HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-04-02 ACTIONS
Board of Supervisors Meeting of April 2, 2003
April 3, 20O3
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION
1. Call to Order.
· Meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m., by the
Chairman. AIl BOS members present. (Mr. Perkins
was present for joint meeting with the Planning
Commission). Also present were Bob Tucker, Larry
Davis, Wayne Cilimberg and Ella Carey.
4. From the Public: Matters not Listed on the Agenda.
· Tom Loach commented on the County's Land use
Program.
5.2. Proclamation recognizing the month of April 2003,
as Child Abuse Prevention Month.
· ADOPTED and presented to Judy Randle.
5.3. Proclamation recognizing the month of April 2003,
as Fair Housing Month.
· ADOPTED and presented to Ron White.
5.4. Proclamation recognizing May 3, 2003 as,
Albemarle County Farm Tour Day.
· ADOPTED and presented to Marsha Joseph.
5.5. Proclamation recognizing May 10 through May 16,
2003, as National Police Memorial Week.
· MOVED to May 7, 2003.
5.6. Authorize County Executive to execute Service
Agreement with Scottsville Volunteer Rescue
Squad, Inc.
· AUTHORIZED County Executive to execute the
Service Agreement.
5.7. Request to set a public hearing to amend the
service area boundaries of the Albemarle County
Service Authority for water and sewer service to
Tax Map 56, Parcel 87(Mass Enterprises, Inc.)
· SET public hearing for May 7, 2003.
Mountainside Senior Assisted Living Center -
funding request for operational support.
· SUPPORTED funding for the Mountainside project,
adding $12,500 as a new initiative in the Board's FY
04 proposed budget using some of the remaining
Board contingency funds.
5.8a. West Leigh Drive - VDOT Rural Addition Project
Waterline Relocation.
· AUTHORIZED the transfer and emergency
appropriation of $45,000 for the project.
5a. Presentation: Housing Resolution.
· PRESENTED Housing Resolution to Carol Clarke
6a. Work Session: Six Year SeCOndary Road Plan and
County Priority List.
5.8.
· SET public hearing for May 7, 2003. DIRECTED
staff to provide policy for paving rural rustic roads.
ASSIGNMENT
(Attachment 1)
(Attachment 2)
(Attachment 3)
County Attorney: Provide Clerk with fully executed
agreement after getting all signatures.
Clerk: Advertised public hearing for May 7, 2003.
County Executive Staff: Proceed as recommended.
Melvin Breedon: Provide Clerk with appropriation form.
(Attachment 4)
Clerk: Advertise public hearing.
Plannin.q Staff: Bdng back policy to the Board for review.
-Page 1-
6b. Transportation Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Theresa Bu,tler:
· Hatton Ferry will be opening on April 12, 2003 and
will be manned by VDOT. Board recommended
VDOT publicize this and to contact Mark Shore at
the Visitors Center to include on their website.
Charles Martin
· Asked for an update on his request to provide left
turn lanes in both lanes traveling from Route 20
onto Route 250.
David Bowerman
· Mentioned the opening of the soccer fields on Polo
Grounds and the problem with traffic backup. Asked
if the light could be adjusted to allow more cars to
go through at one time. Also asked staff to see if
there is adequate parking for events held at the
facility.
6. Request from Lewis and Clark Exploratory Center
for use of Darden Towe Park.
· SET a public hearing on lease for Exploratory
Center for May 7, 2003.
8. Presentation: Family Support Program
· RECEIVED.
9. Presentation: Board to Board
· RECEIVED.
10.
11.
Public hearing on a request to amend the service
area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service
Authority for sewer service only to TM 32A, Sec 3B,
Ps 18&19 for Thomas P. Haught.
APPROVED request.
Public hearing on proposed FY 2003 Budget
Amendment.
APPROVED FY 2003 Budget Amendment in the
amount of $555,035.68, and appropriations
~Y2003039, 2003040, 2003041, 2003042, 2003044,
2003045, 2003046, 2003047, and 2003048.
12,
Discussion: Mountain Overlay Protection Committee
Composition.
SUPPORTED staff's recommendation for committee
appointment, timetable and staffing. Membership to
also include representative from the Historical
Preservation Committee.
13. Discussion: Annual Real Estate Reassessments.
· RECEIVED, staff to include for discussion during
Board strategic Planning session in Fall.
14. SP;-02-072 Arlin D. Martin (Signs #33&34).
· APPROVED SP-02-072, by a vote of 5:0, subject to
8 conditions
15. Appeal: ARB sign for proposed Hightech signs for
Freestyle Store, 475 Westfield Road.
· UPHELD decision of the ARB.
16.
Strategic Plan Progress Report
MADE the following recommendations to
Attachment 2 under Future Actions section:
Clerk: Forward comments to Jim Bryan.
Pat Muilaney: Look into and provide response to Board.
Clerk: Advertise public hearing for May 7, 2003.
Clerk: Forward signed appropriation forms to Melvin
Breedon and copy appropriate persons.
Clerk: Advertise for applications and notify interest
groups for recommendations.
County Executive Staff: Include as item for strategic
planning discussion.
Clerk: Set out conditions. (Attachment 5)
County Executive Staff: Proceed as recommended.
-Page 2-
Page 5, add: Select next area for master plan
· Page 6, suggest participate in forums held by other
entities, i.e. Rivanna, so as not to duplicate public
meetings
· Page 10, include Albemarle Neighborhood
Association as an external customer
o Page 12, add: Legislation for taxing authority
17. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on The
Agenda.
Sally Thomas
She was invited to participate in the Governor's
Natural Resources Leadership Summit being held in
Williamsburg, Apdl 10-11, 2003. The Governor and
Tayloe Murphy are putting on this conference. The
only elected officials invited to participate were from
Albemarle and Fairfax counties. This summit is
being held to determine natural resource policies for
the next three years.
Charles Martin
He will not be present for the April 9th Board
meeting.
18. Closed Session: Personnel Matters.
· At 1:05 p.m., ,the Board went into closed session.
19. Certify Closed Session.
At 2:00 p.m., the Board reconvened into open
session and certified the closed session.
20. Appointments.
· APPOINTED Sade Ridley as the County youth
representative on the Commission on Children and
Families, with said term to expire 6/30/04.
APPOINTED Mitchell Newman as the At-Large
member to the Industrial Development Authority,
with said term to expire 01/19~07.
2:00,p.m. Joint Meetin,q with Plannin,¢I Commission
2. DLscussion: Rural Areas Section of Comprehensive
Plan. (continued from Mamh 5, 2003).
· HELD. Board members and Planning Commission
members were ag reeable with the changes that
staff had made.
3. Work Session: Crozet Master Plan.
· HELD. Board members and Planning Commission
members agreed with the direction staff was
moving.
4. Adjoum.
o The meeting was adjourned at 4:00p. m.
Clerk: Prepare appointment letters, update Boards and
Commissions book and notify appropriate persons.
/gak
Attachment 1 - Proclamation on Child Abuse Prevention Month.
Attachment 2 - Proclamation on Fair Housing Month.
Attachment 3 - Proclamation on Albemarle County Tour Day.
-Page 3-
Attachment 4 - Housing Resolution.
Attachment 5 - Conditions of Approval
-Page 4-
Attachment I
CHILD AB USE PREVENTION MONTH
WHEREA~, the month of April is recognized as Child Abuse Prevention Month in the Commonwealth of Virginia
and across United States; and
[JzI-IE~, during Fiscal Year 2001-2002, 366 qualifying reports of suspected child abuse and/or neglect were
investigated or assessed in the County of Albemarle; and
physical abuse and neglect, sexual abuse, medical neglect, and emotional abuse and neglect, lead to
long-term outcomes for children such as developmental delay, mental and emotional disorders,
antisocial and criminal behavior, childhood pregnancy, truancy and academic.failure, alcohol and
drug abuse, and suicide; and
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle faces a continuing need to support innovative programs to prevent child
abuse and to assist family members when child abuse occurs; and
}$rIIEREAS, in Albemarle there are dedicated individuals and organizations who work daily to counter the
problem of child abuse and neglect and to provide parents with the assistance they need; and
all children deserve freedom from verbal abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect, and
emotional abuse and neglect; and
WHEREAS,
children deserve to have BLUE RIBBON DAYS, including loving hugs, warm homes, tender care,
parents and adults who listen and who promote self-esteem, give quality time, provide necessary
food shelter, clothing, and medical attention; and
WHEREAS, it is vital that we join forces to reach out to parents and children to prevent recurrence of child abuse
and neglect; and
WHEREAS, it is indeed appropriate and fitting to focus attention upon the problem of child abuse and neglect
in the Commonwealth of Virginia and in the County of Albemarle;
NOW, THEREFORE,
i,, Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County
Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the month of Apri12003, as CHII._dD ABUSE
PREVENTION MONTH in the County of Albemarle, and do call upon our
citizens to observe the month with appropriate programs, blue ribbons and other
activities.
Signed and sealed this 2nd day of April, 2003.
-Page 5-
Attachment 2
FAIR HOUSING MONTH
WHEREAS,
April, 2003, marks the thirty-fifth anniversary of the passage of the Fair Housing Act of 1968,
which sought to eliminate discrimination in housing opportunities and to affirmatively further
housing choices for all Americans; and
WHEREAS, the ongoing struggle for dignity and housing opportunity for all is not the exclusive province of
the Federal government; and
WHEREA~, vigorous local efforts to combat discrimination can be as effective, if not more so, than Federal
efforts; and
WHEREAS, illegal barriers to equal opportunity in housing, no matter how subtle, diminish the rights of all;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
that in the pursuit of the shared goal and responsibility of providing equal housing
opportunities for all men and women, the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, does hereby join in the national celebration by proclaiming
~4 PRIL, 2003
FAIR HOUSING MONTH
and encourages all agencies, institutions and individuals, public and private, in Albemarle County
to abide by the letter and the spirit of the Fair Housing law.
Signed and sealed this 2nd day of April, 2003.
-Page 6-
Attachment 3
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FARM TOUR DAY
MAY 3, 2003
the Comprehensive Plan gives highest priority to agriculture and forestry as a land use in the Rural
Area; and
WHEREAS,
WtlEREA&
the citizens of Albemarle County in the 2002 Albemarle CountF Planning Survey rated "preserving
natural resources and open space" and "preserving farmland and forested land" as the sixth and
seventh most important goals out of a series of twenty goals for the strategic plan; and
Albemarle County is among the top 26 counties in Virginia for the market value of agricultural
products sold; and
WHEREAS,
WHER~EAS,
it is the land resource which provides the true value of agriculture and forestry to this community, With
related benefits of open space for cleaner air, watershed protectior~ and wildlife habitat, scenic, rural
and historic landscapes which encourage tourism; and quality of life for all residents; and
maintaining agriculture and forestry also enables the County to grow at a measured and deliberate
pace, and to better plan for services; and
the loss of the agricultural and forestal resource base would permanently damage the County's
economic base and natural environment; and
WHEREAS,
the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee recommended that educational programs
be developed for the public, such as:
improving both the County officials' and the generalpublic's understanding of agriculture;
promoting appreciation of the rural area by the community, and emphasizing the importance of
agtqcultural and forestal lands to them;
· supporting agricultural education in the classroom, and implementing a farm day for school
children; and
· implementing an educational tour of County farms for the general public. County officials and
decision-making staff; and
WHEREAS,
the future of agriculture and forestry in Albemarle County depends on the actions of the farm and forest
owners, but also on the support of elected officials and other citizens;
NOW, TItEREFORE, I, Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors,
do hereby proclaim
May 3, 2003 as:
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FARM TOUR DAY
and commend the Albemarle Farm Bureau and the Piedmont Environmental Council for helping to educate the citizens
about the importance of farming to our community.
-Page7-
Attachment 4
On behalf of the citizens and the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, we would like to recognize
those individuals and organizations that support fair and affordable housing
for all, It is our pleasure to recognize the
Charlottesville Area Association of Realtors (CAAR)
The 800-plus members of CAAR have set high standards for themselves
by adopting and adhering to a strong Code of Ethics. The leadership
and membership of CAAR is committed to coalition building to improve the quality of
life in the area through the provision of affordable "Housing for Everyone~. CAAR
provides homeownership education to prepare families for home purchase and increase the
success of those families in maintaining their homes.
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors is pleased to recognize and honor the members of
CAAR for their efforts in promoting opportunities for fair and affordable housing and for taking a
leadership role at the state and national levels.
Signed and sealed this 2nd day of April 2003.
-Page 8-
Attachment 5
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
SP-02-074 A, rlin D- Martin (Signs #33&34). Public hearing on a request to allow church in
accord w/Sec 10.2.2.35 of the Zoning Ord. TM 55, P 19C, contains 2.851acs. Loc at end of Twinkling
Springs Lane, approx .25 mis from intersec of Twinkling Springs Lane & Rt 250 (Rockfish Gap Turnpike).
Znd RA. White Hall Dist.
1) The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum ninety-three (93)-seat sanctuary or the
maximum allowable to meet Health Department and Zoning Ordinance regulations, whichever is
the lesser number;
2) There shall be no daycare center or private school on the site without approval of a separate
special use permit;
3) Commercial setback standards, as set forth in Section 21.7.2 of the Albemarle Zoning Ordinance,
shall be maintained adjacent to residential uses or residentially zoned properties (including RA
zoned property);
4) Pdor to zoning clearance, construct a right-turn taper or radius per VDOT regulations;
5) Subject to Site plan approval;
6) Health Department approval of well and/or septic systems;
7) While the church use authorized by this special use permit exists, no uses authorized by
previously approved special use permits for a country store shall exist; and
8) Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance, the area within the existing right-of-way will be
cleared to improve sight distance on Twinkling Springs Lane (immediately south of proposed
church parking area as shown on the sketch plan in Attachment F).
-Page 9-
CHILD AB USE PREVENTION MONTH
WHEREAS, the month of April is recognized as Child Abuse Prevention Month in the Commonwealth of
Virginia and across United States; and
I~-IE~S, during Fiscal Year 2001-2002, 366 qualifying reports of suspected child abuse and/or neglect
were investigated or assessed in the County of Albemarle; and
WHEREAS,
physical abuse and neglect, sexual abuse, medical neglect, and emotional abuse and neglect, lead
to long-term outeomes for children such as developmental delay, mental and emotional disorders,
antisocial and criminal behavior, childhood pregnancy, truancy and academic .failure, alcohol
and drug abuse, and suicide; and
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle faces a continuing need to support innovative programs to prevent child
abuse and to assist family members when child abuse occurs; and
WHEREAS, in Albemarle there are dedicated individuals and organizations who work daily to counter the
problem of child abuse and neglect and to provide parents with the assistance they nee& and
WHEREAS, all children deserve freedom from verbal abuse, sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect, and
emotional abuse and neglect; and
WHEREAS,
children deserve to have BLUE RIBBON DAYS, including loving hugs, warm homes, tender care,
parents and adults who listen and who promote self-esteem, give quality time, provide necessary
food, shelter, clothing, and medical attention; and
WHEREAS, it is vital that we join forces to reach out to parents and children to prevent recurrence of child
abuse and neglect; and
WHEREAS, it is indeed appropriate and fitting to focus attention upon the problem of child abuse and neglect
in the Commonwealth of Virginia and in the County of Albemarle;
NOW, THEREFORE,
I, Lindsay G. Dottier, Jr., on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County
Supervisors, do hereby proclaim the month of April 2003, as CHILD ABUSE
PREVENTION MONTH in the County of Albemarle, and do call upon our
citizens to observe the month with appropriate programs, blue ribbons and other
activities.
Signed and sealed this 2nd day of April, 2003.
L1NDSAY G, DORRIER, dl~, CHAIRMAN
ALBEMARLE BOA~ OF COUNTY SUPER VISORS
FAIR HOUSING MONTH
WHEREAS,
April, 2003, marks the thirty-fifth anniversary of the passage of the Fair Housing Act of
1968, which sought to diminate discrimination in housing apportunities and to affirmatively
further housing choices for all Americans; and
WHEREAS, the ongoing struggle for dignity and housing opportunity for all is not the exclusive province
of the Federal government; and
WHEREAS, vigorous local efforts to combat discrimination can be as effective, if not more so, than Federal
efforts; and
WHEREAS, illegal barriers to equal opportunity in housing, no matter how subtle, diminish the rights of
all;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,
that in the pursuit of the shared goal and responsibility of providing equal housing
opportunities for all men and women, the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, does hereby join in the national celebration by proclaiming
APR/L, 2003
as
FAIR HOUSING MONTH
and encourages all agencies, institutions and individuals, public and private, in Albemarle
County to abide by the letter and the spirit of the Fair Housing law.
Signed and sealed this 2nd day of April, 2003.
Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Chairman
Albemarle Board of County Supervisors
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FARM TOUR DAY
MAY3, 2003
WHERF_a~, the Comprehensive Plan gives highest priority to agriculture and forestry as a land use in the Rural Area; and
the citizens of Albemarle County in the 2002 Albemarle Coun~ Planning Sumq rated ~reserving natural resources
and open space" and "preserving farmland and forested land"as the sixth and seventh most important goals out of a series
of ~ent. y goals far the strategic plan; and
WHEREAS, Albemarle County is among the top 26 counties in Virginia for the market value af agricultural groducts sold; and
14rHEaS,
it is the land resource which provides the true value of agriculture and forestry to this community, with related ben,ts of
open space for cleaner air, ~vatershed protection, and ~vildIife habitat, scenic, rural and historic landscapes ~vhich encourage
tourism; and quali~y of life for all residents; and
BrHERF~S, maintaining agriculture and forestry also enables the County to gro~v at a measured and deliberate pace, and w better
plan far services; and
WHERF_~S, the loss of the agricultural and farestal resource base ~vould permanently damage the CounT's economic base and natural
environment; and
WHEREAS, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee recommended that educational programs be ~leveloped for the
public, such as:
· improving both the Oun~y officials' and the general public's understanding of agriculture;
· promoting appreciation of the rural area by the communify, and emphasizing the importance of agricultural and
farestal lands to them;
· supporting agricultural education in the classroom, and implementing a farm day for school children; and
· implementing an educational tour of County farms far the general public, County officials and decision-making staff;
and
14tHEREAS, the future of agriculture and forestry in Albemarle County depends on the actions of the farm and forest On, hers, but also
on the support of elected officials and other citizens;
NOW, THEREFORE, L Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of Courtly Supervisors, do hereby
proclaim
May 3, 2003 as:
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FARM TOUR DAY
and commend the Albemarle Farm Bureau and the Piedmont Environmental Council far helping to educate the
citizens about the importance of farming to our wmmuni~y.
Chairman
NATIONAL POLICE MEMORIAL WEEK
WHEREAS, May 15 of each year was proclaimed "Police Officer's Memorial Day"
by President John F. Kennedy on October 1, 1962, in honor of those peace officers who, through
their courageous deeds, have lost their lives or become disabled in the performance of duty; and
WHEREAS, the calendar week in which it falls was proclaimed "Police Week" in
recognition of the service given by the men and women who night and day protect the citizens
through enforcement of'our laws; and
WHEREAS, in these days of increasing fear, rising crime, reckless acts of violence,
recall to our minds President Kennedy's words of praise for these officers as "trulY men and
women of courage, judgment and dedication;" and
WHEREAS, we share his sentiments and agree that it is time to remind the public of
the day-by-day heroism of our officers, both those on active duty and those who have given their
lives in the line of duty;
NOW, THEREFORE, I, Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Chairman, Albemarle Board of
County Supervisors, do hereby declare and set aside the week of
May 10 through May 16, 2003, as
NATIONAL POLICE MEMORIAL WEEK
and call upon all citizens to recognize the significant efforts and accomplishments of these
officers.
CHAIRMAN
ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Service Agreement with Scottsviile Vol unteer Rescue
Squad, Inc.
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To authorize the County Executive to sign the service
agreement with Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc.
advancing $63,228.40 to replace the chassis of Ambulance
705.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Davis, Eggleston
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
IATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
INFORMATION:
Albemarle County has a revolving fund used by the ten volunteer fire and rescue companies in the County. This fund, currently
funded at two million dollars, provides the volunteer companies a means of acquiring needed tire-fighting and rescue squad
equipment and buildings, interest free, with repayments being deducted from their annual County appropriation. Requests for
disbursements from the fund are monitored and approved by Albemarle County Fire Rescue Advisory Board (ACFRAB).
DISCUSSION:
The current amount available in the revolving fund is $227,551.33. Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad has requested, through
ACFRAB, an advance of $63,228.40 to be used to replace the chassis of Ambulance 705. Scottsville Rescue has executed the
standard service agreement approved by the County Attorney's office. This advance can be disbursed upon approval of this
agreement by the Board of Supervisors. Repayment of the allocation will be over an eight-year period starting in FY 03-04.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends authorizing the County Executive to execute the attached Service Agreement.
03.036
SERVICE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 3rd day of ' April ,2003, by
and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision, (the
"County"), and the SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD, INC., a Virginia
Corporation, (the "Rescue Squad").
WHEREAS, the Rescue Squad agrees to continue to provide valuable rescue squad
services in Albemarle County in its delineated service area as set forth on the Response Area
Maps located at the Emergency Communications Center ("Service Area'); and '
WHEREAS, the Rescue Squad desires the County to contribute Si.xty-three Thousand
Two Hundred Twenty-eight and 40/100 Dollars ($63,228.40) to replace the chassis of
Ambulance 705 necessary to provide rescue squad services.
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above stated premises, the CountY
and Rescue Squad agree, as follows:
1. The County shall contribute to the Rescue Squad Sixty-three Thousand Two Hundred
Twenty-eight and 40/100 Dollars ($63,228.40) to be used to replace the chassis of
Ambulance 705. The funds shall be allocated from the County's Fire Fund ("Fund") and
shall be made available upon execution of this agreement.
2. The Rescue Squad agrees that the County will withhold Seven Thousand Nine Hundred
Three and 55/100 Dollars ($7,903.55) from the County's annual appropriation to the Rescue
Squad's operating budget beginmng July 2003 through July 2010. Thus at the end of eight
(8) years, which is the term of this Agreement, a total of $63,228.40 shall be withheld. This
withholding may be used by the County to replenish the Fund for so long as the County, at its
discretion, continues such Fund. This withholding is in addition to the withholding for all
prior advances under the prior service agreements with the Rescue Squad dated August 24,
2000, November 16, 1998, and May 15, 1996 (and its Addendum dated August 14, 1996).
The Rescue Squad agrees that any amount of this repayment that may exceed the County's
annual appropriation will be remitted to the County no later than July 31 of each repayment
year.
The Rescue Squad agrees that the Sixty-three Thousand Two Hundred Twenty-eight and
40/100 Dollars ($63,228.40) contribution shall be used only for the purchase of a new chassis
for Ambulance 705 to be used to provide rescue squad services in Albemarle County. The
Rescue Squad further agrees that it shall not convey Ambulance 705 or any interest therein to
any party other than the County without the County's prior written consent during the useful
life of the ambulance or the term of this Service Agreement, whichever is longer. For
purposes of this Agreement, the useful life of the ambulance shall be ten years from the date
it is placed into service after the chassis has been replaced. In addition, the Rescue Squad
agrees that any insurance proceeds received from a claim related to any damage to the
ambulance after the chassis has been replaced shall be used entirely for the immediate repair
and improvement of the ambulance unless the County expressly authorizes in writing a
different use for such funds.
4. The Rescue Squad agrees that at such time as it no longer provides volunteer rescue squad
services in Albemarle County while operating under the jurisdiction old'the County that it
shall convey all of its interest in Ambulance 705 to the County at no additional cost to the
County upon the County's request.
5. The County and Rescue Squad agree that the covenants set forth in their prior agreements
dated August 24, 2000, November 16, 1998, and May 15, 1996 (and its Addendum dated
August 14, 1996), to the extent they are not in conflict with this Agreement, shall remain in
full force and effect.
6. Nothing contained herein shall be construed to prevent additional appropriations by the
County to the Rescue Squad, at the discretion of the County Board of Supervisors, to support,
enhance, or augment the services to be provided by the Rescue Squad.
Witness the following signatures and seals:
Date
Date
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA
SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD, INC.
By: .~~ ~i-e~)
Approved as to FOrm:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE:
,~~...o -j The foregoing Service Agreement was signed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this
day of 7/]/18./c~ ,2003 by Robert W. Tucker, Jr..
v '
Nr~t a~j l~ublic
My Commission Expires:
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE:
The foregoing Service Agreement was signed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this
iq day of CC~¢O_~ ,2003 by
Notary Public
My Commission Expires: _('22a~f ~'~, d2tX~
3
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Mass Enterprises, Inc. - Request to amend Albemarle
County Service Authority Jurisdictional Area
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To consider amending the ACSA Jurisdictional Area
boundary to provide water and sewer service to Tax Map 56,
Parcel 87.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Biel
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: ×
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
ITEM NUMBER:
IN FORMATION:
INFORMATION:
BACKGROUND:
The applicant is requesting ACSA Jurisdictional Area designation for water and sewer service to a 3.93 acre lot located on the
south side of Three Notch'd Road (Rt. 240), approximately 600 feet west of the entrance to Western Ridge (Attachment A -
applicant's request, Attachment B -location and tax map). The property is located within the designated Crozet Development
Area, in the Whitehall Magisterial District. Parcel 87 is currently the site of a trucking business consisting of three buildings and
has a zoning designation of Light Industrial, L-I. The current ACSA designation is for water to existing structures only. The
adjacent parcels to the west and east of this site are both designated for public water and sewer service (Attachment C).
There was a preliminary site plan (SDP 2002-098 Crozet Mini Storage) submitted in September 2002 requesting approval to
construct 17,475 square feet of self-storage buildings on the site. The preliminary site plan was deferred indefinitely to address
several issues, one of them being ACSA Jurisdictional Area approval for water and sewer service.
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is located in the Crozet Development Area. The Comprehensive Plan provides the following concerning the
provision of water and sewer service to the development Areas:
"General Principle: Urban Areas, Communities, and Villages are to be served by public water and sewer (p. 114)."
"Provide water and sewer service only to areas within the ACSA Jurisdictional Areas (p. 130)2
"Follow the boundaries of the designated Development Areas in delineating Jurisdictional Areas (p.130)."
The Comprehensive Plan recommends serving Development Areas with public water and sewer. This parcel is located within the
Crozet Development Area and should be designated as part of the ACSA Jurisdictional Area for public water and sewer service.
Water supply in Crozet is provided by Beaver Creek Reservoir.
RECOMMENDATION:
As a general policy, staff has advised that public utility capacity should be reserved to support development of designated
Development Areas. This request is consistent with public utility policy of the Corn prehensive Plan. Since this property is located
within a designated Development Area, the provision of both water and sewer service to the properties would be consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan public utility policy. Therefore, staff recommends the Board of Supervisors proceeding to public hearing
to consider providing public water and sewer service to Tax Map 56, Parcel 87.
Attachments:
A - Application
B - Location and Tax Map
C - Jurisdictional Area Map
03.039
ATTACHMENT A
APPLICATION TO AMEND THE
SERVICE AUTHORITY
JURISDICTIONAL AREAS
County of Albemarle
Department of planning and Comm~lnity Development
401 McIntir~ Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
804 296-5823
~ignature: Phone:
?Address:
JURISDICTIONAL AREA DESIGNATION REQUESTED:
]~ Water and Sewer [] Water Only
[] Water Only to Existing Structure(s) [] Limited Service (Describe in Justification
below)
PROPERTY LOCATION (Address)
Tax Map(s)/Parcel Number(s): ~t~- ~"/
CURRENT SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION (If any):
[] Water and Sewer []
~ Water Only to Existing Structures
Water Only
MAR :~ ~ 2003 I
[] Limited Service
JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST:
For Staff Use Only
DATE SUBMITTED: DATE $130 FEE PAID:
PROPERTY IS LOCATED (Check Appropriate):
[] Inside or [] Outside a Growth Area? [] Adjacent to SAJA?
[] Inside or [] Outside a Water-Supply Watershed? [] Adjacent to a Growth Area?
Location and distance of water/sewer line proposed to provide service
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT ADOPTED: [] Yes [] No Date of Action
ATTACHMENT B
IEVISED: 1/10/90, 8/11/98
ALBEMARLE
4O
COUNTY
ill,,)'
ATTACHMENT C
ZO
72
WHITE HALL DISTRICT SECTION
56
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Mountainside Senior Assisted Living Center
SUBJECTIPROPOSALIREQUEST:
Funding request for operational support.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Tucker, White, Allshouse
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
No
!
BACKGROUND:
Mountainside Senior Assisted Living Center, formally known as Windham, is an assisted living facility in Crozet. Mountainside
provides assisted living houSing to 102 residents, including 28 Region Ten clients.
In'2002, Windham changed hands, and Jefferson Area Board forAging (JABA) began to manage the facility as a limited partner.
In January 2002, the County of Albemarle provided a grant of $177,617 to assist Mountainside during their transition phase as
they worked to become self-supporting. Funding requested by JABA at that time was to subsidize 30 County Auxiliary Grant
recipients who lived at the facility until the private pay residents began to offset the costs. At that time, the thought was that a
one-time grant of $177,6'17 would net out to be a $17,600 subsidy over a ten year period.
Prior to its closing in 1998, the County supported elderly housing at the District Home in Waynesboro for County residents by
providing an annual subsidy of $30,000 to $40,000 per year.
DISCUSSION:
Due to unanticipated expenses that were not disclosed by the previous owner, as well as a delay in having the facility ready to
accept private pay clients, Mr. Gordon Walker, the Executive Director of the Jefferson Area Board for Aging, (JABA), submitted a
letter to all ,Albemarle County Board members and the City of Charlottesville on March 24, requesting additional funding for the
Mountainside Center. Mr. Walker indicated that until the Center achieves an appropriate ratio of auxiliary grant residents and
private pay residents, they will need to find additional funding to operate the Center. JABA has lost over $100,000 in state funds,
and their federal funding is fiat. To keep Morningside's financial condition viable, JABA has set a short-term fundraising goal of
$225,000 for Mountainside to be raised or pledged by April 21st. To date, JABA has received a $75,000 challenge grant to be
matched with other funds.
To meet the challenge grant, JABA is requesting $12,500 from the County of Albemarle and from the City of Charlottesville for
each of the fiscal years '04, '05, and '06 for a total of $37,500 from the County and $37,500 from the City.
Mr. Walker states that the center provides private pay rates considerably below market, thus providing affordable assisted living
to persons of moderate income who cannot afford market place prices. JABA has encouraged the Board to tour the facility and
learn more about the improvements that have taken place and will be completed in the future.
The City of Charlottesville's City Council will also be considering JABA's request.
RECOMMENDATION:
the Board wish to support funding for the Mountainside project, staff will add $12,500 as a new initiative in the Board's FY 04
proposed budget using some of the remaining Board contingency funds.
03.044
03-26-03 0~:52 ~
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS ACT
TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
For Officers and Employees of
Local Government [Section 2.1-639.14(E)]
1. Name: Roxanne White
2. Title: Assistant County Executive
3. Agency: Albemarle County
4. Transaction: Mountainside Senior Assisted Living Center, April 2, 2003 BOS
Agenda
o
Nature of Personal Interest Affected by Transaction:
Personal interest in JABA due to husband's employment by JABA.
6. I declare that:
I am disqualifying myself from participating in this transaction and request that this
fact be recorded in the appropriate public records for a period of five years.
Dated: April2,2003 ~~¥~~[_.~ ~.~~
Signature
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
West Leigh Drive - VDOT Rural Addition Project
Waterline Relocation
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
BOS emergency appropriation and transfer of funds
necessary for the existing waterline relocation.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Graham, Kelsey
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA
ACTION: X
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
IN FORMATION:
Location Map
Mark Graham
BACKGROUND:
On February 13, 1997, CSX Transportation notified the West Leigh owners that the West Leigh Drive private railroad cross~ng
would be closed unless it was signalized and licensed with either all costs/annual fees paid by the neighborhood, or the road
taken into the public system. The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors recognized the importance and the need to preserve
this vital transportation link. In response, on October 6, 1999, the Board requested VDOT acceptance and improvement of a
0.4 mile portion of West Leigh Drive (from Rte. 250 to Leigh Way) through the VDOT "Rural Additions Program". The
Commonwealth Transportation Board accepted this street on December 6, 1999.
VDOT awarded a contract (March 3, 2003) for the road improvements, which included the replacement of an existing and badly
deteriorated 72" metal culvert pipe at Little Ivy Creek. Prior to commencing construction, the contractor informed VDOT that an
existing 12" diameter waterline would need to be relocated before the culvert could be replaced. VDOT's "Rural Addition" policy
specifically excludes the use of"Rural Addition" funds for waterline and other utility relocations. Therefore, VDOT notified the
Department of Engineering & Public Works that the waterline relocation would need to be funded and contracted separately by
the County and/or ACSA.
Recent flooding of Little Ivy Creek collapsed the deteriorated culvert and washed-out the stream crossing. This portion of West
Leigh Drive, a vital transportation link for the community, is now closed to traffic until the waterline is relocated and the new
stream crossing ~s constructed.
DISCUSSION:
The Contractor's $48,000 waterline relocation estimate differs from the Albemarle County Service Authority estimate of
$36,000. The difference is the result of the Contractor changing the location of the temporary stream diversion that is
necessary to install the new stream crossing. What portion of this cost (if any) is attributable to the waterline will need to be
negotiated with the Contractor.
The Department of Engineering & Public Works has reviewed our capital improvement budget and identified that funds may be
transferred from the "Ivy Landfill" CIP account (#1901041000700006) and appropriated to this project to cover the waterline
relocation cost. Bill Brent (ACSA) has agreed, in principle, to reimburse the County fifty-percent of the waterline relocation cost.
However, this will require ACSA Board authorization at their next meeting on 17 April 2003.
RECOMMENDATION:
Authorize the transfer and emergency appropriation of $45,000, from the referenced account, for this project.
03.047
%
\
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Neighborhood Model and Rural Area Review Status Report
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Update on Implementation Activities
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg. Graham
BACKGROUND:
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
IATTACHMENTS: Yes/// /~''
REVIEWED BY: ~ [
The Board originally reviewed the status of the implementation activities at its August 7, 2002 meeting. Staff indicated periodic
updates would be provided. The last update was provided on January 8, 2003.
