HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-06-10
FIN A L
* Added to final agenda
June 10, 1992
Room 7, County Office Building
1)
2)
*3)
4)
& Critical Resource Plan.
Personnel
7:00 P M. Re
1) C 11 to Order.
2) P edge of Allegiance.
3) M ment of Silence.
4) 0 her Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC.
5) *C nsent Agenda (on next sheet).
6) blic Hearing: Appointment of a School Board Member for the At-Large
Position.
7) quest from Murray Whitehill to have property included in the service area
boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for "water only"
service.
8) A-92-01. Charles McRaven. Public Hearing on an amendment to Section
10.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit outdoor theater by special use
permit in the rural areas.
9) A-92-02. Donnie Dunn. Public Hearing on an amendment to Section
30.4. 2 . 2 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the storing and bottling of
spring water by special use permit in the Natural Resource Overlay
District.
10) A-92-06. Public Hearing on an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance under
the Commercial Office District to provide medical and pharmaceutical
laboratories as a use by special use permit.
11) -92-03. University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation. Public Hearing on a
request to rezone 53.52 ac from PD-SC & R-10 to CO. Property on S
side of Fontaine Ave E of & adjacent to Rt 29 Bypass. Site located in
Neighborhood 6 is recommended for office service in the Comprehensive
Plan. TM76,P17B&17Bl. Samuel Miller Dist. (This property lies within a
growth area.)
12) S -92-13. University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation. Public Hearing on a
request to allow supporting commercial uses, research development
activities & medical and pharmaceutical laboratories on 53.52 ac to be
rezoned under ZMA-92-03 (see description above).
13) S -92-16. Scott W. Campbell (applicant), George A. Ragsdale (owner).
Public Hearing on a request to establish auto sales & rental on 1.6 acs
zoned C-l. Property at end of & on the N of Rt 650 just E of Rt 631
(Rio Rd). TM61,P148. Charlottesville Dist. (This property lies in a
growth area.)
14) S -92-19. Albemarle County Fair, Inc (applicant), Elizabeth Scott (owner).
Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-88-90 to permit a fair.
Property containing 50 ac is zoned RA & EC is located on N side of Rt
692 approx 0.4 mi W of Rt 29. TM87,P3. Samuel Miller Dist. (This
property is not located within a growth area.)
15) S -92-20. Crozet Church of God. Public Hearing on a request to construct a
church on 5 ac zoned RA & EC. Property on S side of R t 824 approx 800
ft W of Rt 250. TM55,P96A. Samuel Miller Dist. (This property does
not lie within a growth area.)
16) S -92-22. Dale Wilberger (applicant); Roger Ward (owner). Public Hearing
on a request to permit outdoor storage & display of autos, trucks &
trailers on 0.49 ac zoned HC & EC Overlay Dist. Property located on N
side of Rt 250E, W of & adjacent to White House Motel. TM78,P57B.
Rivanna Dist. (This property is located within a growth area.)
17) MA-91-03. Dominion Land. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 8.79 ac
from R-6 & C-1 to PD-MC. Property in SW quadrant of Rio Rd/ Berkmar
Dr approx 3/10 mi W of Rt 29. Site is located in Neighborhood 1 & is
recommended for Community Service in the Comprehensive Plan.
TM6P1B,Sec 12. Charlottesville Dist. (This property is located in a
growth area.)
18) conomic Development, Discussion of Draft letter on.
19) ppointments.
20) pproval of Minutes: May 20 (afternoon) and May 20 (night), 1992.
21) ther Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
22) djourn.
CON S E N T
AGE N D A
FOR I FORMATION:
5.1 etter dated May 26, 1992, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner, Virginia De-
artment of Transportation, stating that road had Paul H. Cale Elementary
chool had been taken into the State Secondary System effective May 21, 1992.
5.2 etter dated May 26, 1992, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner, Virginia De-
artment of Transportation, stating that additions to and abandonments from
t e Secondary System at Stony Point Elementary School, Crozet Elementary
chool and Yancey Elementary School were approved effective May 22, 1992.
5.3 etter dated May 26, 1992, from Ray D. Pethtel, Commissioner, Virginia De-
artment of Transportation, enclosing a copy of the "Tentative 1992-93 Con-
s ruction Allocations and Six-Year Improvement Program for the Interstate,
rimary and Urban Highway Systems, as well as Public Transit, Ports, and
irports .
5.4 etter dated May 29, 1992, from Thomas F. Farley, District Administrator,
irginia Department of Transportation, giving notice of a location and design
ublic hearing for the Route 691 (Tabor Street) project.
5.5 etter dated May 29, 1992, from Thomas F. Farley, District Administrator,
irginia Department of Transportation, giving notice of a location and design
ublic hearing for the Route 20 (Scottsville Road) project.
5.6 ocal Funding - Social Services Department. Notification that total local funds
a proved for 1991-92 in the Social Services budget will be exceeded by ap-
roximately $23,500 to be reimbursed by an unexpected $26,000 refund from
teState due to a reporting error in the Foster Care Program.
5.7 opy of the Planning Commission's Minutes for May 26 *and June 2,1992.
5.8 opy of Minutes of the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of Directors
f r April 16, 1992.
5.9 opy of the Albemarle County Planning Commission's 1991 Annual Report.
5.10 opy of notice dated May 29, 1992, of an Application filed with the State
orporation Commission by Virginia Power seeking a general increase in its
e ectric base rates.
FOR PROVAL:
*5.11 Request for salary increase for Jefferson Madison Regional Library personnel
for Fiscal Year 1992-93.
*5.12 Resolution requesting acceptance of Colston Drive into the State Secondary
System of Roads.
~
~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596
MEMORANDUM
TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director/Planning & Community Development
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC~
June 12, 1992
Board Actions of June 10, 1992 (Night Meeting)
Following is a list of actions taken by the Board at its meeting on
10, 1992 (night meeting):
Agenda Item No.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mary Luce
ared on behalf of the Jaycees to request financial support in the amount of
00 for their community fireworks display on the Fourth of July. Staff was
TED to draft a staff report for review at the Board's meeting on June 17.
Agenda Item No. 5.3. Letter dated May 26, 1992, from Ray D. Pethtel,
issioner, Virginia Department of Transportation, enclosing a copy of the
tative 1992-93 Construction Allocations and Six-Year Improvement Program for
Interstate, Primary and Urban Highway Systems, as well as Public Transit,
s, and Airports.
REQUESTED a staff report on July 1 concerning the significant
amounts of funds shown in this report.
Agenda Item No. 5.11. Request for salary increase for Jefferson Madison
Reg'onal Library personnel for Fiscal Year 1992-93.
APPROVED the request of the Library Board to grant, from existing funds, a
two and one-half percent increase in salaries for FY 92-93.
Agenda Item No. 5.12. Resolution requesting acceptance of Colston Drive
int the State Secondary System of Roads.
ADOPTED the attached resolution requesting acceptance.
, . ~
Date:
Page 2.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Memo To:
Agenda Item No.6. Public Hearing: Appointment of a School Board Member
for the At-Large Position.
SCHEDULED interviews of certain applicants for July 1, 1992.
Agenda Item No.7. Request from Murray Whitehill to have property included
in the service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for
"wat~r only" service.
ORDERED a public hearing for July 1, 1992. Time set for 10:20 a.m.
Agenda Item No.8. ZTA-92-01. Charles McRaven. Public Hearing on an
amendment to Section 10.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit outdoor theater by
spec~al use permit in the rural areas.
ADOPTED the attached ordinance. Amended Zoning Ordinance sheets will
follow under separate cover.
Agenda Item No.9. ZTA-92-02. Donnie Dunn. Public Hearing on an amendment
to S~ction 30.4.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance to permit the storing and bottling of
spring water by special use permit in the Natural Resource Overlay District.
ADOPTED the attached ordinance. Amended Zoning Ordinance sheets will
follbw under separate cover.
Agenda Item No. 10. ZTA-92-06. Public Hearing on an amendment to the Zoning
Ordipance under the Commercial Office District to provide medical and
pharmaceutical laboratories as a use by special use permit.
ADOPTED the attached ordinance. Amended Zoning Ordinance sheets will
follow under separate cover.
Agenda Item No. 11. ZMA-92-03. University of Virginia Real Estate
Foundation. Advertised as a public hearing on a request to rezone 53.52 ac from
PD-SC & R-10 to CO. Property on S side of Fontaine Ave E of & adjacent to Rt 29
Bypa:ss. Site located in Neighborhood 6 is recommended for office service in the
Comprehensive Plan. TM76,P17B&17B1. Samuel Miller Dist. (This property lies
within a growth area.)
APPROVED subject to the following proffers set out in a letter from Robert
B. McKee, McKee/Carson, dated May 15, 1992, and a 14th proffer agreed to
verbally by the applicant at this meeting:
To:
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Dat
Pag 3.
1. UREF will construct at its expense along its property frontage improvements
to Fontaine Avenue as recommended in the City Urban Design Plan and which
are further described in the JPA/Fontaine Avenue Neighborhood Study.
Generally these improvements will consist of a four-lane, landscaped median
divided roadway which shall be designed to VDOT Collector Road standards.
Based on traffic studies prepared for the project, these improvements are
considered more than adequate to accommodate the additional traffic occa-
sioned by the development of the University Research Park. Specifically,
these improvements will consist of:
(a) an additional full frontage eastbound lane extending from the
existing northbound exit ramp of U.S. 29/250 Bypass to the
easternmost corner of the property,
(b) upgrade of the existing eastbound lane,
(c) provision of a 100-foot taper plus 100-foot right turn lane
adjacent to the new eastbound lane,
(d) median improvements consisting of curbed landscape median
extending from the project entrance west to the Bypass,
(e) median improvements consisting of curbed landscape median to
accommodate the necessary left turn movements into the park from
westbound Fontaine Avenue,
(f) left turn lane into the project, and
(g) two westbound through lanes from the easternmost property line to
the northbound on ramp of the Bypass.
Specific design standards and specifications for all turn lanes and
construction necessary for the widening of Fontaine Avenue shall be
determined upon further discussion with County Staff and VDOT.
Construction of these improvements is contingent upon acceptance by the
City of Charlottesville in allowing necessary transitions into and within
the City limits. Construction of these improvements is also subject to the
successful acquisition of additional right-of-way and/or easements neces-
sary for construction with the City limits.
2. UREF will construct at its expense full frontage bikeway improvements to be
incorporated behind the curb along Fontaine Avenue. The bikeway shall
extend from the northbound off ramp of the U.S. 29 Bypass to the
easternmost corner of the Research Park.
3. UREF will construct at its expense sidewalk improvements along the south
side of Fontaine Avenue from the proposed entrance to the Research Park to
the easternmost corner of the property.
.(
Date:
Page 5.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Memo To:
23.2.2.12 Research and development activities including experimental
testing, and
23.2.2.13 Laboratories, medical and pharmaceutical, subject to:
1. Compliance with Section 4.14, PERFORMANCE STANDARDS, of the Zoning
Ordinance.
In order to accomplish phasing of the plan as proposed, as well as to allow
variations in the development schedule, staff was granted authority over
approval of all phases of development, as well as administrative approval
of all site development plans (and subdivisions plats), if any.
Agenda Item No. 13. SP-92-16. Scott W. Campbell (applicant), George A.
Ragsdale (owner). Advertised as a public hearing on a request to establish auto
sales & rental on 1.6 acs zoned C-1. Property at end of & on the N of Rt 650
just'E of Rt 631 (Rio Rd). TM61,P148. Charlottesville Dist. (This property
lies, in a growth area.)
APPROVED with the following conditions:
l.
2.
3.
4.
Staff approval of lighting plan and landscape plan;
No loudspeakers;
There shall be no flags, pennants, banners, streamers or strings of lights;
Area for storage and display of vehicles for sale or rent spall be limited
to that area approximately shown on "New Parking Area Addit~on" on
Attachment C initialled WDF 4/10/92.
Agenda Item No. 14. SP-92-19. Albemarle County Fair, Inc (applicant),
Eliz~beth Scott (owner). Advertised as a public hearing on a request to amend
SP-8B-90 to permit a fair. Property containing 50 ac is zoned RA & EC is
loca~ed on N side of Rt 692 approx 0.4 mi W of Rt 29. TM87,P3. Samuel Miller
Dist. (This property is not located within a growth area.)
APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Such events shall be limited to six consecutive days excluding Sunday.
'Hours of operation shall be limited to 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., Monday
through Friday, and 9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Saturday, with no operation
on Sunday ("operation" shall mean the period of time during which the fair
is open to the public and shall not include set up, dismantling and
restoration activities). This permit is issued for the conduct of the
Albemarle County Fair by the Albemarle County Fair, Incorporated, and shall
not be used for any other event requiring special use permit pursuant to
Section 10.2.2.42 and 5.1.27 of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. The applicant shall notify the Albemarle County Police Department, Virginia
Department of Health, and servicing fire and rescue squads 60 days prior to
, .
','
Date.
Page 6.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Memo To:
each event and shall make adequate arrangements for the conduct of the event
with each of these agencies;
3. Traffic management shall be approved annually by the Albemarle County Police
Department, Virginia Department of Transportation and Albemarle County
Planning Department, with the final responsibility being that of the Police
Department.
4. The applicant shall abide by the approved site plan and submit any requests
for amendments for administrative approval at least 30 days prior to each
event.
Not Docketed: The Board adopted the attached resolution re: duties of the
Zoni g Administator.
Agenda Item No. 15. SP-92-20. Crozet Church of God. Advertised as a
publ'c hearing on a request to construct a church on 5 ac zoned RA & EC.
Prop rty on S side of Rt 824 approx 800 ft W of Rt 250. TM55,P96A. Samuel
Mill r Dist. (This property does not lie within a growth area.)
APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Administrative approval of site plan;
2. Seating capacity to be determined by adequacy of septic system, not to exceed
a maximum seating of 250 persons;
3. Approval is for worship and related church use only. Day care or other such
uses will require an amendment to this permit.
Agenda Item No. 16. SP-92-22. Dale Wilberger (applicant); Roger Ward
(own r). Advertised as a public hearing on a request to permit outdoor storage
& display of autos, trucks & trailers on 0.49 ac zoned HC & EC Overlay Dist.
Property located on N side of Rt 250E, W of & adjacent to White House Motel.
TM78,P57B. Rivanna Dist. (This property is located within a growth area.)
APPROVED with the following conditions:
1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by
the Architectural Review Board;
2. Storage areas shall be limited to those areas noted on sketch dated 4/16/92
and initialed WDF.
Agenda Item No. 17. ZMA-91-03. Dominion Land.
hea ing on a request to rezone 8.79 ac from R-6 & C-1
qua rant of Rio Rd/ Berkmar Dr approx 3/10 mi W of Rt
Nei hborhood 1 & is recommended for Community Service
TM6 1B,Sec 12. Charlottesville Dist. (This property
are .)
Advertised as a public
to PD-MC. Property in SW
29. Site is located in
in the Comprehensive Plan.
is located in a growth
" ' t'
Date:
Page 7.
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Memo To:
APPROVED with the following agreements:
1. Building E shall be limited to those uses permitted in the CO, Commercial
Office, and C-1, Commercial District;
2. The following uses shall be prohibited:
a. Hotels, motels and inns (24.2.1.2);
b. Motor vehicles sales, service and rental (24.2.1.5);
c. Mobile home and trailer sales and service (24.2.1.23));
d. Modular building sales (24.2.1.24);
e. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles (24.2.1.1.32);
f. Machinery and equipment sales, service and rental (24.3.1.22);
g. Heating oil sales and distribution (24.2.1.39);
3. All exterior lighting shall be face mounted to the exterior of the
buildings;
4. Roof mounted mechanical structures shall be adequately screened from
adjacent residential development;
5. Landscaping shall be of species similar to that on the adjacent Daily
Progress site;
6. Plan shall be revised to indicate not more than thirteen (13) dwelling
units;
7. Administrative approval of final site plan;
8. Privacy fence shall be maintained in good condition by the developer;
9. Fencing, designed to prevent pedestrian access, shall be installed adjacent
to the residential development (and existing right-of-way shown in Deed
Book 804, P. 527) in Berkeley prior to the commencement of grading
activities for development of the site;
10. An eight (8) foot high privacy fence shall be installed adjacent to the
residential development (and existing right-of-way shown in Deed Book 804,
p. 527) in Berkeley and shall overlap for ten (10) feet the existing
privacy fence on Tax Map 61M, Block 9, Parcel 9;
11. No burning on site.
Agenda Item No. 18. Economic Development, Discussion of Draft letter on.
A f w corrections were noted, and staff was directed to have the letter prepared
for the Chairman's signature, and mailing.
Agenda Item No. 19. Appointments. Grace Carpenter, Harold Dixon, and
Jos ph Henley, III, were reappointed to the Piedmont Virginia Community College
Boa d of Directors for terms to expire on June 30, 1996.
Date:
Page 8.
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
June 12, 1992
Memo To:
Agenda Item No. 21. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
Mr. Perkins asked that the Chairman draft a letter to WESTVACO encouraging
them to keep their facility at Ivy open and not to move the facility out of the
coun y. A draft letter should be prepared for Board review on June 17.
Mr. Bain asked that staff draft a resolution in honor of Samuel Miller's
200t Birthday for next week.
LEN: s
Atta hments
5'
Cf)
cc: Robert B. Brandenburger
Richard E. Huff, II
Roxanne White
Bruce Woodzell
Amelia Patterson
George R. St. John
File
I
I
I
~
.
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3 AND 10
IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, and Section 10.2.2,
Special Use Permit in the Rural Areas District, are hereby
and reenacted by the addition of the following words:
3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Theater, Outdoor Drama: An establishment whether
operated for profit or not, providing live performance
recreations of events of historic significance to and
having actually occurred within the locality or
immediately adjacent localities.
Section 10.0, Rural Areas District, RA, add the following use:
10.2.2
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
16. Theater, Outdoor Drama.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w rding constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by
t e Board of Supervisors of Albema e County, Vir ., at a
r gular meeting held on June 0 92.~
C er , Board of C nty Superv sors
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3, 5 AND 30.4
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
COlnty, Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, Section 5, Supple-
me~tary Regulations, and Section 30.4, Natural Resource Extraction
Overlay District, NR, are hereby amended and reenacted by the
ad~ition of the following words:
Section 3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Spring Water: Water derived at the surface from an
underground formation which flows to the surface through
natural cracks and fissures under natural pressure.
Section 5.1, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, add the following words as:
5.1.33
SPRING WATER EXTRACTION AND/OR BOTTLING
a. No such use shall operate without approval of the
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services;
b. No such use shall be established without approval of
a site development plan;
c. Bottling facilities on-site shall be used only for
the bottling of spring water obtained on-site.
Water used for bottling shall not contain any
additives or artificial carbonation other than those
required by regulating agencies for purification
purposes;
d. All structures shall be similar in facade to a
single-family dwelling, private garage, shed, barn
or other structure normally expected in a rural or
residential area and shall be specifically com-
patible in design and scale with other development
in area in which located;
e. These provisions are supplementary and nothing
stated herein shall be deemed to preclude appli-
cation of the requirements of any other local, state
or federal agency.
- 2 -
Se tion 30.4, NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS, NR,
am nd the Statement of Intent to read as follows:
30.4.1
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (herein
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utili-
zation of spring water for off-site consumption, sand,
gravel, stone or other mineral deposits within the county
in a manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use.
S ction 30.4.2.2, BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, add the following use:
8. Spring water extraction and/or bottling which does
not involve pumping of water to the surface.
* * * * *
hereby certify that the foregoing
correct copy of an ordinance adopted
Albemarle County, Virginia, at a
1 1992~
r~, Board 0 ounty
by
I, Lettie E. Neher, do
w rding constitutes a true,
t e Board of Supervisors of
r gular meeting held on Jun
..
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3 AND 23.2.2
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
Co nty, Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, and section 23,
Co ercial Office, are hereby amended and reenacted by the addition
of the following words:
Se 3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Laboratory, Medical: A building or part thereof devoted
to bacteriological, biological, x-ray, pathological and
similar analytical or diagnostic services to medical
doctors or dentists including incidental pharmaceutics;
and production, fitting and/or sale of optical or
prosthetic appliances.
Laboratory, Pharmaceutical: A building or part thereof
devoted to the testing, analysis and/or compounding of
drugs and chemicals for ethical medicine or surgery, not
involving sale directly to the public.
Se tion 23.0, COMMERCIAL OFFICE, CO, add the following use:
23.2 .2
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
13. Laboratories, medical or pharmaceutical.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w rding constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by
t e Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir inia, at a
r gular meeting held on June 10,
C
~
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
vi ginia, that the exhibits/displays admitted to the Albemarle
Co nty Fair shall be at the sole discretion of the Albemarle County
Fa'r Board.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w rding constitutes a true, correct copy of resolution adopted by
t e Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, V' inia, at a
r gular meeting held on June 10, 92.~
er , Board of ounty Supervisors
\.;}
,
-'.''''~lP.!-.-''!II_".iOl'J!:''''';~
A.c;.- e'fd.) ftl":lHl No ", , ..
. ~-_..-'-."" '~"'.""'.~,-"",-......;.
COMMON\VEALT~l of \7IRGINlA..
..
RAY D, PElrHTEL
COMMISSI~NER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTA TION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
, j;
, '">",.
May 26, 1992
..,
Secondary System
Addition
Albemarle County
B~ard of Supervisors
Cqunty of Albemarle
4ql McIntire Road
C~arlottesville, VA 22901
I
I
M~BERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolution dated April 15,
addition to the Secondary System of Albemarle County
e~fective May 21, 1992.
~DITION
I
1992, the following
is hereby approved,
LENGTH
P L H. CALE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
Ro te 9572 - From Route 742 to 0,16 mile East Route 742
0.16 Mi
-0'
" L' ""\
r!r' j
t . '/ a ^. '"""" )
1- ,
6 /I)t ~..~
~
Sincerely,
~ ffi.. /!uittt
~y D. Pethtel
Commissioner
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
-! ,'Ii,
./
I
1
I
I
I
I
I
RAY D, PE~HTEL
COMMISSlfNER
:
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
.; }-\.. It-
","
j",;- L
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND,23219
~ \ .. ' "
. \ \
1992
May 27, 1992
Secondary System
Additions and Abandonments
Albemarle County
i
Bo~rd of Supervisors
co~nty of Albemarle
40 McIntire Road
Ch r1ottesvi11e, VA 22901
I
I
MErBERS OF THE BOARD:
As requested in your resolutions dated April l5, 1992, the following
itions to and abandonments from the Secondary System of Albemarle County are
eby approved, effective May 22, 1992.
LENGTH
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
From Route 20 to 0,10 mile Southeast Route 20
0.10 Mi
ZET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
te 9010 - From Route 810 to loop 0.19 mile East Route 810
0.19 Mi
CEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
te 9771 - From Route 627 to 0,10 mile Southeast Route 627
0.10 Mi
'~DONMENTS
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
From Route 20 to O,lO mile Southeast Route 20
0.10 Mi
ZET ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
te 9010 - From Route 810 to loop 0.15 mile West Route 810
0.15 Mi
CEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
te 9771 - From Route 627 to 0.08 mile Northeast Route 627
0.08 Mi
Sincerely,
160. !!~
Commissioner
.~
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
!
D~TE --r T I#te / ~ / ~? 2-
t'
A~ENDA ITEM NO. ;1,,;: t7&"/ V7 ~s: -3 )
A~ENDA ITEM NAME ~ ,t?/-f1:! ~J~c?fe?~
#I//~y ~-~~~'
D,lU' UNTIL -- /;; V~~ ~ ,?)?~
Form. 3
7/25/86
//.V-.~1.."''''''.
'4 .
/ "
i
)Jlc.
. ,,1 j tr'll :'~,
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA t
'~, .
RAY D, PET TEL
COMMISSIO ER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 671
CULPEPER, 22701
, : j
...>>.", . i I
THOMAS F;.FARI;.{V
D1S?ltC!.t1jl~ll'il~:R.f>.;TQR
May 29, 1992
Location & Design Public
Hearing
Route 691 (Tabor street)
Proj. 0691-002-234,C-501
Albemarle County
Mem ers
Alb marle Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Cha lottesville, Virginia 22901
Dea Board Members:
Attached is a public hearing notice regarding project
069 -002-234,C501. The Hearing will be held Tuesday, June 16 at 7:30
p.m at the Crozet Elementary School, which is located on Route 810,
app oximately 0.4 mile north of Route 240 in Crozet. VDOT represent-
ati es will be present immediately preceding the hearing from 5:00 to
7:0 p.m. for an informal review of information.
The purpose of the Public Hearing will be to consider the proposed
loc tion and design of Route 691 (Tabor Street) in Albemarle County.
Thi project consists of intersection improvements at the inter-
sec ions of Route 240 and High Street (Route 1204).
please let me know if you need additional information.
Thomas F Farley
:lc
Att chment
cc: Mr. D. S. Roosevelt
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
PUB L I C NOT ICE
PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT
ROUTE 691 (TABOR STREET)
ALBEMA RLE COUNTY
Representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) will hold a Location and Design Public Hearing on Tuesday,
June 16, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. at the Crozet Elementary School
located on Route 810, approximately 0.4 mile north of Route 240,
in Crozet.
VDOT representatives will also be present at the Crozet
Elementary School immediately preceding the hearing from 5 :00
p.m. to 7:00 p.m. for an informal review of available information
by interested citizens. All interested persons are encouraged to
review the proposal prior to the formal hearing.
The purpose of this Public Hearing will be to consider the
proposed location and design of Route 691 (Tabor Street) in
Albemarle County. This project consists of intersection
improvements at the intersections of Route 240 and High Street
(Route 1204).
In conjunction with the proposed improvements to the
intersections of Route 240 and High Street (Route 1204), adjacent
streets that are within the project limits may be altered by the
proposal.
.. .,..
~
'~,
J
i
~
"
Crozat
~4'V
..-
J!ll
R4lt. WA Y
'-.( ,;.. of-
. ~$",",
--.:::! ~
. ---..
--
~
"
tj
~
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
TABOR STREET (ROUTE 691)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
PROJECT: 0691-002-234. C-501
INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS
AT ROUTE 240 AND AT HIGH STREET (RTE 1204)
'ft.,.
SCALE
Lenqtn In Feet
I
o
1320
2640
All interested parties are urged to attend and give the
Department
the i r (; 0 mm en t ::;
Cind
suggestions
~elative to the
proposed highway ~mprovements.
Maps, drawings, and other information are available for
public review in the Department of Transportation's District
Office located on Business Route 15, just south of Route 3, in
Culpeper and in its Residency Office located on Route 250, 3.0
miles east of Charlottesville.
Written statements and other exhibits relative to the
proposed projects may be presented i:1 place of, or In addition
to, oral statements at the hearing. Such written statements and
exhibits may also be submitted to the Department at any time
within ten days after the public hearing.
Individuals requiring special assistance
participate in this meeting should contact the
Resident Engineer at (804) 296-5102.
to attend and
Charlottesville
~..., VI'9in.. O'....m.nl .1 r..n......,ion
Ma y 1 1, 1 99 2
f.."
.~
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D, PET TEL
COMMISSIO ER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 671
CULPEPER, 22701
THOMAS F. FARLEY
DIS--RICT ADMINISTRA TOP
May 29, 1992
Location & Design Public
Hearing
Route 20 (Scottsville Road)
Proj. 0020-002-S21,PE101,C501
Albemarle County
Members
Albemarle Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Board Members:
ttached is a public hearing notice regarding project
0020-002-S21,PE101,C501. The Hearing will be held Thursday, June 18,
at 7:30 p.m. at the Cale Elementary School, which is located on Route
742 (Avon street, Extended), 1.1 miles north of Route 20 South, in
Albe arle County. VDOT representatives will be present immediately
preceding the hearing from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. for an informal review of
information.
he purpose of the Public Hearing will be to consider the proposed
and design of Route 20 (Scottsville Road) from 0.43 mile
Route 1801 to 0.03 mile north of Route 1801 in Albemarle
lease let me know if you need additional information.
Farley
:lcs
Atta hment
cc: r. D. S. Roosevelt
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
PUB L I C NOT ICE
PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT
ROUTE 20 (SCOTTSVILLE ROAD)
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
LD-15-92
Representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) will hold a Location and Design Public Hearing on
Thursday, June 18, 1992, at 1:30 p. m. at the Cale Elementary
School located on Route 142 (Avon Street, Extended), 1.1 miles
north of Route 20 South, in Albemarle County.
VDOT representatives will also be present at the Cale
Elementary School immediately preceding the hearing from 5 :00
p.m. to 1:00 p.m. for an informal review of available information
by interested citizens. All interested persons are encouraged to
review the proposal prior to the formal hearing.
The purpose of this Public Hearing will be to consider the
proposed location and design of Route 20 (Scottsville Road) from
0.43 mile north of Route 1801 to 0.03 mile north of Route 1801 in
Albemarle County.
At this location and design public hearing, relocation
assistance programs and tentative schedules for right of way
acquisition and construction will also be discussed.
All interested parties are urged to attend and
Department their comments and suggestions relative
proposed highway improvement.
give
to
the
the
I
Maps, drawings, an environmental evaluation, and other
information are available for pUblic review in the Department of
Transportation's District Office located on Business Route 15,
just south of Route 3, in Culpeper and in its Residency Office
located on Route 250, 3.0 miles east of Charlottesville.
Written statements and other exhibits relative to the
proposed project may be presented in place of, or in addition to,
oral statements at the hearing. Such written statements and
exhi bi ts may also be submi tted to the Department at any time
~ithin ten days after the public hearing.
Individuals ~equiring special assistance to attend and
participate in this meeting should contact the Charlottesville
Resident Engineer at (804) 296-5102.
,~ VlfIIln.. 0.,........... Tron_rto.1on
May 1 4, 1992
River
~,
'''",-/
~/
\=Jrter s
::r1dge
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
ROUTE 20
SCOTTSVILLE ROAD
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
PROJECT: 0020-002- S21,PE-101,C-SOI
FEDERAL PROJECT; HES-055-I(lOn
FROM: 0.426 MI. N, RTE. 180 I
TO: 0.03 MI.N.RTE, 1801
LENGTH: 0,396 MILES
I I i
0, I 2 Mill.
,~ V''9inOO_,otT__tian
"
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D, PETHTEL
COMMISSION R
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
1401 EAST BROAD STREET
RICHMOND, 23219
EARL C.CdCH1:tAN; :UR,
STATE LOCATION AND DESIGN ENGINEER
May 14, 1992
Route 20 (Scottsville Road)
proj. 0020-002-S21, PE-101, C-501
Fed. Proj. HES-055-1 (101)
Albemarle County
Fr: 0.43 Mi. N. of Route 1801
To: 0.03 Mi. N. of Route 1801
rs. Shelby J. Marshall
lerk of the Court
lbemarle County
01 E. Jefferson Court Sq.
harlottesville, VA 22901
ear Mrs. Marshall:
Attached is a Public Notice and Map advising of a proposed
ighway improvement project.
Should you desire additional information or have any
uestions or comments concerning this highway matter, please
efer to the above project number and description when you
ontact this office.
~e_r~,. ~=-V~%
E. C. Cochran, Jr., P.E.
State Location and Design Engineer
C1
1I.~
~N
lL..:c
z:
N
O'l
...0
IJ')
N
%:
(1...
....J 0:
~"! Y- .-
t... .e::
J~~~
.;>=~
,~]~~
.~~
-'j~
':;-~%
i-:'-<-j
ij~>-
'-"llGl
8~~
'5 ~ >'
t.) _
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
PUB L I C NOT ICE
PROPOSED HIGHWAY PROJECT
ROUTE 20 (SCOTTSVILLE ROAD)
ALBEMA RLE COUNTY
LD-15-92
Representatives of the Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) will hold a Location and Design Public Hearing on
Thursday, June 18, 1992, at 7:30 p.m. at the Cale Elementary
School located on Route 742 (Avon Street, Extended), 1.1 miles
north of Route 20 South, in Albemarle County.
VDOT representatives will also be present at the Cale
Elementary School immediately preceding the hearing from 5:00
p.m. to 7:00 p.m. for an informal review of available information
by interested citizens. All interested persons are encouraged to
review the proposal prior to the formal hearing.
The purpose of this Public Hearing will be to consider the
proposed location and design of Route 20 (Scottsville Road) from
0.43 mile north of Route 1801 to 0.03 mile north of Route 1801 in
Albemarle County.
At this location and design public hearing, relocation
assistance programs and tentati ve schedules for right of way
,
acquisition and construction will also be discussed.
All interested parties are urged to attend and
Department their comments and suggestions relative
proposed highway improvement.
give
to
the
the
Maps, drawings, an environmental evaluation, and other
information are available for public review in the Department of
Transportation's District Office located on Business Route 15,
just south of Route 3, in Culpeper and in its Residency Office
located on Route 250, 3.0 miles east of Charlottesville.
Written statements and other exhibits relative to the
proposed project may be presented in place of, or in addition to,
oral statements at the hearing. Such written statements and
exhi bi ts may also be submi tted to the Department at any time
within ten days after the public hearing.
Individuals requiring special assistance to attend and
participate in this meeting should contact the Charlottesville
Resident Engineer at (804) 296-5102.
,~" VI",.'. ~I oIT_.....
May 1 4, 1992
., .
<
..,
HIGHWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT
ROUTE 20
SCOTTSVILLE ROAD
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
PROJECT: 0020-002- S2I,PE-101,C-501
FEDERAL PROJECT; HES-055-1(l01)
FROM: 0.426 MI. N. RTE. 1801
TO: 0.03 MI. N. RTE. 1801
LENGTH: 0,396 MILES
I I i
0, I 2 Mill.
,~ y;"",.. _...... .. ,,,,__'Ion
.. \
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
social
Services
AGENDA DATE:
June 10, 1992
ITEM NUMBER:
-") ci,{( ~ r: )
/
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT
Notifica local funds
approved for 1991-92 in the Social Services
budget ill be exceeded by approximately
$23,500 to be reimbursed by an unexpected
$26,000 refund from the State due to a
reportin error in the Foster Care Program.
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:~
STAFF CO
Messrs.
REVIEWED BY:
ATTACHMENTS:
Huff
BACKGRO
Between uly, 1991 and May, 1992, the County experienced a 70% increase in expenditures for
Foster C re, 38% in transitional day care and 83% increase in JOBS day care over estimates
in the F 92 budget. These are mandated programs which are 50% reimbursed by the State but
which re ire local funds based on actual expenditures. Due to these large increases, local
funds will be over-expended by approximately $20,000 in the current fiscal year.
Within t e Housing Office, local funds are anticipated to be over-expended by approximately
$3,500 d e to an unexpected law suit filed by a client which resulted in a $3,500 deductible
for defe se costs related to the suit. No monetary award was made as a result of the legal
action.
Total a propriation within the department will not be exceeded so that an additional
appropriation is not required, however, staff felt that Board should be made aware of these
over-ex nditures in local dollars. Fortunately, to help offset these over-expenditures in
local fu ds, the County expects to receive approximately $26,000 from the State after July
1st as a reimbursement for a reporting error in the Foster Care Program.
information.
RECOMME
For the
92.079
COUNTY Of AL8E!'tJAHLl.
'I>'~.,. ""Fi!I H"'. ...... ~."" "'iU., "'.".',' '."""'
"~- \',5 J.."of__~ '--~ .... '. . <'J~: - ti '-~
: f'\' ....:;.,.~,::.:."""-,"~'" ',J IAJ ~
'liV' "'" 1-
'"fif' 2 2'" ~
dl" JUN 199 - HI,~
"'.'\ ~"'"
~~ ", ~ ,~
'''.' .' ~ ,q
. , tr-'lt, -........"'~..' ".. J'.-
~ _ ,';:~. ;;v ''lit .j ,_,.,1
o~,. ll. .~r.~ 'r~':>~,/ fJ; ~:t~':tl ;!t~?
EXECUTIVE OfFICI
~ ,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Social Services
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
PH. (804) 972-4010
TOO (804) 972-4012
FAX (804) 972-4060
IVlEMORANDUM
TO:
Richard Huff, Deputy Co. Executive
FROM:
Kathy Ralston, Deputy Director ,i/r:J.fl
Dept. of Social Services ~ ~
RE:
Local Funding
DATE:
May 26, 1992
As the end of the fiscal year approaches, I realize that we
will need additional local funds for mandated services within the
Social Services budget. I had hoped that our administrative
savings would be enough to offset the overexpenditures in foster
care and day care but they have not.
I am projecting the need for $20,000 in local dollars for
these programs. These additional dollars will allow us to pay for
services for the children we have in care and for child day care
for working parents or parents who are in education/training.
An issue you should be aware of is that due to a reporting
error on our part, the county will be reimbursed roughly $26,000
that we had not anticipated in foster care. Unfortunately, I do
not expect these funds in the current fiscal year, but I do expect
them next year. Hopefully, this will offset the impact of having
to come up with the $20,000 now.
Below are figures that may be helpful in the request to the
Board. Karen and I are available should you want us present at the
Board meeting.
Foster Care - Between July 1991 and May 1992 we had a 70%
increase in expenditures resulting from
several factors: 1) change in the rate
structure of Community Attention resulting
in triple the cost of some children, 2) two
children came out of DeJarnette's Hospital and
required residential treatment, 3) items
" .
.
Richard Huff
Page 2
May 26, 1992
previously covered under medicaid are now not
allowed and have to be paid from foster care
funds, i.e., psychotherapy, 4) provision of an
aide for a long term foster child who is
severely emotionally damaged at $2,000 per
month and 5) impact of the CHINS legislation
last year continues to bring more children into
our system.
Day Care
Increase of 38% in Transitional Day Care and
83% increase in JOBS Day Care over budgeted
figures. As you may recall, both of these
programs resulted from the Family Support Act
and both were relatively new last year.
Consequently, there was a start up period that
was very slow but has now caught on.
Additionally, both of these programs result from
ADC clients either getting jobs or going back to
school. Therefore the increase is seen by us as
a positive step away from welfare dependency.
Also wi thin Housing I proj ect to overspend our budget by
$3,500. This resulted from an insurance deductible posted against
the Housing budget last fall from a lawsuit filed by a client. We
of course had not budgeted for such an expense and cannot cover it
now.
Thank you for your help in this. Should you have any
questions, please do not hesitate to call.
mt
c
.,
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
I}
~-.--~:,L~.
c.".- d ',>
J...:~~=-<~-c S;'"} )
it;;;:, No.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
and~
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
Community Development
May 28, 1992
Albemarle County Planning Commission - 1991 Annual
Report
Attached please find a copy of the 1991 Annual Report
approved by the Albemarle County Planning Commission at
their meeting on May 26, 1992.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
VWC/jcw
ATTACHMENT
1991 ANNUAL REPORT
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
I, INTRODUCTION
The Code of Virginia states that local Planning Commissions shall make
recommendations and an annual report to the governing body concerning the
operation of the Commission and the status of planning within the
jurisdiction, This report is a brief summary of what the Albemarle County
Planning Commission has accomplished during the past year and some of the
problems which will be addressed during 1992.
I . PERSONNEL
The Commission is composed of seven members, one member from each of the
six magisterial districts, and one member "at large." The Commission
members during 1991 were:
Keith Rittenhouse,
Harry Wilkerson,
Vice-Chairman
Phil Grimm
Thomas Jenkins
Ellen I. Andersen
Jacquelyn N. Huckle
Walter F. Johnson
Scottsvil1e
6/01/88 - 12/31/91
Chairman
Rivanna
Charlottesville
Whi te Hall
Samuel Miller
Jack Jouett
At-Large
1/18/84 - 12/31/91
1/03/90 - 12/31/93
1/06/88 - 12/31/91
1/03/90 - 12/31/93
1/03/90 - 12/31/93
1/17/90 - 12/31/91
II , EXPENSES
The Commission does not have a separate budget. Expenses for commission
members were a total of $24,050,00 all of which was spent on salaries for
commissioners.
REGULAR MEETINGS
The Planning Commission held 47 regular meetings primarily to review
current development proposals. A total of 212 items were reviewed.
Zoning text amendments addressed such issues as broadening uses permitted
within the various commercial and industrial zoning districts and providing
new guidelines for Comprehensive Plan service areas; definition's for
contractor's office and equipment storage yard or truck terminal; amending
building setback regulations in the Rural Areas zone related to private
roads; and, fees (see Appendix A).
An important procedural measure implemented in March, 1988 was the Consent
Agenda. The Planning Commission authorized staff approval of all of the 11
items which appeared on the Consent Agenda, resulting in an agenda time
savings of about 5 hours or 2 meetings,
I
V, ACTION SUMMARY
The number of actions considered by the Commission during 1991 and in each
of the previous five years is shown by category in the following table.
Consent agenda items are listed separately,
1
I
.
~ CONSIDERED 1991 1990
cotPrehensive Plan Amendments 2 5
Zoning Text Amendments 9 9
Subdivision Ordinance Amendments 1 0
Co~prehensive Plan Compliance
~eviews 5 2
Zo~ing Map Amendments 19 23
Sp~cial Use Permits 67 63
Pr~1iminary Site Plans
25
Final Site Plans
Pr~1iminary Plats
15
Fillal Plats
Si e Plan Extensions
Si e Plan Waivers
Si e Plan Amendments
12
Si e Plan Administrative Approval 0
Fi~al Plat Extensions
Fillal Plat Administrative
~pproval
SUbdivision Waiver
Ag icultural/Forestal Districts
4
21
5
21
3
2
o
o
1
3
1989
4
17
3
5
23
65
32
2
1
1988 1987
1 0
5 14
o 1
3 2
22 15
56 54
45
23
24
3
5
15
24
8
1
17
16
o
1
23
23
9
6
5
o
1
1
1
1
3
11
CO~SENT AGENDA ITEMS tSenarate from Action Considered Above)::
Pr~liminary Site Plans
Fij),al Site Plans
Pr liminary Plats
Fi ~al Plats
Ag icultural/Forestal Districts,
(Referral of application)
2
o
5
2
2
2
o
6
2
4
o
2
o
1
5
4
2
3
4
6
2
5
2
2
5
5
2
7
3
8
1986
3
11
2
1
20
97
33
48
3
3
6
2
2
3
1
5
4
VI. OTHER PLANNING ACTIVITIES
The Commission discussed a number of immediate and long-range planning
issues in 1991, A number of work sessions of 1.5 - 2 hours duration
were held in addition to weekly agendas to discuss the following
topics:
. Agricultural/Forestal Districts . The Commission reviewed and
approved one new A/F district; two additions to A/F districts;
and, reviewed two A/F districts for renewal, These A/F districts
totalled 11,672,55 acres:
High Mowing - 622.44 acres
Keswick Addition - 263.00 acres
Free Union Addition - 716.37 acres
Totier Creek District Reviewed - 7,246.52 acres
Hatton District Reviewed - 2,824,22 acres
o Six Year Secondary Road Plan - The Commission reviewed the
FY9l-92 budget for the Six Year Secondary Road Plan and the
1992-93 to 1997-98 Six Year Secondary Road Plan and County
priority list for road improvements, The Six Year Plan and
County priority road improvement list are adopted for a two year
period with the budget reviewed annually. The recommended
FY9l-92 budget and FY92-93 priority list were forwarded to the
Board of Supervisors for final action. The amount allocated for
the FY1992-93 to FY1997-98 Six Year Secondary Road Plan has yet
to be finalized, but is estimated to be $20,024,104. The
estimated cost for the County's priority list of projects is
$81,500,000.
