ii Ih;f',l fh! t'I~E 0- z w ~'i!' i!1l.8 "II i 'i~11 'I I ',. I r .~ 0 ihi'; ~ Ij~fH h'I.JI.III. il.! !I! i 'I ~ ~IUI . E' I J 'ilj illli") Wf.l\ill '! IIi Ii ~~l j 'I:' fL~'I$1 l.}-tl.i'" mu a: lJlI!!' p!H'" Innil~1 Ht "Ill r 0.. 1.1' .- Hi.h~ !limB nlliH~IHi UHII. m Cl z H"IIJ!~~11 I;': ~ ~ w ~ ! /~ 111h · fl' WI Cl ...J E - i II' l!"l.~ I , ::; 0 !' ,'. ,~ , ':~, ',. Ij h WHI~, I!.!' I U'i ~ 0.. !~H V~UJ ~l~t' Ii<! Pi" I!! J: 0 a: z @> I, trl 'fH'j1i I. i' ,ft <( u <( !l = I', .' ,;" IihJ! I iH'i iii~i M. ...J W ! ~ I .. ,,', ~ Cl I jlllj1lhliIfljllh r z a: i\"::':~l: .. :::> :::> I 'Ii I- i= ~ rlilU,!l.ih; .'l!i () I 5' ..I w Cl iL I- ::; l- II J: l- I U (/) (/) (/) Cl ~ a: !z <( I- ::; <( u Z N N ~ i ~ ~----- ~ ~--:2 ~ ~-- I I, ri1\ ... / ~o~ ~ I ~ " I , o 1* --~ N (; " ~ o ~~ ~ ~ z o~ ,oo '" o ~ o . w > ii' o ~ <( / / / / / / / / / / / / I I I I I I I I I I I I I I , I , I I I I I I I I -../ +% ,c:;) w w ~ i/ C +0 " o > .. ..,..g" .,.; = += .,.; +~ ..,..2 ~ z~ l!o> ~ ~~ 8i~ I"'.~"~j~ J....4 .a -<.&. ~ ~\.7_1:~ z ~ ,- u. -zu ~.~. ii5 , l~o~~~ ~:i aJ'-N tI~~ wh o ~lS~ j~ ,",,,;t 2... - "Q)]1 ~ U J - ~ l~ , " ' II II " I (!) I Z J 52 a:: <( 0- D Z <( W (!) ~ w > 0 () w ..... 00 D w (f) 0 a 0- <0 0 " a:: 0- ~ N c ~ o s::; '" 8 '" a. '" o o ~ .. 1ii E 'x e a. a. <( ~ 0 N N n 5 , ~ ~ ~ :g <( 0- ~ - , J, II 'I u , I ' I 1'1 I. ,I I I 'I I I I , , ...,1 I il 1< I I 1 I I i I ,r I , ' I I I I I I I , I I , I I , I I I I '5 I!! E~~ .~~~ ;~~ 5~t: 00. c, g-fii ~ON .8~.!! '" 0 " ~-g~ -'ii Ol omg "#.om ~:;~ B~~ eft. '5 .2 ~.211ii ~= :g .!! 'ii Gi ,~ ~ ~ ll'lll!!" ~~ ~~ .. IIJ 'C .0 "2 .., 'iij .!! iX en"> ~ &.~ :K l'l e ill '" o.o.-~ ;~~-8 ~ ~ I \.0 00 \.c) ~ . 'a ;-- a I II) .....-1 0- j P e en 1 II p:: d ~r7l la I II) .9 ~ ! u ;> '0 " ,5 I 0 II) ,5 ~ U CI) ] II) II) ~ i'; ,t:: .t:: . ~ CI) CI) s Ol " ~ ~ rn 'x lij ~ ~ ~ Iii -5 ~,5 Ol ..,E ~ ~ [ ~ m~ -a .!: m:<< E c ~~ :g .~ ...,. c 1ii l'l CE 0) ~:o ~ ~ ~i .f; ~ ~ ~ e "0 ~.fi(j~ ~ '~~gE .~ >-Q)J!!O 'S: .o=!!~ a .~~ij~ IV 1:c2~ 8 ~~~:c ~ ,-g~~~ ~~ e ~ e-i ~~~~~e N! 0 -J;: G> <(xu..~.....= ,rCPNOrrjS .9 '" ~ 'S: ,., ~ !i' b - 9 ~~ ~ ~ fill;> ~ .ii ~ :;:: Ol iil q " " :.:; I I I b " "'.0 c_ ]ig ~= OJ ~ :5 l!:! . ".:30 .o'll'" "N .~1g ~ C ~ 0 ill "a:: llc", '" " c -0:5.2 c _ '" ei1 0l0~ ~ -tii .e :;;010 lij-s:g ~.~ ~ .:!::i9~ a."> ill ~~ _ > C '" .., OJ OJc.s:; .s:;"~ i~~ a~:~ " I I., "~I ,:;, : -e.\ ,:," j , .~\ I "'6\ I ~ ';1\ (!) I \ z 52 I a:: <( 0.. I D Z I <( w ,:, II (!) () ~ D , Z Z W 0 0 > i= i= 0 , () () \ w () w w I, (f) (f) ..... 00 ..... !i: IT J: (!) \ (!) (!) z l5 00 00 i= u.. a u.. (f) 0 0 b >< N N W " W W ~ ", z Z II ::; ~ ::; - " \ \1 '" ,\ .... , (.) ~ 0 I I I ,) 'I J I 'I 'I I I ,I ,I , I I I r ,I I , ....... ~ -~ '/ ~~Js.. I /,-----' ~ 1 1/ ---, - /I I L - c---J' I I I/-r---_), /--7r-'~_1 II~~'L 'L-..o.7~J- Jr--7;'~~1 '----J-J l~fiJ-..J/~ k'ur<'7r~/:'" C7lc:,:c!~, '" I ~r-r, 0 I 'N~,---7r7 roo/wi /-7 \ , \ I '----r:-::;~J[/ /~I::--.Jl, I'~r~ "----Jr-,--.- /, " \ I '--::;"--';r---'---1 r-s~ ~I/ "'--" '::--.1, ~,' '~" " \ I '----.10 rtf--JL 7i-it-:;=,/ L 7r-------; ~'':.':..~::'~'~~" (I L JL_ ~~!~-JLJ ac-----J --':........ .....'-" ",,\ , I '-_7:.. --L____ f 'Ir-7 r--::-:..r--~_7j "', ,," ,-",,- ,,"\\.\ ,~~ /} :::::-It..._ 7 "".' ,,'\,-,,-....,- \' I I - I . / ---7r-~-" '" -. )'; ) >) 'j) ,;)\\\,\j/(/ '--'}b-Jt '~:-"..,-'" -"-<1> ~/: />;//; /<)/ /}Ii(' ~//~_//;//'/.:.//,11 i /." /.-' / // //~ /f /,,//.///,/,' /1 , / r II" I Ii' / I / II'; ./ / II , , ' I / / / I I ! / i I I 1 ' ,1 'I I \ \ \ \ ~ I \\ '\ \ \ \. \ \ \,\'\\\\\\\ ,-.'''-',\\ \ \ \ \ ' ". \" \ '.... '\. \ \ \ \ \;~"\\\'~''''i ~ \ \ \ '. i /};/I/l// I / ,; <,'/;, / '! .' J I 4..i../!/l/j i I ,"//// I I j ! I ,,' / I '\J - ::I: ~ ~ o " I 11 I, L t \ ~ ! I \ ~ , 1,/ ~,Il , ~i!i , I"'i 1\ ,';, " I '" ~ '\J '\J 11 ~ 11 ::I: )<0 ~ (f) ~ (f) m m '" m q r: ll!' ~l!l q / ~ I , , : " -----~~ ~ I " -; ~ ~ ::' " w t:J .... !!.. q (1) i [3' Pi' "'0 ! 1 t:r 5' n II tn r c ~ ~ jl s' '1:l ~; " :T ~ fl~~ (JQ e ~ ' 0 ~~ I .... -0 f ~ 3 ~ ;;; ;:; ;;; ~ ~ ~ f (l ~ ~~~ ~g.~ i: ~. .g e?. ~ - '\J J 11 D> ~ Ie )<0 " I I I I -J... ~L :~- :il~c.; v. CD 01", "d ~i~ g~3::~t-4 ''5!'nZ~ .~.=' - "';1'J Z 111>> -0 .... >~~ ~H~r::Jv h8"~~ 5l! ~Z ~ . . . L. PrO:-SU)l1 HryiJnl, Jr. S\10f"13ry ofNillur.1 RtSl)urocs COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Department of Historic Resources 2801 Kensington Avenue, Richmond, Virginia 23221 Tel: (804) 367.2323 hx: (804) 367.:n\H TDD: (804) 367,238(, www,dJu-,virginia,gov Kalhleell S Kilpatrick DINctl;)r December 17> 2007 w. Douglas Gilpin, Jr. FAIA Dalgliesh, Gilpin & Paxton, PLLC Architecture - Historic Preservation - Planning - Interior Design 206 Fifth Street, NE PO Box 2555 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-2555 Re: Emmanuel Episcopal Church - Greenwood Dear Mr. Gilpin: Thank you for forwarding the plans for the parking and landscaping project at Emmanuel Episcopal Church for our review. Based on the review of information provided. the plan appears to be sensitive to the historic setting oithe church and preserves the view of the church from Route 250, By locating the parking behind the church and taking advantage of the lower topography to the sou1h and east, the visibility of 1;1 majority of the cars will be limited as much as possible, thereby preserving the integrity of the church's setting and the historic vista from Route 250. AB proposed, the proposed project should have no detrimental impact on the historic character of the church. Thank you for taking these factors into consideration at the planning stage. If I can be of any further assistance, please do not hesitate to call me at (804)367-2323 ext. Ill. Sincerely, ~~ Kristin Kirchen, Architectural Historian Capital Region Preservation Office Adnlinislr~live Services J U Coul'ilio\lii<' Avtmu" Petenbllrg, VA 23803 Tel: (B04) 863. L 024 hue (8Cl'1) ijtJ2-6196 ClLpllltl Region Office 2801 Ken.inglOlI Ave. Richmond, VA 23221 TeI~ (804) 367.2323 Fax: (804) 367.2391 Tidew.llll' Region Orlic~ J 44 J 5 Old CO~llholl!;<: Way. 2'~ Floor Newport News. VA :B6011 Tel: (757) 880.2807 Fax: ('157) 9SG-JiWll NQI,hcm R.egioll Ofti~c 5357 Main Str."1 POBox SJ9 Ro~nol;e Region Office 1030 PelHl1a,r Ave" SE R".noke, VA 24013 Id: (540) 8:;7-75~5 Fax: (540) ~57,7588 A TT ACHMENT B r1 7.Vl f(.Vl 4")\;;1.-1 S4~ ~T~nISTH ~n 1.-I4n TF.F.7:/"IF.PVlR PT :C;T / VlVl7:/1 T/7:T . County of Albemarle Department of Community Development County Engineer's Commentary Number 1:, Turn Lanes 30 N ov 2007 Question: Why is the county engineer recommending turn lanes when VDOT says they are not warranted? Background: Turn lane improvements to public roadways have become a topic on recent rezoning and special use permit applications, Applicants have pointed out a perceived conflict when they receive a recommendation from the county engineer to provide turn lanes, and comments from VDOT which say turn lanes are not necessary, This discussion deals primarily with undivided two lane roadways, such as Rio Road into town, Rt. 250 in many areas, Rt. 53, Rt. 20, etc, Commentary: Turn lanes are requested by VDOT strictly when warranted based on traffic volumes. This is both the number of cars on the road, and the number of cars turning at the entrance or intersection, VDOT allows for judgment to be used where "other factors are present", such as poor visibility or a history of accidents, In practice, VDOT does not consider other factors unless prompted, usually by the public or a locality, VDOT's perspective is typically that of a government agency drawing a line, or a standard, at which point public funds are justifiably spent on road improvements, Levels of service on the roadway, and safety, are compromised until they are low enough that the thresholds (which they call warrants) are exceeded, and the expenditure of funds is justified, These same standards are applied to private parties when requiring improvements, The county can have a different perspective with discretionary actions like rezonings and special use permit requests, This is where the county engineer's recommendations are considered, There are a number of reasons for a different perspective; (1) The county can plan for a foreseeable future beyond the development's build-out year, when the turn lanes will be necessary (2) The county can request improvements based on a desire to preserve existing levels of service, Every development and new entrance incrementally increases delays and lowers levels of service, Providing turn lanes attempts to mitigate this impact. (3) Turn lanes can be used to incrementally improve public infrastructure, both by acquiring right-of-way, and building improvements to widen roads, (4) The county can request improvements to preserve existing safety levels, In other words, try to prevent accidents, rather than waiting for a number of accidents to }<?' justify improvements, or relying solely on volume and capacity, ATTACHMENT C . . . Albemarle County Community Development County Engineer's Commentary # 1 Page 2 of2 It is important to remember that any development on these busy two-lane roads incrementally increases delays, congestion, and safety hazards, Providing turn lanes does not change this, It only makes it less severe, Turn lanes improve safety substantially, especially left turn lanes. And on the county's busier roads, specifically where we know congestion, or high travel speeds, or steep grades, or heavy trucks are issues, improving safety and preserving capacity should be primary goals, Lastly, unlike other road improvements, in most cases turn lanes have no detrimental affects. As an example, placing signals protects turning movements, but has the downside of delaying through-traffic, and potentially increasing some types of accidents, like rear-end collisions, Turn lanes improve safety and preserve through-movements, without any downside, References: The VDOT Road Design Manual, Appendix C (pages C-6+ for left turn lanes, and pages C-30+ for right turn lanes) provides the volume warrant tables and graphs for turn lanes, These consider volume warrants alone, with brief statements to use engineering judgment where these warrants are not met, and other factors are present. Other factors mentioned are; accident records, poor visibility, availability of right-of-way, angle ofturn, and grades, The volume warrants come from AASHTO in the case of left turn lanes (pages 682-685), and a Virginia Highway Research Council 1981 report in the case of right turn lanes, VDOT also references the Highway Capacity Manual for more detailed study of site conditions, Site entrances are analyzed as unsignalized T -type intersections, The highway capacity manual uses a critical gap analysis, with D levels of service starting at 25 s/veh, An interesting rule of thumb in traffic engineering is that every driveway or site entrance along a free-flowing roadway segment decreases the travel speed by l;4 mph, and spacing ofless than 300' increases the accident potential. (Dane Ismart of McTrans Center, University of Florida) AASHTO states, "Ideally, left-turn lanes should be provided at driveways and street intersections along major arterial and collector roads wherever left turns are permitted", The provision of left-turn lanes has been found to reduce crash rates anywhere from 20 to 65 percent," (p,682) Jq LPDA January 14, 2008 Ms. Joan McDowell Community Development 401 McIntire Road North Wmg Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Enunanuel Episcopal Church SP 2007-027 - Oitical Slopes Waiver Dear Joan: TIlls letter is to fonnally request a waiver for the development of critical slopes. We are proposing to disturb approximately 2,000 sf, of critical slopes at Enunanuel Episcopal Church in order to grade for the new structure, Section 4.2 states "Where modification of regulations is sought pwsuant to section 4.2.5, such request shall address each concern specified in section 4.2," The concerns addressed in Section 4,2 are: rapid and! or large-scale movement of soil and rock; excessive storm water run-off; siltation of natural and man- made bodies of water; loss of aesthetic resource; and in the event of septic system failure, a greater travel distance of septic effluent The disturbance of critical slopes proposed will not have an effect on the health, safety or welfare of the public. The disturbance created by the grading of critical slopes: 1. Does not create rapid and! or large-scale movement of soil and rock The area is limited to a relatively small area and is contained to fill. Large scale disturbance is not planned. 