Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1998-03-18 FINAL 7:00 P.M. MARCH 18, 1998 ROOM 241. SECOND FLOOR 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. 11. 12. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). SP-97-60. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative (Sign #13). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to construct communications facility on O. 194 acs. Loc on W side of Rt 680 (Browns Gap Tnplke), approx 0.77 mls N of Beaver Creek Reservoir. Znd RA. TM57, P2B. White Hall Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) SP-97-61. Central Virgiuia Electric (Sign #14). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to construct communications facility on .53 acs. Loc on W side of Rt 602 (Howardsville Tnpike), approx 0.8 mls S of Rt 800 (Schuyler Tnpike). Znd PA. TM132. P5A. Scottsvitle Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) SP-97-62. Midway Substation. (Sign #15 & 16). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to install communications tower inside fenced area at existing electrical substation. Loc on W side of Rt 635 ~Millers School Rd) at inter of Rts 635 & 688 (Midway Rd). Znd PA. TM72. P6. White Hall Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) SP-97-63. Cash's Comer Substation. (Sign #23 & 24). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to install communications tower inside fenced area at existing electrical substation. Loc approx 1/3 ml W of Rt 231 (Gordonsville Rd) & approx l/2 ml N of inter of Rt 231 & 615 (Lindsay Rd). Znd PA. TM. P45C. Rivanna Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) SP-97-65. Greenwood Farm Bridge (Sign #27). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to allow fill in of the flood plain [Sec 30.3.5.2.1 (2)] to construct road & bridge over Yellow Mountain Creek. Road & bridge will serve timbering & recreational activities of property owner & provide access to future home on property. Loc on S side of Rt 250, approx 2400~ from inter w/Rt 690 & approx 3000' from inter w/Ri 689. Znd RA. TM71. P2. Samuel Miller Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) ZTA-97-02. Jamie Lewis. PUBLIC HEARING on a request to amend Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance Supplementary Regulations Sec 5.1.25 Farm Winerv& Section 5.1.19 Wayside Stand to allow farm winery festivals & larger sales/ tasting floor area by right, to delete commercial entrance requirement for farm wineries & to ddete other requirements. Public Hearing to solicit input on the proposed Community Development Block Grant application to be submitted to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development on the Microenterprise Project. 13. 14. 15. Public Hearing to consider granting a 20 foot wide sanitary sewer easement across a parcel owned by the County of Albemarle and identified as Tax Map 91. Parcel 2. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Adjourn to March 23. 1998, 1:00 p.m. C. ONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: Appropriation: Emergency Communications Center. $16,000 (Form #97050). Authorize County Executive to submit Community Development Block Grant application for the Porter's-Yancey Comprehensive Community Improvement Project. FOR INFORMATION: Copy of Plamaing Commission minutes of February 10, February 17 and March 3, 1998. Letter dated March 4, 1998, from Jay Roberts, Environmental Engineer Senior. re: Public Notice of Draft VWPP Permit, University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation, North Fork Research Park (JPA 97-1961). ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of March 18. 1998 March 20, 1998 5.1 5.2 5.3 10. AGENDA ITEM Call to order. Appropriation: Emergency Communications Cente~, $16,000 (Form #97050). APPROVED. Community Development Block Grant application for the Porter's-Yancey Comprehensive Community Improvement Project. AUTHORIZED. Proclamation procla'uning March 18 through March 22, 1998 as the Fourth Annual Virginia Festival of the Book. ADOPTED. SP-97-60 Central Virginia Electric Cooperative (Sign #13). APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. SP-97-61. CentralVirginia Electric (Sign #14). APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. SP-97-62. Midway Substatiun. (Signs #15 & #16). APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. SP-97-63. Cash's Comer Substation. (Signs #23 & #24). APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS. SP-97-65. Greenwood Farm Bridge (Sign #27). DEFERRED TO APRIL 1, 1998. ASSIGNMENT The meet'rog was called to order at 1:00 p.m. All members of the Board of Supervisors were in attendance. Clerk: Forward appropriation letter to Melvin Breeden and other appropriate persons. Clerk: Distribute to Ginny McDonald and David Benish. Clerk: Prepare final copy of Proclamation. Forward to Mrs. Humphris. Clerk: Send conditions letter to Planning. Clerk: Send conditions letter to Planning. Clerk: Send conditions letter to Planning. Clerk: Send conditions letter to Planning. Planning: Review language of conditions~ including recommended wording changes offered by applicant, and noting that any biological survey should be overseen by the County. Place on April 1, 1998 consent agenda. 11. ZTA-97-02. Jamie Lewis. DEFERRED TO APRIL 1, t998: 12. PH on the proposed Community Development Block Grant application to be submitted to the Virginia Depar~ent of Housing and Community Development on the Microanterprise Project. ADOPTED. 13. Public Hearing on 20-foot-wide sanitary sewer easement across a parcel owned by the County. TM 91, P2. AUTHORIZED COUNTY EXECUTIVE TO EXECUTE TH~ DOCUMENT. /lbh Distribution list: Bob Tucker Rick Huff Roxanne White Kevin Casmer Wayne Cilimberg Larry Davis Bill Mawyer Amelia McCulley Brace Woodzell Staff: Review language of the Ordinance, to include changes from the BOS. Place on April 1, 1998 consent agenda. 3/20/98: Informed by David Benish that, due to advertising requirements, Albemarle County cannot participate. County Executive: Execute document. I N T E R 0 F F I C E MEMO To: From: Subject: Date: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance Laurie Hall, Senior Deputy Clerk Appropriations Approved on March 1-x,8, 1998 March 20, 1998 Attached is the original appropriation form for the following item which was approved by the Board at their meeting on March 20, 1998: 1) Emergency Communications Center, $16,000 (form #97050). Attachment cc: Roxanne White Rick Huff Tom Hanson APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YE3LR: 97/98 NI/MBER 97050 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL TRAiqSFER NEW X kDVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND: ECC PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: PURCHASE OF REPLACEMENT EQUIPMENT FOR POLICE VCIN SYSTEM. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT t 4100 31041 312710 COMPUTER SUPPORT $16,000.00 TOTAL $16,000.00 REVEATgE DESCRIPTION 2~4OUNT 2 4100 51000 510100 FLTND BALD~NCE $16,000.00 TOTAL $16,000.00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: ECC APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINAi~CE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Emergency Communication Center SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of appropriation #97050 in the amount of $16, O00.O0 for the pumhase of replacement equipment for police VCIN system. STAFF CONTACT,S): Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Hanson, Breeden BACKGROUND: AGENDA DATE: March 18, 1998 ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: ' REVIEWED BY: At its September 16, 1997 meeting, the Emergency Communications Center Management Board approved the transfer and expenditure of $16,000 from the ECC fund balance account to the Emergency Communication Center operating budget. DISCUSSION: This transfer of funds will be used toward the purchase of mandated replacement equipment for the three Police Department's VCIN system. All new equipment will be purchased from state contract through the City of Charlottesville. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriation, in the amount of $16,000~ as detailed on form 97050. 98.037 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development Ella W. Carey. CMC. Match 24. 1998 Board Actions of March 18. 1998 At its meeting on March 18, 1998. the Board of Supervisors took the following actions on petitions: Agenda Item No. 6. SP-97-60, Central Virginia Electric Cooperative (Sign #13). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to construct communications facility on 0.194 acs. Loc on W side of Rt 680 (Browns Gap Tnpike), approx 0.77 mls N of Beaver Creek Reservoir. Znd RA. TM57, P2B. White Hall Dist. APPROVED SP-97-60 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: ]?he height of the tower shall not exceed seventy-five (75) feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower; The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall not be permitted: b. The tower shall have no lighting; and c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. 3. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "White Hall Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98"; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to two Yagi antenna not to exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed '~WE)F 1/15/98"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibitecL The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site. subject to these conditions: Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24. 1998 (Page 2) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site: and The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to. evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be frilly shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminalre. For purposes of this condition, a "inminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply; Prior to begirming construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permitree shall not remove existing trees within two hundred {200) feet of the tower; 8. The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued: i0. The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used; and I1. Removal of existing vegetation shall be allowed 0nly after staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. Agenda Item No. 7. SP-97-61. Central Virginia Electric (Sign #14). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to construct communications facility on .53 acs. Loc on W side of Rt 602 (Howardsville Tnpike), approx 0.8 mis S of Rt 800 (Schuyler Tnpike). Znd RA. TM132, PSA. Scottsville Dist. APPROVED SP-97-61 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: The height of the tower shall not exceed seventy-five (75) feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower: The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall not be permitted; b. The tower shall have no lighting; and c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24. 1998 (Page 3) 3. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "Schuyler Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98": Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not to exceedtwo [2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "WDF 1/15/98"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used. for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: 1. Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site: and 2. The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort indudes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permirtee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane rtmning though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site, The County staff . shall identify which trees maybe removed for such construction or installation. ExCept for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower; 8. The permittee shall comply with Section 5. I. 12 of the Zoning Ordinance: The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued: and I0. The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used. Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24. 1998 (Page 4) Agenda Item No. 8. SP-97-62. Midway Substation. (Sign #15 & 16'). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to install communications tower inside fenced area at existing electrical substation, Loc on W side of Rt 635 (Millers School Rdl at inter of Rts 635 & 688 (Midway Rd). Znd IRA. TM72, P6. White Hall Dist. APPROVED SP-97-62 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: The height of the tower shall not exceed seventy-fiVe (75] feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower: The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall not be permitted; b. The tower shall have no lighting; and c. The tower shall not be painted and shall remain in its natural wood stare. Staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide buffering or screening on all sides of the site with the tree type to be of the maximum height feasibleg The tower shall be located on the site generally as shown on the attached plan entitled "Midway Substation" and initialed "SET 12/15/97"; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a, Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not to exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used. for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: 1. Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site: and 2. The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permirtee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal fights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the luminalre. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply; Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24. 1998 (Page 5~ Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing ~rees within two hundred I200) feet of the tower; 9. The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance; 10. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued; and 11. The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year, identifying the users and purposes for which the tower is being used. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-97-63. Cash's Comer Substation. (Sign #23 & 24). PUBLIC HEARING on a request to install communications tower inside fenced area at existing electrical substation. Loc approx 1/3 ml W of Rt 231 (Gordonsville Rd) & approx ~ mi N of inter of Rt 231 Sc 615 (Lindsay Rd). Znd RA. TM: P45C. Rivanna Dist. APPROVED SP-97-63 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: The height of the tower shall not exceed seventy-five (75) feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower; The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall not be permitted: b. The tower shall have no lighting; and c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as shown on the attached plan entitled "Cash's Corner Substation" and initialed "SET 1/15/98"; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not to exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: I. Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site; and Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24. 1998 (Page 6} The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to. evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in excha~nge for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the luminalre. For purposes of this condition, a "lurninaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the perrnittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower: 8. The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued: 10. The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than Jniy 1 of that year, identifying the users and purposes for which the to~ver xs being used: and ll. Staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide a buffer on all sides (except the side shared with the VEPCO substation). No screening shall be required which will interfere with the access to the property. Agenda Item No. 10. SP-97-65. Greenwood Farm Bridge (Sign #27). PUBLIC HEARING on a request ro allow fill in of the flood plain [Sec 30.3.5.2.1 (2)1 to construct road SC bridge over Yellow Mountain Creek. Road Sc bridge will serve timbering Sc recreational activities of property owner Sc provide access to future home on property. Loc on S side of Rt 250. approx 2400' from inter ~v/Rt 690 Sc approx 3000' from inter w/Rt 689. Znd RA. TM71, P2. Samuel Miller Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) DEFERRED until April 1, 1998. Staff to review conditions, induding recommended changes proposed by the applicant. Memo To: V. Wayne Cilimberg March 24, 1998 (Page 7~ Agenda Item No. 1 i. ZTA-97-02. Jamie Lewis. PUBLIC HEARING on a request to amend Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance Supplementary Regulations Sec 5.1.25 Farm Winery & Section 5.1.19 Wayside Stand to allow farm winery festivals & larger sales/tasting floor area by fight, to delete commercial entrance requirement for farm wineries &. to delete other requirements. DEFERRED until April 1. 1998. Staff to include changes recommended by the Board. /ewc Attachments cc: Larry Davis Amelia McCulley Bill Mawyer Brace Woodzell File COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BOAP, D OF S JPERV/SORS AGENDA TITLE: Community Development Block Grant Authorizing resolution SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: It is required to adopt an authorizing resolution to submit a Comprehensive Community Improvement Grant to be funded through a Virginia Community Development Block Grant. STAFF CONTACT(S): Mr. Tucker, Mrs. McDonald AGENDA DATE: March 18, 1998 ACTION: Yes CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes BACKGROUND: Pursuant to a public headn§ on the CDBG program held on February 4, 1998, the Board of Supervisors voted to submit an application for funding for a housing rehabilitation and new construction project, community center improvements, acquisition and park construction, and removal of dangerous neighborhood buildings. A second public headng was held March 11, 1998 allowing comment on the proposed pro.iect and past use of CDBG funds. After the second public headng, the Board of Supervisors must indicate approval of the proposed project and pass a resolution authorizing the County Executive to submit an application to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. DISCUSSION: The County is seeking $1,025,000 in CDBG funds which will: 1) assist with the rehabilitation of twenty-nine single family homes, 2) help pay acquisition and site development costs for a parcel on which five new homes for first-time buyers will be constructed, 3) help pay for additional improvements to the W.D. Ward Community Center in which Albemarle County has recently located a police satellite office, 4) offset the costs of removing numerous abandoned, dangerous buildings in the neighborhood, and 5) augment $125,000 County funds already set aside for the construction of a park in the Porter's Road/Yancy School neighborhood. Total project cost is estimated to be approximately $1.97 million dollars. Attached is the resolution authorizing the County Executive to submit the application for CDBG funds to the state. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the proposed Comprehensive Community Improvement Project and adoption of the attached resolution authorizing the County Executive to submit the application to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development. 98.041 $1,025,000 CDBG Program Cost CDBG 428,000 AHIP/Albemarle County Contribution 125,000 -150,000 Parks&Ree/CIP 10,000 INDOOR Plumbing 250,000 5 new eonstretion homes 70,000 - 140.000 HOME Consortium RESOLUTION WHEREAS /he County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that decent, safe. sanitary, and affordable housing is available for all its residents: and WHEREAS. the County of Albemarle is committed To building strong neighborhoods which provide recreational and community facilities: and WHEREAS. the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring the public safety of all of its residents: and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Hearings held February 4, 1998, and March 11 1998 the County of Albemarle wishes to apply for $1.025.000 in Community Development Block Grant funds for a Comprehensive Community improvement Project for the Porter's Road/Yancey School neighborhood: and WHEREAS, $125,000fromAIbemarleCounty's Departmentof Parks and Recreatior $428.000 in operating support for the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program provided by Albemarle County. funds from the Virginia Indoor Plumbing Program, HOME funding available from the Thomas Jefferson Regional HOME Consortium. family sawngs and borrowed funds and numerous hours of communityvoluntea- hours and private contributions wJlJ be invested Jn this project: an(:J WHEREAS a recent survey of the target neighborhood has determined that some 75% of the residents of the community have incomes below 80% of the Area Median Income; and WHEREAS, it is projected that this project will result in the following achievements: Rehabilitation of twenty-nine single family homes, which will benefit approximately seventy three (73) Iow-and moderate-income residents; The acquisition and site development on which five new homes will be constructed for first- time buyers, which will benefit approximatelyfifteen (15) Iow-and moderate-income resident~ Improvements to the W.D. Ward Community Center: Development of a new park: and The removal of dangerous abandoned buildings in the neighborhood, all of which will benefit the neighborhood as a whole. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, J r.. County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign and submit the appropriate documents for submittal of this Virginia Community Development Block Grant application. [, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held on March 18. 1998. Clerk, County Bo-~-d of Sup/~isors / VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK our love of literature and mqting has led our community to rank first in the nation in book reading households; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Festival of the Book has celebrated the extraordinary writers who grace Albemarle County, and the children and adults who read books; and over two hundred writers will participate in more than one hundred and.fifty programs; and WHEREAS, numerous local businesses and individuals, civic groups and cultural organizations, have contributed time and resources to make this ceent possible; NOW, THEREFORE, L Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supemisors, do hereby proclaim WEDNESDAY, MARCH 18. 1998 THROUGH SUNDAY, MARCH 22, 1998 as the Fourth Annual VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK and encourage community members to participate fully in the wide variety of available e~ents and activities. Signed and sealed this I Sth day of March, 1998, CHAIRMAN ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPER VISORS a ao L [&qS dO (PdVO COMMONWEALTH o{ VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Valley Regional Office James S. Gilmore, III Street address: 4411 Early Road, Harr~onburg, Virginia 22801 Thomas L. Hopkim Governor Mailing address: P.O. Box 1129, Harrisonburg, VA 22801-1129 Director Telephone (540)574-7800 Fax (540)574-7878 ht tp://www.deq.st at e.va.us John Paul Woodley. Jr. Secretary of Natural Resources R. Bradley Chewning, P.E. Valley Regional Director March 4, 1998 Mrs. Charlotte Humphries, Chairman Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McInsire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 RE .' Public Notice of Draft VWPP Permits University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation, North Fork Research Park (JPA 97-1961) Dear Mrs. Humphries: This letter transmits a copy of the draft public notice for the referenced proposed permit action for your review. This notice is provided as required by Section 62.1-44.15:01 of the Code of Virginia. Public notice of this proposed action will also be published in the Daily Progress. Publication of the public notice in the newspaper will initiate a 30 day public comment period for this proposal. If you wish to comment on this proposed action, please contact me au the following address: Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Valley Regional Office P.O. Box 1129 Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801-1129 If no response ls recezved by the end of the 30 day public comment period, it will be assumed your office has so objections to the proposed permit action. If you have questions about this letter or the project, please call me at (540) 574-7800. Roberts / EnVironmental Engineer Senior / Enclosure: Public Notice VWPP 97-196~ PUBLIC NoTicE ISSUANCE OF A VIRGINIA WATER PROTECTION PERMIT AN~ STATE CERTIFICATION UNDER THE STATE WATER CONTROL LAW The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) has under consideration issuance of the following Virginia Water Protection (VWP] Permit: VWP Permit Number: Name of Permittee: Project Name: Project Location: Permittee Address: Stream: Basin:. Subbasin: Section: Special Standards: 97-1961 University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation North Fork Research Park West of Route 29 North, and South of the North Fork Rivanna River P.O. Box 9023 Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 Three Unnamed Tributaries to North Fork Rivanna River James River Middle James River 10 Class: III None Description of VWP Permit Activities: Construction of 10 road crossings of intermittent stream channels, one perennial stream channel realignment for road construction, 4 stormwater management ponds, and one pond expansion for aesthetic purposes supporting the development of North Fork Research Park. Proposed activities.will fill or flood 2.05 acres of forested wetlands, 0.62 acres o~ emergent wetlands, and 1.19 acres of stream channel in 13 impacu areas. Iu~pacts to State waters shall be mitigated by creating 4~!0 acres of forested wetlands, 0.62 acres of emergent wetlands, restoration of 380 feet of perennial stream channel, and placement of a conservation easement on non-impact State waters. On the basis of staff review and application of lawful standards and re~ulations, DEQ tentatively proposes to issue the VWP Permit subject to certain conditions. This permit will maintain the Water Quality Standards adopted by the State Water Control Board. Persons may comment in writing uo DEQ on the proposed issuance of the VWPP within 30 days from the date of the notice. Address comments uo the contact person listed below. Comments shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the writer and a complete, concise statement of the factual basis for the comments. Only comments received within this period will be considered. DEQ may hold a public hearing if public response is significant. Requests for a hearing shall state the reason why a hearing is requested, the nature of the issues to be raised in the hearing, and a brief explanation of how the requestor's interests may be directly and adversely affected by the proposed permit action. Ail pertinent information is on file and may be inspected, and arrangements made for copying by contacting Jay Roberts at: Department of Environmental Quality; Valley Regional Office; P.O. Box 1129; Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801-1129; or call (540) 574-7800. Following the comment period, the Board will make a~determination regarding the proposed issuance. This determination will become final and.effective on-the date. of s~g~ture.by the Director, unless the Director grants a public hearing. Due n~tice~of'any publichearing will~be~iven. BOARD 015' SUPERVISoRs COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 40I Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Memorandum TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Planning Commission William D. Fritz, AICPJot~ Central Virginia Electric Cooperative [CVECI January 21, 1998 CVEC has applied for four special use permits to allow the construction of towers at various CVEC substations in the County. These substations are described as Whitehall, Schuyler, Cash's Comer and Midway. Staffhas reviewed each application individually. This memorandum is intended to provide some general information which is applicable to all of the applications. The four requests are to accommodate installation ora Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part of its daily operation of the electrical distribution system, monitoring and controlling substation equipment remotely on a real time basis. SCADA systems control switches that are necessary for the safety of line crews working on overhead power lines, and facilitate restoration of power during outages. The proposed towers would be located inside the fenced area of existing substations. The tower height is determined by the line of sight requirement between various substations. Whitehall, Schuyler, and Midway substations will communicate with an existing CVEC tower at the Wintergreen substation. The Cash's Comer substation will communication with and existing CVEC tower in Palmyra. It is intended that this new communication system will improve the delivery of electricity in the County. The applicant has submitted information addressing the general operational characteristic of the system. [Attachment A]. Staffhas attached a photograph of the type of antenna proposed to be located on each of the towers. [Attachment BI. These four towers are intended to function as a network. The proposed towers do not provide service to anyone other than CVEC. Three of the proposed towem are wooden poles and one is a steel lattice structure. It is unlikely that the three wooden towers will be available for collocation due to the height of the towers and the load bearing capacity of the towers. The steel lattice tower may be able to provide collocation opportunities in the future. At this time none of the licensed personal wireless service providers has expressed any interest in use of the tower. Staffhas investigated with the applicant alternatives which would alleviate the need for the construction of these new towers. One alternative would be the use of existing phone lines to achieve the same service. The applicant, in attachment A, has commented on the use of land phone lines. The use of land phone lines is not desired by the applicant due to the cost and the lower reliability of phone lines compared to the wireless system proposed. The use of the existing personal wireless service providers is not desired by the applicant due to the fact that would not achieve the same level of service proposed by the CVEC wireless system. Staffhas also requested that the applicant comment on the use of the existing power transmission towers for the wireless system. The applicant has submitted information addressing this issue [Attachment B]. Use of existing structures at Cash's Corner and White Hall is an option. However, collocation requires a temporary outage during placement of the communication equipment and in the cost of use of the towers at Whitehall is anticipated to be one-third of the total communication project budget for CVEC. At Midway and Schuyler Substations the existing poles are not tall enough to provide the necessary communication. The Board will need To determine if cost and a temporary power outage creates a sufficient obstacle to collocation which warrants approval of a free standing facility. Staffhas reviewed the provisions of the 1996 Telecommunications Act for provisions applicable to the review of the CVEC applications. As the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors are aware the 1996 Telecomman/cafions Act places limitations on the review of personal wireless service providers. CVEC is not a licensed personal wireless service provider. Therefore, the County is not linfited by the 1996 Telecommunications Act in its review of the CVEC applications. January 15, 1998 [ATTACHMENT AI Albemarle County Mr. William Fritz Ms. Susan Thomas Planning Depanmem 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: Central Virginia Electric Cooperative is in the process of implementing a SupervisoE~ Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system in order to monitor and control substation equipment in 29 substations in 9 counties. The benefits of the system are a reduction in system operating costs, improved system information and planning resources and the increase in service reliability with a reduction in outage restoration time for the cooperative's 26,000 electrical customers. The Cooperative has received approval to install antenna structures at its substations in Buckingham, Cumberland, Appomattox, Nelson, Goochland and Orange County. We have received positive recommendations from the planning commission of Louisa County and are scheduled to appear before the county supervisors within the next 30 days. Besides Albemarle County, Fluvauna County is the only other county that we have to appear before the planning commission due to the cancellation of a previously scheduled meeting. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative has performed communication path studies and has investigated the use of existing structures at each of the sites that an application was submitted for. Following is an explanation of the structures considered and the reasons for the applications being submitted as they were in Albemarle County. Cash's Comer Substation - Two concrete structures exist and are located within the property and substation of Virginia Power that are approximately 70 feet in height above the ground. These structures could possibly offer the necessary height for communications with the antenna mounted at the top of the structure. These structures support transmission line facilities energized at 115 kV. In order to install the antenna at the top of one of these structures, with the communication line attached down the pole to the radio, the transmission line would have to be de-energized leaving thousands of customers without power for the few hours that it would take to install the antenna. Intentionally turning off the power to that many consumers is something that Central Virginia Electric Cooperative would not do if avoidable. The fact that the substation is located on a small plot of land makes the placement of the proposed wood pole difficult to be located a distance from the property line equal to the height of the pole. The fact that a substation structure already exists with overhead energized lines makes this impossible. The area surrounding the substation site is used for agriculture purposes so the threat ora structure falling into a residential lot does not exist. The proposed wood pole structure, although for communication purposes, is similar to already existing structures that support energized power lines and comply with the strength reqmrements of the National Electric Safety Code. Under severe conditions the wood structure with the communications equipment on it will be even less likely to fall than the electric facilities because of less loading on the pole. Whitehall Metering Point - A Virginia Power Co lattice structure exists within close proximity to the substation that is approximately 120 feet in height. Although this structure has the height needed for the installation of the antenna at this substation the placement of the energized conductors on this structure, the cost to de-energize the line, install the antenna and space rental make it not feasible to be utilized. Considering the installation cost and the annual rental fees, approximately one-third of the total communication project budget will have been spent on one substation. The size of the lot makes it impossible to place the proposed wood pole a distance from the property line equal to the height of the pole. Wood poles already exist that under severe conditions could fall and may not fall on the cooperative property. The substation site is surrounded by wooded area and transmission and distribution line right-of-way. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative believes the installation ora wood pole to be the most reasonable option at this site. Midway Substation - The required height of 130 feet to provide line-of-site communication to this substation is the highest height requirement of all the substations in the entire system. Currently there exists no other structure in close proximity to the substation that would provide the adequate height to accomplish this communication. Transmission towers exist that are approximately 100 feet tall at the same or lower elevations than the substation elevation. The minimum height for successful communication is 130 feet. The proposed location of the structure will be at least 130 feet from the north, west and east property lines. Although the proposed JATTACH MENT Al [Page 41 structure will be less than 130 feet (approximately 90 feet) from the South property line, 25 to 50 foot tall substation structures already exist between the proposed structure location and the south property line. The substation is located on the property where the south property line borders transmission and distribution fight-of-ways the entire length of the substation. The extent of the tower would reach into the area of the transmission right-of-way only along the south property line. Schuyler Substation - The tallest existing, structure is a 60 foot pole with an above ground height of approximately 52 feet. This pole would not provide the required height of 75 feet. The small plot of land on which the substation is located makes it impossible to locate the proposed pole on the site a distance from each property line equal to the height of the pole. Wood pole structures already exist that may not fall within the property limits of Central Virginia Electric Cooperative property. If you have any additional questions please call. Sincerely, Brace Maurhoff, P.E. IATrACHMENT AI IPage 51 IATTACHMENT A1 &.N 1 2 19% Ianuary 7, 1998 Mr. William Fritz Albemarle County Planning Department 401 McIntire Rd.. Charlottesville. VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: The tour applications for installations of wood poles and one tower that Central Virgima Electric Cooperative has submitted is for the purpose of installing a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part of the daily operation of the electrical distribution system. The proposed SCADA system will monitor and provide the capability to control substation eqmpment on a real time basis. The system will be controlling the operation of substation equipment remotely and will control switches that are necessary for the safety of line crews while working on the lines, and will also enable power restoration to be handled quicker and more efficiently. Therefore, the reliability and the continuous polling of information from the substations is crucial to the operation of this system. The proposed communication system will communicate in the 928-952 MHZ band which rcqui,'es licensing and does require "line-of-sight"communications. The communication system is a Multiple Address Radio System (MAS), and as licensed and implemented by several utilities across the United States operates with one or more master radios each talking directly to several remote radios. The remote radios at the substation sites transmit at an operating power of 5 watts and are mounted to thc antenna pole as indicated o, ti~ drawing submitted with the applicatkms. The radios are housed in a weatherproof box that is approximately 18"H x 18"W x 10"D without any additional ground equipment required. This communication system provides the degree of reliability required for the SCADA system. The height of the pole at the substations is dictated by the topography of the land between the master radio and the remote radio at the substation. The placement of the pole very close to the substation is dictated by the fact that the computer gathering the information in the substation and the radio that transmits the information communicate via RS232 format with distance limits of 50 to 100 feet. Post Office Box 247 · Lovingston. VA 22949 · Telephone: 804/263-8336 · Fax: 804/263-8339 IATTACHMENT A] IPage 21 It is possible to transmit the information gathered by the SCADA system back to the cooperative headquarters by dedicated leased telephone lines, but this is undesirable for many reasons. Our experience has been that leased lines connected between serwce areas of different local telephone service providers would cost approximately $400 to $500 a month making the implementation of a SCADA system at some substations cost prohibitive. The reliability of the leased lines tends to be less than that of a MAS system and typically experiences its difficulties at the very times that the communications is needed most at the substations. When problems on the leased lines do occur the problem may not be resolved by the provider within a period of time acceptable for the operation of a SCADA system. The use of personal wireless service providers and receiving information from a SCADA system tn a "dial-up" mode totally defeats the major benefit of a SCADA system of continuous polling of all substations and receiving information within seconds of its actual occurrence. t have tried to address as many of the questions you submitted to me as possible in this letter. I will be providing additional information to you concermng the use of existing structures at the sites and the placement of the proposed structures on the property. This additional information will be sent to you the first parr of the week of January 11, 1998. If you have any additional questions please let me know. Sincerely, / Bruce Maurhoff, P.E. Cc: Susan Thomas, Albemarle County 2 ~reless KarlBridge 900 Mhz Antenna Kit Page Iofl Wireless KarlBridge 900 Mhz Directional Antenna Yagi Antenna, 50' cable and Lightening Suppressor Prodacls [ A_.pplicatioas I Price I,ist January29,1998 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ~O~-- Dept. ot' Planning & Coramunity Developr~ent OFSvPEt ¥I$OI S -_4, 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-~96 (800,) 296-5823 Bruce Maruhoff Central Virginia Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 247 Lovingston, VA 22949 RE: SP-97-60 Central Virginia Electric Cooperative (White Hall) Tax Map 57, Parcel 2B Dear Mr. Maruhoff: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 27, 1998, 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 height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall be not permitted. b. The tower shall have no lighting. c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. 3. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "White Hall Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98" 4. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to two Yagi antenna, not to exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "WDF 1/15/98". Page 2 January 29, 1998 b. Satellite and microwave dish anmnnas are prohibited. 9. 10. 11. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence ora good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered m allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain anthorization from County staffto remove existing trees on the site. The County staffshall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance~ The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used. Removal of existing vegetation shall be allowed only after staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.'/.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance. STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ, AICP January 27, 1998 March 18, 1998 SP 97-60 Central Virginia Electric Cooperative, CVEC [White Hall Substation] Applicant's Proposal: Proposal to construct a wireless communication tower to accommodate installation of a Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition [SCADA] system that will become a part of its daily operation of the electrical distribution system monitoring and controlling substation equipment remotely on a real time basis. SCAD systems control switches that are necessary for the safety, of the line crews working on overhead power lines and facilitate restoration of power during outages. The operational characteristics of the system are described in a memo which accompanies this report. The proposed location is at the CVEC substation near Beaver Creek Reservior on Route 680, Browns Gap Turnpike. This application will allow for the placement of a 75 foot wooden pole. The tower height is determined by the line of sight requirement between this substation and the next one in the CVEC network with which it communicates. The next tower is located at Wintergreen. This pole will support an antennae which will be located at the top of the pole. The antennae will be horizontal to the ground and is two feet long and seven inches in diameter. No other antenna are proposed and no additional ground building is required. A small box will be located on the bottom of the tower, this box is one foot by four inches and includes all of the radio equipment. A sketch of the proposed tower is included as Attachment C. Petition: Proposal to construct a communications facility on 0.194 acres zoned R.A., Rural Areas. [10.2.2.6] Property, described as Tax Map 57, Parcel 2B is located on the west side of Route 680, Browns Gap Turnpike, approximately 0.77 miles north of the Beaver Creek Reservoir in the White Hall Magisterial District. Tins site is not located within a designated growth area. The applicant is also requesting site plan and setback waivers. Character of the Area: A 230ky power line crosses Route 680 at this location and the substation is located near the road. No dwellings are visible from the existing substation. The poles supporting the 230ky line are steel lattice poles approximately 120 feet tall. The area surrounding the substation is a mixture of pasture and hardwoods. Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower and nearby house structures. The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 620 feet ASL, Above Sea Level. The closest dwelling to the proposed tower, is approximately 500 feet (0. I miles) distant. Approximately 8 houses are located within 2.000 feet (0.6 miles) of the proposed tower. No existing towers are located in the area, the nearest tower is located approximately 4 miles to the west on Bucks Elbow. The Windham Retirement Center and a Water Tank are located in Crozet, approximately 2 '/2 miles to the soutwest. The nearest identified structures capable of supporting communications equipment are the poles used for the 230ky line. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning, and Zoning History: Staff can find no history for this site. Comprehensive Plan: Staffnotes that in order to construct the proposed tower no clearing for access and the provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, the impact of the tower itself is the only factor which has been reviewed by staff for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. This site is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan The only resource identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan for this area is farmland/forest. Currently, the Land Use Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of communication towers. The Open Space Plan does provide some guidance for the protection of identified resources of the County, but as no resources are identified on this site which are adversely impacted by this tower staff finds no inconsistency with the Open Space Plan, Due to the lack of any comments in the Comprehensive Plan regarding this type of facility staff opinion ~s that this request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of this request in three sections: 1 Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staffwill address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Sunervisors 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 flndinn bv the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, The proposed tower does not comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance. Staff will discuss the setback issue in later portions &this report. The tower location is within the compound of the existing substation which is flat. The existing substation and proposed tower will be screened from dwellings in the area by the existing pine woods but the site is clearly visible from Route 680. Staff notes that the applicant was asked if alternative use of phone lines or wireless service, and/or collocation options on the nearby transmission line or existing structures within the substation had been explored as an alternative to the new tower. Collocation outside of the substation could occur on the steel lattice towers supporting the 230ky lines. The applicant responded that collocation is not a viable alternative as it would require the 230ky line to be temporarily de-energized during the installation. This will inconvenience a large number of people and businesses and has a cost associated with it. In addition annual rent on the transmission structure would be required, the annual rent is ~10.500. Telephone lines and wireless options, although undesirable from the applicant's point of view (due to mainly to cost and, to a lesser extent, to dependability), appear m offer an alternative form of counection. Staff offers additional comment regarding collocation in latter portions of this repo~t. The proposed tower is located approximately 500 feet from the nearest dwelling. Lighting of the tower is unlikely as the tower is under the height standard for lighting, but staff has included a condition prohibiting lighting. Staffis not able to determine if the detriment caused by this rower is substantial. The fact that this request is within a substation compound adjacent to higher poles mitigates the impact of the tower. [The poles for the 230ky line are steel lattice. The proposed CVEC tower is wood.] Additional information may be provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue of potential impacts. Staff is unable to determine if the impact of this proposal will create a substantial detriment to adjacent property. The applicant has not submitted evidence that the impact from this development will not be substantial. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby. In determining the impact on the character of the district staff has taken into consideration the character of the district as described in the Comprehensive Plan. A topographic mag is attached to this report which shows the location of dwellings, the power line and other features. This tower does not penetrate the Airport Overlay District. As this request is for the construction of a tower within a substation compound adjacent to an existing 230ky power line this request will not result in a significant change in the appearance of the Rural Area. Towers have been permitted in the Rural Areas and have not in the opinion of staff resulted in a change in the character of the Rural Areas to this point. Staff opinion is that this request does comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance. Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4.. 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The purpose of this application is to improve the provision of electrical service which clearly provides a public service, Based on the provision ora public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The prowsion of this facility does increase the reliability of electrical service which may be considered a contributing to a convenient community.. Collocation on the existing poles carrying the 230kv line is possible but would cause a temporary power outage and a significant cost associated with the installation. The CounW has consistently recommended collocation in an effort to reduce the number of towers required. This effort supports the creation of an attractive community. The Board will need to determine if the temporary power outage and cost create an obstacle to collocation sufficient to warrant the establishment of a free standing facility. Staff opinion is that a temporary outage on a 230ky line would affect a large number ofpeople/bnsinesses and indus~es and may be inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. Staff considers the cosl m be a sign'ffleant obstacle to collocation. Staff review of ordinances from other localities indicates that a consideration for collocation is cost. Localities that provide for collocation in their ordinances frequently use as a measure of viable collocation the cost of collocation. If the cost of collocation is more than the cost of construction of a new facility, a new facility may be approved. IA similar approach is used by Albemarle County when determining if a property must connect to public utilities.] Staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district. The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, other by-right uses available on this site or by-right uses on any other property. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance. Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health and safety and general welfare by providing improved service reliability particularly during emergencies or inclement weather. This tower also serves as a remote operation link in the CVEC network and therefore this request may be considered as consistent with the publics safety as it allows for the remora operation of lines which may be downed. Staff has not requested additional information on the effects of radio frequency emissions due to the low output, 5 watts, of the system, The sysmm proposed will use equipment regulated bythe FCC. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4.10.3.1 states: "The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultural museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, sp~res, flag poles, monuments or transmission towers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the structure; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". By the requirements of this provision the proposed tower would need to be located a minimum of 75 feet from the edge of the property. The proposed tower is located approximately 15 feet from the closest property line. Staff opinion is that this provision is designed to prevent undue crowding of the land and to prevent safety hazards should a tower fall. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requirmg approval of a tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure. In this situation the proposed tower is a wooden pole which cannot be designed to collapse in a predicable manner. Relocation of the tower to a site which would meet the setback is not an option. Staff notes that the area closest to the tower is a Virgina Power, VP, easement. Should the CVEC tower collapse it would be either within the CVEC lease area or the VP easement area. Staff oplmon is that in the event of collapse no improvements would be endangered, other than CVEC equipment. Therefore, staffis able to support this request. Waiver ora site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing ora site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. The site review committee has reviewed the request for a site plan waiver. The proposed tower will be within the existing substation compound and will require no grading, clearing or new access to construct the tower. Based on this review staff is unable to identify any purpose which would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following fantors which are favorable to this request: !. The tower will provide increased reliability in the provision of electric service which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5; 2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; 3. The tower will have minimal impact on the character of the area and adjacent residences; 4. Approval of this tower will not require the construction of an access road or clearing for electrical service; 5. The request is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the ordinance. 6. Collocation is not a viable option. Staff has identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request: 1. Other methods for connecting the substation with others in the CVEC network exist. 2. There is an existing reasonable use of the property. While not cited by staffas an unfavorable factor staff does note that this tower will have a minor visual impact to the surrounding area. Staff opinion is that this request generally complies with the provisions of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Therefore, staff is able to support this application. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this request. Should the Board choose to approve this request, staff has provided conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. The height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall be not permitted. b. The tower shall have no lighting. c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. 3. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "White Hall Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98" 4. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "WDF 1/15/98". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the rower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intern stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, ver/fiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the sheild or sheilding part of the lumina'tre. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staffto remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. 8. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The rower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued, 11. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to permit the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 30 feet from the property line. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicants Information D - Topographical Map ALBEMARLE COUNTY SP 97-60 CENTRAL VA ELEC. COOPERA~VE ~' 1ATTACHMENT AI 6O 77 ./ / 58 35 4t 47 .J 48 · =,,L, ,. ,~. SAMUEL MILLER AND --- ' WHITE HALL DISTRIOTS SECTION 57 0 SP 97-60 CENTRAL VA ELEC. COOPERATIVE CASTLE ROCK TOP TOM MOUNTAIN 5 MOUNTAIN ? \ I ATTAC:HM~NT CI Section 31:2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to 'issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request. If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available. WhatistheComprehensivePlandesignationforthisproperty? (~pe.v~ SOqce~ ~,,,~) '~re6 Howwilltheproposedspecialuseaffeetadjaeentproperty? The installation of one (1) wood pole for communications on property already used as an electrical distribution substation, should have no detrimental effect to adjacent property. H~wwi~the~r~p~sedspecialusea~ectthe~haracter~fthedistrictsurr~undingthepr~perty? Th~ s~lbsta~']on site is surrounded by evergreen trees, except for the entrance into the sub station. The substation cannot be easily seen from any residence. The installation of this wood..pole should have no detrimental effect to the district. A transmission tower of approximately 120 feet is directly adjacent to tlSe substation Iaclllty. HowistheuseinharmonywiththepurposeandintentoftheZoningOrdinance? The p~rpose of the installatin is to provide improved service reliability to the customers served by this facility. How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district? Uses, p~rmitted by right, include poles, lines, transformers, meters and related facilities. This installation is a pole and is related to, and a part of, the distribution system. What additional regulations provided in Section 5 0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use? 5.1.12 Public UtiLities Structures/Uses How will this use promote the publie health, safety, andgeneralwelfareofthecommunity? The installation of this communication system will enable CVEC to monitor and control substation equip~aent remotely. The result will be quic}~er response ro emergency ~tn~*~,~n~: ~nn~eased service reliability and reduced outage restoration time. 2 I ATTACHMENT r-----'----1 Describe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of pers~ involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use: c~ntvnl V~v~nla Eleetr'ie Coop proposes to install an 85 ft. wood pole mad antenna with an above grade elevation of 75 feet for the purpose of communication with substation equipment. for approximately 1,050 consumers served by this substation. The pole is proposed to be installed inside the fenced area at the existing substation. ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each: Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning, if there is no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number. Note: if you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing. Ownership information - if ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS: Drawings or conceptual plans, if any. Additional Information, if any. I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is tree and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Sfg/nature Date J~ne$ Wood. Onerations Mgr. Printed Name 804/263-8336 Daytime phone number of Signatory IATTACHPIENT C J 900Mhr Yoc9~ nn~enna --900Mhr Radio Enclosure Dome Novenber 21 ]99T January 29, 1998 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Plannin9 & Community Developing©ARD OF SL~VISO~S 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (8041 296-5823 Bruce Maruhoff Central Virginia Electric Cooperative P. O. Box 247 Lovingston, VA 22949 RE: SP-97-61 Central Virginia Cooperative Tax Map 132, Parcel 5A Dear Mr. Mamhoff: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 27, 1998, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: o The height ofthetower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall be not permitted. b. The tower shall have no lighting. c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "Schuyler Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98" Page 2 January 29, 1998 4. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "WDF 1/t5/98". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless relecommnnications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and eqmpment on the site, subject to these conditions. (i) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaim shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting ora lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staffto remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. Page 3 January 29, 1998 8. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. 10. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July I of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Planning Commission also granted the following modification/waiver: Modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 30 feet from the property line. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 18, 1998. 