. Six Year Primary Road Plan - The priorities of primary road
projects in the County were reviewed as part of the Virginia
Department of Transportation Six Year Plan process.
. Capital Improvements Program - The Commission reviewed project
requests for FY1992-93 to the FY1996-97 Capital Improvements
Program. The Commission recommended fifty-four (54) projects to
the Board to be funded in FY1992-93 at a cost of $16,298,491,
. Comprehensive Plan Amendments - The Commission reviewed two
comprehensive Plan amendments during 1991:
CPA-9l-l Bicycle Plan for the City of Charlottesville and
Albemarle County
CPA-91-2 Blue Ridge Neighborhood "Area B" Study
.
Review for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan - The
Commission reviewed 6 public projects for compliance with
Comprehensive Plan under Virginia Code Section 15.1.456.
projects were:
the
These
. Jefferson Village Sewer Line - Review of the proposed
construction of a sanitary system to serve Jefferson
Village,
3
April 9, 1991 Found to be in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
· New Urban Transmission Line - Review of the proposed
construction of new transmission water line extending from
the South Rivanna Water Plant to an existing line in the
vicinity of Ninth and Main Streets in Charlottesville.
April 23, 1991 - Found to be in compliance with the
Comprehensive Plan.
o Commonwealth Drive Connection to Greenbrier Drive and Peyton
Drive upgrade. July 24, 1991 - Found to be in compliance
with the Comprehensive Plan.
o Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) Scottsville Water
and Sanitary Sewer Line Installation, July 24, 1991 _
Found to be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
· Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA) Route 250 Water
Line Extension, January 29, 1991 - Found to be in
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan,
o Installation of Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA)
Sewer Line to Serve the University of Virginia's new
Dormitory and Dining Hall Located on Stadium Road, December
3, 1991 - Found to be in Compliance with the Comprehensive
Plan,
VII. PLANNING ACTIVITIES FOR 1992:
o Adoption of final sections of the Community Facility Plan.
o Adoption of Open Space Plan.
o Completion of Utilities Master Plan,
o Completion of Neighborhood 3 Plan,
. Housing Committee Final Report and Recommendations,
o Consideration of Historic District Zoning.
· Review of zoning text amendments resulting from Open Space Plan
adoption.
· Consideration of zoning text amendments resulting from Housing
Committee,
. Subdivision Ordinance revision,
These activities are over and above the normal case workload and
annual projects,
4
. ,
APPENDIX A
1991 ZONING TEXT AMENDMENTS
ZTA-91-l Luck Stone Corporation - To amend the Zoning
Ordinance Section 30.4.2.2 SPECIAL USE PERMITS in the
Natural Resource Extraction Overlay District.
PLANNING COMMISSION: May 14, 1991 - Recommended denial, by
a vote of 5-2.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: INDEFINITELY DEFERRED
ZTA-9l-02 - To amend 5.1.2 Forestry
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
[PENDING; NO ACTION]
(COMBINED WITH ZTA-92-05)
ZTA-91-03 Amendments to Zoning Ordinance to Implement
Comprehensive Plan as to Non-residential "Service Areas"
Concept - To broaden uses permitted within the various
commercial and industrial zoning districts and to provide a
new section 9.0 GUIDELINES FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SERVICE
AREAS for the purpose of implementing the non-residential
land use guidelines as outlined by the "service areas"
concept of the Comprehensive Plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION: May 21, 1991 - Unanimously recommended
approval.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: June 19, 1991 - Adopted
ZTA-91-04 Schuyler Enterprises - Petition to amend Section
3.0 to include a definition for contractor's office and
equipment storage yard or truck terminal, and to amend
Section 5.1.33 to provide supplemental regulations for
contractor's office and equipment storage yard or truck
terminal and to include Section 10.2.2(44) which would
provide for contractor's office and equipment storage yard
or truck terminal by special use in the Rural Areas.
PLANNING COMMISSION: September 4, 1991 - Unanimously
recommended denial.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: September 18, 1991 - Denied.
, .
I
ZTA-9l-05 To amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in
Section 5.6.2, Conditions of Approval for Mobile Homes on
Individual Lots by the addition thereto of a subsection "f"
reading: "No rental to be made of the mobile home, the same to be
occupied by the owner of the land on which the mobile home is
located, or by a lineal relative or bona fide agricultural
employee of the owner.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
[PENDING; NO ACTION]
ZTA-91-06 - To amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance
in Section 10.4 to amend building setback regulations in the
Rural Area zone related to private roads.
PLANNING COMMISSION: September 4, 1991 - Unanimously
recommended approval.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: November 14, 1991 - Adopted.
ZTA-9l-07 John Embree - Conventional development
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
[PENDING; NO ACTION]
ZTA-9l-08 Fee Schedule - To amend and reenact Section 35.0,
Fees of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance and to repeal
language in Section 4.15.4.1, Sign Permits.
PLANNING COMMISSION: September 24, 1991 - Unanimously
recommended approval.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: December 11, 1991 - Adopted.
. .
ZTA-91-09 Sign Ordinance - This proposed sign ordinance will
modify the current Zoning Ordinance as follows: All
definitions relating to structures and to signs (in Section
3.0) shall be repealed and replaced within the proposed sign
ordinance; all of Section 4.15 dealing with sign regulations
shall be repealed and the new Section s 21.7.1, 21.7.2,
26.10.1 and 26.10.2. Sign regulations within Overlay
Districts (Section 30.5 and 30.6) shall be amended
comprehensively.
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
[PENDING; NO ACTION]
May 29, 1992
LQcal Governmental Officials
Ladies and Gentlemen:
,;Jo- ~".';' j~~
!' i
, i~
\ \
. . ~ '\ "
Post Office Box 26666
Richmond, Virginia 23261
'c, \i.,;....
&.:'& 7<:?
7:< L4. /? ( 5-/0)
'iq"l", ;'1110
..... <
" l
.. ~:'vlj.fiNIA'A"WER
.....,;
Please take notice that on this 29th day of May 1992, Virginia
P~wer has filed an Application with the state Corporation
c~mmisslon seeking a general increase in its electric base rates.
Pursuant to the Commission's Rules Governing utility Rate Increase
A~plications and Annual Informational Filings, Virginia Power is
providing you notice of this filing and enclosing a copy of its
Application.
A copy of the complete Application, including testimony, exhibits
and filing schedules, may be obtained from Virginia Power at no
cost by written request to Mr. Kendrick R. Riggs, Virginia Power,
P~ O. Box 26666, Richmond, Virginia 23261, or by calling Mr. Riggs
at (804)771-3299.
f:, tl..L R- fN:
endrick R. Ri s
Senior Regulatory Counsel
Virginia Power
,
,
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
BEFORE THE
STATE CORPORATION COMMISSION
APfLICATION OF
VIfGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY
I
Fot a general increase in electric
ba~e rates
I
)
)
)
)
)
)
CASE NO. PUE9200___
APPLICATION OF
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY
Pursuant to Section 56-237 of the Code of Virginia, the
I
copmission's Rules Governing utility Rate Increase Applications and
Annual Information Filings, and the Commission's Rules of Practice
I
I
I
an~ Procedure, Virginia Electric and Power Company ("Virginia
I
po~er" or "company") hereby files this Application for a general
,
I
inprease in its base rates for electric service.
In support of
,
thlis Application, Virginia Power respectfully states the following:
1. Virginia Power is a public utility engaged in the
g~neration, transmission, distribution and sale of-electric energy
I
i
wilthin a 30,000 square mile area in Virginia and northeastern North
I
c~rolina and sells electricity to wholesale and retail customers.
T~e service and operations of virginia Power and its rates and
,
I
c~arges for retail electric service in Virginia, excluding
gqvernmental agencies, are regulated by the State Corporation
I
cqrnrnission. The post office address of Virginia Power is P. O. Box
2~666, Richmond, virginia 23261.
,
2. The Annual Informational Filing ("AIF") for 1991 and the
other schedules, testimony and exhibits filed with this Application
~
de~onstrate that in 1991 Virginia Power did not earn its authorized
ra~e of return.
Based upon the commission's ratemaking
me'thodology, and using the interim rates currently used by the
co~pany for billing its customers, the deficiency in regulated
op,rating revenues is approximately $166 million.
The Company,
therefore, is requesting in this Application an increase in its
jutisdictional operating revenues of $165,864,000 over the level of
revenue currently being collected through the interim rates
approved in Case No. PUE910047.
This increase is necessary to
achieve a total level of operating revenues (including fuel) of
$3~362,002,000. Without this increase in revenues, virginia Power
cannot recover its cost of providing service, including a
reasonable return. This increase is authorized by Chapter 10 of
Ti~le 56 of the Code of Virginia.
3. The proposed increase in revenues is required to recover
increases in the costs of providing service since the period in the
last case that have not been offset by increases in revenues.
Increases for capacity charges associated with power purchases,
increases in rate base through the end of the proforma year,
repovery of the year-end def iciency in the capacity memoranrlum
I
acpount and the uncertain outcome in Case No. PUE910047 are major
factors creating the deficiency in operating revenues.
4. A detailed statement of the facts that the Company is
pr~pared to prove in support of its Application is set forth in
Schedules 1 - 36 and the Company's direct testimony and exhibits of
Dr. James T. Rhodes, Larry W. Ellis, James P. Carney, William E.
- 2 -
f
Avera, M. stuart Bolton, Jr., and E. Paul Hilton, all of which
acoompany this Application and are incorporated by reference. The
prqposed schedule of rates, terms and conditions designed to
prqduce the requested level of operating revenue are contained in
Sc~edule 32 and are marked with a proposed effective date of June
29( 1992.
WHEREFORE, virginia Power hereby requests the Commission to
dOfket this Application as a proceeding for a general increase in
rates, suspend the proposed schedule of rates through and ending on
Oc~ober 26, 1992 pursuant to Virginia Code ~ 56-238, and after
I
investigation and hearing, to approve the proposed rates and allow
I
th~m to become final.
Respectfully submitted,
VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY
By: 1j:ns!;-f i2- ~~
I
Da~ed: May 29, 1992
,
I
Charles K. Trible
Kendrick R. Riggs
virginia Electric & Power Company
P.I O. Box 26666
R~chmond, Virginia 23261
E~ans B. Brasfield
R~chard D. Gary
H4nton & williams
Rlverfront Plaza, East Tower
9~1 East Byrd street
R~chmond, virginia 23219-4074
- 3 -
. .
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned hereby certifies that on this 29th day of May,
19 2, a complete copy of virginia Power's Application for an
in rease in electric rates, including Schedules 1 - 36 and the
te timony and exhibi ts of Virginia Power's six witnesses, was
se ved on Edward L. Petrini, Esquire, Office of the Attorney
Ge eral, Division of Consumer Counsel, 101 North 8th Street, 6th
Fl or, Richmond, Virginia, by hand delivery, and a true copy of
th s Application, without accompanying testimony and exhibits,
to ether with a statement that a copy of the complete Application
ma be obtained at no cost by making a request therefor orally or
in writing to the undersigned, was served by placing the same in
th united states mail to be delivered first class and addressed to
th place of business or residence of those persons required to
re eive such service under the Commission's Rules Governing Utility
Ra e Increase Applications and Annual Informational Filings.
~S~l:Jl fL ~~
virginia Electric and Power Company
- 4 -
AGENDA T TLE:
Jeffers n-Madison
Per sonne Increases
SUBJECT
Jefferso
requests
governin
desire t
increase
STAFF CO
Messrs.
/:.' .(.A ,) J-. "
-t. -{,Ii!...L..i:... ~:.....
County of Albemarle
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA DATE:
June 10, 1992
-ITEM NUMBER:
?
Regional
Library
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
Library. Board
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:
Huff.
BACKGRO
The 1992 93 Jefferson-Madison Regional Library budget did not include funds for staff salary
increa~ss due to expected significant state cuts in funding. Now that most of the state
funding as been restored and no salary increases were provided last year, the Library Board
now re ests participating jurisdiction's concurrence with granting 2 1/2% increases from
their existing funds which are delineated in the attached letter from Ms. Donna M. Selle to
Robert . Tucker, Jr. dated May 29, 1992. No additional funding from localities will be
needed. 1
I
!
RECOMME ATION:
Staff re ommends the Board of Supervisors concur with the Regional Library Board's desire to
grant th small salary increase from approved funds.
92.078
Jefferson-Madison Regional Library
201 East Market Street · Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 · (804) 979-7151 · FAX (804) 971-7035
Office of the Director
*. Robert Tucker
Cfmnty Executive
Afbemarle County
Albemarle County Office Building
4Ql McIntire Road
C~arlottesville, VA 22901-4596
I
I
D~ar Bob:
At our Library Board of Trustees meeting on May 26, 1992, the Board discussed
I
t~eir desire to grant our employees a 2-1/2% increase, based on satisfactory performance,
b~ginning July 1, 1992.
I
I
,
May 29, 1992
I As you are aware when the Library prepared the proposed budget for 1992/1993,
w~ were under the cloud of greatly diminished State Aid funding - and our budget request
d~d not include any salary increases for our staff. Since that time our financial picture has
~proved and we have been awarded our budget requests from all jurisdictions and the
S ate reductions were not as drastic as the Governor originally proposed. By adjustments
w thin our existing budget request, such as not continuing the employment of a temporary
cifculation position at Central, elimination of the furniture/iooures line item for 1992/1993,
a,d some personnel savings in the Regional Reference services, we have made reductions
i~ our budget to allow the granting of a salary increase.
I
I
,
I The Board and I share great pride in the Library's accomplishments this year with
~creases in productivity on the part of all of our employees. Our staff will experience
i~creased costs for family medical benefits, which this proposed raise will cover.
1
I
We are not asking for additional funding for this proposed salary increase. The
L,brary will live within the approved budget. We are requesting concurrence from our five
j~risdictions for this request. If your jurisdiction has any questions or concerns regarding
t~is request, please let me know as soon as possible. The Library Board plans to adopt the
fipal budget for 1992/1993 at their June 23, 1992 Board meeting.
We deeply appreciate your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
CGWNTY Of p.L~;:~;f1J;tU..i
,::. ~-~".~;.,
..'i
~ltIJ.~
1. \
" ':: .... -.,
I
I
DIMS: dig
I
,JUN
1 1992 i
I
~ ;:1' ,,(i'
Donna M. Selle
Director
..
'.>~-T
EX~CUiT.:~ OffiCI
Serving Charlottesville, Albemarle County, Greene County, Louisa County, and Nelson County
..
,
,
r"
1
,.AfII*.>~\
,..~,...
\
. t I
....'
....--'
Edward H. BaJ Jr
Samuel Mille;I'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R Marshall. Jr
Scottsville
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesvill
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y H mphns
Jack Jouett
Walter F Perkins
White Hall
M E M 0 RAN DUM
I
I
Tal:
I
I
i
Hoyt B. Alford, III, Civil Engineer
Engineering Department
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CM~
June 11, 1992
1
I
I
i
I At its meeting on June 10, 1992, the Board of Supervisors
ad~Pted the following resolution requesting the Highway Department
to accept Colston Drive into the State Secondary System of High-
wa s. Attached is the signed resolution.
I
I
I
L,:ec
Atfachments:
Resolution. Requesting Acceptance of Colston Drive into
the State System of Secondary Highways
Original and 3 copies of each
,
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
! BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
copnty, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
thr Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby
re~uested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject
toh. final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Depart-
me t, the following road in Colston Subdivision:
Colston Drive
Beginning at Station 19+87, a point common with the edge
of pavement of State Route 708 and the centerline of
Colston Drive, thence in an easterly direction 1636 feet
to Station 36+23, the end of the cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
po~tation be and is hereby guaranteed a 40 foot unobstructed
ri~ht-of-way and drainage easements along this requested addition
aSI recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit
co~rt of Albemarle County in Deed Book 848, page 444, Deed Book
89~, page 640 and Deed Book 1070, page 505.
I
I
!
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a
tr~e, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of Super-
vi~ors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regula 'ng held on
Ju\>e 10, 1992. Yd a
~d of County Supervisors
"
~,' .,:.
, ,J
). .
r) ,..: (~>' /
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that pursuant to Virginia Code Section 33.1-229,
the Virginia Department of Transportation be and is hereby
requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject
to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Depart-
ment, the following road in Colston Subdivision:
Colston Drive
Beginning at Station 19+87, a point common with the edge
of pavement of State Route 708 and the centerline of
Colston Drive, thence in an easterly direction 1636 feet
to Station 36+23, the end of the cul-de-sac.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation be and is hereby guaranteed a 40 foot unobstructed
right-of-way and drainage easements along this requested addition
as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 848, page 444, Deed Book
893, page 640 and Deed Book 1070, page 505.
* * * * *
, .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
;, :~\ 1 (,I?,
MEMORANDUM
;
~ ~.
1
,
I
ITO:
Lettie E. Neher, Board of Supervisors Clerk
I
IFROM:
I
I
:OATE:
I
I
IRE:
I
Hoyt B. Alford III, Civil Engineer -~~
.3
June 8, 1992
Colston Subdivision - Colston Drive
~he following is a description of Colston Drive which is located
lin the Colston Subdivision.
I
pOLSTON DRIVE
~------------
I
~. eginning at Station 19+87, a point common with the edge of
avement of State Route 708 and the centerline of Colston Drive,
hence in an easterly direction 1,636 feet to Station 36+23, the
~nd of the cul-de-sac.
I
~his road has a forty foot (40') right-of way and has been built
~n accordance with the approved road plans. The deed book
references for right-of-way dedication and drainage easements
~re: 1) Deed book 848, page 444; 2) Deed book 893, page 640;
and 3) Deed book 1070, page 505.
,
I
frBA/ps
I
,
I
I T
D ~TE -~ /~ / /~.v--
I
A t;ENDA ITEM NO. ~.7, tI~/f1r 37'0
A I;mmA ITIlII NAME 1fr/~//;/-41h1/,p/ 5c.k#,/7!JriU/. · k~
D UNTIL ~/1fr/ r/?H".:::1 - -c77 1/??'''?'\
Form. 3
7/25/86
. ,~
I
I
~
I
MqTION: Mr. Bain
S~COND: Mr. Martin
,
M$ETING DATE: June 10, 1992 (Afternoon session)
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of
c~nvened an executive meeting on this date
a firmative recorded vote and in accordance with
T e Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
I
I
i WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires
ce!rtification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that
s~ch executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia
l~w;
I
I
: NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
B~ard of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each
m~mber's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully
e~empted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were
d~scussed in the executive meeting to which this certification
r~solution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as
w re identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were
hard, discussed or considered by the Albemarle County Board of
s~pervisors.
I
I
Supervisors has
pursuant to an
the provisions of
~
I
A~S:
I
I
I
I
N1YS:
Mr. Perkins, Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr.
Marshall and Mr. Martin.
None.
I
[*or each nay vote, the substance of the departure from
r~quirements of the Act should be described.]
,
~SENT DURING MEETING: None.
,
Al$STAIN DURING VOTE: None.
~ Clerk, Al~~~sors
the
v
~ END~ ~TEM NAME '"
/~~7.5J ~
D UNTIL
D
~ ENDA ITEM NO.
Form.3
7/25/86
. ...
~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
,
T(J:
Albemarle County Planning Commission
F~OM:
DATE:
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning
May 19, 1992
R$:
ZTA-92-01 Charles McRaven (OUTDOOR DRAMA THEATER)
ZTA-92-02 Henry Eiden (RIJRAL RETREAT)
In 1980, at time of adoption of the current zoning ordinance, the Board of
S~pervisors established that zoning text amendments and subdivision text
amendments initiated by the public were to be reviewed twice annually. In
t~is manner, the Board could assess the effects of a number of amendments on
Cqunty policies simultaneously and avoid piecemeal change in ordinances to
support the Comprehensive Plan,
I
Yqu have before you CWo amendments (rural retreat; outdoor drama theater) to
tHe Rural Area zone, which, uniform with analysis over the past CWe1ve years,
a~e recommended as inconsistent with, or at a minimum, not supportive of the
intent of the rural areas. Regardless of the outcome of these CWo petitions,
there is demand as evidenced by these and past petitions to warrant a
pnoactive review and assessment of tourist-oriented uses and larger-scale
s~asona1 uses in the Comprehensive Plan and subsequently in implementing
r~gu1ations.
TqURIST USES
Tqurism, as an important sector of the economy, should be addressed in any
eqonomic policy developed by the County. Positive determination as to the
t~pes, scale, and locationa1 aspects of such development from a land use
p~rspective should follow (i.e. some uses such as hotels, motels, restaurants
a~e currently, and in staff opinion, appropriately confined to growth areas,
Some uses may demand a more rural setting to flourish but also demand public
ut~lities and other services to function and may, therefore, be considered for
vi~lage locations), Staff opinion is that "rura1 retreat" and "outdoor drama
th~ater" are of such intensity as to require public utilities, From the
utilities and other services to function and may, therefore, be considered for
village locations), Staff opinion is that "rural retreat" and "outdoor drama
theater" are of such intensity as to require public utilities. From the
history of amendment petitions, business interest i these types of uses has
been consistent. Perhaps some positive program bebween such business
interests and historic and other preservation efforts (apparently necessary to
such businesses) could be established,
Promotion of tourism also has its negative aspects, Retaining tourists
through additional attractions adds additional burden on public services. As
an example, Monticello reports 2,500 visitors per day during the height of the
season. If these tourists are persuaded an additional day in the area, that's
an additional 5000 population to be provided water, sewer, and other services.
All of these factors can best be analyzed by deliberate study as opposed to
individual ordinance amendment.
LARGER-SCALE SEASONAL USES
Albemarle County has no public or private fairgrounds. In past years,
circuses have been unable to locate adequate sites. The Albemarle County Fair
currently operates in a temporary location (a petition has been filed for
extended usage), SPCA rummage sales have been held in inadequate locations
resulting in one case in patrons parking in the median of Rte. 29N. Parking
for craft fairs is generally inadequate, None of the uses apparently can
sustain the cost of adequate facilities based on the brevity of the use. The
Comprehensive Plan recommends as agricultural/forestal industrial support
strategy:
Assesses the need for a local or regional farmer's market and, if
feasible, coordinate its development with the City of
Charlottesville and the proposed statewide farmer's market
system. "
The Comprehensive Plan also recommends establishment of an
Agricultural/Forestal Resources Advisory Committee. Analysis of the farmer's
market should be an early task of such committee. It would seem reasonable
that leasing to non-agricultural uses, could help offset any costs of
supporting such a market.
..
In closing, comments in this memo should not be viewed as recommendation
except to the extent that "tourism" is a segment of the economy not dealt with
either as policy in the text or as a land use on the maps in the Comprehensive
Plan. Staff opinion is that there is a need to deliberately address this
issue through the comprehensive planning process as opposed to a "backdoor"
,approach through zoning ordinance amendment.
RSK/jcw
I A;f
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3 AND 10
I
I BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
c~unty, Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, and Section 10.2.2,
U es by Special Use Permit in the Rural Areas District, are hereby
a ended and reenacted by the addition of the following words:
S~ction 3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Theater, Outdoor Drama: An establishment whether
operated for profit or not, providing live performance
recreations of events of historic significance to and
having actually occurred within the locality or
immediately adjacent localities.
stction 10.0, Rural Areas District, RA, add the following use:
1~.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
44. Theater, Outdoor Drama.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
W~rding constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted
t e Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a
r gular meeting held on June 10, ~.
Cler~ ou
by
.'\'
I f
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3 AND 10
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, and Section 10.2.2,
Usies by special Use Permit in the Rural Areas District, are hereby
amended and reenacted by the addition of the following words:
Section 3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Theater, Outdoor Drama: An establishment whether
operated for profit or not, providing live performance
recreations of events of historic significance to and
having actually occurred within the locality or
immediately adjacent localities.
section 10.0, Rural Areas District, RA, add the following use:
10.2.2
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
~. Theater, Outdoor Drama.
~1
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
wording constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by
the Board of supervisors of Albern e County, Vir . , , at a
regular meeting held on June ]0 92.~
of C nty Superv sors
I ..' \ f
>,-, ;
.. ~~, ,.:
l~!g-:~j'::!~:l
'-'--''''=-+~'.'''''".JOI:"'_',
'\':.:, ~--_:_~
'. . f ,. J.e -.~ .'
-~-'-..........' ,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & CommullIty Devel<Jpment
401 Mcintire Road
C harlottcsville, V irginlil 22901 <1Sllb
(H04) 2% ~)~)2J
"
May 21, 1992
.'-\
, ',1
Charles McRaven
Drawer G
Free Union, VA 22940
RE: ZTA-92-01 Charles McRaven
Dear Mr. McRaven:
The Albemarle County Planning commission, at its meeting on
May 19, 1992, by a vote of 4-2, recommended approval of the
above-noted zoning text amendment to the Board of
Supervisors. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992.
Any new or additional information regarding your application
must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of supervisors
at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
'(2j~
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
RSK/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
.
.-" <::)"\ j ....
~~~ ~~~~~~~~
\b.~~~
Drawer G __ Free union, Virginia ZZ940 -- (804) 973-4859
'\
\ l'"
June 5, 1991
Mr. David BOwerman
Chairman Board of supervisors
co. Office Bld9-401 McIntire Rd
Charlottesville, VA 22902
ThanK yoU very much fOl taking the time to meet with the
Institute of outdOor Drama studY Team thiS weeK on behalf of
our plans fa' a summer outdoor theater. Each man came out
of your meeting expressing positive impressions of both you.
concerns and the potential for the success of the project.
We eagerlY await the studY itself.
Dear Mr. Bowerman:
1 hope yoU concluded that we are seriOUS. conscientiOUS and
a.are of the many sensitive aspectS of this project. We are
confident that this will be a boon for Jefferson country in
many waYs as well as for our arts community.
Please note that on June loth, the Board of supervisors ."i I I
consider the appropriateness of an outdOor summer drama in
Albemarle county. We hope that many of your questions were
answered this week and that yoU can see that sucn an
enterprise can be an asset to the community, our youn9
people and the economy. vour voice at the proceedings would
make this happen faster.
Thank yOU again for your input. We will keep in touch 85
plans develoP and ask that yoU direct any of your concerns
QuicklY to US for best resolution.
SincerelY,
Linda and c~arles McRaven
..
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RONALD S. KEELER
MAY 19, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
ZTA-92-01 CHARLES McRAVEN: To amend 10.0 RA Rural Areas
District to allow "OUTDOOR DRAMA THEATER: Bv SDecial Permit.
PETITION: Charles McRaven petitions the Board of
Supervisors to amend the Rural Areas zoning district to
allow "OUTDOOR DRAMA THEATER" by special permit. The
applicant's justification is provided in Attachment A.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has reviewed this zoning text amendment for
consistency with specific provisions of the Zoning
Ordinance: .
. 1.4 PURPOSE AND INTENT
. 1. 5 RELATION TO ENVIRONMENT
. 1.6 RELATION TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
. 4.8.1 DETERMINATIONS CONCERNING UNSPECIFIED USES
Staff offers the following comments (for discussion of
1.4.7. see ADDITIONAL SUMMARY COMMENT):
. 1.4.8 To Drovide for the Dreservation of agricultural
and forestal lands - Making agricultural and forestal
lands available to unrelated commercial uses is not a
form of preservation but contrary to such effort.
. 1.5 RELATION TO ENVIRONMENT - Staff is unsure of any
study or economic policy which recommends as
appropriate, additional commercialization of the Rural
areas. To introduce large scale commercial uses on the
one hand and attempt to limit subdivision development
on the other hand may be difficult to justify. The
Comprehensive Plan contains no policies directed at the
tourist economy.
. 1.6 RELATION TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN - This section of
the zoning ordinance explicitly states that
"development is to be encouraged in Villages,
Communities, and the Urban Area, where services and
utilities are available and where some development will
not conflict with the agricultural/forestal or other
Rural objectives; and development is not to be
encouraged in the Rural Areas, which are to be devoted
1
..
to preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and
activities, water supply protection, and conservation
of natural, scenic, and historic resources and where
only limited delivery of public services in intended."
Analysis in this report concludes that the proposed use
is contrary to this objective of the zoning ordinance.
. 4.8.1 DETERMINATIONS CONCERNING UNSPECIFIED USES states
that:
"Uses other than those specified in district
regulations as permitted by right or accessory
uses may be added to a district on application by
a landowner if the commission and board of
supervisors find:
a. That there is no clear intent to exclude such
uses; and
b. That the proposed use is appropriate within the
district and would have no more adverse effects on
other uses within the district, or on uses in
adjoining districts, than would uses of the same
general character permitted in the district.
In such cases, the board of supervisors shall
proceed to amend the ordinance in accord with the
provisions of section 33.0."
As will be discussed later in this report, Board actions
have been consistently supportive of the intent of the Rural
Areas zone. Compatibility of "outdoor drama theater" to
other RA uses in also discussed.
The remainder of this report will examine the proposed
amendment in regard to general and specific issues related
to the Zoning Ordinance section cited above as well as other
considerations. A topical summary of this examination
follows:
. ADEOUACY OF CURRENT REGULATIONS: USES SIMILAR IN
CHARACTER ARE CONFINED TO COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. USES
IN THE RA ZONE THAT DRAW LARGER CROWDS ARE OF LIMITED
OPERATIONAL DURATION.
. STATEMENT OF INTENT OF RA ZONE: "OUTDOOR DRAMA
THEATER" DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO OR SUPPORT THE FOUR
STATED PURPOSES OF THE RURAL AREAS ZONE. TO THE
CONTRARY, ASPECTS OF THE USE COULD COMPETE WITH OR BE
CONTRARY TO THESE OBJECTIVES, "OUTDOOR DRAMA THEATER"
IS NOT COMPATIBLE TO INTENSIVE AGRICULTURAL AND
FORESTAL OPERATIONS.
2
..
. DISPOSITION OF AMENDMENTS TO RA ZONE: 1980 TO PRESENT:
THERE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT DECISION SINCE ADOPTION OF
THE 1980 ZONING ORDINANCE NOT TO INCLUDE INTO THE RURAL
AREAS ZONE USES WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO, ARE NOT
SUPPORTIVE OF, OR COULD CONFLICT WITH THE
AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL OBJECTIVE. THIS STATEMENT IS
BOLSTERED BY THE FACT THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS
TAKEN POSITIVE ACTION TO CONSTRAIN OR REPEAL USES
DEEMED INCONSISTENT WITH THE RURAL AREAS OBJECTIVES.
RECOMMENDATION: While many tourist uses may desire rural
location, only small-scale uses have been permitted in the
Rural Areas zone. INCLUSION OF THIS USE WOULD BE IN
OPPOSITION TO:
. INTENT OF THE RA ZONE
. RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
. DELIBERATE ACTIONS OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RELATIVE
TO USES IN THE RURAL AREAS ZONE.
STAFF RECOMMENDS DENIAL OF ZTA-92-01. SHOULD THE BOARD
CHOOSE TO ADOPT THE AMENDMENT, STAFF RECOMMENDS THE
DEFINITION (PROVIDED LATER IN THIS REPORT) BE INCLUDED IN
3.0 DEFINITIONS.
ADDITIONAL SUMMARY COMMENT:
Tourist-oriented uses are not discussed in the Comprehensive
Plan (see Attachment C). The Rural Areas zoning district
provides for limited commercial uses (see Attachment D).
The Rural Areas zone comprises the majority of the County
and has received more qiscussion and attention than any
other zoning district. Currently, 61 use categories are
permitted by right and special user permit, more than
specific listings for any other conventional zoning ,
district. Clearly the RA district provides for reasonable
use of land.
Section 1.4.7 of the zoning ordinance states that a purpose
of zoning is "to encourage economic development activities
that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base."
Clearly, "outdoor drama theater" and other tourist
businesses would enhance the County's tourist economy and
provide employment. However, under the current
Comprehensive Plan, the Rural Areas are to be devoted to
agricultural and forestal sectors of the economy.
DEFINITION: This section of the staff report will propose
and discuss a definition of "outdoor drama theater."
3
~
THEATER. OUTDOOR DRAMA: An establishment whether operated
for profit or not, providing live performance re-creations
of events of historic significance to and having actually
occurred within the locality or immediately adjacent
localities.
This definition attempts to restrict "outdoor drama theater"
to historical preservation as opposed to an unrestricted
menu. staff generally does not favor such limited and
narrow definition. However, some uses allowed in the Rural
Areas zone have been narrowly defined in an attempt to
exclude similar uses (agricultural museum; temporary events
sponsored by local nonprofit organizations which are related
to and supportive of the RA, rural areas district).
ADEOUACY OF CURRENT REGULATIONS: "Outdoor drama theater" is
not specifically listed use in the Zoning Ordinance. Uses
similar in character are:
drive-in theater (HC district)
commercial recreation establishment (C-1 and HC
districts)
Within the Rural Areas zone, no similar listed uses appear.
Two uses - the County Fair and Foxfield Races - draw larger
crowds than anticipated for this use, but are both temporary
operations. The County Fair operates about a week annually
and the Foxfield Races is specifically limited to two races
per year. An outdoor drama theater would operate during
warmer months.
Based on existing ordinance provisions, USES SIMILAR IN
CHARACTER ARE CONFINED TO COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. USES IN THE
RA ZONE THAT DRAW LARGE CROWDS ARE OF LIMITED OPERATIONAL
DURATION.
STATEMENT OF INTENT OF RA ZONE
This section of the staff report will discuss the
relationship of the proposed use to the stated intent of the
Rural Areas zoning district. The statement of intent of the
RA zone was substantially amended in November, 1989 to
reflect the increased emphasis of the Comprehensive Plan to
identify the purposes of the Rural Areas.
1. As to the four stated purposes of the RA zone, the
following comments are offered:
Preservation of aaricultural and forestal lands
and activities: "Outdoor drama theater" would use
land for commercial usage as opposed to
4
..t
agricultural/forestal use. Amending the Zoning
Ordinance to add commercial uses in the RA zone
adds "commercial" value to properties to the
disadvantage of agriculture and forestry. (In
this regard, staff would not anticipate multiple
applications for "outdoor drama theater" and
inclusion of this particular use may not affect
land values).
Water suooly protection: Outdoor drama theater
could involve extensive parking areas and other
areas of impervious coverage.
Limited service to the rural areas: Traffic
generated by such a use could be significant. Of
concern is accommodating a use of this scale on
well and septic system. Recently staff
recommended that an aOO-seat church would be more
appropriately located within a designated growth
area where public utilities are available. (The
church subsequently petitioned to connect to
public sewer). Based on the scale of operation,
public utilities may be initially or subsequently
required.
Conservation of natural. scenic. and historic
resources: Agricultural and forestal uses are
more appropriate to this objective. Making rural
land available to commercial uses appears contrary
to this intent, since it would provide additional
variety of development.
Therefore, staff analysis is that "OUTDOOR DRAMA
THEATER" DOES NOT CONTRIBUTE TO OR SUPPORT THE FOUR
STATED PURPOSES OF THE RURAL AREAS ZONE. TO THE
CONTRARY, ASPECTS OF THE USE COULD COMPETE WITH OR BE
CONTRARY TO THESE OBJECTIVES.
2. The statement of intent of the RA zone also emphasizes
conflicts between residential development and
agricultural/forestal activities. While "outdoor drama
theater" would operate evening hours, as described, it
should be noted that commercial agricultural and
forestal uses are industrial in character and can
involve intensive activity, extended hours of
operation, heavy machinery, noise, chemical and manure
applications and odors. The RA statement of intent
includes the language that "in relation to residential
development, agricultural/forestal activities shall be
regulated only to the extent necessary to protect
public health and safety." Staff opinion is that
"OUTDOOR DRAMA THEATER" IS NOT COMPATIBLE TO INTENSIVE
AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL OPERATIONS.
5
<If
DISPOSITION OF AMENDMENTS TO RA ZONE: 1980 TO PRESENT:
Staff has compiled a summary report to provide background as
to the disposition of zoning text amendments initiated by
citizen petition or request since adoption of the current
zoning ordinance in 980 (Attachment B). Staff opinion is
that this listing demonstrates consistent decision regarding
the intent of the Rural Areas district:
AMENDMENTS APPROVED
Farm Winery
Hydroelectric power generation
Convent, monastery
Agricultural museum
Temporary events supportive of Rural Areas
AMENDMENTS DENIED
Restaurant
Health resort/health farm
Expanded definition of public garage
Rural salvage yard
In addition, the following uses have been repealed as being
inconsistent with the intent of the rural areas:
10.2.2.24 Motels and inns
10.2.2.26 Restaurants located on or adjacent to motel
premises
Also, the definition of "public garage" was narrowed to
exclude renting and selling vehicles and to limited the use
to repair and service.
Finally, the following uses permitted in the prior A-1 zone
were not included in the RA zone when adopted in 1980:
- Planned communities
- Country clubs
- Hospitals
- Horse trailer sales, limited
- Professional offices
Executive offices on a minimum of 100 acres in which
are employed a maximum of 15 persons, etc.
- Slaughterhouse, custom
- Homes for adults
Staff opinion is that THERE HAS BEEN CONSISTENT DECISION
SINCE ADOPTION OF THE 1980 ZONING ORDINANCE NOT TO INCLUDE
INTO THE RURAL AREAS ZONE USES WHICH DO NOT CONTRIBUTE TO,
6
~
ARE NOT SUPPORTIVE OF, OR COULD CONFLICT WITH THE
AGRICULTURAL/FORESTAL OBJECTIVE. THIS STATEMENT IS
BOLSTERED BY THE FACT THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS HAS
TAKEN POSITIVE ACTION TO CONSTRAIN OR REPEAL USES DEEMED
INCONSISTENT WITH THE RURAL AREAS OBJECTIVES.
7
.
I ATTACHMENT A I
ATTACHMENT TO APPLICATION from CHARLES McRAVEN
for a ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT
Description of Request:
This is a request for a zoning text amendment to allow for a
specific use for property in Albemarle County, not currently
listed. If successful, this amendment would allow, after proper
procedure, the establishment of an outdoor theater for ongoing
seasonal, regional presentations.
Justification for Request:
As the result of research, coupled with our background in
the field, we believe that a carefully planned and executed
outdoor drama would be an economic and cultural asset to the
region.
This limited, minimal-impact, seasonal land use would be
compatible with the county's agricultural nature. (See attached
letter)
I ATTACHMENT AI
February 21, 1992
Directors and Staff
Planning and Zoning Commissions
Albemarle County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Our plan is to establish a permanent outdoor drama on the order
of The Lost Colony production in North Carolina and The Stephen
Foster Story in Kentucky. Our play is factual, historically
accurate, and is set in and around Charlottesville, where the
events occurred some 211 years ago.
We are working closely with the Institute of Outdoor Drama, a
national organization which represents 70 of these productions 1n
30 states. Institute officials see this area as being ideally
suited to such a project, both for the richness of our
Revolutionary-period heritage, and for the already-established
flow of tourism to the community (around 2500 a day in summer).
I ~,,,, ~.
We have commissioned the Institute to do a feasibility study for
the project. As part of this study, they will review potential
sites and work closely with us to ensure that our plans are in
accordance with your requirements.
Specifically, we seek a parcel of land large enough to contain
the theater, parking for an eventual estimate of 500 cars, the
necessary adjunct structures (restrooms, rain shelter, office),
plus a considerable natural buffer from surrounding property.
This will be very close to a major highway to minimize traffic
impact.
Our estimate is for 60-plus acres of agricultural land, most of
which would remain in agricultural use, or in existing timber, if
present. Our aim is to disturb the site as little as possible,
and our architect, Bill Edgerton, is in agreement with this goal.
We plan to provide educational, historically valid entertainment
in the evening for the visitors who already come here in summer.
This project will result in attending visitors staying overnight
in the area -- which many of them do not at present --
patronizing our restaurants and lodging. Our projections
indicate a $3 million-plus impact on the economy the first
season. As the attendance grows to the projected 2,000 level
commensurate with similar locations, these benefits will increase
proportionately.
,
,
.' "
I ,'r" ..
This dollar influx is over and above the 50-75 jobs generated
(some year-round) and the money spent locally on marketing,
goods, construction and production.
Finally, we see this as a non-polluting, environmentally friendly
enterprise utilizing the talents of local residents, portraying
events in our rich history, and providing an opportunity for
Albemarle County to show more of what we have to offer. All to a
market that already exists.
Sincerely,
tY~I//~#A
Charles McRaven
Drawer G
Free Union, Virginia 22940
(804) 973-4859
J.
I ATTACHMENT 8\
MONITORING REPORT
APRIL 5, 1992
AMENDMENTS TO RA. RURAL AREAS ZONING DISTRICT 1980 TO
PRESENT
The purpose of this report is to provide background as to
disposition of zoning text amendments to the RA zone
initiated by citizen petition or request since adoption of
the current zoning ordinance in 1980. This report will be
updated and will serve as an attachment to all future staff
reports dealing with amendments to the RA zone.
The following listing includes only petitions acted upon by
the Board of Supervisors. The petitions are briefly
described including key staff comment (in quotation) and
Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors actions.
ZTA-80-05 Andre Arguad petitioned to allow RESTAURANTS by
special use permit. "staff is opposed to further
commercialization of the RA district. provisions for
restaurants are more than adequate." Planning Commission -
denial; Board of Supervisors - denied.
ZTA-81-04 BY Resolution to amend RA district to allow FARM
WINERY by special use permit. staff viewed farm winery as
an agricultural use consistent with the statement of intent
of the RA zone, and recommended farm winery "be permitted as
a use by right with certain controls on related activities."
Planning Commission - approval; Board of Supervisors -
approved.
ZTA-82-03 By Resolution - to amend RA district to allow
HYDROELECTRIC POWER GENERATION by special use permit. staff
noted that "these provisions are intended to encourage the
use of water power as a natural and replenishable resource
for the generation of electrical power. While serving
energy conservation and natural resource goals, these
provisions are also intended to limit such use so as: not
to be objectionable in the area in which it is located; not
to interfere with the passage of boats, canoes, fish or
other aquatic life; not to degrade the riverine and aquatic
habitat nor water quality, in general." Planning Commission
- approval; Board of Supervisors - approved.
ZTA-83-07 BY Resolution to amend supplementary regulations
related to FARM WINERY. Staff at Board direction, developed
amendments to provide broader operation and flexibility to
farm wineries. Planning Commission - approval; Board of
Supervisors - approved.