2. Does not create excessive storm water run-off. The area is currently steeply planted and will remain so after disturbance, Therefore, there is no substantial increase in run-off. 3, Will not cause increased siltation of natural and man-made bodies of water, The plans will follow all applicable Virginia Storm Water Management Regulations, and the disturbed area will be seeded and planted when complete causing no increase in siltation, 4, Will not result in a loss of an aesthetic resource, In fact, it will enhance the area by allowing us to preserve the views of the historic church from the entrance corridor, 5, Will not cause event of septic system failure, as the area to be disturbed is not in the path of septic drainage. Section 4.2.5 states that the requirement of section 4,2 may be modified or waived in an individual case and states specific cases, Subsection 4.2.5,b.3 applies to this project 4.2.5.b.3 Granting such modification or waiver would serve a public purpose of greater import than would be served by strict application of section 4.2, In order for the new structure to be (1) minimallyvisible from the entrance corridor, (2) be in close proximity to the sanctuary, (3) maintain the visual character of the site, the best location for this structure was determined to be behind the existing sanctuary. The church desires to have the new fellowship hall on axis with the courtyard centered on the colonnade in following the historic precedence. The proposed location is LAND PL.ANNING & DESIGN ASSOCIATES. INC. Landscape Architecture Planning 310Ea Suite 21 Charlo\ A TT ACHMENT D 43429,-_ Fax 434,296,2109 www.lpda.net tJJ . . . LPDA Page 2 in the best interest of the entire community, given the National Historic Registrar status to keep the development orderly. The location is also best for the entrnnce corridor, As stated above, the disturbance of critical slopes on this project does not create an impact on the health, safety or welfare of the public, Furthermore, the benefit gained by the public of the placement of the new structure outweighs the impact of the relatively small disturbance of critical slopes proposed, In short, this location benefits the public interest, without endangering their health safety or welfare, Sincerely, IJJ~ Mark Lieberth, ALSA, LEED AP Associate, Land Planning and Design ~I To: From: Date: Subject: County of Albemarle Department of Community Development Memorandum Joan McDowell, Principle Planner Glenn Brooks, County Engineer 7 Jan 2008 Emmanuel Episcopal (SP200700027) critical slope waiver request The critical slope waiver request has been reviewed, The engineering analysis of the request follows: Description of critical slope area and proposed disturbance: The primary areas are wooded slopes leading down to Stockton Creek's buffer and floodplain, (There is a minor area of critical slopes to be disturbed in the entrance on Rt. 250.) The applicant is proposing to place buildings and parking areas on the slopes, with steeper constructed slopes and retaining walls, Below is the area as shown on the county's aerial photographs: Areas Acres Total site 11 acres (on church piece in red above) Critical slopes 1.8 16% of site Critical slopes disturbed 0,5 Approximated, see below A TT ACHMENT E ~z, . . . Albemarle County Community Development Engineering Review comments Page 2 of3 The applicant's request as asked for disturbance of no more than 2000 square feet of critical slopes, This is simply not possible, The placement of erosion control and construction will necessitate more disturbances, A marked-up copy ofthe plan is shown below with areas of disturbance which appear necessary, --_.----.::;:;:_._-_..........:.-_._~.-~-- -'-. - ~ -, ~-;- - ---T ~- ~--._~.~ I_"__~.--_..-" -_-1-__ --"---'--1; -;' . '-. .r ----- , " . r ~ ~~ '-' c: ,~( . '. g~ ~ .: II-:ti/i -:-:--'--L~_-Ji .' /.1 ~-::" > II ........... /:1' ,r<-1.~ r '':~__C~~J ',' -::~-.~--., . '-' :. ---- ---_.~ ...,....i/ .,..., '~'-;'~::-::-=1-" ~ / I I L I ., I : I,., l - - j _ .<(-(~~f:~~J ~~ 'liiC: ')l'- _.._--~~ ~ ,- ;lJ1"'" --.------, . -- ~: , 1. ~ 'I" ~__ L.----'- /J (- ! f ! i ~' Exemptions to critical slopes waivers for driveways, roads and utilities without reasonable alternative locations: The small disturbance in the entrance on Rt. 250 is exempt. Compliance with Zoning Ordinance 18-4.2: "movement of soil and rock" Temporary erosion control facilities will involve movement of soils on the slopes, impacting slopes and possibly Stockton Creek. "excessive stormwater runoff' The storm water management concept could be improved, "siltation" Inspection and bonding by the County tries to ensure siltation control during construction. However, pulling back the development to allow erosion control withqut slope disturbance would be better, "loss of aesthetic resource" This area is visible from across Stockton Creek. t3 Albemarle County Community Development Engineering Review comments Page 3 of3 "septic effluent" I have not received any information regarding the septic system on the site, Based on the review above, there are no engineering concerns which prohibit the disturbance of the critical slopes as shown, 2,L/ I .Ii I ~ f ~ ~ . .! 11j'j'j'fj'j'i'ltl J iJdiJ~!I~ It ~ ...8 ...00 ~ q~ -" ,!<O ~ ~~ en ~'" Ci ~~ ~:!. ------{z <0 o o '" .; ~ I J J if! t ~ ! J iJ f f I I I 101 I It 0 ATTACHMENT F z5 Albemarle County Planning Commission February 26, 2008 The Albemarle County Planning Commission held a meeting and public hearing on Tuesday, February 26, 2008, at 6:00 p,m" at the County Office Building, Lane Auditorium, Second Floor, 401 Mcintire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia, Members attending were Thomas Loach; Bill Edgerton; Jon Cannon, Vice Chairman; Linda Porterfield, Marcia Joseph and Calvin Morris, Chairman, Eric Strucko was absent. Julia Monteith, AICP, non-voting representative for the University of Virginia was absent. Other officials present were Bill Fritz, Chief of Current Development; Tamara Ambler, Natural Resource Manager; Joan McDowell, Principal Planner; Gerald Gatobu, Senior Planner; Glenn Brooks, County Engineer; Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Greg Kamptner, Deputy County Attorney, Call to Order and Establish Quorum: Mr. Morris called the regular meeting to order at 6:02 p.m, and established a quorum, Old Business Mr, Morris asked if there was any old business, SP-2008-00027 Emmanuel Episcopal Church - Waiver for disturbance of critical slopes (Joan McDowell) Mr. Morris noted that last week the Planning Commission did not look at the waiver for disturbance for critical slopes on this request. Ms. McDowell said that this is a housekeeping item concerning a critical slopes waiver request that was not acted on last week. The County Engineer is present to answer any questions, This is concerning where one of the new buildings is being proposed to the rear of the property, There is quite a lot of critical slope in the shaded area around the building and to the rear of the property, In the County Engineer's review it was determined that it might be a little more critical slope disturbance than the applicant had originally proposed, but the recommendation was still for approval. Mr. Cannon asked the amount of critical slope disturbance, Ms, McDowell replied that the applicant had asked for a disturbance of no more than 2,000 square feet. But, it was determined that there might be an addition to that. Mr, Brooks said that it was about 1/3 to % an acre of disturbance, There are basically 3 dips in the topography and each of those areas would have a sediment trap built into it. Each one of those areas would be disturbed for a portion, Ms, Joseph asked if that is not exempt from erosion and sediment control, and Mr, Brooks replied that is a call that they have to make as staff. When there is room to revise the site layout and an approach where they don't have to do that staff brings it to the Commission because it is not avoidable and there are alternatives. Ms. McDowell added that the applicant did change the location of the structure at staff's request. So this avoided as much critical slopes as they could and get the same size building. Mr, Cannon asked what does avoidable mean, ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - FEBRUARY 26, 2008 DRAFT MINUTES - SUBMITTED TO PC Mr. Brooks said that means that they would have to scale back the development or move it all over to the right side behind the existing house, It would involve similar layout of the property or they would put the building on the street side instead of the critical slopes side of the lot. But, he was just throwing out ideas. Mr. Cannon noted that there might be up sides and down sides to those alternatives as well. Mr. Brooks agreed noting that staff does not feel comfortable deciding that and leaves it up to the Commission, Ms, Joseph asked if with appropriate erosion and sediment control measures is this something that he could support, and Mr. Brooks replied yes. Mr. Morris noted that the applicant was not present. There being no further discussion, he asked for a motion, Action on Critical Slopes Waiver: Motion: Mr, Loach moved, Mr. Edgerton seconded to approve the waiver of Section 4.2 for critical slopes with regards to SP-2008-00027, Emmanuel Episcopal Church, The motion passed by a vote of 6:0, (Mr. Strucko was absent.) Mr. Morris said that the critical slopes waiver for SP-2008-00027, Emmanuel Episcopal Church was approved, ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION - FEBRUARY 26, 2008 DRAFT MINUTES - SUBMITTED TO PC 2 ,. It Original Proffer l PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: February 19,2008 ZMA # 2007-00011 Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 3.521 Acres to be rezoned from R-l to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-00011 known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"), 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 it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"), Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan, In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of$19,100, For example, if 15% equates to 1,8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide 1 Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of $15, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable Units minus 1.8 Affordable Units required equaling a 0.2 affordable overage) to Albemarle County, to meet the County's Affordable Housing Policy. Ht:<.;t:IVt:U Al ljU~ MEETlNl::I Date: .& ',q' 0 g Agenda ltJ;1m #:,--lif Clerk's Initials: Yn <1'- '1i .. A. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the 15% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below, The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the Property, The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400,00) or sixty-five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first- time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below, The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of- pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein, All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any second lien Deed of Trust executed as part ofthis paragraph for the 15% required affordable housing shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing, For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. i, For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee, The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units. The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt ofthe certificate of occupancy, If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income ofpurchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start ofthe notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. . 11. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit when the Unites) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office, In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph 1 A(ii)(l) shall apply for a period of ten (l0) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). 2, Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph lA. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure ofthe restrictions and controls established by this paragraph lA(ii), At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph lA(ii) have been satisfied, 3. Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement, In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. B. County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units, If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were t originally plmmed to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then-current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s), For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale. 2, CASH PROFFER A, The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i,e" schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contributions shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: 1. Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit 11, Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. 111. Zero Dollars ($0,00) for each Mfordable Dwelling Unit B. Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer Number 2 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/kla Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein, In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers, The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar vear. and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 .- in the year preceding the calendar year most recentlyendec1, For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be conespondingly adjusted each year. . . 3, Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types, There shall be no more than 10 dwelling units within the development. Of the 10 dwelling units permitted there shall be no more than two single-family attached units. 