DISCUSSION:
Neighborhood Model Implementation
Since the Board reviewed this project's status in October, work has progressed on a number of tasks necessary to implement
the Neighborhood Model. Other tasks have been reassessed and adjusted based on other project workload responsibilities and
activities necessary to accomplish the tasks (Attachment A). The following gives a status of progress and changes to this point
(changes are also noted for particular tasks in Attachment A by the indication of the original completion date for that task in
parenthesis and brackets):
Modifying Community Facilities Plan
Review of overall facility and individual service objectives is underway with the Planning Commission. The Planning
Commission's expected completion has been delayed by approximately 3 weeks, primarily due to weather conditions that
necessitated postponing a Commission work session and some internal agency meetings.
Regulatory Changes
Volume 2 Subdivision Ordinance Changes - Staff development should be completed by the end of the month. This has been
delayed by about 2 weeks to allow for staff/county attorney work in finalizing code changes.
· Neighborhood Model Zoning District - Adopted by the Board of Supervisors on Wednesday, March 19. There was a delay
of one month due to Board decisions to have DISC II review the ordinance proposals and comments from outside groups.
While this, in turn, caused delay for staffworking on Volume 2 Zoning Ordinance Changes, it did yield significant agreement
on Neighborhood Model Zoning District ordinance modifications.
· Volume 2 Zoning Ordinance Changes - Staff development and overall completion delayed by about 8 weeks due to staff
involvement in additional work with the Neighborhood Model District and the parking ordinance changes, additional County
Attorney work, more complicated considerations that have arisen as a result of detailed review of the existing ordinance
provisions and the illness and death in the family experienced by a key staff member developing the changes.
Infrastructure and Services
Work continues with VDOT on local application of subdivision street standards more consistent with the Neighborhood Model.
Of particular significance, Mark Graham, Director of Engineering and Public Works, has been appointed to a statewide
COmmittee reviewing these standards.
Crozet Master Plan
While weather delayed community design day by several weeks, the overall schedule is still on track.
AGENDA TITLE:
Neighborhood Model and Rural Area Review Status Report
April 2, 2003
Page 2
Parks and Recreation Facilities
At the recommendation of Pat Mullaney, Director of Parks and Recreation, the schedule has changed to reflect a new approach
to take advantage of the consultant hired initially to evaluate the need for an urban gym and do a more general review of parks
an d recreation needs and standards. Since the urban gym is being, delayed in the CiP, and given the importance of this issue to
the Neighborhood Model implementation, the contract with the consultant will be modified to focus more on addressing new
standard for park/recreation facilities and methods for developing them consistent with the Neighborhood Model principles.
Overall delay in completion is approximately 10 months.
Affordable:Housing
The Affordable Housing Policy Comprehensive Plan Amendment was delayed by about two months as the Housing Committee
was not prepared to vote in January and decided to delay any decision until February. There was not a quorum at the February
meeting and those attending used that time as a work session to do some final revisions. The HoUsing Committee approved the
final draft of the proposal on March 12.
Rural Areas Review
The review of the Comprehensive Plan Rural Areas section was previously adjusted by two (2) months to allow for the Board's
reconsideration of the Mountain Overlay District. Completion was projected to be in November 2003 instead of September 2003
based on an anticipated Board decision on the Mountain Overlay District in April 2003. Since then, public meetings associated
with the Rural Area review were delayed by weather and the joint Planning Commission/Board of Supervisors meeting was not
held Until March, but the overall schedule as it was previously adjusted to allow for the Mountain Overlay District review by the
Board Was net affected. However, recent decision by the Board to consider further work on the Mountain Overlay District with
the assistance of a committee could have some additional impact on the Rural Area review schedule. This will need to be
evaluated as part of the Board's final decisions regarding the forthcoming Mountain Overlay District work.
RECOMMENDATION:
This is provided for the Board's information.
desired.
Staff can review more particular elements at the Board's April 2 meeting if so
03.041
I
II.
~:::::::~ '
E il I:"..'.:::~ :
-
II
tl~
II ~
II ~
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
KENNETH W. LAWSON, CHAIRMAN
AT LARGE
STEVE CATALANO, VICE CHAIRMAN
AT LARGE
JERI ALLEN
RUCKERSVILLE DISTRICT
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
POST OFFICE BOX 358
STANARDSVILLE, VIRGINIA 22973
434-985-5201
gxx: 434-985-3705
MICKEY L. COX
MONROE DISTRICT
KEVIN WELCH
STANARDSVILLE DISTRICT
JULIUS L. MORRIS
COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR
March 28, 2003
Mi. Lindsay Dorrier, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: Route 29 Corridor
Dear Mr. Dorrier:
Enclosed is a resolution adopted by the Greene County Board of Supervisors on March 19, 2003
regarding the Route 29 Corridor.
Thank you for your consideration of this matter.
Kenneth W, Lawson, Chairman
Greene County Board of Supervisors
KWL/pmv
Enclosure
Mr. Robert Tucker
County Executive
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, a very large percentage of our citizens depend on the Route 29
corridor for safe and efficient travel to their place of employmem in Charlottesville and
Albemarle County; and
WHEREAS, additional development on this corridor, without a long term plan
and financing, would certainly be detrimental to daily travelers on this corridor; and
WHEREAS, the Board members are appreciative of Albemarle County's
attention to the concerns of the neighboring counties;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Greene County Board of
Supervisors requests the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to address the serious
need for traffic improvements related to the Route 29 corridor, prior to their approval of
any large scale development utilizing this corridor.
Adopted in Special Meeting this 19th day of March, 2003.
J(~. M~rfis, Clerk
J~n, Men'bet
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUM MARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Six Year Secondary Road Plan and County Priority List
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Worksession to discuss the proposed County Secondary
Road Priority List for improvements, which is the basis for the
VDOT Six Year Secondary Road Plan for construction
projects.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs., Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Wade
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
INFORMATION:
X
BACKGROUND:
The Board of Supervisors held a worksession on the proposed Six Year Secondary Priority List on March 5, 2003. Staff
presented a draft Priority List. A major focus of the discussion was on the unpaved road portion of the list, which had been
reprioritized with an emphasis on giving roads eligible for the Rural Rustic Road program higher priority. The Board discussed
whether or not rustic rural road eligibility should be a high priority because it may conflict with the County's Rural Areas
objectives and because it significantly changed the priority of projects from the previously approved plan. The Board
requested staff to prepare a new Priority List that compares the priority of all projects from 2002 and 2003, including the
unpaved road projects. The Board of Supervisors also requested staff to consider requests from the School Transportation
Department as an important criterion in ranking projects.
DISCUSSION:
Attachment A is the draft Priority List for FY 2003/04, which has been revised to include a comparison of the proposed
priorities with the priorities approved in FY2002/03. It includes a comparison of the VDOT Six Year Plan priority, the County's
priority, estimated cost, estimated advertisement date, and offers a reason for the changes to the priorities between last
year's Plan and this year's proposed Plan. Regarding the unpaved road projects, the vast majority of the changes in priority
were due to the increased emphasis on the project's eligibility for the Rural Rustic Road program (Rustic Roads).
Board members expressed concerns with the affect of the new emphasis on Rustic Roads. Specifically noted was the
potential for a significant increase the amount of roads paved in the Rural Area, which could be considered inconsistent with
current growth management policy. Also of concem was the significant change to project priorities, which have been
committed to in previously adopted plans. Also of note is that the Rustic Road process does not require full dedication of
right-of-way from adjacent property owners. Full right-of-way dedication has been used as a way to insure citizen acceptance
of the proposed project.
Based on these concerns, staff has revised its recommendation for the unpaved roads portion of the Priority List. The
priorities for the unpaved roads are now based on the Priority List adopted by the Board last year (Attachment B). It'does not
give any priority to projects eligible for rural rustic roads. It does add new projects to the list and prioritizes those projects
based on the Board's current criteria. This new priority I!st includes several unpaved roads (Gilbert Station Rd, Heards
Mountain Rd, Beam Rd, Woods Edge Rd, and Doctors Crossing Rd) that are already in the six-year funding cycle and meet
rural rustic roads criteria. This will give the County an opportunity to implement a few rural rustic road projects and monitor
the April 2, 2003 program before making a more significant commitment to it in our planning process.
The BOard of Supervisors also requested staff to consider requests from the Schools as a criterion when ranking road
projects. Staff has had in place a standard process of requesting a list of projects from Fire/Rescue agencies, the Town of
ScottSville, and the School's Transportation Division each year to consider during the Six Year Secondary Road discussion
with the public, Planning Commission, and Board of Supervisors. Although staff gives projects from the Schools special
attention when ranking projects, they are not included as a specific criterion in the rating system used by staff. In Attachment
C, staff has proposed including requests from the Department of Education/Fire and Rescue as a specific criterion in each
road improvement category.
Staff is requesting the Board of Supervisors direction on the following items:
AGENDA TITLE:
Six-Year Secondary Road Plan and County Priority List
April 2, 2003
Page 2
The County Proposed FY 2003-04 draft Priority List (Attachment B), including the unpaved road projects. (These
priorities are based on the previously adopted unpaved road priorities and have not considered rural rustic roads as a
criterion for unpaved roads).
Inclusion of project requested by Department of Education, and Fire/Rescue agencies as a specific criterion for ranking
all road projects (Attachment C).
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors scheduled a public hearing on the proposed County Priority List, as proposed in
Attachment B, and the draft VDOT Six Year Secondary Plan.
03.042
DRAFT ALBEMARLE COUNTY PRIORITY LIST FOR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
2003-04 Through 2008-09
[Comparison of FY 2002/03 and 2003-04 Priority List]
VDOT 02-03 VDOT 03-04 County 02-03 County 53.o~ Route Number and Name Location Est. Ad Est. Ad Estimated Estimated Description/Comments Reason For Change In
Secondary Proposed Approved Proposed From - To Date Date Cost Cost Priority From Last Year
Plan Ranking Ranking Ranking 2002 2003 2002 2003
Month-Year
0 0 0 0 County wide County wide Jun-08 Jun-09 $825,000 $600,000
0 0 0 0 County wide Traffic mgmt. Program Jun-08 Jun-09 $30(:,000 $300,000
1 I 1 1 625 Hatton Ferry Hatton Ferry Jun-08 Jun-09 $120,000 $120,000
2 2 2 2 West Leigh Ddve Rt 250 to .4 mi nor. Rt. 250 Dec-02 Dec-02 $500,0Q0 $500,000
3 3 3 3 Corville Farm Road Rt. 691-Greenwood Rd-D.E. Mar~03 Mar-03 $150,000 $f50,000
4 4 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Melbourne Rd to Rio Road Jun-05 Jun-05 $14,505,100 $14,505,100
4 4 4 4 Meadow Creek Parkway Bridge over Meadow Creek Jun-OS Jun-05 $2,204,500 $2,204,500
5 5 5 5 649 Airport Road Route 29 to Route 606 Dec-03 Dec-03 $10,944,050 $12,103,950
6 6 6 6 651 Free State Road Free State Road Dec-05 $3,350,000 $3,350,000
7 7 7 7 Meadow Creek Parkway Route 631 to Route 29 $37,500,000 $37,500,000
8 8 8 8 691 Jarmaoa Gap Road Route 240 to Route 684 Jun-06 Aug-05 $5,150,000 $5,300,000
9 9 9 9 649 Profflt Road Rt 29 to 1.6 miles east Jun-08 Jun-08 $9,500,000 $9,500,000
10 10 10 10 601 Old Ivy Road Ivy Road to 250129 Byp Aug-08 Aug-10 $7,200,000 $7,200,000
11 11 11 11 656 Georgetown Road Route 654 to Route 743 Dec-08 Dec-10 $3,200,000 $3,200,000
12 12 12 12 781 Sunset Avenue NCL to Fifth St Extended Oct-08 Oct-ll $1,650,000 $1,650,000
n/a n/a 25 13 Southern Parkway Avon Str. to Fifth Str. n/a nla $4,000,000 $4,000,000
14 13 15 14 679 Grassmere Road .25 miles south of Rt 738 Aug-02 $100,000
13 n/a 13 15 631 Old Lynchburg Road 1.35 MI. S. 1-64 to Rt.708 Dec-08 n/a $1,500,000 nla
n/a n/a 14 16 726 James River Road Route 795 to Route 1302 n/a n/a n/a n/a
15 14 16 17 744 Hunt Club Road near intersection with Rt. 22 Feb-02 Feb-02 $10,000 Sf0,000
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Projects in bold and in italics are new on this year's priory list
signs, pipe,plant mix projects, same funding
Staff working with VDOT for traffic calming project
operation of ferry
torsi addition
rural addition
two lane design approved by County and CTB, includes bridge over CSX RR
(assoclatad with project above)
widen to four lanes, bike lanes,sidewalks,RS98199 [7,200]
construct road from Rio Rd to Free St Rd to replace substandard bridge [420]
County petitioning for eligibility for primary road funding RS 97198
serve increased traf wi rain widening, pedlbike access,RS 1999100 [2,200]
induct, in Secondary Road funding
no change
no change
no change
no change
no change
no change
updated cost from VDOT
VDOT/County working on R-O-W
no change
updated cost from VDOT
improve alig, urban x-sect, with bike/sidewalk,RS 2004/200Sand 200510616,300: no change
widen, improve alignment bike/sidewalk access,RS 2000101 [4,300] reduct, in Secondary Road funding
spot improve., peal. access,urban cross-section, RS 97198, 2002/03 [16,000] reduct, in Secondary Road funding
spot and Inter. Improve., urban x-sect, upgrade 2 lane. peal/bike access[l,100] reduct, in Secanda~ Road funding
Ext to 5th St, wi peal/bike fac, and Nelgh.str deslgnlspoad proj is now elig.for second, funding-rev share
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [250] no change
spot Improvements at various locations, RS 2001102 [2,100] ~o longer in the 6 yr funding cycle reduct, in Sec. Rd funding
spot improvement to improve sight distance,RS 2002/03 [2000] mo longer in the 6 yr funding cycle induct, in Sec. Rd funding
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate. hazard elimination safety funds[6401 no change
VDOT 02-03 VDOT 03-04 County 02-03 County 03-04 Route Number and Name Location Est. Ad Est. Ad Estimated Estimated Description/Comments Reason For Change In
Secondary Proposed Approved Proposed From - To Date Date Cost Cost Priority From Last Year
Plan Ranking Ranking Ranking 2002 2003 2002 2003
Month-Year
n/a n/a 19 '18 Hillsdale Ddve Greenbrier Dr. to Seminole Sq. n/a n/a n/a get from city
n/a n/a 18 19 795 Blenheim Road Intemection of Route 790 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 26 20 Route 240 Route 240 to Route 250 n/a nla n/a nla
n/a n/a 28 21 631 RIo Road Rio Rd @ Pen Park Lane nla nla $'1,000,000 $1,000,000
n/a n/a 33 22 708 Dry Bddge Road Railroad overpass mia ~/a n/a ~/a
n/a n/a 27 23 643 Polo Grounds Road Route 29 to Route 649 n/a ~/a n/a ~/a
n/a n/a 20 24 676 Tilman Road Road Intersection of Route 250 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 23 25 614 Garth Road Iotemection of Rt. 676 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 40 26 60! Garth Road Intemection of Route 658 n/a n/a n/a n/a
nla n/a n/a 27 738 Morgantown Road* at Route 250 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a rt/a 20 28 676 Owensville Rea~i Intemection of Route 601 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 44 29 616 Union Mill Road FCL to Route 759 n/a n/a n/a n/a
~/a ~/a 22 30 606 Dickerson Road Route 649 to Route 743 nla nla nla nla
n/a r~/a n/a 31 654 Barracks Road* Intersection of Route fO0~ n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 21 32 678 Owensville Road Intemection of Route 250 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 46 33 732 Milton Road Intemection of 762 e/a n/a n/a n/a
e/a n/a 17 34 810 Browns Gap Road Intemection of Route 789 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 24 35 795 James Monroe Pky Intemection of Route 53 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a "~/a 641 Frays Mill Road Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run n/a n/a $44(~,000 $440,000
n/a n/a n/a n/a 641 Frays Mill Road Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run els els $60,000 $60,000
n/a n/a 29 36 743 Eadysville Road Rivanna River to Rt 643 n/a nls n/a n/a
n/a nla 30 37 729 Buck Island Rd Rt. 53 to Rt. 1120 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/s 31 38 684 Half Mile Branch Road Rt. 691 to Rt. 797 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 32 39 64f Bumley Station Road Norfolk Southem RR n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 34 40 602 Howardsville Tnpk .01 miles south Route 626 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 35 41 640 Gilbert Station Road Norfolk Southern RR n/a n/a n/a n/a
Projects in bold and in italics are new on this years ~311or[ty list
Projects In bold are in the Development Area.
connector rd between Hillsdale Rd and Hydraulic Rd, Being studied by City and County
Intemect~on improvement. [670] no longer in the 6 yr funding cycle
Interconnecting street s per Crozet Master Plan In Cmzet Development Ama, Plan Pdodty
Inter. improve. Request by City,to be funded from prlv. source [23,000] Meadow Creek sub. In City
school tmnsp. Dept. request, Iow weight limit School department request
public mq. to impmv align, spot improv, safety misted, [1000] other pmj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
intemection improvement, RS 2003/04 [4,800] other pmj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
intemection improvement, public request [3100] other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
add turning lane at Barracks Farm Road, CHARTS recomm. [6,300] increasing traffic on Route 601
close west ramp and construct tapered turn lane [~200] new project
intemection improvement [5400] other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
improve alignment [4600] m-prioritize( with updated data
improve to handle project traffic, CHART recommendation, [6,000. other proj.w, higher pdority moved ahead
Intersection improvement, cul. de-sac road [6400]
intersection improvement [3,400]
spot improvement, requested by public [1000]
Intersection improvement. [1,800]
mcommendedfrom CHART, intersection improvement. [2,7001
install box culvert, a VDOT recommended safety project
install box culvert, a VDOT recommended safety project
public mq to impmv align, spot impmv, safety misted. [8,400]
improve road geometrics, two lane mini section [4400]
spot/safety improve to serve increased traffic w/ min. widening [680]
bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [340]
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate I4101
bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [170]
new project
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
m-prioritize( with updated data
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other pmj.w, higher pdority moved ahead
not prioritized
not prioritized
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other pmj.w, higher priority moved atlead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
VDOT 02.03 VDOT 03-04 County 02-03 County 03,04 Route Number and Name Location Est. Ad Est. Ad Estimated Estimated Description/Comments Reason For Change In
Secondary Proposed Approved Proposed From - TO Date Date Cost Cost Priority From Last Year
Plan Ranking Ranking Ranking 2002 2003 2002 2003
Month-Year
n/a n/a 36 42 642 Red Hill Depot Road ,28 miles northeast Rt.708 n/a n/a nfs n/a
n/a n/a 37 43 671 Millington Road Intersection of Route 665 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 38 44 692 Plank Road Route 29 to Route 712 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 39 45 708 Red Hill Road Route 20 to Route 29 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 41 46 676 Owensville Road Route 614 to Route 1050 n/a n/a n/a nla
n/a n/a 42 47 691 Park Road Park Road to Route 250 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 44 48 678 Decca Lane Intersection of Route 676 n/a n/a n/a n/a
nla n/a 46 49 743 Advance Mills Road At Jacobs Run nla n/a n/a nla
n/a n/a 47 50 796 Hardware Street Near inter, with Rt. 20 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a 51 732 Milton Road* at Rt, 53 n/a n/a nla n/a
nls n/a 4.8 52 622 Atbevanea Springs Rd intersection of Route 795 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a nla 49 53 622 Albevanna Spdngs Rd Intersection of Route 773 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 50 54 680 Browns Gap Tnpk Rt. 240 to Rt. 810 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 51 55 611 Jarmans Gap Road Off Route 691 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 52 56 1310 Ferry Street .06 miles south of Rt. 6 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 53 67 682 Broadaxe Road Off Dick Woods Road n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 54 58 813 Starlight Road Off Route 712 n/a n/a n/a n/a
17 15 57 59 737 Mountain Vista Road Rt. 6 to Rt. 726 Dec-02 Dec-02 $650,000 $650,000
18 16 58 60 708 Secretarys Read Route 795 to Route 620 Aug-03 Aug-03 $825,000 $825,000
19 17 59 61 702 Reservoir Road Ramp to Dead end Dec-04 Dec-06 $1,420,000 $1,40t,586
20 18 60 62 640 Gilbert Station Road Route 641 to Route 747 Oct-05 Oct-06 $360,000 $360,000
21 19 61 63 633 Neards Mtn Road Nelson CL to Route 29 Oct-06 Oct-07 $360,000 $360,000
22 20 62 64 606 Dickerson Road Route 650 to Route 1030 Oct-07 Oct-08 $1,300,839 $1,336,073
23 21 63 65 769 Beam Road Off Route 20 north Oct-08 Mar-08 $200,000 $200,000
n/a 22 64 66 623 Woods Edge Rd Route 616 to dead end Oct-06 Oct~09 $365,000 $365,000
Projects in bom and In itsrics ars new on this year's priority list
RRR=mads that meet rural rustic road critsrla
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Railroad crossing with no gate [80]
intersection improvement [370]
spot improvements, safety related [1,200]
mpreve alignment [1,500]
spot improvements at several points, CATS recom. [2,500]
extend to eastem 240/250 street system [640]
improve intersection, located near schooL, CHART recom [140]
improve approach to bridge [1000]
spot improvement, requested by ScottsviIle [630]
Intersectlonimprovement, publicrequest [lO00]
intersection improvement [1000]
intersection improvement [1000]
spot improvements, public request [700]
Railroad crossing with no gate [210]
Railroad crossing with no gate [80]
spot improvements, public request [140]
school request, needs ture-areund space [60]
unpaved road, [210]
unpaved road, full R-O-W not available [230]
public request, R-O-W undetermined, sidewalks ['1900]
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined - RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR
[300]
[80]
[360]
[780]
[420]
other proj.w, higher pdority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
other prej.w, higher priodty moveo ahead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdorlty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher priority moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdedty moved ahead
new project
other proj.w, higher pdodty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher prlodty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdedty moved ahead
other prej.w, higher pdority moved ahead
other prej.w, higher priodty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pfiedty moved ahead
other proj.w, higher pdority moved ahead
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
other unpaved projects completed
VDOT 02-03 VDOT 03-04 County 02-03 County 03-04 Route Number and Name Location Est. Ad Est. Ad Estimated Estimated Description/Comments Reason For Change In
Secondary Proposed Approved Proposed From - To Date Date Cost Cost Priority From Last Year
Plan Ranking Ranking Ranking 2002 2003 2002 2003
Month-Year
n/a 23 68 67 784 Doctors Crossing Route 600 to Route 640 n/a Oct-11 n/a $1,238,105
n/a n/a 66 68 712 Coles Crossing Rd Rt. 711 to Rt. 692 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 70 69 666 ^lien Road Route 664 to Dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 68 70 688 Midway Road Rt. 638 to Rt. 824 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 72 71 734 Bishop Hill Road Route 795 to Rt. 1807 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 74 72 685 Bunker Hill Road Route 616 to Dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 79 73 762 Rose Hill Church Ln Rt. 732 lo Deand End n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 82 74 704 Fortune Lane Rt. 715 to Dead End n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 84 78 760 Red Hill School Road Route 29 to Dead End n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 60 76 640 Gilbert Station Road Rt.747 to Rt. 784 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 77 77 668 Walnut Level Road Rt. 810 to dead end n/a n/a n/a ~/a
n/a n/a 73 78 640 Gilbert Station Road Route 784 to Route 20 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a 79 790 Holly Road* R£ 795 tO dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 85 80 608 Happy Creek Road Route 645 to Route 646 n/a n/a n/a nla
n/a n/a n/a 81 806 Estos Ridge Road* 663-Dead End n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a 82 774 Bear Creek Road* NCL to dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 89 83 769 Rocky Hollow Road Rt. 1484 to Dead end n/a mia n/a nia
n/a n/a n/a 84 735 M~ Aflo Road* Rt. 602 to Rt. 626 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a 85 747 Preddy Creek Road* RL 600 to Rt. 640 n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 90 86 637 Dick Woods Roac~ Rt. 691 to Rt. 692 n/a n/a ~/a n/a
n/a n/a n/a 87 600 Stony Point Pass* 2.5 miles east to Rt. 23'/ n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 67 88 647 Ma<field Road Rt.22 to Dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a
n/a n/a 69 89 689 Pounding Creek Rd Rt. 250 to Rt. 635 n/a n/a n/a n/a
Projects in bold and In italics am new on [his year's pdor~ list
RRR=mads that meet rural rustic mad criteda Projects in bold are In the Development Area.
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined - RRR [280] other unpaved projects completed
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined [200] high staff ranking
unpaved mad, public request. R-O-W undetermined -RRR [270] no relative change
unpaved read, public request. R-O-W undetermined- RRR [360] re-prioritize( with updated data, width of shoulder andreadway
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [170] no change
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [210]
unpaved read, BOS request. R-O-W undetermlned- RRR [120]
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [120]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [t60]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [200]
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [140]
unpaved road, R-O-W not available- RRR [260]
unpaved read, Scottsvllle request, R-O-W undetermined. RRR [230]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [110]
unpaved read, Scoftsville request, R.O-W undetermined- RRR [140]
no relative change
rural rustic read eligibility
rerel rustic mad eligibility
rural rustic read etigibili[y
re-prioritize( .other RRR higher priority
re-prioritize( ,other RRR higher pdority
re-prioritize( ,other RRR higher priority
new project to list
rerel rustic road eligibility
new project to list
unpaved road, school request, R-O,W undetermined- RRR ILO0] new preject to list
unpaved read, public request. R-O-W undetermined- RRR [46] rural rustic read eligibility
unpaved road, school request, R-O-W undetermined. RRR [20] new preject to list
unpaved road, school request, R-O-W undetOrmined. RRR [80] new project to list
unpaved road, public request. R-O-W undetermined- RRR [20] rural rustic read eligibility
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR [50] new project to list
unpaved read. public request, R-O-W undetermined - [470] not eligible for RRR. pdodty lowered
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermine(~ [3401 not eligible for RRR, pdority lowered
VDOT 02-03 VDOT 03-04 County 02-03 County 03-04 Route Number and Name Location Est. Ad Est. Ad Estimated Estimated Description/Comments Reason For Change In
Secondary Proposed Approved Proposed From - To Date Date Cost Cost Priority From Last Year
Plan Ranking Ranking Ranking 2002 2003 2002 2003
Month-Year
n/a n/a 76 90 712 North Garden Road Route 29 to Route 760 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved mad, R-O-W not available [140] not eligible for RRR, pdodty lowered
n/a n/a 78 91 712 Coles Crossing Rd Rt. 713 to Rt. 705 n/a n/a n/a n/a unaaved road, Bas request, R-O-W undeterm ned [160] not eligible for RRR, pdodty lowered
nia n/a 75 92 645 Wildon Grove Rd Rt. 608 tO Orange CL n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [140] not eligible for RRR, priority lowered
n/a n/a 87 93 723 Sharon Road Route 6 to Route 626 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved mad, public request, R-O-W undetermined [g0] not eligible for RRR, pdority lowered
n/a n/a 71 94 736 White Mtn Road Rt.635- DE (incI.Sec.n.of Rt.636) n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved mad, public request, R-O-W undetermined [2001 not eligible for RRR, priority lowered
n/a n/a n/a 95 787 GIIlums Ridge Rd.* Route 682 to Route 708 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, public request, R.O-W undetermined [350] new project to ~ist
n/a n/a 80 96 682 Broad Axe Road Rt. 637 to to current paved seci n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, R-O-W not availabJe [140] not eligible for RRR, priority lowered
n/a n/a 81 97 605 Durrett Ridge Road Rt 743-Swift Run (includ.bddge n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved read, R-O-W not available [t 201 not eligible for RRR, pdodty lowered
n/a n/a 83 98 678 Owensville Road Route 676 to Route 614 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved mad, R-O-W not available [140] not eligible for RRR, pdodty lowered
nla nla 66 99 674 Sugar Ridge Road Route 614 to Route 673 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [100] not eligible for RRR, pdority lowered
n/a n/a 88 100 707 Blair Park Road Rt. 691 to Dead end n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, R-O-W undetermined [701 not eligible for RRR, pdodty lowered
n/a n/a n/a f 0 f 500 Stony Point Pass* 2.5 miles west to Rt. 20 n/a n/a n/a n/a unpaved road, school request, R.O~W undetermined [50] new project to list
$109,597,497 $110,537,326
Projects in bold.italicS and * are new on this year's priority list
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
RRR=roads that meet rural rustic mad criteria
DRAFT
VDOT's
Priority
List
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PRIORITY LIST FOR SECONDARY ROAD IMPROVEMENTS
2003-04 Through 2008-09
[SOME PROJECTS MAY NOT BE COMPLETED AS PRIORITIZED DUE TO PROJECT COMPLEXITY AND/OR AVAILABLE FUNDING]
County's Route Number and Name Location Estimated Estimated Description/Comments
Proposed From - To Advertisement Cost
Ranking Date
0
0
1
2
3
4
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Month-Year
0 County wide County wide Jun-09 $600,000
0 County wide Traffic mgmt. Program Jun-09 $300,000
1 625 What not Ferry Hatton Ferry Jun-09 $120,000
2 West Leigh Drive Rt 250 to .4 mi nor. Rt. 250 Dec-02 $500,000
3 Corville Farm Road Rt. 691-Greenwood Rd-D.E. Mar-03 $150,000
4 Meadow Creek Parkway Melbourne Rd to Rio Road Jun-05 $14,505,100
4 Meadow Creek Parkway Bridge over Meadow Creek Jun-05 $2,204,500
5 649 Airport Road Route 29 to Route 606 Dec-03 $12,103,950
6 651 Free State Road Free State Road $3,350,000
7 Meadow Creek Parkway Route 631 to Route 29 $37,500,000
8 691 Jarmans Gap Road Route 240 to Route 684 Aug-05 $5,300,000
9 649 Proffit Road Rt 29 to 1.6 miles east Jun-08 $9,500,000
10 601 Old Ivy Road Ivy Road to 250129 Byp Aug-10 $7,200,000
11 656 Georgetown Road Route 654 to Route 743 Dec-10 $3,200,000
12 781 Sunset Avenue NCL to Fifth St Extended Oct-ll $1,650,000
13 Southern Parkway Avon Str. to Fifth Str. $4,000,000
14 679 Grassmere Road .25 miles south of Rt 738 Aug-02 $100,000
15 631 Old Lynchburg Road 1.35 MI. S. 1-64 to Rt.708 Dec-08 $1,500,000
16 726 James River Road Route 795 to Route 1302 Dec-08 $800,000
17 744 Hunt Club Road near intersection with Rt. 22 Feb-02 $10,000
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Projects in bold and in italics are new on this year's priority list
signs,pipe,plant mix projects, same funding
Staff working with VDOT for traffic calming in the Hollymead area in 2001-02, multi-stops, ped. X-walk
operation of ferry
rural addition
rural addition
two lane design approved by County and Comm. Transport. Bd., includes bridge over CSX RR
(associated with project above)
widen to four lanes, bike lanes,sidewalks,RS98/99 [7,200]
proposal to construct road from Rio Rd to Free St Rd to replace substandard bridge [420]
new road, County also petitioning for eligibility for primary road funding RS 97/98
serve increased traf w/min widening, ped/bike access,RS 1999100 [2,200]
improve alignment, urban x-section with bike/sidewalk, RS 2006/2007 [6,300]
widen, improve alignment bike/sidewalk access,RS 2000101 [4,300]
spot improvement, pedestrian access,urban cross-section, RS 97~98 [16,000]
spot and inter. Improve., urban x-sect, upgrade 2 lane. RS 2005106, ped/bike access[1,100]
Extend to 5th St., with pedestrian/bike facility, and Neighborhood street design/speed
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [250]
spot improvements at various locations,RS 2001/02 [2,100]
spot improvement to improve sight distance,RS 2002/03 [2000]
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate. hazard elimination safety funds[640]
VDOT's
Priority
List
County's
Proposed
Ranking
Route Number and Name
Location
From - To
Estimated
Advertisement
Date
Estimated
Cost
Description/Comments
18 Hillsdale Drive
19 795 Blenheim Road
20 N/A
21 631 Rio Road
22 708 Dry Bridge Road
23 643 Polo Grounds Road
24 676 Tilman Road Road
25 614 Garth Road
26 601 Garth Road
27 738 Morgantown Road*
28 676 Owensville Road
29 616 Union Mill Road
30 606 Dickerson Road*
31 654 Barracks Road *
32 678 Owensville Road
33 732 Milton Road
34 810 Browns Gap Road
35 795 James Monroe Pky
641 Frays Mill Road
641 Frays Mill Road
36 743 Earlysville Road
37 729 Buck Island Rd
38 684 Half Mile Branch Road
39 641 Burnley Station Road
40 602 Howardsville Tnpk
41 640 Gilbert Station Road
Projects in bold and in italics are new on this year's priodty list
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Greenbrier Dr. to Seminole Sq.