ZTA-86-08 BY Resolution to allow CONVENT, MONASTERY by
special use permit. "Monasteries and convents are generally
internalized communities often relying on agriculturel
agriculturally related activities as a means of
1
I ATTACHMENT BI Ipage 21
self-support. Such uses tend toward a more permanent
character than "commercial" group living arrangements such
as homes for the elderly, nursing homes, or even private
residential schools. Therefore, staff opinion is that the
monasteries and convents are generally long-term,
low-intensity uses customary to rural settings." Planning
Commission - approval; Board of Supervisors - approved.
ZTA-87-04 Blanka Rosentiel petitioned to amend the RA zone
to allow HEALTH RESORT/HEALTH FARM by special use permit.
This amendment received extensive review. In the original
report, staff stated that: "Most uses in the RA zone are
agricultural/agriculturally related and residential with
limited support uses. Effort was made in developing the RA
zone to encourage agriculture/forestry and to discourage
uses not viewed as compatible to agriculture/forestry. Uses
permitted in the prior A-1 zone not found in the RA zone
include: professional offices; country clubs; hospitals;
executive offices (100 acre minimum; maximum 15 employees);
radio/television stations; and homes for adults. In a
November 1986 Comprehensive Plan work session report, staff
stated that "effort was made to increase the number of
agricultural uses permitted by right under the 1980 Zoning
Ordinance. However, in view of existing subdivision
development and environmental concerns, only limited changes
were made. Some uses (currently) included in the RA zone
bear little or no relationship to the statement of intent
and need not be permitted (based on other zoning provisions)
in the RA zone. These are basically uses permitted by
special use permit, such as motels, restaurants, and public
garages."
"The statement of intent of the RA zone speaks primarily of
the relationship of agricultural and residential
development. Agriculture is to be encouraged while only
limited residential development is to be permitted.
Commercial uses are not discussed. Staff opinion is that
health resort bears no relation to the continuation/
promotion of agriculture/forestry. Since patronage would be
primarily non-local, health resort is not viewed as a
support use to existing rural development." Planning
Commission - denial; Board of Supervisors - denied.
Note: The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors has
deleted provisions for motels and restaurants and
significantly restricted activities related to public
garages in the RA zone.
ZTA-87-08 JWK prooerties petitioned to amend the RA zone to
allow MUSEUM by special use permit. Staff recommended
AGRICULTURAL MUSEUM noting that:
"A stated purpose of the Rural Areas zone is that "the
continuation and establishment of agriculture and
II
I ATTACHMENT 81 Ipage 31
agriculturally-related uses will be encouraged. During
Comprehensive Plan committee work sessions, agriculture
and forestry have received emphasis as the main purpose
of the RA district. Support for active measures to
promote the agricultural industry has been endorsed.
Therefore, staff opinion is that "museum" would be an
appropriate use in the RA zone if it were explicitly
related to agricultural support efforts. The public
purpose to be served by such amendments would be to
promote and publicize the agricultural/forestal sector
of Albemarle economy." Planning Commission - approval;
Board of Supervisors - approved.
ZTA-87-08 Albemarle County Fair - petitioned to allow
TEMPORARY EVENTS by special use permit in the RA zone.
"Staff opinion is that temporary events in the RA, Rural
Areas zone which are related to and supportive of the intent
of that zone are appropriate" and recommended TEMPORARY
EVENTS SPONSORED BY LOCAL NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS WHICH ARE
RELATED TO AND SUPPORTIVE OF THE RA, RURAL AREAS ZONE.
Planning Commission - approval, Board of Supervisors -
approved.
ZTA-88-04 David Spradlin petitioned to expand activities
permitted under the definition of PUBLIC GARAGE. "A salvage
operation bears no relationship to the statement of intent
of the RA zone." Planning Commission - denial; Board of
Supervisors - denied.
Note: Subsequently in 1989 the definition of public garage
was amended to delete certain activities (storing, selling,
renting, equipping) deemed inappropriate to the rural areas.
ZTA=90-03 David and Mary Spradlin petitioned to amend the RA
zone to allow RURAL SALVAGE YARD FOR AUTOMOBILES by special
use permit. "It appears to staff that the level of
regulation needed to minimize the impact of a salvage yard
is itself evidence that such a use is not in keeping with
the intent of the RA district and Comprehensive Plan."
Planning Commission - denial; Board of Supervisors - denied.
SUMMARY:
Approved:
farm winery
hydroelectric power generation
convent, monastery
agricultural museum
temporary events supportive of Rural Areas
Denied:
restaurant
health resort/health farm
expanded definition of public garage
rural salvage yard
~
.
IATTACHMENT cl
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning
David B. Benish, Chief of Community Development
May 11, 1992
Eiden ZTA Request - To permit Rural Retreat in
Rural Areas District
The primary growth management policy of the Comprehensive
Plan is to direct growth to designated growth areas while
conserving the rural areas for agricultural/forestal
activities and other resources protection purposes. The
Growth Management Goal (page 107) places "emphasis on the
importance and priority of the four major elements that form
the basis for the Rural Areas: (1) preservation of
agricultural and activities; (2) water supply protection;
(3) limited service delivery to these areas; and (4)
conservation of natural scenic and historic resources. Of
these, the preservation of agricultural and forestal
activities is the highest priority.
The description of rural retreat as proposed in this request
could permit activities that are similar or character to
Resort/Conference Center uses. I believe these activities
and uses would be inconsistent with the Plan's intent for
the Rural Areas. Ongoing agricultural or forestal
activities could be incompatible with the retreat
activities, creating the potential for nuisance suits.
One of the Plan's strategies for implementing the goal of
preserving agricultural/forestal activities is:
Make the permitted uses of the Rural Areas zoning
district consistent with the intent of the Rural Areas
policies and strategies (page 50)."
"
IATTACHMENT cl
IPage 21
Ronald S. Keeler
Page 2
May 11, 1992
Revisions to the ordinance after the adoption of the plan
modified the uses permitted on the Rural Area District.
These included the deletion of hotels and restaurants as
permitted uses.
Also, the type of use would be better located where public
utilities services and facilities can be provided to serve
it (water and sewer, police, fire and rescue service, road
access). The Village Growth Area designation is intended to
serve as rural service and residential centers, and provide
a location for development with a rural character and
setting.
The plan is silent as to the appropriateness of tourist
related activities in the rural areas, therefore I have made
no comment on the economic benefit of this use. The
consideration of the appropriateness and role of tourist
activity in the County and its relationship to the rural
areas should be considered during the review of the County
Economic development policy and during the next review of
the Comprehensive Plan.
DBB/blb
'"
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
. .
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning~
February 7, 1989
DATE:
RE:
Commercial Uses In Rural Areas
This memorandum is intended to provide a general discussion of
commercial/service uses in the Rural Areas and more.specifically
to introduce the staff report analysis for SP-88-89 STEVEN
SULLIVAN and SP-88-102 J. B. COFFEY.
The Rural Areas zoning district provides for three general
categories of commercial/service uses:
1. Aqriculture/Forestal uses including commercial fruit packing
plants, veterinary services, wayside stands, and sawmills.
For special permit review, the primary focus has been
effects on adjoining properties and other environmental
concerns;
2. Tourism uses including motels and inns, restaurants, gift,
craft, and antique shops, and agricultural museums. Special
use permit review has focused on location and accessibility
relative to tourist routes (for larger scale uses).
3. Basic support uses intended to provide limited basic support
to remote rural/agricultural populations including country
store, public garage, and day care. Staff reports for
support uses have historically made reference to
availability of like uses in the general area. The
remainder of this memorandum will discuss a framework for
review of support uses.
... ."
I ATTACHMENT D I Ipage 21
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Page 2
February 7, 1989
. POLICY GUIDELINES: A problem for staff in reviewing support
uses is the lack of definitive policy guidelines. The
statement of intent of the RA, Rural Areas zone does not
'contain specific language addressing support uses.
Likewise, the Comprehensive Plan contains no definitive
economic development policy to guide staff in reviews. As to
the intent of support uses in the Rural Areas, staff has
relied on recollection of discussions during formulation of
the Zoning Ordinance.
. SERVICE TO THE AREA: Staff reports for support uses
consistently refer to availability of other like uses in the
general area. Since adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance,
only one case has arisen where adequacy of service in the
general area was an issue in the public hearing process.
Recently the Planning Commission recommended approval of a
bank outside of a growth area with no discussion as to the
need for such a use nor availability of such uses within the
nearby growth area (Two other banks had been recently
approved within two miles of the site).
. ECONOMIC PROTECTIVE ZONING which seeks to preserve existing
businesses by discouraging competition is not endorsed by
staff as a legitimate purpose of zoning. At the same time,
zoning is intended to provide for "the current and future
land and water requirements of the community for various
purposes as determined by population and economic studies
and other studies" (Section 1. 5). Two concerns arise
specifically in regard to the Rural Areas zone. The first
is excessive commercialization to the extent that the rural
areas becomes a "catchall" as opposed to an area devoted to
agricultural and forestal uses. The second concern is in
terms of alternative usage of development. As an example,
most country stores are not desirable for residential usage
or other "by right" uses. Therefore, should a country store
fail as a result of competition, it may prove difficult to!
resist petitions for alternate commercial uses including I
rezonings to a commercial designation. I
I
i
. STAFF APPROACH: In review of support uses, staff will
employ three criteria in commenting on adequacy of service
to an area:
1. Similar Uses: Staff will attempt to identify uses of a
similar character within the general area as well as to
identify services available at such locations.
'"
"'
I ATTACHMENT D I
Ipage 31
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Page 3
February 7, 1989
2. Proximity to Growth Area: Staff will comment as to distance
to a designated village, community, or urban area as defined
by the Comprehensive Plan.
3. Traffic Counts: Traffic in the area will be used to
indicate potential customer volume.
Analysis based on the foregoing criteria is clearly arguable.
Given available review time and manpower requirements, staff will
be unable to undertake any market analysis or population analysis
(based on distance or travel time).
Incumbent upon the applicant will be:
. Demonstration of unserved market;
. Identification of services to be provided which are not
duplicated in the general area.
SUMMARY
since no criteria, standards, or other guidelines exist in the
Zoning Ordinance or Comprehensive Plan to direct staff in review
of support uses, recommendations and outcomes may not be as
consistent as for other reviews. While analysis outlined under
STAFF APPROACH would consistently address certain aspects of a
proposal, outcomes under such an approach could vary.
RSK/jcw
- .
Educational & Employment Perspectives of the Albemarle Summer Outdoor Theater
llWill ~~ l!..'lMl. plans an outdoor summer theatre for the production
of an historical drama modeled after The Lost Colony in North Carolina. This
pageant~style production will be performed throughout the summer,S or 6 nights a
week. A major purpose of the summer outdoor theater is to tell an important
story in America's history in an entertaining format. Staged with music and
special effects, the tale concentrates on local Revolutionary War history with
such legendary figures as Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, Daniel Boone, Dr.
Thomas Walker, General Stevens and Jack Jouett.
The play draws together impressions gathered at Monticello, Ash Lawn,
Michie Tavern, Montpelier and other historic sites -- making them especially
meaningful. Instilling pride of country and in Albemarle's contribution to her
history, the story will catch the audience up in that spirit and will leave them
wondering, "Where would we be today if the events portrayed had not occurred?"
Pr-oduction work runs from May through September, with almost 80
performances June through August. This is the quintessential "summer joo" for
both young people and others with summers "off." Since all performances will be
in the evening, it is possible for this work to be a second joo. We will also
work with area arts associations and institutions to develop "for credit"
internship programs at many levels: theater technical creation and production
(lights, sound, set, props, etc.); acting; period music; choreography; theater
administr-ation; business training to operate ticket sales, concessions and gift
shops; etc. These positions will range up and down the pay-scale. Most
dministrative positions and the cast will be filled with local residents. Some
highly specialized joos or roles may require outside professionals.
In addition to the summer performances, the theatre will cooperate with
chool systems around the state to share this aspect of Virginia history in a
ormat suited to school assemblies as well as classroom studies. We will provide
tudy guides for in-class work to complement the special theatrical performances.
he 50+ cast, the special effects and the horse-oriented action will be reworked
Onto a more portable and manageable format, The adjunct show will include 4-6
ctors whose performance will be augmented by slide-show and/or moving
icture/video action. The audience will be invited to become involved and "be
art of history,"
Th(:! students will come to realize the importance of Virginia's place in
istory, be able to appreciate this turning point in the American Revolution, and
hereby, understand how these events changed our world.
Young people enjoy learning through dramatic interpretation in which they
re active performers as well as seeing a performance. History becomes real and
elevant. Theater work encour-ages cooperation, discourages difficult behavior,
i ves young people oppor'tuni ties to explore their talents, channels energy in a
roductive and positive way.
1l./linrr. ~J~J'lM..~},,~ l!..'1M1. created the summer outdcx>r theater with community
alues foremost in mind, We view the theatre as an important element of
lbemarle life celebrating Charlottesville-Albemarle history, our scenery, and
ur role as an American cultural, artistic and educational center.
Address any questions, comments or suggestions to Charles or Linda McRaven
973-4859.
.. ..... .,,~
..
"
I~~m! ~~ ~~$ ~~!w~~m ~~~m &~~OOll!mm&Ymm
Um~~~ W~~~li~~~~m~ ~~~ ~lli~ &li~~~~~li~ &~~~
ll'~ ~~ ~~ plans an outdoor summer theatre for the production
of an historical drama on the order of the Outer Bank's The Lost Colony. This
pageant-style production will be performed throughout the summer, 5 or 6 nights a
week. The story, staged with music and special effects, concentrates on local
Revolutionary War history with legendary figures Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry,
Daniel Boone, Dr. Thomas Walker, General Stevens and Jack Jouett.
The play draws together impressions gathered at Monticello, Ash Lawn,
Michie Tavern, Montpelier and other historic sights -- making them especially
meaningful. Instilling pride of country and in Albemarle's contribution to her
history, the story will catch the audience up in that spirit and people will
leave wondering, "Where would we be had the events portrayed not occurred?"
The production has been created with community values foremost in mind. We
view the theatre as an important element of Albemarle life and hope residents
will bring guests to see the show often. However, the theatre will actually be
targeted toward the tourist trade which already exists (2500+ visitors per day).
Our aim is to give visitors historic, artistic, cultural evening entertainment,
with the expectation that they will stay here overnight.
The purpose of this project is multi-fold:
I to
provide evening entertainment for tourist families and tour groups telling
the history of our beautiful area with pageantry and music, on a regular,
dependable basis
. to
-
broaden the artistic, theatrical and educational scope and opportunities ]n
the Charlottesville area, creating new jobs and educational experiences
(internships and youth jobs as well as professional positions)
I to
launch a business which, while economically beneficial to the area
(with an annual projected impact of more than $20,000,000), will have a
relatively mild environmental impact. The tourists will come, spend
their money, enjoy their stay and LEAVE.
I to
give the 300,000+ summer visitors reason to stay one more night; eat
another dinner & breakfast; see another sight, buy another souvenir, etc.,
changing Charlottesville from a "day trip" destination to one encompassing
a longer stay so other attractions and businesses can benefit.
Clearly, the outdoor summer dntma provides /BlWY opportunities and benefits.
R('search shows that most visitors leave the area after a day at Monticello
and perhaps one other attraction. Charlottesville is an in-transit stop on the
way to Williamsburg or Virginia Beach (via Richmond). A single tour bus of 45
people spends $3,000+ a night for dinner, entertainment, a hotel, breakfast, etc.
When an outdoor theatre opens, the economic benefits to an area can be
enormous. For example, The Lost Colony production claims a 23-million dollar
impact each year for the Outer Banks area. We expect our theatre to put more
than 20--million dollars into the economy. At the same tillie, it will not overload
our schools or other services (unlike a manufacturing or other year-round
industry). And, tourism is relatively non-polluting and controllable and,
although seasonal, will generate an economic "ripple" effect for the whole year.
';/I ... ~
..
For this concept to be successful, the site must start out beautiful and
stay beautiful. The specific site has not been selected as of June, 1992, but
some 50 have been considered. The ideal site must have many attributes,
including a location as near as possible to where the actual events occurred.
Our site must also be on or very near to a major highway to facilitate safe and
quick traffic movement, avoiding narrow, twisting roads, and far from persistent
traffic noise, railroad tracks, air flight patterns. Near utilities.
We plan to nestle the amphitheater in the center of a 60-100 acre property
and blend with the natural environment. We are working with local architect
William Edgerton to design a 2,000-seat showcase theatre, with parking for 400+
cars and tour buses. We have looked at horse and cattle operations and even a
vineyard. Keeping a farm at work year-round will be part of the charm and is
logical since the theatre needs only 8-10 of the acres during the summer months.
This investor-owned, tax-paying project will create some 75+ jobs each
summer in the full pay-scale range with several year round. Student internships
will be an important part of our program. We will cast many roles locally. Some
highly specialized jobs or roles require professionals from outside the area.
The theatre will work with school systems to share this aspect of Virginia
history in a format suited to school assemblies as well as classroom studies.
~,~ ~~ ~~ is being guided by The Institute of Outdoor Drama
(IOD), a national research and support organization affiliated with the
University of North Carolina. The 10D has been counsel to 92 summer productions
including The Lost Colony, Unto These Hills (North Carolina), The Lime Kiln
Theater, The Trail of Tears (Oklahoma), Tecumseh (Ohio). The IOD is currently
conducting a detailed marketing and feasibility study for us. Their findings and
recommendations will cover every aspect of the proposed project and are based on
comparables, visits here and a study of exhaustive data.
Leader of the on-site Study Team is Dr. David Weiss, retired chairman of
the lJVa Drama Department. Dr. Weiss has been instrumental in launching several
successful outdoor dramas across the United States. Scott Parker heads the 100
as Executive Director. Mr. Parker completed graduate work at UVa and was the
producer of The Lost Colony for several years. The third member is Arthur
Cogswell, a North Carolina architect who is an authority on theater design.
Charles McRaven heads ~,~ ~~\l ~~. He is a publ ished author,
historian and nationally-recognized consultant on historic preservation and
construction (stone, log, post-and-beam). Mr. McRaven also has a strong
background in theatre and has been a professor of journalism.
Entertainment is America's biggest business, even when the general economy
falters. In fact, outdoor drama had its best year ever -- during the recession
year of 1991. When the proper research, marketing, community support, plus
?areful and conscientious management guide outdoor theatre productions, longevity
lS the norm. The Lost Colony is in its 54th season; many others are in their
third, fourth or fifth decades.
TIlis summer theater celebrates Charlottesville-Albemarle history, our
scenery, and our role as an Amprican cultural, artistic and educational center.
Address any questions, comments or suggestions to Charles or Linda McRaven
at 973-4859.
~ .~
.
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3, 5 AND 30.4
IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, Section 5, Supple-
Regulations, and Section 30.4, Natural Resource Extraction
erlay District, NR, are hereby amended and reenacted by the
dition of the following words:
S
3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Spring Water: Water derived at the surface from an
underground formation which flows to the surface through
natural cracks and fissures under natural pressure.
S ction 5.1, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, add the following words as:
5.1.33
SPRING WATER EXTRACTION AND/OR BOTTLING
a. No such use shall operate without approval of the
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services;
b. No such use shall be established without approval of
a site development plan;
c. Bottling facilities on-site shall be used only for
the bottling of spring water obtained on-site.
Water used for bottling shall not contain any
additives or artificial carbonation other than those
required by regulating agencies for purification
purposes;
d. All structures shall be similar in facade to a
single-family dwelling, private garage, shed, barn
or other structure normally expected in a rural or
residential area and shall be specifically com-
patible in design and scale with other development
in area in which located;
e. These provisions are supplementary and nothing
stated herein shall be deemed to preclude appli-
cation of the requirements of any other local, state
or federal agency.
, .
. -
~
- 2 -
Se tion 30.4, NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICTS, NR,
am nd the Statement of Intent to read as follows:
30.4.1
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (herein
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utili-
zation of spring water for off-site consumption, sand,
gravel, stone or other mineral deposits within the county
in a manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use.
S ction 30.4.2.2, BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT, add the following use:
8. Spring water extraction and/or bottling which does
not involve pumping of water to the surface.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w rding constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by
t e Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, virginia, at a
r gular meeting held on Jun~~
~d 0 ounty Supervisors
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596
r"!!"'" ," ".~, ,.
g'"\1~~~~.t.,;~.~;- :
AUG 0 4 1992
~}~.~,Pd~n\;
; -. ~'''>:
\..} :L~
MEMO jo: V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning & Community Development
FROM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC ~_~ /
DATE: August 3, 1992 ~
SUBJE T: ZTA-92-02, Donnie Dunn
I
On Jun 10, 1992, the Board held a public hearing on ZTA-92-02 for Donnie Dunn,
and su sequently adopted the zoning text amendments as recommended by the Plan-
ning C mmission.
A ques ion has come up about the wording of the Statement of Intent for the Natural
Resour e Extraction Overlay District (30.4.1). Before this amendment was adopted,
the s18 ement read (refer particularly to paragraph 2):
T .s natural resource extraction overlay district (herein referred to as NR)
is created to provide for the utilization of the sand, gravel, stone or other
mi eral deposits within the county in a manner compatible with adjacent land
us s.
*"
districts may be established where deposits of sand, gravel, stone or
er minerals exist; where the uses permitted hereunder are unlikely to
cr ate effects adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the value
of adjacent properties; and specifically where existing roads will not make it
ne essary to conduct trucking operations through developed residential
ar as or areas likely to be developed for residents during the course of any
ex ractive use.
---"I !
The s18 ement as shown in your staff report, and as adopted by the Board, reads:
T .s natural resource extraction overlay district (herein referred to as NR)
is created to provide for the utilization of spring water for off-site con-
su ption, sand, gravel, stone or other mineral deposits within the county
in a manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
Which v rsion of paragraph 2 is correct?
districts may be established where deposits of sand, gravel, stone or
er minerals exist; where the uses permitted hereunder are unlikely to
ate effects adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the exist-
roads will not make it necessary to conduct trucking operations through
eloped residential areas or areas likely to be developed for residents
ing the course of any extractive use.
R. St. John, Robert B. Brandenburger, Amelia Patterson
}~~';r':n~i-~,>~ te! ):~~a{: _
_'-...l'n.".....___ _-'--,.-;:.;
.;g~;;'i!;.~ ;;~.'I~'1 r'.:"~, _,~_
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
./.\ "./ L t
Dept. of Planning & Community Development; ,.
401 Mcintire Road : ' {
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
._\ .
, ;)
'"
May 27, 1992
Donnie R. Dunn
P. O. Box 231
Free Union, VA 22940
RE: ZTA-92-02 Donnie Dunn
Dear Mr. Dunn:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 26, 1992, by a vote 4-2, recommended approval of the
above-noted zoning text amendment to the Board of
Supervisors. Attached please find a revised staff report
which denotes changes made at the Planning Commission
meeting. Please note that the Board of Supervisors will
review this amendment at its June 10, 1992 meeting.
If you should have any questions or concerns about this
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
V~/l~
william D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc:
I
Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 26, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
ZTA-92-02 DONNIE DUNN
Oriqin: Request by Donnie Dunn.
Public Purpose to be Served: To allow for the bottling of
spring water for sale.
STAFF COMMENT:
The applicant proposes to amend Section 30.4.2.2 to add the
following:
8. Spring Water Extraction and/or bottling which
does not involve pumping of water to the surface.
This report will address the proposed zoning text
amendment's relationship with the:
1. Current State Regulations Governing Water Bottling
Activities
2 . Comprehensive Plan
3. Purpose and Intent of the Natural Resource Overlay
District
4. Purpose and Intent of the Zoning Ordinance
5. Purpose and Intent of the Rural Areas
Summary of the Current State Requlations Governing Water
Bottlinq Activities
Staff has discussed the issue of riparian rights with the
County Attorney and is of the opinion that the use of water
for bottling is permitted, provided that downstream entities
are not unreasonably affected. Issues of reasonable use are
best addressed by the courts. The water bottling industry
is regulated in Virginia by the Department of Agriculture
and Consumer Services with the assistance of the Department
of Health. The regulations address the quality of water
used for bottling and sanitary practices for bottling. The
quantity of water used is not addressed by the Department of
Agriculture and Consumer Services. Virginia has adopted the
guidelines of the Federal Food and Drug Administration as
they relate to bottled water. Staff opinion is that no
County regulations are required to ensure the safety of the
water source or bottling facilities.
1
The Natural Resource District is now, and is likely to
remain, an overlay district found predominately or
exclusively in the Rural Areas. This request was analyzed
under this assumption.
Comprehensive Plan The issue.of water extraction from
springs is not directly addressed by the Comprehensive Plan.
Spring water extraction is not a use directly related to
agricultural/forestal activities which are the primary
activities of the Rural Areas. However, the utilization of
spring water may enable the preservation of
agricultural/forestal lands without the subdivision of land.
This is accomplished by allowing the landowner to derive
benefit from a natural resource occurring on-site thereby
removing the desire to develop the land for residential use.
Regarding water resources the Comprehensive Plan states as a
goal:
"Protect the County's surface water and groundwater
supplies for the benefit of Albemarle County, the City
of Charlottesville, the Town of scottsville, and
downstream interests." (page 57)
Regarding water resources the Comprehensive Plan (page 57)
provides several comments:
"Protection of water resources is of vital importance
to Albemarle County and Virginia in general.
Albemarle's location adjacent to the Blue Ridge
Mountains provides both the advantage of clean
headwaters, and a responsibility to protect them."
and
"The County's Rural Areas playa crucial role in water
supply protections, including protection of surface
drinking water impoundment watersheds and protection of
groundwater supplies for the Rural Area population."
and
"Therefore, it has been a County policy to severely
restrict development in water supply watersheds..."
The plan states generally that the County's water resources,
surface and ground water, are to be treated in such a manner
as to preserve quality and quantity. Water bottling should
not adversely affect water quality but will affect quantity.
The use of water for bottling is currently allowed in the
LI, Light Industry District. Therefore, spring water
extraction may be considered inconsistent with the water
resource portion of the Comprehensive Plan.
2
The Water Resource Manager was contacted regarding this use
and those comments are included as Attachment A.
The Comprehensive Plan states on page 73 "Natural Resources
in Albemarle include its surface and groundwater,
floodplains, wetlands, aquatic and wildlife habitat,
farmlands, and forestal resources, other wooded and open
areas, critical slopes, soils, minerals, and air." The
Comprehensive Plan recognizes the existence and importance
of natural resources. Natural resources are to be utilized
provided that the negative effects of the resource
utilization are mitigated.
The location and character of a request and its consistency
with the Comprehensive Plan could be considered during the
review of each rezoning and special use permit for its
overall impact.
Purpose and Intent of the Natural Resource OVerlay District
The purpose and intent of the Natural Resource Overlay
District is as follows:
"This natural resource extraction overlay district
(hereafter referred to as NR) is created to provide for
the utilization of the sand, gravel, stone and other
mineral deposits within the County in a manner
compatible with adjacent land uses.
"NR districts may be established where deposits of
sand, gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the
uses permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
value of adjacent properties; and specifically where
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during
the course of any extractive use." (Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance, page 189).
The purpose of this district is primarily extractive,
however, some processing activities are permitted (concrete
batching and asphalt mixing plants). The resources listed
for the district are mineral in nature. staff recommends
the inclusion of spring water as a natural resource if this
ZTA is approved in order to clarify the proposed use within
the intent of the NR district.
In order to ensure that the proposed use is operated in a
manner compatible with adjacent land uses, staff recommends
that each special use permit be reviewed with emphasis on:
3
1. Effect of water withdrawal on downstream properties;
2. Size and appearance of water collection and bottling
facilities to ensure compatibility with adjacent uses;
3. Access for trucks transporting water and bottling
materials;
4. Adequacy of water source for consumption;
5. Measures to limit withdrawal of water during periods of
drought.
with appropriate review of each request, this use may be
considered consistent with the purpose and intent of the
Natural Resource Overlay District.
Purpose and Intent of the Zoninq Ordinance
One of the stated intents of the Ordinance is "to encourage
economic development activities that provide desirable
employment and enlarge the tax base" (Section 1.4.7).
The proposed amendment provides for a use not currently
listed in the Zoning Ordinance. The addition of this use
may result in increased employment. However, under the
current Comprehensive Plan, the Rural Areas are to be
devoted to agricultural and forestal sectors of the economy.
Purpose and Intent of the Rural Areas
The Rural Areas district is intended to encourage and
protect agricultural and forestal activities. Development
not related to bona fide agricultural and forestal
activities is encouraged to locate in the designated growth
areas. As has been stated previously in this report, the NR
district is now found and is likely to continue to be found
in the Rural Areas. Therefore, staff opinion is that any
amendment to the NR district must be reviewed with
consideration to the Rural Areas which is the most probable
underlying district.
Current by-right processing activities in the Rural Areas
are limited to Farm Winery [10.2.1(17)]. By special use
permit processing activities are limited to sawmills
[10.2.2(14)] and packing plants [10.2.2(23)]. All of these
uses are directly related to agricultural and forestal uses.
The proposed use is not directly related to agricultural and
forestal uses. The Planning Commission and Board of
supervisors should take into consideration the limited
processing uses allowed in the predominate underlying
district (RA) when considering an expansion of processing
uses in the NR district.
4
staff opinion is that the processing activities, while not
related to agricultural/forestal uses, can be regulated in
such a manner as to minimize their impact. These regulations
may include but are not limited to limitations on building
size in order to restrict the appearance of the bottling
activity to a scale' similar to that currently existing for
farm wineries. These regulations would be determined during
the review of each application.
Summary:
staff has identified the following factors which are
favorable to this request:
1. Current state regulations exist to protect the public
safety.
2. Allows opportunity for use of RA land that may avoid
its further development and does not remove it from
agricultural/forestal production.
3. Natural Resource utilization is anticipated in the
Comprehensive Plan.
4. Other Natural Resource extraction uses are permitted
and spring water extraction and bottling is less
intensive.
staff has identified the following factors which are
unfavorable to this request:
1. The proposed use may increase truck traffic on rural
roads.
2. Spring water extraction is not directly related to
agricultural/forestry.
3. Inconsistent with Comprehensive Plan water resource
goal.
While neither a positive or negative factor, staff notes
that the requested water withdrawal use is not currently
permitted in any Zoning District (Bottling as a use is
permitted by-right in the Light Industry District). Staff
opinion is that each request could be reviewed to ensure
that the use is consistent with the area in which it is
located. Conditions of approval for each request can limit
the activity to a level that does not adversely impact
adjacent properties or downstream interests.
Staff opinion is that the positive factors outweigh the
negative factors.
5
staff recommends approval of ZTA-92-02 with the addition of
language to clarify the intent of the NR district,
supplementary regulations governing spring water extraction
and bottling, and a definition of spring water.
staff recommends the following additions to the Zoning
Ordinance:
In Section 3.0 following Slaughterhouse, Custom add:
Spring Water - Water derived at the surface from
an underqround formation which flows to the
surface throuqh natural cracks and fissures under
natural pressure.
In section 5.1 Supplementary Regulations add:
5.1.33 Sprinq Water Extraction and/or bottlinq
gl No such use shall operate without approval of
the Virqinia Department of Aqriculture and
Consumer Services;
Ql No such use shall be established without
approval of a site development ?lan;
Ql Bottlinq facilities on-site shall be used
only for the bottlinq of sprinq water
obtained on-site. Water used for bottlinq
shall not contain any additives or artificial
carbonation other than those required by
requlatinq agencies for purification
purposes;
Ql All structures shall be similar in facade to
a sinqle-family dwellinq, private qaraqe,
shed, barn or other structure normally
expected in a rural or residential area and
shall be specifically compatible in desiqn
and scale with other development in area in
which located;
gl These provisions are supplementary and
nothinq stated herein shall be deemed to
preclude application of the requirements of
any other local, state or federal agency.
In section 30.4 Natural Resource Extraction Overlay
District - NR amend section 30.4.1 as follows:
30.4.1
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay
district (herein referred to as NR) is
created to provide for the utilization
6
of ~ne sprinq water for off-site
consumption. sand, gravel, stone or
other mineral deposits within the county
in a manner compatible with adjacent
land uses.
NR districts may be established where
deposits of sand, gravel, stone or other
minerals exist; where the uses permitted
hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and
welfare or to the existing roads will
not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed
residential areas or areas likely to be
developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use.
In section 30.4.2.2 add:
~ Sprinq Water Extraction and/or Bottling which
does not involve pumpinq of water to the
surface.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Water Resources Manager Comment
7
jATTACHMENT AI
ALBEMARLE - CHARLOTTESVILLE
OFFICE OF WATERSHED MANAGEMENT
401 MCiNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596
(804) 296-5841
;')~'
MEMORANDUM
,- ,." ."VG DEPT
,..../~~\"(,)l!~ .
TO:
William D. Fritz, Senior Planner
DATE:
J. W. Peyton Robertson, Jr., Water Resources Manager
April 2, 1992 ~~~~~
FROM:
RE:
ZTA-92-02 Water Bottling Operations by Special Permit
I have reviewed available information on water bottling
operations and feel that consideration of this activity
involves three primary issues: 1) water quality, both for
source water and potential impact from operations; 2) water
quantity, both in terms of impact on the resource and
availability; and 3) land use. Each of these items are
iaddressed below:
1) Water Quality - Bottled drinking water is currently
not subject to the same water quality standards as water from a
public supplier. Bottled drinking water is governed by
standards of the Food and Drug Administration, while public
supplies are subject to the Safe Drinking Water Act,
administered by the Environmental Protection Agency. Though
this is not of great importance to the County, it does limit
the location of spring water bottling operations to sources
which meet certain criteria. These criteria are applied by the
Health Department and Virginia Department of Agriculture and
Consumer Services.
The larger issue is potential impacts of bottling
operations on the public resources of groundwater and surface
water. sanitary facilities, disinfection agents (chlorine,
etc.), fuel storage, and other associated operational materials
could have impacts on area water resources if not properly
addressed. The magnitude of such impacts will depend on the
,nature and scale of the operation.
2) Water Quantity - Bottling operations which utilize a
natural spring are not typically using all of the available
water from the spring. Impacts to downstream water resources
(such as a public water supply) would be negligible from a
quantity standpoint and probably difficult to detect. Use of
i springs and other water resources is governed by the common law
'principle of riparian rights - the property owner has a right
:to reasonable use of the water so long as his use does not
adversely affect the ability of another riparian to make
memo to Fritz, 4/2/92
page 2
reasonable use of the water. Any disputes over riparian rights
are adjudicated in a court of law.
If a bottling operation is using a spring-fed source,
there will likely be no substantial impact on groundwater
resources since there is no active pumping of water from the
subsurface. If a well is utilized, there could be drawdown
effects from a pumping operation but this would depend on total
daily withdrawals and site-specific circumstances such as well
yield.
3) Land Use - Related to the potential impact of bottling
operations on water resources is the issue of land use. The
types of facilities necessary to actually bottle water in
containers are industrial in character. While there is not a
great deal of pollution associated with water bottling,
facilities do require adequate floor area for container washing
and sterilization, sanitary bottling, and packaging/storage for
shipment. Associated loading areas, truck parking, road
access, etc. are important considerations in terms of land
disturbance for development and post-construction runoff
characteristics.
One means of addressing these types of impacts would be to
allow water bottling operations only in designated Natural
Resource Extraction Overlay zoning districts. Information
necessary to evaluate the above mentioned issues could be
addressed in a broader geographical/land use context and
site-specific information could be further evaluated when
siting a particular operation.
I hope these comments are helpful. Please let me know if
you need additional information.
wr92-48
L
AN ORDINANCE
TO AMEND AND REENACT
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE
IN SECTIONS 3 AND 23.2.2
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
cqunty, Virginia, that Section 3, Definitions, and Section 23,
cqrnmercial Office, are hereby amended and reenacted by the addition
of the following words:
s~ction 3.0, DEFINITIONS, add the following definition:
Laboratory, Medical: A building or part thereof devoted
to bacteriological, biological, x-ray, pathological and
similar analytical or diagnostic services to medical
doctors or dentists including incidental pharmaceutics;
and production, fitting and/or sale of optical or
prosthetic appliances.
Laboratory, Pharmaceutical: A building or part thereof
devoted to the testing, analysis and/or compounding of
drugs and chemicals for ethical medicine or surgery, not
involving sale directly to the public.
S~ction 23.0, COMMERCIAL OFFICE, CO, add the following use:
23.2 .2
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
13. Laboratories, medical or pharmaceutical.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
wQrding constitutes a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by
tfue Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Vir inia, at a
r~gular meeting held on June 10,
C
,,'" ..,.
r
\
~ .'l
\ .".
...~ '~
" ~.)
," .: () ~_,j :' .} ;.. \ -.:. ; -'. I), f
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
~ 't\
i.
I! i;
j!:
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
and JuJU
FROM:
v. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning
Community Development
DATE:
May 28, 1992
RE:
ZTA-92-06 - To Amend The CO, Commercial Office
District To Include Laboratories, Medical Or
Pharmaceutical, By Special Use Permit And Provide
Definitions
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 26, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted zoning text amendment. Attached please find a
staff report which outlines this amendment.
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to
contact me.
VWC/jcw
.','
...
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RONALD S. KEELER
MAY 26, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
ZTA-92-06- TO AMEND THE CO. COMMERCIAL OFFICE DISTRICT TO INCLUDE
LABORATORIES. MEDICAL OR PHARMACEUTICAL. BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND
PROVIDE DEFINITIONS
ORIGIN: Planning staff
PUBLIC PURPOSE TO BE SERVED: To increase available office service
uses to implement the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT:
On May 5, 1992, the Planning Commission, at staff request, adopted
a resolution to amend the CO zone to include "laboratories-medical
or pharmaceutical" by special use permit. The CO zone is intended
to allow very limited uses adjacent to residential areas, but it
also is intended to accommodate Office Service Area uses described
in the Comprehensive Plan which would include corporate/major
office parks, research/development, and information systems.
"Laboratories" are listed under Industrial Service Areas, however,
the Community Development Division has stated that there was no
specific intent to preclude laboratory uses from Office Service
Areas and that "laboratory" may be viewed as allied with
"research/development." This position is bolstered by standard
reference material.
Review of Anderson's American Law of Zoning (3rd, 1986) shows a
change in treatment for "research laboratories."
Research laboratories have been seeking space in the
suburbs. While these establishments usually are related
to a profit-making corporation and are commercial uses,
many of them present few problems to their neighbors.
They generate a volume of traffic which varies in
relation to their staffs and their need to receive
deliveries of materials, and they require parking space,
but commonly they produce little of the noise, litter,
dust, or glare which are usually associated with
commercial and industrial uses. Research laboratories
cannot always operate in industrial neighborhoods, and
commercial surroundings may interfere wi th their
activities. Thus, one kind of research may require the
use of precision instruments which cannot be used in a
place subject to excessive vibration. Another type may
be adversely affected by noise and air pollution.
Anderson continues to state that "an increasing number of
municipalities are anticipating the need for space to accommodate
1
.-
.f" .. ..
research laboratories, and are meeting it with a 'floating zone'
for planned research office districts."
Neither medical nor pharmaceutical laboratory under definition
proposed by staff would be confined purely to scientific
investigation, as may be anticipated by the term "research
laboratory, " however, staff opinion is that environmental
requirements are similar and that these uses would be compatible to
other uses recommended for Office Service Areas.
Staff recommends the following amendments:
1. Add to the CO COMMERCIAL OFFICE district by special use
permit:
23.2.2.13 Laboratories-medical or pharmaceutical
2. ADD TO 3.0 DEFINITIONS:
Laboratory. Medical: A building or part thereof devoted
to bacteriological, biological, x-ray, pathological and
similar analytical or diagnostic services to, medical
doctors or dentists including incidental pharmaceutics;
and production, fitting, and or/sale of optical or
prosthetic appliances.
Laboratorv. Pharmaceutical: A building or part thereof
devoted to the testing, analysis and/or compounding of
drugs and chemicals for ethical medicine or surgery, not
involving sale directly to the public.
2
... \
~//
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901-4596
Board of Supervisors ! '
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk jjrt--l
/
D
August 10, 1992
Supplement No. 66 (Amendment No.2) to the Zoning
Ordinance
Attached is an amended sheet #189 to be inserted in your copy of
th Zoning Ordinance. A mistake was found on this page in
Su plement No. 66 issued for the June 10, 1992, zoning text amend-
me ts.
LE /mms
cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Robert B. Brandenburger
George R. St. John
Water Resources Manager
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
.' \
30i.4
301.4.1
-7
/
30.4.2
30.4.2.1
the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant
that such development may result in increased premium
rates for flood insurance and that such development may
result in increased hazard to life and property.
5. The zoning administrator shall maintain records of all
such variance applications including such material
considered in review and disposition of the same for
review upon request of the Federal Insurance Adminis-
tration.
NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICT - NR
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (herein
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utilization
of spring water for off-site consumption, sand, gravel,
stone or other mineral deposits within the county in a
manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use. (Amended 6-10-92)
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
Within any NR district, uses may be permitted by right as
for and subject to the district regulations of the under-
lying zoning district. In addition, there shall be per-
mitted by right within any NR district the following uses:
1. Except as otherwise provided in sections 10.2.1.18,
10.2.2.40 or 30.4.2.2, removal of soil, sand, gravel,
stone or other minerals by excavating, stripping,
quarrying or other mining operation. (Amended 7-6-83)
2. Accessory uses to a use permitted by right such as
blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stockpiling,
grinding and the like; provided that such operations
are located on the site of the main use. (Amended
4-28-82)
-189-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
.
.
.
,.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901-4596 '
Board of Supervisors ~ ^ )
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk~~
M 0 TO:
F
August 10, 1992
S
Supplement No. 66 (Amendment No.2) to the Zoning
Ordinance
L /mms
cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Robert B. Brandenburger
George R. St. John
Water Resources Manager
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
tached is an amended sheet #189 to be inserted in your copy of
e Zoning Ordinance. A mistake was found on this page in
S pplement No. 66 issued for the June 10, 1992, zoning text amend-
ments.
D
.
.
.
'"
30.4
30.4.1
30.4.2
30.4.2.1
the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant
that such development may result in increased premium
rates for flood insurance and that such development may
result in increased hazard to life and property.
5 .
The zoning administrator shall maintain records of all
such variance applications incl~ding such material
considered in review and disposition of the same for
review upon request of the Federal Insurance Adminis-
tration.
NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICT - NR
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (herein
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utilization
of spring water for off-site consumption, sand, gravel,
stone or other mineral deposits within the county in a
manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
value of adjacent properties; and specifically where
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use. (Amended 6-10-92)
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
Within any NR district, uses may be permitted by right as
for and subject to the district regulations of the under-
lying zoning district. In addition, there shall be per-
mitted by right within any NR district the following uses:
1. Except as otherwise provided in sections 10.2.1.18,
10.2.2.40 or 30.4.2.2, removal of soil, sand, gravel,
stone or other minerals by excavating, stripping,
quarrying or other mining operation. (Amended 7-6-83)
2. Accessory uses to a use permitted by right such as
blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stockpiling,
grinding and the like; provided that such operations
are located on the site of the main use. (Amended
4-28-82)
-189-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
j.
I
oJ
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 McINTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596
Board of supervisors
f
Lettie E. Neher, Cler~/
July 22, 1992
Supplement No. 66 to the Zoning Ordinance, dated June 10,
1992 (Amendment thereto)
ached are amended sheets to be inserted in your copy of the
ing Ordinance. An error was made in publiShing supplement #66
June 10, 1992, when new use "Theatre, Outdoor Drama" was listed
10.2.2.16. The actual location of this use is 10.2.2.44. For
se of you who threw away page #90.1 with the amended date
1-89 in the lower right-hand corner, a new copy of that sheet is
ached to be reinserted in your copy of the Zoning Ordinance.
o attached is new page #91.1. Since we are now printing
nded sheets only on one side of the paper, attached also are
ies of pages #91 and 92, if they are needed.
Sorry for the mix-up. If you have any questions, call 296-5843.
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
George R. st. John
Water Resources Manager
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
~/~ ,
38. Exploratory drilling. (Added 2-10-82)
39. Hydroelectric power generation (reference 5.1.26).
(Added 4-28-82)
40. Borrow area, borrow pit not permitted under section
10.2.1.18. (Added 7-6-83)
41. Convent, Monastery (reference 5.1.29). (Added 1-1-87)
42. Temporary events sponsored by local nonprofit organi-
zations which are related to, and supportive of the RA,
rural areas, district (reference 5.1.27). (Added
12-2-87)
43. Agricultural Museum (reference 5.1.30). (Added
12-2-87)
10 3 APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT
The following provisions shall apply to any parcel of record
at 5:15 p.m., the tenth day of December, 1980 (reference
6.5). (Amended 11-8-89)
-91.1-
(Supp. #51, 11-8-89)
.
..
c/,~<
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901-4596 ,
Board of Supervisors
Lettie E. Neher, Cler~
July 22, 1992
Supplement No. 66 to the Zoning Ordinance, dated June 10,
1992 (Amendment thereto)
are amended sheets to be inserted in your copy of the
ing Ordinance. An error was made in publishing supplement #66
June 10, 1992, when new use "Theatre, Outdoor Drama" was listed
10.2.2.16. The actual location of this use is 10.2.2.44. For
se of you who threw away page #90.1 with the amended date
1-89 in the lower right-hand corner, a new copy of that sheet is
ached to be reinserted in your copy of the Zoning Ordinance.
o attached is new page #91.1. Since we are now printing
nded sheets only on one side of the paper, attached also are
ies of pages #91 and 92, if they are needed.
Sorry for the mix-up. If you have any questions, call 296-5843.
/mms
c Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
George R. st. John
Water Resources Manager
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
~
..
6. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and
related towers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping
stations and appurtenances, unmanned telephone exchange
centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and
relay towers, substations and appurtenances.
7. Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference
5.1.6).
8. (Repealed 3-5-86)
9. Mobile home subdivisions (reference 5.5).
10. Mobile homes on individual lots (reference 5.6).
11. Hog farms.
12. Horse show grounds, permanent.
13. Custom slaughterhouse.
14. Sawmills, planing mills and woodyards (reference 5.1.15
and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
15. Group homes and homes for developmentally disabled
persons as described in section 15.1-486.2 of the Code
(reference 5.1.7).
-90.1-
(Supp. #51, 11-8-89)
16. commercial stable (reference 5.1.3).
17. Commercial kennel (reference 5.1.11 and subject to
per~ormance standards in 4.14).
18. Veterinary services, animal hospital (reference 5.1.11
and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
19. Private airport, helistop, heliport, flight strip
(reference 5.1.1).
20. Day camp, boarding camp (reference 5.1.5).
21. Sanitary landfill (reference 5.1.14).
22. Country store.
23. Commercial fruit or agricultural produce packing
plants. (Amended 11-8-89)
24. (Repealed 11-8-89)
25. Flood control dams and impoundments.
26. (Repealed 11-8-89)
27. Restaurants and inns located within an historic land-
mark as designated in the comprehensive plan provided
such structur~ has been used as a restaurant, tavern or
inn; in such case the structure shall be restored as
faithfully as possible to the architectural character
of the period and shall be maintained consistent
therewith. (Amended 11-8-89)
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
L 37.
Divisions of land as provided in section 10.5.
Boat landings and canoe livery.
Permitted residential uses as provided in section 10.5.
Home occupation, Class B (reference 5.2).
Cemetery.
Crematorium.
Multi-crypt mausoleum.
Church building and adjunct cemetery.
Gift, craft and antique shops.
Public garage. (Added 3-18-81)
-91-
(Supp. #51, 11-8-89)
38. Exploratory drilling. (Added 2-10-82)
39. Hydroelectric power generation (reference 5.1.26).
(Added 4-28-82)
40. Borrow area, borrow pit not permitted under section
10.2.1.18. (Added 7-6-83)
41. Convent, Monastery (reference 5.1.29). (Added 1-1-87)
42. Temporary events sponsored by local nonprofit organi-
zations which are related to, and supportive of the RA,
rural areas, district (reference 5.1.27). (Added
12-2-87)
43. Agricultural Museum (reference 5.1.30). (Added
12-2-87)
44. Theatre, outdoor drama. (Added 6-10-92)
10 3 APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS FOR DEVELOPMENT BY RIGHT
The following provisions shall apply to any parcel of record
at 5:15 p.m., the tenth day of December, 1980 (reference
6.5). (Amended 11-8~89)
-91.1-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
. ~
Edward H. Bain. Jr.
Samuel Millet
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
David P. Bowerman
Charlottesville
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H~mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
MEMO RAN DUM
DATE:
June 15, 1992
n
:. I
\ ~
\1 J
CMC /'fj, - V(!..,C
TO:
Board of Supervisors
FRlOM:
,
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk,
SQBJECT: Supplement No. 66 to the Zoning Ordinance
Attached are new sheets to be inserted in your copy of the
Zdning Ordinance. This supplement was occasioned by amendments
m~de on June 10, 1992.
L~:ec
co: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
George R. St. John
Richard E. Huff, II
Robert B. Brandenburger
Peyton Robertson
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
Inoperable Vehicle: (Repealed 6-10-87)
Junk Yard: Any land or building used for the abandonment,
storage, keeping, collecting or bailing of paper, rags,
scrap metals, other scrap or discarded materials, or for the
abandonment, demolition, dismantling, storage or salvaging
of inoperable vehicles, machinery or parts thereof.
Kennel, Commercial: A place designed or prepared to house,
board, breed, handle or otherwise keep or care for dogs
and/or cats for sale or in return for compensation except as
an accessory to a single-family dwelling.
-15.1-
(Supp. #41, 12-2-87)
sign, Roof: Any sign so erected or affixed to a building
wholly upon the roof of the building or any sign that
projects above the intersection of the roof decking and wall
face or any sign extending above the eave or parapet shall
be deemed a roof sign; provided that no sign located entire-
ly on that portion of the wall of any building constituting
the gable end thereof shall be deemed a roof sign.
Sign, Sale or Rental: A sign, not illuminated, which
designates all or portions of the lot or premises upon which
it is located to be for sale or lease. Such signs shall be
removed within one (1) week of sale or lease of the lot or
premises upon which it is situated. The lettering or
message on anyone (1) side of such sign may be different
from any other side.
Sign, Subdivision: A sign, not illuminated, sixty (60)
square feet or less in aggregate area, identifying a subdi-
vision and located thereon at the entrances to such subdi-
vision. Said sign shall be not greater in height than six
(6) feet and set back from any right-of-way for proper sight
distance.
Sign, Temporary Directional: A directional sign erected for
a period of not more than ten (10) days.
Sign, Temporary Event: A sign, not illuminated, describing
a seasonal, brief or particular event or activity to be or
being conducted upon the lot or premises upon which it is
located. Such sign may be erected not more than one (1)
month before the event or activity described, shall be
removed within one (1) week of its conclusion, and in no
event shall such sign be displayed for a period longer than
six (6) months in anyone (1) calendar year.
Sign, Wall: A business sign erected or painted on a build-
ing, visible from the exterior thereof, no part of which is
more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the build-
ing on which it is erected. Such sign may be illuminated.
Slaughterhouse, Custom: An establishment for the slaughter
of livestock, including cattle, sheep, swine, goats and
poultry, as a service, and from which there is sold no meat
or other product of such slaughter other than materials
generally considered inedible for humans and which are
generated as waste and/or by-products of such slaughter,
including, but not limited to, blood, bones, viscera, hides,
etc., which may be sold for purposes of removal from the
site.
Stable, Commercial: A building or group of buildings where,
for compensation, members of the public are provided with
horses for hire, accommodations for their horses and/or
lessons in riding.
-21-
Story: That portion of a building, other than the basement,
included between the surface of any floor and the surface of
the floor next above it. If there be no floor above it, the
space between the floor and the ceiling next above it.
Story, Half: A space under a sloping roof, which has the
line of intersection of roof decking and wall face not more
than three (3) feet above the top floor level, and in which
space not more than two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area is
finished off for use.
Street: A public or private thoroughfare which affords
access to abutting property.
Street Line: The dividing line between a street or road
right-of-way and the contiguous property.
Structure: Anything constructed or erected, the use of
which requires permanent location on the ground, or attach-
ment to something having a permanent location on the ground.
This includes, among other things, dwellings, buildings,
signs, etc.
Tourist Lodging: One or more rooms located within a single-
family dwelling which is actually used as such, which rooms
are used secondarily to such single-family use for the
temporary accommodation of transients in return for compen-
sation, whether or not such rooms are used in conjunction
with other portions of such dwelling.
Townhouse: One of a series of attached single-family
dwelling units, under single or multiple ownership, sepa-
rated from one another by continuous vertical walls without
openings from basement floor to roof.
Travel Trailer: A vehicular, portable structure built on a
chassis and designed to be used for temporary occupancy for
travel, recreational or vacation use; with the manufacturer's
permanent identification "Travel Trailer" thereon; and when
factory equipped for the road, being of any length provided
its gross weight does not exceed four thousand five hundred
(4,500) pounds, or being of any weight provided its overall
length does not exceed twenty-nine (29) feet. For the
purpose of this ordinance, a travel trailer shall not be
deemed a mobile home.
~riplex, Quadruplex: A multiple-family dwelling or series
of attached single-family dwellings containing in either
case three (3) or four (4) dwelling units, respectively.
Warehousing, Light: Storage establishments designed to
accommodate primarily individual households, not intended
for use by heavy commercial users and not involving frequent
heavy trucking.
-22-
Wayside Stand, Roadside Stand, Wayside Market: Any
structure or land used for the sale of agricultural or
horticultural produce or merchandise produced by the owner
or his family on their farm.
Wholesale Business: An establishment for the sale and
distribution of goods and merchandise to a retailer for
resale as opposed to sale directly to the public. (Added
12-2-87)
Wooded Area, Forested Area: An area containing one of the
minimum number of trees of specified size, or combinations
thereof, from the following table:
Diameter of Tree
at Breast Height
3.0" - 4.9"
5.0" - 6.9"
7.0" - 8.9"
9.0" - 10.9"
11.0" - 12.9"
13.0" - 14.9"
15.0"+
Per
Acre
60
38
22
14
10
7
5
Per One-
Half Acre
30
19
11
7
5
4
3
Yard: An open space on a lot other than a court unoccupied
and unobstructed from the ground upward, except as otherwise
provided herein.
Yard, Front: An open space on the same lot as a building
between the front line of the building (excluding steps) and
the front lot or street line, and extending across the full
width of the lot.
Yard, Rear: An open, unoccupied space on the same lot as a
building between the rear line of the building (excluding
steps), the rear line of the lot and extending the full
width of the lot.
Yard, Side: An open, unoccupied space on the same lot as a
building between the side line of the building (excluding
steps) and the side line of the lot, and extending from the
front yard line to the rear yard line.
-23-
(Supp. #41, 12-2-87)
5 1.32
TOWING AND TEMPORARY STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES
a. This provision is intended to provide locations for the
towing and/or temporary storage of collision/disabled
vehicles. No body or mechanical work, painting,
maintenance, servicing, disassembling, salvage or
crushing of vehicles shall be permitted; except that
the commission may authorize maintenance and servicing
of rental vehicles in a particular case;
b. No vehicle shall be located on any portion of such
property so as to be visible from any public road or
any residential property and shall be limited to
locations designated on the approved site plan. (Added
6-6-90)
-69.7-
(Supp. #55, 6-6-90)
8. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water,
involving water consumption exceeding four hundred
(400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by
right, not served by public sewer, involving antici-
pated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes.
(Added 6-14-89)
9. Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this
section, uses permitted in section 18.0, residential
R-15. in compliance with regulations set forth therein
and such conditions as may be imposed pursuant to
section 31.2.4. (Added 6-19-91)
10. Hotels, motels and inns (reference 9.0). (Added
6-19-91)
11. Supporting commercial uses (reference 9.0). (Added
6-19-91)
12. Research and development activities including
experimental testing. (Added 6-19-91)
2 .3 ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
In addition to the requirements contained herein, the
requirements of section 21.0, commercial districts,
generally, shall apply within all co districts.
-149.1
(Supp. #62, 6-19-91)
3p.4
30.4.1
,
the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant
that such development may result in increased premium
rates for flood insurance and that such development may
result in increased hazard to life and property.
5. The zoning administrator shall maintain records of all
such variance applications including such material
considered in review and disposition of the same for
review upon request of the Federal Insurance Adminis-
tration.
NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICT - NR
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (hereafter
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utilization
of the sand, gravel, stone and other mineral deposits within
the county in a manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects adverse
to public health, safety and welfare or to the value of
adjacent properties; and specifically where existing roads
will not make it necessary to conduct trucking operations
through developed residential areas or areas likely to be
developed for residents during the course of any extractive
use.
30.4.2 PERMITTED USES
3p.4.2.1 BY RIGHT
Within any NR district, uses may be permitted by right as
for and subject to the district regulations of the under-
lying zoning district. In addition, there shall be per-
mitted by right within any NR district the following uses:
1. Except as otherwise provided in sections 10.2.1.18,
10.2.2.40 or 30.4.2.2, removal of soil, sand, gravel,
stone or other minerals by excavating, stripping,
quarrying or other mining operation. (Amended 7-6-83)
2. Accessory uses to a use permitted by right such as
blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stockpiling,
grinding and the like; provided that such operations
are located on the site of the main use. (Amended
4-28-82)
-189-
(Supp. #19, 7-6-83)
. .
3 .4.2.2 BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
3 .4.3
Within any NR district, uses by special use permit shall be
permitted as for and subject to the district regulations of
the underlying zoning district. In addition, the following
shall be permitted by special use permit in any NR district:
1. Concrete batching plants.
2. Asphalt mixing plants.
3. Mining and milling of uranium or other radioactive
materials. (Added 4-28-82)
4. Extraction of oil and natural gas. (Added 4-28-82)
5. Coal mining. (Added 4-28-82)
6. Deep mining. (Added 4-28-82)
7. Accessory uses to a use permitted by special use permit
or off-site accessory uses to a use permitted by right
such as blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stock-
piling, grinding and the like. (Added 4-28-82)
PERMIT REQUIRED
Prior to commencing any natural resource extraction activity
within any NR district, the operator of such activity shall
obtain a permit therefor from the zoning administrator.
Such permit shall be issued upon filing with the zoning
administrator of a plan of the proposed natural resource
extractive activity, including all data sufficient to ensure
compliance with the provisions of this section. The appli-
cant may comply herewith by the filing of a copy of any plan
of such proposed operation approved by the Virginia Depart-
ment of Conservation and Economic Development filed pursuant
to Title 45.1 of the Code, together with such additional
data as the zoning administrator may require to ensure
compliance with this section. In addition, the applicant
shall provide evidence satisfactory to the zoning adminis-
trator that he has complied with the provisions of Title
45.1 of the Code. Every such permit issued by the zoning
administrator shall be subject to annual review and shall be
revoked in the event that any permit issued for any such
operation shall expire or otherwise terminate in accordance
with the requirements of Title 45.1 of the Code or the
regulations of the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Economic Development. (Amended 4-28-82)
-190-
Supp. #11, 4-28-82)
.
.
.
..
Edward H. Bai . Jr.
Samuel Miller
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesvill
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack Jouett
TO:
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
Forrest R. Marshall. Jr.
Scottsville
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
MEMORANDUM
Board of Supervisors
,/
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC '~( <-
June 15, 1992
Supplement No. 66 to the Zoning Ordinance
Attached are new sheets to be inserted in your copy of the
ing Ordinance. This supplement was occasioned by amendments
e on June 10, 1992.
:ec
cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
George R. St. John
Richard E. Huff, II
Robert B. Brandenburger
Peyton Robertson
v. Wayne Cilimberg
Amelia Patterson
Clerk
.
Hog Farm: A place where hogs are kept and raised primarily
for sale.
.
Home Garden: An activity accessory to residential usage of
a property involving the cultivation of flowers, vegetables,
fruit and/or other plants primarily for the consumption or
enjoyment of the residents of such property, but expressly
excluding the keeping of livestock and/or poultry. (Added
12-2-87)
Home for Developmentally Disabled Persons: A building or
group of buildings containing one (1) or more dwelling units
designed and/or used for housing mentally retarded or
otherwise developmentally disabled persons not related by
blood or marriage.
Home Occupation, Class A: An occupation conducted in a
dwelling unit for profit in connection with which no person
other than members of the family residing on the premises is
engaged in such occupation.
.
Home Occupation, Class B: An occupation conducted in a
dwelling unit, with or without the use of one or more
accessory structures, for profit, in connection with which
there are employed not more than two (2) persons other than
members of the family residing on the premises, which
persons may be in addition to such family members.
Hospital: A building or group of buildings designed, used
or intended to be used, for the care of the sick, aged or
infirmed, including the care of mental, drug-addiction or
alcoholic cases. This terminology shall include, but not be
limited to, sanitariums, nursing homes and convalescent
homes.
Hotel: A building containing six (6) or more guest rooms
intended or designed to be used, or which are used, rented
or hired out to be occupied or which are occupied for
sleeping purposes by guests.
Inoperative Motor Vehicle: Any motor vehicle, trailer or
semitrailer, as such are defined in Virginia Code Section
46.1-1, which is not in operating condition; or which for a
period of sixty (60) days or longer has been partially or
totally disassembled by the removal of tires and wheels, the
engine, or other essential parts required for the operation
of the vehicle or on which there are displayed neither valid
license plates nor a valid inspection decal. (Added 6-10-87)
.
-15-
(Supp. #41, 12-2-87)
Inoperable Vehicle: (Repealed 6-10-87)
.
Junk Yard: Any land or building used for the abandonment,
storage, keeping, collecting or bailing of paper, rags,
scrap metals, other scrap or discarded materials, or for the
abandonment, demolition, dismantling, storage or salvaging
of inoperable vehicles, machinery or parts thereof.
Kennel, Commercial: A place designed or prepared to house,
board, breed, handle or otherwise keep or care for dogs
and/or cats for sale or in return for compensation except as
an accessory to a single-family. dwelling.
Laboratory, Medical: A building or part thereof devoted to
bacteriological, biological, x-ray, pathological and similar
analytical or diagnostic services to medical doctors or
dentists including incidental pharmaceutics; and production,
fitting and/or sale of optical or prosthetic appliances.
(Added 6-10-92)
Laboratory, Pharmaceutical: A building or part thereof
devoted to the testing, analysis and/or compounding of
drugs and chemicals for ethical medicine or surgery, not
involving sale directly to the public. (Added 6-10-92)
.
.
-15.1-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
.
Sign, Roof: Any sign so erected or affixed to a building
wholly upon the roof of the building or any sign that
projects above the intersection of the roof decking and wall
face or any sign extending above the eave or parapet shall
be deemed a roof sign; provided that no sign located entire-
ly on that portion of the wall of any building constituting
the gable end thereof shall be deemed a roof sign.
sign, Sale or Rental: A sign, not illuminated, which
designates all or portions of the lot or premises upon which
it is located to be for sale or lease. Such signs shall be
removed within one (1) week of sale or lease of the lot or
premises upon which it is situated. The lettering or
message on any one (1) side of such sign may be different
from any other side.
Sign, Subdivision: A sign, not illuminated, sixty (60)
square feet or less in aggregate area, identifying a subdi-
vision and located thereon at the entrances to such subdi-
vision. Said sign shall be not greater in height than six
(6) feet and set back from any right-of-way for proper sight
distance.
Sign, Temporary Directional: A directional sign erected for
a period of not more than ten (10) days.
.
Sign, Temporary Event: A sign, not illuminated, describing
a seasonal, brief or particular event or activity to be or
being conducted upon the lot or premises upon which it is
located. Such sign may be erected not more than one (1)
month before the event or activity described, shall be
removed within one (1) week of its conclusion, and in no
event shall such sign be displayed for a period longer than
six (6) months in anyone (1) calendar year.
Sign, Wall: A business sign erected or painted on a build-
ing, visible from the exterior thereof, no part of which is
more than twelve (12) inches from the surface of the build-
ing on which it is erected. Such sign may be illuminated.
Slaughterhouse, Custom: An establishment for the slaughter
of livestock,. including cattle, sheep, swine, goats and
poultry, as a service, and from which there is sold no meat
or other product of such slaughter other than materials
generally considered inedible for humans and which are
generated as waste and/or by-products of such slaughter,
including, but not limited to, blood, bones, viscera, hides,
etc., which may be sold for purposes of removal from the
site.
.
Spring Water: Water derived at the surface from an
underground formation which flows to the surface through
natural cracks and fissures under natural pressure. (Added
6-10-92)
-21-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
Stable, commercial: A building or group of buildings where,
for compensation, members of the public are provided with
horses for hire, accommodations for their horses and/or
lessons in riding.
.
Story: That portion of a building, other than the basement,
included between the surface of any floor and the surface of
the floor next above it. If there be no floor above it, the
space between the floor and the ceiling next above it.
story, Half: A space under a sloping roof, which has the
line of intersection of roof decking and wall face not more
than three (3) feet above the top floor level, and in which
space not more than two-thirds (2/3) of the floor area is
finished off for use.
Street: A public or private thoroughfare which affords
access to abutting property.
Street Line: The dividing line between a street or road
right-of-way and the contiguous property.
Structure: Anything constructed or erected, the use of
which requires permanent location on the ground, or attach-
ment to something having a permanent location on the ground.
This includes, among other things, dwellings, buildings,
signs, etc.
.
Theater, Outdoor Drama: An establishment whether operated
for profit or not, providing live performance recreations of
events of historic significance to and having actually
occurred within the locality or immediately adjacent
localities. (Added 6-10-92)
Tourist Lodging: One or more rooms located within a single-
family dwelling which is actually used as such, which rooms
are used secondarily to such single-family use for the
temporary accommodation of transients in return for compen-
sation, whether or not such rooms are used in conjunction
with other portions of such dwelling.
Townhouse: One of a series of attached single-family
dwelling units, under single or multiple ownership, sepa-
rated from one another by continuous vertical walls without
openings from basement -floor to roof.
.
Travel Trailer: A vehicular, portable structure built on a
chassis and designed to be used for temporary occupancy for
travel, recreational or vacation use; with the manufacturer's
permanent identification "Travel Trailer" thereon; and when
factory equipped for the road, being of any length provided
its gross weight does not exceed four thousand five hundred
(4,500) pounds, or being of any weight provided its overall
length does not exceed twenty-nine (29) feet. For the
purpose of this ordinance, a travel trailer shall not be
deemed a mobile home.
-22-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
Triplex, Quadruplex: A multiple-family dwelling or series
of attached single-family dwellings containing in either
case three (3) or four (4) dwelling units, respectively.
.
Warehousing, Light: Storage establishments designed to
accommodate primarily individual households, not intended
for use by heavy commercial users and not involving frequent
heavy trucking.
Wayside Stand, Roadside Stand, Wayside Market: Any
structure or land used for the sale of agricultural or
horticultural produce or merchandise produced by the owner
or his family on their farm.
Wholesale Business: An establishment for the sale and
distribution of goods and merchandise to a retailer for
resale as opposed to sale directly to the public. (Added
12-2-87)
Wooded Area, Forested Area: An area containing one of the
minimum number, of trees of specified size, or combinations
thereof, from the following table:
.
Diameter of Tree
at Breast Height
3.0" - 4.9"
5.0" - 6.9"
7.0" - 8.9"
9.0" - 10.9"
11.0" - 12.9"
13.0" - 14.9"
15.0"+
Per
Acre
60
38
22
14
10
7
5
Per One-
Half Acre
30
19
11
7
5
4
3
Yard: An open space on a lot other than a court unoccupied
and unobstructed from the ground upward, except as otherwise
provided herein.
Yard, Front: An open space on the same lot as a building
between the front line of the building (excluding steps) and
the front lot or street line, and extending across the full
width of the lot.
Yard, Rear: An open, unoccupied space on. the same lot as a
building between the rear line of the building (excluding
steps), the'rear line of the lot and extending the full
width of the lot.
Yard, Side: An open, unoccupied space on the same lot as a
building between the side line of the building (excludipg
steps) and the side line of the lot, and extending from the
front yard line to the rear yard line.
.
-23-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
4. (
.
4.
4. .1
4. .2
4.~.3
.
4.~.4
4.1.5
4.1.6
.
4.1.7
ARTICLE II. BASIC REGULATIONS
GENERAL REGULATIONS
Except as otherwise specifically provided, the following
general regulations shall apply. .
AREA AND HEALTH REGULATIONS RELATED TO UTILITIES (Amended
6-3-81)
The following regulations shall apply to all districts:
For a parcel served by both a central water supply and a
central sewer system, the minimum area requirements of the
district in which such parcel is located shall apply.
For a parcel served by either a central water supply or a
central sewer system, there shall be provided a minimum area
of forty thousand (40,000) square feet per commercial or
industrial establishment or per dwelling unit as the case
may be.
For a parcel served by neither a central water supply nor a
central sewer system, there shall be provided a minimum of
sixty thousand (60,000) square feet per commercial or
industrial establishment or per dwelling unit as the case
may be.
The provisions of sections 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 notwithstanding,
in such cases where a greater minimum area is required by
the regulations of the district in which the parcel is
located, said district regulations shall apply.
In the case of. unusual soil conditions or other physical
factors which may impair the health and safety of the
neighborhood, upon the recommendation of the Virginia
Department of Health, the commission may increase the area
requirements for uses utilizing other than a public sewer
system.
For lots not served by a central sewer system, no building
permit shall be issued for any building or structure, the
use of which involves sewage disposal, without written
approval from the local office of the Virginia Department of
Health of the location and area for both original and future
replacement septic disposal fields adequate to serve such
use. For residential usage, at a minimum, each septic
disposal field shall consist of suitable soils of adequate
area to accommodate sewage disposal from a three (3) bedroom
dwelling as determined by current regulations of the
Virginia Department of Health. (Amended 11-15-89)
In a cluster development, open space may be used for septic
field location only after the septic field locations on such
lot are determined to be inadequate by the local office of
the Virginia Department of Health. (Added 6-3-81)
-24-
(Supp. #52, 11-15-89)
.
.
.
5.1.29
5. .30
5. .31
CONVENT, MONASTERY
a.
The ownership of the conventlmonastery shall conform in
all respects to the provisions of Chapter 2 of Title 57
of the Code of Virginia, as the same may be amended
from time to time, or any successor statute;
b. This provision is intended to accommodate the long term
residency of nuns, monks or friars in a communal
setting as opposed to transient occupancy as may be
experienced in other religious retreats; provided that
nothing contained herein shall be deemed to preclude
temporary lodging of guests as an accessory use to the
convent-or monastery. (Added 1-1-87)
AGRICULTURAL MUSEUM
a. Items for display in such museum shall be directly
related to past or present agricultural/forestal uses
in Albemarle County;
b. Activities may include: passive display; active
demonstration including tours of processing areas; and
public participation in such agricultural activity;
c.
Sale of display items and accessory items may be per-
mitted only upon expressed approval by the board of
supervisors. (Added 12-2-87)
BODY SHOP
a. There shall be no storage of parts, materials or
equipment except within an enclosed building.
b. No vehicle awaiting repair shall be located on any
portion of such property so as to be visible from any
public road or any residential property, and shall be
limited to locations designed on the approved site
plan.
c. Nothing herein shall be construed to limit the
authority of the governing body in the review of any
special use permit, including, but not limited to, the
regulation of hours of operation, location of door
and/or windows and the like. (Added 12-7-88)
-69.6-
(Supp. #45, 12-7-88)
.
.
.
5. .32
5.1L.33
.
TOWING AND TEMPORARY STORAGE OF MOTOR VEHICLES
a.
This provision is intended to provide locations for the
towing and/or temporary storage of collision/disabled
vehicles. No body or mechanical work, painting,
maintenance, servicing,. disassembling; salvage or
crushing of vehicles shall be permitted; except that
the commission may authorize maintenance and servicing
of rental vehicles in a particular case;
b. No vehicle shall be located on any portion of such
property so as to be visible from any public road or
any residential property and shall be limited to
locations designated on the approved site plan. (Added
6-6-90)
SPRING WATER EXTRACTION AND/OR BOTTLING
a. No such use shall operate without approval of the
Virginia Department of Agriculture and Consumer
Services;
b. No such use shall be established without approval of a
site development plan;
c.
Bottling facilities on-site shall be used only for the
bottling of spring water obtained on-site. Water used
for bottling shall not contain any additives or artifi-
cial carbonation other than those required by regu-
lating agencies for purification purposes;
d. All structures shall be similar in facade to a single-
family dwelling, private garage, shed, barn or other
structure normally expected in a rural or residential
area and shall be specifically compatible in design and
scale with other development in area in which located;
e. These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated
herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the
requirements of any other local, state or federal
agency. (Added 6-10-92)
-69.7-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
6.
.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
.
Electrical power substations, transmission lines and
related towers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping
stations and appurtenances, unmanned telephone exchange
centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and
relay towers, substations and appurtenan~es.
Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference
5.1.6).
(Repealed 3-5-86)
Mobile home subdivisions (reference 5.5).
Mobile homes on individual -lots (reference -5.6).
Hog farms.
Horse show grounds, permanent.
custom slaughterhouse.
Sawmills, planing mills and woodyards (reference 5.1.15
and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
Group homes and homes for developmentally disabled
persons as described in section 15.1-486.2 of the Code
(reference 5.1.7). .
16. Theater, outdoor drama. (Added 6-10-92)
.
-90.1-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
16. Commercial stable (reference 5.1.3).
.
17. Commercial kennel (reference 5.1.11 and subject to
performance standards in 4.14).
18. Veterinary services, animal hospital (reference 5.1.11
and subject to performance standards in 4.14).
19. Private airport, helistop, heliport, flight strip
(reference 5.1.1).
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
. 27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
33.
34.
35.
36.
. 37.
Day camp, boarding camp (reference 5.1.5).
Sanitary landfill (reference 5.1.14).
Country store.
Commercial fruit or agricultural produce packing
plants. (Amended 11-8-89)
(Repealed 11-8-89)
Flood control dams and impoundments.
(Repealed 11-8-89)
Restaurants and inns located within an historic land-
mark as designated in the comprehensive plan provided
such structure has been used as a restaurant, tavern or
inn; in such case the structure shall be restored as
faithfully as possible to the architectural character
of the period and shall be maintained consistent
therewith. (Amended 11-8-89)
Divisions of land as provided in section 10.5.
Boat landings and canoe livery.
Permitted residential uses as provided in section 10.5.
Home occupation, Class B (reference 5.2).
Cemetery.
Crematorium.
Multi-crypt mausoleum.
Church building and adjunct cemetery.
Gift, craft and antique shops.
Public garage. (Added 3-18-81)
-91-
(Supp. #51, 11-8-89)
.
.
.
7.
Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities,
excluding multi-legged tower structures and including
poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related
facilities for distribution of local service and owned
and operated by a public utility. Water distribution
and sewerage collection lines, pumping stations and
appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle
County Service Authority. Except as otherwise
expressly provided, central water supplies and central
sewerage systems in conformance with Chapter 10 of the
Code of Albemarle and all other applicable law.
8. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile
facilities such as schools, offices, parks, playgrounds
and. roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or
federal agencies (reference 31.2.5); public water and
sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment
facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or
operated by the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority
(reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-89)
9. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.18).
10. Dwellings (reference 5.1.21). (Added 3-17-82)
11. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8).
(Added 3-5-86)
23 2.2
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
1. Hospitals.
2. Funeral homes.
3. Electrical power substations, transmission lines and
related towers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping
stations a~d appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange
centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and
relay towers, substations and appurtenances.
4. Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade
(Added 11-7-84)
5. Commercial uses otherwise permitted having drive-in
windows (Added 11-7-84)
6. School of special instruction. (Added 1-1-87)
7. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference
5.1.2). (Added 1-1-87)
-149-
(Supp. #49, 11-1-89)
.
.
.
8.
Uses permitted by right, not served by public water,
involving water consumption exceeding four hundred.
(400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by
right, not served by public sewer, involving antici-
pated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes.
(Added 6-14-89)
9. Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this
section, uses permitted in section 18.0, residential
R-15. in compliance with regulations set forth therein
and such conditions as may be imposed pursuant to
section 31.2.4. (Added 6-19-91)
10. Hotels, motels and inns (reference 9.0). (Added
6-19-91)
11. Supporting commercial uses (reference 9.0). (Added
6-19-91)
12. Research and development activities including
experimental testing. (Added 6-19-91)
13. Laboratories, medical or pharmaceutical. (Added
6-10-92)
23.3
ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS
In addition to the requirements contained herein, the
requirements of section 21.0, commercial districts,
generally, shall apply within all CO districts.
-149.1
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
.
.
.
30 4
30 4.1
30.4.2
30.4.2.1
the zoning administrator shall notify the applicant
that such development may result in increased premium
rates for flood insurance and that such development may
result in increased hazard to life and property.
5.
The zoning administrator shall maintain records of all
such variance applications including such material
considered in review and disposition of the same for
review upon request of the Federal Insurance Adminis-
tration.
NATURAL RESOURCE EXTRACTION OVERLAY DISTRICT - NR
INTENT
This natural resource extraction overlay district (herein
referred to as NR) is created to provide for the utilization
of spring water for off-site consumption, sand, gravel,
stone or other mineral deposits within the county in a
manner compatible with adjacent land uses.
NR districts may be established where deposits of sand,
gravel, stone or other minerals exist; where the uses
permitted hereunder are unlikely to create effects
adverse to public health, safety and welfare or to the
existing roads will not make it necessary to conduct
trucking operations through developed residential areas
or areas likely to be developed for residents during the
course of any extractive use. (Amended 6-10-92)
PERMITTED USES
BY RIGHT
Within any NR district, uses may be permitted by right as
for and subject to the district regulations of the under-
lying zoning district. In addition, there shall be per-
mitted by right within any NR district the following uses:
1. Except as otherwise provided in sections 10.2.1.18,
10.2.2.40 or 30.4.2.2, removal of soil, sand, gravel,
stone or other minerals by excavating, stripping,
quarrying or other mining operation. (Amended 7-6-83)
2. Accessory uses to a use permitted by right such as
blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stockpiling,
grinding and the like; provided that such operations
are located on the site of the main use. (Amended
4-28-82)
-189-
(Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
.. . , ..
.
.
.
30.4.2.2
30.4.3
BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT
within any NR district, uses by special use permit shall be
permitted as for and subject to the district regulations of
the underlying zoning district. In addition, the following
shall be permitted by special use permit in any NR district:
1. Concrete batching plants.
2. Asphalt mixing plants.
3. Mining and milling of uranium or other radioactive
materials. (Added 4-28-82)
4. Extraction of oil and natural gas. (Added 4-28-82)
5. Coal mining. (Added 4-28-82)
6. Deep mining. (Added 4-28-82)
7. Accessory uses to a use permitted by special use permit
or off-site accessory uses to a use permitted by right
such as blasting, washing, grading, sorting, stock-
piling, grinding and the like. (Added 4-28-82)
8.
Spring water extraction and/or bottling which does not
involve p~ping of water to the surface. (Added
6-10-92)
PERMIT REQUIRED
Prior to commencing any natural resource extraction activity
within any NR district, the operator of such activity shall
obtain a permit therefor from the zoning administrator.
Such permit shall be issued upon filing with the zoning
administrator of a plan of the proposed natural resource
extractive activity, including all data sufficient to ensure
compliance with the provisions of this section. The appli-
cant may comply herewith by the filing of a copy of any plan
of such proposed operation approved by the Virginia Depart- .
ment of Conservation and Economic Development filed pursuant
to Title 45.1 of the Code, together with such additional
data as the zoning administrator may require to ensure
compliance with this section. In addition, the applicant
shall provide evidence satisfactory to the zoning adminis-
trator that he has complied with the provisions of Title
45.1 of the Code. Every such permit issued by the zoning
administrator shall be subject to annual review and shall be
revoked in the event that any permit issued for any such
operation shall expire or otherwise terminate in accordance
with the requirements of Title 45.1 of the Code or the
regulations of the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Economic Development. (Amended 4-28-82)
-190-
Supp. #66, 6-10-92)
, .~
Ij t::.M Ie:.
.'
.'-~""-""',~"""","",,~~~'
,~
'Plg~~f!:L' ~tt~fn No.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
/ ','.. ~ !,' ':} ',': t ~
- ,-'~ F. i i'Ii .
-...- ~,.
, :'! I iF:J (-:~) f':J f1 rl n f ,- 'J ,;----;
, , ".' ,........,..._._._~,_u-,.,.d--~_(J...lr-. i n.1
t l~l" ~ I j I)
." t \ 11 i'
." 'i ') IQ()I'\ 'I f ','
. " \ II, III' ",', ,,(, l. 'I'
, I I
~.~ -.~ ~ . 1 r
I..:'.:...... :.:-":rlT-ls I.~J
t
i ,; Fif ~"f t/
May 28, 1992
University of virginia Real Estate Foundation
ATTN: David Westby
1709 University Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: ZMA-92-03 University of virginia Real Estate Foundation
Dear Mr. Westby:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 26, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted petition to the Board of supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to proffers 1-13 as
outlined in letter from Robert B. Mckee to Ron Keeler, dated
May 15, 1992 (copy attached).
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
sincerely,
PW~mberg
Director of Planni
ommunity Development
VWC/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
'i.'.......
.>, ;\..Jl2~ tv BGJr'il
, ."-~~
'to;eru.1 item ,~( ._-,.-Z/:.L~L~:..;;?~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
May 28, 1992
university of Virginia Real Estate Foundation
ATTN: David Westby
1709 University Avenue
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: SP-92-13 University of virginia Real Estate Foundation
Dear Mr. Westby:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 26, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is for the following:
23.2.2.12 Research and development activities
including experimental testing;
23.2.2.13 Laboratories-Medical and Pharmaceutical
1. Compliance with section 4.14 Performance Standards
of the Zoning Ordinance.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation
Page 2
May 28, 1992
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Uc
Community Development
VWCjjcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
~
. '
McKEE/CARSON
CONSULTING ENGINEERS
LANDSCAPE ARCHITEC1S
PLANNERS
15 May 1992
HAND DELIVERY
Mr. Ron Keeler
Department of Planning and Community Development
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, V A 22902
R~~~lH!:'D
\;0-. "'-,rlh..... 1" :.............
MAY 1 5 1992
PI ,.!lI"II',"'" ....r~-l
l..J"\~'\:i'J~I..lJ U,"':i ,
RE: UREF Fontaine Avenue Research Park Rezoning Proffel'S
Dear Ron:
Pursuant to your request, I am writing to outline the latest proffers for Fontaine A venue Research
Park. As we have discussed, the revised final report will be provided to you by Tuesday of next
week. In the interim, I hope this letter will suffice to assist you in preparing your staff report.
With the exception of the extent of the improvements along Fontaine Avenue and a minor
modification in allowable building height and total project square footage, the proffers remain
substantially the same as outlined in our preliminary report of April 6, 1992. The proffers to
which UREF has agreed are listed as follows:
1. UREF will construct at its expense along its property frontage improvements to Fontaine
A venue as recommended in the City Urban Design Plan and which are further described in
the JPA/Fontaine Avenue Neighborhood Study. Generally these improvements will consist
of a four-lane, landscaped median divided roadway which shall be designed to VOOT
Collector Road standards. Based on traffic studies prepared for the project, these
improvements are considered more than adequate to accommodate the additional traffic
occasioned by the development of the University Research Park. Specifically, these
improvements will consist of (a) an additional full frontage eastbound lane extending from
the existing northbound exit ramp of U.s. 29/250 Bypass to the eastern most comer of the
property, (b) upgrade of the existing eastbound lane, (c) provision of a l00-foot taper plus
l00-foot right turn lane adjacent to the new eastbound lane, (d) median improvements
consisting of curbed landscape median extending from the project entrance west to the bypass,
(e) median improvements consisting of curbed landscape median to accommodate the
necessary left turn movements into the park from westbound Fontaine Avenue, ({) left turn
lane into the project and, (g> two westbound through lanes from the eastern most property
line to the northbound on ramp of the bypass. Specific design standards and specifications
for all turn lanes and construction necessary for the widening of Fontaine Avenue shall be
determined upon further discussion with County Staff and VDOT. Construction of these
improvements is contingent upon acceptance by the City of Charlottesville in allowing
necessary transitions into and within the City limits. Construction of these improvements is
also subject to the successful acquisition of additional right-of-way and/or easements
necessary for construction within the Cty limits.
QUEEN CHARLOTTE SQUARE
256 EAST HIGH STREET
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902
804-979-7522
FJlX: ~977-1194
~
L
r ,
1 '
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RONALD S. KEELER
MAY 26, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
ZMA-92-03 UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK
SP-92-13 U~IVERSITY RESEARCH PARK
PETITION: The University Real Estate Foundation petitions the
Board of Supervisors to rezone 53.53 acres from Planned
Development-Shopping Center (25 acres) and R-10, Residential (29
acres) to CO, Commercial Office (PROFFER)> This rezoning is sought
under 9.0 GUIDELINES FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN in
order to allow for unified development of the site and establish an
Office Service Area as described by the Comprehensive" Plan,
together with special use permit petition for: supporting
commercial uses (23.2.2.11): research and development activities
(23.2.2.12); and medical and pharmaceutical laboratories
(23.2.2.13). Property, described as Tax Map 76, Parcels 17B
(35.682 acres) and 17B1 (17.84 acres), is located on the south side
of Rte. 29 Business (Fontaine Avenue), west and adjacent to
Charlottesville corporate limits in the Samuel Miller Magisterial
District.