4. The property shall be developed in general accord with the "Concept Plan" dated February 19,2008 attached hereto, By: ~<:t 44~u/-jJ~ 'Emile Bethanne~atterson (Owner) *f:ldV J Date: "" t , Foxfyre Enterprises, Inc. REAL ESTATE CONSULTANTS 4543 GARTH ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 Clifford H. Fox, Jr. Principal Broker Telephone: (434) 823-7500 Fax: (434) 823-7501 Email: foxfyre@cstone.net March 19,2008 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors By Hand and Email Re: ZMA 2007-00011. Dear Supervisors: There are many references within the Crozet Master Plan that discuss the Neighborhood Model, a section of the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan as a basis for modeling development within Crozet. Paragraph B from Strategies for Implementation on page 23 of the Crozet Master Plan identifies the Place-Type Map and Design Guidelines as the basis to "illustrate the relationships between these mixed use centers and districts, and the proposed hamlets, neighborhoods and Downtown", On page 31 of the Crozet Master Plan the production of "Distinctive Place Types" is discussed. Paragraph A, "Framework for Creating Distinctive Places within Crozet" a part of Section III; "Process and Form of Development" further identifies the relationship between the Crozet Master Plan and the Neighborhood Model. The earlier iterations of the Patterson ZMA expressly attempted to contribute to the neighborhoods "sense of place" through the integration of a multi-functional active recreation facility, a park, that also served as a bio-filter, environmental and aesthetic component of the development. This concept is supported in the "Neighborhood Model Standards" page 46 of the Master Plan, Please note that the hierarchy of Place Types is clearly distinguished and separate from what is later referred to as "Fringe Areas". The Patterson property is designated, in its majority, as CT -3 and is not a fringe area, Please see pages 31 and 32 of the Crozet Master Plan and the Crozet Master Plan Place-Type and Built Infrastructure Map. "The Built Environment: Transect Applied to Place-Type" on page 48 the Master Plan identifies the CT designations and how they relate to site development guidelines, In a Hamlet CT-3 is described as "Urban Edge: supports center with predominantly residential uses, The Neighborhood Model within the Albemarle Comprehensive Plan, page 111 articulates some aspects of the growth area boundaries with the rural areas, This is the twelfth Principle of the Neighborhood Model. "12, Clear Boundaries with the Rural Areas ''''''''&';''11' ' ....3OJ r-., '-"V'\,) 'VICe: I It "\,,0 Date: 'J'1'og ::~,::~ :~~ -I'" The Development Area boundaries are the places where the Development Areas meet the Rural Areas, It is anticipated that, in most circumstances, development in the growth areas will extend to the boundary so that the full potential of the Development Areas can be achieved, A "blended edge" that is so frequently associated with sprawl is discouraged, " The references above support the plan of development for ZMA 2007-00011. The density is at the lower end of the recommended level of 3,5 to 4.5 dwelling units per acre, Thank you for your time and consideration of this matter. Best regards, Clifford H, Fox, Jr, Principal Broker Foxfyre Enterprises, Inc, 2 / / / \ \ ,/ / / 5 / / / / / LAND USAGE CALCULATIONS'", LoTs 1 - 8 S I-tAL..L- 1;;. f 4 M II-J I MlAM 'OF 10)000 S,P, L..oTS \1 ~ 10 5' HALl.- 'BE. NO LES~ THAN 9poo SF ANt> AS. LItRc.;.E poss I 'P.>l- E. ?RD V i De: D T 1+ E ARE:A- 'ljETW EE:N 1\1 J; 1. Nf~~ :PARCE L c-oN^,~c-roR 'ROAD AND Blo FI/...fER. t/.2. / / "A / \*' ~ / A""~) /' \ <,.,() .-4- " {l~' ~, \<, {J ~O ~ ,/ / D / /, 00/'/ ~ <x./ 00 '\ V"t ~ / ~\O I / {J/ /; TorA L L-O r ft R E f+ NoT L E ~-S TH p., N 100,000 sF Avf. F-.AG1 f.. l-Ol S, 1 E: I06,ooa SF / )0 L..o T = IO)oOOSJ:=_ / 1310 f'1L.TE' Q 1 14-,750 SF B/o F I L r F- l2... ~ ~ 4- 2. 3 ~ ~ I 'BID FIl..TER.. ~ 440 I SF I ToT/,\J... A1+>~OX IM~~ 'P"IO Ft I-i~ ,2. AR.E: A '. 23) 574 SF 6 <7 /' /' /' ,/ /' \ /' \ ./ / \ ./ \ ./ \// J \~ '\, > \ ,,/' /\\ \\ /' ,/ \ /' /' \ \9':;; \. /' /' \ ,/' ,/ /' ~ \ )- 0' / / \ \ -- -- ,....-~.._- /,/' ~. ....- .,/ ....- /,/ / <""".._.~'r'" ~ ,/' " ~,,,,.r"" \ {OJ 5/5.4/9 SF \ r ~ ~ cot\.' CIF T PLAN SCALE: I" ::::- 50' - c>" It . . \-- Original Proffer l PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: February 19, 2008 ZMA # 2007-00011 Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 3.521 Acres to be rezoned from R-I to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-000 II known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"), 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 it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1, AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions ofthis proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan, In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of $19, 1 00. For example, if 15% equates to 1,8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide 1 Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of$15, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable units minus 1,8 affordable units required equaling a 0.2 affordable overage) to Albemarle County, to meet the County's affordable housing requirement. A. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the 15% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below, The Owner shall convey the responsibility of . .l' , vI;" constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the Property. The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400.00) or sixty-five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a "silent" second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein, All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any "silent" second lien Deed of Trust executed as pan of this paragraph shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing, For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units, i. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee, The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units, The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy, If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income ofpurchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start ofthe notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. II. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit when the Unites) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office, In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the renl does not include tenant-paid utilities. The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph I A(ii)( I) shall apply for a period often (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for- rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"). . .k! r ..'f" 2, Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph lA. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph I A(ii). At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph I A(ii) have been satisfied. 3. Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then- current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term ofthe rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably req 1I1 re. B, County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units, If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19, I 00) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then- current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale, 2. CASH PROFFER A. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit, The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e" schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contributions shall be paid prior to is~uance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: 1. Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($ I 1,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit . ,~ I ." II. Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit. III. Zero Dollars ($0.00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit B. Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer number 3 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/kJa Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein. In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers, The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December I in the preceding calendar year. For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year. 3. Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types. There shall be no more than 10 dwelling units, these units shall only be comprised of single family detached or single family attached (townhouses) unit types, permitted on the property as a consequence of this rezoning. The 10 dwelling units permitted shall be comprised of no more than two single-family attached (townhouse) units, 4. The property shall be developed in general accord with the "Concept Plan" dated February 19, 2008 attached hereto. By: Emile Bethanne Patterson (Owner) Date: . ZMA 2007 -0011 Patterson Subdivision Owners: Emile Bethanne Patterson & J, Daniel Patterson Acreage: 3.521 acres Proposal: , single family detached and up to 4 single family attached, /acre and Character of Property: Rural residential with an existing house Applicant: Clifford H. Fox Rezone from: R-1 to R-6 Comp, Plan Designation: CT 3 Urban Edge within a Hamlet (per the Crozet Master Plan) Surrounding Properties: Rural residential, Gray Rock North subdivision 1 2 CW~ft.OODIII8,J. 1_ ,~ "GO" "... _~~' ~~;...,,,~....",,; f ~ Lanet~Do<R4' ,.:;,,~ -' " ';i '" "~~,..~ -.;1"" / ~-"#- ~ \\ \ .#" 01 1,\\ , \;.\ ~ ;; ~ 5.. \ '~.e......' \:. '-\,'" 3 321 Ac ; ! D. e..&, D'lIPI." r-J :::~s" " " ;:\ Ii I ','. 1 .ti' . '. I 'c' ~ '0\11-1 ~.'~ ...,~ - '~ ~~~/ ~ ~..1l--:-..... ,,""-':'".......- - , " ' Lanetown Way ....,;0.5-..-:::.~-- 3 4 ZMA 2007-0011 Patterson Subdivision The proposed density was not appropriate, based on the Crozet Master Plan's recommendations for the edge areas of the Crozet Development Area, Concern about adding additional traffic to Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way, Some Commissioners believed the applicant should have had the opportunity to defer Commission action to address the items of concern to the Commission. In discussion, some agreed that the proposal should meet the 10,000 square foot average lot size recommendation of the Crozet Master Plan CT3 Hamlet land use designation, thereby reducing the overall density of the project, that the biofilter/greenspace area adjacent to Lanetown Way should be increased, and that new streets to serve the proposed development should include sidewalks, 5 6 7 . . . ~ 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 5, 2008 Clifford H. Fox 4543 Garth Road Charlottesville, Va 2290 I RE: ZMA2007-00011 Patterson Subdivision (Sign # 43 & 61) Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 Dear Mr. Fox: On January 22,2008, the Albemarle County Planning Commission approved a motion to recommend denial ofthe above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors, by a vote of 4:2. This recommendation of denial was based on the following staff recommendations: o The proposed density was not appropriate, based on the Crozet Master Plan's recommendations for the edge areas of the Crozet Development Area, o Concern about adding additional traffic to Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 19, 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. Therefore any new or additional information regarding your application, including final proffers if applicable, must be submitted to our office at least twenty-three (23) days prior to your scheduled hearing date, which is February 25,2008. 