Intersection of Route 790
Route 240 to Route 250
Rio Rd @ Pen Park Lane
Railroad overpass
Route 29 to Route 649
Intersection of Route 250
Intersection of Rt. 676
Intersection of Route 658
at Route 250
Intersection of Route 601
FCL to Route 759
Route 649 to Route 743
Intersection of Route
Intersection of Route 250
Intersection of 762
Intersection of Route 789
Intersection of Route 53
Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run
Rt. 641 @ Jacob Run
Rivanna River to Rt 843
Rt. 53 to Rt. 1120
Rt. 691 to Rt. 797
Norfolk Southern RR
.01 miles south Route 626
Norfolk Southern RR
Month-Year
$300,000
N/A
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
$2OO,OOO
N/A
$~,2oo, ooo
$650,000
$550,000
$350,000
$440,000
$60,000
$1,000,000
new connector road between Hiilsdale Rd and Hydraulic Rd, most of project is located in City limits
intersection improvement. [670]
interconnecting road as per Crozet Master Plan
Inter. improve, requested by City, to be funded from private source [23,000]
school transp. Dept. request, Iow weigi~t limit
public req. to improv align, spot improv, safety related, RS 2004/05 [1000]
intersection improvement,RS 2003/04 [4,800]
intersection ~mprovement, public request [3100]
add turning lane at Barracks Farm Road, CATS recomm.
intersection improvement, cul-de.sac road
intersection improvement
improve alignment
[6,300]
[1200]
[5400]
[4,600]
improve to handle projected traffic, CHART recommendation, RS 2002/03 [6,000]
intersection improvement, cul-de-sac road [6400]
intersection improvement [3,400]
spot improvement, requested by public [1,000]
Intersection improvement. RS 2003/04.[1,800]
recommended from CATS, intersection improvement. RS 2005/06 [2,700]
install box culvert, RS 2005/06, not a County pdority,a VDOT recommended safety project
install box culvert, no County Priority, a VDOT recommended safety project
public request to improv align, spot improv, safety related. RS 2004/05 [8,400]
improve road geometrics, two lane rural section [4400]
spot/safety improvement to serve increased traffic wi minimum widening [680]
bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [340]
Railroad crossing with no lights or gate [410]
bridge project with Iow sufficiency rating [170]
VDOT's County's
Priority Proposed
List Ranking
Route Number and Name
Locatloi~ Estimated Estimated
From - To Advertisement Cost
Date
Description/Comments
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
642 Red Hill Depot Road
671 Millington Road
692 Plank Road
708 Red Hill Road
676 Owensville Road
691 Park Road
678 Decca Lane
49
5O
51
52
53
743 Advance Mills Road
795 Hardware Street
732 Milton Road*
622 Albevanna Springs Rd
622 Albevanna Springs Rd
54 680 Browns Gap Tnpk
55 611 Jarmans Gap Road
56 1310 Ferry Street
57 682 Broadaxe Road
58 813 Starlight Road
15 59 737 Mountain Vista Road
16 60 708 Secretarys Road
17 61 702 Reservoir Road
18 62 640 Gilbert Station Road
19 63 633 Heards Mtn Road
20 64 606 Dickerson Road
21 65 769 Beam Road
22 66 623 Woods Edge Rd
Projects in bold and in italics are new on this year's priority list
RRR=roads that meet rural rustic road criteria
Month-Year
.28 miles northeast Rt.708
Intersection of Route 665
Route 29 to Route 712
Route 20 to Route 29
Route 614 to Route 1050
Park Road to Route 250
Intersection of Route 676
At Jacobs Run
Near inter, witt~ Rt. 20
at Rt. 53
Intersection of Route 795
Intersection of Route 773
Rt. 240 to Rt. 810
Off Route 691
.05 miles south of Rt. 6
Off Dick Woods Road
Off Route 712
Rt. 6 to Rt. 726 Dec-02
Route 795 to Route 620 Aug-03
Ramp to Dead end Dec-06
Route 641 to Route 747 Oct-06
Nelson CL to Route 29 Oct-07
Route 850 to Route 1030 Oct-08
Off Route 20 north Mar-08
Route 618 to dead end Oct-09
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Those projects underlined are currently in the Six Year funding cycle.
$650,000
$825,000
$1,401,586
$36O,O0O
$360,000
$1,336,073
$200,000
$365,000
Railroad crossing with no gate [80]
intersection improvement [370]
spot improvements, safety related [t ,200]
improve alignment [1,500]
spot improvements at several points, CATS recommendation [2,500]
extend to eastern 240/250 street system [640]
improve intersection, located near school, CATS recommendation [140]
improve approach to bridge [1,000]
spot improvement, requested by Scottsville [630]
intersection improvement, public request [1000]
intersection improvement [1000]
intersection improvement [1000]
spot improvements, public request [700]
Railroad crossing with no gate [210]
Railroad crossing with no gate [80]
spot improvements, public request [140]
school request,needs turn-around space [60]
unpaved road, full R-O-W not available [210]
unpaved read, full R-O-W not available [230]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined, sidewalks [1900]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR [300]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR [80]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined [360]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined - RRR [780]
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined -RRR [420]
VDOT's
Priority
List
Courlty's
Proposed
Ranking
Route Number and Name
Location
From - To
Estimated
Advertisement
Date
Estimated
Cost
Description/Comments
23
67 784 Doctors Crossing Route 600 to Route 640
68 712 Coles Crossing Rd Rt. 711 to Rt. 692
69 666 Allen Road Route 664 to Dead end
70 688 Midway Road Rt. 635 to Rt. 824
71 769 Rocky Hollow Road Rt. 1484 to Dead end
72 734 Bishop Hill Road Route 795 to Rt. 1807
73 685 Bunker Hill Road Route 616 to Dead end
74 762 Rose Hill Church Ln Rt. 732 to Deand End
75 704 Fortune Lane Rt. 715 to Dead End
76 760 Red Hill School Road Route 29 to Dead End
77 640 Gilbert Station Road Rt.747 to Rt. 784
78 668 Walnut Level Road Rt. 810 to dead end
79 640 Gilbert Station Road Route 784 to Route 20
80 790 Holly Road* Rt. 795 to dead end
81 608 Happy Creek Road Route 645 to Route 646
82 806 Estes Ridge Road* 663.Dead End
83 735 Mt. Alto Road* Rt. 602 to Rt. 626
84 747 Preddy Creek Road* Rt. 600 to Rt. 640
85 637 Dick Woods Road Rt. 691 to Rt. 692
86 600 Stony Point Pass* 2.5 miles east to Rt.
87 647 Maxfield Road Rt.22 to Dead end
88 689 Pounding Creek Rd Rt. 250 to Rt. 635
89 712 North Garden RoaC Route 29 to Route 760
Projects in bold end in italics are new on this year's priority list
RRR=roads that meet rural rustic road criteria
Month-Year
Oct-11
$1,238,t05
$450,000
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
Those projects underlined are currently in the Six Year funding cycle.
unpaved road, public request,
unpaved road, public request,
unpaved road, public request,
unpaved road, public request,
unpaved road, public request,
unpaved road, public request,
R-O-W undetermined - RRR
R-O-W undetermined
R-O-W undetermined -RRR
R-O-W undetermined- RRR
R-O-W undetermined- RRR
R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, BOS request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, R-O-W not available- RRR
unpaved road, Scottsville request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, Scottsville request, R-O.W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, school request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, school request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined- RRR
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, R-O-W not available
[280]
[200]
[270]
[360]
[46]
[170]
[210]
[120]
[120]
[160]
[200]
[140]
[260]
[230]
[11 o]
[140]
[20]
[aO]
[20]
[50]
[470]
[340]
[140]
RS - Revenue Shadng
VDOT's
Priority
List
County's
Proposed
Ranking
Route Number and Name
Location Estimated
From - To Advertisement
Date
Estimated
Cost
Description/Comments
90 712 Coles Crossing Rd
91 645 Wildon Grove Rd
92 723 Sharon Road
93 736 White Mtn Road
94 787 Gillums Ridge Rd.
95 682 Broad Axe Road
96 605 Durrett Ridge Road
97 678 Owensville Road
98 674 Sugar Ridge Road
99 707 Blair Park Road
100 600 Stony Point Pass*
Month-Year
Pt. 713 to Rt. 795
Rt. 608 to Orange CL
Route 6 to Route 626
Rt. 635 to Dead End (incl. section n. of Rt. 636)
Route 682 to Route 708
Rt. 637 to to current paved sections
Rt. 743 to Swift Run (including bridge)
Route 676 to Route 614
Route 614 to Route 673
Rt. 691 to Dead end
2.5 miles west to Rt. 20
unpaved road, BOS request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved read, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, R-O-W not available
unpaved read, R-O-W not available
unpaved road, R-O-W not available
unpaved road, public request, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved read, R-O-W undetermined
unpaved road, school request, R-O-W undetermined
[160]
[140]
[90]
[200]
[36o]
[140]
[120]
[140]
[100]
[70]
[501
$119,029,314
Projects in bold, italics and * are new on this year's priority list
Projects in bold are in the Development Area.
RRR=roads that meet rural rustic read criteria
SUCCESSIVE SUBSETTING METHOD FOR RANKING ALBEMARLE COUNTY
ROAD PROJECTS
A. Ma/or Reconstruction
1. Functional Class
2. AADT
3. A. School Depart Request
B. Fire/Rescue
4. Growth Management Policy
5. Pavement Width
6. Shoulder Width
7. Pavement Type
B. Unpaved Roads
1. Growth Management Policy
2. Rural Rustic Roads
3. A. School Department Request
B. Fire/Rescue
4. Functional Class
5. AADT
6. Road Width
7. Shoulder Width
8. Surface Type
9. Right of Way
C. Bricl,qe Replacement/improvement
1. VDOT Bridge Sufficiency Rating
2. AADT
3. A. School Department Request
B. Fire/Rescue
4. Functional Class
5. Growth Management Policy
6. Emergency Vehicle/Bus Access
7. weight limit - less than 12 tons and span length - 20 or more feet
8. Deck width
D. Spot Improvements
1. Growth Management Po/icy
2. Functional Class
3. AADT
4. A. School Department Request
B. Fire/Rescue
5. Pavement Width
6. Shoulder Width
7. Surface Type
E.
1.
2.
3.
5.
6.
7.
At-Grade Railroad Crossing
Existing Protection Devices
AAD T
A. School Department Request
B. Fire/Rescue
Number of Trains/Day
Growth Management Policy
Pavement Type
Sight Distance at Crossing
RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING
Agenda Item #: (D(~ -
Rural Rustic ;Roads Pilot Program Clerk's InJtialsL..._~
Staunton District = Verona Residency
2002 session of General Assembly passed legislation revising Section 33,1-70.1
of the Code. Authorized what has become to be known as Rural Rustic Road
legislation.
Rural Rustic Road legislation does not replace Pave-in-Place provision. Pave-in-
Place should be considered where drainage and slope improvements are
anticipated.
Pave-in-Place remains as a tool to use to pave grave~ roads also.
Borrowed heavily from Maryland's rural rustic road concepts. Virginia also used
the AASHTO Guidelines For Geometric Design of Very Low-Volume Local Roads
(ADT </= 400).
Pave-in-Place and Rural Rustic Road legislation, as well as the AASHTO
publication, represent an evolutionary change in the focus of the Department's
program to improve and pave dirt/gravel roads.
Governing body of any county must designate road or road segment as a Rural
Rustic Road. County must provide resolution requesting Department to hard-
surface road.
The Staunton District, Lexington and Verona Residencies, developed eight pilot
projects to be improved using the Rural Rustic Road concept. Several of these
projects will be completed prior to November 1, 2002.
Criteria:
· Must be an unpaved road already within the State Secondary System.
° Must carry at least 50 but no more than 500 vehicles per day and located in a
Iow-density development area.
Roadways are to be hard-surfaced within existing right of way and ditch-lines
using flexible standards, to preserve as much as possible adjacent trees,
vegetation, side slopes, and the rural rustic character along the. road in its current
state.
Public safety will not be compromised.
H:\SecondaryRoads\Ru ralRusticRoads\RRRBulletPaper.doC
Mill Race Road (Route 781)
Project 0781-007-P17, N501
Before Project
.,... .:::',... ... '.,, . '.'. ..... :' . .:,'..... ,.':~:.~......
After Project
Eagle Rock Lane (Route 721)
Project 0721-007-P16, N501
BefOre Project
After Project
Bailey Road (Route 742)
Project 0742-007-P 15, N501
Before Project
After Project
RECEIVED
P.O. Box 281
LEWIS & CLARK ,AR lg2003 Char10tteiville, VirginiaZ2902
. ~ ' P: (434) 985-2425
E X P L O R A TO R Y C E N T E R County of Altsemarie F: (434) 985-3534
O F V IR G [NI.A I N C,. - ~ County F~ectitive'$O~ .:.: Email: LandCEast@aoLcom
.... - : ' ' '~ ~'5- ~" www. ISd~oisandClarkEast.org.
March 6, 2003
President
Katherine E. Slaughter
Vice-President
Robert W. Jackson
Secretary
Francis McQ. Lawrence
Treasurer
Jean Myers
Board of Directors
Lindsay Dorrier
G. Lawson Drinkard
Elizabeth B. Gleason
Jane Sale Henley
Denny King
Charles E. Lewis
Christopher E. Murray
Blaine T. Phillips, Jr.
Meredith Richards. Ex-officio
Ingrid Smyer-Kelly
Roger B. Stein
Alex Stultz
James D. Stultz
Sally H. Thomas, Ex-officio
John W. Weil
Lawrence M. Zipptn
Advisory Board
John Adams
Daniella Alexander
Howell L. Bowen
John Bunch
Gladys Clark
Linwood Custalow
Dayton Duncan
Robert E. Gatten, J r.
Hugh Gildea
Charles H. Gleason, MD
Satyendra H. Huja
Katherine L. Imhoff
Peppy Linden
Forrest Marshall
Douglas Seefeldt
William G. Thomas
Herman Viola
White McKenzie Wallenborn, MD
Clara Belle Wheeler, MD
Jane Anne Young
Mr. Robert Tucker
County Executive
County of Albemarle
Albemarle County Office Building
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Dear Bob:
I understand from Fran Lawrence that the lease between the LCEC and
the County has been finalized. We very much appreciate the time that the
county and city attorneys have taken in drafting and reviewing this
document.
As you know, we want to develop an agreement so that the Lewis and
Clark Exploratory Center could use Darden Towe Park for its activities.
We will also ask the City to put us on an upcoming agenda.
I would like you to schedule a public hearing on the lease. We of course
wish to be able to attend and speak to the Board about our plans for the
Center and to answer any questions.
Could you call me to discuss what dates might be available? I can be
reached at 977-4090 during the day.
Thank you for your help.
Sincerely,
Katherine E. ~
President
Lewis and Clark Exploratory Center of Virginia, Inc.
Cc: Gary O'Connell Pat Mullaney
Pat Plochek
2
4
5
BOARD -TO
Date:..
April 2, 2003 - 10:30 a.m. AgendaItem#: ~
Clerk's Initials:._.__~::~ff~
A Monthly CommunicationsReport of activities from the Albemarle County School Board to
the Albemarle CoUnty Board of Supervisors.
Highlights: School Board Briefs February 13, March 6, March 13, and March 27
were provided via e-mail.
RECENT
ADMINISTRATIVE VACANCIES: Human Resources began recruitment
efforts to fill the following administrative vacancies for the 2003-04 school
year: Elementary School Principals, Middle School Principals, Monticello
High School Principal, Director of Curriculum and Instruction, and specific
teaching positions. National, regional, and local sources were used for
advertising, including professional journals, newspapers, educational
websites, association postings, and radio public service announcements. It is
important to note that there has been a large reduction in the number of
applications received at this time in comparison to the last time administrative
vacancies were nationally advertised.
REVISED POLICY JC: In an effort to continue commonality between the
School Board and the Board of Supervisors, Policy JC, School Attendance
Areas, was discussed at the February 27th meeting. The Board approved the
recommended changes at its March 13th meeting, allowing all Albemarle
County employees to benefit from this policy. Attachment 1 is a copy of
Policy JC.
SCHOOL CALENDAR: The Board decided at its March 6th meeting that
Spring Break would not be used for inclement weather make-up days, and
the school year would not extend beyond June 13.
The Board will act on a proposed calendar for the 2003/2004 school year at
the April 3rd meeting. Again this year, the Albemarle County School Division
has worked with the Charlottesville City Schools to develop a calendar with
correlating holidays, Spring break, and staff development days.
NUTRITION IN SCHOOLS: At the February 13th meeting, the
Superintendent was directed to form a committee of citizens, students,
teachers, staff, and health professionals to review the issue of vending
machine nutrition and provide recommendations to the Board in May.
JOINT MEETING WITH CITY SCHOOL BOARD: On March 20th, the
School Board met with the Charlottesville City School Board to discuss the
creation of an educational foundation and programs, or instructional areas
where cooperation between the County and the City could be beneficial.
Enthusiasm was generated by the possibility of creating a shared program
for newly identified students with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) and
English as a Second or Other Language (ESOL). Staff from both divisions
will present a feasibility study during the fall of 2003. The Charlottesville
City School Board passed a motion supporting an education foundation, and
there was consensus from the Albemarle School Board to place the foundation
on the April 3rd agenda for action.
STANFORD 9 TEST RESULTS: At the March 27th meeting, the Board
received a presentation from Dr. Kevin Hughes about the Fall 2002 Stanford 9
test results. Albemarle county students' average scores top the averages for
both Virginia and the nation, placing our division among the top 10% of 134
school divisions in Virginia. Due to recent state budget cuts, next year the
School Division will have to fund approximately $11,000 within its current
budget to continue the Stanford 9 component of state assessments.
Attachment 2 is the media release provided by Dr. Hughes citing specific
Stanford 9 information.
CIP - FY 2003/04 THROUGH 2007/08: At the March 27th meeting, the
Board received a CIP proposal for FY 2003/04 through 2007/08. The Board
will take actions on the proposed recommendations at the April 3rd meeting.
LONG-RANGE PLANNING COMMITTEE: The Rivanna District seat on
the Long-Range Planning Committee is currently vacant due to a member
resignation. Applications will be accepted until April 4th to fill the vacancy.
The Long-Range Planning Committee presented a report to the Board at the
March 27th meeting. The Committee was charged by the Board to present
options'and recommendations for possible straight feeder patterns within
Albemarle County. A proposed timeline for tasks associated with redistricting
framework was presented. The Board will discuss the recommendations and
receive more information from the Committee at its May 8th meeting.
FEAT URE ITEMS
BICYCLE AND HELMET GRANT: A grant was awarded from the
Virginia Department of Health to teachers at two Albemarle County schools
to purchase bicycles and helmets in an effort to promote healthy lifestyles to
the students. Attachment 3 is a summary of the grants.
Attachment 1
JC Page 1
SCHOOL ATTENDANCE AREAS
School attendance areas for each school are established by the School Board. The Board
discourages transfers across attendance areas.
Students shall attend the school in the attendance area in which they reside and to which they
are assigned, unless special permission is obtained per the criteria stated below· All requests must be
made in writing to the Superintendent.
Attendance areas will be established based upon the following factors:
99
??
??
??
??
the capacity of the schools;
lhe number of children of school age living in the area;
the natural boundaries, city limits, and major traffic arteries;
the safety of the students going to and from school;
the exceptional educational needs of the student; and
the need to provide cultural, racial, and economic balance.
Changes in attendance areas will be determined by the Board upon recommendation of the
Superintendent based on the need to provide for the orderly administration of the schools, the
competent instruction of the students, and the health, safety, best interests, and general welfare of all
students. A public hearing will be held prior to changes in school attendance areas.
Under no circumstances may a family maintain two residences for school attendance purposes.
It is the obligation of the school to know the complete residence status of each student and to see that
all comply with these requirements. Any change in residence must be bona fide. Detemmm' fion of what
constitutes a bona fide change of residence depends upon the facts of each case, but in order for a
change of residence to be considered bona fide, at least the following facts must exist: (1) the original
residence must be abandoned as a residence--that is, sold, rented or disposed of as a residence--and
must not be used as residence by any member of the family, (2) the entire family must make the change
and take with them the household goods and furniture appropriate to the circumstances, (3) the change
must be made with the intent that it is permanent.
Request for Transfer
Students may be granted permission to attend schools in another attendance area under one of
the following conditions:
A student whose parent or guardian changes residence after the end of the f~t semester
from one school attendance area to another school attendance area in the county may
continue in the school in which currently enrolled for the remainder of the current school
year if the parent or guardian so desires.
Albemarle County Public Schools
JC Page 2
A parent or guardian who is buying/bufl~g a home within another school attendance
area in the Division and fumishes appropriate documentation (i.e., building permit,
contract, completion date, geographic location, letter from builder), may be permitted to
enroll a student in the new school serving the new district if they will reside in the new
district for the majority of the school year.
A parent or guardian who is a resident of Albemarle County and an employee of
Albemarle County Public Schools or local government may request a transfer of his
child to another school. After consultation with both principals (or the department
head) involved, the Superintendent may approve the transfer to accommodate the
parent's work schedule. Approval of any request is discretionary and based upon the
supervisors recommendation and availability of space in the new school.
Seniors whose parents or guardian move from one attendance area to another
attendance area in the school division after the end of the first semester of their junior
year may be permitted to complete their final year in the high school they last attended.
A student may be permitted to attend Albemarle County Public Schools if a parent with
joint custody (papers required) resides in Albemarle County and the student lives with
this parent.
Whenever any student has been the victim of any crime against the person as set forth in
Virginia Code Sections 18.2-30 et seq., and such crime was committed by another
student attending classes in the school, or by any employee of the School Board, or by
any volunteer, contract worker or other person who regularly performs services in the
school, or if the crime was committed upon school property or on any school bus
owned or operated by the school division, the student (if an emancipated minor) or his
parent(s) shal! be permitted, upon written request, to transfer to another comparable
school within the school division, if space is available.
For purposes of this policy, "victim" shall mean any student who has been a victim of
crime, as stated herein and who has suffered physical, psychological, or economic harm
as a direct result of the commission of such crime.
Ho
After constdtation with both principals involved, the Superintendent may approve a
transfer request for curriculum requirements, specific medical reasons or extraordinary
reasons.
Requests for transfers to schools other than the one serving the student's residential area may be
approved only on an annual basis.
Albemarle County Public Schools
JC Page 3
Partial transportation for a student attending a school other than the one that normally serves the
student's attendance area may be provided on a space available basis on an established bus route from
an established bus stop. It will be the responsibility of the parent to Wansport the student to and from
the appropriate bus stop. If such transportation camot be provided, it will be the responsibility of the
parent to arrange tmusportation to and from school.
Appeal and Review
If not satisfied with the Superintendenfs decision(s) made under this policy, the parent/guardian
may appeal to the School Board.
Adopted:
Amended:
July 1, 1993
December 13, 1993; July 28, 1997; May 8, 2000; March 13, 2003
Legal Reft: Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, Sections 22.1-3, 22.1-3.3
Albemarle County Public Schools
Attachment 2
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
PUBLIC SCHOOLS
PUBLIC INFORMATION CENTER
WEBSITE: http://www, kl2albematle, otg
MEDIA RELEASE
For ~mmediate Release
DATE:
CONTACT:
PHONE:
March 28, 2003
Kevin Hughes, Data Analyst
296-5827
Albemarle County Stanford 9 Scores Rise Again and Other Important News
The Stanford 9 achievement test was administered in Fall 2002 to students in grades 4, 6, and 9 in
Albemarle County and throughout Virginia.
· Principals and teachers are excited to learn that once again our students show significant gains in all
sections of the national Stanford 9 tests.
Albemarle county students' average scores top the averages for both Virginia and the nation, in fact,
Albemarle County Stanford 9 scores place oUr division among the top 10% of 134 school divisions in
Virginia.
Dr. Hughes, data analyst for the division, attributes our students' success to:
1) the division's recent focus on literacy
2) clear Board targets for student performance
3) use of student data to make needed instructional changes
Highlights include:
· Reading: In grade 4, Albemarle County total reading exceeded the state average by 13 points and the
national average by 17 points. In grade 6, county students scored 14 points higher thanthe state average
and 24 points higher than the national one. In grade 9, Albemarle County scores exceeded the state
average by 8 points and the national one by 18 points.
· Mathematics: In grade 4, Albemarle County total mathematics exceeded the state average by 6 points and
the national average by 19 points, in grade 6, county students exceeded the state average by 12 points and
the national one by 29 points. In grade 9, county scores were 8 points over the state average and 13 points
over the national one.
· Language: At grade 4, county students scored 7 points over the state average and 20 points over the
national average for total language, in grade 6, Albemarle County scores exceeded the state average by 12
points and the national one by 18 points. In grade 9, county scores were 9 points over the state average
and 11 points over the national one.
Albemarle to pay for Stanford 9 testing out of local budget:
· The state recently announced that, in a cost-saving move, it would no longer fund statewide administration
of the Stanford 9.
· Albemarle County will continue to fund local administration of the Stanford 9 in order to provide parents,
teachers, and administrators with data to track our students' progress.
For more information, please contact Dr. Kevin Hughes, data analyst, at 296-5827 or khu.qhest'~,atbemarle.org
401 Mclntire Road * Charlottesville, VA 22902
Phone (434) 972-4055, Fax (434) 296-5869 * WEB SITE: http://www.kl2albemarle.org
Attachment 3
Bicycle Grant Summary
· From the VA Dept. of Health to purchase bicycles for use in the schools
· Awarded to Mary Alice Bond at Greer and Kathy Gay at Baker-Butler
Both teachers participated in a 16-hour workshop last summer in order to be
eligible for the grant.
Bicycles are on order from Extreme Sports and should be delivered after Spring
Break. In order to receive the best price, we combined our order with an order
from ACCT. ACCT also received a grant for bicycles for use in the City Schools.
Helmet Grant
· Both teachers also applied for an additional grant through the Dept. of Health for
bicycle helmets and have received funding to purchase helmets.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Thomas P. Haught -- Request to amend Albemarle County
Service Authority Jurisdictional Area
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To consider amending the ACSA Jurisdictional Area
boundary to provide sewer service to Tax Map 32A, Section
3B, Parcels 18 and 19.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Biel
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
ITEM NUMBER:
IN FORMATION:
INFORMATION:
Yes
?
The applicant is requesting ACSA Jurisdictional Area designation for sewer service to two half-acre lots located on the north side
of Proffit Road (Rt. 649), approximately 400 feet west of Pritchett Lane (Attachment A - applicant's request, Attachment B -
location and tax map). The property is located within the designated Development Areas, in the Rivanna Magisterial District.
Parcel 18 is the applicant's residence and Parcel 19 is currently a vacant lot owned by the applicant. The applicant would like to
construct a new dwelling on Parcel 19; however, the request for a sewer permit was denied by the health Department due to the
"presence of water table features in the shallow soil horizons." Also, the septic system that serves the applicant's residence on
Parcel 19 is marginal.
The site is located in the Springfield Subdivision, which is within the Hollymead Community. The site is within the ACSA
Jurisdictional Area designated for water only (Attachment C). The applicant's lots are approximately 1,300 feet east of the ACSA
Jurisdictional Area that provides both water and sewer.
DISCUSSION:
The subject property is located in the Urban Area Hollymead Community. The Comprehensive Plan provides the following
-concerning the provision of water and sewer service to the development Areas:
"General Principle: Urban Areas, Communities, and Villages are to be served by public water and sewer (p. 114)."
"Provide water and sewer service only to areas within the ACSA Jurisdictional Areas (p. 130)."
"Follow the boundaries of the designated Development Areas in delineating Jurisdictional Areas (p.130)."
There is a substantial area of the Hollymead Community in this subject area that is not included in the ACSA Jurisdictional Area
at this time (Attachments B & C). This area is formed by the eastern side of Route 29, extending north to the North Fork Rivanna
River, proceeding east and winding along the North Fork Rivanna River to the end of Pritchett Lane, following Pritchett Lane
southwest to the Northwood Mobile Home Park (Attachments B & C). As noted above, the Comprehensive Plan recommends,
serving Development Areas with public water and sewer. Therefore, this quadrant of the Hollymead Community should be
designated as part of the ACSA Jurisdictional Area for public water and sewer service. Upon satisfying the legal notifications, a
public hearing will be scheduled in the near future to consider including this quadrant of the Hollymead Community in the ACSA
Jurisdictional Area for water and sewer service.
RECOMM EN DATION:
As a general policy, staff has advised that public utility capacity should be reserved to support development of designated
Development Areas. This request is consistent with public utility policy of the Corn prehensive Plan. Since this property is located
within a designated Development Area, the provision of both water and sewer service to the properties would be consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan public utility policy. Therefore, staff recommends the Board of Supervisors approve this request for
public sewer service to(Parcel 32A, Section 3B, Parcels 18 and 19.
Attachments: A- Application; B - Location and Tax Map; C - Jurisdictional Area Map
03.038
APPLICATION TO AMEND THE
SERVICE AUTHORITY
RISDICTIONAL AREAS
ATTACHMENT A
County of Albemarle
Department of Planning and Community Development
401 McIntiro Road
Charlottesville, VA 229024596
804 296-5823
CO-APPLICANT Name (or agent, if any):
Signature:
Address:
Phone:
Phone:
JURISDICTIONAL AREA DESIGNATION REQUESTED:
,J~~ Sewer
[] Water Only to Existing Structure(s)
PROPERTY LOCATION (Address)
Tax Map(s)/Parcel Number(s): ,~
3/¥)'
[] Water Only
[] Limited Service (Describe in Justification
below)
CURRENT sERVICE AREA DESIGNATION (If any):
[] Water and Sewer [~Water Only
[] Water Only to Existing Structures [] Limited Service
For Staff Use Only
DATE SUBMITTED: DATE $130 FEE PAID:
PROPERTY IS LOCATED (Check Appropriate):
[] Inside or [] Outside a Growth Area? [] Adjacent to SAJA?
[] Inside or [] Outside a Water-Supply Watershed? [] Adjacent to a Growth Area?
Location and distance of Water/sewer line proposed to provide service
REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT ADOPTED: [] Yes [] No Date of Action
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
In Cooperation with the
State Department of Health
Office of Environmental Health
Phone (804) 972-6259
FAX (8O4) 972-4310
Thomas Jefferson Health District
1138 Rose Hill Drive
P. O. Box 7546
Charlo~_~v_ ille,.. Virginia. 22g06
December 17, 2002
Thomas and Francesa Itaught
3005 Cove Lane
Charlottesville, Virginia 22911
Re.'
Sewage Disposal System Application
Tax Map 32A-3-B-19
Route 649, Albemarle County, Virginia
ALBEMARLE--- ' .: ~ -
FUJVANNA COUNTY
GREENE COUNTY (STANARDSVlLt. E)
LOUISA COLIN'P! (LOUISA}
NELSON COUNTY (LOVINGSTON}
Dear Mr. and Mrs. Haught:
Your application for a Sewage Disposal System Construction Permit filed on October 31, 2002 with the Albemarle
County Itealth Department has been evaluated in accordance with the requirements contained in the Code of
Virginia, Section 32.1-163, the Sewage Handlin~ and Disposal Regulations, and current agency policy and
procedures for processing applications for on-site sewage disposal systems.
Based on the information filed with your application and the site evaluation conducted by the Departments
representattve, your application for a Sewage Disposal System Construction Permit for the above referenced
location is denied for a conventional sewage disposal system in the areas investigated by the health deparm~ent. The
Department's f'mdings and reasons for denial in the areas examined, are set forth in item A:
A. Presence of water table features in the shallow soil horizons.
Ia accordance with the Virginia Administrative Process Act, Title 9, Chapter 1.1:1 and Section 32.1-t64.1 of the
Code of Virginia, this letter is to further infnrm you of your right to appeal from the decision of the Department,
which is specified in this letter.
If you desire to pursue your right to appeal in which-you may at your discretion be represented by counsel, the first
step in the appeal process is to submit to Susan L. McLeod, M.D., M.P.H., P.O. Box 7546, Charlottesville, Virginia
22906, Phone (804) 972-6219, a written request detailing and outlining all the facts and such data or infomaation
which forms the basis for you appeal within 30 days of receipt of this letter.
tf this office may be of further service to you regarding your application, please let us know.
Environmental Health Specialist. Senior
Jan. 13, 2003
Albemarle County Service Authority
168 Spotnap Road
PO Box 2738
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: Sewage disposal System Application
Tax Map 32A-3-B-19
RT 649 Albemarle County, Virginia
Dear Sirs:
My application for a Sewage Disposal System Construction Permit filed October 31, 2002
was denied, as conveyed in Mr. William Loth's letter to me dated December 17, 2002.,
copy attached.
I desire to obtain sewer service fi.om the Albemarle County Service Authority.
The Albemarle County Service Authority sewer line currently exists at a higher elevation
approx 50 yards, from this property, across RT 649 ( Proffit Road) serving Forest Lakes
North residences.
I understand that to obtain this service, I would have to obtain right of ways, install a
grinder pump, and install the sewer line, including crossing under Rt. 649. I further desire
that this installation would also provide the sewer service for the lot I currently own
adjacent to the subject lot, which is on a septic system and where water is supplied by
Albemarle Cou.nty Service Authority( account 0721455520).
Please advise how I may obtain the necessary permits and cost analysis to proceed with
this project.
Sincerely Yours,
Thomas p. Haught
3005 Cove Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22911
434 964 1837
434 981 5452 Cell
frantom ~adelphia.net
Albemarle County
Service
,January 17, 2003
We received your lelter and VDH review for wastewal~rdisposal on Pro~ Rom:l. Tax Map
32A, ~ 3B, Parceb 18 ~ 19 a~ not in the Sen'k:e Aulhor~s ~ area. As such you
c= Wayne Cineeg
Paul A. ,~, P.E.
D~cSorofEng~
i68 Spotnap Road · P.O. Box 2738 · Charloltesviile, VA 22902 · Tel (804} 977-4511 · Fax (804} 979-0698
www. acsanet.com
ACSA REQUEST FOR
WATER & SEWER SERVICE
I INCll = IIX)I~ I-I-;ET
ATTACHMENT B
'032A0 .-- ....,
--'0o- . .... ,'t~'dn~r~t o~
01800 & :19 //'"','.
J PIHiRIOG[ L# ·
EXISTING ACSA JURISDICTIONAL
AREA DESIGNATIONS
· --- Streams and Rivers N
~-~ Parcel Lines W-~E
I~ ACSA Designation - Water Only S
~.,.,, ."-}, ACSA Designation - Water to Existing Structures Only
~ ACSA Designation - Water & Sewer
ATTACHMENT C
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
/
I
¢" ":' '" 1:~..' '" Sit'e/
.; ~,,: , , ,~:':;, ,.,,.,,-'-'-'"-"
Pi'4.r-'!),'~RFD I~Y -OI i "' "'- "' """ ..... I SI
.~.,": ~)~ ~.~:(,~.,l~/~.'Hk, )ATA RVICI ,GI)S;-
THIS MAP IS FOR DISPLAY PURPOSES ONLY. 2/21/03
%`
%.