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 oF comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Willimn D. Fritz, AICP Senior Planner WDF~ef cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ, AICP January 27, 1998 March 18, 1998 SP 97-61 Central Vir nia Electric Cooperative. CVEC [Schuyler Substation ] Apnlicant's Proposal: Proposal to construct a wireless communication tower to accommodate installation of a Supervisory ControI and Data Acquisition [SCADA] system that will become a part of its daily operation of the electrical distribution system monitoring and controlling substation equipment remotely on a real time basis. SCAD systems control switches that are necessary for the safety of the line crews working on overhead power lines and facilitate restoration of power during outages. The operational characteristics of the system are described in a memo which accompanies this report. The proposed location is at the CVEC substation near Schuyler on Route 602, Howardsville Turnpike. This application will allow for the placement of a 75 foot wooden pole. The tower height is determined by the line of sight requirement between this substation and the next one in the CVEC network with which it communicates. The next tower is located at Wimergreen. This pole will support an antennae which will be located at the top of the pole. The antennae will be horizontal to the ground and is two feet long and seven inches in diameter. No other antenna are proposed and ao additional ground building ~s required. A small box will be located on the bottom of the tower, this box is one foot by four inches and includes all of the radio equipment. A sketch of the proposed tower is included as Attachraent C. Petition: Proposal to construct a communications facility on 0.53 acres zoned R.A., Rural Areas. [10.2.2.63 Property, described as Tax Map 132, Parcel 5A is located on the west side of Route 602, Howardsville Turnpike, approximately 0.8 miles south of Route 800, Schuyler Turnpike in the Seottsville Magisterial District. This site is not located within a designated development area. The applicant is also requesting site plan and setback waivers. Character of the Area: A 115ky power line crosses Route 602 at this location and the substation is located near the road. No dwellings are visible from the existing substation. The poles supporting the 115ky line are wooden poles approximately 60 feet tall. The area surrounding the substation is primarily pine woods. Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower and nearby house stmctares. The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 500 feet ASL, Above Sea Level. The closest dwelling to the proposed tower, is approximately 700 feet (0.13 miles) distant. Approximately 8 houses are located within 2,000 feet (0.6 miles) of the proposed tower. No existing towers are located in the area, the nearest tower is located approximately 5 ½ miles to the northwest in Nelson County. The nearest identified structures capable of supporting communications equipment are the poles used for the t 15kv line. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning and Zoning~ History: Staff can find no histoEe for this site. Comprehensive Plan: Staff notes that in order to construct the proposed tower no clearing for access and the provtsion of electrical service will be required. Therefore, the impact of the tower itself is the only factor which has been reviewed by staff for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. This site is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Plan, no resources are identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan. Currently, the Land Use Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of communication towers. The Open Space Plan doesprovide some guidance for the protection of identified resources of the County, but as no resources are identified on this site staff finds no inconsistency with the Open Space Plan. Due to the lack of any other comments in the Compi~ehensive Plan regarding this type of facility staff opinion is that this request is not in conflict with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staffwill address the issues of this request in three sections: Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Sunervisors hereby reserves unto itself the rieht to issue alt special use permtrs permitted herennder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding bv the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, The proposed tower does not comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance. Staff will discuss the setback issue in later portions of this report. The tower location is within the compound of the existing substation which is flat. The existing substation and proposed tower will be screened from dwellings in the area by the existing pine woods but the site is clearly visible from Route 602. Staff notes that the applicant was asked if alternative use of phone lines or wireless service, and/or collocation options on the nearby transmtssion line or existing structures within the substation had been explored as an alternative to the new tower. Collocation outside of the substation would require removal of one of the existing 60 fool poles supporting the llSkv line and the installation ora new 75 foot pole which would support both the 115ky line and the SCADA system. The applicant responded that collocation is not feasible at this site because replacing the existing transmission tower with a new tower structures will require the 115ky line to be temporarily de-energized during the installation. This will 2 inconvenience a large number of people and businesses and has a cost associated with it. In addition annual rent on the transmission structure would be required. Telephone lines and wireless options, although undesirable from the applicant's point of view (due to mainly to cost and, to a lesser extent, to dependability), appear to offer an alternative form of connection. The proposed tower is located approximately 700 feet from the nearest dwelling. Lighting of the tower is unlikely as the tower is under the height standard for lighting, but staff has included a condition prohibiting lighting. Staff is not able to determine if the detriment caused by this tower is substantial. The fact that this request is for within a substation compound adjacent to similar type poles on the 115 ky line mitigaies the impact of the tower. Additional information may be provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue ofpotential impacts. Staff is unable to determine if the impact of this proposal will create a substantial detriment to adjacent property. The applicant has not submitted evidence that the impact from this development will not be substantial. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby. In determining the impact on the character of the district staffhas taken into consideration the character of the district as described in the Comprehensive Plan. A topographic map Is attached to this report which shows the location of dwellings, the power line and other features. This tower does not penetrate the Airport Overlay District. As this request is for the construction of a tower within a substation compound adjacent to an existing 115ky power line this request will not result in a significant change in the appearance of the Rural Area. Towers have been permitted in the Rural Areas and have not in the opinion of staff resulted in a change ~n the character of the Rural Areas to this point. Staff opinion is that this request does comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4,1 of the Ordinance. and that such use will be in harmony with the purnose and intent of this ordinance, Staffhas reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The purpose of this application is to improve the provision of electrical service which clearly provides a public service. Based on the provision of a public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation ora convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The provision oftbis facility does increase the reliability of electrical service which may be considered a contributing to a convenient community.. Options for collocation on the existing poles carrying the 115ky line have been exhausted. The County has consistently recommended collocation in an effort to reduce the number of towers required. This effort supports the creation of an attractive community. The applicant has submitted information indicating that the existing poles for the 115ky line are not of a sufficient height to provide the necessary line of sight. Therefore, collocation on the existing poles is not an option. In an earlier portion of this report staff discussed the possibility of increasing the p01e height on the 115ky line. In staffopinion ~ncreas~ng the pole height is not a viable collocation alternative. Staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, other by-fight uses available on this site or by-right uses on any other property. with additional regulations nrovided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safe _ty and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health and safety and general welfare by providing improved service reliability particularly during emergencies or inclement weather. This tower also serves as a remote operation link in the CVEC network and therefore this request may be considered as consistent with the public's safety as it allows for the remote operation of lines which may be downed. Staff has not requested additional information on the effects of radio frequency emissions due to the low output, 5 watts, of the system. The system proposed will use equipment regulated by the FCC. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4.10.3.1 states: "The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultural museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, spires, flag poles, monuments or transmission towers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the structure; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". By the requirements of this provision the proposed tower would need to be located a minimum of 75 feet from the edge of the property. The proposed tower is located approximately 30 feet from the closest property line. Staff opinion is that this provision ts designed to prevent undue crowding of the land and to prevent safety hazards should a tower fall. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requiring approval of a tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure. In this situation the proposed tower is a wooden pole which cannot be designed to collapse in a predicable manner. Relocation of the tower to a site which would meet the setback is not an option. Staff notes that the area closest to the tower is an Appalachian Electric Power, PEP, easement. Should the CVEC tower collapse it would be either within the CVEC lease area or the AEP easement area. Staff opinion is that in the event of collapse no improvements would be endangered, other than CVEC equipment. Therefore, staff is able to support this request. Waiver ora site nlan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. The site review committee has reviewed the request for a site plan yvaiver, the proposed tower will be within the existing substation compound and will require no grading, clearing or new access m construct the tower. Based on this review staff is unable to identify any purpose which would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver. SUMMARY: Staff bas identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1 . The tower will provide increased reliability in the provision of electric service which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5; 2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; 3. The tower will have minimal impact on the character of the area and adjacent residences; 4. Approval of this tower will not require the construction of an access road or clearing for electrical 5. Options for collocation have been exhausted; 6. The request is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the ordinance. Staff has identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request: 1. Other method for connecting the substation with others in the CVEC network exist, 2. There is an existing reasonable use of the property. While not cited by staff as an unfavorable factor staff does note that this tower will have a minor visual impact to the surrounding area. Staff opinion is that this request generally complies with the provisions of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The options for collocation on adjacent poles has been exhausted. Therefore, staff is able to support this application. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this request. Should the Board choose to approve this requesT, staff has provided conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAl.-- 1. The height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall be not permitted. b. The tower shall have no lighting. c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: · a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "Schuyler Substation" and initialed "WDF 1/15/98" Anteunas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The amenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "WDF I/I5/98". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used. or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminmre. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization fxom County staffto rembve existing trees on the site. The County staffshall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. 8. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. ll. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to permit the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 30 feet from the property line. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicants Information D ~ Topographical Map 7 4 ESMONT & PORTER AREAS TO RT. 29 SP 97-61 CENTRAL VA K C ,% SP 97-61 CENTRAL VA ELEC. COOPERATIVE Section 31.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance raay be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request. If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available. WhatistheComprehensivePlandesignationforthisproperty? O ~ ~fa ce.~ ~ o ~c,I '/~ reWt Howwilltheproposedspecialuseaffactadjacentproperty?, The installation of one (1) wood pole for communications on property already used as an electrical distribution substation, should have no detrimental effect to adjacent property. The substation site How will the ]oropesed special use affect the character of the district surrounding the property? is not openly visible from any residence. The pole to be installed will not be site. The substation site is wooded on all sides exeep! entrance to state highway. Howistheuseinharmonywiththepurposeandin~entoftheZoningOrdinance? The Duroose of the installation is to provide improved service reliability to the customers served by this facility. How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the dis~ct? Uses, permitted by right, include poles, Lines, transformers, meters and related facilities. This installation is a pole and is related to, and a part of, the distribution system. What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use? 5.1.12 Public Utilities Structures/Uses How will this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the conununity?. The installation of this communication system will enable CVEC to monitor and control substation equipment remotely. The result will De quicker response to emergency situations, increased service reliability and reduced outage restoration time, / Describe your request in detail and include ail pertinent information such as the numbers of persda~ involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use: Propose to install o~q~ (1) wood pole and antenna, with an above grade elevation of 75 ft., for the purpose of communicating with the substation equipment. The result will be the capability reliability for the 516 customers served by this substation. ATTA.CItMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each: Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning, if there is no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number. Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing. Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. If_the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS: Drawings or conceptual plans, if any. Additional Information, if any. I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. ~'X~ignature Date James Wood. Operations Mgr. Printed Name 804/263-8336 Daytime phone number of Signatory 3 I ATTACHMEN"I' C~~ -,8'96~ 3N~I NBfSSIHSN~UI 75' ~gOOHhz Yag, Ant:~nna / DOTe: November 2] 1997 II :' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesvflle.($04) Virginia296.582322902-4596 ~OAP~ OF SUPERVI, SORS January 30, 1998 02-02-9 Bp'"- .... Bruce Maruhoff Central Virginia Electric Cooperative P O Box 247 Lovingston, VA 22949 RE: SP-97-62 Central Virginia Electric Co-op (Midway Substation) Tax Map 72, Parcel 6 Dear Mr. Maruhoff: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 27, 1998, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: The height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression eqmpment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows; a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wires shall be not permitted. d. The tower shall have no lighting. e. The tower shall not be painted and shall remain in its natural wood state. Staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide buffering or screening on all sides of the site with the tree type to be of the maximum height feasible. The tower shall be located on the site generally as shown on the attached plan entitled "Midway Substation" and initialed "SET l 2/15/97" Page 2 January 30, 1998 5. Antennas may be attached to the tower o~fly as follows: Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: ao The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval ora building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence ora good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the laminar. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting ora lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staffto remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the Page 3 January 30, 1998 tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. 9. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. 10. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. 11. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year, identifying the users and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Planning Commission also granted the following modifications/waiver: Modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 90 feet from the property line. Waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2 subject to the following condition: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 18, 1998. 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, mas Senior Planner SET/jcf cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: SUSAN E. THOMAS JANUARY 27, 1998 MARCH 18, 1998 SP 97-62 CENTRAL VIRGINLA ELECTRIC CO-OP [MIDWAY SUBSTATION] Applicant's Proposal: Central Virginia Electric Co-op (CVEC) is proposing to construct a 130 foot self supporting tower (probably lattice type) to accommodate installation ora Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part of its daily operation of the electrical distribution system, monitoring and controlling substation eqmpment remotely on a real time basis. SCADA systems control switches that are necessary for the safety of line crews working on overhead power lines, and facilitate restoration of power during outages. The proposed tower would be located inside the fenced area on the north side of the Midway Substation, which is located at the southwest comer of the intersection of Miller School Road and Midway Road. The tower height is determined by the line of sight requirement between this substation and the next one in the CVEC network with which it communicates; the next tower is located at Wintergreen. The tower will support an antennae which will be located at the top of the pole. The antennae will be horizontal to the ground and ~s two feet long and seven roches m diameter. No other antenna are proposed and no additional ground building is required. A small box containing the radio and computer equipment will be ldcated on the bottom of the tower, measuring one foot by four feet and including all of the radio equipment. Petition: Proposal to install a communications towFr ifiside the fenced area at an existing electrical substation. [10.2.2.6] The property, zone4 PA, Rural Areas, and described as Tax Map 72 Parcel 6, is located on the west side of Route 63~ (Miller School Road) at the intersection of Routes 635 and 688 (Midway Road) in the White Hall Magisterial District This site is not located in a development ar,eft, and is located in Rural/Area Three. A location map is included as Attachment A; the applicant s site plan is Attachment B; the applicant's justification is Attachment C. The applicant is also requesting site plan and set back waivers. Character of the Area: The proposed tower site is located on the west side of Miller School Road within an existing substation occupying approximately one acre of land, on a larger parcel of 5.89 acres. The property immediately to the north and east is primarily residential; to the south and west lie larger parcels under residential/agricultural use, traversed by a electrical transmission line operated by Virginia Power. Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower, nearby house structures, and other area features. The proposed site is at an elevation of approx'unately 700 feet Above Sea Level (ASL). The closest dwelling to the proposed tower is approximately 600 feet distant and at an elevation of approximately 700 feet ASL. Approximately 30 houses are located within 2,000 feet (0.37 miles) of the proposed tower. The nearest identified existing tower site is located at the Windham retirement complex in Crozet, approximately 6 miles to the north. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and is unable to recommend approval. Planning and Zoning History_: None available. Comprehensive Plan: Staff can identify no provision in the Comprehensive Plan which prohibits orhas the effect of prohibiting this type of application. This site is located in'the Rural Areas district as defined by and identified in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and is identified as Farmlands and Forest in the Open Space Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of this request in three sections: Section 31.2.4.1 oft he Zoning Ord'mance. Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance Waiver of a~site plan in aCcord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staffwill 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 alt special use pcnn_'!~$ permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ord'mance may be issued u_pon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to ad. iacent property.. Staff review indicates that the proposed tower will be visible from adjacent and nearby residences, and this impact is anticipated to be significant due to its height. The tower would be equal to or greater in height than the nearby transmission lines, and greater in height than any other structure in the area. This visual impact may be considered adetriment to adjacent property;due primarily to the height and orientation of the structure adjacent to the public road and at the top ora slight hill, and the topography of the site relative to adjacent residences. Lighting of thetower is unlikely as it is under the height standard:for lighting, but staff has included acondition limiting lighting unless required by the FAA or other federal officialsL It is not located within the Ai~ort Overlay District. that the cl-zaracter of the district will not be changed thereby. Staff has reviewed the impact of the proposed tower relative to the character of the Rural Areas District and Foresf and Farmlands resource, and determined that it although it does not directly impact the latter resource since it would be located within an existing substation, it does alter the character of the Rural Areas district. Although the substation and transmission line already exist, installation of a tower of this height will be particularly visible due to the height and location factors previously discussed. It would be so much taller than any other structure in close proximity to the road that it would figure prominently in the rural, largely agricultural landscape. Towers have been permitted in the Rural Areas in the past, without a finding of significant change'to the character of the district depending upon the specific site and its surrounding terrain, land use, etc. However, overtime increasing tower density.can be expected to incrementally change the character of the district, diminishing the aesthetic qualifies for which these districts are noted. In this case the proposed tower would be sufficiently tall to draw attention both to itself and the-other electrical facilities in the immediate area. Based on the negative impacts to the Rural Areas from the height and location of this tower, staff opinion is that this request is inconsistent with this provisionof Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public servaces. Electrical systems clearly provide a public servicei Because .it does provide a public service, staff opinion is that this request is'in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". Although the service provided by this tower would increase the dependability and quick restoration of electrical power after system failure, there are alternative options using telephone lines or wireless to provide this enhanced service. Staff opinion ~s that the request for installation ora 130 foot tower is not consistent with the provisions of Section 1.4.3. Staff notes that the applicant was asked if alternative use of phone lines or wireless service, and/or collocation options on the nearby transmission line or existing structures within the substation had been explored as an alternative to the new tower. Collocation outside of the substation would require installation of a second tower, to receive signals from the first, higher tower and transmit that information to the computer equipment located within the substation. Even though a second tower would be necessary with collocation~ it would probably not exceed the height of existing substation equipment and thus not be overly distinctive. The applicant responded that collocation is not feasible at this site because existing transmission tower structures in the area (the tallest available structures) are lower ~n height than 130 feet and also located at lower elevations than the substation, precluding the possibility of a line of sight connection between this substation and the next one in the system (Wingergreen).. Telephone lines and wireless options, although undesirable from the applicant's point o_f view (due to mainly to cost and, to a lesser extent, to dependability), appear to offer an alternative form of connection. The applicant's response is included in Attachment C. with the uses permitted by right in the district. The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, other by-fight uses available on th/s site, or by-right uses on adjacent or nearby property. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance. Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations g07qeming tower facilities and, should the Planning Commission recommend approval, appropriate conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The SCADA system may be considered consistent with the public health and safety and general welfare by providing more dependable, quickly restored power during emergencies. Reduction in setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance Section 4.10.3.1 states: "The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultural museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, spires, flag poles, monuments or transmission towers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the structure; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". This provision is designed to prevent safety hazards, should a tower fall. By the requirements of this provision, the proposed tower would need to be located a minimum of 130 feet from the edge of the property. The proposed tower location is approximately 90 feet from the closest property line, andthe maj~ority of the substation equipmem lies between it and this parcel boundary line. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requiting approval ora tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure (such a condition is proposed by staff for this request), again to protect the public safety. StarThas historically supported requests for modification to allow towers to be located closer to the property line than the length of the height of the tower when no option to relocate exists, or impact or disturbance is reduced as a result of the waiver. In this case, furthermore, an electric power right of way extends along the south side of the substation, so in the event of tower collapse and fall in that direction, if the tower did fall across or over the substation equipment, the right of way would be impacted before the collapsed structure reached private property. Staff recommends approval of the setback modification subject to the previously described condition. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 32.2.2 permits the Commission to waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. The site review committee has reviewed the request for a site plan waiver. Based on this review, staff is unable to identify any purpose which would be served by requiring the submission ora site plan. Staff recommends approval ora full site plan waiver subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. SUMMARY: Staffhas identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The tower will provide increased dependability and restoration of electrical power during outages, which may be considered consistent with~the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1:4.4 and 1.5; 2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; The tower may provide collocation oppommities in an area identified as not having substantial collocation options; 4. The tower utilizes an existing substation site, thus avoiding the need for significant additional disturbance tothe site, Rural Areas, or Farms and ~-, Forestlands resource; x.~ 5. Options for aitemative sites have been exhausted;. Staff'has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: This site is within the Rural Areas and Farms and Forestlands, as identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Planand Zoning Ordinance. The visual impact 15Om the height of the tower,~location adjacent to a public road, and approximately 30 residences located within 2000 feet may be considered inconsistent with the purpose and intent of the ordinance and the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the ordinance; 2. There is anexisting reasonable use of the property; Other communication options exist for connecting t!fis site to the rest of the SCADA system. Staffhas identified negative visual impacts from the proposed tower affecting the Rural Areas District, and believes that the cumulative impact from towers to this district must be taken into ~ccount when evaluating individual towers. Although collocation oppommities on nearby transmission lines appear to be infeasible, other options such as utilizing existing phone lines or wireless service are available and would achieve the desired connection. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff opinion is that this request would create visual impactS that are unmitigable, and delrimental to adjacent properties and the character of the Rural Areas district. Staff cannot support installation ora tower of this height in this location, when other options for connection with the larger network exist. Therefore, staffis unable to support this application. Should the Board choose to approve this requests, staff offers the following recommended conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The height of the tower shall not exceed 130 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceed'rog three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of lattice type. Guy wires shall not be permitted. o d. The tower shall have no lighting. Except as specifically required by the Federal Aviation Administration of the Federal Communications Commission. transmission structures shall use colors such as gray, blue or green, which reduce their visual impacts. The tower shall be located on the site as shown on the attached plan entitled "Midway Substation" and initialed "SET 12/15/97" Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shalI be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97". b. ~ Satellite and micrOwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and eqmpment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval of a building permit~ the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site, (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has madea good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence ora good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle CoUnty. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the laminar. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the ligl~/t, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower~ the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. 9. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. 10. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. 11. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year identifying the users and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Planning Commission only must .take the following action in order to permit the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3. ~ has been~ granted to allow location of the rower approximately 90 feet from the property line, subject to the following condition: The tower shall be engineered to collapse within the lease area in the event of structural failure. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver as requested by the applicant: A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with.the provisions of Section 32.2 subject to the following Conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permn, ATTACHMENTS: A- Location Map B- Applicant's Site Plan C- Applicant's Justification D- Topographical Map Color photographs will be distributed at the Commission meeting,. -BEMARLE COUNTY 55 ~ENT A~ JEL MILLER AND . E HALL DISTRICTS SP 97-62 MIDWAY SUBSTATION SAMUEL MILLER , WHITE HALL DISTR CENTRAL VIRGINIA ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE January 7, 1998 Mr. William Fritz Albemarle County Planning Department 401 Mclntire Rd.. Charlottesville, VA 22902 I)car Mr. Frilz: The four applications Ibr inslalhuious of wood poles and nne lower Ihal Central Virginia Electric Cooperative has submilted is for tike purpose of installing a Supervisory Contrul And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part or the daily operation of the electrical distribulion system. The proposed SCADA system will inonitor and provide tile capabilily to control substation equipment on a real time basis. The system will be controlling Ihe operation of suhstafion equipment remotely and will coutrol switches Ihat are necessary for the safety or line crews while working on the lines, and will also enable power restoration [o be bandied quicker and more efficiently. There[ore, the reliability and the continuous polling of inf(mnation fi'om die substations is crucial to the operation of this system. The proposed communication system will communicate in tile 928-952 MIIZ hand which requires liceusing and does requb'e "line-ol'-sight"communicali(ms. The co~mnunication system is a Multiple Address Radio System (MAS), and as licensed and implemented by several utilities across thc United States operates wilh one or*more master radios each lalking directly lo several remote radios. The remote radios at the substation sites transmit at an operating power o1' 5 waits and are mounlcd to tim anten:u~ pole as indicaled un th~ d~awing submillcd wilh tile applications. The radios are housed in a wealherprool" box Ihat ~s approximately 18"I1 x 18"W x 10"D without any additional ground equipment required. This communication syslem provides the degree ol' reliability required Ibr the SCAD^ system. The height of the pole at tile substations is dictated by the topography of the land between the master radio and the remote radio at the substation. The placement of lhe pole very close to tile suhslation is dictated by Ihe facl that like compuler gathering like information in tile substation and the radio that transmits the information communicate via RS232 format with distance limits of 50 to 100 feet. Pos! O/lice Box 247 · Lovis~gston, VA 22949 * Telephone: 8()4/'263-8336 , Fax: 804/263-8J39 It is possible to transmit rite iufonnation gathered by the SCADA system back to the cooperative headquarters by dedicated leased telephone lines, but this is undesirable for many reasons. Our experience has been that leased lines connected between service areas of different It~cal telcphoue service providers would cost approximately $400 to $500 a month making tile implementation of a SCADA system at some substations cost prohibitive. The reliability of the leased lines tends to be less than that of a MAS system and typically experiences its difficulties at the very times that the communications is needed most at tile substations. When problems on the leased lines do occur the problem may not be resolved by the provider within a period of time acceptable for the operation ora SCADA system. The use of personal wireless service providers and receiving information from a SCADA system in a "dial-up" mode totally defeats the major benefit of a SCADA system of continuous polling of all substations and receiving information withiu seconds of its actual occurrence. I have tried to address as many of the questions you submitted to me as possible in this letter. I will be providing additional informatkm to you concerning the use of existing structures at the sites and the placement of tile proposed structures on the property. This additional information will be sent to you the first part of tile week of January 1 I, 1998~ Ii' you Imve any additional questions please let me know. Sincerely, / ~ Ih'ucc Mau 'hoff, P.E.- ~' Cc: Susan Thomas, Albemarle County January l5, 1998 Albemarle County Mr. William Fritz Ms. Susan Thomas Planning Department 401 Mclntim Road Charlbttesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: Central Virginia Electric Cooperative is in the process of implementing a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA)system in order to monitor and control substation equipment in 29 substations in 9 counties. The benefits of the system are a reduction in system operating costs, improved system information and planning resources and the increase in service reliability with a reduction in outage restoration time for the cooperative's 26,000 electrical customers. The Cooperative has received approval to install antenna structures at its substations in Buckingham, Cumberland, Appomattox, Nelson, Goochland and Orange County. We have received positive recommendations from the planning commission of Louisa County and are scheduled to appear before the county supervisors within the next 30 days. Besides Albemarle County, Fluvanna County is the only Other county that we have to appear before the planning commmsion due to the cancellation of a previously scheduled meeting. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative has performed communication path studies and has investigated the use of existing structures at each of the sites that an application was submitted for. Following is an explanation of the structures considered and the reasons for the applications being submitted as they were in Albemarle County. Cash's Corner Substation - Two concrete structures exist and are located within the property and substation'of Virginia Power that are approximately 70 feet in height above the ground. These structures could possibly offer the necessary height for communications with the antenna mounted at the top of the structure. These structures support transmission line facilities energized at 115 kV. In order to install the antenna at the top of one 0fthese structures, with the communication line attached down the pole to the radio, the transmissmn line would have to be de-energized leaving thousands of customers without power for the few hours that it would take to install the antenna. Intentionally turning off the power to that many consumers is something that Central Virginia Electric Cooperative would not do if avoidable. The fact that the substation is located on a small plot of land makes the placement of the proposed wood pole difficult to be located a distance from the property line equal to the height of the pole. The fact that a substation structure already exists with overhead energized lines makes this impossible. The area surrounding the substation site is used for agriculture purposes so the threat of a structure falling into a residential lot does not exist. The proposed wood pole structure, although for communication purposes, is similar to already existing structures that support energized power lines and comply with the strength requirements oftheNational Electric Safety Code. Under severe conditions the woad structure with the communications equipment on it will be even less likely to fall than the electric facilities because of less loading on the pole, Whitehall Metering Point - A Virginia Power Co lattice structure exists within close proximity to the substation that is approximately 120 feet in height. Although this structure has the height needed for the installation of the antenna at this substation the placement of the energized conductors on this structure, the cost to de-energize the line, install the amenna and space rental make it not feasible to be utilized. Considering the installation cost and the annual rental fees, approximately one-third of the total communication project budget will have been spent on one substation. The size of the lot makes it impossible to place the proposed wood pole a distance from the property line equal to the height of ibc pole. Wood poles already exist that under severe conditions could fall and may not fall on the cooperative property. The substation site is surrounded by wooded area and transmission and distribution line right-of-way. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative believes the installation ora wood pole to be the most reasonable option at this site. Midway Substation - The required height of 130 feet to provide line-of-site communication to this .substation is the highest height requirement of all the substations in the entire system. Currently them exists no other structure in close proximity to the substation that would provide the adequate height to accomplish this communication. Transmission towers exist that are approximately 100 feet tall at the same or lower elevations than the substation elevation. The minimum height for successful communication is 130 feet. The proposed location of the structure will be at least 130 feet from the north, west and east property lines. Although the proposed structure will be less than 130 feet (approximately 90 feet) from the South property line, 25 to 50 foot tall substation structures already exist between the proposed structure location and the south property line. The substation is located on the property where the South property line borders transmission and distribution right-of-ways the entire length of the substation. The extent of the tower would reach into the area of the transmission right-of-way only along the south property line. Schuyler Substation - The tallest existing structure is a 60 foot pole with an above ground height of approximately 52 feet. This pole would not provide the required height of 75 feet. The small plot of land on which the substation is located makes it impossible to locate the proposed pole on the site a distance from each property line equal to the height of the pole. Wood pole structures already exist that may not fall within the property limits of Central Virginia Electric Cooperative property. If you have any additional questions please call. Sincerely, Bruce Maurhoff, P.E. January 30, 1998 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ~OA~ OF ~J~V~'~OR~ Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VirgJni~ 22902-~96 t804) 296-5823 Brace Mamhoff Central Virginia Electric Cooperative P O Box 247 Lovingston, VA 22949 RE: SP-9%63 Central Virginia Electric Co-op (Cash's Corner Substation) Dear Mr. Maruhoff: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 27, 1998, unanimously 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 height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may emend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower, 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood, Guy wires shall be not permitted. d. The tower shall have no lighting, e. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. 4. The tower shall be located on the site as shown on the attached plan entitled "Cash's Comer Substation" and initialed "SET 1/15/98" 5. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to a single Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as Page 2 January 30, 1998 shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocati°n of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. Prior to approval of a building pemfit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort m allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location~ Verifiable evidence ora good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest par~ of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a "luminaire'' is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps tothe power supply. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staffto remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless communications purposes is discontinued. 11. The permittee shall submit a report to the zooming adminis~ator once. per year, by not later than July l of that year, identifying the users and purposes for which the tower is being used. 12. Staff approval of a landscape plan according to Section 32.7.9.8 of the Zoning Ordinance to provide a buffer on all sides (except the side shared with the VEPCO substation). No screening shall be required which will interfere with the access to the property. The Planning Commission also granted the following modification/waiver: Modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 50 feet t?om the property line. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors wilt review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 18. 1998. Any new or additional infm~nation regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior m your scheduled hearing date. lfyou should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do nor hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, // Susan E. Thomas Senior Plamler SET/jcl cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: SUSAN E. THOMAS JANUARY 27, 1998 MARCH 18, 1998 SP 9%63 CENTRAL VIRGINIA ELECTRIC CO-OP [CASH'S CORNER SUBSTATION] Applicant's Proposal: Central Virginia Electric Co-op (CVEC) is proposing to construct a 75 foot wooden self supporting tower to accommodate installation of a Superviso~ Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part of its dally operation of the electrical distiSbution system, monitoring and controlling substation equipment remotely on a real time basis. SCADA systems eon[roi switches that are necessary for the safety of line crews working on overhead power lines, and facilitate restoration of power during outages. The proposed tower wouldbe located inside the fenced area at Cash's Comer Substation, which is located approximately one third mile west of Route 231, north of the intersection Routes 231 and 615 between Keswick and Gordonsville. The tower height is determined by the line of sight requirement between this substation and the next one in the CVEC network with which it communicates, located in Palmyra. The tower will support an antennae which will be located at the~top of the pole. The antennae will be horizontal to the ground and is two feet long and seven inches in diameter. No other antenna are proposed and no additional ground building is required. A small box containing the radio and computer equipment will be located on the bottom of the tower, measuring one foot by four feet and including all of the radio equipment. Petition: Proposal to install a communications tower inside the fenced area at an existing electrical _ substation [10.2.2(6)]. The property is zoned gA, Rural Areas, and lies within the Southwest Mountains Historic District and adjacent to the Blue Run Agriculmrat/Forestal (A/F) District. It is described as Tax Map50 Parcel 45C and located approximately one third mile west of Route 231 (Gordonsville Road), and approximately one half mile north of the intersection of Route 231 and 615 (Lindsay Road) in the Rivauna Magisterial District. This site is not located in a development area, and is located in Rural Area Two. A location map is included as Attachment A; the applicant's site plan is Attachment B; the applicant's justification is Attachment C. The applicant is also requesting setback and site plan waivers. Ch racter~ofthe Area: The proposed tower site is located on the west side of Route 231,.in the Southwest Mountains Historic District. The property to the north, south, east, and west is primarily agricultural; immediately to the north is the Blue Run A/F district, which also includes property located to the south-ofthis parcel. An 115 kv transmission line operated by Virg'mia Power traverses the area in a north/south direction; a 34.5 kv line operated by CVEC traverses the area east/west; both connect m this substation and the Virginia Power substation located immectiately adjacent to it. Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower, nearby house structures, and other area features. The proposed site is at an elevation of approximately 565 feet Above Sea Level (ASL). The closest'd~velling to the proposed tower is approximately 1800 feet distant and at an elevation of approx'nnately 580 feet ASL. Approximately 4 houses are located within 2,000 feet (0.37 miles) of the proposed tower. The nearest identified existing towers are located at Goodloe Mountain and the AT&T installation in the Southwest Mountains, approximately two miles to the west. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning and Zoning History: None available. Comprehensive Plan: Staff can identify no provision in the Comprehensive Plan which prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting this type of application. This site is located in the Rural Areas district as defined by and identified in the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, and is identified as a Registered Historic Property (Southwest ~Mountains Historic District) in the Open Space Plan. Although it is not included in the Blue Run A/F District, the District lies immediately adjacent to it on the north, and is located within one mile of the District on its south side. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of thisrequest in three sections: Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4.10.3.1 o£the Zoning Ordinance Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 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 find/ne by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent prope~_. Staff review indicates that, as a new facility, the proposed tower will add to the visual impact of the substation, although it appears that it wilt not be distinguishable from other substation structures from the closest adjacent residences, which are approximately 1800 feet distant. This tower would be generally consistent with the height ofthe existing 115 kv transmission towers. and other towers located within the substations. Lighting of the tower is unlikely as it is under the height standard for lighting, but staffhas included a condition limiting lighting unless required by the FAA or other federal officials. It is not located within the Airport Overlay District. Staffnotes that the applicant was asked if alternative use of phone lines or wireless service, and/or collocation options on the nearby transmission line or existing structures within the substation had been explored as an alternative to the new tower. Telephone lines and wireless options, although undesirable from the applicant's point of view (due to mainly to cost and, m a lesser extenL to dependability), appear to offer an alternative form of counection. Collocation would be feasible on the existing 70 foot towers which support 115 kv transmission facilities would provide the needed line of sight connection, but the installation process would require the transmission line to be de-energized for several hours, leaving thousands of customers without power. The applicant states that CVEC would not do this if avoidable. The applicant's response is included in Attachment C. that the character of the d/strict will not be changed thereby. Staff has reviewed the impact of the proposed tower relative to the character of the Rural Areas District, Southwest Mountain Historic District, and Blue Run AfF District, and determined that it does not create a direct impact m these resources. The substation and transmission line already exist, and although installation of another tower increases the amount of equipment on site, any visual impact created is minor and not anticipated to be distinguishable from adjacent properties and, in particular, residences. Towers have been permitted in the Rural Areas in the past, without a fmding of significant change to the character of the d/strict depending upon the specific site and its surrounding terrain, land use, etc. However, over time rower proliferation can be expected to incrementally change the character of the RA district, diminishing the aesthetic qualities for which these districts are noted. The proposed location within Cash's Comer substation limits incremental impacts because the site is already developed for this type of use. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance. Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 3 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1 ;5. All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. Electrical systems clearly provide a public service..Because it does provide a public service, staff opimon is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". Staff finds that the slight impact created by the addition ora tower at the substation is balanced bythe enhanced el-ectrical system dependability provided. Although the County has consistently recommended collocation in an effort to reduce the number of towers required, in this case staff agrees that the power outage required during installation is deffimental to the convenience of customers, particularly relative to the minor impact from the additional tower. This effort supports the creation ora convenient, attractive andharmonious community, and therefore staff opinion is that the request is consistent with the provisions of Section 1.4.3. with the uses permitted by right in the district. The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, other by-right uses available on this site. or by-fight uses on adjacent or nearby property. with additional regulations provided in Section 5;0 of this ordinance. Section-5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations govem'ntg ~tower facilities and, should the Plann;mg Commission recommend approval, appropriate conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased commanicati0n facilities may be considered consistent with the public health and safety and general welfare by providing improved service reliability particularly during emergencies or inclement weather. This tower also serves as a remote opemt'lon link in the CVEC network and therefore this request may be considered as consistent with the public's safety as it allows for the remote operation of lines which may be downed. Staffhas not requested additional information on the effects of radio frequency emissions due to the low output (5 watts) of the system. The system proposed will use equipment regulated by the FCC. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3/1 of the Zoning Ordinance Section 4.10.3.1 states: ~'The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultural museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, spires, flag poles, monuments or transmission rowers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the swacture; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". This provision is designed to prevent safety hazards, should a tower fall. By the requirements of this provision, .the proposed tower would need to be located a minimum of 75 feet from the edge of the property. The proposed tower location is approximately 50 feet from the closest property line, as a result of the location of existing equipment within the fenced substation site. The area immediately outside of the fence is in agricultural use, with no structures located nearby. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requiting approval of a tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure, again to protect the public safety. This provision is not possible with a wooden pole type tower, however. As staffdiscussed previously, however, there are no structures located nearby and no threat to human safety is anticipated. Staff has historically supported requests for modification to allow towers to be located closer to the property line than the length of the height ofthe.:t0wer when no option to relocate exists, or impact or disturbance is reduced as a result of the waiver. Waiver Of a$ite plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2~of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 32.2.2 permits the Commission to waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. The site review committee has reviewed the request for a site plan waiver. Based on this review, staff is unable to identify any purpose which would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staffrecommends approval of a full site plan waiver. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The tower will provide increased reliability in the provision of electric service which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Seefious 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5; 2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; 3. This tower will have minimal impact on the character of the area and adjacent residences; Approval of this tower will not require the construction of an access road or clearing for electrical service: 5. Options for collocation have been exhausted; 6. The request is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the ~. ordinance~ Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: Other methods for connecting this substation with others in the CVEC network exist; 2. There is an existing reasonable use of the property.. While not cited by staff as an unfavorable factor, staff does note that this tower will have a minor visual impact to the surrounding area. Staff opinion is that this request generally -complies with the provisions of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. The options for collocation on adjacent poles has been exhausted. Therefore, staff is able to support this application RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff opinion is that this request complies with the promsions of the ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. Although alternatives to installation of this tower exist, staff feels that negative impacts from the tower would be minor and such impacts are balanced by the benefits of increased electrical dependability. Therefore, staff supports this application and offers the following recommended conditions of approval. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The height of the tower shall not exceed 75 feet. Lightning suppression equipment not exceeding three (3) inches in diameter may extend up to an additional twelve (12) feet above the top of the tower. 2. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be wood. Guy wixes shall be not permitted. b. The tower shall have no lighting. c. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as shown on the attached plan entitled Cash s Comer Substation and initialed SET 12/15/97 4. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: Antenna shall be limited to asingle Yagi antenna not exceed two (2) feet in length or seven (7) inches in diameter. The antenna type shall be as shown on an untitled plan for a SCADA 900Mhz Substation Structure which is initialed "SET 12/15/97". b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: The permittee shall allow wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions. (1) Prior to approval of a building permit, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting to locate on the tower or the site. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allowsuch location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permit-tee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the luminaire, For purposes of this condition, a "lurninaire" is a complete lighting unit consisting ora lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to 'the power supply. Prior to begirmmg construction or installation of the tower, the permittee shall obtain authorization from County staff to remove existing trees on the site. The County staff shall identify which t/ees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by County staff, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the.date its use. fox wireless .communications purposes is discontinued. 10. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year, identifying the users and purposes for which the tower is being used. The Plalm'lng Commission only must take the following action in order to pemait the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower approximately 50 feet from the property tine. The Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver: A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted-in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Applicant's Site Plan C - Applicant's Justification/Response D - Topographical Map Color photographs will be distributed at the Commission meeting. I:IGENERALISHAREITHOMASITOWERS~CASHCNR. RPT 4©. ALBEMARLE COUNTY SP ~?