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, ~f{~ Rebecca Ragsdale Planner Planning Division RR/SM cc: Emile Bethanne Patterson POBox 865 Crozet Va 22932 Ella Carey File COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 2007-11 Patterson Subdivision STAFF: REBECCA RAGSDALE SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Rezone 3,521 acres from R1 Residential to R6 Residential for 10 residential units AGENDA DATE: March 19, 2008 ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Cilimberg, Ragsdale CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: LEGAL REVIEW: YES (proffers) ATTACHMENTS: YES OWNERlAPPICANT: Emile Bethanne Patterson & J, Daniel Patterson, owners; represented by Clifford H, Fox BACKGROUND: A public hearing was held on this rezoning at the Planning Commission on October 16,2007 and the Commission supported staffs recommendation to deny the rezoning, This item was scheduled for a Board public hearing on December 12, 2007, but was referred back to the Planning Commission at the request of the applicant. A second Planning Commission public hearing was held January 22, 2008, Staff recommended approval at that time, since it appeared the applicant had addressed outstanding concerns of the Commission in its October 16 recommendation for denial. However, the Commission recommended denial based on the following outstanding uses: o Density-The proposed density was not appropriate, based on the Crozet Master Plan's recommendations for the edge areas of the Crozet Development Area, o Traffic Impacts- Concern about adding additional traffic to Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way. o Other Commission comments-Some Commissioners believed the applicant should have had the opportunity to defer Commission action to address the items of concern to the Commission. In discussion, some agreed that the proposal should meet the 10,000 square foot average lot size recommendation of the Crozet Master Plan CT3 Hamlet land use designation, thereby reducing the overall density of the project, that the biofilter/greenspace area adjacent to Lanetown Way should be increased, and that new streets to serve the proposed development should include sidewalks, DISCUSSION: The applicant submitted a revised concept plan and signed proffers, including reduced residential density and increasing the average size of residential lots, on February 19, 2008, Minor technical changes had been requested by staff and were made to the proffers so they are legally acceptable, (See Attachment I-Proffers and Attachment II-Proffered Concept Plan) The following addresses substantive issues discussed at the Planning Commission's last public hearing. Density Concept Plan The applicant's property is designated on the Crozet Master Plan (CMP) Place-Type & Built Infrastructure maps as CT 3 within a Hamlet. The CMP recommends a maximum net density of up to 4,5 units per acre in Hamlets and does not recommend the provision of up to 6.5 units per acre if accessory apartments added for 50% of the residential stock, ZMA 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision BOS March 17, 2008 The property is located on the edge of the Crozet Development Area, but the property is designated CT3 (yellow) with the exception of a very small green strip of cn designated along Lanetown Road. (See inset to the right) The CMP also recommends a 10,000 square foot average lot size for Hamlets, The CMP, on page 32, under Fringe Areas, indicates that most of the periphery of the Development Areas is recommended for the lowest density of development, consistent with the Rural Area designation in the Comprehensive Plan, This text is referring to the CT 1 and CT 2 designations (green and gray land uses colors) and the Patterson property is predominantly CT3, Staffs analysis has determined that the project's currently proposed density falls within the guidelines of the Crozet Master Plan for the CT3 Edge designation within the Hamlet Place Type: Patterson Subdivision Patterson Subdivision Crozet Master Plan Patterson Subdivision Crozet Transect Densi Net Acres Acres Min Max Units Net Densi CT 3 Min 3,5 Max 4,5 3.521 2,82 10 13 10 3.55 Notes: Net acreage is 80% project area, Minimum, Mid, and Maximum Crozet Master Plan Suggested Units are determined by multiplying the CT 3 suggested densities for each CT type, For example, CT 3 Max is equal to 2,82 x 4,5, which equals 13 units, CT 1 and CT 2 areas, show no density, Crozet Master Plan anticipates very low density at 1 unit per 20 acres. The applicant's revised proposal limits the number of residential units to 1 a, with up to two being single family attached and the balance single family detached, The proffered concept plan now provided has been revised from the plan reviewed by the Commission to reduce the number of lots from 12 to 10. (See Attachment II) The applicant's proposal now specifies that 8 lots shall be a minimum of 10,000 square feet in size and that two lots will be no less than 9,000 square feet. This results in an average lot size of 10,000 square feet for the total area in lots, The Grayrock Homeowners Association continues to express concerns and their comments are provided as Attachment III. All other features of the concept plan have remained unchanged. The Subdivision Ordinance requires that the applicant provide curb, gutter, a planting strip, and sidewalks for all new streets. The applicant is not seeking an alternative design at this time, and any request for variation from these requirements would be subject to Commission approval at the time of subdivision, ZMA 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision BOS March 17, 2008 2 RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff had recommended approval of the rezoning since it appeared outstanding concerns of the Commission had been addressed, However, the Planning Commission has recommended denial of this rezoning as noted in the Background section of this Executive Summary, The applicant has addressed outstanding issues cited by the Commission in its recommendation for denial. However, the proposal has not been modified to the extent that it provides an edge area density for the entire property as cited by the Commissioners who voted to recommend denial of this rezoning, Should the Board find that this rezoning is approvable as currently proposed, staff recommends approval be inclusive of the proffers dated February 19, 2008 and signed March 13, 2008, which include the proffered concept plan, (Attachment I-Proffers and Attachment II-Proffered Concept Plan) ATTACHMENTS: I. Proffer Statement, dated February 19, 2008 and signed March 13,2008 II. Proffered Concept Plan, dated and received February 19, 2008 III, Grayrock Homeowners Association letter dated March 11, 2008 ZMA 2007-011 Patterson Subdivision BOS March 17,2008 Attachment I Original Proffer l PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: February 19,2008 ZMA # 2007-00011 Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 3,521 Acres to be rezoned from R-l to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-00011 known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"), 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, ifrezoned with the offered plans approved for development. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable, 1, AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"). Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan, In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of $19, 1 00, For example, if 15% equates to 1.8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide 1 Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of $15, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable Units minus 1,8 Affordable Units required equaling a 0.2 affordable overage) to Albemarle County, to meet the County's Affordable Housing Policy, A, The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the 15% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below, The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser of the Property, The current Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400,00) or sixty-five percent (65%) ofthe applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below, The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the home buyer, such as, but not limited to a second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein, All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph for the 15% required affordable housing shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing, For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units[GK: In the Oakleigh Farm rezoning, staff requested that the term "silent" be deleted from the proffer, so the same change is requested here,] i. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee, The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units. The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale, This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy, If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of purchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer, If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. 11. For-Rent Affordable Units 1. Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit when the Unites) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office, In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%). For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities, The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph I A(ii)(1) shall apply for a period of ten (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for- rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"), 2, Convevance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph lA. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph lA(ii). At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements ofthis paragraph lA(ii) have been satisfied, 3. Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then- current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably reqUIre, B. County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units, If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current ownerlbuilder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then- current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s). For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent ownerlbuilder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale. 2, CASH PROFFER A. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (Le" schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program, The cash contributions shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: 1. Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit 11, Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. 111. Zero Dollars ($0,00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit B, Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer Number 2 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/k/a Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein, In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers. The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the year preceding the calendar year most recently ended, For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year, 3. Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types, There shall be no more than 10 dwelling units within the development. Of the 10 dwelling units permitted there shall be no more than two single-family attached units, 4. The property shall be developed in general accord with the "Concept Plan" dated February 19,2008 attached hereto, ~~ &4,1'~~ Emile Bethann Patterson (Owner) By: Date: '~NO!J.~'1I93)l fiO~S.J^1<nlYJS Al.Nl10"J ..l..:l3W -,'11tis:. \'Jo!1')YlCl!SNO) ^-YfiI<t~Q'cl 03S0qO~ .t )3~?1t "S'~ ,3~'d'S~ 'l\l1~ ~9 13~Yd S~ dYW~'{!.'''='l3J<lVd: l-A~ ""()S~Vd 3NN'It1J.3g 3l1l..J3 :'(13NMO , . . ~"~OUYW(fQt,.." A1tl.~&CId '<2: "JdVN ^3^~,'Y1S lV,)t>O~ Sn hJo~j t-B)!V.l Nol1rVW'dO.:::ll'J1 :>JHd\;4~Od9..l 'z ~. , / ""--.. >\s,s:'" '0001 r'al ')3<1 <E.J..'1a ('~NI'31ve>'jJNtf HS.h~N(IYOc.1 ,Na // '-.., .... 6 d3~Vd:n:J\!,-q'1d HOCtf ti3ro ~q!L'I7'k~~NI ^~V<1wT\Q8 I ,~^' f ~ , ~'''1;\'' S 31 ON ,-f'>.;~ / /( . ""~'tJ Q'<O /~~.r .....: 0)' , /A~' l 0'-f, A.\..0 / " ',<, . ~~ ,/' i i) J>~ ~ 6/ r " ,', \, ~ / ........ _.0.' .-.. I ..I '", \, 't ~ 01 ~ ~ I /' ,{, \ ", \\ \,~ / p/ ,../,,/ >", I ",,\( r / / f.iYJ to ~ ' !,' ..... \\.,' , ) / / \ ,0 0' '\ " / hC"" ",,> ,// , ' ,6 \ 'iiJ' "- Cy ~ 1/ "~'( /. I , / / "- \ / T ~ I (//~ II lU<lwqJenv ,,0 -,os :::: .III :31VJS N'v'ld 1 illJ \\JO:J 9007. ( bl ~JOjl?.d- ~ ~ - = QJ e -= <:J ~ - - -< .:is 61t?'~'5 '01 I ,,/// " / / \ ./ . \ / / cjb\... / \ \ \ \ \. \ , =I <; ~ L S (~Z -. "cI ::nn:f ~\ 3.1.'1 l:::i CO\~ ;t.L\ll....1l Xo~L ~ .., ~..J..o....1 I ~s I o-vv ~ "'C:I3j..,t;::i Ole , ( ..:t >" ~ 'Z. -v :.t> 1:" 1:1 3 J 1/~ 01E::l ..:Ie:; oSL (-bl ~ ?j.3l.il.::!. 019. / / / / s / ~ .:::1 S 000 (0' = -LO/ 01 I =l S QOQ(9o/ ; 311 S j.O"1 3~V'(j.3^V ::l s 000 (00 I N \1H-L <;<;3 -, -LON -\;/ 3~iJ JOI -'VJ.O....L \ \ . Z 11 "'d3jiI::J ora QNtI <I. t1 o~ ~ <?J -:>3 NNO'v 13'J(jIJ-i ~3~N I. :3 Ti.L N33 ('I')..J.3t,l, -'cI3?Jt:.' 3-H1. <l3(l!^a~d. 3.,<d,ISSOd. ::f.<;)~"l SV <IN\! :I S c>oo(b N \i tI.l SS3, oN 3<t\. -1'1 'if!,~ Q I -t- b SJ.01 :-:l's 000(01 :I 0 W Yl WIN \ v-J \t ;1 ~ '1.,.IQ f-l $ g - ~ s 101 -,5 NOll Yl',1O 1 V:J 3 ~ \I <.: n Cl N Vl \ \ \ '\ c9 ///\ \ \ //\ ,/ ,/ /- < ./ ./ \ ./ /' ,/ ~ / \,)q' i>~x\ / '" ~. e; t;j'"'>, 1",1" /' J.. ., f" 'l' 11'\ y" / / / (J / 1 (J\C6 / ,,\) ~ -'\ "'D/ /// / _0 , Q /A\- /' ClOD O'y' ) ../ ,~ // ~ a-D &- / /' / 1\.nacnment 111 . PO Box 245 Crozet · Virginia" 22932 March 11,2008 Rebecca Ragsdale, Lead Planner Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 ... .. "_....._..__.........._.__...____.,._._............__.__.__._ .._ n. ."._......