~0 500 1,000
/
/
/
Feet
2,000
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Annual Real Estate Reassessments
SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Staff report on annual versus biennial reassessment process.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Woodzell; Ms. White
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION: X
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Department of Finance presented the Board with information on the reassessment process at the February 5th meeting. At
that time, the Board expressed an interest in the possibility of changing to an annual reassessment process, rather than the
current biennial review. Staff indicated at the time that information on an annual process vs. biennial reassessment would be
brought back to the Board.
Current Assessment Process
The County of Albemarle consists of approximately 740 square miles and currently contains 36,611 real estate parcels. These
parcels are assessed on a biennial basis by the County Assessor's office. Office staff consists of fourteen employees: a County
Assess°r, Deputy County Assessor, seven appraisers, tax supervisor, and four clerical staff.
The current assessment process takes approximately one and one-half years to complete. Each appraiser is assigned a
geographical area to assess and is responsible for assigning value to approximately 5,000 parcels. During this eighteen-month
process, all parcels are visited and reviewed by the assigned appraiser. In addition, values are assigned for new construction that
may have occurred; if applicable, the land use status is reviewed; and values are assigned to parcels that have been newly
created by subdivision of property. The Assessor's Office attempts to visit every parcel during the reassessment process.
In 1999, the assessment process changed from a completely manual process to a computer assisted mass appraisal (CAMA)
process. With this system, every cost schedule associated with CAMA is updated to accurately reflect current market conditions
and costs prior to the start of the reassessment process. These tables assist the appraisers in arriving at their property valuations.
In addition to increasing the efficiency of assessment operations, the CAMA software speeds mathematical computations and
allows extraction of data for reports and analyses. It also allows the appraisers to adjuSt costs closer to the effective date of the
reassessment, thereby making assessments more acCurate relative to the most recent market data.
DISCUSSION:
Annual Assessment Process
Currently, annual assessments are being conducted in 10 out of 80 counties and 15 out of 35 cities in the Commonwealth. Of the
remaining counties and cities, 20 conduct their assessments on a biennial basis with the remaining localities performing their
assessments every 3-6 years
Staff conducted a Survey of the localities conducting annual assessments to determine the following: number of parcels, ratio of
develOped vs, undeveloped land, appraisal staffing levels, percentage of parcels visited each year, cycle of parcel review, and
sales ratio information. This data is summarized in Exhibit A.
The annual assessment process will take approximately nine to ten months to complete. This condensed timeframe will require
that the majority of the assessments be completed from sales ratio analysis conducted in the office. It is anticipated that physical
inspection of properties will be limited to those parcels which have sold, have a current building permit, or whose owner has
requested a review.
AGENDA TITLE:
Annual Real Estate Reassessments
April 2, 2003
Page 2
This limited timeframe will also require the reduction of the appea period to the County Assessor from 60 days to 30 days and to
the Board of Equalization from 30 days to 15 days. These appeals periods would be in line with the condensed timeframe
req ui red for an annual assessment program.
It is anticipated that the timeline for office workflow would be adjusted as follows:
Process Biennial Assessment Annual Assessment
Reassessment December 31 December 31
Notices Mailed
Assessment January 1 - February 28 January 1 January 31
appeal hearings
Board of March 1 - March 31 February 1 - February 15
Equalization
reviews
Inspection of new
properties
applying fOr land January 1 - February 28 February 16 - March1
use and parcel
divisions
New Construction March 1 - May 31 On-going
New Cost Tables April 1 - May 31 February 1 - February 28
Established
Reassessment June 1 (odd yr.) to March I December 15
work period December 15 (even yr.)
Benefits of Annual Assessments
· Provides a more current picture of the property tax basis;
· Increases the borrowing capacity of local governments since the maximum amount a local government can borrow is usually
limited to a certain ratio of debt to total assessed value;
· A higher tax base can result in a higher bond rating and a lower interest rate;
· Assessments are a more accurate reflection of current fair market value, especially in rapidly increasing or declining markets;
· Assessment accuracy is essential to property assessment and can have legal benefits;
· Taxpayers and the courts are becoming more cognizant of the desirability of annual assessments in order to secure a just
valuation of property for taxation.
· Annual appraisals result in less dramatic changes in property values.
Disadvantages of Annual Assessments
· Costs associated with additional operating expense would result in an increase in on-going costs of approximately $16,000 per
year for mailing costs and reassessment notice forms.
· Appeal process would need to be shortened in order to accomplish all annual workload deadlines for both appraisal staff and
Board of Equalization;
· Market trends and sales ratio analysis, rather than a physical inspection, would be used to assess the majority of parcels,
therefore appraisers will be less familiar with individual parcels.
· In a declining market, the impact on the tax base will be more immediate, possibly requiring a rate increase to maintain
revenue levels.
AGENDA TITLE:
Annual Real Estate Reassessments
April 2, 2003
Page 3
· Parcels that are currently under the Land Use Taxation Program may not be subject to a physical inspection every two years,
therefore, these parcels may not be immediately recognized should they fail to meet or maintain the requirements of the
program.
· Increases will have a more immediate impact on the Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City.
Implementation of Annual Assessments
Prior to implementation of annual assessments, several items will need to be addressed.
Albemarle County Code Sections 15-1000, Biennial assessment of real estate, and Section 15-1002, .Time limits for appeals of
real estate assessments, will have to be amended. This requires advertisement of the proposed code changes followed by a
public hearing.
The assessment software currently being used for the computer mass appraisal system (CAMA), SMDA 2000, is capable of
supporting the annual reassessment process without any significant software or programming changes at this time. The
software vendor has, however, advised us that support for SMDA 2000 is gradually being phased out and replaced by Proval
Plus software. Prior to the implementation of annual assessments, staff would recommend that the migration from SMDA
2000 to Proval Plus be completed thereby lessening the learning curve associated with both the change in assessment
process and the new computer software. This software change is anticipated to cost approximately $25,000 to $30,000 and
will not be available until mid to late May.
A review of the appraisal staff assignments and job descriptions should be conducted. In reviewing other localities that assess
annually, most localities have one position dedicated to commercial appraisals, one position that serves as an appraisal
reviewer, with the remaining staff conducting residential appraisals. Staff believes that one appraiser position will be required
to conduct commercial appraisals and that an appraisal reviewer is essential due to the quantity of appraisals required within
the limited timeframe given to complete the annual assessment process.
Education of the public regarding the change in assessment process should also be addressed. Staff would recommend that
the change in assessment process and reasons why this change in necessary be promoted to the public through press
releases and other media prior to implementation,
RECOMMENDATION:
Annual assessment is feasible. The CAMA System permits annual assessments with some minor modifications. At this time staff
believes the change from biennial to annual assessments can be accomplished without additional staff. However, with an annual
growth of approximately 725 parcels per year, additional staff: may be required in the next three to four years.
Due to the issues identified above relating to staffing realignments, programming changes, and impaCt on workflow processes,
staff: believes immediate implementation is unrealistic. If the Board desires to begin annual assessments, staff would
recommend implementation in 2005 efffective for the 2006 tax year.
03.045
E
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Proposed FY 2003 Budget Amendment
SUBJECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Public Hearing on the Proposed FY 2003 Budget
Amendment in the amount of $555,035.68 and request
approval of the amendment and of Appropriations# 2003039,
2003040, 2003041,2003042, 2003043, 2003044, 2003045,
2003046, 2003047, and 2003048 to provide funds for various
General Government and School programs.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Breeden; Ms. White
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENTAGENDA:
ITEM NUMBER:
IN FORMATION:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Code of Virginia § 15.2-2507 stipulates that any locality may amend its budg.et ,~, ~t~(l~gregate amount to be
appropriated during the current fiscal year as shown in the currently adopted budge. Ho,,~ever, any such amendment which
exceeds one percent of the total expenditures shown in the currently adopted bd~get or the sum qf ~00,000,-Whichever is
lesser, must be accomplished by first publishing a notice of a meeting and h~)ldi~g a public heari~gbefore amending the
budget. The Code section applies to all County funds, i.e., General Fund, Capital Funds, E-911, School Self-Sustaining, etc.
DISCUSSION:
This proposed FY 2003 Budget Amendment totals $555,035.68. The estimated expenses and revenues included in the
proposed amendment are shown below:
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES
General Fund
General Government Programs/Grants
School Fund
School Programs/Grants
$ 1,000.00
104,131.79
405,309.30
44,594.59
TOTAL ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES -All Funds
$ 555,035.68
ESTIMATED REVENUES
Local Revenues
State Revenues
Federal Revenues
Fund Balances
29,467.00
25,430.00
109,131.79
391,006.89
TOTAL ESTIMATED REVENUES- All Funds
$ 555,035.68
This budget amendment is comprised of ten (10) new appropriations as follows: two appropriations are for school programs in
the amount of $246,663.89; one appropriation requesting re-appropriation of funds in the school division in the amount of
$203,240.00; three appropriations are grants for County Police Department programs totaling $14,186~51; one appropriation for
grant funds for Offender Aid & Restoration totaling $26,366.00; one appropriation for a contribution to the Housing Office
totaling $1,000.00; and one appropriation of $63,579.28 for the County Police and Fire Rescue Departments.
A detailed description of these appropriations is provided on Attachment A.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends approval, after the public hearing, of the FY 2003 Budget Amendment in the amount of $555,035.68, and
then approval of Appropriations #2003039, 2003040, 2003041,2003042, 2003043, 2003044, 2003045, 2003046, 2003047, and
2003048 as described on Attachment. A, to provide funds for various General Government and School programs.
03.037
Appropriation 2003039 $8,073.30
Baker Butler Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $4,440.00 from the Baker Butler PTO.
This donation will be used to purchase materials for a TV studio for the students at the school.
Murray Elementary School received donations in the amount of $1,725.00. Dr. David Hamer donated $1,000.00
and Martin Art & Design donated $25.00 to be used for arts and cultural enrichment programs for the school.
Wylie Cooke, III donated $100.00 and Dr. Jeffrey Barth donated $600.00 to be used to help finance the Lap
Tops for Teachers Project.
Western Albemarle High School received a donation in the amount of $1,000.00 from the Frederick S. Upton
Foundation. This donation will be used to support the Fine Arts Program at the school.
Broadus Wood Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $908.30 from the Broadus Wood PTO.
This donation will be used to pay the salary of theSpanish teacher at Broadus Wood Elementary School.
Apr)ro~)riation 2003040
$ 26,366.00
Offender Aid & Restoration (OAR) and Jefferson Area Community Corrections provide services to adult
offenders while incarcerated and provides services to those released into the jurisdictions served by OAR. The
Department of Criminal Justice Services has awarded OAR a grant in the amount of $26,366. The awarded
grant monies will partia!ly fund salaries, benefits, travel, and other operating expenses for Employment Case
Managers, Volunteer Coordinator/Employment Case Manager, and Assist DirectodProject Director. Local match
monies in the amount of $8,789 will be provided from the current contributions made to OAR by the County, City
of Charlottesville, and United Way.
Appropriation 2003041
$ 3,750.0n
The Albemarle County Police Department gets 10 to 15 requests a month to target the same specific "problem
areas" in the County. The Division of Motor Vehicles has awarded $3,750 to the Police Department to purchase
a traffic monitoring and data collection device (TMD). This device will be used to study the traffic activity in
specific areas and collect data necessary to properly handle citizen/community complaints. Any excess monies
associated with this project will be handled through the department budget.
Appropriation 2003042
$ 5,936.5'1
The Bureau of Justice has awarded funding in the amount of $5,936.51 to the Albemarle County Police
Department for the purchase of bulletproof vests. The award funds cannot exceed 50% of the total cost. All
excess monies associated with this project will be handled through the department budget.
Appropriation 2003043
$ 4,500.00
The busiest times for major shopping in the County occur during the Thanksgiving to New Years holiday season.
December tends to have the highest frequency of traffic accidents, shopping thefts, partying, and socializing.
DUI's are at their highest level during this season also. The Division of Motor Vehicles has awarded the Police
Department a $4,500 grant to support 150 hours of traffic safety overtime activities as part of the larger efforts of
Operation Safe Holiday. There is no local match.
Ar)r)ror~riation 2003044
$ 44,594.5-q
Albemarle County Public Schools received a grant from the State Department of Education in the amount of
$24,430.00 for the Individualized Student Alternative Education Program. The Individualized Student Alternative
Education Program (ISAEP) provides counseling, academic and occupational services to address a growing
population of students at risk of dropping out of school, not meeting attendance requirements, and/or
academically not meeting the requirements for a standard high school diploma. This program will supplement
existing GED services by developing specialized occupational training and employment necessary for students
to become productive and contribUting citizens. The Charlottesville/Albemarle Technical Education Center
(CATEC) will administer the ISAEP program for Albemarle County Public Schools.
Stony Point Elementary School has been selected by the University of Virginia to receive funding in the amount
of $11,568.70 for Project BUILD (Bridges of Understanding to Inclusive Literacy Development Program). This
project will help identify patterns in thinking, communication and actions that will improve teaching and learning
and identify contexts wherein these efforts can be created and sustained over time.
The Jefferson Region Destination Imagination (DI) will provide a regional DI competition for county students and
surrounding school districts. Of the 70 teams that participate, about 25 will be from Albemarle County. Team
registration fees, t-shirt sales and contributions in the amount of $7,200.00 a fund balance of $1,395.89 will help
cover expenses incurred. Albemarle County will continue as fiscal agent for our region.
Appropriation 2003045 $ 63,579.2R
Albemarle County will be receiving grant funds in the amount of $63,579.28 to assist in the preparetion of
response to incidents involving mass destruction weapons. These funds will be split 50/50 between Fire/Rescue
and the Police Department. The equipment purchased under these grents must come only from the commodity
areas targeted by the Federel government. A portion of these monies, $3,777.72, must be used by March 23,
2003, leaving $59,801.56 to be used by July 31, 2004. There is no local match.
Appropriation 2003046
$1,000.0o
The Virginia Housing Development Authority has provided $1,000 in funding to cover staff's attendance at a
housing conference in Washington, D.C.
Appropriation 2003047 $ 203,240.00
Re-appropriation of $184,796.00 of school carryover funds and $18,444.00 of building rental funds. School
Board Policy DB-E allows schools to carry forward up to 10% of their operational budgets from year to year.
Policy KG-R allows 40% of the base fees collected for building rental to be returned to each school.
Appropriation 2003048
$193,996.0n
Baker Butler Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $600.00 from the Baker Butler PTO. This
donation will be used to purchase a set of scales for the school and to help pay for an artist to design and build a
sculpture for the school.
Murray Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $100.00 from Nancy Letteri. This donation will
be used to help support culturel enrichment and technology replacement. Murray Elementary School also
received a donation in the amount of $400.00 from Teresa and George Hashisaki and a donation in the amount
of $25.00 form David and Joan Gilrain. These donations will be used to help support the purchase of wireless
laptop computers for staff and students..
Monticello High SchOol received a donation in the amount of $1,500.00 from State Farm. This donation will be
used to purchase instructional materials and athletic materials for the school.
Albemarle County Public Schools received a grant award in the amount of $5,000.00 from the Virginia
Department of Health's Center for Disease Control. The Bicycle Education Grant funds will give students and
opportunity to increase school and community bike safety awareness and promote lifetime fitness with the
purchase of bicycles and safety equipment.
Currently Albemarle County Schools is paying $295,925.00 in budgeted recurring funds to service the debt
associated with a VRS early retirement program that was offered about 8.5 years ago. This payment is based
upon a 10-year payback at 8% interest, compounded quarterly. We have been making full payments on this
debt each July 1 in order to reduce the overall interest paid. For the FY2003/04 budget, we have again planned
to make a $295,925.00 payment on this debt. During the current budget process, there was discussion of
appropriate use of one-time funds to meet FY03/04 budget needs. This VRS early retirement debt could be fully
paid in the current fiscal year, which would reduce the FY03/04 expenses by $295,925.00. Full payoff of this
debt would require a payment of $379,129.00 to be made no later than mid-April 2003 (interest of 2% would be
assessed if payment were made later than this timeframe). A payment of this amount would constitute an
appropriate use of one-time funds to reduce expenses for FY03/04 and to reduce our overall interest paid by
$14,262.00.
FMS2 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE NUMBER 2003 039
REVIS~'D 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM ' DATE
· BATCH #
EXPLANATION: AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND DONATED FUNDS.
:' SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
I 2217 61101 601300 Inst/RecSupplies J 'i "1 4,440.00 i
I 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment J i~_,.....~ 1,200.00 1
I 2215 61411 580000 Misc. Expenses J ! ....... ,_1,,I 525.00 ~
I 2302 61411 580000 Misc. Expenses J ~.~r___]~,~ ' 1,000.00 ~
I 2201 61101 132100 P/TWages-Teacher J i I 838.85 i
I 2201 61101 132100 FICA J i-'~'~ 69.45 i
J
2 2000 18100 181109 Donation J 2 8,073.30
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
I J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
'OTAL t 6,146.60 8,073.30 8,073.30
I
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 02/05103
APPROVED BY: | · DATE:
iFMS2 ~' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ............. NUMBER ~)3--'(~~ .........................................................
!REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
i BATCH #
iEXPLANATION: GRANT FUNDS FOR OAR PAPIS GRANT.
i SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
!TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION C0D_,,,,,~,,IAMOUNT ............... p_~BI_T ........... _.~J_~.~,****~,R.~I.~ ...........
! 1 1520 29406 566121 PAPIS GRANT J li 26,366.00
~ 2 1520 33000 330409 PAPIS GRANT J 2i 26,366.00
i J
1520 0501 EST REVENUE J 26,366.00
i 1520 0701 APPROPRIATION J 26,366.00
~ J
~ J
i J
i J
~ J
~ j
~ J
~ j
i J
~ J
~ j
i J
i J
i J
J
J
i J
~ J
~ J
J
J
i ' j
! J
i J
i J
! J
i J
i J
i J
i J
~'OTAL 52,732.00 26,366.00 26,366.00
I
~PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03105/03
~APPROVED BY: ~ DATE:
i~ ............... l ................................. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ................ NUMBER 2003 041
i REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
~ BATCH #
!EXPLANATION: DMV-TMD SAFETY PROJECT GRANT
i SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
iTYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION COD~._E_IAMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
i 1 1534 ~ 31146 800700 TMD SAFETY PROJECT J li 3,750.00
i 2 1534 33000 330011 FEDERAL DMV GRANT J 2i 3,750.00
! J
! 1534 0501 EST REVENUE J 3,750.00
i 1534 0701 APPROPRIATION J 3,750.00
i J
i J
i J
! J
! J
i J
i J
i J
i J
! J
i J
i J
! J
i J
i J
! J
i J
i . J
i J
i J
~ j
! J
~ J
i'OTAL 7,500.00 3,750.00 3,750.00
i PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03~07~03
~APPROVED BY: ~ DATE:
~1~ ................. I' .............................. COUNTY OF ALBEM~.RLE NUMBER 2003 042
!iREVISED 6184 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
i EXPLANATION: BULLETPROOF VEST GRANT
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION C0~.D..~.!AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
li 1241 31013 601000 POLICE SUPPLIES J ~_..~,i 5,936.51
2! 1241 33000 330001 FEDERAL GRANT J 2' 5,936.51
J .........
J
i1241 0501 EST REVENUE J 5,936.51
1241 0701 APPROPRIATION J 5,936.51
J
J
J
J
J
, J
J
, J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
tOTAL 11,873.02 5,936.51 5,936.51
i PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03107103
!A~PROVED BY: ! DATE:
FMS2 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
NUMBER
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: OPERATION SAFE HOLIDAYS GRANT
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CO.~,IAMOUNT DEBIT
1 1535 31013 120000 OVERTIME J 11 4,180.00
1 1535 31013 210000 FICA J _~_.1_i 320.00
2 1535 33000 330011 FEDERAL DMV GRANT J ...... _2i 4,500.00
1535 0501 EST REVENUE J 4,500.00
1535 0701 APPROPRIATION J 4,500.00
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
I J
J
J
~ J
~ J
~ J
~ J
~ J
i J
i J
! J
i J
i J
i J
! J
~ J
~ J
i J
i J
tOTAL 9,000.00 4,500.00 4,500.00
!PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03107/03
iAPPROVED BY: ~ DATE:
i~E.~N.~.E~R E D~B~~ ........................................................................~ ~A~TE~.~
'~1~ ................. 1 .......................... COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ............ NUMBER
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: VARIOUS SCHOOL GRANTS AND PROGRAMS,
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODEIAMOUNT_.__.~! DEBIT CREDIT
1 3142 60410 312700 ProfServ-Consultants J t 24,430.00
2 3142 24000 240360 Donation ISAEP Grant J .___2. ii 24,430.00
J
3142 i050___:! .............. _E_~.~.¥,~,~ E J 24,430.00
3142 i0701 APPROPRIATION J 24,430.00
J
1 3148 61311 152100 Sub-Wages-Teacher J 1 7,164.90
1 3148 61311 160300 Stipends-Staff/Curr J 1 2,850.00
I 3148 61311 210000 FICA J 1 766.14
1 ' 3148 61311 221000 VRS J 1 373.44
1 3148 61311 231000 Health Ins J 1 399.36
I 3148 61311 232000 Dentallns J I 14.86
' 2 3148 18000 181260 Project BUILD J 2 11,568.70
J
! 3t48 i050t EST REVENUE J tl,568.70
3148 i 0~70__..1 ............ .~P.?R_~,~ ~_~ION J 11,56S.70
~ 1 3129 61104 520100 Postage J 1 169.32
I t 3129 6t 104 580000 Misc. Expenses J I 4,838.00
I t 3129 61t04 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J 1 3,588.57
t 2 3t29 16000 161260 Jeffersion DI Fees J 2 2,500.00
I 2 3129 18100 181109 Contributions J 2 200.00
t 2 3129 18000: 189918 Proceeds-Sales J 2 4,500.00
I 2 3129 51000 510100 Approp-Fund Balance J 2 1,395.89
t 3129 !0501 EST REVENUE J 8,595.89
I 3129 i0701 APPROPRIATION J 8,595.89
£OTAL ~ 89,189.18 44,594.59 44,594.59
I
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/11/03
APPROVED BY: ~ DATE:
l~:~'~ ................. ~ ................................ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ........... NUMBER
I REVlSED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
I BATCH #
· EXPLANATION: DEPT. OF JUSTICE GRANT FOR MASS DESTRUCTION INCIDENTS.
) SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
ITYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODEIAMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
I 1528 31091 800100 MACHINERY& EQUIP J 11 31,789.64
I I 1528 31092 800100 MACHINERY& EQUIP J _ 1_i 3t,789.64 !
2 1528 33000 330416 DEPTOF JUSTICE GRANT J 2 63,579.28
t 1528 )050t EST REVENUE J 63,579.28
I 1528 i0701 APPROPRIATION J 63,579.28
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J.
J
J
J
J
J
J
FOTAL 127,158.56 63,579.28 63,579.28 i
I
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03112/03
APPROVED BY: I DATE:
~'~'~ .................... I ..................... COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ....... NUMBER 20--1~'~'04"'"'~
REVISED 6~84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: VIRGINIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CONTRIBUTION
I SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
ITYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 t000 81030 570806 HOMEBUYERS CLUB J 1~i ' 1,000.00!
2 1000 24000 240805 VA HOUSIND DEV'LAUTH. J 21 1,000.00 !
J
J
1000 i0501 EST REVENUE J 1,000.00
1000 i0701 APPROPRIATION J 1,000.00
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
' j
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
: I i j
J
['OTAL 2,000.00
PREPARED BY: M£L¥1N BREEDEN DAT£: 03/'12./03
^PPRO¥ D BY: D^T :
E~N~T~E RE O Y~,L ........................................................................... Pb~
FMS2 T COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE .............. NUMBER
REVISED 6184 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: ALLOCATION OF SCHOOL CARRYOVER FUNDS TO OPERATIONAL BUDGETS.
I SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
tTYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE IAMOUNT DEBIT [ CREDIT
I 1 2201 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ...... _1_i 13,271.00
I 1 2202 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ..... ~_! 5,888.00
I I 2203 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J li 72.00
f 1 2204 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 1i 12,153.00
I I 2205 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J li 4,158.00
I 1 2206 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 11· 6,257.00
1 2207 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J li 3,854.00
1 2209 61101 601300 Ed/Rec SupPlies J ........ !_! 3,537.00
1 2210 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ....... .1~i 3,645.00
1 2211 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ........ ~i 1,320.00
I 2212 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J li 12,729.00
I 2213 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J 11 4,076.00
1 2214 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J 11 5,488.00
1 2215 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ..... -1,1 2,519.00
1 2216 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J .... ~..~ 8,005.00
1 2217 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ,___!i 2,834.00
I 2251 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J , 11 1,120.00
1 2252 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J 11 1,869.00
1 2253 6110t 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ...... _1.1 15,990.00
1 2254 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 1i 16,318.00
1 2255 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ...... ~i 19,018.00
1 2301 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J ~1~i 982.00
1 2302 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J 1 ! 9,671.00
1 2303 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J 1 ~ 5,758.00
I 2304 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J 1~ 42,708.00
2 2000 51000 510100 Approp Fund Balance J 2 203,240.00
2000 0501 EST REVENUE 203,240.00
2000 0701 APPROPRIATION 203,240.00
I'OTAL 406,480.00 203,240.00 203,240.00
I
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03117103
APPROVED BY: ! DATE:
FMs2 l ................................ ~'- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE' * ................. ~1~'~'i~ ............... 2003 048
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: SCHOOL DONATIONS AND PROG~MS.
SUB. LEDGER GENE~L LEDGER
~PE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CO_~,~ ~AMOUNT DEBIT ~, CREDIT
I 2217, 61101 301210 Contract Se~ices J ..... ~,~,~ 500.00~
1 2217 62220 600400 Medical Supplies j ....... ~.~ 100.00 ~_
I 2215 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 1~ 50.00
I 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment J ..... ~ ],~ 475.00
1 2304 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ._~,~,~,~ 500.00
1 2304 61105 601300 Ed/Rec Suppl J .__]~,~ i,000.00
2 2000 18100 181109 Donation J 2~ 2,625.00
J
1 3153 61311 800100 Equipment J __~_~ 5,000.00
2 3153 33000 300001 Bicycle Ed Grant · J 2~ ' 5,000.00
2000 ~050~__!- EST REVENUE O ....... 5,000.00
2000 ~0701 APPROPRIATION J ........ : 5,000.00
1 2420 93010 930003 Debt Svc Fund-VRS J 1 379,129.00
1 2410 60100 999981 Sch Bd Rese~e J 1= (192,758.00)
2 2000 51000 510100 Approp-Fund J 2 186,371.00
2000 ~0501 EST REVENUE J ~ 186,371.00
2000 ~0701 APPROPRIATION J ~ 186,371.00
J :
J
J
J
J
J
j
J
I j
tOTAL 387,992.00 193,996.00 193,996.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/17/03
APPROVED BY: ~ ~ DATE:
FMS2 I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE · _t_ ~,~,t~,, NUMBER 2003 039
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH # ·
EXPLANATION: AUTHORIZATION TO EXPEND DONATED FUNDS.
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODEIAMOUNT .......... D__EB__I~ ...........CREDIT
- 1 2217 61101 ' 601300 Inst/Rec Supplies J i 1/ 4,440.00 i
I 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment J . 1 , 1,200.00 i
I 2215 .61411 580000 Misc. Expenses J i 1/ 525.00 ~ .............................................. .
I 2302 61411 580000 Misc. Expenses J i ............. :¥i 1,000.00 i ..............................................................................
I 2201 61101 132100 P/TWages-Teacher J '___1,,./ 838.85 i
1 2201 61101 132100 FICA J ! 1!'~ 69.45i
J
2 2000 18100 181109 Donation J 2 8,073.30
J
J
I J
2000 i~'~i' .................... i'~"'i~'~'~'~'b E J 8,073.30
' 2000 10701 iAPPROPRIATION J 8,073.30
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
j
J
J
J
J
J
J
'OTAL. 16,14~.~0 8,073.30 8,073.30
!PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 02/05103
.APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2/03
i ENTERED BY: ~ ........ ~_L i DATE:
FMS2 '/ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ........ NUMBER 2003 040
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: GRANT FUNDS FOR OAR PAPIS GRANT.
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUNDI DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION C,,0,.~,IAMOUNT DEBIT ~ CREDIT
1 1520 29406 566121 PAPIS GRANT J t 1I 26,366.00
21520 33000330409PAP~SGRA. T J ..... ~ 26,366.00
J
~ 1520 0501 !EST REVENUE J 26,366.00
! 1520 ~?i~J:i-__~'~?~'"'l~i~'~*~i~l O N J. 26,366.00
I ' j
· J
J
O
J
, J
J.
O
J
J
tOTAL 52,732.00 26,366.00 26,366.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/05/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2103
FMS2 '/ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ............. NUMBER 2003 041
iREVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: DMV-TMD SAFETY PROJECT GRANT
I SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
ITYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPT!ON COD.,,__~,IAMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT'
i 1 1534 31146 800700 TMD SAFETY PROJECT J I .......
3,750.00
~ 2 1534 33000 330011 FEDERAL DMVGRANT J t ....... ~ 3,750.00
1534 0501 EST REVENUE J ·3,750.00
1534 0701 APPROPRIATION J 3,750.00
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
· j
J
J
J.
tOTAL 7,500.00 3,750.00 3,750.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/07/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4~3~03
ENTERED BY: ,,~,_ ~.{v DATE:
iFMS2 l~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE -'~'--~-'- NUMBER 2003 042
!REVISED 6~84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: BULLETPROOF VEST GRANT
/ ~ SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
/TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE!AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
/ I 1241 31013 601000 POLICE SUPPLIES J li 5,936.51
I 2 1241 33000 330001 FEDERAL GRANT J ..... ~i 5,936.51
J
1241 0501 [_E~ST REVENUE ' ' J 5,936.51
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
j
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
tOTAL 11,873.02 5,936.51 5,936.51
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/0'7~03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2/03
ENTERED BY: l,L- : DATE: ' '
FMS2 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE .......... NUMBER 2003 043
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: OPERATION SAFE HOLIDAYS GRANT
SUB.~ LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION COD._~!AMOUNT DEBIT .J CREDIT
I 1535 31013 210000 FICA J li 320.00
2 1535 33000 330011 FEDERAL DMVGRANT J 2i 4,500.00
I J
1535x~x'~'-'-----~~i~0501 EST REVENUE J 4,500.00
J
J
,J
J
J
J
.J
J
J
J
J
t J
t J
· J
. J
tOTAL 0,000.00 4,S00.00 4,500.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/07/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2/03
!"~-~ '/ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
REVISED 6~84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: VARIOUS SCHOOL GRANTS AND PROGRAMS.
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CO~_~_EIAMOUNT
2 3142 24000 240360Dona. on ISAEPGrant
J
i0501
3142 E__ _S_T_~_E.~_u E J 24,430.00
J
I 3148 61311 152100 Sub-Wages-Teacher J 1 7,164.90
I 3148 61311 160300 Stipends-Staff/CUrr J
· I 3148 61311 210000 FICA J 1 766.14
I 3148 · 61311 221000 VRS J 1 '373.44
1 3148 61311 231000 Health Ins J 1 399.36
1 3148 61311 232000 Dental Ins J I 14.86
2 3148 18000 181260 Project BUILD J 2 11,568.70
J
!0501
3148 i EST REVENUE J . 11,568.70
3148 i0701 APPROPRIATION J 11,568.70
J
I 3129 61104 520100 Postage J 1 169.32
I 3129 61104 -580000 Misc. Expenses J 1 4,838.00
1 3129 61104 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J 1 3,588.57
2 3129 16000 161260 Jeffersion DI Fees J 2 2,500.00
2 3129 18100 181109 Contributions J 2 200.00
2 3129 18000 189918 Proceeds-Sales J 2 4,500.00
2 3129 51000 510t00 Approp-Fund Balance J 2 1,395.89
................................................................................................. j
3129 i07_____~1 APPROPRIATION J 8,595.89
J
- j
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
j
~'OTAL 89,189.18 44,594.59 44,594.59
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/11/03
APPROVED BY: · ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 412/03
iFMS2 l* COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ............... NUMBER 2003 045
i REVlSED 6~84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
i EXPLANATION: DEPT. OF JUSTICE GRANT FOR MASS DESTRUCTION INCIDENTS.
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION Cq_D.~ I AMOUNT
1 1528 31091 800100 MACHINERY& EQUlP J li ' 31,789.64 i
I 1528 ~ 31092 800100 MACHINERY& EQUIP J li 31,789.64
2 1528 33000 330416 DEPT OF JUSTICE GRANT J 2 63,579.28
J
1528 i_07_~._1~ ........ ~PP__~TION J 63,579.28 i
J
J
j
J
J
J
j
~ J
J
~ J
J
J
J
J
J
J
'OTAL 127,158.56 . 63,579.28 63,579.28
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/12/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2/03
,~F~TERED B~. Y~ ........................................... DATE~.~: ........................................................
FMS2 'I ICOUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ........... NUMBER 2003 046
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: VIRGINIA HOUSING DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY CONTRIBUTION
SUB..LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CqD_.~_IAMOUNT DEBIT / CREDIT
1 1000 81030 570806 HOMEBUYERS CLUB J li 1,000.00 i ........... · '~I' ' ................
2 1000 24000 240805 VA HOUSING DEV'LAUTH. J 2i ' 1,000.00 i ' i ..................................................... : .......................
J
J
J
J
J
J
J
i J
i J
J
J
J
J
J
, J
J
J
J
J
FOTAL - 2,000.00 1,000.00 1,000.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN · DATE: 03/12/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2!03
FMS2 I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ............. NUMBER 2003 047
REVISED 6~84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: ALLOCATION OF SCHOOL CARRYOVER FUNDS TO OPERATIONAL BUDGETS.
' SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
ITYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION C0DE~AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 2201 61101 '601300 Ed/Rec Supplies .. J .L~_ 13,271.00
1 2202 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J I 1 5,888.00
I 2203 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J i---!~i 72.00
1 2204 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J ~ ...... I 12,153.00
1. 2205 61101 601300 Ed/RecSuPplies J i~~ ~{ 4,158.00
1 2206 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J 1 ........ ~_~ 6,257.00
1 2207 '61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies ' ' ' J j ...... ~_ 3,854.00
1 2209 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J~t.~-~-~-! 3,537.00
1 2210 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J [_...!~ 3,645.00
1, 2211 61101 601300 Ed/Rec SUpplies J li 1,320.00
1 2212 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies j !__..__1~_ 12,729~00
1 2213 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J i 11 4,076.00
I 2214 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J I_~_~_1.1 5,488.00
1 2215 61101 601300 EdlRecSupplies J 1! 2,519.00
1 2216 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 11 8,005.00
1 2217 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ~__~1~ 2,834.00
I 2251 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies jI 1,120.00
1 2252 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 11 1,869.00
I 2253 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J li 15,990.00 .
1 2264 61101 601300 Ed/ReC Supplies J ~.__1~ 16,318.00
I 2255 61101 601300 Ed/RecSupplies J 11 19,018.00
61101 ~
1 2301 60130(} Ed/Rec Supplies J li 982.00
1 2302 61101 601300 EdlRec Supplies J li 9,671.00
1 2303 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J 11 5,758.00
I 2304 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ~i 42,708.00
2 2000 51000 · 510100 Approp Fund Balance J 203,240.00
2000 ~5~ ........~E.~?..~R. ~ .v..E..~_M_E 203,240,00
2000 0701 APPROPRIATION 203,240.00
I'OTAL 406,480.00 203,240.00 203,240.00
PREPARED BY: MELVIN BREEDEN DATE: 03/17/03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY DATE: 4/2/03
FMS2 '1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE .................. NUMBER 2003 048
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: SCHOOL DONATIONS AND PROGRAMS.
SUB. LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE ·FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODEAMOUNT___ DEBIT CREDIT
I 2217 61101 301210 Contract Services J li 500.00 ~,
1 2217 62220 600400 Medical Supplies J ~,_~..~,,1_i~ 1~0~.0~1
1 2215 61101 601300 Ed/Rec Supplies J ~i- 50.00
1 2215 61101 800700 ADP Equipment J t 1~ 475.00
1 2304 61101 ' 601300 Ed/RecSupplies. J 1~ 500.00
1 2304 61105 601300 Ed/Rec Suppl J ~i 1,000100
2 2000 18100 181109 Donation J i___~i 2,625.00
J~
2000 1o501 ESTREVE.UE J I 2,625.00
2000F~7~ APPROPRIATION J ...... ~-- 2,625.00--
J
1 3153 61311 800100 Equipment J li 5,000.00
2 3153 33000 300001 Bicycle Ed Grant J 2i 5,000.00
2000 0501 EST REVENUE J ....... ~__ 5,000.00
1 2420 93010 930003 Debt Svc Fund-VRS J 1~ 379,129.00
1 2410 60100 999981 Sch Bd Rese~e J 1~ (192,758.00)
2 2000 51000 510100 Approp-Fund J 2~ 186,371.00
J
2000 ~0501~ EST REVENUE J ~ .186,371.00
2000 0701 APPROPRIATION J ~ 186,371.00
J
J .
FMS2 /~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE .......... NUMBER 2003 051
REVISED 6/84 APPROPRIATION FORM DATE
BATCH #
EXPLANATION: RELOCATION OF WEST LEIGH WATER LINE.
SUB. ,LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODEIAMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
I 9010 41000 950170 WEST LEIGHWATERLINE J ~1. i 45,000.00
I 9010 41000 700006 IVY LANDFILL J ....... ~_! (45,000.00)
9010 0501 EST REVENUE J ~ 0.00
9010 , 0701 APPROPRIATION J ! 0.00
J
J
J
J
J
tOTAL 0~00 0~00 0.00
PREPARED BY: · MELVIN BREEDEN I DATE: 04~07~03
APPROVED BY: ELLA W. CAREY r DATE: 4/7/03
STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS ACT
TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
For Officers and Employees of
Local Government [Section 2.1-639.14(E)]
1. Name: Roxanne White
2. Title: Assistant County Executive
3. Agency: Albemarle County
4. Transaction: 2003-04 County Budget requests by JABA
5. Nature of Personal Interest Affected by Transaction:
Personal interest in JABA due to husband's employment by JABA.
6. I declare that:
I am disqualifying myself from participating in this transaction and request that this
fact be recorded in the appropriate public records for a period of five years.
Dated: April2,2003 (~~J~/~ ~ ~~_
Signature
March 6, 2003
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Departmeqt of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296 - 5823
Fax (434) 972 - 4012
Adin Martin
91 Galaxie Farm Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: SP-02-74 Arlin Martin, Tax Map 55, Parcel 19C
Dear Mr. Martin:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 4, 2003, by a vote of 6:0,
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this
approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 50-seat sanctuary.
2. There shall be no daycare center or private school on the site without a p proval of a separate special
use permit.
3. Commercial setback standards, as set forth i'n Section 21.7.2 of the Albemarle Zoning Ordinance.
shall be maintained adjacent to residential uses or residentially zoned properties (including RA zoned
property).
4. Right-turn taper or radius as per VDOT regulations.
5. Subject to site p(hn approval.
6. Health Department approval of well and/or septic systems.
7. While the church use authorized by this special use permit exists, no uses authorized by previously
approved special use permits for a country store shall exist.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on April 2, 2003. 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,
Steven Biel
Planner
SB/jcf
Cc:
Ella Carey
Jack Kelsey
Amelia McCulley
Steve Ai!shouse
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING
Date: ... ~--~--O ~
Agenda Item #:. //'/'-/ --
Clerk's Initials:_~~
Steven Biel
March 4, 2003
April 2, 2003
SP 2002-074 Arlin D. Martin (Church)
The following conditions were recommended by the Planning Commission at their March
4, 2003 meeting. Condition #8 and #9 have been added in response to the Department
of Engineedng's re-evaluation of the application as directed by the Planning
Commission. Noted clarifications are shown in bold type.
1. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 50-seat sanctuary.
2. There shall be no daycare center or private school on the site without approval of a
separate special use permit.
3. Commercial setback standards, as set forth in Section 21.7.2 of the Albemarle
Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained adjacent to residential uses or residentially
zoned properties (including RA zoned property).
4. Prior to zoning clearance, construct a right-turn taper or radius per VDOT
regulations.
5. Subject to site plan approval.
6. Health Department approval of well and/or septic systems.
7. While the church use authorized by this special use permit exists, no uses
authorized by previously approved special use permits for a country store shall exist.
8. Prior to the issuance of a zoning clearance, the last curve on Twinkling Springs
Lane (immediately south of proposed church parking area as shown on the
sketch plan in Attachment F)requires clearing and easements for sight distance.
9. Prior to zoning clearance, guardrails may be required (as shown on the sketch
plan in Attachment F) on the east side of Twinkling Springs Lane if clear distance,
shoulder and slope requirements are not met per the VDOT Road Design Manual
and current Engineering Department policy.
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Steven Biel
March 4, 2003
April 2, 2003
SP 2002-074 Arlin D. Martin (Church)
The following condition is offered for consideration to replace the current condition #1.
This revised condition would allow for possible future expansion up to a 93-person area
of assembly (approximately 2,500 square feet) that would keep tdp generations below
the level of a country store use.
The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 93-seat sanctuary or the
maximum allowable to meet Health Department and Zoning Ordinance
regulations, whichever is the lesser number.
RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING
Date: ~
Agenda Item #:.~
Clerk's InitialsL.-~
Albemarle Board of Supervisors
April 2, 2003
Ladies & Gentleman:
RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING
Date: ~C>'~-C>3
Agenda Item #:_~
Clerk's Initials:~.~,~__
I am Ariin Martin, a 35 year resident of Albemarle County. I have entered into a contract to buy the property under
consideration, pending approval to allow me to rent this facility to a small church. It is my desire to exchange [he
present country store permit for a new one to allow a church.
I am sorry I cannot be present at this meeting. I was told months ago that this meeting would be held on March 19.
After the Planning Commission meeting, the date was changed to April 2. I am presently in Trinidad with a mission
construction team helping to build a church. Again, I apologize for not being here and have instructed CliffFox to read
this statement for me and represent me at this meeting.
I have had conversations and meetings with the Planning Department staffin hopes of working out my 6oncerns and
the Planning Commissioners concerns. The Planning Commissioners felt that the imposed requirements were "heavy
handed" and questioned if they were really needed. Even though I have made some progress, I still feel that the latest
requirements are unnecessary and will be a financial burden to the small church that could possibly cancel the project.
After the Planning Commission meeting we were advised that the county attorney ruled that the county could not
legally require me to improve this offsite road. Several days later we got word that yes, they can impose these
requirements if they want. I have been on an emotional roller coaster trying to determine what is actually required vs
what the county would like to see happen. I still don't know which it is.
I understand VDOT's safety concerns at the entrance and will agree, if approved, to make these improvements in
accordance with the letter fi.om Jim Kesterson. As for the other road requirements, I feel it is unnecessary to require
guardrails on a private offsite road. I have provided the Planning Department information that the daily vehicle traffic
would be reduced significantly from the present country store permit. There are many roads in the county with sharper
curves and steeper banks than this road with no guardrails. In fact, there is a short dead end mad (Blue Bird Lane)
similar to this road, just ¼ mile to the west that has similar curves and banks without guardrails. This is a state
maintained road.
I have requested a site plan waiver for this project based on significantly reduced ADT on the road and are under the
350 vehicle threshold for any parking lot changes. Since there is at present a paved parking lot and I am not making
any changes to the landscape or roadways I am requesting a waiver fi'om all site plan requirements.
I talked with Mr. Brooks about the upgrade requirement and he agreed that ill were to use this property as a country
store, I would not be required to make any upgrades. Since I am requesting a change from country store to church use,
an upgrade is required. I find this to be unreasonable and it doesn't really make sense.
Since the county would like to remove the existing country store special use permit, I would propose that the current
permit simply be exchanged for an S/P for church use with no road improvement stipulations or site plan requirements
other than VDOT required entrance improvements.
Another item that I would like addressed is the planning staff's limitation cfa 50 seat auditorium. This requirement
stems from the Health Department data on the septic system capacity. I request that the wording on seating capacity be
worded in such a way as to allow increased seating if additional septic capacity is installed in accordance with the
Health Department requirements. A suggested wording could be: "The area of assembly shall be limited to a
maximum 50 seat sanctuary until additional septic capacity can be installed to meet Health Department requirements:
In no case shall seating capacity exceed 93 seats which equates to ITE trip generation and corresponding county
parking regulations for churches which we have supplied to the county.
In summary, I am asking the following:
I. Site plan waiver for any roadway, parking lot or storm management requirements except entrance
improvements per VDOT.
2. Additional seating to be allowed if septic capacity is permitted per Health Department requirements.
It is my hope and prayer that this body will respond favorably to this request. If not, it is my desire that you deny this
request bemuse it will not be financially feasible to pursue this any further.
Thank you for your consideration.
R~lly submitted~
ED AT BOS MEETING
FOR TH£ ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOA~ OF~i~. PERVI$ORS~.<
A P£TITION IN SUPPORT OF SPECIAL USE P£RMIT 2002-07'4
THE SIGNATURES BELOW REPRESENT PERMANENT RESIDENTS IN ALBEMARLE
COUNTY OR NEARBY NELSON COUNTY (18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER) WHO
FAVOR THE USE OF THE BUILDING LOCATED ON TAX MAP 55, PARCEL 19C FOR
USE AS A CHURCH BUILDING.
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Steven Biel
March 4, 2003
April 2, 2003
SP 2002-074 Arlin D. Martin (Church)
Update: At the March 4, 2003 Planning Commission meeting, the.Planning
Commission recommended approval for this request with the expectation that
VDO T and the Department of Engineering would re-evaluate their initial reviews.
Staff met with Mr. Arlin Martin, Mr. Cliff Fox, and a VDOT representative at the site
to re-evaluate VDOT's requirement for a right-turn taper as mentioned in the staff
report. Although the trip generation does not necessarily support the VDOT
requirement for a right-turn taper, VDOT cites a safety issue with the two
westbound lanes of Route 250 merging into one lane approximately 300 feet east
of the Twinkling Springs Lane entrance. The applicant has agreed to VDOT's
requirements as described in Attachment G.
The Department of Engineering has also furnished a re-evaluation of their initial
review (Attachment H). The Department of Engineering has noted that Chapter 14,
Section 237 of the Subdivision Ordinance allows a waiver orsubstitution for any
of the requirements of Section 400 through 526, which would include road
requirements under Section 514. The applicant has submitted a request to waive
the off-site roadimproVements recommended by the Department of Engineering
(Attachment I). The Department of Engineering has reduced their requirements
for road improvements and believes the recommendations noted below are in the
interest of public safety. Therefore,'staff cannot support the ~applicant's request
for a waiver to off-site road improvements. If the Board of Supervisors were to
waive road standards, the Department of Engineering recommends that the waiver
does not include the following:
· The last curve on Twinkling Springs Lane requires clearing and easements for
sight distance.
· A guardrail may be required on the east side of Twinkling Springs Lane if clear
distance, shoulder and slope requirements are not met per the VDOT Road
Design Manual'and current Engineering Department policy. The exact
locations would be determined with final plans.
· Entrance improvements as identified by VDOT.
Recommendation: Staff believes the VDOT entrance and right-turn taper
requirements should be followed to provide for safe turning movements from
Route 250 onto Twinkling Springs Lane. Staff also supports the updated
Department of Engineering recommendations as noted above to address public
safety concerns. Staff does not support the appliCant's request for a waiver to the
Department of Engineering's recommendations as noted in the updated
conditions #8 and 9. Staff recommends approval of SP 2002-074, subject'to the
folloWing updated conditions (the Planning Commission revised condition
1. The area of assembly shall' be limited to a maximum 50-seat sanctuary;
2. There shall be no daycare center or private school on the site without approval
of a separate special use permit.
Arlin D. Martin Update 1
1/13/03
J.
3. 'Commercial setback standards, as Set forth in Section 21.7.2 of the Albemarle
Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained adjacent to residential uses or
residentially zoned properties (including RA zoned property).
4. Construct a right-turn taper or radius per VDOT regulations.
5. Subject to site plan approval.
6. Health Department approval of well and/or septic systems.
7. The chUrch use authorized by this special use permit exists, no uses
authorized by previously approved special use permits-for a country store
shall exist.
8. The last curve on Twinkling Springs Lane requires Clearing and easements for
sight distance.
9, A guardrail may be required on the east side of Twinkling Springs Lane if clear
distance, shoulder~ and slope requirements are not met per the VDO T Road
Design Manual and current Engineering Department policy. The exact
locations would be determined with final plans.
Staff Report dated March 4, 2003
Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is requesting approval to allow a church in an
existing building that is' currently approved for a country store (Attachment A). The
proposed church would initially have approximately 30 members with anticipated growth
reaching 60 members. There would be worship services on Sundays.from 9:30 a.m. to
12:00 p,m. There would be an occasiOnal Sunday night service 'and there would be a
monthly meeting of the Elderson a weeknight. There is currently an apartment located
on the second floor of the existing bUilding. The applicant is requesting to maintain a
one-bedroom apartment that would accommodate no more than 2 people. This
apartment would house a general maintenance person who would also oversee the
property.
Petitions: Request for special use permit to allow a church in accordance with Section
10.2.2.35 of the Zoning Ordinance, which allows for churches in the Rural Areas. The
property, described as Tax Map 55, Parcel 19C, contains 2.851 acres, and is located in
the White Hall Magisterial District at the end of Twinkling Springs Lane; approximately
.25 miles from the intersection of Twinkling Spdngs Lane and Rockfish Gap Turnpike
(Rt. 250), The property is zoned RA, Rural.Areas and is located in an Entrance Corridor.
The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Areas in Rural Area 3
(Attachment B). - ~' ---,--
Character of the Area: The site is located at the end of Twinkling SPrings Lane,
approximately .25 miles north of Route 250. The surrounding area can be described as
consisting of scattered residential lots intermixed within wooded areas and open fields
(Attachment C).
The site is located within the Interstate 64 Entrance Corridor, approximately 400 feet to
the south of 1-64. Since the prOposed use woukf not change the appearance of the site
as viewed from the .Entrance CorridOr, review by the Architectural Review Board is not
necessary. Any future changes to the building or site that would impact the appearance
of the development as viewed from 1-64 would 'be subject to review by the Architectural
Review Board.
Arlin D. Martin Update
1/13/03
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of super'visors
hereby resets'es 'unto itself the right to issue ail special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use
per. mits for uses as provide.d 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 the. rcby 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 generfi] welfare. -
' :thcs form and prov:de addmonal mD=anon whzeh will ~stst the'County m
If you need assist=ce filhng out these xtems, staff ~s avmlable. '~'~%~;~'~j5~?:5::
What is the Comprehensive Plan deaignation for ~i$ prop~y~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Hp~willtheproposedspeeialuseaffeetadjaeentprope=y~ ~ ~ 0~ ~
How will tt~e propased s ~eial usa affect the charactar of ~o district surrounding the property7
How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent of}he Zoning Ordinance7 '~O
How is the use in h=mony wi~h the us= permitted by right in the district7 ~ ~/~
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the ~ning Ordinance apply to this use7
How will this usc promote thc public health, safety, and general welfare of the community?
SP - 02 - 74
Arlin D. Martin
N
xG96.j~',,'
ATTACHMENT B
/i ?
)6.9
.,.
,/,~
t/
ATTACHMENT C
ATTACHMENT D
FoxfYre Enterprises, Inc.
RE,~L ESTATE CONSULTANTS
4543 GARTH ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901
Clifford H. Fox, Jr.
Principal Broker
Telephone: (434) 823-7500
Fax: (434) 823-7501
Email: foxfyre~cstone.net
November 18, 2002
To whom it may concern
Department of Planning ~
Albemarle County
40i Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902 ..
Re: Letter of support for the Special Use permit for a'ch~ch at Tax Map'55 p~cel 19C
by Arlin Martin and otherS.
Dear Sir or Madam:
We the undersigned are writing to express our support for the Special Use Permit fOr the
property ,~ Tax Map 55, Parcel 19C, to be used as a church. Further, We understand that
should the church move; or dis6°ntinue use of the property, Mr. Martin Would like to
:~eserve the County Store Special Use as a,alternate use; we do not object to this
rese~ation.
Respect~ly Submitted,
ATTACHMENT E
Foxfyre Enterprises, Inc.
REAL ESTATE CONSULTANTS
4543 GARTH ROAD
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901
Clifford H. Fox, Jr.
Principal Broker
Telephone: (434) 823-7500
Fax: (434) 823-7501
Email: foxfyre~cstone.net
December 11, 2002
Steven B. Biel, Planner
County of Albemarle
Dept. of Planning &
Community Development
401 Mclntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Re: Trip generation on private road to TM 55, parcel 19C for SP 2002-074.
Dear Mr. Biel:
Please find attached a letter and spreadsheet that demonstrates the traffic generation for a
6100 square foot church and 5 residences using Twinkling Springs Lane. From our
preliminary evaluation and a brief discussion with Juan Wade, the County's traffic
planner, there does not seem to be justification for a mm and taper lane, only a radius.
This information was developed from ITE specifications and VDOT's "Guidelines For
Right Turn Treatment (4-Lane Highway).
PI-IV's are at 31 entering vehicles before adjustments in consideration of the east/west
directional distribution of those trips. In the Pre-application meeting comments were
made by VDOT that a T&T would be required. This data. is 'supplied to argue that such is
not the case. We would appreciate the county's comments on this data at site review,
which is in early January. You will note that the east/west data is blank on the
spreadsheet. We are still attempting to get that data from VDOT sources.
Thank you for your time and consideration with this matter. And we hope that you have
a wonderful Holiday.
R~mitted,
Clil~o(d Hi ~ox, Jr.
Foxfyre Enterprises, Inc.
Applicant: _
Cc. Juan Wade, County Traffic Planner
Use class ITE I AM wkday PM wkday Saturday Sunday
Manual Data, Weekday peak hr. gert/ peak hr. gert/ peak hr. gen/ peak hr. gen/
Average 1000 sf ' '1000 sf" '1000 sf 1000 sf
C'store(851) 249.8 253.5
Direction Dis. "' 49/51:in/out 47/53:in/out
C'store (852) na 121.0 134.8 na na
Direction Dis. 50/50:in/out 49/51 :in/out
5 SFD (210') 47.85 3.75 5.05 4.7 4.3
~rection Dis. 50150:in/out 25/75:inlout 64136:in/out 54/46:in/out 53147:inlout
Total Trips 124.73 139.87 254.50 257.8
Total Trips In 61.43 69.28 124.94 121.42
East/West Dis.
Church (560) 55.57 ' 7.81 8.60 21.35 57.89
Direction Dis 50/50:in/out 50/50:in/out 59/41 :in/out 74/26:in/out 50/50:in/out
5 SFD (210) 47.85 3.75 5.05 4.7 4.3
Direction Dis. 50/50:in/out I 25/75:in/out 64/36:in/out 54/46:in/out 53147:in/out
Total Trips 103.42 . 11.56 I3.85 26.05 62.19
Total Trips In 51.71 4.84 8.31 18.337 31.22
East/West Dis
ATTACHMENT F
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Eng/neering &Public Works
MEMORANDUM
To: Steven Biel, Planning
From: Glenn Brooks, Engineering
._Subject: ALrlin D. Martin, SP-02-074, for a church on the Ridgewell property
Bate received: 12 Dec 2002
Date'~of Comment: 30 Dec 2002
The Engineering Department can recommend approval of the special use permit with the
following conditions': _ _
1. Road and entrance improvements are required, as discussed with Mr. RSdgwell on previous
applications. The necessary improvements are outlined in the attached letter and sketch to
Mx. Ridgwell dated 1 Apr 1998.
2. Traffic generation figures should be provided for the site to ascertain paving requirements.
Paving is required for 350 vehicle trips per week or greater.
3. prelim/nary.water quality computations are needed to ascertain stormwater management
requ/rements. Project drainage areas and general impervious percentages w/Il give.an
indication of what type of facility may need to be constructed. Non-structural measures,
such as enhanced buffers on protected streams may also be possible. Such possibilities can
be discussed with DaVid I-Iirschman, Water Resources Manager.
4. A site plan or amendment is required to address road improvements, stormwater
management, and parking and circulation per ordinance requirements.
Copy: file 2418
File: Martin church on Ridgwell prop sp (I).doc
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Engineering & Public Works
401 McIntire Road. Room 211
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296 - 5861
Fax I804) 972 - 4035
1 April. 1998
Mr. Wiliiam D. Ridgwell.
1804 Hydraulic Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Re: Ridgwvell's Run road 6valuation (formerly Eagles Nest, The Very Thing)
Dear Mr. Ridgwell:
This letter documents the meeting of 27 Ma~ch 1998, betxveen you, me, and Jim Kesterson of VDOT. At
your request' we met to arrive ar a better understanding of the road improvements necessary at ..R/..'dgWell's
Run in Crdzet. We discussed the improvements required at the entrance, as well ~as what would be'
required for the road to meet VDOT standards. Attached please find a sketch of the existing road.
conditions as noted at the site. . -
The entrance improvements consist of narrowing the existing-width down to 30' at Rt. 250; The.culvert
undei' the entrance must be'uncovered. VDOT will perform grading work in the downstream (westward)
ditch along Rt. 250 if necessary to e~tablish positive drainage from the entrance culvert. Ditches must be
established alongside the entrance and initial.stretch of road to channel drainage into the ditches along
Rt. 250~ and the entrance is required to be paved within the right-of-way, which was estimated to be 40'
from the edge of Rt. 250. Asphalt paving in the entrance must match the design pavement section of Rt.
250.
In addition to the entrance requirements, the following items were identified during our site visit as'
necessary for the road to meet VDOT standards.
-~ Repaying. Core samples of the road are required to determine the exact overlay requirements.
Widening and shoulder and ditch work. 1'-2' of additional pavement is required in most places.
Some grading is required t'o establish 4' of shoulder and an adeqtiate ditch section near the end of
the road (see sketch section "D") as well as at a few spots alOng the road.
An analysis of the existing drainage patterns must be performed ro determine if the existing 12"
CMP culverts are adequate. Where they are nor adequate they must be replaced.
The culvert before section A must be uncovered and the ditch line restored.
-Guardrail is required on the right side of the road approaching and through the last curve due to
the steepness of the roadside embankment. The steepness of the bank near section A may also
necessitate guardrait.
Mr. William D. R/dgwell
April 1, 1998
Page Two'
A turnaround (cul-de-sac) must be installed at the end of the road, where pubtic maintenance
would end if this were to be a public road.. This would likely be plac'ed at or b. eyond section
on the attached sketch, and must be separated from the parking lot when complete, although an.
entrance from the.end of the turnaround into the parking lot is acceptable.. Cul-de-sacs must. be a
minimum of3.0'-in paved diameter, with 10' of shoulder.
Road and shoulder grades must be adjusted to eliminate the low areas where water collects at the
last curve in the road.
Clear/ng of trees for sight distance may be required at the last horizontal curve.. This appears to
be the only curve where the radi. us is below the minimum VDOT requirement. If the grading for
widening, and establishment of shoulders, ditches, and guardrail at this location .dOes not create
clear sight distance; trees will have to be cleared.
The above list is a general one, where we have tried to identify all of the major areas where work is
needed' for the road to meet minimum VDOT standards. Other items may be needed when a more
detailed study is made of the road, such as would be performed if the road were to be. accepted for state
mdintenance. Other standard items required roi state maintenance are platting of right-of-ways and
drainage easements, preparation and revieW of as-built road plans, and inspection and review of the
constructed improvement&
With the plat submitted for site review, the requested private road would have to meet VDOT standards,
including all improvements up'Xo the commercial use (TM 55-19C), with the possible elimination oft he
- turnaround requirement. As discussed in the Site review meeting, this is because the private' road
standard is for the commercial use. The Subdivision Ordinance has different standards for residential
and commercial' uses. A road that mixes these uses falls under the more stringent standard, which is
Usually'the commercial standard.
You have expressed concerns that only Lot 1 is desired at this time, and that the road standards should be
applied w/th this in mind. The Engineering Department has taken this' into consideration, and since the
commercial use on the road is under different ownership, and is not. part of the subdivision proposal, the
Engineering D~partment 'can apply the commercial road standard in a manner usually reserved for small
(3-5 lot) reSidential subdivisions. This means, if the subdivision 'were revised to subdivide only lot 1,
with the rest of the property in a residue lot, the VDOT road Standard (commercial) would be applied to
the location of the driveway for the residence of Lot I. Subsequent residences would necessitate
improvements up to where the driveways are located on the road. Of course, any change to. the parcel
where the commercial use is located, or a subdivision on the Brasco Bay property Would require further
improvement as discussed above.
Sincerely,
Glonn E. Brooks, P.E.
Senior Engineer
(gbrooks~albemarle.org)
GEB/ybv
Attachment (sketch)
Copy: SUB-98-002
Elaine Echols, Senior Planner
File: glenn\RIDGWELL.R2
/-
W
//
SP-02-074 Arlin D. Martin, Rte, 250
Steven Biel
Page I of 1
ATTAC~]IYI-ENT G
From: Kesterson, Jimmy [Jimmy. Kesterson@VirginiaDOT.org]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:03 PM
To: Stephen Biel (E-mail)
Subject: SP-02-074 Arlin D. Martin, Rte. 250
Stephen, Based our field review and onsite meeting a 100' taper will remain required for the existing entrance.
The taper should begin at the end of the radius and be 12' in width and continue for 100' and tie into the existing
edge of pavement, The existing paved shoulder surface can remain and be a portion of the taper, however the
edge will need to be milled to remove the white edge line and provide for a pavementjoint.-The remaining area
will require 8" of 21A aggregate (primed) and 2" of SM-9-5A over the new area'and the milled area. In addition
the landing of the entrance should be resurfaced for a minimum of 12' from the edge of pavement. A
recommendation would be to continue a 12' pull when the surface is applied to the taper. As a minimum the
landing area must be patched if the 12~ strip is not applied. At the conclusion of constructing the taper new
pavement markings must be applied. The above noted items will requirea permit prior to commencement of any
activity within the right of way and upon completion should satisfy our concerns regarding the entrance. If a site
plan is not required the department will provide a sketch for the improvements.
The VDOT maintenance area at Yancey Mills has checked the existing entrance and indicates a culvert
does not exist. They have indicated they will grade the ditch on the north east side to provide poSitive drainage.
J. H, Kesterson
Permit & Sub. Spec, Supv.
Tel # (434) 951-6428
ATTACHMENT H
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Engineering & Public Works
MEMORANDUM
To: Steven Biel, Planning
From: Glenn Brooks, Engineering
Subject:: Martin, SP-2002-074, road standards
Date received: 6 Mar 2003
Date of Comment: 18 Mar 2003
As requested, the Engineering Department has taken a fresh look at the road improvements
re'quired for the Martin Special Use Permit. This request is for a Church on property formerly
approved for a CoUnty StOre, at the end ofRidgewell's RUn~
The applicable regulation is from Zoning Ordinance 18-32.7.2; "Each development shall be
provided withsafe and convenient ingress f~om and egress to one (1) or more public roads..." In
this case, access is through the private road, Ridgewell's RUn.
The standards for private roads are given in the Subdivision Ordinance, section 14-514. Item C,
Table B, applies to roads, serving uses o~er than single family detached residential, and requires
the full VDOT Rolling Terrain Standard. Section 14-233D allows the use of VDOT
Mountainous Terrain Standards for private roads authorized with section 14-232(A)(2). In an
effort to interpret the ordinances advantageously for the applicant, this lesser standard was used,
hoWever it is not really known what approvals or authorizations the existing road may have.
It has been the consistent application of the Engineering Department to require the standard
referred to above on all roads serving both residential, and non-residential uses. All proposed
development is required to meet current standards,-regardless of whether the'private road is off-
site, on-site, or under other ownership. Proposed uses on roads not meeting the current standards
are not recommended for approval, unless the necessary up-grades are made.
The regulations do not give the Engineering Department the d/scretion to selectively apply
portions of the standards as deemed appropriate. In this regard, the Engineering Department
regrets that it does not have the latitude to address concerns of the Planning Commissioners and
the Applicant.
With regard to road standards, this application is very similar to that requested by the Ridgewells
in 1998. It involves a road serving residential, and non-residential uses. The same letter was used
to reference required road improvements in an effort to demonstrate consistency. The owners
and sellers of the property should have already been aware of these necessary road
improvements.
Improvements at the entrance on Route 250 are in the interest of safety for vehicles entering and
existing from the highway, and also vehicles passing by the entrance on Route 250. ~t is the
Engineering D '
epartment s stance that these safety knprovements be supported by the County,
regardless of the amount of traffic generated bythe proposal.
Section 14-237 of the Subdivision Ordinance alloWs a waiver or substitution for any of the
requirements of 14-400 through: 14~526, which would include road requirements under 14-514.
Though no such request has been received, if the PlUg Commission Or the Board of
Supervisors were to waive road standards, it is recommended that the folloWing items related to
safety be retained by conditions of the Special Use Permit approval:
1. The last curve in the road before the proposed church requires clearing and easements for
sight distance.
2. Guardrail may be required on the right side of the road if clear distance, shoulder and slope
requirements are not met per the VDOT Road Design Manual and current Engineering
Department Policy. Exact locations can be determined with £mal plans.
3. VDOT identified improvements to the entrance must be provided.
Currem photos of the roadway and entrance are provided for reference. Also attached, please
find the original field sketch of 1998, which was attached to the original letter, but did not appear
in the staffreport.
Copy: file 2418
File: Martin road standards for Ridgewell property doc
Figure 1: Ridgewell's Run, entrance on Rt.250
Figure 2: Ridgewell's Run, last curve with sight distance problem
./?
BLUE_RIDGE
FRX
NO. :
434
979
Mi~. 21 2803 02:57PM P2
ATTACHMENT I
Steven B. Biel, Planner
County of Albemarle
Dept of Planning & Community Development
40i McIntire Road, Room 218
Re: Special Use Permit Application 2002-074
Dear Mr, Biel:
In reference to the various phone conversations concerning my application for
a special use permit for this property, I hereby request a waiver for the requirement
ora site plan for the offsite road improvements.
]]ae reduced traffic on this road does not jus. tify the major mad improvements as
reqUested by the p! ,_arm.lng department The present SPecial use permit on this property
for a county store would generate approximately 12l trips per day. My application for
a church would reduce this traffic to 31 trips on Sundays and much less during the week,,
This property has a road maintenance agreement for each property owner and I will
to do more than my share to maintain this road, To require th/s mad to be brought up to
state standards would make this project financially impossible.
Thank you for your consideration,
~-s~tf-ully submitte4j/
Arlin D. Martin
Planning and Zonin.q History: A history of special use permits includes the following:
· SP 1972-261 for a country store was approved.
· SP 1974-352 for a retail/antique store was denied.
· SP 1976-031 for a sign was approved.
· SP 1979-052 for a retail/country/general store was denied.
The special use permit approvedin 1972 has been used. intermittently. The Department
of Building Code and Zoning Services has requested all special use permits related to
the country store be abandoned if the special use permit for a church is approved.
Should the church special use permit be approved, initiated, and in the future decide to
relocate, the owner of the property could apply for a new special use permit for a country
store. The review would then be under the County's current process and regulations.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan identifies this site and surrounding
area as being located in the Rural Areas. The operat_ion or expansion of a church in the
Rural Areas is permitted by special use permit.
RECOMMENDATION: 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
2002-074 with conditions, based on its consistency with the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance:;
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 adiacent property.