ZONING APPLICATION PLAN
The proffered zoning Application Plan proposes a maximum gross
floor area of 389,000 square feet housed in seven buildings. Five
percent of the floor area (19,450 square feet) would be devoted to
supporting commercial uses. Pri vate roads would be provided
internal to the development.
A summary of land uses follows:
Acreage
Percentaqe
Building Envelopes
Parking/Driveways/Roads
Landscaped/Open Space
SITE
2.93
13.75
36.84
53.52 acres
5%
26%
69%
100%
The buildings would be 3-4 stories resulting in a floor area ratio
(FAR) of 0.16 (i.e. - floor area is equivalent to 16% of the site
while building coverage is about 5% of the site). This relatively
conservative development schedule is, in part, reflective of site
constraints to development.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
.
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK IS CONSISTENT WITH
THE GUIDELINES SETFORTH IN THE COMPREHENSIVE
PLAN FOR OFFICE SERVICE AREAS, AS THE FIRST
1
, l
t'
PETITION SUBJECT TO SECTION 9.0 OF THE ZONING
ORDINANCE, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN MOST
COOPERATIVE, THE PROCESS HAS WORKED SMOOTHLY,
AND THE RESULT IS A PROJECT PROPOSAL CLEARLY
SUPERIOR TO PAST DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS FOR
THIS SITE.
.
THE APPLICANT HAS SUBSTANTIALLY ADDRESSED
COMMENTS BY THE CITY. THE PROJECT WOULD NOT
ADVERSELY AFFECT RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE
CITY.
.
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK SUBSTANTIALLY
COMPLIES WITH DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE
JEFFERSON PARK AVENUE/FONTAINE AVENUE AREA "B"
STUDY.
.
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK SUBSTANTIALLY
COMPLIES WITH THE FOLLOWING PLANS AND
INDIVIDUAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS WILL COMPLY
WITH THE FOLLOWING REGULATIONS:
-ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
-JPA/FONTAINE AVENUE AREA "B" STUDY
-ALBEMARLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN (UNADOPTED)
-CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE BICYCLE PLAN
-ALBEMARLE PEDESTRIAN OBSTACLE STUDY
REGULATIONS
-EC ENTRANCE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT
-FH FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT
-WATER RESOURCES PROTECTION AREAS ORDINANCE
-WETLANDS REQUIREMENTS (U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS)
-SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN/ZONING ORDINANCE
CRITICAL SLOPES
URBAN STORMWATER MANAGEMENT
TREE CANOPY/LANDSCAPING/BUFFERING
4.14 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
PRIVATE ROADS
.
IN REVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK
PLAN EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE TO PROVIDE FORMAL
BUILDING ORGANIZATION AND OPEN SPACES WHILE
ENSURING A RESPECT FOR THE NATURAL FEATURES
AND ENVIRONMENTAL SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE.
.
THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND UREF
HAVE BEEN COOPERATIVE IN PLANNING FOR A SINGLE
ACCESS TO FONTAINE AVENUE. THIS ACCESS WILL
SERVE ALL PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF FONTAINE
AVENUE IN THE COUNTY. STAFF REQUESTS MAXIMUM
2
, I
1 '
DISCRETION IN ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS IN
ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE FORESTRY AND INITIAL
RESEARCH PARK OCCUPANT.
.
UREF HAS PROFFERED TO UPGRADE AND EXTEND
PUBLIC UTILITIES AID SERVE THE SITE AS WELL AS
RELOCATE AND MODERNIZE THE ANTIQUATED RWSA 18-
INC RAW WATER LINE WHICH TRAVERSES THE
PROPERTY, THE COST OF ALL IMPROVEMENTS TO BE
BORN BY UREF.
.
UREF THOUGH PROFFERS HAS PROPOSED ADEQUATE
MEASURES TO PROVIDE PUBLIC UTILITIES TO THE
SITE WHILE UPGRADING THE RSWA SYSTEM AT NO
COST TO THE PUBLIC. ON-SITE CONVENIENCE
SERVICES WOULD BE PROVIDED TO EMPLOYEES.
VDOT AND STAFF RECOMMEND THAT PROFFER #1
ADEQUATELY ADDRESSES ROAD IMPROVEMENT NEEDS AS
MAY BE OCCASIONED BY THE PROPOSED
UREF/FORESTRY DEVELOPMENT.
SP-92-13 USES BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
.
PROVISION OF SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL USES WOULD NOT ONLY BE A
CONVENIENCE TO EMPLOYEES BUT WOULD ALSO REDUCE OFF-SITE TRAFFIC,
CONSISTENT WITH TRAFFIC REDUCTION EFFORTS.
23.2.2.11 SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL USES: STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF
THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1.
IN ADDITION TO LIMITATION UNDER PROFFER #6,
TOTAL FLOOR AREA DEVOTED TO SUPPORTING
COMMERCIAL USES SHALL NOT EXCEED TEN (10)
PERCENT OF TOTAL FLOOR AREA AT ANY TIME DURING
PHASED DEVELOPMENT.
23.2.2.12 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES INCLUDING
EXPERIMENTAL TESTING: AND 23.2.2.13 LABORATORIES-MEDICAL AND
PHARMACEUTICAL ARE APPROPRIATE WITHIN AN OFFICE SERVICE AREA AND
WOULD NOT BE OBJECTIONABLE TO THIS SITE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS:
1.
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 4.14 PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
.
IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE
PHASING PLAN AS PROPOSED AS WELL AS TO ALLOW
VARIATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, STAFF
SHOULD BE GRANTED AUTHORITY OVER APPROVAL OF
ALL PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF ALL SITE
3
t; "
DEVELOPMENT PLANS (AND SUBDIVISION PLATS, IF
ANY) .
.
STAFF RECOMMENDS ACCEPTANCE OF THE APPLICANT'S
PROFFERS TOGETHER WITH THE PROFFERED REZONING
APPLICATION PLAN. IN THE SPIRIT OF SECTION
8. 5. 6 . 3 , THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE AUTHORIZED
DISCRETION OVER REASONABLE VARIATIONS FROM THE
ZONING APPLICATION PLAN.
4
, ,
. '
OFFICE SERVICE AREAS: This section of the report will discuss the
appropriateness of this site for CO, Commercial Office zoning in
relation to recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan.
An Office Service area as described in the Comprehensive Plan (p.
159 and 161) would require a site area in excess of 20 acres to
accommodate a building floor area of 150,000 square feet or more.
The site should be situated adjacent to a major collector or
arterial road and be provided with adequate internal circulation.
The purpose of an Office Service Area is to provide major
employment center with limited production activities and marketing
of products. Primary uses include corporate/major office parks,
research /development activities, and information systems as well
as professional uses providing services to the County and the
region in general. Secondary uses may include residential
development, supporting commercial uses, and hotel/motel/conference
center.
Rather than adding several hybrid districts to the zoning
ordinance, staff developed measures intended to implement the
various service area proposals of the Comprehensive Plan through
existing conventional and planned districts. Section 9.0
GUIDELINES FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SERVICE AREAS provides strategies
and regulatory provisions for implementation of service areas.
SimUltaneously, with adoption of Section 9.0, various zoning
districts were amended to incorporate uses envisioned in these
service areas (All service areas are mixed use in nature with major
distinction being the primary intended uses).
Section 9.3 RELATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SERVICE AREAS TO ZONING
DISTRICT REGULATIONS suggests three zoning districts as appropriate
to establishment of an Office Service area:
23.0 CO COMMERCIAL OFFICE
27.0 LI, LIGHT INDUSTRY
29.0 PD-IP PLANNED DEVELOPMENT-INDUSTRIAL PARK
In September, 1990, UREF submitted a rezoning petition for Planned
Development-Industrial Park (PD-IP). In June, 1991, the zoning
ordinance was amended to provide for the various service areas of
the Comprehensive Plan. The PD-IP zoning was abandoned in favor of
a CO Commercial Office designation as being more in keeping with
UREF's intent for the development.
Employing the guidelines setforth in Section 9.0, UREF has
petitioned for 23.0 CO Commercial Office zoning accompanied by
three special use permit requests including support uses as
envisioned by Section 9.4. The rezoning petition is accompanied by
a set of proffers pursuant to Section 33.3 of the zoning ordinance.
The petition is also accompanied by a proffered Zoning Application
Plan and other supporting plans which have been reviewed in
accordance wi th the provisions and procedures as setforth in
5
Section 8.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, GENERALLY (While this is a
proffered rezoning, the applicant has submitted the petition to
rev1ew as for a planned development and staff analysis and
recommendations will be as required for a planned development).
STAFF OPINION IS THAT THE PROPOSED UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK IS
CONSISTENT WITH THE GUIDELINES SET FORTH IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
FOR OFFICE SERVICE AREAS AS THE FIRST PETITION SUBJECT TO SECTION
9.0 OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN MOST
COOPERATIVE, THE PROCESS HAS WORKED SMOOTHLY, AND THE RESULT IS A
PROJECT PROPOSAL CLEARLY SUPERIOR TO PAST DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS FOR
THIS SITE.
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Prior sections of this report have provided background as to the
development of Comprehensive Plan recommendations for this site and
general area and selection of zoning approach. Section 8.5.3 of
PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS-GENERALLY requires an applicant "to
meet with the planning staff and other qualified officials to
review the Application Plan and original proposal prior to
submittal" in order to "assist in bringing the application" into
conformity with various planning and zoning regulations and
policies.
This process, informally and formally, has involved four years and
has included multiple meetings with various agencies of the Site
Review Committee as well as other agencies. The applicant has
endeavored to address all issues raised by various agencies as well
as adjusting plans to accommodate regulatory measures adopted
during this time period.
At this time, under Section 8.5.4 of the zoning ordinance, the
University Research Park petition is forwarded to the Planning
Commission which "shall proceed to prepare its recommendations to
the Board of Supervisors," and "specifically, recommendations of
the Commission shall include findings as to:
a.
The suitability of the tract for the
generaltype of PD district proposed in terms
of: relation to the comprehensive pan;
physical characteristics of the land; and its
relation to surrounding area;
b.
Relation to major roads, utilities, public
facilities and services;
c.
Adequacy of evidence on unified control and
suitability of any proposed
agreements, contracts, deed restrictions,
sureties, dedications, contributions,
guarantees, or other instruments, or the need
6
,
for such instruments or for amendments in
those proposed; and
d.
Specific modifications in PD or general
regulations as applied to the particular case,
based on determination that such modifications
are necessary or justified by demonstration
that the public purposes of PD or general
regulations as applied would be satisfied to
at least an equivalent degree by such
modifications.
Based on such findings, the commission shall recommend approval of
the PD amendment as proposed, approval conditioned upon stipulated
modifications, or disapproval.
While this petition is for a conventional zoning district, the
applicant has voluntarily postured the petition under 8.0 PLANNED
DEVELOPMENT--GENERALLY. In that respect, staff has viewed the
proffers as proposed agreements as specified by 8.5.4.c. above.
Staff has attempted to ensure that this development will be
compatible to the area in which it is to be located and that the
development will provide its "fair share" to infrastructure
improvements. That is to say, that the proffers reflect the
"rational nexus" test and are not inadequate nor excessive.
The remainder of this report will address these various
considerations. Items a. and b. will be discussed in the context
of the Comprehensive Plan. Item c. is addressed by the applicant's
proffers and phasing plans (Subsequent assurances such as bonds may
be required at time of site plan approvals). Item d. will be
specifically addressed under STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE RECOMMENDATIONS
Charlottesville has made seven specific recommendations relative to
this project. (These recommendations are provided by City staff).
These recommendations are separate from and do not carry
endorsement from the PACC Tech Committee.
1.
Fontaine Avenue Development: The applicant
should be reauired. at this time. to provide a
four-lane road with divided medians as
proposed in the JPA Study aqreed by the
Citv/County/University. This is not so
dissimilar a reauirement from previous proffer
on this property for four-laninq of Fontaine
Avenue. Proffers 1, 2, 3 and 4 in staff
opinion adequately address this issue (See
Fontaine Avenue Improvements in this report.)
7
I
2.
sidewalk: Sidewalks should be across all the
frontaqe of this orooertv and not only the
oart as shown. My recollection from the
Public Hearing in the Countv on the JPA Studv.
was that many oeoole use this area for walkinq
and ioqqinq: The sidewalk as proposed would
provide pedestrian access from the City to
University Research park. Staff would not
recommend encouraging walking/jogging in
vicinity of the interchange until
signalization controls are provided.
3.
Bike Lane: This is a designated bike lane in
the Citv/County iointlY adooted olano Thus.
the a01;)licant should be required to orovide
imoroved bicycle lanes alonq its frontaqe:
The applicant proposes a bikeway along the
full frontage of the property. Location and
design would be reviewed by Community
Development staff.
Landscaoinq/Buildinq: Landscaoinq should be
aporooriate in keepinq with the entrance
corridor conceot acceoted by the
CitY/CountY/University. The nature and
location of buildinqs should resoect the
character of buildinqs in the City and its
urban settinq. This property is subject to
ARB review under the EC overlay district. One
member of the ARB is familiar with the project
which has also been reviewed by the ARB's
Design Planner. City comments will be
forwarded to the ARB for consideration.
Proffer #11 states that "strict architectural
and landscape architectural guidelines and
restrictions will be adopted which shall
govern the design and construction of all
buildings and parcel specific site
development."
4.
5.
Drainaqe: Due to extensive surface parkinq an
severe slopes. we want to be assured that this
develooment adequatelY handles its drainaqe:
This site is subject to urban stormwater
management requirements and on-site detention
will be required.
6.
JPA/Maury Avenue/Fontaine Avenue Intersection:
The County should make a soecial effort to
assure that this deve100ment does not
8
adverselY affect the above intersection and
that appropriate remedial measures are
provided if necessary: This intersection is
signalized and if traffic flow problems are
encountered, the phasing of signals could be
changed. (See Fontaine Avenue Improvements in
this report).
Future Road: The JPA Studv adopted by the
Citv/Countv/Universitv indicates a road
through this propertv connectinq to Sunset
Avenue to take care of future development
wi thout adverse impact on the City streets.
We understand that the aliqnment shown in this
studv is not feasible. We feel that the
applicant should be responsible for suqqestinq
alternatives which are feasible. This is the
second time in the Countv's review of
developments when proposed aliqnments west of
the Citv have been deemed unfeasible without
provisions for alternate routes. This can
only lead to future problems unless confronted
now: Due to the requested zoning change on
this property (which would significantly
reduce traffic generation in volume) and the
City's closure of Sunset Avenue, the need for
any new roadway should be reassessed by the
County. The applicant previously provided an
assessment of the feasibility of the
Fontaine/Sunset connector, which has been
determined as unfeasible to build by PACC and
the County Board of Supervisors. No
alternative connection seems to exist.
However, it is proopsed that emergency access
be retained over Route 782 to residential
areas south of the railroad if Route 782 is
abandoned by the Board of Supervisors.
While not mentioned in the City's comments, this project is
adjacent to a small residential development in the City. Due to
intervening Rt. 782 and a stream, the closest dwelling is about 250
feet from a parking area and 400 feet from abuilding. UREF
proposes landscaping to further buffer this residential area.
Proffer #10 states that "UREF will design and install landscape
buffer area as shown on the plan to screen the proj ect from
Fontaine Avenue and residential neighborhoods adjoining the
Research Park."
7.
STAFF OPINION IS THAT THE APPLICANT HAS SUBSTANTIALLY ADDRESSED
COMMENTS BY THE CITY. THE PROJECT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT
RESIDENTIAL AREAS IN THE CITY.
9
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN--SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS
The JUly, 1989 Comprehensive Plan was substantially amended in
October, 1989 to incorporate recommendations of the Jefferson Park
Avenue/Fontaine Avenue "Area B" Study as stipulated in the Three
Party Agreement among the University, City, and County. This
section of the staff report will address recommendations of the
Comprehensive Plan as identified by the Community Development
Division as applicable to this petition.
1.
To the extent feasible. traffic reduction
measures should be encouraqed. Soecifica1lv.
sidewalks should be orovided to. and on. the
site. CTS and University Transit Service
should be encouraqed to serve the site:
Proffer #3 stipulates that "UREF will
construct at its expense sidewalk
improvements along the south side of Fontaine
Avenue from the proposed entrance to the
Research Park to the easternmost entrance of
the property." Off-road walkways are proposed
to add to a park-like atmosphere within the
development. Proffer #3 states that "UREF
will encourage traffic reduction measures
within the Research Park through the provision
of CTS and UVA bus drop off points and on-site
[supporting] commercial uses."
The Pedestrian Obstacle Studv and JPA/Fontaine
Avenue Area B Studv recommend sidewalks alonq
Fontaine Avenue. Sidewalks should be orovided
on the south side of Fontaine Avenue from the
UREF entrance eastward a10nq the lenqth of
oroiect improvement related to this site: As
stated in #1 above, the applicant has complied
with this recommendation under Proffer #3.
2.
3.
The citv-countv Bicvcle Plan recommends a
bikewav alonq Fontaine Avenue. These
imorovements should be incoroorated as a part
of road imorovements. The design standards of
the Bicycle Plan call for a seoarated bicycle
oath: Proffer #2 stipulates that "UREF will
construct at its expense, full frontage
bikeway improvements to be incorporated along
the eastbound travel way of Fontaine Avenue.
The bikeway shall extend from the northbound
off-ramp of the U.S. 29 Bypass to the
easternmost corner of the Research Park.1I
4.
The Community Facilities Plan indicates fire
service to this qeneral area of the Countv may
10
be insufficient:
Under cooperative agreement, the City Fire
Department would be the first company to
respond to this site. The applicant has
stated an unwillingness to provide site area
for a fire company due to lack of available
area.
5.
staff recommends the closure and abandonment
of Rte 782 from Fontaine Avenue to the
railroad as a public road. The road aliqnment
should remain. however. for emerqencv access
to this area. The Countv will be addressinq
this issue with the citv and VDOT. The
existing proffer on the propertv to improve
Rte 782 is no lonqer considered necessarv for
this development. Historically, the Board of
Supervisors has dealt with public road
abandonments and right-of-way vacations
wi thout input from the Planning Commission.
This matter will be presented to the Board of
Supervisors.
6.
Consider the recommendations of the
JPA/Fontaine Neiqhborhood Study. Particular
consideration should be qiven to these
recommendations concerning road design
characteristics and frontaqe improvements.
The applicant has availed these design plans
to PACC Tech Committee, City Planning,and
University Architect (also a member of the
County ARB). Negotiations as to visual design
aspects will be addressed during site
development plan review.
STAFF OPINION IS THAT UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK SUBSTANTIALLY
COMPLIES WITH DETAILED RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE JEFFERSON PARK
AVENUE/FONTAINE AVENUE AREA "B" STUDY AND OTHER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
DOCUMENTS.
OTHER PLANS AND REGULATIONS
This project is subject to several plans and regulatory measures.
Previous sections have outlined a few of these documents. The
UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK SUBSTANTIALLY COMPLIES WITH THE FOLLOWING
PLANS AND INDIVIDUAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS WILL COMPLY WITH THE
FOLLOWING REGULATIONS:
-ALBEMARLE COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
-JPA/FONTAINE AVENUE AREA liB" STUDY
-ALBEMARLE COUNTY OPEN SPACE PLAN (UNADOPTED)
11
. .
-CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE BICYCLE PLAN
-ALBEMARLE PEDESTRIAN OBSTACLE STUDY
REGULATIONS
-EC ENTRANCE CORRIDOR OVERLAY DISTRICT
-FH FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT
-WATER RESOURCES PROTECTION AREAS ORDINANCE
-WETLANDS REQUIREMENTS (U. S. ARMY CORPS OF
ENGINEERS)
-SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN/ZONING ORDINANCE
CRITICAL SLOPES
URBAN STORKWATER MANAGEMENT
TREE CANOPY/LANDSCAPING/BUFFERING
4.14 PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
PRIVATE ROADS
PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SITE: RELATION TO SURROUNDING AREAS
In approaching physical redesign of the University Research Park
plan, a primary focus of McKee/Carson and other various consultants
was to define the physical and environmental constraints to
development and to respect these constraints in the development
proposal. Additional considerations were access/circulation
considerations, desire to maximize usage of existing site features
to produce a formal building layout, and to capitalize on mountain
views. The plan significantly downscales development from the
880,000 square feet proposed in 1990 to the current proposal for
389,000 square feet of floor area. As described in the applicants
textual narrative, the following site characteristics were
investigated (mapping also provided):
site Characteristics
-Soils and Geology
-Slope and Terrain
-Surface Drainage and Wetlands
-Vegetation
Depth to bedrock is 4-5 feet. An area of unconsolidated spoil
would be reworked. (Staff recommends the spoil area not be
subjected to 4.2 Critical Slopes). Soils on the site are very
erosive. Proffer #12 states that "Best Management Practices will
be implemented in all areas of earth disturbing activity. No earth
disturbing activity shall be permitted within the limits of the
flood plain."
IN REVISION OF THE UNIVERSITY RESEARCH PARK PLAN EFFORT HAS BEEN
MADE TO PROVIDE FORMAL BUILDING ORGANIZATION AND OPEN SPACES WHILE
ENSURING A RESPECT FOR THE NATURAL FEATURES AND ENVIRONMENTAL
SENSITIVITY OF THE SITE.
An earlier section of this report discussed the relationship of
12
to or simultaneous with initial development of this site will be
construction of a major office building complex on the adjoining
Virginia Department of Forestry site (This is the same project
originally proposed along Rte. 53 and subsequently on the Hillcrest
tract between Rtes. 20 and 742). Several years ago staff
recommended that the Forestry Department be provided access through
the UREF site. Forestry is agreeable to this recommendation and,
therefore, construction of the access to the University Research
Park site may precede development within the site itself. Also, an
initial occupant for the research park may submit site plan prior
to Board action on this rezoning request. Due to the time demand
on this user, staff will process the site plan as though requested
zoning were in place. THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF FORESTRY AND UREF
HAVE BEEN COOPERATIVE IN PLANNING FOR A SINGLE ACCESS TO FONTAINE
AVENUE. THIS ACCESS WILL SERVE ALL PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF
FONTAINE AVENUE IN THE COUNTY. STAFF REQUESTS MAXIMUM DISCRETION
IN ISSUANCE OF GRADING PERMITS IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE FORESTRY AND
INITIAL RESEARCH PARK OCCUPANT.
PUBLIC UTILITIES
An 18 inch raw water line located in a 30 foot easement traverses
the site parallel to and about 700 feet from Fontaine Avenue. This
is an old cast iron line with leaded joints and unknown bedding
susceptible to leaks and fragile to development activity. UREF is
negotiating with the Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority (RWSA) to
relocate/reconstruct this line. The line should be field located
and surveyed and method of relocation approved by RWSA prior to
review of any final site plan or grading activity. Proffer #8
states that "UREF will relocate the existing 18-inch raw water line
in a manner acceptable to and in accordance with the standards of
the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority."
A 20-inch finished water line is in proximity to the site. A new
8-inch sewer line is under construction adjacent to the site.
Proffer #9 states that "UREF will design and construct at its own
expense all improvements and upgrades of utilities which are
occasioned by the development of the Research Park."
Consistent with County policy, UREF HAS PROFFERED TO UPGRADE AND
EXTEND PUBLIC UTILITIES TO SERVE THE SITE AS WELL AS RELOCATE AND
MODERNIZE THE ANTIQUATED RWSA 18-INCH RAW WATER LINE WHICH
TRAVERSES THE PROPERTY, THE COST OF ALL IMPROVEMENTS TO BE BORN BY
UREF.
PUBLIC FACILITIES/SERVICES
As stated previously in this report, UREF has proffered provision
o.f sidewalk and bikeway consistent with recommendation of the
Community Development Division, but is unwilling to provide a site
for a volunteer fire company. A park-like atmosphere would be
13
provided on the site to provide employee open space amenity.
In addition, a maximum of 19,450 square feet of building area would
be devoted to employee convenience uses such as but not limited to:
day care center, post office, banks, drug store, newsstand, dry
cleaning/laundry, health club, and restaurants. Each use would be
reviewed for consistency with CO Commercial Office subordinate uses
and uses envisioned under Section 9.4.3 of the zoning ordinance.
UREF THROUGH PROFFERS HAS PROPOSED ADEQUATE MEASURES TO PROVIDE
PUBLIC UTILITIES TO THE SITE WHILE UPGRADING THE RWSA SYSTEM AT NO
COST TO THE PUBLIC. ON-SITE CONVENIENCE SERVICES WOULD BE PROVIDED
TO EMPLOYEES.
PUBLIC ROADS
FONTAINE AVENUE IMPROVEMENTS: Under existing PD-SC Planned
Development Shopping Center and R-10 residential zoning, potential
traffic generation would be about 13,900 vehicle trips per day from
the UREF site only. Under proposed zoning for the UREF site and
traffic from the Forestry property, anticipated traffic would be
about 4,400 vehicle trips per day. While total traffic under
proposed zoning would be about 1/3 of traffic levels under existing
zoning, differences in dynamics became the focus and peak-hour
traffic became the concern. The UREF site is situated in proximity
to the U.s. Rte. 250/29S interchange and peak-hour capacity of the
interchange as well as level of service of Fontaine Avenue was
investigated and projected (Staff had informally observed that
during the a.m. peak, the north bound bypass off-ramp appears to be
approaching capacity). The applicant's traffic consultant (Wilbur
Smith & Associates) and VDOT ran separate capacity analysis studies
of Fontaine Avenue and the U.S. Rte. 250/Rte. 29S interchange,
which provided staff with the following condensed review context:
1.
The CATS shows a U4 (urban 4-lane) typical
section for the proposed improvement.
Fontaine Avenue is a Phase IV (final phase)
improvement. The CATS projected an ADT of
10,700 for the year 2000. The 1990 ADT was
12,900.
2.
VDOT and Wilbur Smith agreed to an annual
background traffic increase of 2.7% to apply
to all studied areas.
3.
UREF anticipates a 15-20 year buildout and
therefore, projection year is 2011.
4.
VDOT agrees that the interchange would be in
failure in year 2011 due to increase in
background traffic but also states that the
UREF development would accelerate that
14
, .
condition.
5.
VDOT stated that "background traffic will make
Fontaine Avenue operate at LOS E in 2011 and
with addition of site generated traffic, LOS
will drop to F."
Regarding interchange ramp failure, VDOT
agreed with staff assessment that the north
bound off-ramp would fail initially.
VDOT stated that "eventually (by the year 2011
for the traffic analysis sUbmitted) the ramps
for the Route 29 interchange will need to be
signalized and upgraded due to the anticipated
normal [background] traffic increases. This
development would hasten (in about 8-10 years,
depending on the amount of time for buildout)
these needs."
6.
7.
Staff approached these issues from the following perspective:
1.
What improvements to the bypass interchange
and Fontaine Avenue were necessary to avoid
accelerated failure of these facilities due to
introduction/conflicts of UREF traffic? That
is to say, what improvements could be directly
attributable to the UREF development?
2.
Are these improvements (proportionately)
equivalent to or superior to existing
proffered improvements? In other words, would
the proposed zoning compared to existing
zoning equally or better serve the public
interest regarding transportation
improvements?
Following multiple meetings involving UREF, VDOT, PACC Tech, and/or
staff involving various road improvements/contributions on behalf
of UREF, VDOT AND STAFF RECOMMEND THAT PROFFER #1 ADEQUATELY
ADDRESSES ROAD IMPROVEMENT NEEDS AS MAY BE OCCASIONED BY THE
PROPOSED UREF/FORESTRY DEVELOPMENT. While staff has calculated
UREF traffic to represent 16-19% of the improvement need, UREF
construction costs for improvements would represent 24-26% of the
total costs to improve Fontaine Avenue to a U4 typical section in
the City and County (i.e. - from JPA to bypass) as recommended by
CATS.
Lastly, the City staff has stated that "JPA/Maury Avenue/Fontaine
Avenue Intersection: The County should make a special effort to
assure that this development does not adversely affect the above
intersection and that appropriate remedial measures are provided if
15
necessary." Wilbur Smith Associates assigned 30% of site traffic
to arrive from the City by Fontaine Avenue and 70% to arrive from
the bypass. VDOT accepted this distribution. This would represent
a daily increase of 1320 vehicles through this intersection.
Fontaine Avenue at this intersection provides three lanes eastbound
(exclusive left, through, and right). Maury Avenue approaching
this intersection provides three lanes southbound (right slip,
through, left). JPA approaching this intersection provides three
lanes (right slip, through, left) and JPA westbound provides two
lanes (right/through, left). It would appear that any additional
lanes would negatively affect existing development in the
intersection quadrants (Staff is unaware of the extent of road
right-of-way in this intersection. UREF does not have the right of
eminent domain).
SP-92-13 USES BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT:
UREF has requested three categories of uses by special use permit,
all of which are intended to be provided under appropriate
circumstance, within areas shown for Office Service Area in the
Comprehensive Plan. As stated earlier in the report, the closest
dwelling is about 400 feet from the closest proposed building in
the development and, therefore, the proposed uses regardless of
location should not be obtrusive to the area (i.e. - the minimum
setback for a heavy industrial use from an adjoining residential
property is 100 feet). Special use permit requests include the
following:
23.2.2.11 supporting Commercial Uses are described by the applicant
to possibly include uses such as: day care center, post office,
branch bank, drug store, newsstand, dry cleaning establishment,
small health club and restaurants. Uses permitted as supporting
commercial uses would include uses permitted by right under the C-1
zone, as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The
applicant has proffered not to exceed the total floor area limit
established by 9.4.2 (b) of the Zoning Ordinance (i. e. - 50%)..
PROVISION OF SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL USES WOULD NOT ONLY BE A
CONVENIENCE TO EMPLOYEES BUT WOULD ALSO REDUCE OFF-SITE TRAFFIC,
CONSISTENT WITH TRAFFIC REDUCTION EFFORTS.
23 . 2 .2 . 11 SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL USES: STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF
THIS SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1.
IN ADDITION TO LIMITATION UNDER PROFFER * 6,
TOTAL FLOOR AREA DEVOTED TO SUPPORTING
COMMERCIAL USES SHALL NOT EXCEED TEN (10)
PERCENT OF TOTAL FLOOR AREA AT ANY TIME DURING
PHASED DEVELOPMENT.
23.2.2.12 Research and develooment activities including
exoerimental testing and 23.2.2.13 Laboratories - medical and
oharmaceutical are appropriate uses within Office Service Areas of
16
the Comprehensive Plan. As stated earlier, the closest dwelling to
a proposed building is about 400 feet distant and these uses should
therefore not be objectionable to the area (As a comparison,
minimum building setback in the Heavy Industrial zone from an
adjoining residential area is 100 feet). An additional assurance,
these uses should be subject to the County's performance standards
for industrial uses.
23.2.2.12 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES INCLUDING
EXPERIMENTAL TESTING; 23.2.2.13 LABORATORIES-MEDICAL AND
PHARMACEUTICAL ARE APPROPRIATE WITHIN AN OFFICE SERVICE AREA AND
WOULD NOT BE OBJECTIONABLE ON THIS SITE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL
SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING CONDITION:
1.
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 4.14 PERFORMANCE
STANDARDS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE.
PROJECT PHASING:
Three phases of development are proposed with the first phase being
most extensive in terms of site preparation. As described earlier
in this report and in the UREF textual submittal as well as plan
maps, a substantial volume of unconsolidated fill needs to be
removed and reworked (This is the only area of significant
intrusion into steep slope, which are in this case, manmade). Mass
grading would also occur during Phase 1 development, as would all
Fontaine Avenue improvements. Substantial design/economic
consideration has been devoted to the phasing schedule which would
provide basic infrastructure together with public road improvements
in the initial phase. IN ORDER TO PROVIDE ACCOMPLISHMENT OF THE
PHASING PLAN AS PROPOSED AS WELL AS TO ALLOW VARIATIONS IN THE
DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE, STAFF SHOULD BE GRANTED AUTHORITY OVER
APPROVAL OF ALL PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS ADMINISTRATIVE
APPROVAL OF ALL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS (AND SUBDIVISION PLATS, IF
ANY) .
PROFFERS
Thirteen written proffers as well as the proffered Zoning
Application Plan accompany this petition. Most of these proffers
have been discussed in the text of this report. STAFF RECOMMENDS
ACCEPTANCE OF THE APPLICANT'S PROFFERS TOGETHER WITH THE PROFFERED
REZONING APPLICATION PLAN. IN THE SPIRIT OF SECTION 8.5.6.3, THE
DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE AUTHORIZED
DISCRETION OVER REASONABLE VARIATIONS FROM THE ZONING APPLICATION
PLAN.
17
I. , I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296.5823
MEMORANDUM
FROM:
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Ronald S. Keeler, Chief of Planning~
May 18, 1992
TO:
DATE:
RE:
ZMA-92-03/SP-92-13 University Real Estate
Foundation
Attached please find the staff's report together with a
document from the applicant entitled "University Research
Park Supplement to Rezoning Application" (referred to here
as the applicant's text). As you can see both the
applicant's text and staff's report are lengthy. Regarding
other materials, the Wilbur smith Associates and the VDOT
traffic studies are so lengthy that only summary portions of
these documents are enclosed.
The applicant's text (which contains analyses maps as well
as the proffered Zoning Application Plan) provides a very
thorough analysis of most of the elements normally addressed
in a staff's report. For that reason the staff's report
does not repeat or rephrase much of this material. Let me
recommend that you read the applicant's text first and then
proceed to the staff's report. Also attached please find an
extra copy of the applicant's proffers. You may wish to
keep the proffers beside both reports for quick reference.
Finally, I should explain the structure of the staff's
report. I believe a staff report should perform two
functions. The first is to document and present a
deliberate and systematic review of a proposal in regard to
ordinance regulations and various plans and policies. The
, .
. .
Albemarle County Planning commission
May 18, 1992
Page 2
second purpose is to provide a comprehensive presentation of
the issues without being so lengthy and detailed as to
overwhelm or confuse the reader. Since the structure of the
report gives preference to the second purpose, let me assure
you that it is not at the expense of the first purpose:
1) While specific reference is not made in the report to
operative provisions of the Zoning Ordinance (Section
1.4, 1.5 and 1.6) such analysis has been made and the
proposal, in staff's opinion, is consistent with those
provisions;
2) The special use permit requests, in staff's opinion,
are consistent with the positive findings required by
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance;
3) The proposed Office Service designation and
accompanying proffers is superior in terms of the
public interest to the existing proffered PD-SC/R-10
zonings on this site.
The staff's report topically focuses on three issues:
..
1) Since this is the first such petition under new zoning
regulations, discussion is provided as to the approach
to establishing an Office Service Area designation for
this property (NOTE: The plan map in the Comprehensive
Plan does not show this property for Office Service.
Designation was changed with adoption of the
JPA/Fontaine "Area B" Study a few months after the
Comprehensive Plan was printed);
2) Much of the text is devoted to analyzing the University
Research Park in light of comments from the City of
Charlottesville and County Community Development
Division;
3) Traffic and road improvements also receive attention.
More detailed description of the traffic dynamics which
lead to need for improvements will be provided at the
public hearing.
RSK/mem
. .
"
I ATTACHMENT B II Page II
,I..,
f-". r----
..' ,.........,
RAY 0, PETHTEL
COMMISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
POBOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
O. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
March 23, 1992
ZMA-92-03 UREF
Route 29 B.
The Department has reviewed the traffic analysis submitted for the above
quest. Overall, the information appears adequate. The Jefferson Park Avenue
tersection was not included in the study area and since this is within the City of
arlottesville, the Department would not have any responsibility for this
i tersection. The trip generation rates used were based on the Fourth Edition of
t e ITE Trip Generation Manual instead of the current Fifth Edition. The Department
mpared the rates between the two manuals and found some differences, but they were
t major and we can accept Vilbur Smith's numbers. Figure 3 has what appears to be
a typographical error, the brackets should be around the PM traffic and not the AM.
F'gure 5's Route 29 southbound left turn movement does not match the southbound left
t rn volume op the HCM analysis printout. It was assumed that 470 is the correct
t tal volume. Unsignalized intersection capacity calculations and results as given
i the 1985 HCM are almost meaningless and therefore were not reviewed by the
D partment.
. Ronald S. Keeler
ief of Planning
unty Office Building
1 McIntire Road
arlottesville, VA. 22902
Mr. Keeler:
The consultant gave level of service (LOS) for intersections based on overall
L S as determined by the program. As a general policy, VDOT does not accept this
p ocedure. Instead the LOS of an intersection is the LOS of a major movement at the
i tersection. Using this method, the following LOS can be expected in 2011 at each
of the intersections assuming only the improvements stated in the study, plus
si nalization:
Fontaine Ave. and Entrance Drive
Route 29 NB Ramps and Fontaine Ave.
Route 29 SB Ramps and Fontaine Ave.
AM Peak
D
F
PM Peak
D
E
F
TRANSPORT ATiC', FOR~h'c 21 ST CENTURY
I ATTACHMENT B II Page 21
Page 2
March 23, 1992
M . Ronald S. Keeler
EF Rt. 29 B.
The conclusion that the greatest reason for failure of the Route 29 Bypass and
siness interchange is background traffic is not completely correct. The traffic
nerated by this site plays a big part in the failure of the ramps intersections
th Fontaine Avenue. The following changes in LOS are observed by adding site
nerated traffic to background traffic:
Rt. 29 NB Ramps and Fontaine Ave. (PM)
Rt. 29 SB Ramps and Fontaine Ave. (PM)
Background
Traffic
D
E
Total
Traffic
E
F
Additionally, the VIC ratios for failing movements become much worse when site
t affic is added to background traffic. Attached are the summary reports from the
s'gnalized intersection analysis run by the Department. Background traffic will
m ke Fontaine Avenue operate at LOS E in 2011 and with the addition of site
nerated traffic, LOS will drop to F. Attached are the summary printouts for each
these runs. Also attached is a sketch showing the minimum improvements necessary
achieve an acceptable LOS. The LOS at the intersection of Fontaine Avenue and
e Route 29 southbound ramps can not be improved to higher than a D without
tensive redesign of the interchange. There are two configurations attached that
prove the LOS, but even the second of these may be impractical due to the
oximity of this interchange with the Route 29/1-64 interchange. VDOT policy
ecifies LOS C as the minimum acceptable in rural areas and LOS D the minimum for
banized areas. In addition, the CATS calls for LOS C in the Charlottesville area.
ute 29 B (Fontaine Avenue) is classified as a principal arterial. The CATS shows
a U 4 typical section for the proposed improvement and a 2000 plan of ADT 10,700 for
2 00. The 1990 ADT was 12,980.
I ATTACHMENT sllPage 31
Page 3
March 23, 1992
r. Ronald S. Keeler
F Rt. 29 B
Eventually (by the year 2011 for the traffic analysis submitted) the ramps for
he Route 29 interchange will need to be signalized and upgraded due to the
nticipated normal traffic increases. This development would hasten (in
pproximately 8-10 years, depending on the amount of time for buildout) these needs.
he Department recommends that Fontaine Avenue be upgraded to a four-lane divided
oadway and rebuilt to meet current geometric standards. This would be consistent
ith previous proffers on this property. Development of this property does
ecessitate some road improvements. If this is not be included as part of the
evelopment, the Department recommends a right turn lane along the frontage of the
roperty from the ramps to the proposed entrance. As the traffic analysis
ndicates, a right and left turn lane along with a traffic signal are necessary for
he entrance and therefore, are required. The entrance should have at least four
anes. The left turn lane needs to be a minimum of 250' in length with a 200' taper
nd the right turn lane should be 200' long with a 200' taper. The width of these
urn lanes should be 12'. Should the full roadway improvements noted above not be
uilt as part of this development, then the right of way for the ultimate
mprovement should be dedicated or at least reserved.
Sincerely,
q-. 0 . eJ)~
J. A. Echols
Assistant Resident Engineer
AE/ldw
, '
IATTAeH~~NT ell Page II
f' ..'~-" '!" ~ ;' ;'-, '. ..~-'-~' .~_..
RAY D. PETHTEL
co MISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
POBOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE. 22902
D. s. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
March 23, 1992
Special Use Permits
& Rezonings
April 1992
. Ronald S. Keeler
ief of Planning
unty Office Building
1 McIntire Road
arlottesville, VA. 22902
ar Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. ZHA-92-01 Ednam House Limited Partnership, Route 250 V. - This request is to
ermit three dwelling units which would result in a traffic generation of 30 VPD.
he access to this development is to a signalized intersection that is currently
dequate on Route 250.
ZMA-92-02 Virginia Land Trust & South 29 Land Trust, Route 1520 - This request
to amend the PUD to permit residential usage on property that was designated as
ommercial. The number of units indicated in your letter would result in a traffic
eneration of approximately 900 VPD. Commercial development on the 19 acres could
ertainly result in a higher traffic generation. The Department recommends a right
urn and taper lane on South Hollymead Drive and a left turn and taper lane on North
ollymead Drive for the two proposed entrances. Construction of the left turn and
aper lane on North Hollymead Drive will require rebuilding a section of the
xisting road because there is up to a 2 foot difference in elevation in the median
etween the travel lanes on this road. Adequate sight distance will be necessary
or these proposed entrances. Additional right of way may be needed for the turn
anes.
ZMA-92-03 University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation, Route 29 B. - This
equest is to change the zoning from the current PD-SC and R-10 to CO. The
epartment questions the status of Route 782 from Fontaine Avenue to the railroad
verpass in conjunction with this request. Previous proffers on this property have
ncluded reconstructing Fontaine Avenue to current standards with a four-lane
ivided roadway. The Department supports this previous proffer. This site plan
hows closing the existing Forestry entrance and having all access to both
roperties through a single entrance. Consolidation of the accesses on the south
ide of Fontaine Avenue is supported by the Department. There is adequate sight
istance at the location of the proposed entrance shown on the plan. Comments
oncerning the submitted traffic analysis and recommended roadway improvements will
e addressed in a separate letter.
F1AN5PORTATiON FOR rHE 21 5T CENTURY
IATTACHMENT cl~ Page 2/
Page 2
March 23, 1992
r. Ronald S. Keeler
pecial Use Permits & Rezonings
SP-92-09 David D. Allen, Route 743 - This request is for a day care facility for
p to 25 children which would result in a traffic increase of 125 VPD. Since the
raffic generated by this request would occur during peak hours, the Department
ecommends a 200 foot long right turn lane and whatever taper length can be
ccommodated along the property frontage. Additional right of way would have to be
edicated at this time to accommodate this turn and taper lane.
SP-92-12 Ednam House Limited Partnership, Route 250 V. - This request for a
ealtor office would result in some increase in traffic. The existing entrance at
oute 250 for this development is currently adequate.
SP-92-13 University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation, Route 29 B. - This
equest is to allow supporting commercial uses and research development activities
n conjunction with #3 above. This request should not result in traffic generations
reater than what could be expected from the current zoning.