_.........._.".. Subject: Patterson Subdivision (ZMA2007011) Dear Ms Ragsdale: The Grayrock HOA has reviewed the latest revision to the subject proposal and requests that this letter be part of the read-ahead staffing package that is prepared for the Board of Supervisors (BOS) public hearing, . The Grayrock HOA continues to have concerns over the proposal as it exists before the BOS, While the applicant has reduced the number of dwellings from 12 to 10 since the Planning Commission (PC) hearing, we remain convinced that the proposed development still lacks consistency with the surrounding neighborhood and that safety/traffic concerns have not been adequately addressed, The proposed development calls for zoning and lot size that is not in concert with either Grayrock or the more rural setting to the West of the property. Based on the applicant's concept plan, the average lot size under this rezoning would be approximately 10,000 sf. By comparison, the 26 homes in Grayrock North average a lot size of 12,371 sf. The Patterson development as proposed would be a pocket of greater density in an area that otherwise serves as a transition from residential (R-4) zoning to the much more rural feel ofR-l zoning, The Grayrock HOA would prefer to see this parcel ofIand rezoned to nothing more dense than R-4, and that development site plans observe an average lot size consistent with Grayrock North, As vehicular access to the proposed development will be exclusively through Grayrock North, we remain deeply concerned by the prospect of an undefined increase in traffic on , Lanetown Way. Lanetown Way was built as a rural section of street (18' wide, no sidewalks), As such, it is used for pedestrian traffic and as play space fOf the neighborhoods 40+ children, As proposed, the development would add 10 new residences using Lanetown Way as their only access route, The 'interconnectivity spur' in the concept plan, could be the conduit for future additional traffic on Lanetown Way, We . , ,.. '- view the possibility of any traffic increase as very concerning for the safety of our children and the many pedestrians that enjoy walking and running throughout Grayrock and ask that it only be allowed ifthere is no other solution possible, The Grayrock HOA would like to see the applicant seriously investigate the possibility of accessing the parcel from Lanetown Rd, We note that the existing driveway the Patterson property is the same distance from Lanetown Way as Lanetown Way is from the next adjacent street connecting to Lanetown Rd (Orchard Dr). It would appear that minimum distance/sight line requirements could be met for access to the Patterson property from Lanetown Rd if the access were offset from center. If access from Lanetown Rd is absolutely not possible, we'd like to ask that the 'interconnectivity spur' be removed from the plan to limit the likelihood of future additional traffic on Lanetown Way. r While the Grayrock HOA acknowledges that the concept plan has moved in a positive direction when compared to what we originally saw in October 2007, we still feel that the proposed development is inconsistent with the surrounding area and that safety concerns for children and pedestrians on Lanetown Way have not been sufficiently addressed, The Grayrock HOA is not opposed to any development of the subject property however, we are opposed to the plan as proposed, The Grayrock HOA will have a representative at the BOS meeting and will be prepared to answer any questions from the BOS or Community Development staff. Sincerely, Jnec ff\u~ Tina Munchmeyer (j President, Grayrock HOA . . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE PLANNING STAFF REPORT SUMMARY Project Name: ZMA 2007-0011 Patterson Staff: Rebecca Ragsdale Subdivision Planning Commission Public Hearing: Board of Supervisors Public Hearing: January 22, 2008 March 19, 2008 Owners: Emile Bethanne Patterson & J, Daniel Applicant: Clifford H, Fox Patterson Acreage: 3.521 acres Rezone: R1 Residential to R6 Residential TMP: TMP 55-63 By-right use: 1 dwelling unit per acre residential uses, potentially up to five units with bonus/clustering provisions; supporting uses permitted in R-1 such as schools, churches, and clubs by special use permit. Magisterial District: White Hall Proffers: Yes Proposal: Single Family subdivision Requested # of Dwelling Units: 12, gross density of 3.4 units/acre; net density of 4,26/acre DA (Development Area): Community of Crozet Comp, Plan Designation: CT 3 Urban Edge in a Hamlet in the Crozet Master Plan Character of Property: Rural residential with an Use of Surrounding Properties: rural residential, Gray existing house Rock North subdivision Factors Favorable: Factors Unfavorable: 1, The rezoning is consistent with the Crozet 1. The applicant has not made proffer commitments Master Plan recommendations for to features of the concept plan that has been density, provided. However, the maximum number of 2, The applicant has provided for impacts to residential units has been proffered, public facilities through cash proffers, 3. The applicant has provided affordable housing consistent with County policy, RECOMMENDATION: Staff believes the applicant has addressed outstanding issues that led to the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial. Therefore, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2007-11 with the attached proffers. STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS REBECCA RAGSDALE January 22, 2008 March 12, 2008 ZMA 07-12 PATTERSON SUBDIVISION PETITION PROJECT: ZMA 2007 - 00011 Patterson Subdivision PROPOSAL: Rezone 3.52 acres from R1 - Residential (1 uniUacre) to R6 - Residential (6 units/acre) to allow for up to 12 dwelling units, PROFFERS: Yes EXISTING COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY: Community of Crozet; CT-3 Urban Edge: single family residential (net 3,5-6,5 units/acre) supporting uses such as religious institutions and schools and other small-scale non-residential uses ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: No LOCATION: Between Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way approximately 400 yards from the intersection of Mint Springs Road, Lanetown Road, and Railroad Avenue, TAX MAP/PARCEL: Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: White Hall BACKGROUND: 10/16/07 Planning Commission Public Hearing A public hearing was held on this rezoning at the Planning Commission on October 16, 2007 and the Commission supported staff's recommendation for denial of the rezoning and accompanying waivers of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and street tree requirements, This motion for deni~1 included a number of outstanding issues, which will be addressed later in the report. 12/12/07 Board of Supervisors This item was scheduled for a public hearing at the December 12, 2008 Board of Supervisors meeting. The applicant submitted a revised concept plan and proffers for this Board hearing following the Commission public hearing on November 9,2007. However, based on staff's recommendation, and subsequently the request of the applicant, the rezoning was referred back to the Planning Commission, This staff report reflects review of the applicant's revised plan and proffers submitted prior to the Board hearing, CHARACTER OF THE AREA The property is 3,521 acres in size, with an existing house that dates to 1900, and is zoned R1 Residential. Properties adjacent to the north and west are zoned R1 and are low density residential, similar in character to the Patterson property, To the south and east of the property is the Grayrock north subdivision, which is zoned PRO and developed as single family homes on an average lot size of % acre, approximately 4 dwelling units per acre, (Attachment A-Zoning and Attachment B-Aerial Map) BY-RIGHT USE OF THE PROPERTY The current zoning of the property is R1 Residential. R1 zoning allows a density of 0,97 units per acre and minimum lot sizes of 45,000 square feet. Through clustering and bonus density provisions, R1 zoning allows a density of 1.45 units per acre and minimum lot sizes 2 . . . of 20,000 square, Since the property is 3.521 acres in size, up to 5 dwelling units may be possible if criteria were met for clustering/bonus provisions, SPECIFICS OF PROPOSAL On November 9, 2007, the applicant submitted a revised concept plan, including reduced residential density, and revised proffers, The concept plan proposes 12 residential lots, served by a public street off Lanetown Way that would end in a cul-de-sac and a future interconnection to the west. The revised concept plan includes elimination of the open space dedication to the County, provides for an interconnection to the properties to the west, and demonstrates workable stormwater management concepts, However, while the applicant has proffered limitations on the number of residential units, the applicant has not proffered the concept plan. The applicant no longer proposes waivers to the Subdivision Ordinance of curb, gutter, sidewalk, and planting strip requirements and intends to provide those features on both sides of the new streets within the proposed development. Concept Plan The concept plan submitted was revised from the plan reviewed by the Commission and includes some additional detail. (See insets below and Attachment C and Attachment F) 11> 11,,., DN LA~P IJSA(~ CALI:LLAll0NS' l::: :t..:.::;.'! ~: ==:: .... ~ .'1&11'" Lztll 1'ttt.XI" LM., 'l'ftf.J:1 II a.-~ m\ftI9" l.#t. '''",'''''' !At 10 "'}UM'" bt" .rC"...., II I.JIl TJ B:=": '~f ~ ~,.,..,a~fI ..".... ........_.... 1lU1,',1'l' .....".. I '~",lln '" ftt.....:z~,U' .... ...... ... !~.::: ur:su u... .."" ., q, fll:.'cl'.Ul ...~_ ",/' ~. ::5l.l.bcl,II.Si....... -/ ./ vJ-I"l:~?--===-'-'- r:=,,~. ' .. .~~y;r__,v//----\-_. --_/'~ \ \ ---.-" ''- c:r \ \ \ I ,}~~;7V:=r I~ . '\""\ \ [ cf."l " " !(" ;''''-,;. ---- , \ \ .,,~\~ , r \ ~/ \ $) .._'~...;. \, ~o~ ,..r 1"III.tlt II' \. g;.)" ./" ~~,. \ ~ <,G".# '" <iP -;;..'" '" ","f- ,,-'" <it-/~"}'" ~/<;J ........, "",' /," I r r. ~,-" "n.., k ,/_......' .".... '" ..___~, ~/~~ t:r~--;~~tt--"j!---'-,,' -\\ \. /~~- \'~,,\ \ .-/~~ \. t'! \ ........ '=~\\ -.. \..~ '\ \..""... ..w.Rt5l' \,\\ '\ ~~. .~...'" , .~~~~ //\\\,~ /~'/"~t ~~ ~\ ,/ \\ '\,\,/~...._". \~ ~ '''';\~' ......n'F j:},\<\~~ ,l{\ : , /' \~ .~\ / 1 '~\ ff' \ .,.,~ \ \ \\\ .,.,,,,"~l \( \ .. .,., \ ~- \ .. \ " - ........" " ) \~ ' '''M.. ~'\ \ ~.l,."_\ \ .-- ;;' \ \ ~ -,-~,,/ ", ",,"'/ \{ ~'-~~ ".."'" or'" _--....,.r .\ //' ~........ ...",- -~...... -"U.'i1I't.f l ", ,1tl; "(. ...-~" :\.. 1;\/ '\.;/..~y " " 1./ "} \ -;r '<:L"'~"""" ... Jli .!/t)~ \ /",'" "...,.... ~"~ " > \ "!,,'" 4,.ofU"';\4J" \. , 'I " ,v~ ..... " f..'f4.lDl!f' 'I' 1I".J,. ..... v ...~,__.// ,./ ..~' '''.... if ..~,. #A:-~ ,~~ ',,,;' Q-f' r,"~~...../I"ff I/~" ~~ '-, ':7 s ~ ";', ..... '.. " ...... '..,. -# ,../ ~ ~ oS ~.(' /' !:ll<lll. '. ........"" Itftf'.wrm TtKM ~ ,a~TPl/EIl'~P D'I' IO.NaI.IIl ... ~ IIt~ DMCD IE 14 JC1IlD. l.~""";nrcr.ww.ft1SRJ'I'ItOIVIl'J~&.1li,.~Il.-.s. 1io'1tiAa"I~CII' ~PJ DUlnI... ~ 111 ".w.:a- ,........ tI\ f'CIQI. .., '1'l::r.IloL~~I~ ~3' J.91 ~a 4-~tlIlO~,~ .FOOI'...-c~.Q.e:I.G.l.. .1"'JOT1IIf&~""""S1fI"r4Ifttrtll'....Y :5 nY..T "11UICWI.k at ~ P-.:.. <"'""1- I I "''''f- ; l--- ! l s...p,\~~~:_~!- _"" ~_ .--- ..,.,.~- :sc-,.-lL 1~"'5o' -- ... ....)0:, __ .,..o~;.r vlft't .:.- \ ""~ CONCEPT PLAN SCALE: ,. - :r:.' _ tr' Concept Plan, 9/10/07 Revised Concept Plan, 11/9/07 ZMA 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Planning Commission 1/22/08 Boara of Supervisors 3/17./08 3 APPLICANT'S JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REQUEST The applicant has indicated that this project would provide a range of housing stock that will include affordable units, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: Crozet Master Plan The property is located within a Neighborhood as defined in the Crozet Master Plan, at the edge of the northwestern edge of the Crozet Development Area, The northern boundary of the Community of Crozet follows Lanetown Road adjacent to this property, (see inset below and Crozet Master Plan Attachment H) Crozet Master Plan Place Type and Built Infrastructure Map Site Proposed for rezoning , .' Density The applicant had originally proposed up to 14 residential units, which included 10 single family detached units and 4 single family attached (townhouse) units, The staff report provided to the Planning Commission for the October 16, 2007 public hearing mistakenly identified the applicant's property as being designated CT 3 in a Neighborhood on the Crozet Master Plan (CMP) Place-Type & Built Infrastructure map, However, the property is designated CT3 within a Hamlet, The CMP recommends a maximum net density of up to 4,5 units per acre in Hamlets and does not recommend the provision of up to 6,5 units per acre if accessory apartments added for 50% of the residential stock, The applicant's revised proposal limits the number of residential units to 12 with up to four being single family attached and the balance single family detached, The proposed density lMA 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Planning Commissior 1/22/08 Board of Supervisors 3/1L/OS 4 . falls within the guidelines of the Crozet Master Plan for the CT3 Edge designation within the Hamlet Place Type: Crozet Patterson Patterson Subdivision Master Plan Subdivision I Acres Net Crozet Transect Density Acres Min Max Units Net Density CT 3 (Min 3,5, Max 4,5) 3,521 2,82 10 13 12 4,26 Notes: Net acreage is 80% project area, Minimum and Maximum Crozet Master Plan Suggested Units are determined by multiplying the CT 3 suggested densities for each CT type, For example, CT 3 Max is equal to 2.82 x 4,5, which equals 13 units. The CMP also recommends a 10,000 square foot average lot size for Hamlets, The applicant's proposal includes a range of lot sizes from 7,699 to 10,515 square feet in size with an average lot size of 8,839 square feet. The area in lot development and the average lot size has resulted from the provision of the two separate bio-filter areas to provide on-site stormwater management. Lot size has been a concern of the adjoining neighborhood Grayrock, The Grayrock Homeowners Association has expressed their concerns in the attached letter, (Attachment G) If biofilters were placed on individual lots, this could result in average lot sizes of 10,000 square feet or more per lot; however, it is preferable to have stormwater management facilities such as biofilters outside of lots, . The Green Infrastructure map in the Master Plan reflects open space resources and shows proposed greenways behind neighborhoods, along the ponds in Gray Rock and to Lanetown Road, The intent is to provide access for these neighborhoods to Downtown and other park destinations, (See inset below,) . ,/ .