The adjacent property to the west (Parcel 19E) contains 3 acres and has a residential
dwelling that is approximately 200 feet from the proposed church. The adjacent property
to the east and south contains 4.3 acres, also with a residential dwelling located
approximately 200 feet from the proposed church. With the reasonably small
congregation (currently 30 members) and morningservices on Sunday's only, staff.
believes the proposed use would not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property
owners. Staff has not received any calls in opposition .to this proposal. In fact, five area
residents have submitted' a Letter of Support for the proposed church (Attachment D).
that the character of the district will not be chanqed thereby,
The church has not proposed any changes/expansion to the existing building. The
applicant is proposing a boundary adjustment with Parcel 19E (Attachment A), At the
time of this report, the acreage involved in the land exchange had not been finalized.
The applicant has provided a trip generation report (Attachment E) that demonstrates
the traffic generation for a 6,100 square foot church and five residences using Twinkling
Springs Lane, On a Sunday, the total trips in would be 31 during peak hour compared
with 121 for a country store during the same time. Although the building is not cUrrently
being used as, cOuntry store, the church traffic would be less than the country store use.
Arlin D. Mm-tin ~Update
1/13/03 3
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinan ce,
Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent as contained in Chapter18, Sections 1.4, 1.5,
and 1.6 of the Albemarle Zoning Ordinance'. In the opinion of staff, the proposed use
would not cenflict with the purpose and intent as described in the Zoning Ordinance.
with the uses permitted by right in the district,
This use would not prevent by-right 'use of the adjacent properties.
with additional requlationS provided in-Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
There are n.o additional regulations relating to churches.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The public health, safety, and general welfare of the community is protected through the
special use permit process., which assures that uses approved by special use permit are
appropriate in the location requested.
The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) would require a minimum 100-foot
right-turn taper. VDOT cites their Land Development Manual, Volume II, Chapter 3 titled
"Entrance Geometry" that discusses turn lane bay tapers and states, "Tapers may be
required in some cases due to deceleration requirements, rather solely on demand."
The manual also notes that speed differentials must be kept within an acceptable 10 to
15 M.P.H. limit. If a generous speed of 25 M.P.H is assumed for the turning movement
and the speed limit on Route 250 in the area of Twinkling Springs Lane is 55 M.P.H., the
speed differential at the entrance would be 30 M.P.H.' As a result, a required minimum
100-foot right-turn taper would have to be installed.
The Department of Engineering alsO supports the need for a minimum 100-foot right-turn
taper. The Department of Engineering also is requiring improvements to Twinkling
Springs Lane and entrance improvements as discussed in 1998. with Mr. William
Ridgwell, the owner of what was formerly the Eagles Nest and Ridgwell's Run'
(Attachment F). Twinkling Springs Lane should be improved to VDOT standards as well
entrance improvements Consisting of narrowing the existing width down to 30 feet at
Route 250. In addition, ditches must be .established alongside the entrance and initial
stretch of road to channel drainage into the ditches .along Route 250.
Staff supports the requirements by VDOT and the Depa.rtment of Engineering for a
minimum 100-foot right~turn taper and road improvements to Twinkling Springs Lane.
Although there would be minimal traffic generated by the proposed church, staff believes
the minimum 100-foot right-turn taper is necessary due to the two westbound lanes of
Route 250 merging into one lane approximately 300 feet to the east of the Twinkling
-Springs Lane entrance.
The Department of Engineering is also requiring the applicant to submit a site plan,
which would address the road improvements, stormwater management, and parking and
circulation requirements. Water quality computations would be needed to ascertain the
stormwater management requirements. A site plan waiver could be requested to relieve
the applicant from additional site plan requirements of the Zoning Ordinance.
Arlin D. Martin Update 4
1/t3/03
The Health Department has given verbal preliminary apprOval for no more than 50
church members and a one-bedroom apartment.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application:
The proposed' church would be less intensive than the use the existing building is
currently approved for (country store).
Surrounding residents are in support of the propoSed church.
Staff has not found any significant factors that are unfavorable to this request. However,
the Health Department has stated that the septic system would not support more than 50
church members in addition to the one-bedroom apartment.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based onthe findings 'contained in this staff report, staff recommends approval of SP
2002-074, subject to the following conditions:
1. The area of assembly shall be limited to a maximum 50-seat sanctUary.
2. There shall be no daycare center or private school on the site without approval of a
separate special use permit.
3. Commercial setback Standards, as set forth in Section 21.7.2 of the Albemarle
Zoning Ordinance, shall be maintained adjacent to residential uses or residentially
zoned properties (including RA zoned property).
4. VDOT approval of a minimum 100-foot right-turn taper.
5. Subject to site plan approval.
6. Health Department approval of well and/or septic systems.
7. While the church use authorized by this special use permit exists, no uses authorized
by previously approved special use permits for a country store shall exist.
Attachments:
A - Application and Plan
B - Location Map& Tax Map
C - Aerial Map
D = Letter of SUpport
E - Trip Generation Report
F - Department of Engineering Letter
G - VDOT. Memo
H - Updated Department of Engineering Letter
I - Waiver Request
Arlin D. Martin Update
1/13/03
County of Albemarle ':' Department of Building Code and
' '' ATTAC~NT A
OFFICE U N~ '
-~:rr ~m et,, you~'~=aa':~,~m~:'%:*,~7:':'"'"-:*:::%:.~] ?~;:'~:¢~j.tY~:~%'d~. '. _ . "'. ~'.'. ' ."" "4..". ':" :".' ,.']' ' ".:.
qumberor:~tob~c~ere~ ...... b~'SpedWUsePermit~,~,,-~,~. -.'m~" W ~ ~ ~ I~ '. "~ :.. ~ [ .'
tiffs an amendment to an ~ist~ng Spedal Use Permit~ ~ Y~'~No .' '
Are you submitting a site developmen~ plan wiflt ~ application? ' 0 Y[~o
i
i
Address q/ f~,[~ F~ ~- City
}Daytime Phone ( ~ ) ~ 7q- o~o t Fax ~
Owner of land (As listed in the County's records):
Daytime Phone ( ~ ) ~7~- ~
city
Fax # - .E-mail -
i
LLc.
Zip
Daytime Phone (.a/34L ) 07q- &5'o !
Fax # ~.i~-{vq-oa-o ~ E-mail
Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any. abutting property7 If yes, please list
those tax map and parcel numbers W/tO
OFFICE USE ONLY q
Fa: amount $ Dam Paid
History: 0 Special Use Permits:
m_ ZMAs and Proffers:
Concu=ent review of Site Devdopment PI~? ~ ~ No
40I Mctntire Road -:' Charlottesville, VA 22902 -:' Voice: 296-58.32 -.'- Fax: 972-4126
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Proposed Mountain Overlay District (MOD) Ordinance
Committee
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Information regarding composition, charge and staffing
capabilities for proposed committee review of the draft of the
above noted ordinance.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish
AGENDA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION: X
ACTION: IN FORMATION:
Yes
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROU ND:
On March 19, 2003, the Board of Supervisors proposed the establishment of a committee to review the MOD ordinance
with the expectation that, through a committee representing varied interests and concerns, consensus could be achieved
on a draft ordinance that would be acceptable to the public.
DISCUSSION:
Attached is a proposal for the MOD Review Committee that identifies committee membership, charge, and staffing
capabilities. Please note that the assessment of required staff time is focused on the Department of Planning and
Community Development. Recognized, but not assessed, is the additional staff time that will be needed from the County
Attorney's Office, Department of Building Code and Zoning Services, and the Department of Engineering and Public
Works.
RECOMMENDATION:
If the Board decides to appoint a committee, it is probable that the appointments would not be made until May based on
typical appointment procedures. That considered, staff recommends that MOD work with the committee not start until the
first of July, after the completion of staff's work on the draft of the Rural Area Plan for Planning Commission review.
Planning staff would be more capable of providing support at that time, and the rural area review work would be
completed. The intervening period could be used by committee members to review background materials and complete
basic organizational issues (meeting time/location, chair, etc.).
Attachment:
Committee Outline
03.046
PROPOSED MOD REVIEW COMMITTEE
Committee composition:
· It would be desirable to keep the committee membership manageable in size (ideally
no more than seven).
Recommendation: membership should be from among the following interests/groups:
Agricultural interest (Farm Bureau)
Forestry interest
Bio-diversity interest (Biodiversity Work Group member)
Water resource expertise
Free Enterprise Forum
PEC representative
Citizens for Albemarle representative
Citizen representatives (include Mountain Landowners Protection Group-total of 2, max.)
Rural Area Focus Group (1 to 2)
Planning Commission Liaison
Board of Supervisor Liaison
ALTERNATIVE: This assignment could be forwarded to the existing Rural Area Focus
Group to undertake in addition to the ongoing Rural Area Comprehensive Plan review
they 'are involved in. The Focus Group participants include many of the representatives
recommended above, but not all. This option would likely extend the overall Rural Area
Review to some degree.
Charge of the Committee
Evaluate the existing proposed ordinance against the goals and objectives of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Mountain Protection Plan, current information regarding
mountain area resources and relevant information regarding other mountain protection
techniques, ordinances, etc., and modify the ordinances as necessary to provide an
acceptable ordinance to protect mountain resources.
· End product/outcome: Consensus on an acceptable ordinance for adoption.
· The focus is on reviewing the proposed ordinance, not on reassessing the adopted
policy.
· Regular updates should be provided to the BoS and PC on status and direction of the
committee.
Steps toward end product:
1. Provide background/history/understanding of Mountain Protection Plan (policy) and
the currently proposed ordinance.
2. Evaluate new information (debris flow, groundwater) relevant to mountain protection
policy and ordinance.
3. Review existing draft ordinance:
a. Critique ordinance based public concerns received to date;
b. Identify key issue areas (acceptable components, areas of disagreement).
4. Evaluate other ordinances, particularly those adopted within the State, but also other
appropriate examples nationally.
5. Identify changes, draft ordinance.
6. Receive public input, consider refinements to draft ordinance.
7. Consensus on acceptable ordinance for adoption.
8. Forward to Planning Commission for consideration and public heating.
9. Planning Commission recommendation forwarded Board of Supervisors for
consideration, public hearing and action.
10. Committee is on call for further direction from the Board-otherwise committee's
work is complete.
Staffing capability_
Under the current plan for the Rural Area review, it had been anticipated that
approximately 40 total hours of Planning and Community Development staff time would
be spent related to the Mountain Protection aspect of the RA review. This would not
provide significant time to manage this type of committee with this type of expected end
product. Significant County Attorney, Zoning Dept. and Engineering Dept. staff time
would also be necessary that was not anticipated in the RA review component.
The RA review was to be focused on assessing the potential impact of other proposed RA
strategies and recommendations coming from the RA review (ex. modifications to
RPD's, increasing 21 acre lot size, etc.) and determining how these could serve to address
the recommendations of the Mountain Protection Plan and the purpose/intent of the
ordinance. Also, there would be an evaluation of other measures and strategies that
would need to be developed, recommended, and/or implemented to support the
recommendations of the Mountain Protection Plan. It was not anticipated that there
would be a specific and detailed re-evaluation/re-write of the proposed ordinance, or
drafting of alternative ordinances. It was anticipated that modifications to the ordinance,
if warranted, would be recommended as part of the RA review.
Staff estimates that, at a minimum, the committee would require 170 total man-hours
from the Department of Planning and Community Development. This total does not
include estimates of man-hours from the Department of Building Code and Zoning
Services, Department of Engineering and Public Works, or the County Attorney's Office.
Of this total (170 hours), 40 hours of related work on mountain protection is embedded in
the RA review work noted above. Therefore, supporting the committee would generate
the need for additional 130 man-hours of work from the Department of Planning and
Community Development staff, alone. The total man-hours assigned to the RA related
Mountain protection work (40 hours) would allow approximately three (3) hOurs per
week of staff time to be available to work with this committee through the end of June,
2003. The remaining 130 hours necessary beyond this point could be accomplished in as
little as 7 weeks based on 20 hours per week once the RA review work is complete.
However, this does not account for slippage that might occur due to the committee's
dynamics and ability to meet. It is also not known what ability other departments have to
keep pace with this schedule.
Staffing Options
Refocus staff and work program priorities to provide the staff time necessary to
manage the committee work and produce the expected end product. Assuming
this is considered a very high prioriW (at least equal or higher than the RA
review), Planning and Community Development staff Workin~ up to 20 hours
per week should provide sufficient capability to staff the committee as
expeditiously as the committee process will accommodate.
Again, staff estimates that, at a minimum, the committee would require 170 total
hours of Planning and Community Development staff support. Forty (40) hours are
available as part of the RA review between early April and late June. Focusing staff
on this project would take a minimum of 130 additional hours away from other RA
projects. Projects that would most likely be impacted are the RA review, revision to
PRFA easement criteria, and/or the Biodiversity Work Group. At this time staffhas
not been able to fully assess the impact to these project schedules. If the committee
works efficiently, 20 hours per week could allow the Department of Planning and
Community Development staff work to be completed in as little as 8 to 9 weeks.
Again, this is dependent on the committee's dynamics and ability to meet, and the
ability of other development departments and County Attorney staff to keep pace with
this schedule.
· Augment staff with outside resources.
This option would help to avoid impacts to other work program activities. It Would
require additional man-hours for management and training to bring the temporary
staff person/consultant up to speed on the project. It may be difficult to find
temporary staff person that can efficiently and effectively undertake this assignment
immediately. To hire a consultant would require a procurement process that will take
time to undertake.
· Delay beginning of MOD Committee work until July 1~t.
The majority of the RA review should be complete prior to July.
When that work is complete, more staff time will be available to focus on the MOD
ordinance and work with the committee. This option assumes extensive additional
work will not result from the Planning Commission's review of the proposed Rural
Area Plan after July 1.
David P. Bowerman
Rio
Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr.
Scoitsville
Charles S. Mar~in
Rivanna
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Office of Board of Supervisors
40I McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296-5843 FAX (434) 296-5800
March 13, 2003
Walter E Perkins
White Hall
Dennis S. Rooker
Jack Joue~
Sally H. Thomas
Samuel Miller
Mr. Steven H. Aden, Esq.
Chief Litigation Counsel
The Rutherford Institute
PO Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Re: Appeal: ARB-(Sign)-2003-06. Freestyles Sign
Dear Mr. Aden:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated March 11, 2003 appealing the decision of the
Architectural Review Board on March 3, 2003. This appeal has been scheduled to be heard by the Board
of Supervisors on April 2, 2003, at 11:45 a.m.
/ewc
The Board meets in Meeting Room f~241, on the Second Floor of the County Office Building. The
applicant or his representative must be present at this meeting.
Any additional materials you wish mailed to the Board on this request should be in the hands of
the Clerk by 12:00 noon, March 24, 2003. If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
CC:
Ben Foster
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Margaret Maliszewski
Larry Davis
Printed on recycled paper
THE
JOHN W. WHITEHEAD
Founder and President
RUTHERFORD
INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
Post Office Box 7482
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
U.S.A.
Telephone 434 · 978 · 3888
Facsimile 434 · 978 · 1789
E-Mail · t~istaff@mthefford.org
Internet · www. ruthefford.org
INSTITUTE
INTERNATIONAL OFFICE
CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPE
Budapest, Hungary
March 11, 2003
Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 Mclntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Appeal of Architectural Review Board Decision
Denying Application for Sign Proposed by Hightech
Signs for Freestyle Store, 475 Westfield Road
Decision Date: March 3, 2003
On behalf of Ben Foster, President of FRF, Inc., dba Hightech Signs, the
undersigned hereby appeals the above-referenced decision of the Architectural Review
Board to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Foster presents the following points of error that
warrant review and correction by the Board:
1. The Architectural Review Board abused its discretion in denying the
permit.
By imposing its own subjective, unwritten "standard" prohibiting the use of logos
or graphics on on-site business signs, despite that said "standard" is not rationally related
to the ARB's legitimate interest in prese~wing the aesthetic quality of the Entrance
Corridor, the ARB abused its discretion.
2. The Architectural Review Board exceeded its duly delegated authority in
denying the permit.
By imposing its own subjective, unwritten "standard" prohibiting the use of logos
or graphics on on-site business signs, without public review, formal approval or
publication of said standard, the ARB exceeded its duly delegated authority.
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
March 11, 2003
Page 2
The Architectural Review Board review and approval process is facially
invalid under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
Constitution and Article I, Sec. 12 of the Constitution of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
Commercial speech is entitled to constitutional protection, provided it concerns a
lawful activity and is not misleading. Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public
Service Corem'n, 447 U.S. 556, 566 (1980). Government restrictions on commercial
speech must directly advance a substantial government interest and must be no more
extensive than necessary to serve that interest. Id. Moreover, communication by signs is
"virtually pure speech," and receives favored protection under the First Amendment.
Arlington County Republican Comm. v. Arlington County, 983 F.2d 587, 593 (4th Cir.
1993). A municipality may not foreclose an entire medium of expression by prohibiting
all signage on private property. City ofLadue v. Gilleo, 512 U.S. 43 (1994).
The United States Supreme Court has repeatedly struck down governmental
regulation of private speech where no clear and objective standards have been
promulgated to govern the review and approval process. See, e.g, City ofLakewood v.
Plain Dealer, 486 U.S. 750, at 782 (1988) FW/PBS, Inc. v. City of Dallas, 493 U.S. 215,
225-26 (1990)("an ordinance which.., makes the peaceful enjoyment of freedoms which
the Constitution guarantees contingent upon the uncontrolled will of an [government]
official - as by requiring [permission] which may be granted or withheld in the discretion
of such official - is an unconstitutional censorship or prior restraint upon the enjoyment
of those freedoms"); City of Lakewood, 486 U. So at 782 ("a licensing statute placing
unbridled discretion in the hands of a government official or agency constitutes a prior
restraint and may result in censorship"). Regulations must be sufficiently clear so as to
allow persons of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is
prohibited. KEV, Inc v Kitsap County, 793 F.2d 1053 (9th Cir. 1986) (citing Grayned v.
City of Rockford, 408 U.S. 104, 108 (1972)).
There are no written guidelines for the restrictions imposed by the Architectural
Review Board. At the meeting on March 3, Mr. Foster specifically requested written
copies of the guidelines which were currently being implemented and was specifically
told that there was none available. The restrictions being imposed are therefore totally
subjective, arbitrary and discriminatory..
4. The ARB's decision violated Hightech and Freestyle's Fourteenth
Amendment rights, inasmuch as numerous examples of signs with
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
March 11, 2003
Page 3
exactly the same style of illuminated logos have been approved by the
ARB in the past.
Mr. Foster has presented numerous example of illuminated signs that included
logos or graphics that the ARB has approved in the past. This uneven and capricious
administration of the ARB's authority clearly demonstrates the dangers inherent in a
system of prior restraint lacking objective standards. Such standards are the "guideposts
that check the licensor and allow courts quickly and easily to determine whether the
licensor is discriminating against disfavored speech." Plain Dealer, 486 U.S. at 758. It
is apparent to Mr. Foster that the ARB's recent decisions, particularly with respect to the
Freestyle sign and a rejected sign created by Hightech for Dips & Sips on R. 29 North,
are clearly examples of discriminatory enforcement that violate the Fourteenth
Amendment's guarantee of equal protection. See, e.g., North Olmstead Chamber of
Commerce v. City of North Olmstead, 86 F. Supp.2d 755 (N.D. Ohio 2000) (Equal
Protection Clause was violated because speech was allowed to some speakers but not to
others; permitting scheme gave unfettered discretion to the permitting official
constituting an impermissible system of restraint).
The Architectural Review Board review and approval process is
facially invalid under the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the
United States Constitution for lack of prompt judicial review.
To qualify as "prompt judicial review" within the standards enunciated by the
Supreme Court in FW/PBS v. Dallas, supra, review should occur within no more than
two weeks from the date of application. The average time from ARB application to
review is 6 - 7 weeks.
In King Enterprises, Inc et al v. Thomas Township, 215 F.Supp.2d 891 (E.D. Mich.
2002), it was held that the sign ordinance does not indicate a time period for the building
inspector to grant or deny an application for a sign permit nor does it provide for
"prompt" judicial review. Consequently, the permit section of the ordinance appears to
constitute an unconstitutional prior restraint of protected speech and may not be enforced.
6. The ARB's unwritten restriction on displaying logos infringes the Lanham
Act, 15 U.S.C, § 1051 etseq.
The restrictions on logos also infringes the laws on interstate commerce
(see U.S. Const., Art. 1., § 8, cl. 3), which "prohibits local laws that
impose a burden on interstate commerce that is excessive in relation to the
putative local benefits." See Pike v. Bruce Church, 397 U.S. 137 (1970).
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
March 11, 2003
Page 4
Please contact the undersigned to inform Mr. Foster when the hearing on this matter
will be scheduled. Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.
Sincerely yours,
~TEV~~N~. ADEN, ESQ.
Ch'i'egL~i'gation Counsel
cc: Ben Foster, President
FRF, Inc., dba Hightech Signs
T =fRuTHERFORD INSTITUTE
INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS INTERNATIONAL OFFICE
' Post Office Box 7482 ~m2~ AND EASTERNBudapest,EUROPEFkmgary
Charlottesville, VA 22906-7482
Telephone 434 ° 978 · 3888
FacsSnli!.e 434 ' 978 · 1789
E~Mail · tr/staff@rathefford.o~g
lnternet · www.ratherfor,t org
March 11, 2003
Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County
401 Mclntire Rd.
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Appeal of Architectural Review Board Decision
Denying Application for Sign Proposed by Hightech
Signs for Freestyle Store, 475 Westfield Road
Decision Date: March 3, 2003
~On behalf of Ben Foster, President of FRF, Inc., dba Hightech Signs, the
undersigned hereby appeals the above-referenced decision of the Architectural Review
Board to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Foster presents the following points of error that
warrant review and correction by the Board:
1. The Architectural Review Board abused its discretion in denying the
permit.
By imposing its own subjective, unwritten "standard" prohibiting the use of logos
or graphics on on-site business signs, despite that said "standard" is not rationally related
to the ARB's legitimate interest in preservi_ng the aesthetic quality of the Entrance
Corridor, the ARB abused its discretiOn.
2. The Architectural Review Board exceeded its duly delegated authority in
denying the permit.
By imposing its own subjective, unwritten "standard" prohibiting the use of logos
or graphics on on-site business signs, without public review, formal approval or
publication of said standard, the ARB exceeded its duly delegated authority.
05-i !-05 22:2
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SU M MARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Freestyle Signs
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST."
Appeal of ARB decision
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Wayne Cilimberg, Margaret Maliszewski, Bob Tucker
AGENDA DATE:
ITEM NUMBER:
April 2, 2003
ACTION: IN FORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
Yes
REVIEWED BY:
Background:
ARB Review of Proposal: On March 3, 2003 the Architectural Review Board reviewed an application for new
signs to be installed for the Freestyle business located on the west side of Route 29 North at Westfield Road
(previously Starbase Alpha). The proposal included a new sign to be installed on the building and a new face
for the existing freestanding sign. (See Attachment A;) The proposed wall sign consisted of internally
illuminated channel letters reading "FREESTYLE" and an internally illuminated logo box depicting a
,¢'~'-nountain/wave graphic. The Board discussed the size, scale, and proportion of the graphic in relation to the
channel letters. They determined that the larger scale of the graphic would make internal illumination
inappropriate. The wall sign was approved with the condition that only the "FREESTYLE" letters would be
illuminated and the logo box would not be illuminated.
The new face for the. freestanding sign consisted of the word "FREESTYLE" in dark blue and "Your Source for
Adrenaline Sports" in black, with a mountain/wave graphic, on a white background. The existing freestanding
sign is internally illuminated and all portions of the new sign face were proposed to be translucent; i.e., all
portions of the sign face would be visible at night when the sign was lit. In keeping with the ARB's practice of
requiring that the backgrounds of internally illuminated cabinet signs be opaque (not permitting light to shine
through), so that only the message portion of the cabinet sign would be illuminated and visible at night, the
ARB voted unanimously to approve the proposal with the condition that only the word "FREESTYLE" would be
illuminated in the freestanding sign. In neither case did the ARB deny the use of the graphic - the Board
limited the extent of internal illumination. (See Attachments B-D for ARB action, minutes, and staff report.)
ARB Guidelines: The original ARB design guidelines were adopted in 1990-91 and included some specific
references to signs. In 1998 the ARB updated the sign. sections of the guidelines and last year the ARB
guidelines were made available on-line at the County's website. (See Attachment E for guidelines related to
signs.) Recognizing the need for additional clarification of their guidelines, the ARB is in the process of
updating the sign guidelines again. At a special meeting on March. 24, 2003, the ARB discussed _the issues of
internal illumination and Iogos/graphics. They discussed generally that no illumination or external illumination
are preferred, but that internal illumination might be approved for Iogos/graphics that meet certain guidelines
relating to scale, proportion, overall size, relative size, balance, color, complexity of image, etc. The Board
agreed to compose these specific guidelines at a meeting in the near future and to include them in the overall
~ign guidelines that they are currently revising. The Board also determined that they would like to present the
Proposed guidelines to the public at a meeting on June 9, 2003. (Staff is in the process of confirming this
schedule.)
Recommendation:
~,..~he ARB recommends that the application, as presented, be denied. The ARB can recommend approval of
e application with the condition that only the business name be illuminated in both the wall sign and the free
standing sign.
Attachments:
A- Freestyle sign proposal B- ARB action letter
C - Draft ARB minutes D - ARB staff report
E - ARB sign guidelines (1998)
F - Photos illustrating various types of signs and illumination
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE '1
T
64"
I
225"
Total 57 ft2
RECEIVED LN
PLANNING JAN. 31, 2003
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE 2
~EEES'I'YLE
March 17, 2003
ATTACHMENT B
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dcpartmcqt of Planning & Community Development
401 Mc[ntire Road, Room 218
Charlo~esville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296 - $8:Z3
Fax (434) 972 - 4012
Ben Foster
HighTech Signs
2165 Seminole Trail
Charlottesville VA 22901
RE: ARB-2003-06 Freestyle - Sign; Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2
Dear Mr. Foster:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above noted item at its meeting on Monday,
March 3, 2003. The board, by a vote of 5:0, approved the request, pending staff administrative approval of the
following conditions:
1. The logo box shall not be internally illuminated. If external illumination is proposed, provide
information on proposed light fixtures.
2. Internally illuminate "Freestyle" only in the freestanding cabinet sign. If external illumination is
proposed, provide information on proposed light fixtures.
Please provide 2 cop~es of the revised drawings or other information addressing each of these conditions au your
earliest convenience. Include a memo indicating how each condition has been satisfied. If changes other than
those requested har/e been made, identify those changes in the memo also. When staff's review of this
information indicates f:hat all conditions of approval have been met, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be
issued.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincrely,
La dscape Planner
JM/jcf
Cc:
File
John Grady
Greg Kamptner
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 2
Ms. Maliszewski stated that a portion of the Albemarle Square Shopping Center building does not face the road
in the same manner that Freestyle does.
Ms. Hobbs stated that it was a pretty close shotl She Pointed out that if it was done that wayso many years ago,
then someday when they get a'chance they need to look at the whole shopping center again.
Mr. Lebo stated that what they were saying was that the rules for that center are different from the rules for a
new sign.
Ms. Hobbs stated that those signs were grandfathered in.
Mr. Foster stated that he installed the Georgetown Farm sign on Thanksgiving of last year.
Mr. Train pointed out that the ARB did not see that sign. He asked if he had any other signs.
Mr. Foster presented photographs of other signs that he wanted the ARB to review.
Ms. Joseph asked that he submit all of the photographs at one time for review by the ARB.
Mr. Foster pointed out that the majority of the signs, with the exception of Keglers, are closer to the road than his
client's building. He stated that they were limited in visibility because his client's building was set back about 400
feet off the eage of the road. The visibility of the sign traveling southbound is limited because you come over a
hill. Visibility is limited traveling northbound because a building blocks the view.
Mr. Train stated that he was unaware that the Countrywide Loan sign was lit. 'He pointed out that generally they
have said no illumination to logo boxes.
Ms. Smith pointed out that they compromised on the proposal and changed it from multi-color to a single color.
Mr. Foster asked about the Dodge, Honda or the AMF signs.
Mr. Train stated that they havenot seen those signs.
Ms. Maliszewski stated that she did not recall reviewing the Brown's and AMF signs. She pointed out that the
Honda sign is in violation and that a previous Board approved the Dodge sign.
Ms. Smith stated that she had some questions on the Freestyle sign design itself. She asked if it would be
individual letters and not on a raceway.
Mr. Foster stated that was correct.
Ms. Smith stated that the image sent was computer generated. She pointed out that she was not sure if the
size of the logo is to scale in the computer-generated image.
Mr. Foster stated that it was in scale according to the building.
Ms. Smith asked if there was any reason physically that he could not center Freestyle and put the logo at a
scale that relates to Freestyle or over the first arch. She asked if there were any structural reasons why he
could not slide that sign around a little bit. She suggested that the word Freestyle be centered over the three
arches and then let the logo be centered over the other arch.
Mr. Foster noted that they were somewhat limited due to the construction of the front of that building and the
way that roof comes to that portion. There is some latitude that they can move the sign. The distance between
the left edge of the logo and the left edge of the building is the same as the dght edge of Freestyle to the right
edge of the building. He pointed out that it was a standard that his client has developed over the years. He
noted that they also feel that it should be illuminated in the evening based upon the fact that there are so many
Page 2
ATTACHMENT C
PAGE 4
Ms. Smith stated that they wanted the applicant to be able to come forth and know exactly what to expect.
They feel that would be a good thing and that they were trying to work towards that.
Mr. Foster stated that if they were not going to be able to illuminate the pole sign, they are thinking that they may
need to make some changes in the appearance of the sign to maximize their customer's visibility. Simply a
letter that big on a sign illuminated at night is nonexistent, particularly in that color. He recommended allowing
the 32 square feet that his client should be allowed according to the Zoning regulations for a second and a third
sign inside the cdteria for the County.
Mr. Train asked if there was any discussion.
Ms. Smith stated that this was a good point, if you are trying to do something within the Guidelines, you need to
design according to what will give you the message. She stated that they could not review this new proposal
because they just received it. This is exactly what they would have wanted to be submitted as an idea.
Ms. Joseph stated that she did not want this to be a design discussion. She stated that she wanted the
applicant to come in with what he wants and then they will give him what he wants or they don't give him
what he wants. They should rely on what they have done in the past and the guidelines. She stated that
she opposed designing his sign right now.
Ms. Smith stated that conceptually these are the steps that he should be doing, and not just do one and
get bulled over. Think about what the guidelines are and be able to respond to it so that they can get the
most for his message. She stated that she had comments about his sign. She felt strongly that this logo
is overscaled for these words. She thought the computer-generated image was cock-eyed and put on
badly. She felt that it would be a lot more attractive if the logo was related to the sign, maybe the small
mountain being the 24 inches and then whatever he wants to do with the height she did not care.
Somehow, it needs to be relating. She noted that the lettering was out of proportion and not centered
over the arches. She stated that she would either like to move the logo over and center the letters on
those three arches or reduce the logo so that there is a balance to it. She felt that the word Freestyle only
should be illuminated and if he wants it tO be bigger that he should come back with a new design.
Ms. Hobbs stated that she agreed that the lettering was as important as the logo and that it should relate
to each other.
Ms. Joseph agreed with the staff's recommendation.
Ms. Hobbs agreed with staff's recommendation. All you need to do is read the analysis number 5 and
that pretty much says what she was thinking.
Mr. Lebo stated that he knew that the consensus was that they don't illuminate Iogos, but he would differ
with this one because he felt that it looks unique and he finds it attractive. He suggested a compromise
by allowing external illuminat!on on the pole sign and then allowing internal illumination on the wall sign.
Mr. Train stated that external illumination would give them everything that they wanted. Only "Freestyle"
on the freestanding sign can be illuminated and the logo must match the one color, which was the Radio
Shack and the Countrywide approval. He agreed with the staff's recommendation.
Ms. Smith stated that it was a bad photo. She stated that if the sign was in scale that she could agree with
Mr. Lebo to allow it only on the wall.
Mr. Train agreed with the staff's recommendations.
Motion: Ms. Joseph moved for approval of the proposal as presented, with the following conditions to be
administratively approved by staff:
Page 4
ATFACHMENT D
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT PAGE 1
Project #: Name ARB-2003-6: Freestyle Signs
Review Type Certificate of Appropriateness for Signs
Parcel Identification Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2
Location West side of Route 29 North at 475 Westfield Road, south side of Westficld
Road
Zoned Entrance Corridor (EC), Commercial (C-1)
Magisterial District Rio
Proposal- To install a new channel letter wall sign with logo box and to reface an existing
intem.a_lly_illuminated pole-mounted cabinet sign
ARB Meeting Date March 3, 2003
Staff Contact Janet Miller
PROJECT HISTORY
ARB-(SIGN) 97-05: The ARB, on May 19, 1997 approved a 5' x 5' internally illuminated, freestanding cabinet
PROJECT DETAILS
The applicant proposes to install one channel letter wall sign with a logo box and reface an existing internally
illuminated freestanding cabinet sign.
Wall Signs:
Sign Type: Channel letters
Illumination: Internal neon
Text: FREESTYLE
Sign Size: 2' high x 18.75' long (37.5 SF)
Overall Sign Height: 14.5' to top of sign
Colors: Dark blue (PMS 2727) faces (with the first four letters having 2 horizontal white lines dividing the letters
into thirds), white trim caps and returns
Location: Within the signband (above the arches), on the east fagade of the building, fronting Route 29
Sign Type: Logo box
Illumination: Internal neon
Sign Size: 3.5' high x 5.5' long (19 SF)
Overall Sign Height: 15'-3 ½" to top of sign
Graphics: Snow-capped mountain transitioning down into a wave at the base of the logo box
o~lor..' White, light blue (PMS 298), yellow (PMS 108), dark blue (PMS 2727); dark blue trim cap, white return
ocation: To the left (south) of the proposed channel letter wall sign, on the east faqade of the building, fronting
Route 29
ARB 3/03/2003 Freestyle Signs -- Page 1
ATTACHMENTE
ARB GUIDELINES
Signs
General Guidelines
(Adopted by the ARB on November 16, 1998)
1. Material used in both sign and support structures should compliment the building being
served by the sign.
2. Lighting should be shielded and not create glare.
3. Signs with no lighting or with indirect illumination pointed downward are more appropriate
for Entrance Corridors than internally lit signs.