Sincerely,
j-,o , ~/t
J. A. Echols
Assistant Resident Engineer
AE/ldw
c: R. V. Hofrichter w/attach.
.
.
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
\.,J'-J, l L- bUh ~M r- \ M
Fl::.~. , \~~ 2-
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
Chapter 3
ANTICIPATED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
An evaluation of anticipated traffic impact on the surrounding roadway network requires an
estimation of site-generated traffic volumes, which then are superimposed upon local traffic volumes.
These combined volumes are used to test the adequacy of the adjacent highway network. This chapter
summarizes this evaluation.
Estimated Site Traffic Generation
Anticipated traffic volumes generated by the proposed development are summarized in Table 1. The
trip generation is based on the 4th Edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trio
Generation Manual.
Based on the trip generation, a total of 4,404 vehicles per day are anticipated to utilize the
site. Approximately 12% of the total traffic is expected to be generated by the forestry site, while
the remaining 88% is anticipated to be University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation traffic.
For the forestry land uses, the employee unit of measurement was utilized instead of the building
"'JIr.s-q'uare footage because the resultant generation was more reflective of the land use characteristic.
Approximately 21 % of the building consists of non-office and non-employee areas and, therefore, use of
the total square footage would reflect an unrealistically high trip generation. Approximately 1 03
employees are anticipated to use the building, however, 125 was used to account for possible future
employment. A 37,000 square foot storage warehouse also is planned for the site (Table 1). This is not
expected to generate traffic on a daily or peak-hour basis. The use of the facility is to house heavy
equipment which would be used in rare cases such as forest fires. Therefore, no traffic is generated
for the facility.
Anticipated Site Traffic Distribution
Anticipated site traffic distribution for the site was determined based on the A.M. and P.M.
peak-hour turning movement counts conducted at the Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business interchange. A
determination of the distribution to the east was based on an educated assumption of attraction to the
City of Charlottesville. It was assumed that a low attraction, due to minimal residential housing,
would be assumed (30%). The remaining 7CJ% was distributed onto the Route 29 Bypass based on the turning
4
.
III
.
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
;; ;; C\l C\l :6
ll'I ll'I
<Il ll'I ll'I ll'I
... ... G
<0 <0
ll'I ll'I 0 0 ll'I
Q) Q) ~ I ~ 0
~
-,1",":";>'-
..
:0
.
...
>
a:
<
:I
:I
::I
(/)
Z
OCD
- ::J
~ ~
W<
z..
We
<:I.
~g
::...
W
(/)
::I
o
z
:5
:I
.(
(/)
<>.
...a:
<I-
...a:
0::1
1-0
:I:
...
C\l
...
z
W
::l;
a:
1-::1
-m
z<
::Iw
::l;
...
o
OW
zO
:58
ww
I-{/)
-::I
.
o
I-
co co
Q) Q)
ll'I ll'I
i>>
D
E
::J
Z
C\l C\l
r:o r:o
#.
::!
i>>
D
E
::J
Z
00
ll'I ll'I
ll'I It)
#.
...
r:o
OJ
(5
...
C\l C\l
.., ..,
co co
... ...
.., ..,
......
..,ri
...
(/)
8
o OJ
~ 0
1i
::J
<II
o
~
...
w
m
::I
o
z
~
w
...
u;
u..
w
a: CD
~~
::>0
co
~
co
~
r:o
r:o
o
Q)
..,
... ...
ll'I I ll'I
...
o
CO
...
<0
ll'I
COI
~ I c:;
It) ll'I
:g
C\l
...
-'
<>....
::l;m
w
ll'IO
C\l0
-0
... OJ
.., (5
1i
::J
m
-'
~
o
I-
o
~
...
CD
<Il
Uj ::I
... 0
u; li
> ;;;
a: :::
Iii ..
UJ .. III
a:.2 0
~8iii
5
~
.
u
""
'<;
CD
0-
0>
U
IE
~
..
~
.,
e
CD
Q
2
"0
CD
OJ
0-
:2
c
.
'0
e
,!!
CD
<Il
::J
o
iii-
m:=
J :;:
.,-
QCD
.., ~:
~iii.2
o~
z::'
r::
g
'6
w
.c:
.
;i
o
1=
~
w
z
w
<:I
<>.
a:
I-
iii
Gi
CD
e
.;;,
e
w
e
.2
OJ
1::
o
Q.
<Il
e
.
~
i5
CD
'5
...
1;;
.5
W
o
a:
::>
o
(/)
C\l
Q)
I
,..
I
N
::I
-'
...
Z
o
...
.
.
.
I
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
II
.
.'
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
movement counts conducted at this interchange (Figure 2). This resulted in a north/south split of
26%/44%, respectively. Based on telephone conversations with Virginia Department of Transportation
(VDOT) officials and summarized in a January 1992 letter, this information is enclosed in Appendix A.
Figure 3 presents the anticipated site traffic distribution.
Local Traffic Growth
As previously mentioned, traffic counts were conducted at the Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business
interchange--more specifically the ramp junctions with Route 29 Business. These counts were utilized to
determine the east/west volumes along Route 29 Business. These volumes are the basis for determining
future projected volumes.
Historical traffic volume data were obtained from the Commonwealth of Virginia Deoartment of
Tr ns ort ti n Avera e Dail Traffic AD Volumes on Interstates Arterial and Prima R ute
booklet. Data between 1976 and 1990 were evaluated to determine the average growth rate for that time
period.
The three road sections studied included the Route 29 Bypass, both north and south of Route 29
Business, and Route 29 Business east of Route 29 Bypass. Based on tables included in Appendix A and on
conversations with VDOT officials, projected growth rates were determined. A growth rate of 2.7% for
Route 29 Business, inclusive of the Route 29 Bypass ramps, was agreed upon.
, ,'.,1"""''1'1'\1.
mbined Traffic Volumes
Anticipated traffic volumes, depicted in Table 1, were assigned to the roadway network based on the
anticipated traffic distribution shown on Figure 2. These volumes then were superimposed on local
raffic volumes to estimate total traffic demand. Figures 4 and 5 present the projected site and local
raffic volumes for the A.M. and P.M. peak hours.
6
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.,~, .., .,. '
SS'td),.8 62 '3HI
~I ~
ATTACHMENT 0
Vl
=>
lD
"3^'V >U:I'Vd NOS~3.:k:l3r
en
N
W
I-
0::
"-
W
>
<
w
z
<(
I-
Z
o
u..
o
'"
L
r
o
r-
L~~
9Z -.J
N
o
r-
.
W
I-
a:
'a~ 3115
a3S0dO~d
W
0::
G N
1--4
l.L
z
o
-
I-
::J
en
-
0::
l-
V)
-
o
W
I-
-
V)
C)
Z
-
0::
W
I-
Z
W
I-
Z
W
U
0::
W
0..
~II~ ~
~..~
~..~
~==~
.
III
I
"
II
.
.
.
.
, \
'-,''':''1:", .~. "
00
,., ,.,
CD L{l
I I
00
,., ,.,
r- '<T
:::E:::E
0<0.
Z
W~
(,:>00
WOO
-l -
I ATTACHMENT D I
"3^V >IC1Vd NOSl:I3.:H3r
VI
::J
III
0'1
N
"
W
f-
a:
"-
W
>
<
W
Z
<(
f-
Z
o
u..
"OCl 311S
03S0dOCld
II
"'W"l
N'"
o-
N-
-...
N
SSVdA8 6<: "31Cl
~ ...........-.
N
o
r-
"
W
f-
a:
W
0:::
::J rt)
<.:>
lL.
(/)
w
:2
:::J
-1
o
>
u
.......
lL.
lL.
<(
0::
~
~
01
01
~
Q
Z
.......
~
V)
.......
x
w
~II~ ~
:A..a;:
~..~
~II~
'"'
IL L
,
. Ir . 3A V )ll:lV d NOSl:l3.:l.:l3r V)
Vl
::l
III W
. CTl 2
N
" ::Jet:
w
I- -1::J
0::
. " 00
"
w
> >:r:
<(
w
. Z
<( U~
I-
Z .........<(
0
u... - LL W
ON
. ",CO
...:: Ll5Z1 LLO-
lL ,(59) <(
...0
N" et:
Ir .
. ' ,',':""'" ...... "a~ 311S 1-2
"'''' 0-
NN ......
Jl _N a3SOdO~d
-.. .
. 0<(
11 W
00 l- I
...,.,
N <(
. 0
~ 0-0
-
......... ..-
. uo
......... N
l-
. Z
<(
. SS'1dA8 6Z "3HJ
0
. N ..
0 -
r-
-- w lL
I - l-
I 0::
Ir
"'0
i ..- ~~~~ ~
" ;.o..~
~..~
~==~
ATTACHMENT 0
W
0::
G ~
a
z
::l
o
0::
<.:)
W:..:
I-U
-<(
OV11I1
Z
w-
<.:) 00
woo
-oJ ~
..........
LL
.
III
.
I
I
.
\
.
\
.
\
.
.-
, \
I'
o
Z
::J
o
a:
(;)
w:.::
....u
-<(
o VleD
Z
W-
(;)00
WOO
-1-
~ "r 'I') 'r' ,~
I ATTACHMENT D I
0111
......
-N
IL L
r
Ir '3^V >I1:Nd NOS~3=l=l3r
III
::J
m
m
N
W
....
oc
"
W
>
<(
w
z
<(
....
Z
0 111_
u.. 00
~~ L(B91)
IL r(SBtl
tr .a~ 311S
0- a3SOdO~d
...on
....~
0111
111111
....'" Lost (SIo)
JI rOz
11
1110
....-
...
SSVdA8 6l .31~
N
o
r-
111
0....
...'"
~I --.
.
w
....
oc
lL
-
111
...
N
Ir
1110
W
0::
::J
C)
L!)
-
l.L
tf)
w
2
:JO::
-1:J
00
>:r:
U~
-<(
l..L W
l..L(L
<(
0:: ·
1-2
.
O(L
w
1-1
<(
(LO
-~
UO
-N
I-
Z
<(
~I=~ ~
!;....-:
~..~
~=;1
,
I
.
.
i
.
.
I
I
.
\
.
.
.
!
III
III
.
.
.
~
I ATTACHMENT 01
Chapter IV
PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS
AND CONCLUSIONS
",'1 r"('}.l',l,
, ,
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
III
III
III
III
III
III
III
.
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
Chapter 4
PROJECTED TRAFFIC CONDITIONS AND CONCLUSIONS
This chapter presents a summary of the impact of the projected site and local traffic on the
existing roadway network based on 20 year projections.
Proposed Access Plan
As previously stated, direct access to the site is provided by the Route 29 Business/Proposed Site
Road intersection. The following analysis evaluates this intersection in terms of recommended
geometrics to accommodate a projected 20-year buildout.
Indirectly, the Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business interchange also is impacted by the proposed site
development. Based on recommendations by VDOT officials, the interchange also was analyzed in terms of
capacity constraints. Figure 6 presents the location of each of the subject interchanges.
Plan Adequacy
The intersection capacity analysis techniques outlined in the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual were used
. ".~tl!ranalyze the capacity of the roadway network. These procedures provided a quantified "Level of
Service" (LOS) which describes traffic conditions by intersection delay. These service conditions are
defined by letters "A" through "F", with "A" being excellent (no delay) traffic conditions and "F"
equating to congested, unstable traffic flow of excessive delay. Table 2 presents a summary of these
service levels.
Generally, these definitions cover both signalized and unsignalized intersections; however, an
unsignalized intersection quantifies a LOS based on reserve capacity, while a signalized intersection
utilizes delay (seconds). Reserve capacity numerically presents the number of available gaps in traffic
for a vehicle to negotiate a turning movement. Enclosed in Appendix B are excerpts from the Highway
Capacity Manual which summarizes the LOS criteria for signalized and unsignalized intersections.
7
.
.
.
.
~
.
,;
II
II
',:;'\
. ,",I ,...t"."
SSVdA8 6l "3Hl
~I ___
I ATTACHMENT 01
"3^,,1 )H:IVd NOS~3~.:13r
III
::l
CD
en
N
.
W
I-
a:
......
"
w
>
-<
w
z
-<
I-
Z
o
u..
I \
\ I
""
.a~ 311S
a3SOdO~d
N' '~
o
r-
.
W
I-
a:
w
n::
~ c..o
1--4
LL
V>
Z
o
........
t-
<!
U
o
---1
z
o
........
t-
U
W
V>
0::
W
t-
Z
........
<!
w
0::
<!
>-
o
::J
t-
V>
~I=~~
....~
~..~
~;;~
.'
.
:
.
.
\
Table 2
LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS
L.O.S.
,'.. "4('"1'''''
SOURCE:
ROADWAY SEGMENTS
OR CONTROLLED-
ACCESS HIGHWAYS
A
Freo flow, low troffic density.
8
DelLlY is nol unren::onnble,
stable traffic flow.
c
Stablo condition, movemont:;
somewhat restricted due to
higher volumes, but not
objectionable lor motorists.
o
Movements more restricted,
queues and delays may occur
during short peaks, but lower
demands occur olten onough
to permit clearing, thus
proventing excossive delay.
E
Acluol copncily 01 the roadwny.
Involves delay to all molorists
due to congestion,
F
Forced flow wilh demand
volumos greater lhLln capacity
resulting in complele
congestion. Volumes drop
to zero in oxtreme co:;os.
INTERSECTIONS
No vohiclo wails longer than
one signal indication.
On 0 rara occasion, motori::ls
will wait through moro than
one signal indication.
Intcrmillontly, drivers wail
through moro than one signal
indication, and occasionally
backups may dovelop bohind
lolt-turning vehiclos, Irallic
/low still stablo and acceplablo.
Dolays at intorsoctions may
bocome oxtensivo with some,
ospocially lolt-turning vohiclo::,
waiting two or moro signal
indications, onough cyclos with
lowor demand occur 10 pormit
pori odic clearonco, thus
preventing excessivo backups.
Very long quoues may creale
longthy delays, especially lor
lelt-turning vehicles.
Oackups Irom locations
downslream ro::lricl or provont
movemont or vehicles oul or
approach, creating a storage
nroa during pnrt or 011 01 on
hour.
A PolicV on Dcsiqn of Urban Hiqhwoys nnd Arterial Slreets,
AASHTO, 1984 bosed opon matorial publishod in tho
Highway Capacily Manual, Transportalion Resaarch Boord, 1905.
8
I ATTACHMENT D I
F ~
~
~~ @ @
~~@~~V
4~~ ~~
~ @ ~
~
.
.
.
;
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
I
I
.
.
.
.
.
"
.
.
.
I
I .
I ATTACHMENT 01
Existing Conditions
The Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business interchange was analyzed based on the existing roadway and
traffic conditions in the A.M. and P.M. peak hours. The results of this analysis are summarized in
Table 3. Existing roadway geometries are shown on Figure 7.
Proiected Roadway Conditions
The following 2011 projected roadway conditions are presented for both the Route 29 Bypass/Route 29
Business interchange and the Route 29 Business/Proposed Site Road intersection.
Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business - The Route 29 Bypass/Route 29 Business interchange was
analyzed as unsignalized intersections based on 20-year traffic projections (Figures 4 and 5) and
existing roadway conditions (Figure 7). Table 4 summarizes the results of this analysis.
As shown on Table 4, some of the critical turning movements indicate "F" LOS, which are unacceptable
service levels. Based on these unacceptable conditions, a signalized capacity analysis was performed
based on the Highway Capacity Manual. Table 5 summarizes the results of this analysis.
Due to the close proximity of the two intersections and potential for signalization, the Passer 3
"..I....'''.lt.
signal timing optimization also was performed This Passer 3 software was developed specifically to
assess progression at signalized diamond interchanges. This program evaluates the effectiveness of
various geometric design alternatives for both pretimed and actuated type signals. For purposes of the
following analysis, the existing geometric conditions are analyzed assuming both a pretimed and an
actuated condition. The results of this analysis are summarized in Table 6. Capacity analysis
worksheets for Tables 4 through 6 are enclosed in Appendices C through E, respectively.
Route 29 Business/Proposed Site Road Intersection - This intersection was analyzed to determine
the recommended roadway conditions required to accommodate projected traffic volumes. The recommended
geometries utilized to analyze the intersections are shown on Figure 8. Table 5 summarizes the Level of
Service and delay for the Proposed Site Road/Route 29 Business intersection. Capacity analysis
workseets are enclosed in Appendix E.
9
'II'
.
,
.
.
I
.
I
.
I
I
.
III
I
.
.
~
III
i
II
.
.
.
.
.
.
,
IN Ir-ERSECTION
Rt~ 29 Bypass/Rte 29 Business
Interchange --
. Rte 29 Bypass NB Off-Ramp
. Rte 29 Bypass SB Off-Ramp
, ,.., 'l!r'" "".
Table 3
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
UNSIGNALlZED CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Existing Conditions Year 1991
A.M. PEAK HOUR
(1 )
TU RN ReseNe (2)
MOVMNT. Capacity L.O.S.
P.M. PEAK HOUR
(1 )
ReseNe (2)
Capacity L.O.S.
NBL 309 A 115 D
NBR 279 C 615 A
EBL 652 B 398 B
SBL 347 B -131 F
SBR 548 A 945 A
WBL 863 A 426 A
NCDTE:
(1 ReseNe Capacity represents the number of available gaps in traffic for vehicle movement.
(2 L.O.S. = Level of SeNice.
Fe NTLOS3 1/17/92
10
. .
z
o
!-
<
Z
<.:l
Vl
W
o
W
Z
<
0-'
z
~I
-'
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
W
0:
::J
C)
r-
>-<
LL
If)
'3^V )I~:fVd NOS~3=:1=:13r U
Vl
::l -
lD
0'> 0::
N J-
w W
!-
a: 2
"
,
W 0
>
< W
w
z <.:)
-
<
!-
Z
0 >-
l.L.
<(
3:
0
'OH 311S <(
I I 03S0dOHd 0
1".".1 r"''J'''''ll. 0::
<.:)
Z
-
J-
JI If)
-
X
W
SSVd),8 6Z '31H
Ir
N
o
r-
--
,
W
!-
a:
--
~=I~ ~
....~
~..~
~==~
I'
. .
Table 4
I ATTACHMENT 01
UNSIGNALlZED CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Year 2011 Projections
A.M. PEAK HOUR P.M. PEAK HOUR
(1 ) (1 )
, TURN Reserve (2) Reserve (2)
I
!.tJTERSECTION MOVMNT. Capacity L.O.S. Capacity L.O.S.
I
Rue 29 Bypass/Rte 29 Business
I
: Interchange --
I
I
~ Rte 29 Bypass N B Off-Ramp NBL 67 E 12 E
I NBR -603 F 295 C
I
I EBL 398 B 86 E
I
I
I
Rte 29 Bypass SB Off-Ramp SBL -133 F -544 E
SBR 872 A 933 B
WBL 719 A -284 E
~OTE:
1) Reserve Capacity represents the number of available gaps in traffic for vehicle movement.
(2) L.O.S. = Level of Service.
FOLTLOS42-20-92
I
11
. .I' .
Table 5
SIGNALIZED CAPACITY ANALYSIS SUMMARY
Year 2011 Projections
A.M. PEAK HOUR
(1 )
Delav
(2)
L.O.S.
NTERSECTION
te 29 Bypass/Rte 29 Business
Interchange --
*
F
C
. Rte 29 NB Off-Ramp
. Rte 29 SB Off- Ramp
17.0
I
I
I
I
~te 29 BusinesslProposed Site Rd
21.1
C
~OTE:
(1) Delay indicates the average number of seconds a vehicle may
I waite at a traffic signal .
1(2) L.O.S. = Level of Service.
I
I
1* Indicates the Delay & L.O.S. can't be meaningful when the V/C ratio
is greater than 1 .2.
I
FONTLOS5 2/20/92 12
I ATTACHMENT 01
P.M. PEAK HOUR
(1) (2)
Delav L.O.S.
39.5
D
F
*
18.4
C
.. '"
II
- I
!!!. 0 <( <(
o..J
+ (i) ~
c( tel c? '"':
. 0;
0
~ p~ u:-
N ~
c? -
N '"':
a:
:J
~~ i u:- u:-
~- 0
c( ...J ~ co
UJ 01
a.. . tel C;; m
0
0; C\l
:E 0
~-I
~ 0 0 u:-
..J 0'
< in a:j
. tel ai .....
0; ~
0
~Q; ~ u:-
co
'OQ; .0
1-0 10
>- - I
a: !!!. 0 W u:-
c( o..J
:E co in
:E + u:i ai
c( tel
:J . 0; U) co
(J) 0
(J)
(jj GI
:J pI
~ c:: ~
GI u:- 2:
fI) c( >
. zc( in -
I rn~p"'c( GI u:i N
~ ~.~ co C\I
a:
Oc :J
c( 0 L I
a..U-
c(
() ~~ 0 co ~
c( ..J
CO) UJ [0 <if
a: <<
w a.. . III C\I <<
(J) 0; <<
(J) :E 0
c(
a.. c(
~ ~i u:- u:-
~ (;)
-
C\I ~
10 10
- u:-
0; ~ N
00; ai
-
1-0 C\I
1i:
1i: E
E a:
a: I
I :t:
:t: 0
m GI 0 01
C\l0J 01 Z
Z GI c:: en m
0 a:"i m C\I
1= -- () C\l GI
.. ~
() .. GI GI ~
W tel- ~
en 0.5 GI
a: >-.. GI "tl
UJ 01 .. "tl Cii
?- m .. Cii
?; C\I .= 1:
GI .. *' OJ
"S :J .. if
om ..J
a: 0 0
13
I ATTACHMENT 01 co -'
o:~
.. :>u
u:w
.. w Ul
.... -
* Z
_:I:
* ....
wC)
.. UlZ
o:w
.. :I:..J
U.
*
* * * * * * * *
:;
m
c::
'c
III III
-; aiE
G) .~o
'i ~ tel c::
3: c:: ..c:: ..
>. as~'-
III ..c::GI>-
E () - III
Q;5"ii
GI -Gl"tl
o'E .5:-SG)
:E G) CD_~
GlE -So;
~~ o~o
{; ~ Glen;
;~ ~1:-S
~.!:! -= ~olj
..c GI C\I
-c ...J~.....:
00) Q-c
Qi'0 -See
..0'- cO-S
E.!! oc::~
~ .~ g ,g ~
G)"'== ~~!
O)~ G):'!CJ)
~ III ~ GI ..
~o ~E.;;
as ECD~
GlC GI..c::a:
-S.2>~=-;;o
!!! 0 .~ .s ; :>
II CD CI) CD CD
en ~.!';=
"tl OGla:..
c:: 0;a:1I.;
in g > II GI ()
c" jCll~'5
li.il:~;: 1I~~5
I- .= III en *' ..c:: <<
OGiOi O...~<<
ZOO ..J..Ja:<<
()
;:
~
.. w
* U I
* * zu I
* W I I
.. :=l I I
c:;
.. w
:z: Ul
0 *
- w or. .
.... * Q
([ .....
1:: * Ul
u: I
0 * .... ....
~ :I: I
.. C)([ I
- I
* u: I
C) * * *
:z: * * * * *
..... I
Ul * I
a: w I I
:I: .. uu I I
U. Z I I
* W --:>
..J :=l
a: * 0
:z: w
C) * Ul
..... or.--:>
Ul * W
Q
* -
Ul
* .. I I ....
* .... I I
.. * "-0: I I
W I I
* ..J - I
.. * * * * * * '*
*
..
..J
([
:>
u:
wa::
....w
zor.
_Ii:
:=l
WZ
Ul
([
:I:
U.
*
*
*
'"
*
'*
-0
GI
'lii
:;
()
C
<> .
.!!
GI
<>
.~
GI
.en
"'-
o 0
3:"ii
-a; ~
C..J
~olj
c: >-
III III
..c::"ii
~C. . .
~"tl
c:: GI
.- ,.:
CD -.,;::
..c:: c:
- III
05-
~Ol
~~
_ ..c::
~ 3:
o ~
- 0
GI-
:5"i
.. >
::.~
..-
"tl 0
c: c:
8.2...
!~
~:6
G)~
0_ .
- .. u
~;-..+
~~!P9~
C\I
m
--
C\I
C\I
--
-
Ul
en
9
I-
Z
o
u.
;:-NM~iO'
-----
r ... ti
"
,- .;
~
~~~
;~
"1."
:~
:;!
(
-~;:
f,:'.
~~
,{.,
"t~
ii,r<,
~
'(~
~
~.
':,
,]
...,!, I ~ ~h"~. .1.
U
-
LL
WZ WZ LL
za za <
<- <- 0:
...11- ...11- I-
< <
.z .z . ...J
1-1.:) :::EI.:) :::E<
Vl- 0- oz
-Vl UVl UI.:)
xw WW W-
~wo 0:0 O::Vl
W , ~
I.:) ,
W ,
...1
SSVdA8 62: '3Hl
-
-
I ATTACHMENT 01
"3^ V >lHV d NOSH3=l=l3r
Vl
:J
CD
17l
N
.
W
l-
n:
"
W
>
<
W
Z
<
I-
Z
o
u.
L
r
r
;L
r
'a~ 31lS
a3SOdO~d
N
o
,...
W
I-
0:
W
0::
::J
o
ex)
-
LL
(j)
U
-
0:::
I-
W
2
o
w
<..:)
>-
<(
~O
o~
<(0
ON
0:::
o
w
o
z
w
2
2
o
u
W
0:::
~=I~ ~
........
~..~
~1;1
. III.. .
'rI '.'_
I ATTACHMENT D I
~Clusions
,
Ir summary, the existing Route 29 Bypass interchange is not anticipated to satisfactorily
acc~mmodate year 2010 projected volumes. The greatest cause of unsatisfactory delay impacting the
inter~hange is attributed to the background traffic destined to and from the south. For instance,
I
apprpximately 500 vph (in the A.M. peak hour) originate from the south and return in the P.M. peak via
the i~terchange. Applying the 20 year growth rate to this volume nearly doubles the existing volume.
I
I
I
I
lIhe existing two-lane Route 29 Business with the recommended turning lanes shown on Figure 8 will
I
accommodate projected 2011 site and local traffic. In addition to these turn lanes, a fully actuated
I
traffi~ signal is recommended.
I
,
I
l'ljll!lr"p~'"
14
Di:'~,;
lJ B:):::d
" t..
-~..-.-~. -.~ '-""--. .,-,....,"<0--'. .....,
"
(':0.
-----~-~-.. -..:..~~. J
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, VirgiT1lCl 22901-4596
(804) 2965823
''''i
May 7, 1992
Scott W. Campbell
84 Mill Creek Court
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: .SP-92-16 Scott W. Campbell
Tax Map 61, Parcel 148
Dear Mr. Campbell:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
May 5, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. Staff approval of lighting plan and landscape plan;
2. No loudspeakers;
3. There shall be no flags, pennants, banners, streamers
or strings of lights;
4. Area for storage and display of vehicles for sale or
rent shall be limited to that area approximately shown
as "New Parking Area Addition" on Attachment C
initialled WDF 4/10/92.;
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
.... .11.......
Q
....1
z I'
W.
::::E "
:I: I'
(),
~ :..~;. I'
..... '\ I
~-~~.'I.. :
"
Ii
l!i
%
o
I'
..
e
'"
o
Ii' ""
.,p '.:i
<f C
'7
e:
\ ~ 6
\ 1''' 1\ f" 1\\\ c"
1\~6E\1.~
GE..O{\G_ e" \
'tOt'ol'\:.
-- ~:.
~ ~~-:j
C- tJiP
-;: 0
-;; () .iJ~
I "Z:r'"
-:i:.I. O~
~ ,d rJ
,l
------
T.M 101 PAR
0.63'; ACRES
O.B. .769 P. ~ I> 7
\ 48
~~
7-
~
T.M. 61 PAR 149
06<15 ACRE.S
D. B. 619 P. ~6'
:i-
,- 0
(1: ~ _
..:. - .
c.... 0 <oJ
- ....
'.0
.....
-;. r 0
. ..
\- ,,)
'Rb..fI':,rp ~\~ ~
"(""""L"",- 41iL'r" :,/2~lo,'L
tJ....~1 L kL '~(.~~Vf a..IA.Oe.~ IN ....&~
~1t\l.boIL. ~R1:.A. b.'ltE ~ '5". ocz..LE~
r..," ~iOI'J'i: on. t.Att,,-'e;Q. W\U,. t!E: iA'bC:O
rN ~~ rMtt.lNl,.. ~A
''P 1'<l:~ oae..... ~ ~""~C
~..:: "T'I~~I:.O 'I'OQ, l..o....E: ~::
UI- ,...~ ItaU a- ;JU.
'i)c./~ ~
j...1/1/--
f f 'I C ~\
,...
Z
"
0.
~
o
'<I 'g
~~
'"
~
o
CJ
>-
..
~
-'
W.rsE'" ",,'eO ,""- \
--r-
<<
'"
z
t!
o
:r
...
"
_ 0
~'O
NO.
~-
~~
Cl\\lllOlIe.u~ 'D,StIl.I6
~mAltLE Cjl..oJT'{ ,J".
bt..Le ,o.!C'
'CROW"","" ~D ~ ""
brre ~ ~\_~,.o
Cl>W\'T YooH..'''''' 00; '''', ''IS,
DI\<e 3/1!O1 'Il._
Scott Campbell
Page 2
May 7, 1992
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
1/~R ~..
william D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
George Ragsdale
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 5, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
SP-92-16 SCOTT CAMPBELL
Petition: Scott Campbell petitions the Board of Supervisors
to issue a special use permit for auto sales and rental
[22.2.2(8)] on 1.6 acres zoned C-1, Commercial. Property,
described as Tax Map 61, Parcel 148, is located at the end
of and on the north side of Route 650 just east of Route 631
(Rio Road) in the Charlottesville Magisterial District.
This site is located in a designated growth area
(Neighborhood 2) and is recommended for Neighborhood
Service.
Character of the Area: This site is the former location of
a tire store. The Southern Railway tracks are located
adjacent to the east. Petroleum storage tanks are adjacent
to the south. A gas station is adjacent to the west. Two
dwellings are located beyond this site on Route 650 on the
opposite side of the Railroad. This site is substantially
lower than Rio Road. The area proposed for storage of the
autos is level and open.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant proposes to operate a
car sales and rental operation in connection with the repair
service provided in the existing structure. The area
proposed for the storage of autos is shown in Attachment C.
The proposed storage area is anticipated to be adequate to
store 35 autos.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval of
SP 92-16 subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
August 28, 1984 - The Planning Commission approved the site
plan for the tire store (now a repair garage).
December 11, 1984 - A plat creating the parcel for the tire
store was approved.
April 12, 1988 - The plat creating the parcel currently
under review was approved.
1
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This area is recommended for
Neighborhood Service in Neighborhood 2.
STAFF COMMENT:
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance states:
"The board of supervisors hereby reserves unto itself
the right to issue all special use permits permitted
hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in
this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the
board of supervisors that such use will not be of
substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the
character of the district will not be changed thereby
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose
and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted
by right in the district, with additional regulations
provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, and with the
public health, safety and general welfare."
Staff has reviewed this request for consistency with section
31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance and offers the following comments
and observations. This use will not be of detriment to
adjacent properties nor will it change the character of the
district due to the commercial activity on the adjacent
properties. The nearby residential development is separated
from this site by the Southern Railway and staff will
recommend conditions to minimize the impact of this
activity on those residential properties. (Those conditions
include staff approval of a lighting plan and prohibition of
loudspeakers.) This use will have minimal visual impact on
Rio Road due to the lower elevation of this site and the
existence of other commercial activity between this site and
Rio Road. Route 650 is a low volume, dead end road; the
1990 trip count indicated 30 vehicle trips per day. Staff
notes that this type of use, auto sales and rental, does not
generate more vehicle trips than other uses which are
permitted by-right. The Department of Transportation has
provided comment regarding this request (Attachment D).
Staff recommends a condition to ensure that an adequate
entrance is constructed to serve the site.
Summary:
Due to the existing adjacent commercial deve~opment, the
position of this site at a lower grade than Rio Road and the
separation of this site from adjacent residential
development, staff opinion is that this use will have
minimal impact. With appropriate conditions staff opinion
is that the potential negative impact of this site can be
mitigated. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this
request subject to the following conditions:
2
..
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Staff approval of lighting plan and landscape plan;
2. No loudspeakers;
3. There shall be no flags, pennants, banners, streamers
or strings of lights;
4. Area for storage and display of vehicles for sale or
rent shall be limited to that area shown on Attachment
C initialled WDF 4/10/92;
5. Construction of a commercial entrance prior to the
commencement of storage, sales or rental or motor
vehicles.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Sketch Delineating Storage/Display Area
D - Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
3
~
1130IIIlITO ~.
'Rt..
I
.
c
1..____ _ ______
",1N
o
)
IATTACHMENT A:
$'/
(j
~
..0
-
....IN
'I
G'~o
"1-"
0,0
~
~
~.A
~
~
..
"'.~
}
S
R
"-
\
"
.~
I, ....
(-- T.....
l!:i!
"; ~fI GerGen
-"
/~
ffi21~: [ill].
Jt'r1.. rm1~
~, .7;7
SP-92-16 --
CAMPBELL, SCOTT W. -~
. ~ .10 ~
~ ~rr
fJ. ~ go ~~
~
~~ // ;J,0.''- ~
~ ~.~ ) ~ ~,.. .~
/-" ..'~,:" .~I~;'
/ // ~\,~: ~ ~.CT'OO
J/'h \\:;, ('.. '
.0/"""7'/"- '. .~:I ~ ~~
.,. .
Y" 7// : \ :{"~\) · ._ '....):~. 210
4Y / ,U \ " _\~:;.~ . ....,,; ~i.J.~ \
...v /// \,' - - ... .""10 __ \
/f/ " 'I \ I iJ ~
/;/ ~ --, I
~ l~ /~
~ I, i'
-'~ '" ~
//1/ ~ 1/ I
'/// ~
Iffl ~
7I/ ~
11/ A.
...
77
JACK JOUETT, RIVANNA AND
CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICTS
.
~
I. )..
-:...J--,
....----. I
~ ....-t----
......... Ie '- I zo \ /... "
....... 2_,( J~ I.. '^" ..:r1i,I.~TO.~ rr
. "'-J' .....~:.0~.;lJJ...~,
. $
, ,
iEC'-
61-XI a. '!:/:
. - FOUR
::,.SEAS ONS
~
EC
618
".
10
60
, .. .1fISJ!j$J "'if!!!14 " ..
,....... T rll
!\. ~~ IS.~
I~ a
../. 7J 'J-i
~J''' E'I In.'1111 '/!/J
~~~$~~ ~
~~... ~ ~ ~ ><8 ~ ;::
"".,~~~~~
4_~~_~~~
. ~ ~ :-.;
~ ~~ ~
~ ~..........~ ~',
~: ~W:~:' "-/'
""\\ ' '-, /
,\ . / ~ ........ /
~. / 7
~ /
I '< /
"^
-7
I
fill
".Uc,\':f,
I.wl
/r
.. 0
HILL
SEe. 61 ~
~
\
~
"'-
'\.
,
"
In
//f
///.
II. W L__
/~V
UI.
.V//
U
/),
/'
:v
~~..,...
~
-.-/
- -------.
,,~'"
\.',~
"
\\
1.j
~
\
\
\.
\,
\.
\.
\,
-
..... .. ...
- -
'-
~61 .,
IATTACHMENT 8: -.
~
:v .,~, '~'23 (/~
, . ,m Vir
.~ ~.. ~~: [; .,OT"(
, . SCcTlo.
ISO .... ~..
'~XY/~~In ~
IlIA ~~~"2T.
lit 10 I 127
"~ 'u.
~&-f.... ~
'''''
"," ~ ';""~
, .. :-......~~,
,'Ii '~~*.~
"";::.~,~-;:" '- ~~
<'~
:\
o
_TIOlI IRA ~
~~~
~~ Q' ~
~~~~' ~
>'1.310 'i'oc~ ---4
) .",
- ~,~
SEe 1011 61Z t ~ ~rJ!!j
a",.NCH.LANDS "l I I! I ~
- "~~~ 'f7IJfi,I' dr.),.. ~~
....0 " ~-:: /I ~ 'tf(V .... ' \
(i...-.....'-'~ 'I t \ '\. ~
~ ...~ ,\, ,.."'-'--
. ~p. ~,-,'T~ ~Mt ~ \i!! l~ ~ ~ f-~
. -h'-.~:::-~ '- ___. ~"41 i)
..~~~ , !II" _ 164.
~t~::., '::::f 't ., '55
~~~V I,';/,. -
---~ I.'"
" I
" I
I
I
~. J
-Z- /!/,
62
CITY
~164 ~
l'< IO~ t;
ifll \6111 .~ ~
flf(f :~
~ 1ST ~~~
- , -
OF
CHARLOTTESVILLE
\
\
\
\
,,~
--.-
\
SECTION
61
. "0.
.
,"
-
IATTACHMENT 01
.
COMMONWEALTf11 of VIRGINIA
RAY D. PETHTEL
COM ISSIONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P. O. BOX 201 J
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
D. S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
April 20, 1992
Special Use Permits
& Rezonings
May 1992
Ronald S. Keeler
f of Planning
ty Office Building
McIntire Road
lottesville, VA. 22902
. Dea Mr. Keeler:
The following are our comments:
1. SP-92-16 Scott W. Campbell, Route 650 - Route 650 is currently non-tolerable.
Thi request would result in an increase in traffic from the current vacant use on
the property. The usage in this request is in line with what would be expected for
tra fic generation under the C-1 zoning. A commercial entrance with adequate sight
dis ance will be required for the access to this property. Depending on the
ent ance location, a sight easement could be needed on the adjacent property.
2. SP-92-19 Albemarle County Fair, Inc., Route 692 - This section of Route 692 is
cur ently tolerable. A commercial entrance was constructed several years ago when
the fair was first held at this site. Since that time Route 692 has been plant
mix d and the entrance is surface treated. The entrance, particularly the east
sid, is breaking up and it is recommended that it be plant mixed. A right turn and
tap r lane is recommended along the frontage of the property to the east. The right
tur lane should be 12 feet wide and as long as possible, with the taper lane
tra sitioning back to the edge of pavement. The existing right turn taper lane on
sou hbound Route 29 at the Route 692 intersection is approximately 150 feet in
len tho With a heavy right turn movement at the intersection of Routes 29 and 692,
the existing taper lane is inadequate. The existing left turn lane from northbound
Rou e 29 is approximately 100 feet in length with a 150 foot taper lane. The
exi ting crossover at the intersection of Routes 29 & 692 is fairly wide and
unm rked. Pavement markings in this intersection would help control traffic. The
cir ulation and on site parking design should be such that there is no backup of
tra fic on either Routes 29 or 692 due to vehicles entering the site. This request
is or a 30 year extension and it could be beneficial for the period of time to be
sho ter so that it can be reevaluated as to the effectiveness of the operation.
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
r
I
Dlstr;buhJd tv UOt;;ci: _'..,~..",,,~.._"O"~_"-
AQ~}n(1.1 H'~~~'1 ~\~(:
,-_f', .~_~~., :~~_",;, /' j.
" \
'd j
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
: i"
.!._.LLi~' "
"'~/) \,!' .,:
:l,~. .
June 3, 1992
Albemarle County Fair, Inc
ATTN: Michael G. stewart
5 Lake Forest Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-92-19 Albemarle County Fair
Tax Map 87, Parcel 3
Dear Mr. stewart:
The Albemarle County Planning commission, at its meeting on
June 2, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted request to the Board of Supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
conditions:
1. Such events shall be limited to six consecutive days
excluding Sunday. Hours of operation shall be limited
to 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and
9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Saturday with no operation
on Sunday ("Operation" shall mean the period of time
during which the fair is open to the public and shall
not include set up, dismantling and restoration
activities.) This permit is issued for the conduct of
the Albemarle County Fair by the Albemarle County Fair,
Incorporated, and shall not be used for any other event
requiring special use permit pursuant to Section
10.2.2.42 and 5.1.27 of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. The applicant shall notify the Albemarle County Police
Department, Virginia Department of Health, and
servicing fire and rescue squads 60 days prior to each
event and shall make adequate arrangements for the
conduct of the event with each of these agencies;
3. Traffic management shall be approved annually by the
Albemarle County Police Department, Virginia Department
of Transportation and Albemarle County Planning
Department, with the final responsibility being that of
the Police Department.
-l
~
Albemarle County Fair, Inc
Page 2
June 3, 1992
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
IJ/~/~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Elizabeth P. Scott
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
JUNE 2, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
SP-92-19 ALBEMARLE COUNTY FAIR INC.
Petition: Albemarle County Fair Inc. petitions the Board
of Supervisors to amend SP-88-90 to permit a fair
[10.2.2(42)] on 50 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC,
Entrance Corridor Overlay District. Property, described as
Tax Map 87, Parcel 3, is located on the north side of Route
692 approximately 0.4 miles west of Route 29 in the Samuel
Miller Magisterial District. This site is not located in a
designated growth area (Rural Area 3).
Character of the Area: This site is open pasture land.
Properties between this site and Route 29 South are
developed residentially. Other properties in the area are
large farm tracts.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is seeking approval of
this permit in order to allow the fair to continue to
operate as it has in the past. The applicant has obtained a
30 year lease for the property.
I SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with the provisions of Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance as well as past approvals
and history of the fair operation and recommends approval of
SP-92-19 subject to conditions.
Planning and Zoning History:
March 23, 1988 - SP-87-109 was approved which authorized the
operation of a fair for one (1) year. (A site plan was
subsequently approved by staff.)
November 16, 1988 - SP-88-90 was approved which authorized a
fair until December 31, 1992.
: The reports for the past approvals are attached to this
report.
, Comprehensive Plan: This site is in the Rural Areas. The
report for SP-87-109 stated, "Staff's opinion is that the
, County fair is consistent with the agricultural support
objectives and would not detract from the existing
agricultural/forestal district." The Comprehensive Plan has
been readopted since that time, however, it is the opinion
of staff that these comments remain valid.
1
I I
"
I
STAFF COMMENT:
In 1991 the fair attracted approximately 25,000 visitors.
Staff is unaware of any significant problems and no
complaints have been received regarding the past use. Staff
and the applicant have met with the Police Department to
determine alternate methods for traffic/parking control
designed to improve the traffic patterns in the area. The
recommendations of the Police Department are included as
Attachment D. No condition is needed to address these
recommendations as it is currently addressed by Condition 2
of the previous approvals.
Staff has noted the recommendation of the Police Department
as evidence that past approvals have contained adequate
conditions to react to changing needs. Staff sees no change
in circumstance to warrant disapproval of this request or
change in conditions governing the operation of the fair.