~. ':,'r: " :' /. ' ~,J'. j . yo , .. ' :~ .J '- I,: " : ; ~,.' .' "~ , y~~ .. The Green Infrastructure Plan does not show any environmental features or call for open space/greenway provisions on the applicant's property, The revised concept plan does . ZMA 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Planning Commission 1/22/08 board of Supervisors 3/17./08 5 not propose a recreation area/park of approximately 0,80 acres adjacent to Lanetown Road, which was originally proposed but not supported by County Parks and Recreation, Neighborhood Model The Neighborhood Model describes the more "urban" form of development desired for the Development Areas, The following is an assessment of this proposal's consistency with the Neighborhood Model's 12 principles: Pedestrian Orientation Neighborhood Friendly Streets and Paths Interconnected Streets and Transportation Networks Parks and Open Space Neighborhood Centers Building and Spaces of Human Scale Mixture of Uses Relegated Parking The applicant is now proposes to meet ordinance requirements and all new streets within the development will have 5' sidewalks on both sides of the street. This rinci Ie is met. New projects within the Development Areas are expected to have curb, gutter, sidewalk, and planting strips as features of streets servicing new development and this is a requirement of the Subdivision Ordinance. The applicant is providing these features so this rinci Ie will be met. VDOT recommends that only one entrance be provided to this relatively small property through Lanetown Way, through Gray Rock North and that there be no access through the property to Lanetown Road because of driveway spacing issues on that road, (Attachment E) The revised concept plan now also shows an interconnection to the ad' oinin ro erties to the west. This rinci Ie is met. The applicant is proposing conventional lots and there are no recreation requirements in the ordinance based on the number of units proposed, Future greenway trails, eventually planned to connect this part of Crozet to Mint Springs park, which is about a mile from the site, are located near this property, which is the closest park to this property, Future Western Park will be located within Old Trail and is also about a mile from the ro'ect site, This rinci les is met. Downtown Crozet and Old Trail, with its proposed center, appear to be the closest nei hborhood centers, This rinci Ie is met. The applicant is proposing a residential development under R-6 zoning, which allows a maximum building height of 35 feet and front setbacks of 25', Typically, shallower setbacks are more in keeping with the Neighborhood Model. Street trees and sidewalks provide a reater sense of enclosure and will be rovided, This rinci Ie is met. Given the Crozet Master Plan designation of CT3, non-residential uses are not ex ected on this ro ert . This rinci Ie is met. The applicant's concept plan does not demonstrate how parking will be provided and whether garages would be associated with the single family units. There is no information for staff to comment on whether this rinci Ie will be met. 6 j . Mixture of Housing Types and Affordability Redevelopment Site Planning that Respects Terrain Clear Boundaries with the Rural Areas The applicant is proposing 12 residential units and has proffered to meet the Affordable Housing Policy. (Attachment D) According to the policy, the applicant is expected to provide 15% of the total number of units as affordable, which is 1,8 units in this proposal. The applicant has proffered to provide either 2 affordable units, or one affordable unit and cash-in-lieu for 0,8 unit. This has been reviewed by the Housin Director and is acce table. This rinci Ie is met. The property is redeveloping from rural residential to density in keeping with the Crozet Master Plan and the existing house will be demolished and it has not been identified as a significant historic resource. This rinci Ie is met. The site is relatively flat and topography is shown on the aerial exhibit submitted by the applicant. (Attachment B) No conceptual grading has been provided, There is no information for staff to comment on this rinci Ie; however, it a ears this rinci Ie could be met. Lanetown Road delineates the edge of the Rural Areas/Crozet Development Area. This principle is met. Relationship between the application and the purpose and intent of the requested zoning district The applicant has requested a rezoning to R6 Residential and the intent of that district in the Ordinance and lot and setback requirements are provided here: . This district (hereafter referred to as R-6) is to provide a plan implementation zone that: -Provides for compact, medium-density residential development; (Amended 9-9-92) - Permits a variety of housing types; and -Provides incentives for clustering of development and provision oflocational, environmental and developmental amenities. R-6 districts may be permitted within community and urban area locations recommended for medium-density residential use in the comprehensive plan, (Amended 9-9-92) 16.3 ARIA .-\..";0 BULK RIGI.1ATIOl\'S .;P,~A .~iD 3UIK REGU:AT:C~8 REQT,;I REI1E:n,S Gress density ~-1inimum Lot Size ,STANDARD :'EVE:' :ONVEN~ICNAL::.r.;S~ER DEVE:'OFl1ENI DEVELO?HE:rr 6 dUiaC1'e 6 dn,'acre (Added -;>-17 -85) 7,160 s it )>A BCl;:! S LEVE:' c::mvn:r:o)l;'.:' CLUSTER DE~~:'02r~)IT DE\~LCP~)I~ 9 du-:acre 9du-'acre 4,840 s ft, N:A Y81'd.~, minimum: F~cnt 25 feel 25 feet 25 feet 15 feet Side(') 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 10 feet 20 feet 10 feet 10 feet ! M:ininmw. ;lde \'!!-ds ;,haU be I'educed to nOlle;; than tl!l1 (10 feet in accordance with section .1.11.3, (Ameodedl-1-113) ~-1aximum StlUcture hei!!ht 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet The R-4 Zoning district was also discussed with the applicant and has been suggested as more appropriate by neighboring property owners, The intent of the R-4 district is essentially the same as R-6, except that it notes that it is intended to provide for compact, medium density, single family development. However, both districts allow . Z~/]A 07-11 Patterson Subdivision Planning Commission 1/22/08 Board of Supervisors 3/12/08 7 attached units, The applicant is proposing a gross density of 3.4 dwelling units per acre but would like flexibility in lot size so is requesting R6 Zoning, which allows a minimum of 4,840 square feet with bonus/clustering provision, However, regardless of the zoning district proposed, the applicant has proffered a maximum of 12 units on the property, which limits density, Considering the particulars of this property, staff believes R-6 Zoning is acceptable and the applicant's proposal meets the intent of that zoning district. As the applicant is proffering to limit the number of units to 12, it is assured that density will not exceed what could be achieved under R4 Zoning, Staff believes that the size, configuration of the parcel, and number of units makes it unlikely that any other plan could be created, except one with fewer units, Anticipated impact on public facilities and services Environmental & Stormwater Manaaement- There are no environmental resources on this property that would be impacted by the proposed development. The County Engineer has reviewed the revised concept plan and indicates the open space areas for stormwater management appear to be adequate to meet the ordinance requirements, This site drains to Lickinghole Basin, and a pro- rated fee will be assessed for the site's water quality, Water quality BMP's provided on the concept plan appear to be more than required by ordinance, Streets - The property has access to both Lanetown Road and Lanetown Way, through Gray Rock North, VDOT recommends that only the connection to Lanetown Way be made because the proposed connection to route 684 is less that 200 feet from the closest intersection and that is not a desirable situation, The revised concept plan now provides for an interconnection to the adjoining property to the west. No interconnection to Lanetown Road is provided, in keeping with VDOT's recommendations, Schools - Students from this development, which would be expected to generate about 6 students, would impact Crozet area schools and likely attend Crozet Elementary School, Henley Middle School and Western Albemarle High School. Cash impacts are intended to provide for impacts to schools. Fire. Rescue. Police - The Crozet Volunteer Fire Station and the Western Albemarle Rescue Station provide fire and rescue services to the area, The planned Ivy Area Station will also augment services provide by the two existing fire and rescue stations Crozet. The service objective of the Community Facilities Plan is to achieve an average response time (how long it takes once the call is dispatched from ECC until a fire apparatus arrives on scene) to fire emergency calls of five minutes or less in the Development Areas and an average response time to rescue emergency calls of four minutes or less in the Development Areas, Albemarle County Fifth Street Office Building contains the County's Police Department, although police patrol all areas of the County, The service objective of the Community Facilities Plan is to achieve an average response time of five minutes or less to all emergency calls 85 percent of the time in the designated Development Areas, This achieved through their sector/beat system, Police satellite offices are recommended within a service sector to help achieve these desired response times to all police emergency calls and there is a small police office located within The Meadows 8 ~niI5C' . . . Community Building, although not staffed at all times, The possibility of an additional fire/rescue/police station is under consideration for the area in 2012. Utilities - This property is in the Albemarle County Service Authority's jurisdictional area for water and sewer service. There is an 8 inch water in Lanetown Way approximately 25' from the property, Fire flow from the nearest public hydrant, located 30' away is 3,030 gpm +/- at 20 psi residual. An 8 inch sewer line is located approximately 135' distant. Offsite sewer plans and easements will be required. Anticipated impact on cultural and historic resources Existing structures on the property would be demolished with this proposal and the existing structure on the property has not been determined significant. Anticipated impact on nearby and surrounding properties Neighbors within the adjoining Grayrock North development have expressed concerns about this proposal changing the character of the area and also about Lanetown Way serving as access to it. In the Development Areas, however, development is expected and this property is designated CT3 in the Crozet Master Plan, Public need and justification for the change The change in zoning is consistent with the CT3 designation of the Land Use Plan and would provide for residential capacity in a Development Area, SUMMARY The applicant has attempted to address outstanding issues that led to the Commission's recommendation for denial of the rezoning at the October 16, 2007 Public Hearing. Each issue is noted below with staff comments on how the applicant has responded to that item in bold italics. Cash Proffers-$3,OOO per market rate unit proffered, There were 10 market rate units proposed and the Board's expectation for single family detached (SFD) units to offset their impacts to public facilities is $17,500 per unit. The applicant has now provided cash proffers, meeting County policy guidelines, to address impacts to public facilities. Affordable Housina Proffer- It was unclear in the proffers the number of units being proffered, The applicant has now provided for affordable housing in the proffers using standard language and meeting County policy. Affordable Accessory Units Proffers- This proffer was unclear and did not define accessory units, The applicant had proffered that half of the SFD units proposed, or a total of 5, would have affordable accessory units, The applicant is no longer proposing accessory units and has eliminated this proffer. Open Space Dedication to the Countv- The applicant proposed to proffer approximately 0.80 acres of open space, adjacent to Lanetown Road, to the County for parks and recreation purposes, The dedication was not desired by Parks & Recreation and there is no park shown for this property in the Crozet Master Plan. The applicant is no longer proposing an open space/park dedication to the County and has eliminated this proffer. .