4. The structure of monument signs should not overpower the message portion of the sign.
5. Landscaping should be used with freestanding and monument signs to integrate them into the
landscape.
6. Sign colors should not clash with the context of the building or site.
7. Sign colors should not be overly intense; colors of a Iow to medium intensity are appropriate
for signs in Entrance Corridors.
8. The use of more than three colors is rarely appropriate for a sign in the Entrance Corridor.
9. Jarring color combinations should be avoided (for example~ orange crush (Pantone 150-1364)
and lime fizz (Pantone 14-0264).
10. Typically, monument signs are preferred to pole-mounted freestanding signs.
11. Applicants should be prepared to provide backup documentation when the design of a
proposed sign is a trademark design.
Policy for illuminated Cabinet Signs
Mdopted by the ARB on November 16, 1998)
1. Internally illuminated cabinet signs in Entrance Corridors should have non411uminated
backgrounds or backgrounds treated with an opaque backing such that when the sign is lit,
the background is not illuminated.
2. Internally illuminated cabinet signs, should be constructed such that no light spills outward
from the top, bottom, or sides o£the sign.
3. Cabinet signs with illum/nated backgrounds will not be approved administratively.
ATTACHMENT F
Staples monument sign at Shoppers' World.
Internally illuminated cabinet w/translucent red
background.
Staples monument sign at Shoppers' World. Daytime
view.
Albemarle Square pylon sign. Internally illuminated
cabinet with translucent white background.
Goodyear pylon sign. Internally illuminated cabinet with
translucent blue background.
Albemarle First Bank monument sign. Externally
illuminated.
Whole Foods wall sign. ~ illuminated white
channel letters above internally illuminated cabinet
with white letters on an opaque green background
Lowe's pylon sign. Internally illuminated cabinet with
opaque blue background.
Whole Foods/Staples monument sign.
Daytime view.
Examples of existing signs on the 29N Entrance Corridor, illustrating various backgrounds and types of illumination.
a. lq'RAZIER SOLSBERRY
Also Admitted
in Florida
ATTORNEY AT LAW
103 East Water Street, Suite 301
Post Office Box 625
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-0625
Telephone
(434) 296-2220
Facsimile
(434) 977-4228
March 26, 2003
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Ella W. Carey, Clerk
Albemarle COunty Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Re: Appeal: ARB-(Sign)-2003-06. Freestyle Sign
Dear Ms. Carey:
I will be appearing at the hearing on Tuesday, April 2, 2003 on behalf of the sign applicant
and will appear together with Steven H. Aden, Esquire of The Rutherford Institute. Enclosed is our
supplemental submission on behalf of the sign applicant and in connection With this appeal. The
supplemental submission consists of seven copies each of the following:
Letter of March 17, 2003, from Janet Miller.
Photo of proposed free-standing sign.
Photo of proposed wall signage.
Thank you for kindly agreeing in your telephone conversation with Mr. Aden earlier this
week, to extend the deadline for this submission until today.
Thank you for your attention to this.
RFS/bc
Enclosure
cc: Steven H. Aden, Esquire
Ben Foster
Yours very truly,
Received at: 5:20PM, 3/24/2003
n~ uy: ~.gn'cecn;
lVla r - ;,-'Zl. - u;_-t D:-i /I-'M,;
wage
March 17, 2003
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dfpa~¢me~[ of Pla,ming & Community Dcvclopmcnt
40[ Mclndre Road, Room 218
Chatlollesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(434) 296. 5823
Fax (434) 972 - 4(112
Ben Foster
HighTech Signs
2165 Seminole Trail
Charlottesvi,e, VA 22901
RE: ARB-2003-06 Freestyle - Sign; Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2
Dear Mr. Foster:
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above noted item at its meeting on Monday,
M. ar.ch 3,.2003,,-The board, by a vote of 5:0, approved the request, pending staff administrative approval of the
following conditions:
1. The logo box shall not be internally illuminated, tf external illumination is proposed, provide
information on proposed lig ht fixtures.
2. ntemally illuminate "Freestyle" only in the frees[and[ng cabinet sign, If external illumination is
proposed, provide information on proposed light fixtures.
Plaase provide 2 copies of the revised drawings or other information addressing each of these conditions at your
earliest convenience. Include a memo indicating how each condition has been satisfied If changes other than
those 'requested have been made, identify those changes in the memo also, When staff's review of this
info[mation indicates that all conditions of approval have been met, a Certificate of Appropriateness may be
issued.
tf you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sin/c~rely,
dtsaie~e~ ila n ne~
'JM/jcf
File
"'Jbhn Grady
'Greg Kamptner
C~-26-03 02: s, 4 N
Your Source For
Adrenaline Sports!
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Strategic Plan Progress Report
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Review Strategic Plan progress, provide
schedule fall retreat
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Ms. White, Ms. AIIshouse
AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
April 2, 2003
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
guidance, CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS_: Yes (2) , _...-.-----'---'
REVIEWED .¥:
/
BACKGROUND:
In spring 2002, the Board initiated the County's strategic planning process. The Board developed the County's Vision, Mission,
and initial Goal Statements. Since that time, staff developed a framework and timetable, incorporated changes suggested by
the Board at their October and January strategic planning work sessions, targeted priority.objectives based on their level of
importance and timing considerations, and developed strategies and action plans to achieve these priority objectives.
DISCUSSION:
Attachment 1:
As a result of staffs' ongoing strategic plan implementation efforts, staff recommends combining the two separate customer
service objectives into one for additional clarity and focus. Attachment 1 is a copy of the current strategic plan's ten
priorities, including the Board's recommended changes from the January work session and this additional modification for
customer service. The proposed changes to the customer service objectives are on the top of page 7 in this attachment.
Attachment 2:
Information regarding the County's 2002 overall progress in relation to the strategic plan is included in the County
Executive's recommended budget, which you have previously received. To keep the Board informed on progress in specific
areas, Attachment 2 is a quarterly report on the County's progress on the ten priorities.
In accordance with the strategic plan timeline, staff will complete the County's strategic plan document in June and present it
to the Board for approval.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the Board review the quarterly report, and provide any additional guidance for staff. Staff further
recommends that the Board schedule a Strategic Planning Retreat in the fall of 2003 to review the County's long-range
forecasts, annual progress, and make any needed adjustments to the County's strategic direction.
03-26-03
03.040
Attachment 1 Strategic Plan Goals, Objectives, Strategies April 2003
STRATEGIC PLAN
FRAMEWORK
TEN PRIORITIES
April 2, 2003
Attachment 1
To maintain Albemarle County's stature as a quarry community by promoting the values of educa{fon and lifelong
leareing~ historic and scenic preserva~len, safatyt affordability, culturol diversity~ ci~zen parifcipa~on and economic
opportunity thatmake the County a desiroble place in which to grow uPz roise a family and grow old while preserving our
MISSION
To Enhance the well-being and quality of life for all citizens through the provision of the h ighest level of public service
consistent with the prudent use of public funds
I
I
A Ibe~ C
I
GO~S
(This will be a
contbination of the
School Board's Goals
and other goals to be
developed at a later
date.)
2. Protec~the Counb/~ I
Natural,, Scenic and
tfistorlc Resources
I
GOALS
Protect and/or preserve
the County's rural
character
Protect and/or preserve
the County's natural
resources
Protect and/or preserve
the County's historic and
cultural resources
Protect and/or preserve
the County's scenic
resources
Protect and/or preserve
Ute County's open spaces
Provide for
environmentally sensitive
government operations at
the local and regional level
3. Enhance fhe Quality of
Life for ail A lbem~rle County
Citizens
I
GOALS
Make the County a safe and
healthy community in which
citizens feel secure to live
work and play
Provide an efficient and
responsive human services
system that emphasizes
prevention and fosters self-
sufficiency
Promote a variety of safe,
sanitary & affordable
housing types
Plan, develop and maintain a
diverse regional
transportation system that
addresses population
growth and protects
neighborhoods
Maintain a strong and
sustainable economy
Provide opportunities for
the healthy and productive
use of leisure time
I 4
, ProvMe Effcac~f~re and
E ftfcient C ounb/ services to
the public in a ceurt~ous and
equitable manner
I
GOALS
Provide effective, responsive
and courteous service to our
customers
Fund County serv ices in a fair,
efficient manner and provide
needed public facilities and
infrastructure
Maintain and improve
relationships with other public
jurisdictions in order to
)rovide better services to our
citizens
Create and maintain an
effective dialogue with the
corn'nunity, that encourages
problem solving and
incorporates on-going
feedback systems.
Error! Not a valid link.
TEN PRIORITIES
3
Attachment 1
Protect the County's Natural, Scenic, and Historic Resources
Protect and/or preserve the County's rural character
(2.1.1) By December 2003, the County will have a strategy in place to ensure
the implementation of completed neighborhood master plans within each
development area.
2.1.1.1. Promote community and business development activities and partnerships
that support master plan initiatives.
2.1.1.2. Formulate a detailed infrastructure plan that outlines a long-term approach
to meeting identified infrastructure needs.
2.1.1.3. Encourage and maintain ongoing meaningful interaction of community
members and county staff as process moves from planning to implementation phase
2.1.1.4..Insure the provision of county services that are adequate to meet the needs
of the master-planned neighborhood
2.1.1.5 Insure that county decisions, actions, policies and long term commitments are
consistent with the priorities identified in the master plan.
e
(2.1.2)By December 2003, the County will have an implementation plan in
place that identifies the actions and resources necessary to carry out the
County's newly revised rural area polices
2.1.2.1. Prioritize implementation items from those that are identified in new rural
area polices chapter.
2.1.2.2 Develop a coordinated approach to effectively implement the required
changes to zoning and county ordinances
2.1.2.3. Identify resources necessary to implement new policies
2.1.2.4. Develop a communication plan that will ensure that the newly revised rural
area policies are well understood by policy makers, county staff, and members of the
community.
2.1.2.5. Develop data collection and a monitoring system to ensure implementation
process obtains the desired results.
2.1.2.6. Establish a mechanism for the development of future updates to the plan.
Protect and/or preserve the County's natural resources
4
Attachment 1
(2.2.1) By December 2004, the County working in cooperation with Rivanna
Water and Sewer Authority, will have an integrated water resource plan in
place that directs the County's efforts to address water quality and water
supply.
2.2. I. 1. Establish a team to manage the process of developing an integrated water
resources plan that includes representation of the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority, Engineering & Public Works and Planning & Community' Development.
Others may be included by the County or R WSA as needed to assure adequate
representation of affected agencies and citizens.
2.2.1.2. Establish a process for assuring public input prior to drafting a plan and
adequate opportunity for comment prior to bringing the proposal to the Board of
Supervisors
2.2.1.3. Assure the plan is consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan or
provides for amending the Comprehensive Plan to assure consistency.
Provide for environmentally sensitive government operations at the local and
regional level
(2.6.1) By July 2004, the County working in cooperation with Rivanna Solid
Waste Authority will have a long-term solid waste strategy in place that
emphasizes the importance of waste reduction, reuse of materials and
recycling and provides reasonable solid waste disposal options for County
citizens and businesses.
2.6.1.1. Establish a team to manage the process of developing a strategic plan that
includes representation of the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority and Engineering &
Public Works. Others may be included by the County or RSWA as needed to assure
adequate representation of affected agencies.
2.6.1.2. Establish a process that assures public input prior to drafting the strategic
plan and adequate opportunity for comment prior to bringing the proposal to the
Board of Supervisors.
2.6.1.3. Assure the strategic plan is consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan
or provides for amending the Comprehensive Plan to assure consistency.
(2.6.2.) By July 2003, the County will have an environmental management
system in place that ensures environmentally sensitive County government
operations.
2. 6.2.1. Establish initial team to manage the process of developing a system
2. 6.2.2. Evaluate current practice, policies and procedures
Attachment 1
2.6.2.3. Establish policies and procedures for implementing the new system
2.6.2.4. Determine resources needed to address initial and ongoing
responsibilities
Enhance the Quality of Life for All Albemarle County Citizens
Make the County a safe and healthy community in which citizens feel secure to live,
work and play.
(3.1.1.) June 2004, the County will establish a strategy to insure that its
public safety systems meet the demands of the growing County.
3.1.1.1. Establish county public safety standards and a plan to achieve them.
3.1.1.2. Coordinate technology advances on a regional basis.
3.1.1.3. Plan for and provide infrastructure necessary to support desired level of service.
3.1.1.4. Assess and improve public safety's organizational capabilities to achieve
established standards.
3.1.1.5. Increase public safety prevention activities.
Promote a variety of safe, sanitary and affordable Housing types
0
(3.3.2.) December 2003, the County will develop policies and ongoing
programs that increase affordable home ownership options for households
with incomes below 80% of median income.
3.3.2.1. Prepare Albemarle County residents for homeownership through promotional
efforts and enhanced educational programs.
3.3.2.2. Promote public awareness and support for affordable housing needs in the
community.
3.3.2.3, Develop financial and publicpolicy incentives to increase the production and
sustainability of affordable housing
3.3.2.4. Create an informed and collaborative public/private partnership to implement
affordable housing options
Provide Effective and Efficient County Services to the Public in a
Courteous and Equitable Manner
Attachment 1
Provide effective, responsive, and courteous services to our customers
J
(4.1.1.) July 2004, each County department will establish and implement
revised standards for superior customer service, which wilt include th e
implementation of additional customer-friendly ways to deliver services.
4..t. 1.1. Develop and implement a County Customer Service Academy
4.1.t.2. Implement a process within each department for developing specific
department standards for superior customer service
4.1.1.3. Conduct internal and external customer satisfaction surveys on the
superior customer se~x, ices guidelines.
(4.1.3.) June 2005, the County will be recognized as a quality place of
employment with a workforce of employees who continuously provide high
quality, customer-focused service to its citizens.
4.1.3.1 Develop a total rewards strategic plan that rewards/recognizes and values
excellent job performance
4.1.3.2. Develop a recruitment plan to identify and target high potential
candidates
4.1.3.3. Focus on employee retention by creating an environment that encourages
trust, respect and employee advocacy.
Fund County services in a fair, efficient manner and provide needed county public
facilities and infrastructure
10.
(4.2:1.) By June 2004, the Count)' will establish criteria defining fair and
efficient revenue sources, recovery of the costs of services, and fee schedules
for beneficiaries of special enhanced or targeted County services.
4.2. i. 1. Identify and assess the services for which fees are currently charged and
recommend modifications based on an assessment of the importance of services to
the mission of each department/agency and overall to the County
4.2.1.2. Research other localities to determine how they address cost recovery
and service fees in connection with special, enhanced or targeted services
7
Attachment 2 Progress Report
STRATEGIC PLAN
Quarterly Progress Report
Priority Objectives
April 2, 2003
Attachment 2 Progress Report
Table of Contents
Pages
Protect the County's Natural, Scenic and Historic Resources
Priority Objectives:
Develop Strategy for Implementation of Completed Neighborhood Master Plans
Develop Implementation Plan for Carrying Out Revised Rural Area Polices
Develop Long-term Solid Waste Strategy (in cooperation with RWSA)
Develop Integrated Water Resource Plan (in cooperation with RWSA)
Develop Environmental Management System
3
4
5
6
7
Enhance Quality of Life for All Albemarle County Citizens
Priority Objectives
Develop Strategy to Insure Public Safety Systems Meet Demands of Growing County
Develop Policies and Programs to Increase Affordable Home Ownership Options
Provide Effective and Efficient Service to the Public in a Courteous and Equitable Manner
Priority Objectives
Develop and Implement Revised Standards for Customer Service
Be Recognized as a Quality Place of Employment
Establish Criteria Defining Fair and Efficient Revenue Sources, Cost Recovery and Fee
Schedules
10
11
12
2
AttaChment 2 Progress Report
PROTECT THE couNTY'S NATURAL, SCENIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
O'BJ ECTIVE.:
By December 2003,. the County will have :a 'strategy in place to'ensure the implementation of
completed "neighborhood master plans within' each development area."
HIGHLIGHTS
Implementation Plan Strategy has been completed.
The Strategies are as follows:
Promote community and business development activities andpartnerships that support
master plan initiatives
· Encourageand maintain ongoing meaningful interaction of community members and
county staff as process moves from planning to implementation phase
· Formulate a detailed infrastructureplan that outlines a long-term approach to meeting
identified infrastructure needs
· Insure theprovision of county services that are adequate to meet the needs of the master-
planned neighborhood
· Insure that County decisions, actions, policies and long-term commitments are consistent
with the priorities identified in the master plan.
Identified actions needed to complete the strategies for implementation plan.
· Implementation of the Crozet Master Plan in accordance with these strategies..
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROTECT THE COUNTY'S NATURAL, SCENIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
GOAL: Protect and/or preserve the County's rural character
OBJECTIVE:
By December.200.3~ .the .County 'will have an implementation plan i'n' place:that identifies, the actions
and'! ~SoUrCes necessarY'.t°':carry'out the County's neWly revised rural area pOliCe~
· Completed facilitated meeting to create preliminary strategies to be used in the development of the
implementation plan.
· Identified actions needed to complete the strategies for implementation plan.
Rural area Comprehensive Plan review has been delayed to allow Planning Commission and Board
reconsideration of the Mountain Overlay District. Continued MOD review will require further evaluation
of the RuraiArea Comprehensive Plan review schedule and will impact the completion of the
implementation plan
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Re-evaluate the RuralArea Comprehensive Plan review schedule and, therefore, the implementation plan
schedule based on the impact of additional review of the proposed Mountain Overlay District.
· Evaluate the recommendations/strategies in the draft RuralArea Plan and make recommendations to the
Planning Commission on implementation measures.
Re-evaluate the implementation strategies and actions identified to date for the implementation plan to
insure all necessary steps have been identified to implement the adopted Rural Area Plan
recommendations and implementation measures.
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROTECT THE COUNTY'S NATURAL, SCENIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
IGOAL: Protect and/or preserve the County's rural character
i
OBJECTIVE:
By July 2004~ the.County, working in cooperation with RivannaSolid Waste .Authority~ will. havea
lOng-term solid waste strategy in PlaCe that. emphasizes the. importance of'waste reduction, reuse of
.materials, and recyclings: and provides reasonable solid waste disposal options for:county citizens
and businesses.
· Project Schedule has been drafted and is being reviewed by steering team members.
· Staff assembling existingpolicies andprograms for review by steering team.
· Considering adding additional member to steering committee.
II
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Establish public forums for sharing of concerns to be addressed with theplan
· Recommendation to be brought before Board for consideration after public review and comments.
· Implementation of approved solid waste management strategy.
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROTECT THE COUNTY'S .NATURAL, ,SCENIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
OBJECT:IVE:
By December .2004, the County, working in cooperation w.ith Rivanna Water and"SeWer .AUthority~
willh'ave.an i'ntegrated'water. 'resource plan in placethat directs, the CoUntY's effort to'~ddress
water.qualitYan'd water, supply
· Project schedule drafted and being reviewed by steering team members.
· Staff is focusing on the completion of the stormwater masterplan, anticipated to be completed mid-
summer, before moving forward with other efforts associated with this item.
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Establish public forums for sharing of concerns to be addressed with theplan
· Recommendation to be brought before the Board for consideration after public review and comment.
· Implementation of approved integrated water resourceplan
6
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROTECT THE COUNTY'S NATURAL, SCENIC AND HISTORIC RESOURCES
IGOAL: Provide for environmentally sensitive government operations at the local and regional level
OBJECTIVE:
By July :2003> the' County will have an environmental management system in place that ensures ~an
~envirOnmentally sensitive County .government operation.
HIGHLIGHTS
· Established a steering team with representatives from the County Executive's Office, County Attorney's
Office, School System and the Department of Engineering and Public Works
· Conducted research ofprograms andpolicies from other localities for use in the-development of the
County's policies and procedures
· Contacted regional agencies regarding environmental managementpractices
· Developed an inventory of all County and School facilities for use in conducting facility evaluations
· Began evaluation of organizational structure for consideration to establish an ongoingprogram
· Hired a consultant to conduct sample facility evaluations to be used in the development of a specific
environmental management system for ~41bemarle County
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Board of Supervisors and School Board approval ofenvironmentalpolicies and procedures
· Completion offacility evaluations
· Development ofplan to address ongoing responsibilities
Attachment 2
Progress RePort
ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR' ALL ALBEMARLE COUNTY aTIZENS
IGOAL: Make the County a safe and healthy community in which citizens feel secure to live, work, and
play.
'OBJECTIVE:
~By ~JUne 2004, the County Will.' establish:a strategy to ~insure that :its. publiC safety:'sys~e'ms meet the
'demands: of'the.growing County.
Il HIGHLIGHTS
· Conducted a workload allocation study. (Police)
· Established a customer survey for Victim Witness program. (Police/ECC)
· Redesigned employee orientationprogram. (ECC)
· Established Call TaMng and Dispatch time standards for Police and EMS agencies. (ECC)
· Planned and completed the annual community training drill at Zehmer Hail.
· Coordinated citizen training classes for the "Citizen Emergency Response Team'program. (ECC)
· Began collecting National Fire and EMS service standards and service standards from benchmark
localities in Virginia. (Fire)
· Completed initial Department of Justice Homeland Security Grant. (Fire)
· Completed Fire Station construction schedule and submitted in FY 03/04 CIP
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Re-configuration of the Police Sector/Beat system. (Police)
· Update and sign the memorandum of understanding between the County Fire/Rescueand the Police
Department.
· Complete the Homeland Security Grant application for the regional Hazmat Team. (ECC)
· Space needs analysis, 800 MHz Radio Project, Computer Network Redesign and enhancemen~ (ECC~
· Fire Department will begin to participate on ACPD Mobile Data Terminal Team.
· Begin working on a feasibility study for SAFE KIDSprogram (Fire)
8
Attachment 2 Progress Report
ENHANCE THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR ALL ALBEMARLE COUNTY CITIZENS
IGOAL: Promote a variety of safe, sanitary and affordable housing types
OBJECT. IYE::
BY DeCember'2003, .the Countywill 'develop policies and,ongoing programs that increase :affordable
home oWnership options for ~hoUs'ehoIds 'with incomes below 80%of. median incom'e~
HIGHLIGHTS ]l
· Received enabling legislation forflexibility in developing an affordable dwelling unit (ADU) ordinance.
· Completed draft amendment to the Comprehensive Plan regarding affordable housing.
· Participated in development of a conference entitled "Making Mixed Use Work" to bring together
policymakers and practitioners to discuss mixed-use planning that includes affordable housing.
· Began work with a task force created by Piedmont Housing ~411iance to study long-term affordability
strategies using housing trusts and land trusts.
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Submit Comprehensive Plan amendment to Planning Commission for recommenation to the Board of
Supervisors.
· Participate in discussions with Planning staff on proposals that may be applicable for seekingproffers on
affordable housing.
· Begin developing implementation actions to support Comprehensive Plan amendment
9
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC IN A COURTEOUS AND
EQUITABLE MANNER
IGOAL: Provide Effective, Responsive and Courteous Services to our Customers
:OBi'ECTIVE:
By'July'2004, each County Department will establish and implement revised standards :for superi;or
customer service, whiCh'will include the implementati'on of additi:onal customer,[riendly ways.to
deliver services.
HIGHLIGHTS
The Strategic Planning Customer Service Objectives were combined- provided for improved focus and
staff coordination
Customer Service Academy Team organized and began work. Curriculum is currently being developed.
Customer Service Best Practice benchmark study has been completed. Staff interviewed customer service
experts in Chesterfield County, Martha Jefferson Hospital, the Crutchfield Organization and Plow and
Hearth.
Eighteen members of the County's Leadership Council/Management Group read "Be Our Guest" by the
Disney Institute and participated in a luncheon book discussion.
FUTURE ACTIONS
Organizational Customer Service Standards will be developed by the Leadership Council.
A Customer Service Academy will be conducted and will include representatives from each Department
Internal and External Customers will be surveyed to identify ways to improve customer service
10
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC IN A COURTEOUS'AND
EQUITABLE MANNER
IGOAL: Provide Effective, Responsive and Courteous Services to our Customers
.O.B] ECTIVE:
By .June 20.05, the' County:will be recognized .as a quality 'place,of emPloyment.with a workforCe of
employees whOcontinuously provide high qualitY, customer--focused serVice.to its ~citiz'ens.
HIGHLIGHTS
· Identified actions needed to accomplish objective with cross functional team
· Have identified competitive market and continue to survey to ensure maintain market comPetitiveposition
· Established and implemented exit survey tool and have identified thirdparty administrator
FUTURE ACTIONS ]1
· Assess current recruitment/advertising strategy andproject vacancies
· Identify focus group to help evaluate performance management system to target areas of improvement and
make necessary revisions
· Develop succession planningprogram and tools
· Assess current training and develop targetedprofessional development
· Identify consultant to assist with evaluating current total rewards programs
11
Attachment 2 Progress Report
PROVIDE EFFECTIVE AND EFFICIENT SERVICE TO THE PUBLIC IN A COURTEOUS AND
EQUITABLE MANNER
IGOAL: Fund County services in a fair, efficient manner and provide needed County public facilities and ]
I
infrastructure
I
OBJECTIVE:.
BY June 2004, the County will establish criteria, defining fair and efficient:revenue:sources, recovery
of'the costs of. services, andfee~sched~iles fOr beneficiaries of special, enhanced or'targetedCourity
services~
HIGHLIGHTS
· Action Plan developed
· Research conducted on decal rates
Data gathered on land use taxation
· ~4nnual reassessment report completed
FUTURE ACTIONS
· Survey will be conducted to find ways other jurisdictions establish fee structures and ways to recover costs
of services.
12
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE-
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Joint Work Session
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Review of topics and issues to be addressed in the Rural
Areas Comprehensive Plan section
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs: Cilimberg, Benish; Ms. McDowell
AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER:
April 2, 2003- Board of Su pervisors/Planning Commission
Joint Work Session
ACTION:
INFORMATION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY: Cilimberg; Benish
BACKGROUND:
On March 5, 2003, in a joint work session with the Board of Supervisors and Planning Commission, staff received direction
regarding the potential topics and major issues to be researched and addressed in Rural Areas section of the Comprehensive
Plan. In response to that direction, staff has revised the report accordingly. A copy of these revisions is attached fo~ review
and comment (Attachment A).
The Board and Commission also directed staff to examine the status and provide a summary of Family Divisions. A copy of
staff's research and recommendations for Family Divisions is attached for review and comment (Attachment B).
In addition, the Guiding Principles for the Rural Area are attached for review and comment. The Guiding Principles are
included as Attachment C.
DISCUSSION:
· Comprehensive Plan Summary of Discussion. The re port includes the information provided in the March 5~h report,
as well as a summary of the direction given to staff at the meeting. The format of the report is as follows: following
each topic reviewed on March 5th, a new section has been added titled "Direction to Staff.' This new section (in a box)
summarizes the direction given to staff at the work session. The bulleted strategies identified under each topic in the
original report have not been changed, unless otherwise noted in the "Direction to Staff" sections. (Attachment A)
· Family Divisions. The attached report includes a summary of regulations, results from research conducted in 1997,
and a comparison with other Virginia Counties. Staff has also included recommendations for strategies to be
conducted during the comprehensive plan review regarding family divisions. (Attachment B)
· Guiding Principles: After several extensive discussions, the Planning Commission determined that the attached
Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas should be the foundation for future rural area decisions. The Guiding Principles
reflect the Growth Management policy to conserve "the balance of the County for rural areas and resource protection.
Resource protection is the basic theme behind the County's growth management approach." Further, the Growth
Management policy currently identifies agricultural and forestal resources as the "most critical County resources and
the desired primary land use in the Rural Area." The most important deviation of the Guiding Principles from existing
policies is .that agricultural and forestal land uses would share equal status in with natural resources, land preservation
and conservation, water supply resources, scenic resources, historical, archeological and cultural resources in future
policy development. (Attachment C)
Rural Areas Comprehensive Plan Joint Work Session
Apdi 2, 2003
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has provided the summary of major issues to insure the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor's direction has
· been accurately reflected. Information regarding family divisions has been included for review and comment.
The Guiding Principles for the Rural Areas has been provided for review and comment.
ATTACHMENTS:
A Comprehensive Plan Major Issues
B Family Divisions Preliminary Research
C Guiding Principles for the Rural Area
A TTA CHMENT A
RURAL AREAS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
MARCH 5, 2003 WORK SESSION SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION:
The Board of Supervisors and the Planning Commission at a joint work session discussed the following
topics and issues on March 5, 2003.
The format of this report is' as follows: after each topic major issues section (contained in the March 5th
report), a new section has been added titled "Direction to Staff." This new section (in box) summarizes
the direction given to staff at the work session. The bulleted strategies identified under each topic in the
original report have not been changed, unless otherwise noted in the "Direction to Staff" sections.
It should be noted that the "major issues" in the. March 5th report are not the only major issues considered
in the Rural Area review. They are the issues identified by staff to be the ones most in need of direction
from the Board and Commission.
INFRASTRUCTURE/COMMUNITY SERVICES
I. Transportation
Transportation needs should be carefully analyzed so as not to conflict with the pdmary goal of the
County's growth management policy to direct growth into the designated growth areas and conserve the
remainder of the County for rural areas and resource protection. The two main considerations in rural
transportation issues are providing safe roads and maintaining rural character. The County should
consider the following strategies to determine what tools could be used to provide a safe transportation
network in the rural areas while maintaining the rural character:
· Road improvements should not necessarily preclude that paving and widening of roads is a sole
solution, but rather focus on safety improvements such as providing shoulders, guardrails, and spot
improvements such as straightening a curve.
· The Rural Rustic Roads program, recently created by the Virginia Department of Transportation,
should be implemented to provide an alternative to the Pave-in-place program. Rural Rustic Roads is
a more environmentally friendly and less costly way than the Pave-in-Place program.
· Re-evaluate the Pave-in-Place program. This program is little used in the County as few roads can
meet the criteria. Also, this program does not meet the goal of maintaining the rural character, as the
design standards are more like urban road standards (i.e., rights-of-way area and pavement widths).
· Consider expanding transportation altematives, such as JAUNT to provide and enhance rural transit
opportunities.
· Explore new transport[~tion alternatives such as park and ride lots and traffic calming in crossroad
communities.
Major Issue:
· There needs to be a balance between the safety of rural roads and maintaining the rural
character. Staff will evaluate the need to establish rural road design standards to help
articulate expectations for road design that meet this balance.
3
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
It should be clearly understood that it is not the intention of the County to increase road capacity
in the-rural areas.
The County should serve needs of rural area residents with safe and well-maintained roads.
We do not need to evaluate the Pave in Place Program; we should evaluate the Rustic Roads
program for implementation.
II. Water and Sewer
Current County policy is to restdct development in water supply watersheds and to discourage the
location of public facilities such as public sewer and water lines in the rural areas. Current County policy
also does not support central water and sewer systems. The County shoUld consider the following
strategies:
· Maintaining the current policy of not encouraging the extension of the Jurisdictional Area that serves
the Development Areas.
· As part of the Groundwater Program, the Groundwater Committee has recommended the County
adopt a policy that would provide technical guidance on how to conduct site-level groundwater
assessments.
· The Planning Commission has had several work sessions with planning staff and representatives of
the Groundwater Committee regarding central water and sewer systems. It was generally agreed that
County policy should be re-evaluated toward the use of central systems. In particular, rural
preservation developments could utilize central systems where the site's groundwater suggested that
employing a central system would be the most sustainable approach. A Rural Utility District could be
created by the County to ensure proper operation and maintenance of any such central system.
· Tools that could be used to achieve water protection at a specific rural preservation development site
could include using community open space for reserve drainfields and/or well fields.
· There would have to be design flexibility to maximize the effectiveness of site-level groundwater
studies.
Major Issue:
· Central water and sewer systems are to be considered for RPD's or other types of rural
development. Staff will be re-examining current County policy which discourages use of
central systems, particularly for use with RPD's and possibly other types of rural
development.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
With a focus on technology, staff will explore the use of central systems. Central water and sewer
systems may be considered where feaSible for RPD's or other types of rural development. It is
not the intent that central systems would be a mechanism for encouraging development or that
they would create additional development that couldn't otherwise occur with private systems o~
individual systems.
4
RURAL COMMERCIAL
I. Crossroad Communities
Albemarle County has numerous crossroad communities that were once thriving. For many years,
communities such as Batesville, Covesville, Free Union, Greenwood, and Profit provided the necessary
services to the surrounding areas of each community. In fact, crossroad communities were the heart and
soul for the outlying areas as they were the commercial and social centers of the surrounding
communities. Many of these areas still function as centers of activity and there is a desire from many
residents for them to maintain some level of viability.
The rural crossroad communities are an important part of the County's heritage. There are many
buildings located in the crossroad communities that are vacant and could have local historical
significance. These buildings could be renovated to maintain the rural character of the crossroad
community and provide a valuable service to the immediate local area. There appears to be substantial
support for maintaining strong, viable crossroad communities, as the Albemarle County 2002 Citizen
Survey reveals 96% of respondents favored allowing localized services in traditionally rural communities.
This component of the Comprehensive Plan should be closely connected to the Historical Resources
section in the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets chapter of the Comprehensive Plan, which is
considered to be a component of rural conservation, as the older surviving histodc buildings typically
relate directly or indirectly to agricultural pursuits. The County should consider the following:
· Buildings in crossroad communities could be used/renovated to provide appropriately scaled services
to the surrounding community with particular emphasizes given to historic buildings.
· Crossroad communities should remain viable rural cOmmunity/social centers that retain their
individual rural historic characteristics while also supporting the broader Rural Area GroWth
Management Goals.
· Ensure the scale and scope of any new use is consistent:with the existing infrastructure and
character of the crossroad community and rural areas, without any requirement for upgrade or
expansion of infrastructure.
· Establish standards to guide decisions on the location of uses in crossroad communities.
· Establish design standards to ensure the scale and scope of businesses maintains the character of
the crossroad communities and supports the County's growth management policies.
Major Issues:
· Establish the concept of, and identify rural crossroad areas in the Comprehensive Plan.
· Staff will identify the types of uses that should be permitted in crossroad communities.