Therefore, staff recommends approval of SP-92-19 with the
following conditions which are identical to past conditions
with the exception of a time limit for the approval and the
deletion of the condition requiring site plan approval.
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Such events shall be limited to six consecutive days
excluding Sunday. Hours of operation shall be limited
to 4:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m., Monday through Friday and
9:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. on Saturday with no operation
on Sunday ("Operation" shall mean the period of time
during which the fair is open to the public and shall
not include set up, dismantling and restoration
activities.) This permit is issued for the conduct of
the Albemarle County Fair by the Albemarle County Fair,
Incorporated, and shall not be used for any other event
requiring special use permit pursuant to Section
10.2.2.42 and 5.1.27 of the Zoning Ordinance;
2. The applicant shall notify the Albemarle County Police
Department, Virginia Department of Health, and
servicing fire and 'rescue squads 60 days prior to each
event and shall make adequate arrangements for the
conduct of the event with each of these agencies;
3. Traffic management shall be approved annually by the
Albemarle County Police Department, Virginia Department
of Transportation and Albemarle County Planning
Department, with the final responsibility being that of
the Police Department.
2
A'rl'ACHMENTS:
A -SP-88-90 Staff Report
B -Location Map
C -Tax Map
D -Recommendation of Police Department
3
I ATTACHMENT AI
TITION:: The Albemarle County Fair, Incorporated petitions the
ard of Supervisors to amend a condition of SP-87-109 to permit
ntinued usage of the North Garden site for the annual County
Fir. Property, described as Tax Map 87, parcel 3 consisting of
50 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas is located on the north side of
R ute 692 about 600 feet west of U. S. Route 29 South. Samuel
M'ller Magisterial District.
RONALD S. KEELER
PLANNING COMMI-SSION: NOVEMBER 1, 1988
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: NOVEMBER 16, 1988
S -88-90 ALBEMARLE COUNTY FAIR INCORPORATED
additional information see attached SP-87-109 staff
e Albemarle County Fair had projected an attendance figure of
a out 16,000 persons. The actual event was far more successful
drawing, an attendance of 25,000 people, more than 50% higher
t an the original estimate.
ysical improvements as reflected in the site plan were adequate
t accommodate the nearly 17,000 vehicles over the six day
period. Due to coordinated efforts by Fair officials, the
A bemarle County Police Department, and Virginia Department of
. , T ansportation, traffic control and other operational measures
m naged traffic without accident or injury. Traffic congestion
o curred one evening as a result of (human) operational problems.
C anges in parking procedures corrected this problem (See
A tachment A). Staff is unaware of any other problems and no
c mplaints were received from residents in the area.
aff recommends approval subject to the following revised
nditions:
1. ~nis s~eeiai ~se ~e~mi~ is iss~ed fe~ a ~e~ied ef eae yea~
~e~iaaia~ ia i988 aad eadia~ ia i989. Such events shall be
limited to six consecutive days excluding Sunday. Hours of.
operation shall be limited to 4:00 P.M., to 11:00 P.M.,
Monday through Friday and 9:00 A.M. to 11:00 P.M. on
Saturday with no operation on Sunday ("Operation" shall mean
the period of time during which the fair is open to the
public and shall not include set up, dismantling and
restoration activities.) This permit is issued for'the
conduct of the Albemarle County Fair by the Albemarle County
Fair, Incorporated, and shall not be used for any other
event requiring special use permit pursuant to Section
10.2.2.42 and 5.1.27 of the Zoning Ordinance;
1
2.
3.:
4
.. ,
I
The applicant shall notify the Albemarle County Police
Department, Virginia Department of Health, and servicing
fire and rescue squads 60 days prior to each event and shall
make adequate arrangements for the conduct of the event with
each of these agencies;
The applicant shall submit a preliminary plan in accordance
with Section 32.4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance for Planning
Commission review no later than June 1, 1988;
Traffic management shall be as approved by the Albemarle
County Police Department, Virginia Department of
Transportation and Albemarle County Planning Department,
with the final responsibility being that of the Police
Department.
2
. , .
, '.
PERSON
RONALD S. KEELER
REPORT
HEARINGS: PLANNING COMMISSION: FEBRUARY 2, 1988
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: FEBRUARY 17, 1988
-87-109 ALBEMARLE COUNTY FAIR INCORPORATED
TITION: Albemarle County Fair, Incorporated petitions the
ard of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a
T MPORARY EVENT SPONSORED BY A LOCAL NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION
( 0.2.2.42) on !50 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property,
d scribed as Tax Map 87, Parcel 3, is located on the north side
o Route 692 about 600 feet west of U.S. Route 29 South at North
G rden in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
is site is open pastureland. Properties between this site and
ute 29 South are developed residentially. Other properties in
e area are large farm tracts.
is site is within the designated North Garden village in the
mprehensive Plan, however, remains zoned Rural Areas. The
operty is currently within an Agricultural/Forestal district.
e Comprehensive Plan objectives recommend that the County
" ontinue to examine the County's policies which support
a riculture and forestry and where necessary, modify policies to
courage such support." Staff's opinion is that the County fair
consistent with agricultural support objectives and would not
tract from the existing agricultural/forestal district.
e 1982 County Fair was held on 5th Street Extended on
dustrially zoned property. Since that time the fair has been
ld at Claudius Crozet Park. As the fair has become more
p pular, space needs have ihcreased. The proposed North Garden
site is over twice the size of Crozet Park.
e Albemarle County Fair would be conducted on 6 days prior to
La or Day (Attendance estimates by Fair officials. Traffic
estimates by staff assume 3 people/vehicle): '
DATE/HOURS
29 Aug (4PM-11PM)
s 30 Aug (4PM-11PM)
31 Aug (4PM-11PM)
Th rs 1 Sept (4PM-11PM)
Fr' 2 Sept (4PM-11PM)
Sa 3 Sept (9AM-11PM)
TOTAL
ESTIMATED
ATTENDANCE
1,000 person
2,500
1,600
1,800
3,200
6,000
16,100 persons
ESTIMATED
VEHICLE TRIPS
670 vehicle trips
1675
1070
1200
2140
,4020,
10,775 vehicle trips
1
Me jor events of this nature are governed by such conditions of
a~proval as may be imposed by the Board of Supervisors in a
slpecific case as well as specific regulations of 5.0
SlffPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS of the Zoning Ordinance (see Attachment
A Regulations governing TEMPORARY EVENTS SPONSORED BY LOCAL
N(DNPROFIT ORGANIZATIONS). The remainder of this report will
d scuss logistical concerns of accommodating such an event.
O~F-SITE TRAFFIC: Staff anticipates that the largest percentage
o traffic to the site would access from the southbound lane of
Repute 29 South and that the majority of traffic would access
t~rough the Route 29 South/692 intersection. Western portions of
t~e County would access by Routes 692, 635, and other secondary
rcpads .
T~e Virginia Department of Transportation has stated that:
"The existing right turn taper lane on southbound Route 29
at the Route 692 intersection is approximately 150 feet in
length. With a heavy right turn movement at the
intersection of Routes 29 and 692, the existing taper lane
is inadequate. The existing left turn lane from northpound
Route 29 is approximately 100 feet in length with a 150 foot
taper lane. The existing crossover at the intersection of
Route 29 and 692 is fairly wide and unmarked. Pavement
markings in this intersection should help control traffic."
T~e Virginia Department of Transportation will provide
r~commended pavement markings at the crossover, however, has
... .
sated that if the Board of Supervisors requests turn lane
i~provements, such a project would likely not occur for 2-3 years
a the earliest. Existing turn lanes do not meet current
V rginia Department of Transportation standards and in staff
opinion should be improved regardless of the outcome of this
p~tition.
D~e to inadequacies of the Route 29 South/692 intersection to
a~commodate fair traffic, other traffic control measures should
b~ developed by the Albemarle County Police Department, Virginia
D~partment of Transportation, and Planning staff.
I
\00'/-\(;(")'
S TE ACCESS: Access to the site would be from Route 692. The
V~rginia Department of Transportation has state~ that:
"This section of Route 692 is currently tolerable. The
minimum 550 feet of sight distance required on Route 692
exists at a location approximately 50 feet east of the
bridge. However, the sight distance to the east is no more
than 550 feet and with the volume of traffic using this site
during the fair, the Department recommends that the
entrance be further to the west where visibility is much
better. A commercial entrance with adequate radii will be
required for this proposal. The Department recommends for
right turn and taper lane on Route 692 to serve this
2
.1
.' I
entrance due to the volume of traffic and the possibility of
traffic queueing at the entrance."
ny people attending the fair will be unfamiliar to the area and
erefore maximum facility of access should be provided. Staff
commends that site access be established where sight distance
best. A turn and taper lane should be provided in accordance
th the Virginia Department of Transportation recommendations to
oid interference with local through-traffic.
TE DEVELOPMENT: Fair officials have obtained a 5 year lease
r this site. (See Attachment B). Section 5.1.27 of the Zoning
dinance requires that "a separate special use permit shall be
quired for each event." Staff recommends waiver of this
ovision and approval for this special use permit for a period
5 consecutive years, subject to Planning Commission (as
posed to administrative) approval of a preliminary site plan.
tters of public concern relative to development of the property
t addressed in this petition would be addressed at time of site
an approval. While staff has no intent to contravene
ovisions of the lease agreement, certain improvements are
ewed as appropriate. The following comments are provided to
d fair officials in plan preparation:
1
Objectionable uses/activities located in
adjoining dwellings will be discouraged.
should consult adjoining property owners
preparation;
vicinity to
Fair officials
during plan
~. 2 The County Engineer will provide recommendations to the
Planning Commission as to specifications for the entrance
road and parking areas in accordance with intensity of
usage. Should the property owner object to such
improvements, the County Engineer may require a bond
appropriate to restore such areas consistent with provisions
of the Soil Erosion and Sedimentation Control Ordinance;
3. Planning staff will recommend reasonable separation of
vehicular and pedestrian circulation. Separate public road
access and adequate on-site circulation for emergency
service vehicles will be recommended.
4. The site plan will be referred to the Site Review Committee
which for the purposes of this petition c~nsists of
representatives of the Department of Planning and Community
Development, County Engineering Department, County Fire
Official, Virginia Department of Health, Virginia Department
of Transportation, and soil Conservation Service.
Recommendations of these agencies will be presented to the
Planning Commission. Fair officials are encouraged to work
with these agencies as well as the Department of Inspections
in plan preparation.
3
I
S~aff recommends approval subject to the following conditions:
1 This special use permit is issued for a period of 5
consecutive years beginning in 1988 and ending in 1992 to
allow 5 County Fair events. Such events shall be limited to
6 consecutive days excluding Sunday. Hours of operation
shall be limited to 4PM to 11PM Monday through Friday and
9AM to 11PM on Saturday with no operation on Sunday
("Operation" shall mean the period of time during which the
fair is open to the public and shall not include set up,
dismantling, and restoration activities). This permit is
issued for the conduct of the Albemarle County Fair by
Albemarle County Fair, Incorporated and shall not be used
for any other event requiring special use permit pursuant to
Section 10.2.2.42 and 5.1.27 of the Zoning Ordinance.
2 The applicant shall notify the Albemarle County Police
Department, Virginia Department of Health, and servicing
fire and rescue squads 60 days prior to each event and shall
make adequate arrangements for the conduct of the event with
each of these agencies;
... .
3
The applicant shall submit a preliminary plan in accordance
with Section 32.4.2 of the Zoning Ordinance for Planning
Commission review no later than June 1, 1988. Such plan
shall be reflective of: comments offered in this report;
Virginia Department of Transportation comments of January
21, 1988 relative to access to Route 692; and Virginia
Department of Health comments of January 13, 1988 (see
Attachment C; Virginia Department of Transportation and
Health Department comments).
4
J
cJ
CD'(
.$ ../I}
~ /G
..
A..
t\..90-.N
"
9'Vc'~"
.::>
:J
1>
-
AIbema
.'"
Ie
o
~
1/
c:;..
-t-
~
--
--
---./'
.
----..../.
- -.....
1
" I /
\//~ I
7~ :', ) Jj.
\/ \ ~ .
//\ \/~ ..., /
/. '\ '1V/
_ L~
........
SP-92-19
COUNTY FAIR
,
INC.
. ALBEMAR E
.........
./'\~
'..\ ....
'c', ~..
... 1\1. .~~
?
59
49
.
I ATTACHMENT 0 I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Police Department
County Office Building
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4:)96
(804) 296-5807
April 6, 1992
Albemanle County Planning Department
I .
401 Mc~nt1re Road
Charlo~tesville, Virginia 22902
p.-,-.......'-' 1-0
,<. .,.:!.~j; i::J
t.' ' ..
"... I :'-.~
,;,....
> ~.
I
Mr. Wi~liam D Fritz:
Senior :Planner
I
The concerns I have requarding the use of the present site on
I
Rt 692 :by the Albemarle County Fair are as follows:
I
I
T~e traffic pattern in the parking lot needs to be modified
so the I incoming traffic can proceed quickly to the upper side of
the lo~. By having the vehicles proceed to the top of the hill to
enter the lot every vehicle can be placed in the closest parking
space ~o the entrance to the grounds.
I
I
T~e pattern they are currently using allows people to look
for clqse spots and creates arguments with parking lot attendants.
This p~ttern also creates wanting in the people to stop and drop
off pa~sengers before going into the parking lot. This delays
traffi~ and also causes pedestrians to cross the incoming traffic
furthet slowing the egress into the parking lot.
I
I
T~e traffic pattern set properly would cause the drivers to
enter bff Rt 692 and proceed to upper back side of the parking
lot. T~ey would then follow down into the closet parking space.
The pa$sengers would then leave vehicle in the lot and follow the
rows t~ the grounds entrance without crossing incoming traffic.
I
I
I
T~e vehicles leaving would then proceed to the lower edge of
the pat-king lot and exit to the main entrance. This would have
pedestrians crossing only the exiting traffic.
I
I
I~ the past years the
I .
have u~ed have been slow1ng
RT 29.: They at the best
vehicl~ per minute into the
this u~ this pace.
vehicles entering on the pattern they
up and causing a back up of traffic on
have been able to get six or seven
lot. They have not been able to keep
T*e Virginia Department of Transportation may
suggestions on this, and I would like to meet with you
the trfffic prOblem.
I
i
I
have some
to discuss
.
I feel the permi t s huol,d be
for the parking lot showing these
issued only with
improvements.
Sincerely,
.---;::?IJ, 711~
R. B. Martin
Projects Sergeant
attch~ent:
! Draft Idea of Traffic Pattern
I
cc: Chief John F. Miller
qaptain Scott M. Hambrick
Page 2
the
site
plan
.. '
1
I
r
(J
c6
I If
J
r
,
\Il
:1-
,
3
Q
<t.
()
(X.
o 0 II!
. --7 ---?>-
-4 ~
"f: 6 , -"~
~
~
~
~
$
~ ~
:>
~
~
">
~
~
--~
L<
I ~
~---- Ql'
~
<;:,
3.l!dtl --
~
f)
'>
t
~
~i-~
~~
11
- ...
If
t
i
.11 j
~~ I
~~ 4
~\.
~~T
~
: ~"!.
: <} ~
r ~ \o!
~~
Q, ..6 t-
"", ".:I .l
.:!lo'-_A 1'-
s~~
. ->,~
~
~
~
~
~
~
-:> ~.
~
~ .:'>
--=>
~ ;,.
.--~
~ ~
_~ .. ::::;:i::JX~'l ~W7~I'i77--~:;>N::'"'>>
'"";I' ~.,.' I',,.,r
i?."i .L ,,/./ "l/"'(/,V1i?NI>'~;il
", .. ~"" ~_..__... .' ~..__..~.._. ...~ .,........ __.. n
t
--> J~
I
r
> J~ ~
''?
Q
~
{;
. {
JJ/ ~
. ~
- I ,~
I ~
) )~"
>\
;::.
t:"'\; n ........~
" .
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
RECFIVED
MAY 2 6 1992
PI ~ ~l"l'"i''' "'''''~T
_f't.;'<l'lb-'I ~',J U\::i'" .
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
William D. Fritz, Senior Planner .~
Amelia M. Patterson, Zoning Administratort~
SP-92-19 Albemarle County Fair
May 26, 1992
l
I appreciate your request for comments, and sincerely apologize for
the delay in my response. The only two issues I wish to mention,
I have mentioned verbally on prior occasions. They are as follows:
I recall that the special permit approval did not require
installation of a travelway surface, except that in the event of
poor weather, gravel would be necessary on the entrance road. It
might be advisable to require some stockpile onsite or nearby, for
the necessary gravel to be used in short notice. otherwise, it
could involve delays in being able to obtain it and install it when
the road is not easily accessible, or it could disrupt the fair
schedule.
There has been some question in recent years of which vendors are
permitted, or if there is any limitation to individual vendors. It
arose in conjunction with a request for a multi-dealer car show at
the fair. It would be extremely helpful to the administration of
the zoning to have this discussed by the Board in the review of the
current permit.
The category of use under which the special permit application is
made states that the events "are related to, and supportive of the
RA, rural areas, district." Does this extend to require that the
vendors and other displays be related to and supportive of the
rural areas district? If so, other than agricultural and forestal
use, and the other purposes of this district as stated within the
Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan, what does this
include? If not, then is it the legislative intent of this section
that'~the event itself, the fair exemplify those rural area
characteristics and qualities? In that case, with only a few
exceptions, the individual displays would be irrelevant.
II
SCOTT'S POLlED HEREFORDS
BOriDORflri
FARM NORTH GARDEN,
VIRGINIA 22959
FRED W. SCOTT, JR.
OFFICE: 804-295-4188
HOME: 804-293-9221
COMPLETE PERFORMANCE RECORDS SINCE 1952
May 28, 1992
Mr. William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
Albemarle County Department of
Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
Re: SP-92-l9 Albemarle County Fair
Dear Mr. Fritz:
I am writing in support of the above-referenced petition to come
before the Planning Commission on June 2 and before the Board of
Supervisors on June 10. As a neighbor of the County Fair, I
support this sort of flexibility in the planning process_ Please
feel free to contact me if you require any further input from me.
Sinceji:cJ~ f I
Fred W. Scott, Jr.
Rt:GF'VED
MAY 2 9 1992
HOME oI?h:A~~SEI&)N
OUNTRY
~c SALE
RES 0 L UTI 0 N
RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
V'rginia, that the exhibits/displays admitted to the Albemarle
C unty Fair shall be at the sole discretion of the Albemarle County
F ir Board.
* * * * *
I, Lettie E. Neher, do hereby certify that the foregoing
w rding constitutes a true, correct copy of resolution adopted by
t e Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, V' inia, at a
r gular meeting held on June 10, 92.~
of ounty Super isors
10 B0~fd:
,~.:.1 ;:,:lin
. i ~' ;
'. . . '. '.
--_.......~,......_..".__... --,-.,-, ",~--:.'.,-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Depl. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
May 28, 1992
Crozet Church of God
P. O. Box 190
Crozet, VA 22932
RE: SP-92-20 Crozet Church of God
Tax Map 55, Parcel 96A
Dear Sir:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 26,
1992, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted request to the
Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the
following conditions:
1. Administrative approval of site plan;
2. Seating capacity to be determined by adequacy of septic system, not
to exceed a maximum seating of 250 persons;
3. Approval is for worship and related church use only. Day care or
other such uses will require an amendment to this permit.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June
10. 1992. Any new or additional information regarding your application
must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
p~~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Jo Higgins
Amelia Patterson
Les Rowsey
..
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 26, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
SP-92-20 CROZET CHURCH OF GOD
Petition: Crozet Church of God petitions the Board of
Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a church
[10.2.2(35)] 5.0 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC,
Entrance Corridor. Property, described as Tax Map 55,
Parcel 96A, is located on the south side of Route 824
approximately 800 feet west of Route 250 in the Samuel
Miller Magisterial District. This site is not located
within a designated growth area (Rural Area 3).
Character of the Area: This site consists of a prominent
knoll with a Virginia Power transmission line crossing to
the rear. Other properties in the area are rural in
character with the closest dwelling over 1,000 feet away. A
Virginia Department of Transportation maintenance shed is
located at the end of Route 824.
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL: The applicant is proposing a church
with a maximum seating capacity of 250 persons. The
existing church in Crozet (St. George Avenue) will be used
for day-care and the parsonage. No day care will occur at
the Route 824 location.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with the provisions of Section
31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval of
SP-92-20 subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
June 18, 1986 - The Board of Supervisors approved SP-86-26
and SP-86-27 permitting a 250 seat church and a 60 child day
care center.
May 17, 1989 - The Board of Supervisors approved SP-89-25
and SP-89-26. These special use permits were for reapproval
of the previous permits which had expired. At that time the
Board of Supervisors granted staff administrative approval
of the site plan. \
COMPREBENSrvE PLAN: This site is located in the rural areas
(Rural Area 3) and is approximately 1.25 miles from the
Community of Crozet
1
,I
I
I
I
STAFF COMMENT:
The Board of Supervisors has approved the applicant's
request for a church on this site on two prior occasions
(June 18, 1986 and May 17, 1989). The staff report for
SP-86-26 is included as Attachment C. The findings of
SP-86-26 were reaffirmed during the review of SP-89-25. The
current request is before the Board of Supervisors due to
the expiration of the previous approval. The prior requests
indicated day care, the current request does not include day
care. Staff opinion is that there has been no change in
circumstance to warrant disapproval of the applicant's
current request. This request has been reviewed and
approved by the Architectural Review Board. Their comments
are included as Attachment D.
Staff recommends approval of SP-92-20 subject to the
following conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Administrative approval of site plan;
2. Seating capacity to be determined by adequacy of septic
system, not to exceed a maximum seating of 250 persons;
3. Approval is for worship and related church use only.
Day care or other such uses will require an amendment
to this permit.
ATTACHMENTS :
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Staff Report for SP-86-26
D - Architectural Review Board Action Letters
E - Sketch Plan
2
p
~
(/,!
~
i \
, i )
- I
I
I !
/
Ij
, 2
lr.1 "'"
\~' u..
I /~
\ ... i2
,\ I?
: ~ ,/) ..
o /<~-x
~;,~,
v.., ~ ".. >,/, ,', 61'
fit}
f'
~ I
.,(/
....,
~
~
/0.;.
~
2'
....
~
~o~Si~
~ ~ ~ i :: r
A..
~
.::>
o
CJ
..
MOUNTAIN
A..
tl..'OO-.N
"
.::>
<:J
.::>
~
't.
IJ'I
o
't.
o
o
c::;.
~~~
.,~
'1
'0
y~.
, //"
-t~fl'
\ ,/ SEE
\/
i
.1
70
'~~;..>.r:':h'-':~'e~V'"
ATTACHMENT C
STAFF REPORT
HEARINGS:
PLANNING COMMISSION: JUNE 3, 1986
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: JUNE 18, 1986
SP-86-26 CROZET CHURCH OF GOD
Petition: The Crozet Church of God petitions the Board of
Supervisors to issue a special use permit for the location
of a CHURCH AND PARSONAGE (10.2.2.35) on 5.015 acres zoned
RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 55, parcel
96A, is located on the south side of Rt. 824 south and
adjacent to the I-64/Rte. 250W interchange near Yancey Mills
in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District.
Character of the Area: This site consists of a prominent
knoll with-a Virginia Power transmission line crossing to
the rear. Other properties in the area are rural in
character with the closest dwelling over 1,000 feet away.
The property is outside the Albemarle County Service
Authority service area at Yancey Mills. The property is
located on an improved section of Rte. 824 about 600 feet
from Rte. 250W.
STAFF COMMENT:
The applicant proposes a church with a seating capacity of
200-250 persons and a parsonage on this property. Church
usage would involve regular worship services, revivals, and
business meetings about two days per week (See SP-86-27).
Staff opinion is that a church would not be objectionable to
nor substantially change the character of the area. Staff
recommends approval subject to the following conditions:
1. Site plan approval. Prior to Planning Commission
review of site plan the applicant shall obtain Health
Department and Virginia Department of Highways and
Transportation approvals.
2. Seating capacity to be determined by adequacy of septic
system, not to exceed a maximum seating of 250 persons.
1
o
-,
.
'ATTACHMENT 0 " Page 'I
H' ~ A~,
rt_y~
b'1 T '"
~ ,
/.i/RGi\'l\h
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
. .
May'5, 1992
Crozet Church of God
Rt. 1, Box 129
Crozet, Virginia 22932
ATTN: Pastor Rousy
-OC,,;
Re: ARB-P(SDP)-92-16 Crozet Church of God
Tax Map SS Parcel 96A
Dear Pastor Rousy:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above
noted request at its meeting on May 4, 1992. The Board unanimously
approved the request subject to the following conditions:
1) submittal of a grading plan;
2) saving as many of the existing trees on site as possible;
3) location of Thomas Jefferson Health Department approved
septic sites;
4) field locate and indicate existing substantial sized
trees on the site plan;
5) indicate that the larger trees closest to Route 824 will
be maintained;
6) submit window, door, steeple and trim color samples, the
color should be uniform;
7) submit roofing sample, this should be a light gray;
8) provide a brick and mortar sample;
9) provide a lighting plan;
10) choose a steeple more in scale with the structure;
. .........
, )
l '
. . I,
)
I ATTACHMENT 0 II Page 21
ARB-P(SDP)-92-16
May 5, 1992
Page 2
11) change the plant materials surrounding the parking from
dogwood to a larger shade tree.
The Board has granted staff administrative approval for the
certificate of appropriateness for this item.
-'If you 'have any questions please call me.
Sincerely,
UA~~'
I - ('\)\' /
Marcia Jo ph
Design Planner
-
MJ
cc: Bill Fritz
..------;
/
/
/
v/'
/
I
iJ t,,-
! '\"'fr~':
"'-
rr\
'"
~
f
;: n:1Un n~ lJ)
~,~;'::M5.kFJl ~l.!.-
, r- ~ ~ 1 ~ ~ ~~~ ~ ~ -1
'~~ll~tZ~~f11
'j r1 ~~ i _{\. 4' CI 0 ~ Gl F
"'>'r,,'~~:t~~ ~
: ~ C. \J .> 'l' .0, ~ ~ ~
· ~.~~s.~~;.,S~ p:
~ ~ri~~~~ o~
I'. r 0 z J1l \l .
, -I ~ ~ E
~ -::,
llr)~~
~~"F
G ~t J
f.~SQ
~ ~J ~
"JHQ
1 ~ ~ ~ ~
~ -,1 Z "e
S; ;~~
~~F~t
"?a It '"lo
~l'LMi -0
\J?~tJz r-
;~~:i~ ~
~1<\~~ :2
~~~oo
z:~;;z: .3
ii~?~ C)
H?~~'"
.tl: "'.~ .~..
l~," .'f)
-.)
Z
r,';;~l
r ~..._-~.:;:.I
.' v"~1l
L.. ....:...1.
~ ~-))
"L,
':~
!...~ ...
Ii tf.J
~ i" ;,~ ~ ~ J ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~
, ~ 11 'Jl C ~ 1A"""^' 1'8 '"
~l :~~,^r~~~~'!o)
:,. :- r -1\ I' {l,,:,,7'1 C
'!l ;1 ~l F ~ ~ ~,--. ~
j I' n 1; ~-.
; ~,Tl r- in ? ~tf_ ~
~ !~ r" I: X ~
( ,:~ ~ v ~~ :
~ I.' 0 f' ~~....
z.'~ 'n ~ .j~.,.
.Q (~ ?: :
<1 ~ v
." '" ~
..n
;:4 V>
, !~",~,",
- ' I. N
I I -~ s I !
SITE PLAN
CHURCH BUILDING for
CROZEr CHURCH OF GOD
RT. 824
ALeEM~RL e: COU~~_!_, 'vA:.
.. _..-u_
--.-....,.
_..... -.,1It
__Ill_I'''''
-.n,,, 1I1IlIIICT.
.--.......
='lll:.:-~m:
:::::.....
.......-....
~
~
n
:r
J:
IT:
2
-i
m
-,
[ '''1;;\
..... " ~
'< ,
...-c...._/.~
. ~
V~
Verebcly & Associates,
Architects
Ch*up".kP VIr""I.
,
\
",:;~rl
I ~ , ;l
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
C harlollesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296.5823
~. i
May 6, 1992
L)":
Dale W. Wilberger
2213 Williamsburg Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-92-22 Dale Wilberger (applicant), Rhodes Ward
(owner); Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B
Dear Mr. Wilberger:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 5,
1992, by a vote of 5-1, recommended approval of the above-noted request
to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject
to the following conditions:
1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is
issued by the Architectural Review Board;
2, Storage areas shall be limited to those areas noted on sketch dated
4/16/92 and initialed WDF.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June
10. 1992. Any new or additional information regarding your application
must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
s;;~~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Rhodes Ward
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
, ..
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 5, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
SP-92-22 DALE WILBERGER (APPLICANT), RHODES WARD (OWNER)
Petition: Dale Wilberger petitions the Board of Supervisors
to issue a special use permit to permit outdoor storage and
display of autos, trucks and trailers [30.6.3.2(b)] on 0.49
acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor
Overlay District. Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcel
57B, is located on the north side of Route 250 East west of
and adjacent to the White House Motel in the Rivanna
Magisterial District. This site is located within a
designated growth area (Neighborhood 3) and is recommended
for Regional Service.
Character of the Area: This site and all adjacent
properties are commercially developed. This site is and has
been used as an automobile repair and sales facility.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to operate
a vehicle rental service for autos, trucks and trailers, in
addition to the current operation of auto repair and sales.
[The auto sales use is grandfathered as it was in existence
prior to the adoption of the EC district.]
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and
the Comprehensive Plan and recommends approval of SP 92-22
subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
March 1, 1974 - Original site plan for property approved.
May 16, 1983 - Minor site plan amendment for an office
trailer approved.
April 20, 1992 - Architectural Review Board reviewed this
request and granted staff administrative approval of a
Certificate of Appropriateness.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This site is recommended for Regional
Service in Neighborhood 3. The Comprehensive Plan lists
auto dealer as a primary use for this service designation.
Staff opinion is that rental of vehicles is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
1
~ ,
, STAFF COMMENT:
This use is by special use permit due to the use of outdoor
storage and display of vehicles and trailers within the
Entrance Corridor District. This use is permitted by-right
in the underlying HC district. The Architectural Review
Board has reviewed this request for its visual impact on
Route 250. Their action is included as Attachment D. Staff
opinion is that based on the ARB's conditional approval that
this use is consistent with the intent of the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan and therefore, staff
recommends approval of SP-92-22 subject to the following
conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of
Appropriateness is issued by the Architectural Review
Board;
2. Storage areas shall be limited to those areas noted on
sketch dated 4/16/92 and initialed WDF.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Sketch Delineating Storage/Display Area
D - Architectural Review Board Action Letter
2
011
1,
&
~(~v
q..l'"
-l..
.....
l
1-/ /
r \~ ~
\ ~ '" /1
,A } ~!lf'~
~
-.)
o
c,
.
i .
ALBEMARLE t"l"\ll rv
62
I
I
I
I
,
I
I
,
I
I
IMONTICELLD
I
I
i.... ZI
--'"
'"
."----j
~
'" u)
~~. ..--d:/
.--' ..... /./<.....' ~ \
.-- ,,/. , /.,./\'........ (I'(/~ . \
~ . /' _..J
.\- Y' ) /
--+-., /"r.;;;;..A' /
,\ ;7 ~K:.". I
.,..
.-......
-'
SCAlI IN 'EET
...
S 92
COTTSVI LLE AND
RIVANNA DISTRICTS
SECTION 78
c ·
"
..
/ A1 Pile 'T ,A U -r (), S(;(l.,r/ /C,€
.(<.~ 131 /Jd>< st'
C~o:r-lf)"frf~SI./J //(,. I Vb. Z f,1J01
I .
i /-11 ;1-c/.d
I
! ZO/tU) H'c,
I
,
I
I
~ /,
. pc.c.Je y~ :. ~'
,
I
i
,
I
,
--
bFo.Jl<' (
;;.~
t,
l
'"
Ccl\c.t:e+-e
pG.d
~(r9(c:A,.i
~l rc...^k\ (31
I,
~
5
I
d
e
'70'
;' I
tf{)
I
-'
Wo- 1<
~
I
, 1//<''2.
~ I~
J
,:;-
i
1.5'
(
,
I.
I
COr\ClefC :..Itl...)
( . r
I
fS'
I
ExIS'T1I</t4
"- ,f._Il-i}SO l~.(w
. i~:: - -
/
,~
7
0'
~- .-~~ ~~
G.",...s
, ~~~i.
To /J.= ~j;Ja
,
~"s:.F;J;i,.~
~
",- --
orJ€'-
./ CG-13
48' EI'IT/{fI.!
.
to
I ATTACHMENT 01
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
April 23, 1992
RECEIVED
APR 2 3 1992
PLANNING DEPT.
Dale W. Wilberger
2213 Williamsburg Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: ARB-P(SDP)-92-05 Impact Auto
Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B
Dear Mr. Wilberger:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above
noted application at its meeting on April 20, 1992. The Board
unanimously approved the staff's recommendations. A certificate of
appropriateness will be granted subject to the following:
1) Placing trees along the area designated for "Auto
Display";
2) Placing screening trees or a wood slat fence adjacent to
the building to screen the U-Haul vehicles for rental;
3) Placing street trees in the newly acquired area adjacent
to Route 250 East.
4) Identifing the third space from Route 250 as the U-Haul
space in the front of the site.
5) Removing the existing interior light pole and curbing.
The Architectural Review Board has granted staff administrative
approval of the plan. Please call me to make an appointment to
discuss the specific locations, sizes, and heights that will be
required for the plants and/or the fence.
Sincerely,
Design Planner
cc: Rhodes Ward
~.Bill Fritz
Di :~t:i t; ~J l sd to HQ:~ rei:
- ~."""."".."-9!Ir,-.C"'o~,",-'l-~,~.,,
,
Ag~fi:iJ ;;,:.':'1': ~,h, . ...._,._.,;.:..:,_~ ":':._':h"."-'~: (2-,_"/
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development .
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
William D. Fritz, Senior Planner ~/r
FROM:
DATE:
June 4, 1992
RE:
ZMA-91-03 Dominion Land
During the Planning Commission's review of this request the
issue of fencing was raised. The concerns of the Commission
were:
1. Maintenance of required fencing.
2. Fencing to provide security during grading.
3. Fencing to provide screening from development in
Berkeley.
In an effort to address the concerns of the Planning
Commission and residents of Berkeley, staff and the
applicant have prepared additional agreements:
8. Privacy fence shall be maintained in good condition by the
developer, his successors or assigns.
9. Fencing, designed to prevent pedestrian access, shall be
installed adjacent to the residential development (and
existing right-of-way shown in Deed Book 804, P. 527) in
Berkeley prior to the commencement of grading activities for
development of the site.
10. An eight (8) foot high privacy fence shall be installed
adjacent to the residential development (and existing
right-of-way shown in Deed Book 804, p. 527) in Berkeley and
shall overlap for ten (10) feet the existing privacy fence
on Tax map 61M, Block 9, Parcel 9.
WDFjjcw
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
June 3, 1992
Smith/Lebo, Inc
ATTN: Robert T. Smith
2004-A Morton Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: ZMA-91-03 Dominion Land
Tax Map 61M, Section 12, Parcel 1B
Dear Mr. Smith:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on
June 2, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of the
above-noted petition to the Board of supervisors. Please
note that this approval is subject to the following
agreements:
1. Building E shall be limited to those uses permitted in
the CO, Commercial Office and C-1, Commercial District.
2. The following uses shall be prohibited:
a. Hotels, motels and inns [24.2.1(2)J:
b. Motor vehicles sales, service and rental [24.2.1(5));
c. Mobile home and trailer sales and service [24.2.1(23)J;
d. Modular building sales [24.2.1(24)J;
e. Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles
[24.2.1.1(32)] ;
f. Machinery and equipment sales, service and rental
[24.3.1(22) J;
g. Heating oil sales and distribution [24.2.l(39)J;
Smith/Lebo, Inc
Page 2
June 3, 1992
3. All exterior lighting shall be face mounted to the exterior
of the buildings.
4. Roof mounted mechanical structures shall be adequately
screened from adjacent residential development.
5. Landscaping shall be of species similar to that on the
adjacent Daily Progress site.
6. Plan shall be revised to indicate not more than thirteen
(13) dwelling units.
7. Administrative approval of final site plan.
8. Privacy fence shall be maintained in good condition.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors will review this petition and receive public
comment at their meeting on June 10. 1992. Any new or
additional information regarding your application must be
submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the
above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
V~jJ~-
william D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
Dominion Lands, Inc
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
JUNE 2, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
ZMA-91-03 DOMINION LAND (REVISED)
Petition: Dominion Land petitions the Board of Supervisors
to rezone 8.79 acres from R-6, Residential and C-l,
Commercial to PD-MC, Planned Development - Mixed Commercial.
Property, described as Tax Map 61M, Section 12, Parcel 1B,
is located in the southwest quadrant of the intersection of
Berkmar Drive and Rio Road in the Charlottesville
Magisterial District. This site is located in a designated
growth area (Neighborhood 1) and is recommended for
Community Service.
Character of the Area: The site is currently wooded with a
strip of cleared land on the northwest boundary. The site
slopes upward from Rio Road. The Seminole Trail Fire
station is adjacent to the south as is the Berkeley
Subdivision.
ADDlicant's ProDosal: The applicant proposes to rezone 8.79
acres to PD-MC. Currently 0.67 acres are zoned R-6 and 8.12
acres are zoned C-1. The applicant proposes to construct 13
dwelling units on 1.39 acres and 63,400 square feet of
commercial use, including a drive-thru window for Building C
on the remainder of the site. Two entrances on Berkmar
Drive and one entrance on Rio Road are proposed.
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this
request for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the
Zoning Ordinance and recommends denial of ZMA-91-03 based on
insufficient provisions for safe and convenient access.
Planning and Zoninq Historv:
Three requests were made for this site. All were withdrawn
on February 22, 1984. Those requests were:
SDP-84-3 VEPCO District Headquarters
ZMA-84-04 Request to rezone to LI, Light Industry
SP-84-04 Request to locate office and materials
storeroom and microwave tower
1
STMFcomm~:
The applicant is seeking PD-MC zoning as is the
Comprehensive Plan's recommended approach for commercial
rezonings of three acres or greater. A Planned Development
(PD) approach offers advantages to the County by permitting
review of the project as a whole. The Planned Development
approach offers the developer the advantage of unified
review and approval of the project. Section 8.5.4 of the
Zoning Ordinance states:
8.5.4
PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS
At such time as further conferences appear
unnecessary, or at any time on request of the
applicant, the commission shall proceed to prepare
its recommendations to the board of supervisors.
The date of the commission's determination to
proceed, or of the applicant's request for
preparation of recommendations, shall be deemed
the formal date of submission of the application.
Specifically, recommendations of the commission
shall include findings as to:
a. The suitability of the tract for the general
type of PD district proposed in terms of:
relations to the comprehensive plan; physical
characteristics of the land; and its relation
to surrounding area;
b. Relation to major roads, utilities, public
facilities and services;
c. Adequacy of evidence on unified control and
suitability of any proposed agreements,
contracts, deed restrictions, sureties,
dedications, contributions, guarantees, or
other instruments, or the need for such
instruments or for amendments in those
proposed; and
d. Specific modifications in PD or general
regulations as applied to the particular
case, based on determination that such
modifications are necessary or justified by
demonstration that the public purposes of PD
or general regulations as applied would be
satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by
such modifications.
2
Based on such findings, the commission shall
recommend approval of the PD amendments as
proposed, approval conditioned upon stipulated
modifications, or disapproval.
The applicant has requested that this request proceed
forward to the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors.
staff will address each item of Section 8.5.4 individually.
~ The suitability of the tract for the qeneral type of PD
district proposed in terms of: relations to the
comprehensive plan; physical characteristics of the
land; and its relation to surroundinq area;
This site is recommended for Community Service in the
Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent land use designations are
Community Service and Low Density Residential (1-4 dwelling
units per acre) to the south, Medium Density Residential
(4.01-10 dwelling units per acre) to the west and north, and
Community Service to the east. The rezoning request is
consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map
designation. The applicant has submitted a Planned
Development rezoning request which is the method of rezoning
recommended by the Comprehensive Plan for sites of three
acres or more (p. 154). Medium density residential may be
included as a secondary use (p. 159). The proposed
residential development is within the range listed for
medium density. (The applicant's proposal results in a
density of 9.4 dwelling units per acre.) Agreements have
been provided that prohibit those uses which are of Regional
Service intensity.
The development of the site does not involve activities on
critical slopes. However, due to the natural grade of the
property, substantial clearing and grading will be required
to provide building footprints as well as parking and access
aisles meeting slope requirements.
The site is adjacent to the Berkeley Subdivision. The
residential development is proposed adjacent to Berkeley as
is one commercial building. The building closest to the
Berkeley subdivision will be restricted by agreement to
those uses provided in the C-I, Commercial and CO,
Commercial Office districts. This represents the currently
permitted C-1 uses and the less intensive CO uses while
prohibiting the more intensive HC, Highway Commercial uses.
Detailed landscaping and screening plans will be required
where commercial development abuts residential development.
The applicant has proposed an eight foot high privacy fence
where the proposed development abuts Berkeley. (Screening
is not required by the Zoning Ordinance between residential
developments and is provided by the applicant in excess of
Zoning regulations).
3
staff opinion is that this request is consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan and that the agreements provided limit
uses and activities which may be objectionable to adjacent
residential development. Existing Zoning Ordinance
requirements will allow for screening and landscaping which
minimizes the impact of the commercial development on
adjacent residential properties.
~ Relation to major roads. utilities, public facilities
and services;
This development proposes full frontage improvements on
Berkmar Drive. A single entrance is proposed on Rio Road.
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has stated
that a right turn lane is required to serve this entrance.
In addition, VDOT will require construction of a left turn
lane on Rio Road to serve the entrance while Rio Road is two
lanes. The length for this lane would be dependant upon the
left turn lane length for Berkmar Drive (extended)
(Attachment C). This left turn is recommended with the Rio
Road widening project scheduled for construction in 1995.
The proposed development is anticipated to generate 4,890
vehicle trips per day. The entrance on Rio Road is
anticipated to accommodate 4,060 vehicle trips per day
(2,030 entering and 2,030 exiting). staff believes that the
left turn requirement of VDOT addresses concerns about
access before Rio Road is widened. Further, staff feels it
is unnecessary to have an agreement for a left turn lane
with the widening of Rio Road. If development of the site
occurs concurrent with or after Rio Road is widened, a left
turn may be designed into the widening project or required
during later site plan review if it is determined that the
left turn lane is needed to provide safe and convenient
access. It is the opinion of staff that this site will have
safe and convenient access as required by Section 32.7.2 and
32.7.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance (Attachment D).
This site is served by public water and sewer. Due to the
existing fire flows in the area, it is likely that the
buildings will need to be sprinkled.