-,,\1:' 9 ,,, Concept Plan- The applicant had not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that had been provided. However, the maximum number of residential units and provision of open space were proffered, The applicant has not proffered the concept plan but has still provided a proffer limiting the number of dwelling units on the property to no more than 12. Some Commissioners noted the following additional reasons for not supporting the project in discussion: . The proposed conceptual layout was not sympathetic to the adjoining neighborhood, . This proposal was not right for this area and there were concerns about the density of this project at this location in Crozet. The applicant has reduced the total number of proposed units from 14 to 12 since the Planning Commission public hearing. . The applicant did not provide acceptable submittal materials with sufficient information on the concept plan, The applicant has provided a revised concept plan that includes additional information. . There were infrastructure concerns, including sufficient water capacity, School capacity issues were also a concern, with students recently moved from Crozet to Brownsville Elementary School. Storm water and erosion was cited as a problem in Gray Rock and this project did not include workable stormwater concepts, The ACSA has not indicated capacity concerns. The applicant has provided cash proffers to address impacts to schools. The applicant has provided workable on-site storm water provisions that exceed ordinance requirements. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this rezoning and special use permits requested: 1, The rezoning is consistent with the Crozet Master Plan recommendations for density. 2, The applicant has provided for impacts to public facilities through cash proffers. 3. The applicant has provided affordable housing consistent with County policy, Staff has identified factors unfavorable to this request: 1. The applicant has not made proffer commitments to features of the concept plan that has been provided, However, the maximum number of residential units has been proffered, RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: Staff believes the applicant has addressed outstanding issues that led to the Planning Commission's recommendation for denial. Therefore, staff recommends approval of ZMA 2007-11 with the attached proffers, 10 :0 . . . ATTACHMENTS A. Zoning Map B. Aerial Map C. Concept Plan, dated 11/9/07 D. Proffers, dated and December 1, 2007 E. VDOT comments F. Concept Plan, dated 9/10/07 G. Grayrock Homeowners Association letter, dated H. Crozet Master Plan Place Type & Built Infrastructure Map ZMA ()711 Patterson SUbdivision Pi.cmning Cornmisslon Iln '08 Board of Supervisors 3/12;08 11 I a J f < [ I J 1 I I I J I i il <1z .... . I i I := j I I '~ eo I I ! J i ~ I . . f I ~Q~ ilJ .Ii I I I I ! I J I ! ~ ~ f ~ hi~ e l J I f ~ ! ! i ! J . J i ;; m E " 2 . . l B l ! . ch~i~ .cl 5:0: '~ ~ 1 r . .. ... .... ..rn Ji- ~ f N '" ~ ~ s i ~ i ! t I I I J f J i f B f i i J . l ! . Ii OJ I 101 1 ., 10 c:: o f CI) ~ ca a.. \0 o:t I I/) I/) v~E:~~ .!j ~ J ~ 'G fF"f,~ ~1.~~ ~~ I/) o:t I I/) I/) ~ ~ . ...... Q Q N <( :E N P'l o:t I I/) I/) LI- o o:t I I/) I/) \0 ~ . CC ... o:t I I/) I/) ... o:t I I/) I/) ~ - ~ = Q,l e .:l ~ ~ ~ ..... J < 15 ~ z t<') ...oQ..., ~~ ~~ 1.1") . 5 Lt")U ft-> ~~ I-, ><~ ~'"'"" -= ' 'I ~ i ! tl r .<' j] ..a! ~il t ~" !I:} i~{R '0 ,11 lii~ ] ~~J !~t= hJ Jlji ~ .s:.!i iftU l 1'O! J! ~~! I , jj 111 - ..~l lS~~ l u - = ~ e -= CJ = - - -< , , S ~6tTZt't , /, -1f O~./ ",9~ ... ).. / e 9 0V ~/ ' ~O~'J ... C) /).,Y ./ VO~', &~A' / -0/ / ~ '\.; / ' / A. ',. / , '< /' , // ,. ',/ \ , // \ / ,aa, OO~ 09 at o 09 Ol ,0<; = ,,~ ::::JlVJS NVld Id3JNOJ ,,0 (()'v () ~~ T-- .~q, ~~ rlS tL8'lOt't , !P < 0' . 0'>> :// ~y --0 ' \ Cy .,1 , / \ / '\ <;<6 L- ..:IS LOL'Z~t'8 \ \ \ / , h \ . / ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ~ C) :::0 """'l :t: <;0L- \ '"Q \P. ,~ \~, ~( ~\ " ~. '\ ./ ~~ ./,./ U'l, ./' ^ VM ..:10 lH~ltJ 301M 100..:1 Ot l3JtJVd HJV3 NO )jlVM30IS 301M 100.:l <; ^ VM ..:10 lH81tJ NI dimS 8NllNVld 301M 100..:1 9 tJ311n8 If? 8tJnJ '^ VMOVOtJ 301M 100..:1 8Z NOllJntJ1SNOJ ^ VMOVOtJ O3S0dOtJd 't S3tJJV lZ<;T :38VtJ3JV S3tJJV lZ<; T :38VtJ3JV lV 101 ~9 l3JtJVd '<;<; dVV'-J XVl :l3JtJVd V'-Jl NOStJ311 Vd 3NNVH138 3llV'-J3 :tJ3NMO : V'-JO 11 VV'-JtJO..:lNI HtJ3dOtJd T 'SdVV'-J ^3^tJnS lVJ180l03~ sn V'-JdOtJ.:l N3)Nl NO 11 V'-JV tJO..:lN I JIHdVtJ~Od01 'Z 'OOOZ '8l J30 031 VO "JNI '3lV8 ONV HSn8VOnOtJ ^8 O3tJVd3tJd 1 Vld V'-JOtJ.:l N3)jVl NOllV'-JVtJO..:lNI ^tJVONn08 'l S 31 0 N ..:IS 6lY<;l<;'Ol \ ./ ./ /"\ ./ \ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ 008 ./ ./ ./ ..:IS 90<;'9t9'8 ./ ./ ./ ./ \ \ \ ./ . ././ \ ././ \ ././ \ ./ ./ \ \~ ./" a ./ \ ~\ ./ ' ./ \'9r ./ ' , ./ ./ ~\ ~ ././ ~\.~ \ ../....\ ././ \ ./ ././ \ ././ \ ./,./\ ./ / ./ ./ / ././ ~/ ./ q,'4 ' ./ / ,{ ./ c..c.. /.~1J ./ / /' ~~ \'y' ~, S8.J:JD f..DM :J.O ly5!tJ ..:IS 66'9lltZ .:lS tL8'lOtt ~ .Jall!:J. 0!8 ..:IS ~6tTZtt Z .Jall!:J. 0!8 .:lS Z9'l6Z<;l l .Jall!:J. Ol8 :az!s 101 a5D.Ja^v sa.J:JD Z~~Z~<; '0 <;9~<;<; '0 sa.J:JD Lll'6~88 8l0<;~t'Z.J0 .:lS Y6909m LO~'t098 Zt'<;l<;Ol Z9<;'l~l6 <;<;l'99~6 66<;'l806 ZO~'669L ZO~'669L 99l'6rl6 6t L 't~Z6 90<;'9t98 <;Z9 '8l <;8 .:lS LOL 'Z~t8 :S NO 11 V'l nJlV'J 3~V'S n Zl 10l II 10l m 10l 6 10l 8 10l L 10l 9 10l <; 10l t 10l ~ tOl Z 10l l tOl ONV'l ..:IS <;<; l'99~'6 .:lS 6tL.t~Z'6 ..:IS 66<;'l80'6 ..:IS 99l'6U'6 ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ./ ..:IS ZO~'669'L ^' / ~~ Q) ,,') ()() () y ~~ () --0 c} / 0\<0 / \-\\~ / \ ~;, /' ..:IS 6l9'l6Z'<; l / / ,"~.~ -u'4, ~ '7 '4 , / / -u~ \ /' / " q,..... "~. ~ ~ ,fI \ \ \ \ . . . Attachment D Original Proffer l PROFFER FORM Date of Proffer Signature: ZMA # 2007-00011 Tax Map 55 Parcel Number 63 December 1, 2007 3,521 Acres to be rezoned from R-1 to R-6 Patterson Subdivision Emile Bethanne Patterson is the owner (the "Owner") of Tax Map 55, Parcel 63 (the "Property") which is the subject of rezoning application ZMA 2007-00011 known as "Patterson Subdivision" (the "Project"). 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 it is acknowledged that the conditions are reasonable. 1. AFFORDABLE HOUSING The Owner shall provide affordable housing equal to fifteen percent (15%) of the total residential dwelling units within the Project in the form of for lease or for sale affordable dwelling units (the "Affordable Dwelling Units" or "Affordable Units"), Each subdivision plat and site plan for land within the Property shall designate the lots or units, as applicable, that will, subject to the terms and conditions of this proffer, incorporate Affordable Units as described herein, and the aggregate number of such lots or units designated for Affordable Units within each subdivision plat and site plan shall constitute a minimum of fifteen percent (15%) of the lots in such subdivision plat or site plan, In the event that the number of Affordable Dwelling Units to achieve 15% results in a fractional unit, the Owner shall contribute cash to the County in a proportionate amount based on the amount of$19,100, For example, if 15% equates to 1,8 Affordable Units, the Owner would provide 1 Affordable Unit pursuant to the terms described herein, and would contribute cash to the County in the amount of $15, 280 be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the first Affordable Dwelling Unit. The Owner reserves the right, however, to provide two (2) Affordable Units and concede, or gift, the fractional monetary interest, (2 Affordable units minus 1,8 affordable units required equaling a 0,2 affordable overage) to Albemarle County, to meet the County's affordable housing requirement. 2, A. The Affordable Dwelling Units shall be comprised of single-family attached housing (townhouses) or single family detached houses at the Owner's option. The Owner or his successor in interest reserves the right to achieve the 15% Affordable Dwelling Units in a variety of ways, utilizing the above mentioned unit types alone or in combination as outlined below. The Owner shall convey the responsibility of constructing the affordable units to any subsequent purchaser ofthe Property. The current Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page 1 of4 Owner or subsequent Owner shall create units affordable to households with incomes less than 80% of the area median family income (the "Affordable Unit Qualifying Income"), such that housing costs consisting of principal, interest, real estate taxes and homeowner's insurance (PITI) do not exceed 30% of the Affordable Unit Qualifying Income; provided, however, that in no event shall the selling price of such Affordable Units be required to be less than the greater of One Hundred Ninety Thousand Four Hundred Dollars ($190,400.00) or sixty-five percent (65%) of the applicable Virginia Housing Development Authority (VHDA) maximum mortgage for first-time home buyers at the beginning of the 90-day identification and qualification period referenced below. The Owner or his successor in interest may at its option facilitate the provision of down payment assistance loans to reduce the out-of-pocket cash requirement costs to the homebuyer, such as, but not limited to a "silent" second lien Deed of Trust, so that the resultant first mortgage and housing costs remain at or below the parameters described herein, All financial programs or instruments described herein must be acceptable to the primary mortgage lender. Any "silent" second lien Deed of Trust executed as part of this paragraph shall be donated to the County of Albemarle or its designee to be used to address affordable housing, For purposes of calculating the price of the Affordable Dwelling Units, the value of Seller-paid closing costs shall be excluded from the selling price of such Affordable Dwelling Units. i. For-Sale Affordable Units - All purchasers of for-sale Affordable Units shall be approved by the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee, The Owner shall provide the County or its designee a period of ninety (90) days to identify and pre-qualify an eligible purchaser for the Affordable Units. The 90-day period shall commence upon written notice from the Owner that the units will be available for sale. This notice shall not be given more than 120 days prior to the anticipated receipt of the certificate of occupancy. If the County or its designee does not provide a qualified purchaser during this ninety (90) day period, the Owner shall have the right to sell the Unit(s) without any restriction on sales price or income ofpurchaser(s); provided, however, that any Units(s) sold or leased without such restriction shall nevertheless be counted toward the number of Affordable Units required to be provided pursuant to the terms of this proffer. If these Units are sold, this proffer shall apply only to the first sale of each unit. Nothing herein shall preclude the then-current Owner/builder from working with the County Housing Department prior to the start of the notification periods described herein in an effort to identify qualifying purchasers for Affordable Units. 11, For-Rent Affordable Units 1, Rental Rates For-Lease Affordable Units The initial net rent for each for-rent Affordable Unit when the Unit(s) is available for occupancy shall not exceed the then-current and applicable maximum net rent as published by the County Housing Office, In each subsequent calendar year, the monthly net rent for each for-rent affordable unit may be increased up to three percent (3%), For purposes of this proffer statement, the term "net rent" means that the rent does not include tenant-paid utilities, The requirement that the rents for such for-rent Affordable Units may not exceed the maximum rents established in this paragraph lA(ii)(1) shall apply for a period often (10) years following the date the certificate of occupancy is issued by the County for each for-rent Affordable Unit, or until the units are sold as affordable units as defined by the County's Affordable Housing Policy, whichever comes first (the "Affordable Term"), 2. Conveyance of Interest - All instruments conveying any interest in the for-rent affordable units during the Affordable Term shall contain language reciting that such unit is subject to the terms of this paragraph lA. In addition, all contracts pertaining to a conveyance of any for-rent affordable Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page 2 014 . . . unit, or any part thereof, during the Affordable Term shall contain a complete and full disclosure of the restrictions and controls established by this paragraph lA(ii), At least thirty (30) days prior to the conveyance of any interest in any for-rent affordable unit during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall notify the County in writing of the conveyance and provide the name, address and telephone number of the potential grantee, and state that the requirements of this paragraph lA(ii) have been satisfied, 3, Reporting of Rental Rates - During the Affordable Term, within thirty (30) days of each rental or lease term for each for-rent affordable unit, the then-current owner shall provide to the Albemarle County Housing Office a copy of the rental or lease agreement for each such unit rented that shows the rental rate for such unit and the