-$3 CASH'S CORNER SUBSTATION 66 RIVANNA DISTRI(~T IATTACH MENT/~ S EC]'I__O N 50 r. ATTACHMENT.BI Power L CENTRAL VIRGINIA January 7, 1998 Mr. William Fritz AlbemaHe County Planning Department 401 Mclntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 I)ear Mr, Fritz: Thc four applications For install:~fions of wood poles and ()ne lower that Ccnlral Virginia Electric Cooperative has submitted is for the purpose of installing a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system that will become a part of the daily operation of the electrical distribution system. The proposed SCADA system will monitnr and provide the capability to control substation equipment on a real time basis. The system will be controlling the operation o£ substation equipment remotely and will control switches that are necessary for the safety of line crews while working on the lines, and will also enable power restoration to be handled quicker and mom efficiently. Therefore, the reliability and the continuous polling or' information from the substations ts crucial to the operation of this system. The proposed communication system will communicate in the 928-952 MIIZ band which requires licensing and does require "linc-ot'-sight"communications. The communicatkm system ts a Multiple Address Radio System (MAS), and as licensed and implemented by several utilities across the United States operates with one qr more master radios each talking directly to several remote radios. The remote radios at the substation sites transmit at an operating power of 5 watts and are mountcd to thc antenna pole as indicated on tl,~ dlawing sulnnitted with tim applicatim~s. The radios are housed in a weatherproof box that is approximately 18"H x 18"W x 10"D without any additional ground equipment required. This communication system provides the degree of reliability required for the SCADA system. The height of the pole at the substations is dictated by the topography of the land between the master radio and the remote radio at the substation. The placement of the pole very close to the substation is dictated by the fact that the computer gathering the information in the substation and the radio that transmits the information communicate via RS232 format with distance limits of 50 to 100 feet. Posl Office Box 247 · Lovingslon. VA 22949 · Telephone: 804/263-8336 · Fax: 804/263-8339 It is possible to transmit the information gathered by the SCADA system back to the cooperative headquarters by dedicated leased telephone lines, but this is undesirable for many masons. Our experience has been that leased lines connected between service areas Of different local telephone service providers would cost approxintately $400 lo $500 a month making lite implementation of a SCADA system at some substations cost prohibitive. The reliability of ~he leased lines tends to be less than that of a MAS system and typically experiences its difficulties at the very times that the communications is needed most at the substations. When problems on the leased lines do occur the problem may not be resolved by the provider within a period of time acceptable for the operation of a SCADA system. The use of personal wireless service providers and receiwng information from a SCADA system in a "dial-up" mode totally defeats the major benefit of a SCADA system of continuous polling of all substations and receiving information within seconds of its actual occurrence. 1 have tried to address as many of the questions you submitted to me as possible in this letter. [ will be providing additional information to you concerning the use of existing structures at the sites and the placement of the proposed structures on the property. This additional information will be sent to you the first part of the week of January 11, 1998. If you have any additional qnestious please let me know. Sincerely, . ./.~/' Bruce Maurh0ff, P.E. Cc: Susan Thomas, Albemarle County 2 January 15, 1998 Albemarle County Mr. William Fritz Ms. Susan Thomas Planning Department 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: Central Virginia Electric Cooperative is in the process of implementing a Supervisory Control And Data Acquisition (SCADA) system in order to monitor and control substation equipment in 29 substations in 9 counties. The benefits of the system are a reduction in system operating costs, improved system information and planning resources and the increase in service reliability with a reduction in outage restoration time for the cooperative's 26,000 electrical customers. The Cooperative has received approval to install antenna structures at its substations in Buckingham, Cumberland, Appomattox, Nelson, Gooehtand and Orange County. We have received positive recommendations from the planning commission of Louisa County and are scheduled to appear before the county supervisors within the next 30 days. Besides Albemarle County, Fluvauna County is the only other county that we have to appear before the planning commission due to the cancellation of a previously scheduled meeting. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative has performed communication path studies and has investigated the use ofexisting structures at each of the sites that an application was submitted for. Following is an explanation of the structures considered and the reasons for the applications being submitted as they were in Albemarle County. Cash's Comer Substation - Two concrete structures exist and are located within the property and substation of Virginia Power that are approximately 70 feet in height above the ground. These structures could possibly offer the necessary height for communications with the antenna mounted at the top of the structure. These structures support transmission line facilities energized at 115 kV. In order to install the antenna at the top of one. of these structures, with the communication line attached down the pole to the radio, the transmission line would have to be de-energized leaving thousands of customers without power for the few hours that it would take to install the antenna. Intentionally turning off the power to that many consumers is something that Central Virginia Electric Cooperative would not do if avoidable. The fact that the substation is located on a small plot of land makes the placement of the proposed wood pole difficult to be located a distance from the property line equal to the height of the pole. The fact that a substation stmcture already exists with overhead energized lines makes this impossible. The area surrounding the substation site is used for agriculture purposes so the threat of a structure falling into a residential lot does not exist. The proposed wood pole structure, although for communication purposes, is similar to already existing structures that support energized power lines and comply with the strength requirements of the National Electric Safety Code. Under severe conditions the wood Structure with the communications equipment on it will be even less likely to fall than the electric facilities because of less loading on the pole. Whitehall Metering Point - A Virginia Power Co lattice structure exists within close proximity to the substation that is approximately 120 feet in height. Although this structure has the height needed for the installation of the antenna at this substation the placement of the energized conductors on this structure, the cost to de-energize the line, install the antenna and space rental make it not feasible to be utilized. Considering the installation cost and the annual rental fees, approximately one-third of the total communication project budget will have been spent on one substation. The size of the lot makes it impossible to place the proposed wood pole a distance from the property line equal to the height of the pole. Wood poles already exist that under severe conditions could fall and may not fall on the cooperative property, The substation site is surrounded by wooded area and transmission and distribution line right-of-way. Central Virginia Electric Cooperative believes the installation of a wood pole to be the most reasonable option at this site. Midway Substation - The required height of 130 feet m provide line-of-site communication to this substation is the highest height requirement of all the substations in the entire system. Cmxently there exists no other structure in close proximity to the substation that would provide the adequate height to accomplish this communication. Transmission towers exist that are approximately 100 feet tall at the same or lower elevations than the substation elevation. The minimum height for successful communication is130 feet. The proposed location of the structure will be at least 130 feet from the north, west and east property lines. Although the proposed structure will be less than 130 feet (approximately 90 feet) from the South property, line, 25 to 50 foot tall substation structures already exist between the proposed structure location and the south property line.. The substation is 16cared on the property where the south property line borders transmission and distribution right, of-ways the entire length of the substation. The extent of the tower would reach into the area of the transmission right-of-way only along the south property line. Schuyler Substation - The tallest existing structure is a 60.foot pole with an above ground height of approximately 52 feet. This pole would not provide the required height of 75 feet. The small plot of land on which the substation is located makes it impossible to locate the proposed pole on the site a distance from each property line equal to the height ofthepole. Wood pole structures already exist that may not fall within the property limits of Central Virginia Electric Cooperative property. If you have any additional questions please call. Sincerely, Brace Maurhoff, P.E. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Deve}opment 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-t1596 (804} 296-5823 March 9. 1998 Nancy Brody 503 Faulconer Drive Charlottesville, VA 22903 RE: SP-97-65 Greenwood Farm Bridge Tax Map 71, Parcel 2 Dear Ms. Brody: the Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 3, 1998, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: In addition to agricultural and forestal and recreational activities, the bridge shall serve no more than two building sites for dwellings (or throe building sites for dwellings if one or more of those sites is created as part ora family division) on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. o The building sites for dwellings, as referred to in condition No. 1 shall be located below the elevation of 900 feet as identified on the County's Open Space Plan. Engineering Department approval of an erosion control plan. Engineering Department receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment outlining mitigation measures for encroachments into the Water Resources Protection Area Buffer. Engineering Department approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations for the crossing. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Plans must show the existing and proposed floodplain boundaries and elevations. Page 2 March 9, 1998 7. Engineering Department approval of structural plans, details, and computations. Engineering Department approval of grading plans to evaluate cut and fill in the floodplain. The bridge and floodplain crossing shall be in substantial accord with the plan submitted by the applicant with the special use permit. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March t 8, 1998. 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, Elaine K. Echols, AICP Senior Plalmer EKE/jcf cc: Ella Carey Jack Kelsey Amelia McCulley STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: ELAINE K. ECHOLS, AICP FEBRUARY 17, 1998 MARCH 18, 1998 Revised March 9, 1998 to reflect staff comments of February 2 7, 199& SP 97-65 Greenwood Farm Bridge Applicant's Proposal: The applicant's proposal is to construct a bridge to span Yellow Mountain Creek, which drains to Stockton Creek and the Mechums River. Greenwood Farm is located south of Route 250 West, approximately 1 mile from the interchange ofi-64 and Route 250 West near Crozet. The farm comprises 275 acres; approximately one-third of the property, (90 acres) is located on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. The applicant is requesting permission to construct a bridge of prefabricated laminated wood with concrete abutntents placed in the stream banks designed to accommodate a 100 year storm. The purpose of the request is to allow the property owner vehicular access to Yellow Mountain for possible timbering activities, home construction, or other uses permitted by tight in rural area districts. Petition: The petition is for approval of a special use permit, in accordance with Sections 30.3.5.2.1 and 30.3.6 of the Zoning Ordinance, m allow construction ora stream crossing over the floodway and to obtain a landfill permit for floodplain alteration, respectively. This petition is requested for a parcel described as Tax Map 71, Parcel 2 and it is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. The property is zoned Rural Area (RA) zoning district and is recommended as a Rural Area on the Land Use Plan. Applicant's Justification for the Request: The applicant believes thaFthe conditions and circumstances requiting approval of a Special Use Permit and Landfill Permit are supportable because: The use advances the purposes set forth in the Zoning Ordinance by protecting water supply and preserving agricultural and forestal lands. (The bridge will eliminate the need for the tractor, farm truck and other agriculture equipment to cross through Yellow Mountain Creek which reduces stream degradation that currently occurs with each crossing.) The character of the surrounding district will remain unchanged. The use allows access to property for uses permitted by right in rural area districts. The use permits vehicular access to Yellow Mountain which a. Enhances the health, safety, and productivity of the forest b. Allows the owner, who is handicapped, vehicular access to Yellow Mountain Planting of shrubs and trees, which will be done after construction of the bridge, will enhance stability of the banks along Yellow Mountain Creek. Character of the Area: The proposed stream crossing is near the community of Crozet and the parcel contains a working farm. There are five houses and several farm buildings on the property. Surrounding land uses include a campground and other agricultural and related residential uses. RECOMMENDATION: Staff`has reviewed the proposal for conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval of the special use permit with conditions. Planning and Zoning Historv: The Greenwood Farm was owned and operated by the Mize family for 32 years until the estate was sold in 1996. It was purchased in 1996 by the applicant, Ms. Nancy Brody. The parcel contains 275 acres. A request to subdivide 12 acres containing the main structure facing Route 250 was approved administratively in June of 1997. The plat was never recorded and has since expired. There are 5 division rights on the parcel and the 5 existing houses are served by a private driveway of 9 - 10 feet. Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan shows this area as Rural Areas, intended for preservation of agricultural and forestal activities; water supply protection; limited service delivery; and conservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources. The property has four characteristics designated for preservation in the Open Space Plan: mountains, forests, major stream valleys, and location in a water supply watershed (See Attachment Cl. The water protection ordinances, which will apply here, exist to preserve the major stream valleys and the water supply reservoirs from further environmental degradation. In particular, the WRPA wilt apply as this is a perennial streana. The goals of the Open Space Plan regarding mountains are to protect the scenic and aesthetic values associated with the mountains and to further protect their environmental characteristics. Mountains identified for protection include Yellow Mountain above the 900 foot contour. Recommended conditions for this special use permit include placement of both building sites below the 900 foot contour. The applicant has discussed with the staff`her concerns about this restriction and believes that more discussion of the relationship between the Open Space Plan and a special use permit restriction to the area below the 900 foot contour should take plaCe. _Engineering Analysis: The applicant's engineer has provided design and supporting bridge information to the County for its analysis. (See Attachment D.) The Engineering Department has reviewed this request and supporting documentation and can recommend approval of the construction elements (See Attachment~ E and F.I 2 STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance below: The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, The impact of the proposed stream crossing on adjacent properties should be very small due to the distance between the proposed bridge location and the adjoining property, the deepness of the existing stream banks at the proposed crossing point, and the width of the floodplain. The applicant is requesting a bridge designed for a 100 year storm. Her engineer notes that, "The proposed bridge substructure will be set at elevation 641, which is above the low point in the driveway of elevation 640. This elevation will allow s~gniflcant storms to flow around the structure, nor over it." that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, The addition ora stream crossing, in and of itself, will not change the character of the district. Timbering activities on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek will, for a period of time, change the appearance of the hillside; timbering, however, is an activity supported as forestry industry activity by the Comprehensive Plan. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Section 30.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance establishes the purpose and intent of the Flood Hazard Overlay District to provide safety and protection from flooding. More specifically, the provisions of this section of the ordinance are to "restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy of lands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man-made environment". As previously stated, the applicant has asked for permission to construct a bridge for a 100 year storm. Fill activities for a 100 year storm are more environmentally degrading than fill activities for a lesser storm, such as a 10 year storm. It is possible that a bridge designed to meet a lesser storm would be suitable for timbering, have less of an environmental impact on the floodplain, and provide for permanent access to the Yellow Mountain area. The applicant has made the case, however, that for flood protection and long-term protection of the bridge abutments, a span bridge that is higher than the low point of the driveway will better protect neighboring properties and the environment. It should be noted that there is no alternative access to the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek other than the proposed bridge. No access easements from adjoining properties exist. And, m the event ora I00 year flood, the bridge wotfld be the only form of access from the proposed house to the land between Yellow Mountain Creek and Stockton Creek. If the Stockton Creek bridge were flooded, access to Route 250 would not be m-aitable. with the uses permitted by right in the district, By-right uses in the Rural Areas include agricultural and forestal uses and other supporting uses to agriculture and forestry. The proposed stream crossing would enable a road to be built to serve a future residential use and timbering activities. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, There are no additional regulations for stream crossings in this section of the ordinance. 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 limits stream crossing to places where a property owner has no reasonable use of her/his property, except with a stream crossing. Stream crossings are also approved where their construction would prevent environmental degradation and flooding. Stream crossings are also approved to advance the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff believes that there is reasonable use of the property without the need for a permanent bridge crossing. There are several potential building sites on the north side of Yellow Mountain Creek. And the ConServation Services "lend" bridges for stream crossings for timbering activities in the region. Staff also believes, though, that a request for permanent access to the 90 acres on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek for timbering and other agricultural uses is a reasonable request. It is staff opinion that such access be limited to two building sites on the south side of the Yellow Mountain Creek. The recommended limitation is based on issues of additional fill in the floodplain. The subdivision standard for road construction in the Rural Areas where 3 - 5 lots or building sites are proposed is 14feet in width with 4foot shoulders. If the road crosses the floodplain, it must be elevated to the point that it would not be covered with water in a 100 year storm. When a third lot is platted or building site proposed, the road standards become applicable such that a significant amount of fill in the floodplain would be required to serve those lots or houses on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. Staffbelieves that construction of a bridge for agricultural and limited residential purposes can be done in a way that provides minimal environmental damage and a minimal impact on the floodplain. FUTURE USE OF THE PROPERTY The most common concern raised by neighboring property o~vners with this special use permit is the impact ora stream crossing on the development potential of the 275 acres. Exemising all subdivision rights on the property could result in the platting of 17 lots (five development right lots and twelve 21 acre lots). In order for the owner to subdivide the property into 17 lots, a public road or private road meeting public road standards would have to be built and the existing bridge across Stockton Creek serving the existing development on this property would have to be upgraded or another one built. The driveway and bridge itself would also have to be upgraded if the owner wanted to have more than two building sites (which are not family divisions) on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. As noted earlier in the report, there are five houses on the property at present. The applicant does not wish to retain all of these structures as houses. Although the applicant's plans for any further development of the property have no direct bearing on this special use permit request (except for #4), the applicant has provided her plans for information only. At present, she plans to: Subdivide a 12+ acre tract containing the house facing Route 250 and possibly the house closest to it. Remove the kitchen appliances from most or all of the remaining houses and let them become "accessory structures" to the farm. 3. Construct a new house on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. Have additional house construction activities available for the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. At present, the property is served by a 9 -10 foot driveway. This driveway can serve 2 residential lots or an unlimited number of family division lots. For non-family division lots, the design of and recommended conditions for the proposed bridge will limit the development potential on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. Otherwise, future development of the property is not affected by this request. HISTORIC ASPECTS OF THE PROPERTY Greenwood Farm has been in continuous operation for at least the last hundred years. Sometime in the mid- 1800's the property was divided off from the Mirador Farm and was held by the Funsten family. In the mid 20th century, it was sold to the Carpenter family, and then the Mize family in 1964. There are farm buildings and what appears to be the original farmhouse at the end of the driveway closest to Yellow Mountain Creek. Although none of these buildings appear on any of the County's "historic" maps or maps of historic structures, the applicant has agreed to consider any historic importance the buildings may have prior m completing plans for the future of the buildings. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The bridge advances the goals for ongoing agricultural activities, such as orchards and regularly scheduled timber harvests, which are outlined in the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed span bridge with concrete abutments will result in less environmental damage than a series of culverts. The wideness and gradual incline of the floodplain requires less fill than a narrow floodplain with steep slopes. The Engineering Department is satisfied that the stream crossing can be constructed to in such a way as to cause minimal environmental degradation and negligible increase in flood levels. With the bridge, 90 additional acres of land will be provided with permanent access rather than temporary access or access that requires fording the stream. Limiting the south side of the property to a single building site will have a minimal effect on the appearance of the rural areas zoning district and will not intrude upon the Mountain Protection Area as identified in the Open Space Plan. Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: A permanent bridge is not necessary to provide for reasonable use of the farm and to exercise the subdivision rights on this property~ A bridge would require fill in the floodplain and along a stream valley which is part of a water supply watershed. All fill activities in the floodplain have an environmentally degrading effect and all bridges affect flooding, even if the effect is only a slight one. RECOMMENDED ACTION This request has been considered in terms of the need and justification provided by the applicant and the goals of the Comprehensive Plan. Staffhas concluded that, although there is reasonable use of the property without the need for the stream crossing, the owner's proposed restrictions to limit home building on the south side of the creek to two buihling sites and the desired permanent access for timbering and other agricultural activities justifies the request as proposed. Staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: In addition to agricultural and forestal activities, the bridge shall serve no more than two building sites on the sonth side of Yellow Mountain Creek. 2. The building sites shall be located below the elevation of 900 feet as identified on the County's Open Space Plan. 3. Engineering Depanmem approval of an erosion control plan. Engineering Department receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment outlining mitigation measures for encroachments into the Water Resources Protection Area Buffer. Engineering Deparunent approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations for the crossing. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Plans must show the existing and proposed floodplain boundaries and elevations. 7. Engineering Department approval of structural plans, details, and computations. Engineering Department approval of grading plans to evaluate cur and fill in the floodplain. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Parcel Map C - Map showing Open Space Plan elements D - "Bridge Across Yellow Mountain Creek Summary Report" E - Engineering Department Memo dated Jmluary 20, 1998 F- Engineering Department Memo dated February 27, 1998 I:\GENERAL\SHARE\ECHOLS\SP\GREENWOD.SR 7 16 SP 97-65 GREENWOOD FARM BRIDGE TOP ROCK TOM MOUNTAIN MOUNTAIN \ \ \ 3EMARLE GOUNTY ALBEMARLE 55 -: SP 97-65 GREENWOOD FARM BRIDGE / :L MILLER AND HAL L DISTRICTS 3?¢ SEGTION SAMUEL MILLER ANt' WHITE HALL DISTRICI~ ,-;........, .: f TO: FROM: DATE: RE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM Elaine Echols, Senior Planner Glenn E. BrookE, Senior Engineer . ~ 27 February 1998 Greenwood Farm, special use permit for bridge over Yellow Mtn. Creek As we discussed this morning, our previous comments regarding the special use permit for the creek crossing at Greenwood Farm are in need of revision. At the time our comments were written, it was our understanding that the applicant was proposing one residence on the far side of the creek. In this case, with the explanations provided in previous memorandums, the bridge crossing was supported by the Engineering Department as proposed; Also, as discussed in previous correspondence, for 3 residences or more the driveway would be required to be improved. It was our understanding that this was not proposed at that time. Subsequent to the previous Engineering evaluations, the applicant changed their proposal to allow the possibility of three or more lots on the opposite side of the proposed creek croSSing. This would require the existing driveway to be improved as discussed previously for a 3-5 lot subdivision, In addition, section 32.7.2.3 of the Zoning Ordinance requires that the principle means of access to a residential development shall be unobstructed during a 100 year storm. This would require that the entire driveway remain above the' 100 year flood level, including the crossing of Stockton Creek at the front of the property, and the approaches to both the existing bridge and the proposed bridge over Yellow Mountain Creek. The preliminary analysis submitted by the applicant for the ,proposed crossing indicates the driveway to either side of the bridge would be inundated during a 100 year flood. Raising these sections of driveway, as would be necessary to serve 3 or more residences, would require significant fill in the floodplain, which is not recommended. An analysis of the existing Stockton Creek crossing has not been submitted, but it may require similar improvement. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. GEB/ Copy: SP-97-65 File: BRODY.RV GREENWOOD FARM ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA NANCY L. BRODY BRIDGE ACROSS YELLOW MOUNTAIN CREEK SPECIAL USE PERMIT APPLICATION SUMMARY REPORT /J/Ir". McKEEICARSON CONSDLTING ENGINEERS · LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS ', PLANNERS 301 EAST I-~GH STREET CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22902 804-979-7522 10 FEBRUARY 1998 Greenwood Farm Special Use Permit Application for Yellow Mountain Creek Bridge Summary Report This narrative has been written to support the request for a special use permit to construct a bridge across Yellow Mountain Creek for an improved private access to the Greenwood farm. Property Description Greenwood farm is an approximate 275-acre property situated in the Samuel Miller district west of Charlottesville near Yancey Mills. The property is located south of Route 250, East of Route 690, and west of Route 689. The address is Greenwood Farm Road, Greenwood, Virgin~, and the property is described on Tax Map 71, Parcel 2.. Purpose of Special Use Permit The purpose of the special use permit is to construct a bridge across Yellow Mountain Creek to provide access to 90 acres or appro:dmately 32% of the property. This project requires a special use permit because the bridge is located within a designated flood hazard overlay district. The floodplain is designated as Zone A - "areas of 100-year flood; base flood elevation and flood hazards not determined" (See FEMA Floodplain Maps). Special Use Permit Justification On the following pages are summarized several reasons which justify the special use permit request for the bridge crossing over Yellow Mountain Creek. · The bridge will allow regular, selective long-term timbering efforts on the property. Long- term selective clearing enhances the health of the forest. In contrast, the use of temporary cut timber crossing imposes financial and time constraints on a logger who then must cut down many more trees in order to make the operation worthwhile. · The bridge will serve for future agricultural activities, including the possibility of reestablishing a previous orchard. · ]7he bridge will allow vehicular access to this large portion of the property by the owner, who is permanently physically disabled. The intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to give priority to handicapped access over all other zoning considerations as evidenced by Section 4.9 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. · l~he bridge will eliminate the need for the tractor, farm truck and other agriculture equipment to cross through Yellow Mountain Creek, thus greatly reducing stream degradation that currently occurs with each crossing. · The bridge has received a Nationwide Permit #14 from the US Army Corps of Engineers. The Department of Environmental Quality has waived 401 Certification for the Nationwide Permit #14. It is anticipated that no permit is required from the Virginia Marine Resources Commission. The proposed bridge substructure will be set at elevation 641: which is above the low point in the driveway of elevation 640. This elevation will allow significant storms to flow around the structure, not over it. Access is not an issue here; bridge protection is. Safety is greatly increased when floodwaters do not flow into the bridge. · In addition to soil erosion and sediment control measures, some additional planting will be undertaken along the stream to improve stabilization. The remainder of this report includes a USGS map showing the drainage area and location of the bridge, Tax Map # 71, a bridge plan, a bridge and driveway cross section, a FEMA Floodplain Map, and relevant correspondence. Bridge and driveway pian drawings are conceptual only and subject to changes based on further engineering design. 9736 o o FL~)~3DPL^IN LIMIT ........ APPROX, .FEMA _ ~ 7/.... ....... z." .f IATTACHHENT E t TO: FROM: DATE: RE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM Elaine Echols, Senior Planner Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer ~-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_~ 10 Februao' 1998 Greenwood Farm Bridge on Yellow Mountain Creek, special use permil Based on further information provided by the applicant on 9 February 1998 and the preceding week, the Engineering Department has the following comments to supplement our memorandum of 20 January 1998. The applicant has provided a preliminary report, from which the attached profile of the proposed bridge has been used to illustrate our comments. As illustrated on the attached profile, the height of the bridge deck dictates the fill necessary on the roadway approaches in the floodplain. The applicant's engineer has designed the bridge so that the bottom of the bridge deck will be above the adjacent floodplain. This protects the bridge deck from inundation, as the flood waters will go over the road around it. Added height on the bridge deck will further protect the bridge from floating debris during a flood. Approximately 50' of the 14' wide roadway will require fill in the floodplain to achieve this safe bridge height. The fill slopes at 2:1 would extend at least 6' beyond the road's edge, making the average total width of fill approximately 26'. If the height of the bridge deck is not set by other considerations, such as those described above, a more common approach is to set the height of the deck based on a computed water surface elevation during a storm of a given return interval. For public roads VDOT and County standards range from a 10 year return interval storm m a 100 year return interval depending on the circumstances. For private driveways, there is no specific requirement. The applicant's design, based on raising the bridge over adjacent floodplain, has placed the bridge deck higher than the 100 year storm flood levels. Lowering the bridge deck to clear rhe 10 year storm flood levels would reduce fill in the floodplain as shown by the dashed lines which have been sketched on the attached profile. The Engineering Department still recommends approval of the special use permit with the conditions as given in the memorandum of 20 January 1998. As described above, the fill in the floodplain could be reduced at the risk of more frequent inundation of the bridge deck. However, the fill in the floodplain proposed by the applicant is not a great obstruction to flood waters, as most of the driveway is at existing grade, and the floodplain limits should not be significantly affected. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. GEB/ Copy: SP-97-65 File: BRODY. SP2 ~].~p. ~v]asoo]~m~s'. . 0 TO: FROM: DATE: RE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM Elaine Echols, Senior Planner Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer 20 January 1998 Pla ]ni Dep'L Greenwood Farm Bridge on Yellow Mountain Creek, Special Use Permit The special use permit application and supporting documemation received on 23 December 1997 has been reviewed. The applicant is proposing a bridge to span Yellow Mountain Creek, which drains to Stockton Creek and the Mechums River. FEMA flood insurance rate map 190 indicates that the bridge location is an area of approximated floodplain averaging about 200' feet in width centered on the creek. We visited the site on 14 January' 1998 and took measurements of the channel and overbanks. The channel has steeply cut banks of 3 feet to 5 feet in height, with a water surface approximately t2 feet wide and 0.5 feet to 1.5 feet in depth. The overbank, or floodplain area is a flat and gradually sloped (4:1 or 3:1 and flatter) hay field which spreads to either side tbr about 105 feet to 140 feet before steep hillsides are encountered. Refer to the attached cross-section sketch. There are some trees along the banks, but the hay field is cleared to the stream banks in most areas. As indicated in conversations with the applicant and McKee/Carson, the engineering firm representing the applicant, the bridge is to be a prefabricated laminated wood bridge, placed higher than the 10 year storm flood elevation, with concrete abutments placed in the stream banks. McKee/Carson has indicated that this bridge will be the same type built for Reid and Jessica Nagle over the Doyles River in Whitehall (SP-94-21). Tlfis bridge was proposed with a 12~ lane, and built with load capacities for trucks (16 ton axle loads). The height of the bridge approaches on the road to either side has not yet been determined, but it is the Engineering Department's recommendation that they be kept as low as possible to minimize the obstruction to stormwater flow within the floodplain, and minimize fill within the floodplain. Based on the discussion above, the Engineering Department recommends approval of the special use permit for a bridge subject to the following conditions: A. Engineering Department approval of an erosion control plan. Engineering Department receipt of proof of compliance with State and Federal agencies regulating activities within jurisdictional streams and wetlands. McKee/Carson has indicated that the Army Corps representative has visited the site and does not foresee any problems with the proposed bridge. ~Page 2 Memorandum: Greenwood Farm Bridge 20 January 1998 Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment outlining mitigation measures for encroachments into the Water Resources Protection Area Buffer. This can be incorporated with the erosion control plan. Mitigation measures can take the form of erosion control to minimize construction disturbance, or the changing of farming practices to avoid clearing to the edge of the stream allowing deep rooted vegetation to grow and stabilize the stream banks, or specific plantings around the disturbed areas. Please contact David Hirschman of the Engineering Department for guidance. Engineenng Department approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations demonstrating compliance with sections 30.3.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Plans must show the existing and proposed floodplain boundaries and elevations. The Zoning Ordinance indicates no allowable increase in flood levels. However, in areas of FEMA approximated floodplain, FEMA indicates that their studies are accurate to 1', and it is Engineering Department policy to allow 1' depth variations which have reasonable affects on the floodplain boundaries and do not affect adjacent property. E. Engineering Department approval of structural plans and computations for the bridge. Engineering Department approval of grading plans to evaluate cut and fill in the floodplain. It should be noted that the construction of a residence on this property, or a proposed property subdivision for another residence, will necessitate that the driveway meet private road standards according to the Subdivision Ordinance. The asphalt driveway currently averages about 1 ff in width and appears to serve 4 residences. The Subdivision Ordinance requnces a 14' travelway width with adequate provisions for drainage where roads serve 3 to 5 residences. VDOT standards apply to roads serving 6 or more residences. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions or require additional information. GEB/ctj Attachment (sketch) Copy: SP-97-65 ATTACH M ENT Al COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Developmem 40t Mclntire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 [804) 296-5823 February 20, 1998 Jamie Lewis 1652 Harris Creek Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 ZTA-97-02 Jamie Lewis Dear Mr. Lewis: The Albemarle County Planning Commission at its meeting on February 17, 1998 took no action on the recommended changes to Supplementary Regulations Section 5.1.19 Wayside Stand. They asked that it be set aside for fitrther study. Concerns were the large proposed size (1500 sq. ft.) and lack of clarity in the wording (no limitation on the number of buildings). The Planning Commission recommended nnanimously the following amendments to the Supplementary Regulations Section 5.1 .;/5 Farm Winery: 5.1.25 FARM WINERY a. Facilities for fermenting and/or bottling of wine shall not be established until the vineyard, orchard or other growing area has been established and is in production. The owner shall obtain a farm winery license from the State Alcoholic Beverage Control Board. One location may be established per farm for the on-premise sale of wine and wine consumption may bc ~'~ k,: ~t. ~ ~: ...... .~ ....... :,L ~ ~,:~_ ,,j -~ ........................ j, with an aggregate total floor area not to exceed fifteen hundred (1500) square feet for sales and consumption. No such use may be established without approval of a site development plan with particular attention given to provisions for special events, parking outdoor lighting, signs, and protection of adjoining property. Virginia Department of Transportation approval of commercial access to the site and Health Department approval are required. Page 2 February 20, 1998 Daily tours shall be permitted Special events with maximum 150 participants shall be permitted up to twelve (12) times per year. In addition to the aforesaid events, there may be four (4) festivals open to the general public per year. In addition to the approval of a site development plan: Written notice of private events shall be provided to the Count,/fourteen (14) days in advance. Notice shall include a description of the event and the anticipated number of participants. Written notice of public events. where more than 150 participants are expected, shall be provided to the County thirty (30) days in advance_~ No pem~anent food preparation facili _fy is allowed on site; There shall be no outside amplified sound system: and Hours of operation shall be limited to 9 am to 10 pm; Wine shall be produced from fresh fruits or other agricultural products predominantly gro~vn or produced on such farm, consistent with the State Alcoholic Beverage Control Act, unless a waiver has been granted by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Agriculture: The foregoing notwithstanding, the board of supervisors in accordance with section 31.2.4 may authorize through issuance Of a special use permit any or all of the following: A greater floor area for on-premise sale and/or consumption of w~ne than permitted under .............. ' ...... :~ ..... ~ - ,,}, ......... ~ ....... p ..... Special events w~th greater attendance or frequency than permitted in c., above; Page 3 February 20, 1998 The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this zoning text amendment and receive public comment at its March 18, 1998 meeting. Any new or additional information must be submitted to the Board no later than seven days prior to the scheduled meeting. If you have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Senior Planner MJS/jcf cc: Ella Carey Amelia M¢Culley Jack Kelsey Building Code Information (804) 296-5832 ]ATTACHMENT COUNTY OF ALBEMARI .F Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 Mdntim Road, Room 223 Charlottesville. V'mginia 22902-4596 FAX (804) 972-4126 T/D (804) 972-4012 Zoning Information (8O4) 296.5875 MEMORANDUM TO: Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration DATE: February 20, 1998 RE: ZTA for Totier Creek Vineyard In response to the applicant and the Planning Commission's concerns about the zoning clearances, we propose the following outline of handling the two types of events to be allowed by right. There will always be a zoning clearance involved with the initial opening of a farm winery, just as there is for any commercial operation which is regulated through the zoning ordinance. On this initial clearance we can cover a lot of the basic information that would be related to the occasional events, such as: location of tents, porta johns, and overflow parking. We would need to note on the clearance which types of events the winery is planning to host. If the initial clearance covered both the minor events rot up to 150 people and the major events open to the public, we could identify all the critical issues on the one clearance. At that point, the owner could be responsible for contacting the health department, the police and the fire/rescue agencies when appropriate and not need get individual clearances from zomng. If only daily tours were permitted originally, then the owner would need to change the clearance if special events were added at a later time. Certain tents require building permits, so those would require that someone come in before setting up for each of those. I have spoken to Captain Scott Hambrick of our Police Department and he has no concerns regarding the minor events. He believes that events with a cap of 150 participants can occur with little to no disruption that would necessitate police involvement. However, with events that are open to the public, with no cap on the number of participants, there is great concern for problems relating to both traffic on the state roads and safety on the premises, particularly where alcohol is served. For these events, he recommends that the owner be required to send a letter to the police department, at least 30 days in advance of the event, describing the type of event, the date, time and anticipated number of participants. Police personnel would then contact the owner and discuss what options are available to control both the traffic and the crowd. am also concerned with the wording recommended by the Planning Commission. "no ~ermanent food preparation facility on site." We would read this to mean that no kitchen facility could be in the building. In the case of Totier, that would be a great expense and require demolition of part of the interior of the existing building. It would also limit the manner in which food can be safely and conveniently handled and distributed by a licensed caterer. We believe that a better way to insure that a restaurant is not permitted in the rural area and still allow wineries to safely and conveniently host events with food would be to condition, "no commercial kitchen shall be permitted by the Health Department. Kitchen areas are a~lowed only as a convenience to support licensed caterers." CC; Laurie Chabassol, Health Department Bill Craun, Health Department Ben Blankinship f~ ¥ &OS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Z'I'A 97-02 Jamie Lewis SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:. Summary of County Attorney changes to staff report following Planning Commission action STAFF CONTACTtS}: Ms. Scala, Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg and Benish AGENDA DATE: Mamh18,1998 ACTION: ITEM NUMBE~ INFORMATION: Yes CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS_: Yes ,,~ REVlE_WED BY: BACKGROUND: The ZTA affects Supplementary Regulations for Farm Winery, Section 5.1.25, The Planning Commission took action on February 17, 1998 (action letter attachment A). The Planning Commission amended staff's recommended language as follows: in b: inserted "and protection of adjoining property''; in c: Allowed 4 festivals per year in addition to rather than included in the 12 events per year recommended by staff; They asked for a wdtfen notice rather than a zoning clearance for each.event; They changed the wording but not the intent of the food preparation wording and inserted "outside" before amplified music. (They also chose not to take action on the Wayside Stand regulations.) Since then, Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Zoning Administration, wrote a memo dated February 20, 1998 (attachment B) regarding: 1) concerns of the applicant and the Planning Commission regarding zoning clearances for farm wineries and 2) Z. oninffs concern regarding food preparation in the form of a commercial kitchen on site. The County Attorney's office had additional concerns about the proposed language of the ZTA, as outlined in the staff report and amended by the Planning Commission, and has submitted a revised version (attachment C). DISCUSSION: The changes made by the County Attorney's office are as follows: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 8) Section 5.1.25 is reorganized New subsections a and b replace previous subsections a and d, with same intent. Special event and festival are now defined. The food preparation language in subsection e.2. has been revised with similar intent. New subsection e.5. has been added. Subsection e.1. specifies that the notice be sent to additional agencies. A single zoning clearance is permitted under certain conditions. RECOMMENDATION: Staff notes that the County Attomey,s proposed wording regarding zoning clearances differs slightly from both the Planning Commission's recommendation and Zoning's recommendation. Otherwise, the County Attorney,s proposed language is cleaner and reflects the Planning Commission's intent. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: MARY JOY SCALA FEBRUARY 17, 1998 MARCH 18, 1998 ZTA 97-02 JAMIE LEWIS Origin: Property owner application. Public Purpose to be Served: To encourage and support the preservation of agricultural lands and promotion of agricultural activities in the Rural Area through direct marketing of agricultural products, Proposal: The applicant's proposal (Attachment A) is to amend the Supplementary Regulations of the Zoning Ordinance, Sections 5.1.1,9 Wayside Stand and 5.1.25 Farm Winery, in order to ease the current requirements for approval of farm wineries. Major changes the applicant proposes are: (1) Commercial access shall no longer be required for wayside stands or farm wineries; (2) The maximum floor area for a farm winery shall be changed from 600 to 1000 square feet; (3) The special use permit option shall be deleted for: A greater floor area for on-premise sale and/or consumption of wine; On-premise consumption of wine in a location other than wayside stand; Festivals open to the public; and Production of wine from products grown or produced other than on the farm. (4) Festivals up to 250 capacity shall be allowed by right. Staff Recommendation: Staff recommends some revisions to the Supplementary Regulations, Sections 5.1.19 and 5.1.25. Background: Farm Wineries are allowed by right in the Rural Areas, RA, zoning district, with Supplementary Regulations (5.1.25). On-premise sate of wine and wine consumption may be established in accordance with wayside stands (5.1.19). A farm winery is usually approved with a site plan waiver request. In addition, a farm winery requires a special use permit for any or all of the following: l) A greater floor area than is permitted for a wayside stand (600 feet); 2) Festivals open to the public, or wine consumption in a location other than the wayside stand; 3) Production of wine from products not produced on the premises. A farm winery license is issued by the Virginia Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control, with strict conditions for the manufacture and sale of wine. Note the paragraph in the attached letter regarding the source of fruit used to produce wine. fiAttachment B) There are currently five wineries open to the public in Albemarle: · Bumley Vineyards on Bumley Station Road, Rt. 641; · Jefferson (formerly Simeon)Vineyards on Thomas Jefferson Parkway, Rt. 53; · OakencroitVineyards on Garth Road, Rt.601; · Totier Creek Vineyard on Harris Creek Road, Rt. 720 off Scottsville Road; and · White Hall Vineyards on Sugar Ridge Road, Rt. 674. All have farm winery approvals issued by Albemarle County for tasting rooms. White Hall Vineyards is the only winery which has a special use permit for a larger tasting area. All the wineries are listed in the 1998 Virginia Wineries Festival and Tour Guide brochure. In 1993, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee was appointed by the Board of Supervisors to report on ways m support and promote agriculture and forestry. One of the committee's recommendations, "Develop marketing strategies for all agricultural/forestal products" (Attachment C) includes several pertinent strategies to encourage promotion of local products, direct marketing, farms retailing to the public, and agricultural tourism. Comprehensive Plan: The Growth Management Goal states: "Protect and efficiently utilize County resources by: A. Emphasizing the importance of protecting the elements that define the Rural Area: 1) agricultural and forestry resources 2) water supply resources 3) natural resources 4) scenic resources 5) historic and cultural resources 6) limited service delivery Of these, the protection of agricultural and forestry resources is the highest priority. B. Designating Development Areas where a variety of land uses~ facilities, and services are planned to support the County's future growth, with emphasis placed on infill development." (Land Use Plan, p.3). The Agricultural and Forestal Resources Goal states, "Promote the continuation of a viable agricultural and forestal industry and resource base." (1989 Plan, p. 40) An Objective is, "Support the agricultural and forestal industry through promotional activities." The Plan also states, "For agricultural and forestal resources to be successfully preserved from a land use standpoint, they must be successful as a business/industry." (1989 Plan, p.55) Regarding commercial uses, the Plan states, "Because agriculture and forestry are so important to Albemarle County, they are given highest priority as a land use in the Rural Areas, rather than other land development activities which do not support agricultural/forestal activities." And, :'Regulatory inconsistencies should be addressed regarding commercial land uses in the Rural Areas in the interest of providing support for agricultural and forestal activities." (1989 Plan, 2 p. 50) As part of the revised Rural Area chapter of the Plan, limited commercial uses appropriate to the Rural Area will be discussed. In the past, staff has noted a lack of policy guidelines to use when reviewing support uses in the RA District. Discussion: There are several issues raised by the proposed amendments to the Supplementary Regulations: 1) Consistency with the Comprehensive Plan: County policy is to promote and support agricultural activities in the Rural Area. Vineyards are a land use which should be encouraged. Albemarle is one of the top grape producing counties in the State. It is County policy is to restrict commercial activities in the Rural Area, unless they provide support for agriculture or forestry. And, the Growth Management goal emphasizes limited service delivery to the Rural Area. Therefore, a balance is needed between support of agricultural activities and restrictions on commercial activities in the Rural Area. Support for the farm winery should not allow activities of an intensity normally associated with Development Areas, such as a restaurant or retail shop. The frequency and scale of events should not have significant impact on Rural Area resources. 2) Impact of"festivals" or evems: All the wineries currently conduct "festivals" open to the public, contrary to the Supplementary Regulations which require a special use permit for festivals and the like. Those regulations were established in 1981 and should be reviewed and compared with current practices in the Virginia grape industry and the current Comprehensive Plan. The 1998 Virginia Wineries guide lists planned festivals and events for Bumley (2), Jefferson (4), Oakencroft (8), Totier Creek (12), and White Hall (2). These include gatherings such as an armual pig roast, a Christmas candlelight tour, and dinners requiring reservations. In addition, the wineries are available for private functions such as meetings and weddings. For example, last year White Hall Vineyards held approximately four scheduled public events, including the second annual Farm Tour, and six private events. White Hall Vineyards is closed during the winter months. These events serve a positive function for the wineries of increasing direct sales to the public. However, possible impacts of events include traffic/road access, sanitary facilities, parking, music/noise, lighting, signs and hours of operation. 3) Site design: The Virginia Department of Transportation has commanted that a commercial entrance is necessary for public safety because a winery retails to the public. A commercial entrance is minimum thirty feet in width; it must have minimum sight distance (ten times the 3 speed limit); and may require a turn lane, depending on the conditions of the public road. The Health Department has commented that the Cotmty should require permanent bathroom facilities on an approved septic system for wineries with regularly scheduled events. Zoning has commented as follows: Dinners, weddings, meetings, and occasional outdoor events are items not addressed in the Zoning Ordinance. These require special consideration by the Board of Supervisors. If these events are to be allowed, Zoning would like a set schedule for all those items that can be identified now with a specific number to be set by. the Board of Supervisors' action. For other events which have not yet been scheduled, the winery should be responsible for obtaining a zoning clearance for each individual event so that Zoning can maintain a record of activity, and respond to public and BOS inquiries. It is recommended that the appropriateness of outdoor lighting, amplification of music or PA system, the total number of participants, hours of operation, and the location of at~y tents or signage be considered. Staff Recommendation: Staff opinion is that a vineyard is an agricultural use which should be encouraged in the Rural Area. A farm winery is a quasi-commemial use which is appropriate in the Rural Area because it directly supports an agricultural use. The existing farm wineries located in Albemarle are, in general, attractive and desirable land uses in the Rural Ama. Staff can support some revision of the existing Supplementary Regulations to reflect the current operations of the farm wineries in Albemarle. Staff cannot support the applicant's request to delete the commercial entrance requirement. Staff also recommends that the maximum floor area for a wayside stand be increased from 600 square feet to 1500 square feet, to better accommodate this use which directly supports agriculture. Zoning has also recommended this change. Staff recommends the following amendments to the Supplementary Regulations: 5.1.19 WAYSIDE STAND a. Structures for wayside stands, including vehicles, shall not exceed six htmdred-(60~ fifteen hundred (1500) square feet in aggregate floor area nor be located closer than thirty-five (35) feet to any public road right-of- way; No such use may be established without approval of a preliminary site development plan by the director of plarming. In review of such plan, the director of planning shall give particular attention to provisions for safe and convenient access from and to the public road and adequacy of delineation of parking. No such plan shall be approved until the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation has approved commercial access to the site. 4 5.1.25 FARM WINERY a. Facilities for fermenting and/or bottling of wine shall not be established until the vineyard, orchard or other growing area has been established and is in production. The owner shall obtain a farm winery license from the State Alcoholic Beverw, e Control Board. bo One location may be established per farm for the on-premise sale of wine and wine consumption ina3' bc c3tabl'l~hcd in accc, rda,'~cc w'lt~, 3ccfion 5.1.19 waya~dc atand: nc, inc,rc t~an c,nc way~dc ~tand ~k, all ~c pc~-xr.~cd oj ~ ....................... j, w~ ~ aggregate tot~ floor ~ea not to exceed fifteen h~&ed (1500) sq~e feet for sales ~d consmpfion: No such me may be es~blished ~thout approval ora site'development pl~ with pmicul~ ~tention given to provisions for speci~ events, p~ng. outdoor lighting. ~d signs. Vkgiffia Dep~ment of Tr~spo~ation approval of commerci~ access to ~e site ~d He~th Dep~ent ~¢proval ~e req~md. Dally tours shall be permitted ...... x als ............ v ........ v ..... ............ v ......... , Special evems with maximum 150 participants shall be permitted up to twelve (12) times per year. Four of these events may be festivals open to the general public. In addition to the approval of a site development plan: A zoning, clearance shall be obtained: All food shall be prepared off-site; There shall be no amplified sound system: and Hours of operation shall be limited to 9 am to 10 pm; Wine shall be produced from fresh fruits or other agricultural products predominantly grown or produced on such farm, consistent with the State Alcoholic Beverage Control Act. unless a waiver has been ~anted by the Conrmonwealth of Virginia Department of Agriculture; eo The foregoing notwithstanding, the board of supervisors in accordance with section 31.2.4 may authorize through issuance of a special use permit any or all of the following: A greater floor area for on-premise sale and/or consumption of w~ne than permitted under ................ ~ ........ b.. above, ° ....... L ....... 1 _..~.,:_ S ecial eve 'th dance 0 frequency than permitted in c., above; 5 APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL ATTACHMENTA 5.1.19 WAYSIDE STAND a. Structures for wayside stands, including vehicles, shall not exceed six hundred (600) square feet in aggregate floor area nor be located closer than thirty-five (35) feet to any public road right-of-way; 5.1.25 b. No such use may be established without approval of a preliminary site development plan by the director of planning. In review of such plan, the director of ptarming shall give particular attention to provisions for safe and convenient access from and to the public road and adequacy of delineation o£parking. No such plan shall be approved until the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation has approved ¢c,~-r, crcial access to the site. FARM WINERY a. Facilities for fermenting and/or bottling of wine shall not be established until the vineyard~ orchard or other growing area has been established and is in production; On-premise sale of wine and wine consumption may be established i~ accordr,nc¢ -;~Sth scctSon 5.1.19 wayaldc sta~'~d: no ~orc ~,r,n one waysldc strand shall bc permitted by right for each fam~ whncr/; in each farm winery_ with total floor area not to exceed 1000 square feet for sales and consumption. Access into the farm winery_ shall be in accordance with Section 5.1.19 (bi: Tours shall be permitted. , ....,, ~ bc pcrmlttcd; Festivals open to the public shall be _nermitted _nrovidine adequate sanitary conditions are provided. Total capacity_ not to exceed 2~50; Wine shall be produced from fresh fruits or other agricultural products predomimmtly grown or produced on such farm; 7 BOARD MEMBERS ANNE P, PETERA. CHAIRMAN CLATER C. MOTHNGER CLARENCE W. ROBERTS GO MoNWEALTI+ Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control Staunton Regional A.B.C. Office P. O. Box 3036 Staunton, Virginia 24402-3036 FebruaE¢ 3, 1998 ECEIVED FEB 0 6 2901 IIERMITAGE ROAD I[O. BOX 27491 RICHMONE. VIRGINIA 23261 ~8041 367-0605 Ms. Mary Joy Scala County of Albemarle - Dept of Planning' 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Va. 22902 Dear Ms. Scala: As you requested I have enclosed the pertinent sections of the Code of Virginia and the Virginia Administrative Code that govern the operation of Farm Winery Licensees. In addition I thought I should offer a brief summary of these code sections and regulations. The Code of defines a Farm Winery- as an estabfishment located on a farm in the Commonwealth with a producing vineyard, orchard, or similar growing area and with facilities for fermenting and bottling wine, where the owner or lessee manufacturers wine containing not more than fourteen percent (14%) alcohol by volume. The privileges permitted under a Farm Winery License include the following: the manufacture of wine containing not more than 14% alcohol by volume allows the farm winery licensee to sell the wine manufactured by him to the ABC Board, to wholesale wine licensees and to retail establishments that are licensed to sell wine at retail by the Board. In addition the license authorizes the licensee to sell wine at retail at the place of business designated in the license and at two additional remote retail establishments. Wine may be sold at these locations for on premises consumption and in closed containers for off premise consumption. the licensee may also give samples of wine to visitors of his winery for on premises consumption in a hospitality room approved by the Board. As noted above the farm winery licefise allows the licensee to serve wine at the place of business designated on the license for on and offpremises consumption. This would permit a licensee to serve wine at a dinner or festival located on the premises. ATTACHMENT Bl At least 51% of the fresh fixtits or other products used by the licensee in the production of wine shall be grown or produced on the farm owned or leased by the licensee. In addition no more than 25% of the fruit_ fruit juices or other agriculture products shall be grown or produced outside of the Co~mnonwealth; however, upon petition of the Department of Agriculture the Board is authorized to grant a waiver to this section and may allow the use of a greater quantity of out of state products These waivers are granted when there is a crop failure due to such things as a winter freeze, frost or drought. Often the terms farm winery and winery licensees are used unchangeably by individuals. These are two different licenses with the Winery license being more of a commercial operation. A winery license permits the licensee to manufacture wine with no regards as to the source of the raw products used to produce the wine. A person holding a wine~' license may only sell the wine produced by him to wholesale licensees and to ship the wine out of state. 1 hope this information is hetpful. Should you have aay questions, please feel free to contact me. cc SAC S. P. Walker Jamie Lewis ~Sincerely2, Roger D. Stevens Assistant Special Agent In Charge Enforcement Division Compliance Section Proposed language for Condition # t: ¥/ 1. in addition to agricuitural and forestal and recreational activities (x~rnich activities include but are not limited to the construction and use of structures related thereto), the bridge shall serve no more than two building sites for dwellings (or three building sites for dweliings if one or more of those sites is created as part of a family division) on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. The bridge shail also serve accessory structures for the dwellings. Condition #1 currently reads: 1. in addition to agricultural and forestal and recreational activities, the bridge shall serve no more than two building sites for dwellings (or three building sites for dwellings if one or more of those sites is created as part of a family division) on the south side of Yellow Mountain Creek. Proposed language for Condition #9: 9. The 14 feet wide bridge and flood plain crossing shall be in substantial accord with the plan submitted by the applicant with the special use perm/t, subject to such modifications as are approved by the Engineering Department. Condition # 9 currently reads: 9. The bridge and flood plain crossing shall be in substantial accord with the plan submitted by the applicant with the speeiai use permit. Proposed language for Condition # 10 (added): i0. The land owner shall have the right to maintain, repair and replace the bridge and flood plain crossing, provided that the replacement, if any, shall he in substantial accord with the design of the original unless modifications thereto are approved by the En~neering Department. Piedmont Environmental COuncil Statement on ZTA-97-02, Jamie Lewis Delivered to the Board of Supervisors, March 18, ~1998 With one exception, we support the zoning text amendment as proposed by staff because it will help keep land open. Farm wineries supp,o'rt local agriculture: the more grapes they process and the more wine they selL, the more likely it is that vines will be planted rather than lots platted. We remain concerned about the requirements for zoning clearances and notification We supported the changes, recommended by the Planning Commission which called for the applicant to provide written notice to the. Zoning Department. That section has been rewritten to require the owner to notify four separate departments before an event. Zoning clearances are still required for each event, unless the applicant knows in advance his or her yearly schedule. This seems redundant for wineries required to undergo site review. At least three of the four departments required to be notified participate in the County's site review'- process. This gives them an opportunity to review the plans for wineries, learn from the owner what the maximum attendance at the eveiqts might be and require that the facilities be sized to fit the crowd. A representative of the police department has stated that he has "no concerns regarding the minor events. He believes that events with a cap of 150 participants can occur with little to no disruption that would necessitate police involvement." He did recommend notice for the larger events, or festivals. While one zoning clearance may be necessary to signal that the applicant has -complied with all the conditions and the use has officially begun, it seems cumbersome to require zoning clearances for every event. Compare these requirements with the conditions imposed upon the outdoor theater approved in 1993.. Under that Cspeciat use permit, up to 2000 people can attend plays on property located in the rural areas. Nothing in the supplementary regulations requires that the owner of the theater seek a zoning clearance before each performance, Why should the County regulate more strictly a business which supports the number one priority set forth in the Comprehensive Plan for the rural areas: preserving agriculture and forestry? · Virg[~ia o 20 ~ 88 · 540-34-7 2334 · Fax 540-349 9003 · Suite One · Charlottesville Virginia · 22903 '· 804-977-2033 ~ Fax 804-97745306 Draft: March 11, 1998 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 20, ZONING, ARTICLE II, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 20, Zoning, Article II, Supplementary Regulations, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 5.1.25 as follows: By Amending: Chapter 20. Zoning Article II, Supplementary Regulations Sec. 5.1.25. Farm Winery. Article II. Sec. 5.1.25. Farm Winery. Chapter 20. Zoning Supplementary Regulations Each farm winery shall be subiect to the followinq: a. The owner shall obtain a farm winery license from the State Alcoholic Beveraqe ab. Control Board At least fifty-one (51~ oercent of the fresh fruits or aqricultural products used bv the owner to manufacture the wine shall be qrown or produced on the farm, unless the State Alcoholic Beveraae Control Board waives such reauirement. Facilities for fermenting and/or bottling of wine shall not be established until the vineyard, orchard or other growing area has been established and is in production. The followin(~ uses and activities are oermitted at a farm winery with the Prior approval of a site Dian as provided in subsection (d~. Soecial events and festivals are also subject to the additional re(~uirements set forth in subsection re). \DEPT~ATTORN EY~G K\ORDINANC~ZONING~FARMWIN3.ORD I Draft: March 11, 1998 On-premise sale of wine and wine consumption. One location may be established on each farm for the on-premise sale of wine and wine consumption .... ~._ __,_,.,:~,.A.~ = ...... .~ ....... :,~. ~A~,:~- = ~ ~,~ ,,~,,, ,,,, ~= ............ ,,~, y, The aqqreoate total floor area for such sales and consumption shall not exceed fifteen hundred {'1500) souare feet. A special use permit issued pursuant to section 31.2.4 of this chapter may authorize the aqqreqate floor area to exceed fifteen hundred (15003 square feet. e2. Dailv tours. Daily :1:tours of a farm winery shall be permitted. Special events. Special events shall be permitted up to twelve (12) times per vear. For purposes of this section, a special event is an event conducted at a farm winery on a sinole day for which attendance is allowed only bV invitation or reservation and whose participants do not exceed one hundred fifty i150/Persons: sDecial events include, but are not limited to, meetin(]s, conferences, ban(]uets, dinners, weddino receptions, private oarties and other events conducted for the PurPose of marketino wine. A special use oermit issued pursuant to section 31.2.4 of this chapter may authorize the number of special events per year to exceed twelve (12/. or the number of allowed participants at any event to exceed one hundred rift,/(150/, or both. I:~)EPT~ATTO RN EY\GK~ORDINANC~ZON[NG\FARMWIN3.ORD 2 Draft: March 11, 1998 Festivals. Festivals shall be permitted up to four (4~ times per vear. For purposes of this section, a festival is an event conducted at a farm winery on a sinqle day or two (2~ consecutive days which is open to the oeneral public and conducted for the PurPose of marketin(~ wine. A use or activit~ identified in subsection (c~ is authorized only with the prior approval of a site plan. Pdor to approval of the site plan. the owner shall obtain from the Vir(]inia Department of Transportation approval of a commercial entrance to the farm winery, and any re(~uired ap royal from the local office of the Virclinia Department of Health. If a site plan waiver is requested, particular consideration shall be qiven to provisions for safe and convenient access, parkinq, outdoor li(]htino, sions and potential adverse impacts to adioininq property, and reasonable standards and conditions may be im osed as conditions of such waiver. Special events and festivals shall be also subiect to the followino: The owner shall provide at least fourteen ['14~ days prior written notice of a special event, and at least thirty (30) days prior written notice of a festival if more than one hundred fifty persons (1501 are allowed to attend the festival. The notice shall be provided to the zonin(] administrator, the county police department, the county fire and rescue division, and the local office ofthe Viminia Department of Health. The notice shall describe the nature of the special event or festival, its date and hours, the facilities, buildin(~s and structures to be used. and the number of participants allowed to attend. The zonin(~ administrator shall issue a zoninq clearance for the special event or festival upon rece~wnq approval and anV conditions of such approval from the other county offices receivinq the notice. The zonin(~ clearance shall be conditional upon the owner's compliance with all conditions imposed therein. A sinqle zoninq clearance may be issued for two or more special events or festivals if: Ii) the owner provides the notice re(~uired above and includes the required information for each such special event or festival: (ii) the zoninq administrator determines each special event or festival to be substantially similar in nature and size: and ('iii~ the zonin(~ administrator determines that a single set of conditions that would aPPlY to each special event or festival mav be imposed with the zonino clearance. No kitchen facility permitted bv the Health Department as a commercial kitchen shall be allowed on the farm. A kitchen mav be used by licensed caterers for the handlino, preparation and distribution of food to be served i:\DEPT~ATFORNEY\GK~ORDINANC~ONING\FARMW[N3.ORD 3 Draft: March 11, 1998 at such special event or festival. An outdoor amplified sound svstem shall be prohibited. The hours of operation shall be no earlier than 9:00 a.m. and no later than 10:00 p.m. All activities shall either be outdoors or in a buildin(~ or structure approved by the buildinq official for occupation by persons other than employees of the farm. (Added 12-16-81; amended 1-1-84) I:\DEPTV~'CrORN EY\GK~ORDINANC~ONING\FARMWIN3.ORD 4 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Public Headng on Microenterprise Grant (CDBG) SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Resolution authorizing participation and support in community improvement grant for Micraenterpdse loan capitalization STAFF CONTACT(S): Messm. Tucker, Huff, Benish AGENDA DATE: March 18, 1998 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: DISCUSSION: Eligible local governments may apply for CDBG funds under five broad objectives for any of twenty project types. CDBG applications ara encouraged for eligible project typos that meet Department of Housing and Community Development objectives. Objective #2: to assist local governments in increasing business and employment opportunities through economic development projects. Microenter~se Assistance Prciects - provide assistance to small businesses with 5 or ~ess employees, one or more of whom are the owners. Assistance takes the form of business support activities and financing. Loans are limited to $25,000; CDBG may support a full-time staff person for two years. The proposed applicants for this grant ara Nelson (lead), Albemarle and Fluvanna. The grant amount is for $100,000 (loans and/or to leverage lean funds) and $60,000-$65,000 (operating costs) with no commitment from the locality for matching funds. The deadline is March 27, 1998. County Comnrehensive Plan - Economic Develooment Policy. adopted March 1, 1995: GOAL: Maintain a strong and sustainable economy: 1) benefiting County citizens and existing businesses and providing diversified economic opportunities; 2) supportive of the County's Growth Management Policy and consistent with Comprehensive Plan goals; and, 3) taking into consideration regional (including the City of Charloffesville, and Greene, Louisa, Fluvanna, and Nelson Counties) economic development efforts. Objective h Strategy 9: Base economic development policy on planning efforts which support and enhance the strengths of the County. Encourage employment of the local labor force, rather than heavy reliance on relocated workers. Objective V: Strategy 2: Provide local business development opportunities. Coordinate with the existing entities that assist new small, locally-owned, and minority businesses and micro-enterprises in their start-up and early operation efforts. RECOMMENDATION: The proposed grant is consistent with the County's Economic Development Policy,'adoptad March t, 1995. After the public heating, staff would support your adoption of the attached resolution authorizing an application seeking a CDBG grant totaling $165,{)00 for Microenterptise loan capitalization. 98.043 MI'CROLOAN PROGRAM BOARD OF SUPER¥IgORS PO Box 1505 CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22902-1505 for enl:repreneu rs 804 979-0114 · FAX 804 979-1597 E-MAIL; MICROLOAN.TJPD~$TATE,VA.US April 3, 1998 (__C _9E~1:2i RCVS Mr. Forrest Marshall Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 2.2902-4596 Dear Mr. Marshall, Enclosed please find, for your records, a copy of the completed Community Development Block Grant application for the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microente~rise Program. Thank you for your help in facilitating the public hearin~ required as a part of this CDBG application process. We look forward to working with you for the advancement of micro- entrepreneurship in your locality. Sincerely, Attachment Copy:file THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT VIRGINIA ECONOMIC DEVELOPIvlENT CORPORATION MEMBER ASSOCIATION OF ENTERP~SE OPPORTUNITY · VIRGINIA MICROENTERPRISE IN[ETWORK · THE ASPEN INSTITUTE BLUE RiDGE INVENTOR"S CLUB · NATIONAL CONGRESS FOR COMMUNITY ECONONIIC DEVELOPMENT 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMAR~ 1. Applicant: 2. Chief Elected Official: 3. Local Government Address: Nelson County Thomas D. Harvey P.O. Box 336 Lov/ngston, VA 22949 4. Project Type: 5. Project Name: 6. Contact Person: Microenterprise Assistance Nelson-Fluvarma-Albemarle Janet K. Dob Microenterprise Program Phone: (804) 979-7310 7. Project Cost: 8. Regional Project: VCDBG " $165,000.00 X Yes No If yes, list other participants and State (VA Enterprise Initiative) $ 19,430.00 CDBG $ requested Fed. (Grant) Locality Amount Fed. (Loan) Local 1)Nelson Countv $55,000.00 Private (Cash + In-Kind) $223,070.00 2)Fluvanna County $55,000.00 Total $407,500.00 3)Albemarle County $55,000.00 9. List Activities National ObjectiveNational Objective A. Administration LMI H. B. Loan Capitalization LMI I. C. ME Support LMI J. D. K. E. L. F. M. G. N. 10. Two (2) Grant Eligibility Rule: EXEMPT Do you have an existing CIG? Yes [ ] No Amount Awarded $ $ If yes, percentage of CDBG construction completed, funds drawn down and expended is % % Amount requested in this proposal. $ Are you also submitting a second CIG proposal? Yes No Amount $ 11. To the best of my knowledge and belief, data in this proposal are true and correct, the proposal has been duly authorized by the governing body of the applicant, citizen participation requirements Chief Administrative Officer: Name: John D. Cutlip Signature: Title: County Administrator Date: March 27, 1998 (Please include a Resolution(s) in ATTACHMENT 1 ~ See Instructions) CIG-1 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMAR? 1. Applicant: 2. Chief Elected Official: 3. Local Government Address: Fluvanna County Andrew M. Sheridan, Jr. P.O. Box 299 Palmyra, Virginia 22963 4. Project Type: 5. Project Name: 6. Contact Person: Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Janet K. Dob Microenterprise Assistance Microenterprise Program Phone: (804) 979-7310 7. Project Cost: 8. Regional Project: VCDBG $165,000.00 X Yes No If yes, list other participants and State $ 19,430.00 CDBG $ requested Fed. (Grant) Locality Amount Fed. (Loan) Local 1)Nelson County $55.000.00 Private $223,070.00 2)Fluvanna County $55.000.00 Total $407,500.00 3)Albemarle County $55.000.00 9. List Activities National Objective National Objective A. Administration LMI H. B. Microenterprise Support LMI I. C. Loan Capitalization LMI J. D. K. E. L. F. M. G. N. 10. Two (2) Grant Eligibility Rule: EXEMPT Do you have an existing CIG? Yes [ ] No Amount Awarded $ $ If yes, percentage of CDBG construction completed, funds drawn down and expended is __% % Amount requested in this proposal. $ Are you also submitting a second CIG proposal? __Yes __ No Amount $ 11. To the best of my knowledge and belief, data in this proposal are true and correct, the proposal has been duly authorized by the governing body of the applicant, citizen participation requirements have been met and the proposal was submitted for PDC review. Chief Administrative Officer: Name: Dean BeLer Signature: ~, ~9~h Title: County Administrator Date: March 27, 1998 (Please include a Resolution(s) in ATTACHMENT 1 - See Instructions) CIG-1 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMARY 1. Applicant: 2. Chief Elected Official: 3. Local Government Address: Albemarle County Forrest Marshall 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 4. Project Type: 5. Project Name: 6. Contact Person: Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Janet K. Dob Microenterprise Assistance Microenterprise Program Phone: (804) 979-7310 7. Project Cost: 8. Regional Project: VCDBG $165,000.00 X Yes No If yes, list other participants and State $ 19,430.00 CDBG $ requested Fed. (Grant) Locality Amount Fed. (Loan) Local 1)Nelson County $55 000.00 Private $223,070.00 2)Fluvarma County $55.000.00 Total $407,500.00 3)Albemarle County $55,000.00 9. List Activities National Objective National Objective A. Administration LMI H. B. Microenterpr/se Support LMI I. C. Loan Capitalization LMI J. D. K. E. L. F. M. G. N. 10. Two (2) Grant Eligibility Rule: EXEMPT Do you have an existing CIG? Yes [ ] No Amount Awarded $ $ If yes, percentage of CDBG construction completed, funds drawn down and expended is % % Amount requested in this proposal. $ Are you also submitting a second CIG proposal? Yes No Amount $ 11. T~ the best ~f my ~n~wledge and belief~ data in this pr~~~sal are true and c~rrect~ the pr~p~sa~ has been duly authorized by the governing body of the applicant, citizen participation requirements have been met and the proposal was submitted for PDC reviefq // Chief Administrative Officer: // _ Title: County Executive Date: Mar~h~ 27, 1998 ' (Please include a Resolution(s) in ATTACHMENT 1 - See Instructions) CIG-1 CIG-2a 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMARY 12. PROJECT SERVICE AREA (Provide a map as ATTACHMENT//2): The Nelson-Fluvarma-Albemarle Microenterprise Program will serve the geographic service area of Nelson County, Fluvanna County, and Albemarle County- localities within the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Under this microenterprise support program, clientele will be restricted to low- and moderate-income entrepreneurs who reside in and wish to start or expand micro-businesses within this geographic service area. 13. Census Place Code Census Tract(s) Blocks(or B1 Groups) County of Nelson 125 County of FIuvarma 065 County of Albemarle 003 14. ACTIVITY CHART: Activity Total// Total # Total # LMI Total//LMI % LMI Households Persons to Households Persons to Persons to to be Served be Served to be Served be Served be Served Loan Capitalization 21 21 21 21 100% Microenterprise Support 75 75 75 75 100% TOTAL 15. PROJECT AREA RESIDENTS: a. # of Persons 26,800 (Families); 37,235 (Households) b. LMI Persons9,571 - 35.7%; (Families); 13,286 - 35.7% (Households) 16. SURVEY INFORMATION: N/A a. Households in Project Area # b. Households Surveyed __# c. Households Responding # d. LMI Households Responding # e. Households desiring service/willing to participate # f. Households with handicapped persons # INCLUDE IN ATTA, CItM~NT #2 A COPY OF THE SURVEY iNSTRUMENT WITH A DESCRIPTION OF HOW 1T WAS USED AND iNCLUDING ALL OF THE REQUIRi~D INFORMATION DISCUSSED ON PAGES 5-6. CIG-2 CIG-2a 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMAR] 17. URGENT NEED/IMMINENT THREAT a. Does the project address an emergency need or imminent threat to public health or safety? Yes X No If YES, Provide documentation in ATTACHMENT #2. DHCD will verify the situation with the responsible agency. b. Date situation developed or became critical.__ __/ c. Is the applicant unable to finance this project on its own? Yes __ No d. Are there other sources available to address this situation? Yes No e. To what other funding sources have you applied to resolve this need? 18. PREVENTION AND ELIMINATION OF SLUMS AND BLIGHT N/A a, Does the project service area contain a substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating buildings or improvements? Yes No b. Does the project service area meet the definition of sIums and blight contained in Section 36 -49 of the Code of Virginia? Yes No c. Has the area been designated a redevelopment area with clearly delineated boundaries by the local governing body/applicant? Yes No (Provide evidence in ATTACItMENT #2) d. Will this project address at least one condition contributing to the area's deterioration? Yes No e, ~Vill residential units to be rehabilitated be brought up to HUD Section 8 HQS as supplemented DHCD Field Guide Standards? Yes No N.A. f. Will non-residential units to be rehabilitated be brought at least to conformance with the Uniform Statewide Building Maintenance Code (Volume II)? Yes No N.A. by CIG-3 1998 COM2M]YNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT ........ PART II - NEEDS AND EVIPACT OVERALL COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING NEEDS FROM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND OTHER PLANNING DOCUMENTS* Each of the counties participating in this microenterprise project have identified, in their respective Comprehensive Plans and/or Economic Development Commission repons, the overall community needs relating m econormc developmenu water, sewer, streets/drainage, housing, and other community development areas. Following is a narrative, separated by County, highlighting these needs The sources for this information are documented within each section. Nelson Countw: Community development and housing needs revolve around Nelson County's generally low-income population, a relatively high unemployment rate, a large portion of the workforce commuting outside the County for employment, and its appreciable number of substandard homes. Nelson County's Comprehensive Plan (adopted November 8 1994) identifies 15.2% of its population (persons) in poverty and an unemployment rate of 4.6% (Page 28). With a poverty rate of 15%, Nelson County compares unfavorably to the Statewide poverty rate of I0% for persons. In addition, the median household income for 1996, projected by the Center for Public Service, of $29,914 is much lower than the Statew/de median household income of $41,470. Nelson County's Comprehensive Plan (1994), (Pp. 31-32), addresses out-commuting of its workforce, "There were 1.810 more persons who left the County for employment than came into the County to work (not including Nelson County residents)." The 1990 U.S. Census reveals that of Nelson's 6,13)-person workforce, 3,099 (51%) out-commute. Additionally, the (ZS Census data shows that of the out-commuters. 