At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning
staff reviews residential rezoning requests for their fiscal
impact on public and transportation facilities. This
analysis is limited to those rezonings that have some effect
on facilities that are identified in our CIP or six Year
Road Plan and have a cost associated with them.
The analysis is based on a fair share determination of a
particular development's impact to affected facilities. It
must be pointed out that this analysis is cursory, due to
the lack of information on revenues and the amount
attributable to this development. The cost outlined by
4
staff only indicates the proportionate share of construction
costs from the additional development generated by the
rezoning over by-right development. This development
results in nine (9) more units than could be achieved
"by-right".
The following are those facilities which will be affected by
the rezoning request and have a cost associated with them.
A. Schools
Schools affected by this proposal which have a cost as
identified in the CIP are:
Burley Middle School
New Middle School
Agnor-Hurt Elementary School
$ 480,000
$ 8,291,000
$ 1,500,000
Based on the additional students as estimated by multipliers
currently used by the County, one (1) additional elementary
school student and two (2) additional middle school students
are anticipated. Costs attributable to this development
based on the proportion of students is $14,979 or $1,152 per
dwelling unit.
B. Libraries
This proposal is considered to be in the service area of the
Northside Library ($300,000). Based on the proportionate
impact to library capacity, the proportionate share cost of
this project is $165 or $13 per dwelling unit.
c. Recreational Facilities
Recreation facilities affected by this proposal which have a
cost identified in the CIP are:
Rivanna Five Senses
Albemarle High School Tennis
Rivanna Park
Urban Area Elementary Recreation
$ 25,000
$ 75,000
$ 143,144
$ 40,000
Based on the additional population generated by this
request, the proportional share cost of this project is
$311.50 or $23.80 per dwelling unit.
5
J
Summary of Fiscal Impact
Cost/DU
Proportionate 13 DU
Projects Total Costs $ Share $ $
Agnor-Hurt Elementary School 1,500,000.00 2,700.00 208.00
Burley Middle School 480,000.00 12,279.00 944.00
New Middle School 8,291,000.00
Rivanna Five Senses 25,000.00 27.50 2.10
Albemarle High School Tennis 75,000.00 82.50 6.30
Rivanna Park 143,144.00 157.50 12.10
Urban Area Elementary Recreation 40,000.00 44.00 3.30
Northside Library 300,000.00 165.00 13.00
TOTALS 10,854,144.00 15,455.50 1,188.80
Consideration of the fiscal impact of the development needs to be
balanced against considerations of the County's growth management
policy and other County policies. Excessive development
exactions could have the effect of discouraging utilization of
the holding capacity of area, and thus, lead to accelerated
development in the Rural Areas.
~ Adeauacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of
any proposed aqreements. contracts, deed restrictions.
sureties, dedications, contributions. quarantees, or other
instruments, or the need for such instruments or for
amendments in those proposed; and
This parcel is under single ownership.
~ Specific modifications in PD or qeneral requlations as
applied to the particular case. based on determination that
such modifications are necessary or iustified by
demonstration that the public purposes of PD or qeneral
requlations as applied would be satisfied to at least an
eauivalent deqree by such modifications.
The applicant is requesting a modification to allow grading
within the 20 foot undisturbed buffer adjacent to residentially
zoned land to the west. The area is currently an open field.
Preservation of the undisturbed buffer would not provide for any
landscaping/screening features. It is the opinion of staff that
landscaping/screening can be installed at the time of development
that meets the requirements of the ordinance and is superior to
the existing situation. No other modifications are proposed with
the exception of agreements intended to offset potential negative
impacts.
6
Based on such findinqs, the commission shall recommend approval
of the PD amendments as proposed, approval conditioned upon
stipulated modifications, or disapproval.
staff opinion is that the proposed development is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and that adequate
agreements are proposed which are designed to minimize the
development's impact on adjacent development.
The Department of Transportation will require improvements on
Berkmar and Rio sufficient to ensure that this site has safe and
convenient access.
Summary
staff has identified the following factors favorable to this
request:
1. Request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use
Map designation.
2. Agreements are proposed designed to minimize the impact of
this development on adjacent property.
3. Currently the site is zoned C-l and R-6 which permits a
character of development similar (but less intensive as to
use and number of dwelling units) to that proposed.
However, the Planned Development approach provides for a
unified development allowing multiple issues to be addressed
at one time.
Staff has not identified any significant factors which are
unfavorable to this request and, therefore, staff recommends
approval of ZMA-91-03 subject to the acceptance of the following
agreements:
1. Building E shall be limited to those uses permitted in the
CO, Commercial Office and C-l, Commercial District.
2. The
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
following uses shall be prohibited:
Hotels, motels and inns [24.2.1(2)];
Motor vehicles sales, service and rental [24.2.1(5)];
Mobile home and trailer sales and service [24.2.1(23)];
Modular building sales [24.2.1(24)];
Sale of major recreational equipment and vehicles
[24.2.1.1(32)] ;
Machinery and equipment sales, service and rental
[24.3.1(22)] ;
7
g. Heating oil sales and distribution [24.2.1(39)];
3. All exterior lighting shall be face mounted to the exterior
of the buildings.
4. Roof mounted mechanical structures shall be adequately
screened from adjacent residential development.
5. Landscaping shall be of species similar to that on the
adjacent Daily Progress site.
6. Plan shall be revised to indicate not more than thirteen
(13) dwelling units.
7. Administrative approval of final site plan.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Virginia Department of Transportation Comments
D - Section 32.7.2 and 32.7.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
E - Site Plan
8
~.
"
"
I ATTACHMENT AI
.
~
[f!1J
\
\
'\
'\ '-
\~ ('
f S? jtiliJ
t\J.I\
\ ~I.
\~
/
;.vllle
;0
IG~
0'\1 "'0;0
~
"
'..,
0(.. ([fl] l::.., ,
't.-"A - l
~'t.
"
, I
I
Rt!cJbvd
Ea.
p..\~
~'"
)0
SEE INStT Z A
Carter Mln
F T
ASh lawn.
11Bol]
Ij
.,>,
,,/, ~ 9~-/"
[!EJ
""
$'
\
,..
ZMA-91 03
DOMINION LAND INC.
ILQ!l.I
,
.
/'
61U- lID
000
61M LOTS 1 7
0,8, 79 .~ 249
REV. 1111161
~ '~~'.!'J
OPfN SPAU
~~
8 ~
O"'CH ~
LBEMARLE
I ATTACHMENT B I
COUNTY
....
'lo
.,
.
,<I'
,,"
.,'"
o~
"
,,"
~o
Q:rQM
OFFICES
lCol, ift h,l
PH' O,B, 747 pQ,176-207
PH' 0, B. B 20 PQ 351-356
BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC. I, O,B,337, Pgs,336,337
BERKELEY COMMUNITY' SEC. 2. O,B,
BERKELEY COMMUNITY SEC. 3,0.8, 360,Pgs,I44A,1448
ZMA-91 03
DOMINION LAND INC.
-
-
CHARLOTTESVLLE
SECTION
61-M-U
OISTRICT
. ,
..
>i\rFd-",""'-, -
S"!, ...~,I"',::('\" ,'., '
4". I, erl 0{ ,'. -
," /Ii!~~~ )."
J', f,~I\ \,'
. 1,1 ~\ ~;
" '.r.L"","~ N
:;(' "l~1~.'!J' ,j,I~""{jf'
t~~~~l'
I ATTACHMENT CI
... ZS ..
....... DEPT..
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
RAY D. P THTEL
COM MIS lONER
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
p 0, BOX 2013
CHARLOTTESVILLE, 22902
May 29, 1992
D, S. ROOSEVELT
RESIDENT ENGINEER
M . Villiam D. Fritz
A bemarle County Planning Dept.
4 1 McIntire Road
C arlottesville, VA 22902
R
Dominion Lands Site Plan
Route 1403
Mr. Fritz:
This is in reference to our phone conversation of May 27, 1992 regarding the
a ove subj ec t.
Further review of the traffic analysis at this site indicates that a left
turn lane into the Rio Road entrance is required under the existing two (2) lane
cr ss section. The Department recommends a left turn lane into this entrance
un er the ultimate four (4) lane cross section. The tentative design length of
this left turn lane is a 100 foot long full width turn lane and a 100 foot long
va iable width taper lane. Exact dimensions of the ultimate left turn lane will
be determined as the plans for the Rio Road improvements are developed.
Should you have any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
Ass t.
Engineer
AG /yrm
cc: Mr. V. A. Smith, Sr.
Mr. J. DePasquale
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY
3.2.7.2
SAFE AND C VENIENT ACCESS; CIRCULATIO'
WAYS; PARK..L..~G AND LOADING
~ATTACHMENT DI
PEDESTR AN
Each development shall be provided with safe and
convenient ingress from and egress to one (1) or more
public roads designed to: reduce or prevent congestion
in the public streets; minimize conflict and friction
with vehicular traffic on the public street and
on-site; minimize conflict with pedestrian traffic; and
provide continuous and unobstructed access for emer-
gency purposes such as police, fire and rescue vehi-
cles. To these ends, the commission in review of a
site development plan may specify the number, type,
location and design of access points to a public street
together with such measures as may be deemed appro-
priate to insure adequate functioning of such access
points. (Added 5-1-87)
32.U.2.1 Each entrance onto any public road for vehicular
traffic to and from each development shall be subject
to the approval of the commission upon the advice of
the resident engineer of the Virginia Department of
Highways and Transportation and other staff and shall
be constructed in accordance with the design standards
of the Virginia Department of Highways and Transporta-
tion. (32.5.8.01, 7-15-81)
- 219.2 -
(Supp. #37, 3-18-87)
.
\
:;~J\ _
,::l
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 2965823 ' /.
'i'
.' ,
11
;
May 6, 1992
, ,
,..,
Dale W. Wi1berger
2213 Williamsburg Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
RE: SP-92-22 Dale Wi1berger (applicant), Rhodes Ward
(owner); Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B
Dear Mr. Wi1berger:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 5,
1992, by a vote of 5-1, recommended approval of the above-noted request
to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject
to the following conditions:
1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is
issued by the Architectural Review Board;
2. Storage areas shall be limited to those areas noted on sketch dated
4/16/92 and initialed WDF.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will
review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June
10. 1992. Any new or additional information regarding your application
must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least
seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date.
If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted
action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
s~~~
William D. Fritz
Senior Planner
WDF/jcw
cc: Lettie E. Neher
Rhodes Ward
Amelia Patterson
Jo Higgins
, ~
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
WILLIAM D. FRITZ
MAY 5, 1992
JUNE 10, 1992
SP-92-22 DALE WILBERGER (APPLICANT), RHODES WARD (OWNER)
Petition: Dale Wilberger petitions the Board of Supervisors
to issue a special use permit to permit outdoor storage and
display of autos, trucks and trailers [30.6.3.2(b)] on 0.49
acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor
Overlay District. Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcel
57B, is located on the north side of Route 250 East west of
and adjacent to the White House Motel in the Rivanna
Magisterial District. This site is located within a
designated growth area (Neighborhood 3) and is recommended
for Regional Service.
Character of the Area: This site and all adjacent
properties are commercially developed. This site is and has
been used as an automobile repair and sales facility.
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to operate
a vehicle rental service for autos, trucks and trailers, in
addition to the current operation of auto repair and sales.
[The auto sales use is grandfathered as it was in existence
prior to the adoption of the EC district.]
SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the
provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and
the comprehensive Plan and recommends approval of SP 92-22
subject to conditions.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
March 1, 1974 - Original site plan for property approved.
May 16, 1983 - Minor site plan amendment for an office
trailer approved.
April 20, 1992 - Architectural Review Board reviewed this
request and granted staff administrative approval of a
Certificate of Appropriateness.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This site is recommended for Regional
Service in Neighborhood 3. The comprehensive Plan lists
auto dealer as a primary use for this service designation.
Staff opinion is that rental of vehicles is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan.
1
, ..
STAFF COMMENT:
This use is by special use permit due to the use of outdoor
storage and display of vehicles and trailers within the
Entrance Corridor District. This use is permitted by-right
in the underlying HC district. The Architectural Review
Board has reviewed this request for its visual impact on
Route 250. Their action is included as Attachment D. Staff
opinion is that based on the ARB's conditional approval that
this use is consistent with the intent of the Zoning
Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan and therefore, staff
recommends approval of SP-92-22 subject to the following
conditions:
RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL:
1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of
Appropriateness is issued by the Architectural Review
Board;
2. Storage areas shall be limited to those areas noted on
sketch dated 4/16/92 and initialed WDF.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Location Map
B - Tax Map
C - Sketch Delineating Storage/Display Area
D - Architectural Review Board Action Letter
2
I
o~
1,
~
....
\
\~,
(,'<."
l"C'
<?-
. rOWWP'ltod
~
I
....
~
-..)
o
c,
,
I 0
ALBEMARLE ('1'\1. rv
62
TTS E
I
I
: MONTICELLO
r'
, i
~
'\
)
/
~. ~d''/
........-' ~.- /.-;:;-.....~ - \
.-- . /\ ./~ \
... /' /'..........( ,
"" ~ Y'/ -," ) /
~,-/~...A /
,\ ;7 ~~.". I
ZTI
.-.......
u
""
I"..
o
S 92
COTTSVI LLE AND
RIVANNA DISTRICTS
I
I
.~ - - -I
I
,
I
SCALI IN ,[[T
...
SECTION 78
, - l.~- I
c
.
\ '
"
-
I
I
IMpAc I AUrrJ.. SG(<.f/IGe
I "
,fd-/~ 131 /JtJ>< 56
C/ki-("If)H~.5v, I/t I f/",. Z z,?01
I '
: /1 r !1-c1.d
i ZOltul H'C
I
I
,
I
. ~ LC.JC y~ I, ~ ~'
:
--
G*o.itd
"~,;,.'"
t,
l
"
CoI\,C,.f:e+'t
pOod
UJo,)<r9 ("fX,L~
4.<<./ t:t..^k\ Gn
l ,
n
~
1
5
I
d
e
, ,
'70
- I
40'
I
WOo- I<
:J
, /,
'!{.iC,'2.
L"vl' (
1.
1S'
{
I
IS'
I
'-' ..
/
.~
7
0'
CO/lCfefC. ;'S/tJ,.kd
c" r
'~o ~~~
.$.. ",
. ,
- ~o - '
~"l:.J'j,p.~, ,,~~.' -".
G-r,,-~.s
,.4' exts.i7"'~
t.: . /U')5O l~lw
-,f- - - - - - --
, iil'; "ONe\ -
." ,CG-13
'" .:' _ - 5"0 - . .,/ ,
. CDtJC.Ilr- r::: SlD,E.jl1k,,..,',.~.. .:;,/ 48 Ef/TfI../tJ
.,!M....:_____. ,&-L . _ ....A.-..... ~., - .
~ ~
.
Iio
I ATTACHMENT oj
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Zoning
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5875
April 23, 1992
REceIVED
APR 2 3 1992
PLANNING DEPT.
Dale W. Wilberger
2213 Williamsburg Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: ARB-P(SDP)-92-05 Impact Auto
Tax Map 78, Parcel 57B
Dear Mr. Wilberger:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above
noted application at its meeting on April 20, 1992. The Board
unanimously approved the staff's recommendations. A certificate of
appropriateness will be granted subject to the following:
1) Placing trees along the area designated for "Auto
Display";
2) Placing screening trees or a wood slat fence adjacent to
the building to screen the U-Haul vehicles for rental;
3) Placing street trees in the newly acquired area adjacent
to Route 250 East.
4) Identifing the third space from Route 250 as the U-Haul
space in the front of the site.
5) Removing the existing interior light pole and curbing.
The Architectural Review Board has granted staff administrative
approval of the plan. Please call me to make an appointment to
discuss the specific locations, sizes, and heights that will be
required for the plants and/or the fence.
Sincerely,
cc: Rhodes Ward
~,Bill Fritz
w
...
z
w
1':
J:
~
~
t06ZZ '<tINI!)HI^ '3111^S3H01H'<tH:J S - '\\, " -
aVOl:j O"3:JllNO~ trL6 S=-:""',...,-.:;,....- ,,- \.
'ONI "OOSS\1 ~ 31\18 'HSn8\1anO~
~J
Ui ; ~
;; .: r
UJ . r
a: : =
. .
e611~'LL6 (IIoe) :auo4d
906/:/: e!u!6J,^ 'alllASallOIJe40
H/:9 xos 'O'd
":::l.d '6upaau!6u3 pue A6010U4::>al pa!ldd'Q'
"
~
~
~
-
CI)
I
i\,
: ~
~ ~
'"
o
~
H
~ i
~
~ ' ~
Hi
~
;;~ g
~
~i~~ ~
~~~
......... .
g g
~!
J!:-
~ --
l.
i
~-
o.g--
"
~ .~ ~
u,
..
'"
o
:i
:i
..
..
..
:
~
e
..
::>
e
II
..
..
.
..
.. Z
~~~
... 0
(.l
~~ w~
>w ~..J
8~ Via.
N N
" ,
N
..
w
::. - -
w
..:
.."';:~ --
::5 :i
" ..
~
i
W
!!
i
-
..:
!!
:i
~~
~~
~
..
..
'"
..
..
~ ~
~ ~
~ ~
li 3
3 E
e "" ~
~ :'1- ...
.- ~g ~
~ ~~ ;
~
!i!
i!
~
..
.
~
~
~ '"
~ ~..
.z
; ~~
.. ..0
~ ~::
Q 2:"-
~ ~~
~ :;
~~
J~
..Z
"0
~..
z
~..
-..
...
..0
!C
::>
~
..
~ h
~
~ i~
~ ~oC
~ ~ e
~II
~
f !~
~o. ... u
21
~ :.~
~ <C.
o
UJ
>
W
()
w
a:
N
en
en
.-
-'
en
0::
<(
::t:
..
10
~
o
..
01
..~
....
10",
....
to.
o
..'"
""
......
.....
..-
","
..10
:~
....
~'"
I ~ .
z.....
..e..
.....u
"''''e
uJ:..
"","
...."
0..0
J:zu
o~Q
e~:I
;.-2
jl"o
i5~f
..0
..-..
o
..
!C
~,
...
I
j
.. .
"'..
...,
i~
~~
g~
~~
i~
....
5~
...=
0..
UJ
C
C!:J
z
7
~
Q.
..
.
..,,~
. E .'
.., -
.,2.,L.
~ ~ t.
. ~.
! il ;
1C-t.
, . .
e.&. ,6"
.... '- ~.
c .
~- S
, ~ ,
.s P "oJ
.....
..'"
~ . ~.
." ,..
j~~
:20~
o c
o '
:i,>1
.. ~ .,:.
.... 'l.
i ~ ~
.. ..
. .9-
j] ~
..c::~
o ·
~~5
3-""
.....
j.,.., .
~;j1
Ill". a
c: C . Q.
- o..a ..
..;
.,A .. ,.:
G~N
w _
~ ,....
a:
..
CD
:::I N
:> ....
z ol)
UJ po.
....
~
..
S:~
"
,0
OJ
Z.. ~
III~ ~ uI
0'" ~
z.. ~
<CillO>
-'~ ~ .
Z 11I0 ~
~ ~ .a a:l
~~:~ ~
g~~; u.I
a:I
i
~
~
~
z
~
J
..
~
~
;;
j!
;;
..:
~ i_ ;
~ .::.
i.. _
Ii i
'"
'"
at ... ]"'0 ~ .
~~~..:.~l SA ~~~ ca] "Z 1:!;;'
,";"'0<..'), 't)-' .-'i gl u"iN
.~~~l eLc't) ~ ~ ~ ~~
t > ci . ~. ~ . ! 1 S 'Q':,
~~ .;~ _ e..,~l-:~::J.jI ~..
ODI '.., ~5. N ,5 ~' ij",
S~ :g~ .c~i.~ li~' J l~
;.~,~:. .o{8.:!-. :21...: i= EC't
.~-~~~ = L~..o L.~!.~~ c~
.l~~~ .9~12~ t't).cS~. ~~
~S~~5: i~~-.~ ~;~~5~. ~i
~ ~. C ~L.~. ~~ .~~~'
~~~ .4 E~OA~ ]a....!~...
~~ ~j. ~~~3uo ~~~iE~ ~=
~~~:!~ ia~.b: S~~~~~~ Z~
c=~~~ e~..~='" "'C~b"":
~8~~"'O~ _ ~.~~ ~i~-8>8 't)~
.S"1~ ~~;:J~ ~~~i~'_ ~~
l~!!~- ~f~~1: ~~~~iJ~ .f8
_u, 4J"'O ~ "'O~3. -~
~~~J&1.o :UZ~.. ~"'O~.c "'O=~~
. ~!.i~ L_ ~.waat i ..,~
e ..t.~~ ,g~~B .I .c~. :~L
~~85.3 ~.....e~ =~~ ~ J 0
~~ ;~:,. ~~j5 i:O"'Oo-.o~:
e~"'O~"'O~~ ~ "'Ox3 cLbbbL~' "'0
iL:~5~'~.~;~~ ~~iS8 '!E~
ij~'c~.~.ik ,,~..~ j~".C
2oec'Cli -o1.:a-a!&otJl 15 >11
BL;S~8.~"'O~J1~t~ .:~ .~3~
}~ei"=J~b~.~i.jl"'1~:b Jb:~
~~~l~~~S~S~~~~~:o~~~58~6
h
~
,.;
..;
~
...: ai en
... ~
't; e.5 "'0
.)>.~~_a
n.:.S",
Go..... 8- e
~:g-a~!
~ ~ ~ ~5 0
:51(c?~~
~ l:E., 0::;:
tJ:t.!$~
i: ~ ~;..
~~~-~~~
~!b:~~
X~ ~ S ~,L".
~~j't.~~~,.
-3i:~. "....
"'Ooi~o.b~
~oo b.; li~
';5~~:.~
l::i~e:
c: >.!II.. CL.s
::> j.,~" ~~
lD._.:"'~
.... "JlS ~O~
:5S'O~~~
...
..
..
o
'"
...
..
o
oj
>
...
r.
Q
c::
-c:(
-.J
z
<(
-I
D..
W
....
-
en
<:
o
.....
c::
.....
:E
o
Q
J
~
..
z
..
o
'0 ..
..z ..
::>0
0< ~
"'.
:~ ~
0'" z
.
o
;;
00
_N
-
..:
-
- -
;;
i
.. = ii
~i 5 I.:
~~ ...; ;:;..
i
~
i
W
"
ti >-~ .; ~ "5
. i" 1.0 o~
.~ -ttt &.;- ~ g:5 ~)((.)l
)o.k ~l:S ~, -o!C ..:I....Ic
(. ~il ,"l ; ~~. ~i!Jilo~
It ~]J IIi I ;.; ~:3111
· .~- ~l- ~~e j~~1~u.
~1 -oa~ 5 ~ ~ ~.:5 1S~:~A'O
.. I" ~ ]:N . 8 . . C ~..,
>. . )c~ ~ !~J a.>>e.-!
it ~~ ;8~ ~~ ~ ~b~ ~~A~e~
~~ il ~~~ ~: i .~tj~~5;~~c.
~l s~~ ~~: ~~ ~ k.~i~~5~~~.
8~ ::::.~.. JJ.E .., ."-i: ..~~~~
~.... 'Oc". E>>;f!: ~o. 't; :'~S:'~.~~~5~
~~ ~~.! ~.~ as E -o~..;.~ -5 ~a.
e:9 .:: i ~ ):... CJ ~ ~.; lI) C >0. ...r! ~ ~..c i
.~~. ~ :50 ~ J~ ~~!."j.~" ~
~~h:5C~ ~~~ i~ t.i}~:~:i~~~:):
,.:):.~:i i.D,!.,Q& ~;~:c~"'Oc.. ct
.a,-e9.~ lS-ae ~.... .0 (j .-.IN..!-
c.5b"O~ _3R ~~ ~!.~~.~>~~~:~
gA~.5S -11 SA .:~~..cf. e a
~e~_:.~ i.: c~=~~E'l;!:~~S~
~~~~jo j:. .i l~"a~~\lfSc.e~".~.
S~.~4~ ~ ~ it .uec~~~_~~A~~
'9!j,.r..g~; -t t.!."(-3.:>-~~l-;.
3.::J~~S'b~. .0 ~5c~.., Q..~..o~
1~~ls~~i~. ~; ;~~~~~ijl~i~i
~.i=Ci;~l~ ;i~.~~"'O~~:t~.~~J
.::J1"!l~<iI. - .~_S'I~~_~3..5..t'!;"
. to.! --2 8".. .)Ia.-a. S~e
~ .OJ: ~.!!j)o. '; '"i~a. 1_~l\~ .::I~
~-)o..'~b.~ b~ ~ "'Oc~~-~c c.
;~U ~ ~iH ~ ,~~bhi~; ~jHH;~
~5.1.~ .~.3.~ -..u~e..>1
h ~ ~~ &'b=' cl.~.l.-101 c: :1.0. ~. k.J-
._C~ ~.~~O_O~_C~N.~.OO~..~~
-'
,.;
.; ~
w
..
"'
.. '
~I'": "': "': ""
~1Il"l...'" ""
~o9: :
N N
m m
~
J
~
"
': z
0' ,
~ =~~
- ~
~
~
<;
Cl
ZI
~
III
;
~
I:
I:
o
o
~
:; ~
~ ; !1I
~~ ~ ~.!~ ~ ~
I~ a i~ ~~:~ :
~ ~ ~ ~~~ ~
o ~<CCL 0
<C lD~O ~
C\
;;
i
i
;;
i
!!
::*
5= .i ai ~i
.. .. .. .,:;
-''';
I I I
lE'
.w
'I-
Z
w
1:
J:
U
~
!;:-
Ii
I I
s ~
Q I
~
0~~ ~~
. '- ~ -~
8
VlNlOlllA ',uNnOO nlI.....381... ,
aNY' NOINllllOO
8~-z:l-III~'-'III'l
--- . ---' NY"1cI 3.l.1S
.... IS..~-HS (..01) :euolld
10S1:1: e,UI"J'A 'ejIlA.eUOlJellO
L~Z9 xog 'O'd
~
0 N t-=
0') c...
W 0') UJ
~ - C
0') C!J
W :z ~
0 Z
UJ a::: z !;
a: <( :s 0
::L J:
Cl
Q. ~
0
a::
~
c
III
OIl
~
..
<<l
~
N
I '6uIJaaUl6u3 pue A6ol0U40al. pa!lddv .
....
Ii
'"
c:I
o
Iii
~
o
z
\ l.~
".. ~ __ o,'g.'"
.....:;:.----. -1 :.~,~~'~
/. 'l.S'.~ ~~.
1.."4 /tI) lea') . ,~---=-
~
":
a
z
0
:a
..
0
~
,.
.... .,;
'1
\
'5~
'i>-
i'5
.....
'"
~..
~~
~~ ~II. '
_"4' 't. ~~....."
~ .~?~ .....',~...
___--..::.::.::- ...,..+~ ,,"1I~
__---- ~ oi 'e.~~
z .) l.il"l
I'
I
,
),
I
I
i
'!
! ~
"
.,
I,
i.
i, 0
': <
0
a:
.... .,v'.~,.._'- '...&.'.
. .........">:: . ..~.. ..W,4~,,{-J:..'-/J
, .,.~....,. " .~-.~~, ,-:;"
~.;N
...-
a~:.::.~
I
:I N
::I ...
Z ..
~..
It.
/
~
.:
...
..
:z
>-
...
z
!;!
>-
~~
"'~
...-
~ [~9
7~8~
Na: $_
7:~~"
----- 2S~ L-o
t't..,~O ~!~.- t
/'J ':a~".
/. ~~.c~~
f'
1\
\'
,I
;1
I
. ,
560 '-)"
(, (~
/ "" 0,",:'" ')
( "t"~' ",>
'" ,tA.,,"
......",
i~
Ox
2':;
~~ ~
-~~ ~
~tl~~
. .o.::~
2_u _
;O~8~~
~~::2~
, t
"
: \
'.~\
", ~ "'-
96'66 \.~ -.-
,."'''~'' ~r~ -:.,:=~
. . "., 1..I.1,,-.J
111'. t.1 '.'O~" ..~. ___ _ __
--- - . -----
..' - .,.. ""," \~ ---
\
,
\
I
!
<<
'"
x
z ':.
... 4
~ ...
'" ~
~':c ~ l(-
~u ~~!
. d)w2 m: ([
~w;ze ..,.
;DOJ_WJ
% ~~~ ~ ~
...~'iN.....::J
-............
----
--
--
580
I
,""LO ..... .... ..
..... ". 3..'i'il,,:,.,,-z.._6lLW/
y....'. , / /
"; "'z~i(/'''/ /----
~~eV /
~~~/
4'" w-t /"
~ ;;L/ /"
/..~/ /
/ / /
! / I II Tr"i / / / / / / / / /
/ I I I i I I Ii / I \:I~ / / / ( /
/ \ I \ II II I I I i~l~ I I I
i \ \\\ \ \ \ \ 1'1 \ \
'"
10
---
-----
--
,
"
,
~'(
......"
.
;; .
;: .
'; ';
. ~
0 0
.
~ ..
~
; ;
:
'O,
H .
-' ' .
0( g .0 ~
> u_
.
0 .4
a: - . '; . . ';
o.
a. ~o .;i
a. :" A
c: ,04 0 .... 0
C)i:.'r'b:iu,;d 10 Board: t;:!~?:;;: -c;;" ~
.~. ",..--,,-' --...~
lig.;nda Item No ,7'.,;>? Ud-I'1, 51-:3
. .-.....-.. .'."...--........-. ...........,
"
Edward H, Baln, Jr,
Samuei MilI~r
I
David p, Bowerman
Charlottesvil~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
I' arrest R. Marshall. JL
Scottsville
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. Humphris
Jack Jouett I
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
TO:
FROM:
Albemarle County Board of sup~sors
David P. Bowerman, Chairman ~
D.TE:
RE:
May 20, 1992
Discussion of Attached Letter to Mr. Framme
Attached is a draft of a letter to Secretary Framme. It is my
u~derstanding that the Fortune 500 company has not made a decision
as yet regarding a site and I felt it important that Mr. Framme was
aware of the status of the site here in Albemarle as well as our
l~nd use process.
I:look forward to reviewing this letter with you on June 3rd.
DPB/dbm
9~.025
~', 7
...
DRAFT
.",'-' :.t :1't', I"'
(.
.,
June 5, 1992
I
T~e Honorable L. Douglas Wilder
G vernor of virginia
S ate capitol
R'chmond, Virginia 23219
I
,
D~ar Governor Wilder:
,
i
i
I
I
I ~ant to convey to you as the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
,
,
Cqunty our continued support in maintaining an active dialogue with the unknown
I
I
Fqrtune 500 company who has expressed interest in Albemarle County. I felt it
I
,
in}portant to share this information with you, due to Mr. Framme's recent
I
I
d~parture from your Cabinet.
I : believe you are well aware of the interest in this company both from our
,
,
b~siness community and the general public. While there are planning issues yet
u~resolved, I can say these are not considered unsolvable impediments.
E~ployment, traffic impacts and environmental concerns are examples that require
I
I
f1rther analysis and can only be resolved with further information. I want to
e~phasize our desire to have the opportunity to consider such issues. We are
,
h~ppy t.o work with them, or any other such business, on finding mutually
I
a~reeable solutions to these and any other issues or concerns, whenever possible.
I
I
,
W~ believe our process of rezoning and development is a positive yet flexible
,
p~ocess that ultimately provides us all with results that are compatible with our
I
C~unty's long range goals and objectives. The next step in this process would
I
I
b, a rezoning application from the applicant. We anticipate such an application
I
I
w,en the intentions of this company are known. This Board, our staff, and this
ctmmunity would welcome the opportunity to review the details surrounding
p+ssible location in our community by this company.
,
I
,
,
,
I~ closing, we request your support in these efforts and conveying our comments
,
I
tt the appropriate individuals.
Sincerely,
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DPB/dbm
92.033
cc: Mr. Sylvius S. Moore, Jr., Deputy Director,
Department of Economic Development
Ms. Kaye S. Burke, Marketing Manager,
Department of Economic Development
.
.
.
DRAFT
June 5, 1992
Honorable L. Douglas Wilder
ernor of Virginia
te Capitol
hmond, Virginia 23219
De r Governor Wilder:
I
o conve u~ the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
ntY~~C~~d support in maintaining an active dialogue with the unknown
, L..4-
tune 500 company ~ has expressed interest in Albemarle County. I felt it
i ortant to share this information with you, due to Mr. Framme' s recent
arture from your Cabinet.
I believe you are well aware of the interest in this company both from our
siness community and the general public. While there are planning issues yet
resolved, I can say these are not considered unsolvable impediments.
traffic impacts and environmental concerns are examples that require
rther analysis and can only be resolved with further information. I want to
our desire to have the opportunity to consider such issues. We are
work with them, or any other such business, on finding mutually
solutions to these and any other issues or concerns, whenever possible.
believe our process of rezoning and development is a positive yet flexible
ocess that ultimately provides us all with results that are compatible with our
unty's long range goals and objectives. The next step in this process would
a rezoning application from the applicant. ~ ~..I-4. . '" At.
III 11 #otrl r.l:"'l:,.,~Ll",,&&
This Board, our staff, and this
1::he opportunity to review the details surrounding
ssible location in our community by this company.
1l"\
closing, we request your support in these efforts~ conveying our comments
the appropriate individualS.
Sincerely,
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DPBjdbm
92.033
cc: Mr. Sylvius S. Moore, Jr., Deputy Director,
Department of Economic Development
Ms. Kaye S. Burke, Marketing Manager,
Department of Economic Development
Alib.UJ. b~ 0\')
MOTION: Mr. Bain
SE~OND: Mr. Martin
MEETING DATE: June 10, 1992 (Night Session)
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of
convened an executive meeting on this date
affirmative recorded vote and in accordance with
T~e Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
Supervisors has
pursuant to an
the provisions of
WHEREAS, section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires
c~rtification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that
s~ch executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia
law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each
m~mber's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully
e~empted from open meeting requirements by virginia law were
d:hscussed in the executive meeting to which this certification
r~solution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as
were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were
heard, discussed or considered by the Albemarle County Board of
S~pervisors.
V<f>TE:
AlES: Mr. Perkins, Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr.
Marshall and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
I
[for each nay vote, the substance of the departure from the
requirements of the Act should be described.]
AaSENT DURING MEETING: None.
Clerk, Albemarle Boa
~
f
TO:
FROM
DATE
''j
EJjrd
~~..\,,,,,,,/M't:"~~
. - '- '.....
,~-'~ <j.)",}
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
OFFICE OF BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
401 MciNTIRE ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22901-4596
MEMORANDUM
Members of the Board of Supervisors
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC ~V
J
June 5, 1992
Appointments to Various Boards/Commissions/Committees
REN AND YOUTH COMMISSION: The term of the student representative has
ed. An appointee for this position has been solicited from the three high
1 principals. Albemarle has given the names of Ashley Edwards and Julie
from which to pick a representative. We had not heard from the other two
Is at this time.
PIED ONT COMMUNITY COLLEGE BOARD OF DIRECTORS: The terms of Grace Carpenter,
d Dixon and J. T. Henley, III, all expire on June 30, 1992. All three
rs have been contacted, and all would like to be reappointed.
ITY SERVICES BOARD (REGION 10): The term of Dr. W. D. Buxton expires on
30, 1992. He is not eligible for reappointment. This vacancy will be
tised.
FIRE PREVENTION CODE BOARD OF APPEALS: The term of William C. Thacker expired
Nove ber 21, 1991. He is eligible for reappointment.
Y BOARD: The term of Mary V. Mikalson expires on June 30, 1992. She does
ish to be reappointed. This vacancy will be advertised.
The term of Michael J. Marshall as the at-large member expires on
30, 1992. All applications from interested persons were forwarded for your
week. '
s
.
Piedmont
Virginia
Community
College
Office of the President
ox 1, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-8714 Tel. (804) 977-3900 (V/TDD)
, .
,'" .,
March 11, 1992
! \
. David Bowerman, Chair
bemarle County Board of Supervisors
1 McIntire Road
arlottesville, VA 22901
ar Mr. Bowerman:
Our records indicate that the terms of office on the
p'edmont Virginia Community College Board of Ms. Grace H.
rpenter, Mr. Harold G. Dixon, and Mr. Joseph T. Henley, III
pire June 30, 1992, and that they are eligible for another
ur-year term on the Board.
Our College Board provides a vital link between the college
d the community. We appreciate your help in assuring that we
ways have outstanding individuals on our Board.
We at PVCC look forward to continuing to serve the people of
bemarle County and would appreciate hearing from you in the
ar future regarding the three appointments of Albemarle County
presentatives.
sincerely,
~
Deborah M. DiCroce
President
D D:pnb
c Mr. Ronald L. Kirby, College Board Chair
Ms. Grace H. Carpenter
Mr. Harold G. Dixon
Mr. Joseph T. Henley, III
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Albemarle
Charlottesville
Fluvanna
Greene
Louisa
Nelson
Edward H, Bai , Jr
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
June 15, 1992
Forrest R, Marshall. Jr
Scottsville
David p, Bowe man
Charlottesvill
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Mr . Grace Carpenter
67 Chapel Hill Road
Ch rlottesville, VA 22901
De r Mr_. Carpenter: - ~
At the Board of Supervisors meeting
we e reappointed to the Piedmont Virginia
of Directors with this new term to expire
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity
to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to
co tinue serving the County in this capacity. It is only through
th efforts of citizens such as yourself that the County continues
to maintain a high quality of representation on its boards and
co issions.
y;elY,
U~I
David P. Bowerman
Chairman
DP :len
cc Dr. Deborah DiCroce
The Honorable James Camblos, III
Edward H, Sai , JL
Samuel Mille
;'
I
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
May 12, 1992
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr,
Scottsville
Charles S. Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
While Hall
. Grace H. Carpenter
Chapel Hill Road
rlottesville, VA 22901
De r Mrs. Carpenter:
It has come to the attention of the Board of Supervisors that
r term as a member of the Piedmont Community College Board of
ectors will expire on Jaune 30, 1992. I have been asked to
ertain whether or not you would like to continue to serve on
s Board. A positive response to the undersigned at 296-5843
ld be welcome.
Sincerely,
~~cf! Clerk, CMC
Board of County Supervisors
LE :mms
)/1-9 - c;, .r
.
D ~ENPORT & CO.
OF VIRGINIA, INC.
E TABLISHED
186 3
600 EAST WATER STREET · p, O. BOX 1481 . CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902.1481 · TELEPHONE (804) 296-9013
Ma 14, 1992
, '.
.
~11'"'Y
t .,'
1':<' )
: ~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk CMC
Bo rd of Supervisors
Co nty of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Ch rlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
I,,:>
r Ms. Neher:
ish to inform you, and the Board of Supervisors, of my desire
be considered for reappointment as a member of the Piedmont
ginia Community College Board of Directors. My term has been
tifying to me and I hope beneficial to the College.
ave attempted to keep the Charlottesville Supervisor informed
situations developing within the College.
uld you need further information, please contact me.
nk you for your consideration.
'Y truly yours,
~~rCQ ~ /
Gr ee H, carpenter~
MEMBER: NEW YORK STOCK EXCHANGE. AMERICAN STOCK EXCHANGE (ASSOCIATE) . SIPC
Edward H, Sai , Jr
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
June 15, 1992
;Correst R. Marshall, Jr
Scottsville
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Mr. Harold Dixon
14 Bennington Road V
Ch rlottesville, VA 22901 ?
De r Mr. Dixon, ~
At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on June 0, 1992, you
we e reappointed to the Piedmont Virginia Community ollege Board
of Directors with this new term to expire on Decem r 1, 1996.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity
to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to
co tinue serving the County in this capacity. It is only through
th efforts of citizens such as yourself that the County continues
to maintain a high quality of representation on its boards and
co issions.
Sincerely,
a2~
Chairman
DP : len
cc Dr. Deborah DiCroce
The Honorable James Camblos, III
...
Edward H. Bai . JL
Samuel Miller
David P. Bower an
Charlottesville
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack Jouett
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
May 12, 1992
Mr. Harold Dixon
130 Bennington Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Mr. Dixon:
-,
Forrest R, Marshall, JL
Scottsville
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
White Hall
It has come to the attention of the Board of Supervisors that
yo r term as a member of the Piedmont Community College Board of
Dir ctors will expire on Jaune 30, 1992. I have been asked to
asc rtain whether or not you would like to continue to serve on
this Board. A positive response to the undersigned at 296-5843
wo ld be welcome.
~,~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
Board of County Supervisors
LEN:mms
Edward H, Bai , Jr
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
June 15, 1992
Forrest R, Marshall. Jr
Scoltsville
David P. Bowe man
Charlottesvill
Charles S Martin
Rivanna
Charlotte Y. H mphris
Jack Jouett
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall
Mr. Joseph T. Henley, III
Ro te 2, Box 163 0
Crozet, VA 22932 ~
At the Boa f Supervisors meeting held on JU~O' 1992, you
we e reappointe 0 the Piedmont Virginia Community ollege Board
of Directors with this new term to expire on Dece er 1, 1996.
On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity
to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to
co tinue serving the County in this capacity. It is only through
th efforts of citizens such as yourself that the County continues
to maintain a high quality of representation on its boards and
co issions.
/}e,lY'
I~~~
~avid P. Bowerman
Chairman
DP :len
cc Dr. Deborah DiCroce
The Honorable James Camblos, III
. .
Edward H, Bain Jr.
Samuel Miller
David p, Bower an
Charlottesville
Charlotte y, Hu ph,is
Jack Jouett
~.,.....,-
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
May 12, 1992
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr.
Scottsville
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F. Perkins
Wh;te Hall
Mr. Joseph T. Henley, III
Rou e 2, Box 163
Crozet, Virginia 22932
Dear Mr. Henley:
It has come to the attention of the Board of Supervisors that
yo r term as a member of the Piedmont Community College Board of
Dir ctors will expire on June 30, 1992. I have been asked to
ascertain whether or not you would like to continue to serve on
this Board. A positive response to the undersigned at 296-5843
wo ld be welcome.
~~
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC
Board of County Supervisors
LE :mms
Edward H, Ba' . Jr.
Samuel Mille
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mcintire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060
David P. Bow rman
Charlottes viiI
Charlotte y, H mphris
Jack Jouett
M E M 0 R' AND U M
T Board of Supervisors
~
! I
F OM: Lettie E. Neher, Clerk, CMC /, '
/
D June 5, 1992
S BJECT: Reading List for June 10, 1992
M Y 20(A), 1992 - All - Mr. Marshall
M y 20(N), 1992 - All - Mr. Martin
L N:ec
cr~~ r'lo.
./
Forrest R, Marshall, Jr.
Scott5vilte
Charles S, Martin
Rivanna
Walter F, Perkins
White Hall