· Staff will consider the scale and scope of uses in crossroad communities that would be
consistent with the Rural Areas.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Establish the concept of and identify existing rural crossroad areas in the Comprehensive Plan,
with an emphasis on historic crossroads communities.
With the help of community involvement, staff will identify the types of uses that should be
permitted in crossroad communities. The County should locate government offices/services
within these crossroad communities, rather than other rural area locations, if feasible.
The scale, scope, and geographic boundaries of crossroad communities will be considerations in
the identification of crossroads communities and in the determination of appropriate uses.
I1. Alternative Uses
There is increasing pressure on landowners to subdivide their property as the decline of agriculture has
provided limited options for farmers to keep their land. Rural alternative uses, such as home
occupations, commercial recreation, special events, and farm sales, could be supported that would not
conflict with the County's growth management policies and could be supportive of protecting and
conserving the County's natural resources. These uses should also be compatible with and supportive of
the policies and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The County should consider the following
strategies:
· Ensure that any effects of rural alternative uses will have minimal imPacts on the surrounding area
(i.e., road improvements such as paving, erosion, stormwater runoff).
· Limit the size and intensity of any rural altemative use so that it would not conflict with the character
of the rural area.
· Maintain the exiSting policy of not expanding public water and sewer service to the rural areas,
including rural alternative uses.
· Ensure that rural altemative uses do not conflict with agricultural and forestal uses.
· Review the Zoning Ordinance to re-evaluate by-right uses and uses by special permit, such as home
occupations and farm sales, to encourage uses that promote agriculture, crossroad communities, and
the preservation of rural land, and discourage uses that are contrary to the County's growth
management policies and the Defining Elements.
Major Issues:
· Staff will consider amending the Zoning Ordinance to make it easier to establish certain home
occupations and other uses in the Rural Areas, such as farm sales, certain types of
commercial recreation, and special events.
· Explore strategies that could provide alternative uses in the Rural Areas to help farmers
maintain their farms rather than subdivide.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Explore strategies that could provide alternative uses in the RUral Areas to help rural landowners
preserve their land intact rather than subdivide, with the goal to eliminate and/or reduce
subdivisions.
Staff will consider amending the ZOning Ordinance to make it easier to establish certain home
occupations and other uses in the Rural Areas, such as farm sales, certain types of commercial
recreation, historic and cultural, arts and crafts, artisan, and temporary special events. The
County's goal is to reduce subdivision on land that would benefit from this inclusion of these
uses, Le., land use in exchange for commitment not to subdivide.
AGRICULTURE
In 1994, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee presented a report (attached for
reference) to the Board of Supervisors. Representatives from many types of farms participating on the
6
Committee provided recommendations based on their valuable, first-hand experiences. Among those
recommendations, the Committee sought a reduction of ordinances in order to provide support for and to
promote agricultural interests. They asked that measures to be taken that discourage farmland
fragmentation and for the development of policies and ordinances that favor clustered development.
Furthe r, they recommended that marketing strategies for agricultural products, niche agriculture, such as
cut flowers and garlic, and direct marketing operations be Promoted and encouraged. They also
requested that County policies support farmers regarding nuisance conflicts in Rural Areas. These
concerns and recommendations are still compelling and valid, as the County continues to lose
agricultural lands. The County should consider the following strategies:
· Encourage creative land uses that support agricultural and horticultural uses.
· Support land use standards that reduce conflicts between different agricultural uses and between
agricultural and non-agricultural uses.
· Encourage protection of prime agricultural soils from non-agricultural development, whenever
possible.
· Discourage the fragmentation of land.
· Continue the land use tax program.
· Encourage Rural Preservation Development that preserves farmland.
· Work with property owners to develop conservation easements and other voluntary techniques to
preserve land and habitats.
· Actively promote Agricultural and Forestal Districts.
· Actively promote and establish a reliable funding source for the ACE program.
· Actively promote conservation easements.
· Establish agricultural support through the assignment of a dedicated staff person who would work to
establish a viable agricultural community. Staff assignments would include the following:
Explore the inclusion of appropriately scaled, Iow-impact agricultural industries that support the
local agricultural economy;
- Review a streamline processing for appropriately scaled Iow-impact uses that support the local
agricultural economy.
Explore the inclusion of appropriately scaled, Iow-impact agricultural industries that support the
local agricultural economy.
Streamline processing for appropriately scaled Iow-impact uses that support the local agricultural
economy.
Explore marketing strategies that support and enhance the local agricultural and horticultural
economy.
Improve the understanding and appreciation of agriculture and horticulture resources at the
County level and with the general public.
Major Issues:
· Reduce the fragmentation of land
· Consider establishing a dedicated County staff position to focus on Agricu Itural/Forestal/Rural
Area initiatives
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Consider establishing a dedicated County staff position to focus on Agricultural/Forestal/Natural
Conservation/Natural Preservation/Rural Area initiatives. The consideration of this position
would include a canvas of organizations, departments, and agencies to determine existing
support and need.
FORESTRY
The Department of Forestry Strategic Plan 2000-2002 lists "Conserve the Forest Land Base" as one of
its goals. The Plan includes a broad spectrum of critical issues, objectives and performance measures in
order to obtain its goals. Among the critical issues identified is the recognition that suburban expansion
presents many challenges for continued forest renewal and improvement. The proposed strategies
within the Forestry Strategic Plan that would address this issue include education, small lot management,
and application of grants to develop sustainable community forestry programs.
The 1994 Agricultural/Forestal Industry Support Committee Report identified forest fragmentation as the
biggest threat to the future vitality of the forest industry in Albemarle County. The Report stated that tract
sizes below 40 acres are difficult to manage economically and the. proximity to houses and other
structures further escalates the problem. Further decreases in forestland, and further fragmentation of
the remaining land, reduces the sustainability of both the ecological services and the forest products
provided by the forests of Albemarle.
Although this section speaks to the forestry industry and not the undisturbed forests within open space
areas, it should be noted that proper land stewardship of lands that are being managed for timbering
would promote a habitat for wildlife habitat. The erosion of larger blocks of forest decreases the habitat
for forest-interior bird species, favors edges species, such as white-tailed deer, and increases the risk of
forest fires and the loss to fire of woodland homes. The County should considerthe following strategies:
· Employ creative development tools that result in suitable land areas that can be used as forestry
resources, including Rural Preservation Development.
· Encourage educational programs that teach conservation of the forest land base.
· Encourage the use of Department of Forestry Forest Stewardship Plan.
· Encourage the use of Department of Forestry Healthy Forest Resources.
· Continue the land use taxation program.
· Actively promote conservation easements.
· Actively promote and establish a reliable funding,source for the ACE program.
· Consider giving priority to the conservation of large contiguous blocks of forest.
· Consider the impact on forest fragmentation in the evaluation of land use decisions.
· Encourage cooperative management of small parcels of forestland to provide economies of scale and
better management.
· Actively promote Agricultural and Forestal Districts.
Major Issues:
· Reduce the fragmentation of land
· Consider establishing a dedicated County staff position to focus on Agricultural/Forestal/Rural
Area initiatives
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
(Same as Agricultural)
Consider establishing a dedicated County staff position to focus on Agricultural/Forestal/Natural
Conservation/Natural Preservation/Rural Area initiatives. The consideration of this position
would include a canvas of organizations, departments, and agencies to determine existing
support and need.
8
LAND USE PATTERNS, DENSITY, AND DEVELOPMENT
Residential development and its social, physical, and economic impacts on the Rural Areas are central
topics for this plan review to address. The level of development that has occurred to date along with the
future potential development will lead to a character of development inconsistent with current County
goals and expectations for the Rural Area. Staff pm poses to analyze and add tess policies that affect the
intensity and extent of development on the land.
I. Land Use and Land Cover Paffern
Staff proposes to develop a comprehensive strategy to ensure that all the land elements reflected in the
Guiding Principles including agriculture and forestry, land preservation and biodiversity, open space
conservation, water resources, and natural, sCenic, and cultural resources--can be accommodated in our
finite land area
I1. Density and Development
Possible strategies to address the overall level of residential development in the Rural Areas could
include:
· Modify lot size and density permitted in the RA District.
· Development rights (reduce number or establish time release/phasing).
· Develo pment-right lot sizes (smaller minimum sizes, set maximum size rather than 31-acre total for 5
lots).
· By-right lot sizes (increase to size consistent with agricultural, forestal, and open-space/conservation
goals).
· Other zoning approaches (large lot, sliding scale, and overlays).
· Enhance voluntary land-conservation programs, such as ACE and easement donations.
Major Issues:
· Staff will pursue alternatives that reduce the development potential in the Rural Areas,
potentially through reduction of assigned development rights, increasing size of non-
development-right lots, or through other zoning approaches (e.g., large-lot zoning, sliding-
scale zoning, others).
· Staff will explore reducing size of development-right lots to reduce consumption of land for
residential uses
DIRECTION TO STAFF
Do not consider a reduction in development rights.
Staff will pursue alternatives that reduce the development potential in the Rural Areas, potentially
through increasing size of non-development-right lots or through other zoning approaches (e.g.,
large-lot zoning, phasing, sliding scale zoning, for example).
Staff will explore incentives that would result in a reduction of land used for residential acre*age,
in order to increase land used for natural resources, agricultural, and forestal resources, for
example rural preservation development.
RURAL PRESERVATION DEVELOPMENTS
Rural Preservation Developments (RPD's) are currently used by the County as an alternative to
traditional by-right residential development. The advantages of RPD's over traditional development are
that they reduce fragmentation', generally require less road length/impervious surface, provide for better
stream protection, and provide for the potential of preserving agricultural land. However, as the current
RPD ordinance is written, the goals of an RPD are not fully being realized (average lot size is
approximately 6 acres and only 40 acres are required for the preservation tract). The County should
consider the following strategies:
· Establish a maximum lot size for RPD lots that is lower than the current 6-acre average lot size and
require a larger preservation tract.
· Establish a percentage for the preservation tract in relation to the overall acreage of the development
(i.e., at least 75% of the parcel being developed must be in the preservation tract).
· Permitting central water/sewer systems as an acceptable means for providing utility services for
RPD's.
· Consider the creating rural utility districts that could operate and maintain central water and/or sewer
systems in RPD's.
· EStablish community open space for reserve drainfields'and/or well fields.
· Health Department approval necessary prior to approval of any RPD proposal.
Major Issues:
· Attempt to make RPD's the standard form of rural development as opposed to an option.
· Permitting central water/sewer systems in RPD's and to creating rural utility districts to
maintain central systems.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Attempt to make RPD's the standard form of rural development as opposed to an option.
With a focus on technology, staff will explore the use of central systems. Central water and sewer
systems may be considered where feasible for RPD's or other types of rural development. It is
not the intent that central systems would be a mechanism for encouraging development orthat it
would create additional development that couldn't otherwise occur with private systems of
individual systems.
Include residential design standards listed below into standards for Rural Preservation
Developments.
RESIDENTIAL DESIGN STANDARDS
While the level and character of permitted residential development is the major issues we will .address,
we also need to consider and improve the design standards for those residential developments that we
do permit. These standards would be the basis of future Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance
amendments, and would be used for evaluating discretionary reviews, such as special-use permits.
Some possible strategies include:
10
Lot arrangement- setting standards for subdivision layouts based on physical land features.
· Water conservation measures- requiring and/or encouraging designs that reduce consumption of
groundwater.
· Water protection measures- requiring and/or encouraging home designs, land-management tools,
and subdivision layouts that protect groundwater and surface water from contamination, plus
incorporating stream buffers and groundwater infiltration areas into designs.
· Visual design standards - reducing the visual impacts of rural subdivisions.
· Mountain protection plan - developing standards to reflect this portion of the Natural Resources &
Cultural Assets Plan.
· Building sites - instituting standards for house locations for all subdivisions, beyond the current
restrictions on slopes and floodplains.
Major Issue:
· Staff intends to establish development-design standards for residential uses permitted in the
Rural Areas.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Include all issues (indicated by all bullets within this topic) to the Rural Preservation Development
topic.
It is not the intention of rural,residential design standards to reduce or eliminate affordable
housing in the rural area.
Retain the strategy to develop Mountain Protection Plan standards to reflect this portion of the
Natural Resources & Cultural Assets Plan, as Mountain Protection is a broader issue.
In recognition of the importance water conservation and protection, retain the following strategies
in this topic:
Water conservation measures - requiring and/or encouraging designs that reduce
consumption of groundwater.
Water protection measures - requiring and/or encouraging home designs, land-management
tools, and subdivision layouts that protect groundwater and surface water from
contamination, plus incorPorating stream buffers and groundwater infiltration areas into
designs.
FISCAL/TAX TOOLS
Taxation and incentives can be influential in determining the future of an area. Staff proposes to
investigate the effects of current taxation and funding programs in the rural areas, analyze incentives that
support or contradict Rural Area goals, investigate additional funding sources, and recommend changes
to County policies:
· Review the use-value taxation program (possibly by committee).
· Funding strategies for purchasing development rights.
· Incentives to support Rural Area goals.
· Fiscal analysis of development impacts.
11
· Pursue state and federal grants.
· Explore state tax-credit programs.
Major Issue:
· Staff proposes to explore taxation and incentive programs to ensure that they support Rural
Area goals, and to recommend changes as necessary.
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
No changes to strategies listed above.
CONSISTENCY WITH NATURAL RESOURCES & CULTURAL ASSETS PLAN
All of the goals of the Natural Resources & Cultural Assets Plan include elements that are found in the
Rural Areas. Staff proposes to ensure that proposed policy changes in the Rural Areas chapter reflect
the goals of Chapter Two. Strategies that those goals can be incorporated into the planned sections of
the Rural Areas chapter include:
· Water Resources - All topic areas include measures to protect groundwater and surface-water quality
and quantity.
· Biological Resources and Biodiversity-lncorporate the existing goals from Chapter Two into the topic
areas identified above. Also, the chapter can accommodate expected future input from the ongoing
biological inventory work and the standing Biodiversity Committee, to be established later this year.
· Agricultural and Forestry Resources- Protection of these resources and uses incorporated into most
or all sections of this chapter.
· Cdtical Slopes and Mountains -Include these subjects in proposals on density and development
design standards. However, the upcoming headngs on the proposed mountain-protection ordinance
will affect how this issue is addressed.
· Dark Sky- Lighting concerns addressed in proposals on design standards.
· Scenic Resources -How to achieve the County's scenic-resource goals in the context of protecting
agriculture and land preservation/conServation.
· Historic Resources -Address protection of historic resources in the Rural Areas in the sections on
density & development, rural commercial uses, commercial recreation, and Rural Preservation
Developments.
· Critical Resources Inventory - Amendments to the Rural Area chapter as portions of the Critical
Resources Inventory are expanded or completed in the next few years by the Historic Resources
Committee, the Biodiversity Work Group, and others.
· Greenways - The greenways plan reflected in the sections on density & development, scenic
resources, and subdivision design standards.
However, incorporating these individual goals into the various sections of the Rural Areas chapter could
lead to piecemeal consideration. To avoid this, staff proposes to also analyze the chapter
comprehensively to ensure that the proposed pattern of land uses in the RUral Areas forms a coherent
vision for how natural and cultural resources can best be protected in the Rural Areas.
Major Issue:
· No major issue; these strategies relate to the application of existing goals already in the
Comprehensive Plan within the development of the Rural Areas section.
12
DIRECTION TO STAFF:
Staff intends to ensure that all recommendations are consistent with the goals established in the
Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan to protect water resources, biological resources and
biodiversity, agricultural and forestry resources, critical slopes and mountains, the dark sky,
scenic resources, historic resources, and greenways. Staff will take into account new information
received since that chapter was adopted and provide for flexibility in using future input from the
ongoing Critical Resources Inventory.
A TTA CHMENT B
FAMILY DIVISIONS
Researching Family Divisions in Albemarle
In !997, staff carded out research on the sale of parcels created by family diviSion from 1990 through
1995. This research found that of the 223 parcels created by family division within that period (an
average of 37 per year), only 9 parcels were transferred out of the family. Information on family divisions
for 1996 through the present would require extensive research.
Enabling Legislation from Code of Virginia
Section 15.2-2244.C of the Code of Virginia does not require family divisions in Albemarle, as it is
considered a high growth county underthat regulation. The section does allow "..reasonable provisions
permitting divisions of lots or parcels for the purpose of sale or gift to a member of the immediate family.."
County of Albemarle Subdivision Ordinance
The County's Subdivision Ordinance sets the requirements for review and approval of family divisions.
The ordinance specifies a lower fee and fewer requirements than those established for standard
subdivisions. Currently, family divisions are exempt from subdivision ordinance requirements, including
road standards.
Section 14-211 specifies that family divisions should be approved only if: · each family member receives only one lot
· the subdivider has not previously transferred a family-division lot to that person, and
· the agent is satisfied that the family division is not sought for the purpose of circumventing
the requirements of the subdivision ordinance.
SUMMARY:
Without further research, staff cannot conclude that there are any significant abuses of family division
regulations. However, family divisions are part of the broader issues concerning land divisions that were
discussed during the joint work session on March ,5th. Therefore, the County should consider the
folloWing strategies:
· Staff will research family divisions to determine their compliance with ordinance standards
· Staff will evaluate family divisions in conjunction with other methods of subdivision during the review
of the comprehensive plan
· Evaluating the qualifications for family divisions, including extending the length of time required for
family ownership, will be included in a review of family divisions
14
VIRGINIA COUNTY COMPARISONS
FAMILY DIVISIONS
At the March 5, 2003 joint Board of Supervisors/Planning Commission meeting, staff was directed to
research the policies of surrounding counties in regards to family divisions and the length of time required
the family division is held before the family member can sell the property to a non-family member. As the
following chart indicates, there is a range of no time limit to five years. In addition to Loudoun County
having a one-year requirement before a family division can be sold outside the family, they also require
the person requesting the family division to have owned the property at least one year pdor to a family
division.
County
Albemarle
Buckingham
Fluvanna
Greene
Loudoun
Louisa
Orange
Rockingham
Spotsylvania
,Required Time For Holding .Family Division
2 years
No limit
1 year
5 years
1 year (also requires property owner requesting family
division to hold property for 1 year pdor to division)
5 years
No limit
5 years
5 years
15
ATTACHMENT C
GUIDING PRINCIPLES-FOR THE RURAL AREA
The Planning Commission has recognized these principles as the guiding principles for the Rural Areas:
1) Recognize in policy development that all the following defining aspects are equal and important
components of the Rural Areas:
a) Agriculture - - Protect Albemarle County's agricultural lands as a resource base for its agricultural
industries and for related benefits they contribute towards the County's rural character, scenic
quality, natural environment, and fiscal health.
b) Forestry resources - Protect Albemarle County's forests as a resource base for its forestry
industries.
c) Land Preservation - Preserve and protect Albemarle COunty's rural land as an essential and finite
resource:
d) Land Conservation - Protect Albemarle County's rural land through planned 'management to
prevent exploitation, destruction, or neglect.
e) Water supply resources - Protect the quality and supply of surface water and groundwater
resources.
f) Natural resources - Preserve and manage the rural areas' natural resources in order to protect the
environment and conserve resources for future use.
g) Scenic resources - Preserve the County's rural scenic resources as being essential to the
County's character, economic vitality, and quality of life,
h) Historical, archeological and cultural resources- Protect the rural areas' historic, archeological and
cultural resources.
2) Protect and enhance rural quality of life for present and future rural area residents.
3) Provide support to local agricultural and forestal economies and connect local producers and
consumers of rural products.
4) Address the needs of existing rural residents without fostering growth and further suburbanization of
the Rural Areas.
5) Develop tools to direct residential development into designated Growth Areas, where services and
utilities are available, and where such development will have minimum impact on rural resources and
ag ricultural/forestal activities.
6) Establish development standards that are consistent with rural-area characteristics and expectations.
7) Provide levels of service delivery in accord with the Facilities Planning goals of the 'Land Use Plan.
8) Provide support for long-standing rural crossroads communities and villages without creating de facto
growth areas.
9) Consider financial and fiScal tools to support implementation of Rural Area policies.
10)Consider the goals of the Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council in rural-area policy and code
development.
11)Strive for better understanding and coordination of rural-area land use planning with neighboring
counties.
16
12) Provide tools that offer alternatives to fragmentation of parcelS into pieces too small for economic
viability.
13)Implement the applicable objectives of the Natural Resources and Cultural Assets Plan.
14)Encourage creative and diverse forms of rural-production and support rural land uses that provide
rural landowners with economic viability.
15) Encourage and implement protection and enhancement of genetic, species, and ecosystem diversity
for wildlife in the County.
17
To: County Planning Staff:
From: Charlottesville/Albemarle League of Women Voters
Date:
Re: Rural Areas Section of the Comprehensive Plan
The League wishes to commend the Planning Staff for their diligent work on revisions to the
Rural Areas chapter of the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan, and to present our vision of
what the revised chapter should look like.
First, our hats off to you for conducting a series of thoughtful and effective public meetings on
the Rural Areas. Public education and input are the cornerstones of effective public policy,
especially on so fundamental an issue as the comprehensive plan. The information provided and
solicited at these meetings has been fight on the mark, with a spectrum of questions aimed at
fostering thought on both the big picture and on the stubborn details. We hope you will
continue to use public meetings to inform and be informed throughout the Rural Areas
chapter review process.
The League views County government as the public's steward of the finite resource that is
Albemarle County's rural land. As such, the County must balance competing loeai demands for
present use of the Rural Areas' resources against the needs of future generations and the broader
public. We believe the County has largely accomplished this balance by delineating the
Development Areas and consciously directing residential and commercial development there in
order to limit development and its impacts in the Rural Areas. Facilitating responsible
development in the Development Areas and discouraging development in the Rural Areas
should remain a primary goal of the comprehensive plan.
Unfortunately, County statistics showing continued residential development in the Rural Areas
indicate that much fine-tuning of the balance remains to be done. The Rural Areas chapter of the
Comprehensive Plan should include a policy on population size--not just population
distribution--in the Rural Areas. A population policy should be based on a determination of
the County's carrying capacity using appropriate data, recognize that population is a
primary environmental issue in the Rural Areas and strive to delineate a population size
that will not jeopardize the Rural Areas' resources.
The League supports the current Comprehensive Plan's prioritization of four elements of the
Rural Areas: preservation of agricultural and forestal activities, water supply protection, limited
service delivery and conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources. While the last round
of comprehensive planning identified the right goals, the challenge now is to identify the right
tools to achieve those goals. Following are our thoughts on how those goals may best be
accomplished in the coming years.
1) Preservation of agricultural and forestal activities
Sustaining the viability of working farms in the County makes the highest and best use of our
rich agricultural soils and preserves a farming heritage stretching back to prehistoric times.
Using County fmancial resources to support agriculture makes economic sense: by encouraging
prosperous farms and responsible agribusiness, the County can encourage income- and job-
producing activity without extending costly public infrastructure into its far-flung comers.
However, the County desperately needs to develop new ways to help its farms and agricultural
industries succeed in a competitive economy. The League supports expanding and promoting
the use/value taxation and agricultural/forestal district programs and lowering the costs of
entry for landowners interested in enrolling in these programs. The League also supports
the use and/or hiring of County staff devoted exclusively to promoting the County's
agricultural economy and securing state and private funds for supporting farming. The
League encourages the County to facilitate mentoring among farmers to promote success
stories. The League supports changes to the zoning code to facilitate home industries and
allow tenant and accessory houses in the Rural Areas. The League supports zoning that
allows manufactured homes as an option for low-income farmers. Finally, the League
supports use of Best Management Practices by aH agricultural activities.
2) Water supply protection
The League has a long history of supporting protection of water supplies at the local, state and
national levels. We believe the events of this past summer (indeed, the past four years) highlight
the fragility and finiteness of local water supplies. Identification and regulation of fragile
wetlands, watersheds, ground water recharge areas and shorelands of rivers, lakes and streams
where land disturbance could cause irreversible harm to our water supplies is key to watershed
preservation, and the County's Open Space and Critical Resources Plan acknowledges this
necessity. The Rural Areas chapter should reflect this value system by prohibiting development
in identified critical areas. The League supports mountaintop protection to reduce
sedimentation from runoff and safeguard critical slopes and recharge areas. The League
supports reduction of impervious surfaces in the Rural Areas including limiting
construction of buildings and paved surfaces. The League supports the County's use of soil
surveys and hydrogeologic information to evaluate requests for building permits, site plan
approvals and subdivision approvals in the Rural Areas. Lastly, the League supports
acquisition of development rights to the most sensitive resource areas.
3) Limited service delivery to Rural Areas
Infrastructure investment in Rural Areas has historically been low, geared toward serving largely
self-sufficient farms rather than suburbs. Further, providing municipal services throughout the
Rural Areas is beyond the County's financial capability. Residents of the Rural Areas therefore
should not expect the same access to public services as residents of the Development Areas.
Further, it must be acknowledged that ready access to vital services such as water and sewer
increases the attractiveness of rural land for residential and commercial development, which the
County rightly wishes to steer into the development areas. The League supports increased
local regulation and testing of wells and septic systems to reduce the hazards to human
health associated with failure of these systems. The League also supports the County's
current polic~v of discouraging new central water and sewer systems except where
necessary to solve a public health or safety problem of existing residences.
4) Conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources
Rural Areas add immense value to Albemarle County. In addition to providing our drinking
water, clean air and farm products, they harbor wildlife, recreational areas, scenic vistas and
historical sites. From our own backyards and beyond they draw artists courting their muses,
athletes craving challenge and souls seeking solitude. The League supports special protection
of significant wildlife habitats, renewable resource lands and unique scenic and historic
areas where development could result in irreparable loss. The League supports incentives
and protections for rural landowners who open their agricultural, scenic, recreational and
historic properties to the public.
In conclusion, the League believes there are many tools available for fine-tuning the balance of
uses between the County's Rural and Development Areas. All should be evaluated based on
their consistency with the four fundamental goals for the Rural Areas. It is the County's
challenge to discover, test and implement those tools that will best serve those goals for the
coming twenty years, and beyond. To these ends the League cautions against the use of
clustering as the one-size-fits-all approach to rural land planning. Our research indicates that this
toot may in fact do more to encourage development in Rural Areas than to protect them, and
should be used only as a last resort when all other strategies to preserve the Rural Area for farms
and resource protection have failed. We believe that innovative ideas for nourishing our Rural
Areas and sustaining their current residents abound, and look forward to continuing to work with
County staff, leaders and our colleagues in the public and private sectors to discover those ideas
and put them into action.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Crozet Master Plan
SUBJ ECTIPROPOSAL/REQU EST:
Board of Supervisors/Planning Commission
Session
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Ms. Thomas
Work
AGE N DA DATE:
April 2, 2003
ACTION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION: X
BACKGROUND:
ACTION: INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
The Renaissance Planning Group-Nelson Byrd Landscape Architects were retained as technical consultants for the Crozet
Master Plan project in June, 2002. After extensive public involvement during the summer and fall, a Framework Plan was
developed and discussed at a joint work session with the Board and Planning Commission on December 16. The Board
subsequently adopted a resolution of support for the Framework Plan, accepting it as "a preliminary guide and foundation
from which future Master Plan activities, products and policies will proceed."
DISCUSSION:
The Master Plan project is entering its final phase, Implementation Strategies, and presentation of the completed Plan to
the Board and Planning Commission is anticipated in mid-June. The attached memorandum from Ken
Schwartz, project manager for the Renaissance Planning Group, provides both context and specific examples of the kinds
of issues to be discussed more fully on April 2.
RECOMMENDATION:
The technical consulting team hopes to accomplish the following objectives at the joint work session: 1) provide preliminary
information on implementation needs and strategies in Crozet; 2) proactively engage the Board and Commission in
discusSing and evaluating implementation options; and, 3) gain an eady indication of decision-makers' preferences in
approach (es) to meeting identified needs.
Attachments:
A- March 17, 2003 Memorandum frOm Kenneth Schwartz, FAIA, Renaissance Planning Group
03.043
Renaissance
Planning Group
[13 Fou'rrh Street N. E. * Charlottesville * VA 22902-5225 * 434:296.3025 Fax 434.296-9567
MEMORANDUM
To'
From:
Date:
Re:
Tom Foley
Kenneth Schwartz, FAIA
Renaissance Planning Group
March 17, 2003
Implementation Issues and the Board of Supervisors
The Crozet Master Plan process has generated a good deal of interest and attention on the issue of
implementation within the community. As technical consultants to the County, we understand our
responsibility in addressing these issues. This brief memorandum grows out of the work that we have begun.
It is intended to assist in your dialogue with other key county staffpersons as well as the Board of
Supervisors in anticipating some of the opportunities and challenges they will have in moving forward with
the Master Plan.
The current strategic planning that is underway with the Capkal Improvement Program (CIP) represents one
such important opportunity. Preliminary indications coming out of our work on the Master Plan suggest that
this is also an area of significant challenge. The community believes that the County is not delivering on their
basic service needs right now, not to mention their serious Skeptidsm about the County's willingness and
commitment to deal with the significantly added demands that come along with an increase of 9,000 residents
in the growth area (from approximately 3,000 today to 12,000 in the future). Current expectations with/n the
Crozet community are high, gaining focus and intensity with the Master Plan process that the county has
developed for this designated growth area. It is important to note that with the current Comprehensive Plan
buildout at around 12,000 people, there would be significant costs under a "by fight" development scenario
as well.
just using the cIP as one example (and there are many other important issues involving schools, social
services, commumt! service needs including fire and police, open space and recreational planning), it is elear
that a proactive engagement by the County's political leaders, appointed officials, and staff witNn county
departments will be key to the early and sustained success of the Master Planning effort in Crozet. There are
a few items "in line" within the current CIP (some sidewalk improvements downtown, some transportation
funding going forward with Jarman's Gap Road in the 6 Year Secondary Plan, a new library eventually), and
these are helpful as points of departure. As the first "master planned" growth area under the Neighborhood
Model, it is particularly important for the County to develop ways - most likely these must include new ways
- to work effectively in addressing community needs. There are difficult decisions ahead. The leadership and
sense of "ownership" on the part of the elected officials will be absolutely essential.
We will continue to serve this process with all of our professional ability, and we are eager to engage in
collaborative work with the Board of Supervisors, the Planning Commission, and the community to make
progress in this important area. Our work on the Master Plan includes identifying the needs (under the
growth scenario), and laying out options for the County's consideration. We believe that the reality of the
situation and challenges are such that it is m the County's best interest to begin considering difficult derisions
earlier rather than later. In other words, it will be especially helpful if this dialogue develops even before the
completion of the Master Plan in June, utilizing some of the preliminary indications that we have already
developed, and several strategies and options that are beginning to be formulated. Some examples of the kev
topics that are beginning to emerge include the following road, park and school examples. Clearly this is nor
a comprehensive list: there are additional dimensions that will be part of the Master Plan Implementation
Strategies and these are provided simply to demonstrate some of the challenges ahead.
.*ew. Ci~ks Tt~at Work. c
oli1
Renaissance Planning Greup
East of Crozet Avenue
· Bridge over Lickinghole Creek (~6 million +/- - $200/sf): this is a key element in the development
of a significant portion of undeveloped land east of Crozet Avenue and south of the CSX tracks.
Funds could come from County sources (this connection has been contemplated for a long time to
alleviate traffic pressures downtown among other reasons), or funds could be partially or completely
negotiated from the two or three principal developers who will be developing the properties in this
area.
· Eastern Park is directly tied to this and integrated into the larger Master Plan for development.
(Preliminary cost estimate tbd)
· New Elementary school (preliminary ske and building construction costs tbd).
· Eastern Avenue: aside from the bridges (over Lickinghole Creek and the CSX track), it can be
assumed that the private developers should pay for all of the roads within the development areas
including Eastern Avenue (with bike lanes, sidewalks both sides, streerscape, etc.) However, the
County should be prepared to play a key role in planning and coordinating negotiations between
multiple landowners to ensure that easements and rights of way are attained in a timely manner.
West of Crozet Avenue
· Bridges and roads in this development are entirely encompassed within one developers' land holdings
and "implementation" here should involve the developer paying all costs of building such facilities in
conjunction with the Master Plan design guidelines. These include an extensive interconnected street
system (with sidewalks both sides, streetscape, bike lanes, etc.)
· Western Park is an area of public amenity that is within the private landholdings. This will require
negotiation ro determine the extent to which the developer should support the costs of signing over
this land to the County, costs for developing the park, and a plan for maintenance.
Jarman, s Gap Road
· Bike lane, sidewalks (both sides) and other streetscape improvements are essential and funding must
be identified for this work. Given ks relationship to the significant development load that will be
carried by (and generated by) the large property to the west of Crozet Avenue, this improvement will
need to move forward ahead of or in conjunction with the development time-line for the western
property. A small segment of this could be reasonably expected of the developer (that which fronts
his property), but the rest will likely need to come from public funds in some form.
Downtown:
· Main Street is a key component of the long-range success of the Crozet Master Plan. The first
segment needs to be built as soon as possible (coming off Crozet Avenue). In the short range, this
will provide safe access for the lumber yard, and the County would be well-advised to negotiate the
costs of this new intersection and short length of road with payment covered by the owner of the
lumber yard (with the road built to standards allowing it to serve eventually as part of a continuous
and standard street section for Main Street. This allows "The Square" to become a safe, pedestrian-
oriented commercial area tied to the County's current planning for sidewalks in this area (already in
the works).
· North of the CSX tracks needs to be "programmed" for funding and other forms of support to
assure Crozet that this part of the central retail, community area. There is serious discussion about
an overlay designation for downtown as well as a Community Service District that would allow
downtown to develop ks own funding for priority improvements.
www. Cities ~at Work. c
0II1
Renaissance Ptanninc Greup
We understand that there is a scheduled joint work session with the Board of Supervisors and Planning
Commission on April 2. We would be very pleased to parddpate in a facilitated discussion with the Board
and Planning Commission at that time including these and other issues related to Lmplementadon Strategies
for the Crozet Master Plan: Input from the elected and appointed officials will be very helpful as we work
toward our next major Crozet Community Meeting scheduled for April 30. Clearly, the process will benefit
from substantive county engagement before that event.
~v. Cia'es T~at l~otA c