term of the rental or lease agreement. In addition, during the Affordable Term, the then-current owner shall provide to the County, if requested, any reports, copies of rental or lease agreements, or other data pertaining to rental rates as the County may reasonably require. B, County Option for Cash In Lieu of Affordable Units. If at any time prior to the County's approval of any preliminary site plan or subdivision plat for the subject property which includes one or more for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units, the Housing Office informs the then-current owner/builder in writing that it may not have a qualified purchaser for one or more of the for-sale Affordable Dwelling Units at the time that the then-current owner/builder expects the units to be completed, and that the Housing Office will instead accept a cash contribution to the Housing Office to support affordable housing programs in the amount of Nineteen Thousand One Hundred Dollars ($19,100) in lieu of each Affordable Unites), then the then-current owner/builder shall pay such cash contribution to the County prior to obtaining a certificate of occupancy for the Unites) that were originally planned to be Affordable Dwelling Units, and the then- current owner/builder shall have the right to sell the Unites) without any restriction on sales price or income of the purchaser(s), For the purposes of this proffer, such Affordable Dwelling Units shall be deemed to have been provided when the subsequent owner/builder provides written notice to the Albemarle County Office of Housing or its designee that the Affordable Units(s) will be available for sale, 3, CASH PROFFER A. The Owner shall contribute cash to the County in the following amounts for each dwelling unit constructed within the Property that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit. The cash contribution shall be used to address the fiscal impacts of development on the County's public facilities and infrastructure (i.e., schools, public safety, libraries, parks and transportation) identified in the County's Capital Improvements Program. The cash contributions shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit for the category of units described in this paragraph 2 in the following amounts: 1. Eleven Thousand Nine Hundred Dollars ($11,900) for each attached town home/condominium unit that is not an Affordable Dwelling Unit 11. Seventeen Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($17,500) for each single family detached dwelling unit. 111. Zero Dollars ($0,00) for each Affordable Dwelling Unit B, Beginning January 1,2008, the amount of cash contribution required by Proffer number 3 shall be adjusted annually until paid, to reflect increase or decrease for the preceding calendar year in the Comparative Cost Multiplier, Regional City Average, Southeast Average, Category C: Masonry Bearing Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page 3 of4 Walls issued by Marshall Valuation Service (a/k/a Marshall & Swift) (the "Index") or the most applicable Marshall & Swift index determined by the County if Marshall & Swift ceases publication of the Index identified herein, In no event shall any cash contribution amount be adjusted to a sum less than the amount initially established by these proffers, The annual adjustment shall be made by multiplying the proffered cash contribution amount for the preceding year by a fraction, the numerator of which shall be recently ended, and the denominator of which shall be the Index as of December 1 in the preceding calendar year, For each cash contribution that is being paid in increments, the unpaid incremental payments shall be correspondingly adjusted each year, 4. Total Number of Dwelling Units and Unit Types, There shall be no more than 12 dwelling units, these units shall only be comprised of single family detached or single family attached (townhouses) unit types, permitted on the property as a consequence of this rezoning. The 12 dwelling units permitted shall be comprised of no more than four single-family attached (townhouse) units, By: Emile Bethanne Patterson (Owner) Date: Proffer Form Patterson Subdivision Page4of4 . . . Attachment E David 5, Ekern, P.E. COMMISSIONER C()MMONWEALTH Of VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 Orange Road Culpeper, Virginia 22701 VirginiaDOT ,org August 6th, 2007 Mr, John Shepard Dept, of Planning & Community Development 40 I McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: Special Use Permits and Rezoning Submittals Dear Mr. Shepard: Below are VDOT's comments for the July 2007 Rezoning and Special Use Permit applications: SP-2007-00034. SP-2007-00035 First Church of the Nazarene (Scott Clark) · VDOT has previously met with the applicant to review the proposed entrance to this site, The plan shows a right turn lane and sight distance grading, These improvements will be adequate for the proposed uses, ZMA-2007-00011 Patterson Subdivision (Sean Dou2hertv) · The attached plan appears to connect to route 684 and Lanetown Way, It is recommended that only the connection to Lanetown Way be made because the proposed connection to route 684 is less that 200 feet from the closest intersection and that is not a desirable situation, ZMA-2007-00012 Blue Rid2e Cohousin2 (Sean Dou2hertv) · Comments from VDOT for this development were provided in April of2007, If you have any questions, please let me know Sincerely, Joel DeNunzio, P,E, Staff Engineer VDOT Charlottesville Residency 019 N11 I '_1.01,,1'1\ N~~:---- I o~ :;. II I 7\-II.:>S: ""'- .:-- ----;:;:-::>--'- __________ ~'J~~ ( ;;I~/'l'IH :J. ,.,;1~ .,n-t.'" Wl:Laj-S Jlluamq;nmv '? S'- ,,~ , .- J / /' --./ ~ '" ~'" .., "" :E 0'''- , \ \ \,\ "'\\6l\-~\" \:- -;, '" .It (J''' \ \ ' ~ f l ..:.-------- ....~ / -0 / ~ / ooCh W1IS!I\I~Y)> NQS)O'~~ . . . Attachment G PO Box 245 Crozet · Virginia. 22932 December 03,2007 Rebecca Ragsdale, Lead Planner Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Subject: Patterson Subdivision (ZMA20070 11) Dear Ms Ragsdale: The Grayrock HOA has met and discussed the subject proposal and requests that this letter be part of the read-ahead staffing package that is prepared for the Board of Supervisors (BOS) public hearing. The Grayrock HOA continues to have serious concerns over the proposal as it exists before the BOS, While the applicant has removed accessory apartments from the plan and reduced the number of dwellings from 14 to 12 since the Planning Commission (PC) hearing we remain convinced that the proposed developments compliance with the Crozet Master Plan (CMP), consistency with the surrounding neighborhood and safety/traffic concerns remain to be sufficiently addressed, Additionally, it seems as though the County's use of the PC to provide recommendations on the parcel has been emasculated by allowing substantive changes to occur between the PC and BOS hearings without additional formal review by the Pc. The proposed development calls for zoning and lot size that is not in compliance with the CMP, and home types that are not in concert with either Grayrock or the more rural setting on the West side of the property. The proposed development is in an area designated by the CMP as CT3 - Hamlet. Table 1 of the CMP calls for an average lot size of 10,000 sf As shown in the applicant's site concept plan, the average lot size under this rezoning would only be 8,839 sf. By comparison, the 26 homes in Grayrock North average a lot size of 12,371 sf. The Patterson development as proposed would stand out as a pocket of density in an area that otherwise serves as a transition from residential (R- 4) zoning to the much more rural feel ofR..l zoning, As vehicular access to the proposed development will be exclusively through Grayrock North, we remain deeply concerned by the prospect of increased traffic on Lanetown Way, Lanetown Way was built as a rural section of street (18' wide, no sidewalks). As such, it is used for pedestrian traffic and as play space for the neighborhoods 40+ children, As proposed, the development would add 12 new residences using Lanetown Way. When coupled with unknown future increases in vehicular traffic due to the linterconnectivity spur' in the site plan, we could expect traffic to increase by at least 46 % when compared with the traffic generated by the existing 26 residences currently using Lanetown Way, We view this possibility as very concerning for the safety of our children and the many pedestrians that enjoy walking and running throughout Grayrock. There have been some procedural irregularities in how this proposal has progressed through milestones required by the County, In order to ensure adequate public involvement and discourse on rezoning issues, County guidelines require that public notice signs be posted at least 15 days prior to public hearing before the PC. In the case of the Patterson property, signs were not posted until five days before the hearing. Additionally, and perhaps of greater concern, there have been substantive changes to the proposal after the PC rendered its recommendation, When this proposal went before the PC on 16 October 2007, it was rejected by a 6-0 vote, While each Commissioner spoke to differing areas of concern, they were united in their assessment that the plan before them had insufficient infonnation for them to render a thoughtful recommendation, In fact the PC directly asked the applicant's agent if he 'wanted to turn this hearing into a work session' due their unease with the lack of detail in the plan, The applicant's agent asked for an up or down vote, and the result was a 'no' recommendation. The plan for the Patterson property has since been modified, yet the PC hasn't reviewed/voted on the plan before the BOS nor has the public had opportunity express its concerns on the new plan for consideration by the PC, Since one of the purposes of appointing a panel of diverse citizens to the PC is to ensure a :full vetting of plans that will come before the BOS, shouldn't a 'revised plan' go back to the PC for review, hearing and a vote? We feel that there are at least two sound reasons to reject the Patterson subdivision rezoning/development plan outright as it is proposed: non-compliance with the CMP and safety concerns for children and pedestrians on a section of road that does not have sidewalks, The Grayrock HOA is not opposed to any development of the subject property however, we are opposed to the plan as proposed. Perhaps a better solution is to send this proposal back to the PC for further work until it is able to fully evaluate the revised plan and associated community concerns, The Grayrock ROA will have a representative at the BOS meeting and will be prepared to answer any questions from the BOS or Community Development staff, Sincerely, -.JUr1tL Ii) L<l1chrJUt'- Tina Munchmeyer President, Grayrock HOA .. /. .. .' ----L. " 'l '::.\ ; ",- > ~ e "" \ 0 . ~ 0 .. 3' .. ::r: .. 0 QC IClI: \" 0 0 -\ 1 l- I- ~( Z CICl 0 .. 1 ~ ~ ::r: Cii: , < 0 <-' IClI: W 0 ~ ::r: 0 Z ~ ..--. u -.-..' I '-. --<( ~ c:\ <€1 (,,:t:t:) :t:t:' /'./ \.::.'/ "- / ~L "fE: d: *' . ..:: 0 "" - E <= CL.oC)S...9oJ:~2 ~ CJ 0 o;nu.......c..... .~ --5 ~ -~ 1: bot E !: rJ) :::d- c:"'O--S ~ .~.~ 0 ..g ~ e l-<~i3us::tCV)~~ S ~ '~.s .g 5 ~ ~ ~ 8 ~-o..s~ 5--5 ~ 5 e-'~ ;; <5'~ Q. B. ~ ~ c:: E ~ ~ .~ E e'C "'0 ""Cl gBE~f3;E~~ U ~ ~ :.~ ; ~ E ~ ~ "0 c: .-:.- .... ..... c 0 " ;; ';' E ~ ~.:'~ ~ 5 I- ,- ~ 5'" I- ::> OJ ~ 0 ~""C 0.. QJ CC ~ :3 ~.~ e <= 0'= <= ~ <( e"'O 0 cc~ fl.-S >- QJg.:~~~a~Q ~ _ ._.... 0 ""C u >.::: '-+- ~ s:: >- 1:: OJ ~.;;; ~ :~..s B u.-s ~ E cc ... _ Q.. c::: e ....:.=...c: CL.l [~~ QJ g.J::~~-S '"0 a.;;; ~ Qj QJ '; Q.,..e ~ 2 5 -a 6j:E b.c E .=: Q.........c::CI..""I;:l~~Uo~ oJ? QJ::J bLl ... ..... ~ QJ ~:~ : E~ B ;; 1 !3 1: 0 : g- ~ .~ 2'~U o~ ~~.: 15 l.'C ~ QJ"'U s:: ~ 111""; U Ci: ~ t= ;;.g ~ Q '5 6 .... OJ V) cc rJ) ...... s:: \ ~eCtt:]"';~~Q.l ~ cc ~ ~ OJ c: c::: ~ e ~ ~ 2 --e E..;s ~ ~.~ ~~~ ig~~ g ~ o""Coccu.::oru~ u5e-e~::",,5u OJ i: '2 ~ ~~ .S {S . ..c'''' ::l'- C OJ c::: Q. U \ f-.~ e ~ r: c..r3 ~ ~ '" . . . I o Q , .. -d'-- '---. . -;.J/ -\ '- ~ .' -\ \ .~"._/ \ r-- \ \ \,.- ''jL , ~ \ \, \ \- - \-., . . ....... -, . . i } I . = Hs e e.- ~d 'O:oc: j .8 u 8 10" .2.g~ .Ji il'''Y c ~=j ';; .~ ~ ~~l;. en ;; 8 !! ~~i u; i e~. ~ "ii ~ ~ '2 ~5.~ ~ u; u ~ e -;e. u ~ e Ht e ~ 0 0 ~ a: 0 w ~ .. ~ ~ !:! "ii ;; J; ~ ~ c ~ 'E 'E ;n &. ~ ~ ~ ,G Ii u ~ < EH ,f III I I I . z 0 >= > 0 . ~ ~ ....< z ",w ::> ::>0: 0 21" "' z.... " OZ w E~ I ~ 0.. 00 .... <... z ~~ w :! "'0 9 ~:! w ~o :> ..if w 0 ~ ~ ~ -\ (3) .... = ...- U = .... ...- rLJ d ~ ~ .... .....-1~ ~ d ~ .... ...- (3)- ~ .,. rLJ = ~(:Q ~"'O d ~ (3) ~ ~ , (3) U ~ - ~ !: CIl c;: ...... ~ o \ "'0 - ,- ~ ~ I-< CIl Q) ~ o N N ;:- .... .... ~ ~ w ~ :> 0: 0: W w '" ... '" w 0 ;;;' .. w 0: wO: .... 0: .. W ?- M " " ~~ .... ~ ~ w W I- ~ ~ ....0 ~ 0: ~ ~ :0... W w .... .... ILZ ... W W Z Z ~w 0: ~ ~ (!) w w .... S:! 0 c :! :! " ....> " 0 '" w o. S 0: zo Z z z 0 .... w'" " i ~ Z ~ en ~~ "' ~ w 15 0: 0: 0: :> ::> ::> w w :0 :0 0 0 I ~ IIIJI II ~ '" ~ '" ;.. ~~ :;:~ ;; :: :: ~ ;i:~ jj"'fl~ .;:> ' , ~}1\ \..!j,::! , , . :z:: - C CD E .J: CJ ~ <( -q- o o N ... Q) S Q) <) Q) Cl "0 Q) ..... 0- .g < ". "0 =. z. ..- ..- .... <. ... ,< z' ~~ 0,,;" z- z" <" ;. ~.. rr p-