92% (2,850) travel more than 30 minutes to their place of employment. Clearly Nelson County lacks sufficient employment to meet the employment needs of its residents Nelson County's ability to create j ohs for its residents {and to diversify its tax base) is limited by a lack of infrastructure, particularly water and sewer. Ihe Compreheusive Plan identifies water systems in the communities of Lovingston, Shipman, Schuyler and Gladstone as well as within the Mountain Village and Stoney Creek Village developed by the Wintergreen Resort. Nelson County is fmstrated by a low median income, a high incidence of poverty, and a resident population that must commute outside the County for employment, combined with a lack of appropriate infrastructure to recruit new employers to the County. Fluvanna County: Local employment opportunities are a growing need in Fluvauna County, particularly as the population has bacreased significantly in recent years (Fluvauna grew by over 2,500 persons from 1990 to 1994 (I2,429 to 15,000)-- Center for Public Service). This growth is due in large measure to the County's proximity to the Charlottesville and Albemarle urban areas. This also means that Fluvanna's workforce population out-commutes to Charlottosville and Albemarle for employment. In 1990 as many as 67% ofFluvanna's workforce commuted to jobs outside of Fluvanna, 77% experiencing commutes of thirty minutes or more (.1990 U.S. Census.). In a July, 1992 county-wide resident survey done as part of the Comprehensive Plan process, the three greatest community development needs identified were "attracting quality shopping facilities, protecting the farming and forest interests, and attracting quality industry and employment." The survey also revealed that creating more jobs was the top need over the next ten years. (Fluvanna County Comprehensive Plan. adopted August 2, 1993. Pp. $4-3,4). Meeting these identified needs has been hampered by a lack of focused economic developmenr and by the lack of adequate water and sewer. There is no public sewer in the County and public water only in the Fork Union area. Fluvauna County is also hampered by substandard, primarily rural, housing. Albemarle County: In the 1994 Albemarle Count~ Planning Needs Survey Report o£Results, August 1994. bringing more jobs to the area was identified by a 2.40 mean rating (on a scale of 1-3) as very important by 53% of all county residents. The analysis of demographic variables reveal that "Blacks and non-blacks have a very different vision" of Albemarle County's needs. "Blacks are more concerned about economic and social security while non-blacks are more concerned about preserving the physical and natural environment. Quality education, public safety, controlling the cost of living, affordable housing, and promoting job growth were rated as the most impor~ant needs by 100% of all African-Americanrespondents and promoting economic growth followed in importance by 77% of these respondents. The County's need to promote either economic development is supported by 100% of the African-American population and 90% of lo,v-income households. Albemarle County's need to promote new j ohs and diversification of employment is supported by 88% of Blacks and 68% of non- blacks. Low- and moderate-income households support economic development and job growth at 90.3% and 78.7%. respectively Name of Comprehensive Plan: Noted in italics throughout narrative Date of Adoption: Noted in italics throu~houtnarrative Other Planning Documents include Planning Grants, other functional plans such as community development, economm development, caF~tal improvement plans. Include dates of plan completion. CIG-4 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART 1I - NEEDS AND IMPACT SPECIFIC COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING NEEDS THAT THIS PROJECT WILL ADDRESS: There are numerous community development needs within each County of the defined region. The Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program will promote the following: diversificafion of local economies; reduction of out-commuting for employment; support of larger economic development and growth initiatives through microenterprise; financing and business skills training for micro- entrepreneurs; generation of home-based microenterprise opportunities for low- and moderate-income (LMI) residents in the shadow of welfare reform and welfare-to-work initiatives. ks noted, diverse job opporturdfies for residents within each County are a critical need for the Region's LMI residents. Entrepreneurship is one such opportunity. Creating new opportunities for self-employment through microenterprise support will cV~versify the local economy and give citizens more control over their ov~a employment destiny. "Microenterprise development is suited to rural areas because it supplements the few other employment opportunities and diversifies the local economy (Microloan Funds in RuralAmerica, p. 5)." This rural Microenterprise Program will address out-commuting of the local workforce The primary reason for out-commuting is the lack of adequate job opporturfities Although manufacturing .iobs are highly coveted, they are concentrated in only a few industries and most often require extensive commuting. The opportunity for residents to own and operate businesses locally will reduce out-commuting. As noted, each County has larger economic growth and development needs that will be supported by this Microenterpnse Program. In every economy small businesses and micrnanterprises represent one of the fastest growing sectors of the economy and are an important element of our community's economic mix The small mom-and-pop eateries, the corner dry cleaner, the baker, butcher, and candle-stick maker each contribute to the quality-of-life that is important to support growth and attract [urge-scale manufacturers and Fortune 500 companies to the region. This Microenterprise Program represents support to. and cooperatinn with, the growth and development initiatives of the localities. This will help to fuel our community's economic growth into the twenty-fzrst century. The Nelson-Fhivanna-Albemarie Microanterprise Program is designed to meet the needs of the LMI entrepreneur; it is consistent with the economic and community development goals of each locality. Additionally, this Microenterprise Program is consistent with the goals for welfare reform and welfare-to-work initiatives as identified by the VIEWSteering Committee Report, "Working at home requires very little in the way of commuter transportation Many people mn successful home-based businesses, including personal services such as child care or sexving, retail services such as mail-order businesses, and information services. People who want to nm a business in their home may need help dealing with complex logistics, business marketing, planning, and finance? (Welfare Reform in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District, July 1997, Pp. 41-43). A key finding, reported in Realizing the Promise of Microenterprise Development in Welfare Reform. Corporation for Enterprise Development, April 1997, is that, "Microenterprise developmenr creates jobs for welfare recipients, their families and others in their communities- at a time when jobs may be scarce for people transitioning offof welfare." This Microenterprise Program will meet these needs. Only one MicroLoan Pool exists in the entire Thomas Jefferson Planning Distc/ct. During the two years of this successful program. $219,942 loans were made to 18 entrepreneurs (average loan size $12,219). The program has experienced one default (6.7% of total loans) and two loans ($30,000) paid off early. To-date. more than 132 LMI persons have entered die TYPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program, 73 potential businesses have received technical assistance, 108 LMI person have received business training, 21 new businesses have been started resulting in 25 new jobs and 5 jobs retained, and 38 LMI rmcroemerprises are receiving follow-up business counseling. the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program will directly address the expanding need of trahimg and financing for LMI micro-entrepreneurs. Oarrently our file includes 23 LMI individuals from these localities who have visited the office within the past six (6) months to express an interest in training, tecknical assistance support, and financing for a nncroemerprise. These entrepreneurs have either attended training seminars or undergone a personal intake meeting with the TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program, demonstrating that they are serious candidates for microenterprise training and f'mancing. These entrepreneurs are identified in Question I i of this application where the existing demand for the Nelson-Fluvanna- Albemarle Microenterprise Program is further demonstrated. Demand for microenterprise support is expressed at the state level, "The availability of capital for business expansion, particularly with entrepreneurs and small businesses, was identified as one of the top concerns ofbnsiness leaders as part of the (Governor's) Opportunity Virginia Strategic Plan (Growing Our Own Businesses. Virginia Enterprise Initiative, 1996, p. I)." DATA SOURCES AND METHODOLOGY (Cite surveys, needs assessments, preliminary engineering reports. Provide Ietters from any other relevant sources of information that support the needs documentation in ATTACHMENT #3: CIG-5 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT PART II - NEEDS AND IMPACr 5. ACTIVITY LISTING: N/A - There are no direct physical improvements that will resolve microenterprise needs for this geographic area. In some cases, however, support m entrepreneurs who wish to start businesses in the areas that are in need of physical improvements will result in prevention of further deterioration and immediate improvements to some structures in the geographic area. 6. PROJECT NARRATIVE DESCRIPTION · The Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program ('NFAMP) is a comprehensive microenterprise assistance program that includes f'mancing, training, mentoring, and monitoring components. This program is a regional partnership between the counties of Nelson, Ftuvanna, and Albemarle. The County of Nelson is the lead locality for this CDBG Microenterprise project and a contract will be issued to the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission fo~ grant administration. Administration of the NFAMP is a partnership between the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) and the Virginia Economic Development Corporation (VEDC). The TJPDC manages and maintains all aspects of the grant and the VEDC collateralizes the credit lines for the loan pool. contributes its loan committee, maintains lending documentation, and provides loan processing through its banking parmers. · The NFAMP will parmer with local area banks- NationsBank, Crestar Bank, and First Vkginia Bank by placing fifty percent of the CDBG loan capitalization funds ($50,000) in an interest-bearing loan loss reserve account to leverage an initial $200.000 for the NFAMP Loan Pool. Each of the partner loan pool banks will estabhsh pre-approved lines of credit in equal shares. These credit lines will be secured by the VEDC and the NFAMP will be charged at Prime rate. This approach follows the practices of the current TYPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program, and makes available, as needed, lending capital at a ration of 4:1. Loans from this pool will be charged interest at Prime + 1'/2 to 5%. · The remaining CDBG loan capitalization funds will be combined with $5.000 from the Alliance for Interfaith Ministries to form a flexible interest-rate loan pool totaling $55,000. Capital from this pool ~vill be used to provide loans to the lowest- income entrepreneurs, with interest being negotiated on a case-by-case basis, at a rate not lower than two percent (2%). · Additionally, the NFAMP ~vill have available matching funds (cash and in-kind/from the 1998-I999 and I999-2000 TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program budgets in the amount of $37,500. This amount is calculated based on the share of LMI Families in the Nelson-Fluvarma-Albemarle localities of the entire Planning District. the projected sLx-locality program budget for training, teclmical assistance, business counseling, and loan processing, and anticipated VEl funds. · In addition to the financial component, the NFAMP includes numerous training, monitoring and mentoring elements. These are modeled after the current TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program summarized as follows: A borrowar must have completed program training seminars or another approved small business development train/ag. The borrower must submit a written business plan, a completed loan apphcation (~vith attachments), and three references from business associates or personal acquaintances (no relatives]. Credit checks will be performed on ail loan applicants. No loans will be made to any applicant with bankruptcies less than one year old. Judgrnents. liens, and slow credit will be looked at on a case-by-case basis; borrowers must have installment agreements in place with the creditors involved. Applicants will be required to produce a satisfactory explanation of previous credit problems. The business must be located in the identified region. Loans will be secured by collateral land/or a co-signer) to the maximum extent feasible If no collateral is presently available, the Program ~vill consider an applicant's references, past repayment record, personal commitment and business potential, in addition to collateral hereafter available by the use of loan funds. Borrowers will be encouraged, though not required, to inject at least five percent equity into the business. Loans will not exceed $25,000. Once the funds are disbursed, the borrower will undergo scheduled monitoring and enter into the Program's mentor program. 7. PROJECT IMPACT: In the two years of the grant, the Nelson-Fluvann-Albemarle Microenterprise Program will create rwemy-oue I21) new microenterprises through its lending component ($255.000/$12, i40 avg. loan); assist in the creation of three (3) additional new rmcroemerprises through its training technical assistance componems; and add or reta/n 34 jobs (24'1.4 employees) benefitting low- and moderate-income persons. Loan reserve income and the revolving nature of the fund will generate other business in the long term. Projecting for the long term (10 years), not including the addition of leveraged Ioan pool funds and using an average loan term of four (4) years, the initial CDBG micro-loan capitalization of $100,000 is expected to net $718.145 in loans to sixty- one (61) LMI entrepreneurs that create 85 new jobs. These businesses and jobs will increase econormc diversity, reduce out- commuting of each locality's workforce, and support greater economic development and job growth. COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT BUDGET CIG-6 0 0 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEM2ENT GRANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT 1. For neighborhood service or LMI facilities, please specify: N/A a. Total number of residents or users: b. Total number of LMI residents or users: c. % LMI: d. Methodology. Please explain in ATTACHMENT #5 2. JOB CREATION/RETENTION Full-Time Part-Time Total Jobs a. Number of jobs to be created: 34 (21 microenterprises * 1.4 employees) Undetermined 34 b. Number of jobs to be retained: 0 0 0 c. Total number of jobs: 34 Undetermined 34 d. Number of jobs that will benefit LMI: 34 Undetermined 34 e. % of jobs to'benefit LMI: 100 100 100 fi Documentation YesN/ALettersofcommitmen;~thatmeetDHCDstandards(Pro~amDesign, pagelg)fromaI1 No __ participating businesses included as ATTACHMENT # 5. 3. GENERAL ASSESSMENT: a. Number of business(es) located or expected to locate in the project area. Business(es) Name JOBS SIC Code Full Time Part Time Total LMI 1.N/A 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. Total b. Total CDBG dollars requested + Total number of jobs = $ 4,853 per job. c. If cost per job is $10,000 or less, only those jobs created or retained by the business(es) in 3a. shall be considered towards meeting the national objective. d. If cos~ per job is greater than $10,000, all jobs created or retained by any business(es) locating in the area within one ( 1 ) year of completion must also be counted toward the national objective. CIG-10 1998 COMMUNITY IM~ROVEM1~NT GRANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMEN' 4. Check the following items contained in the industry comment letter(s) related to availability of jobs to LMI: a. Business will provide job training N/A Yes No __Not needed b. Use of VEC or JTPA for recruitment Yes No c. Business will also recruit Yes No c. Job ads directed to LMI Yes No d. Include letters from industry(ies) and VEC or JTPA in ATTACHMENT #5 5. Describe efforts to direct jobs to LMI persons. The Nelson-Fluvaana~Albemarle Microenterprise Program, is designed to support (through training, technical assistance, and business counseling) and finance only LMI persons. Marketing outreach for this program will be geared toward LMI persons interested in entrepreneurship. The current TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program has util/zed a community-based advisory comm/ttee in order to ensure that the focus of its program is directed toward the individuals most needing the benefits thereof. The MERI (MicroEnterprise Regional Initiative) Committee has been, and remains, a very important and valuable component of micro-lending and microenterprise support. The MERI Committee is comprised of interested citizens, including small business owners, members of the lending community, members of the area chambers of commerce and economic development authorities, representatives of programs to assist minority and disadvantaged citizens, and from educational institutions. Each committee member provides the Program with their community's perspective, enabling us to continue the grass-roots development and growth of the program in the required target populations. This committee will be expanded to the regions delineated in this grant application. 6. Description of jobs to be created and/or retained. Specific categories or types of jobs that will be created are difficult to determine at this time. Our experience in the TYPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program show that jobs have the potential of being created in manufacturing (22%), service (28%), retail (39%), and constmctiun trades (i 1%). Approximate wages are expected to be in the $7 to $10 per hour range. 7. NEW REVENUE ANTICIPATED FROM PROJECT: Value Added by Additional Tax Rate % of Valuation the Project Tax Revenue Real Property Taxes N/A Personal Property Taxes Machine and Tool Taxes Other Local Taxes I Total New Project Revenue CIG-il 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT NOTE: Complete question 11 only for Microenterprise applications. 11. a. Describe the proposed structure of the micro loan pool. The Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program's Loan PooI will be defined by two subcategories of lenrfng capital. 1) The Primarv Loan Pool (PLP): initially capital/zed at $250,000 ($50,000 CDBG funds placed in an interest-bearing loan loss reserve account, leveraging $200,000 in pre-approved lines of credit, secured by the VEDC. from the partner bamks). The NTAMP will be charged at Pr/me rate. The PLP will provide capital at the program's standard interest rate of Prime + 1 ~/z to 5% to LMI entrepreneurs. 2) The Low-income Loan Pool (LILP): will be initially capital/zed al $55,000 ($50,000 CDBG loan capitalization and $5,000 from the Alliance for Interfaith Ministries). The LILP will have the function of providing capital at below standard rates of interest (not less than 2%) to the lowest of LMI entrepreneurs. Funds from the LILP will also be combined with the PLP in order to provide capital at blended rates of interest. These functions of the LILP may be used by the program to the benefit of the lowest of LMI persons, determined on a case-by-case examination of the borrowers capability, coordinated by the Loan Review Committee and the Program Director. Funds from either pool will be disbursed as term loans not to exceed three (3) years if the loan amount is _< $5.000 and not to exceed five (5) years if the loan amount is > $5,000. There will be a $25,000 maximum loan amount for each borrower. Borrowers may receive multiple loans, but the total cannot exceed $25,000. Loans will be secured by collateral (and/or a co-signer) to the maximum extent feasible. If no collateral is presently available, the Program will consider an applicant's references, past repayment history, personal commitment and business potential, in addition to collateral hereafter available by the use of loan funds. Borrowers will be encouraged, though not required, to inject at least five percent equity into the business. b. Describe the technical assistance component of the program. the training,.technical assistance, and follow-up business counseling element of the NFAivlP will be an expansion of the current TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan program. These processes have been approved by the VEl and the training manuals and technical assistance guidelines are akeady in place. A borrower must complete program mfmmg seminars or other approved small business development training. The emphasis on microenterprise development, through training and one- on-one mentoring and counseling, has proved to make a very significant contribution to LMI entrepreneurs. Although the loan pool funds are a critical part of facilitating rmcroenterprise development in Nelson, Fluvanna, and Albemarle, the CDBG funding of program staffis an essential element in expanding this region's microenterprise support effort. Ali entrepreneurs applying for microenterprise capitalization funds are required to complete training seminars or other approved small business development training. Training seminars, directly administered by the N'FAMP, will be held in locations within the localities, during the evenings or on weekends, unless other times are requested. Fees for the seminars will be on a sliding scale ($0 - $25) and completion of a seminar registration form, that includes a request for income-level data from the enttepreneur, will determine the fee to be paid. tn cases where LMI entrepreneurs will benefit most from fee-bearing seminars sponsored by other agencies, sliding-scale scholarships will be available. This ensures that the required training is provided to the target population. Technical assistance is the one-to-one (LMI enrrepreneur-to-mentor) component that requ/res an in-take meeting between the NFAMP staff and the LMI entrepreneur. The meeting will determine the specific technical assistance that is required for the LMt entrepreneur and enable the NFAMP to match the entrepreneur with the best available assistance. In many cases, this assistance can be provided by the NFAMP Director. Available resources for additional assistance are available from SCORE, the Small Business Development Center. local Chambers of Commerce, and volunteers to be organ/zed in the individual localities. CIG-12 · 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT c Target population to receive program benefitS. The NFAMP is. by CDBG requirement, for to low- and moderate-income persons wishing to start or expand microenterpnses As shown in Part I- Proposal Summary, Question 15. the Nelson-Fluvauna-Albemarie geographic region is residence to 9.571 families or 13.286 households (35.7% of totals) falling into the LMI statistics. All LMI people and all business types will be gtven equal opportunity and assistance in applying to the NFAMP. In addition, minorities, women, and citizens with disabilities will be encouraged to apply. Target areas, within each locality, with the greatest economic challenges will be actively recmited to participate in the NFAMP. For example, Nelson County's LMI residents who are out-commuting because of the lack of local opportunities, those challenged by the high incidence of poverty, or unable to step up out of substandard homes because of lack of job diversity or underemployment will be actively recruited for this program. Fluvanna County's LMI residents who are fi'ustrated by the lack of local employment opportunities or those hampered by substandard, primarily rural, housing without the means to out- commute for employment will be encouraged to participate in the NFAMP. And, in Albemarle County, those LMI residents in target areas challenged by the need for new jobs and diversification of employment will also be encouraged. d. Benefit to low- and moderate-income persons (owners and/or employees). CDBG regulations will be clearly communicated and enforced to guarantee that low- and moderate-income persons benefit from the NFAMP. To ensure that borrowers are LMI individuals, two additional procedures will be implemented: 1) applicants will be required to sign a statement as re their eligibility and 2) a credit check and collateral listed will be analyzed for LMI inconsistencies. Failure to comply with LMI regulations will cause and applicant to be excluded from the program. e. Interested borrowers and loan amounts, if this information is available. The following entrepreneurs have met with the TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program within the past six ,6) months are expressed an interest in operfing a business. Potential Client County Loan Amount Kristie Adams Albemarle $8.000 Page Vanischak Albemarle $13.000 Cecile Clover Albemarle $15,000 irene Jordan Albemarle $5.000 Susan Lavendar Albemarle $7,500 Evan Schider Albemarle $4,000 Ruby Smith Albemarle $25.000 Jackie Syrkes Albemarle $15,000 Deanna Hypes & Angle Kean Albemarle $10,000 Joel Spring Albemarle $9,000 Ron Colter Albemarle $5.000 Business Idea Clothing design Stables Publishing Soap manufacture Living foods education Siding & window installation Laundromat Millinery Childcare Patient billing services Personalized childran's book publishing Diane LaFon Fluvanna $10.000 Donna Lawson Fluvanna $20,000 James & Carolyn Tinsley Fluvanna $20.000 Andrea Mathis Fluvanna $5.000 Ines Rivera-Johnson Fluvanna $15,000 Andrea Phillips Fluvanna $5.000 Computer repair Events planning and errand service Catering Wants to work at home Child day-care Children's Consignment Clothing Phil Justice Nelson $10,000 Catherine Hitch Nelson $6.000 Ralph & Anna Margolius Nelson $15.000 Organic herb propagation Graphic design Video rentals CIG-13 · 1998 COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT f. Structure of lending organization. Nelson County is the recipient of the CDBG funds for this regional microenterprise project. The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) ~vill be the grant administrator. Administration of the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program is a partnership between the TJPDC and the Virginia Economic Development Corporation (VEDC). The TJPDC manages and maintains all aspects of the grant and the VEDC collateral/zes the credit lines for the loan pool. contributes its loan committee, maintains lending documentation, and provides loan processing through its banking parm~rs. The Virginia Economic Development Corporatinn is a Small Business Adm/nistration certified loan development corporation. organized in December, I983 and incorporated in Virginia. The mission of the VEDC is to furdaer economic development throughout the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to improve the economy for small businesses, stimulating :quity capital and long-term loan funds for small businesses, and improving the employment oppommifies in all businesses for the employees of the region. The VEDC and the TJPDC maintain a cooperative managemem agreement for staff support, office space, maintenance of records, fmancial services, and secretarial suppotr. The TJPDC and the VEDC employs Janet Dob to provide coordination and management of the Microc~nterprise Program. Ms. Nancy K. O'Brien. Executive Director of the TYPDC. is responsible for overall supervision and serves as Secretary/Treasurer of the VEDC Board of Directors. The VEDC is comprised of up to fifty members from throughout the TYPD, who meet annually and elect a nine member Board of Directors. The Board of Directors meets quarterly in January, April, July, and October, and at additional times whenever required. The Thomas Jefferson Planning Dis~ict Commission has developed parmerships in regional economic development, manages the Thomas Jefferson HOME Consortium (which provides approximately $750.000 in affordable housing funds each year), staffs the region's fu:st-t[me home buyer program, has regional committees dealing with both urban and ru,ral transponanon tssues, suppor[s the Thomas Jefferson Venture. the Sustathability Council in developing environmentally sound policies for our future, assists in regional criminal justice and disabilities boards, and assists local governments th community development projects, managing Community Development Block Grants on behalf of member localities land use policy. Thus, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has day-to-day expertise in working with all sectors of the community, particularly the disadvantaged. The TJPDC manages over $1.2 milhon in pass through funds, with a budget of over $1,7 million. g. Other businesses assistance resources to be used in this pro,am. Small Business Development Center for assistance in business planning and developmem. When it is determ/ned that the SBDC can provide a good match in assisting a LMI entrepreneur, this resource xvill be used. Senior Core of Retired Executives (SCORE) for assistance in business planning and development, individual counseling, and n-nplementation of seminars. Piedmont Virginia Community College (PVCC) for assistance with individualized training needs and skills evaluations for certain LMI entrepreneurs. University of Virginia Darden School for assistance with marketing plans and special needs projects for LMI microenterprises. Virginia Office of Volunteerism for assistance in coordinating quahfied business leaders within the rural areas of the specified region. CIG-14 ATTACHMENT #1 - RESOLUTIONS CIG-19 RESOLUTION Authorizing Application for a Community. Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization in thc Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program gFHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development is soliciting applications for Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grants; and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the region's economic base and improve the physical and social conditions of its Iow- and moderate-income citizens, Nelson County, under the guidance of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has prepared an application; and WHEREAS, the current MicroLoan Program of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has gotten offto a successful start; and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the MicroLoan Program throughom the regton, the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program is designed to help low- and moderate-income individuals start or expand small businesses; and WHEREAS, the Nelson County's application includes matching funds from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District/Virginia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program's budget and the region's banks: BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to two public hearings, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Nelson, Virginia, sitting m regular session on March 24, 1998, that it authorizes the submission of an application seeking a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for $165,000 for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization, Tra/ning, Support, and Staff for the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program and that County Administrator is authorized to submit all information necessary to apply for the grant and to meet other program administrative and reporting requirements. This Resolution is effective upon adoption, and is adopted this 24~ day of March. 1998, by the recorded vote of the Board of Supervtsors as follows: Thomas D. Harvey Ave Gary E. Wood Aye Samuel C. DeLaura, Jr. Aye Attest: COUNTY OF NELSON, VIRGINIA By: John D. Cutlip, CAO Virgie Carter RESOLUTION Authorizing Application for a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization in the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development is soliciting applications for Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grants; and WX-IEREAS, in an effort to expand the regnon's economic base and improve the physical and social conditions of its low- and moderate-income citizens, Nelson County, under the guidance of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has prepared an application; and WHEREAS, the current MicroLoan Program of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has gotten off to a successful start: and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the MicroLoan Program throughout the region, the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program is designed to help low- and moderate-income individuals start or expand small businesses; and WHEREAS, the Nelson County's application includes matching funds from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District/Virginia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program's budget and the region's banks: BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to two public hearings, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Fluvauna, Virginia, sitting in regular session on March 26, 1998, that it authorizes the submission of an application seeking a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for $165,000 for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization, Training, Support, and Staff for the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program and that County Administrator is authorized to submit all information necessary m apply for the grant and to meet other program administrative and reporting requirements. This Resolution is effective upon adoption, and is adopted this 26t~ day of March. 1998, by the recorded vote of the Board of Supervisors as follows: Cecil L. Cobb Andrew M. Shet/dan, Jr. Stafford Pace Donald W. Weaver Leonard F. Gardner COUNTY OF FLLrVANNA, VIRGINIA Dean BeLer, CAO RESOLUTION Authorizing Application for a CommuniW Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization in the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program WIIEREAS. the Virginia Departmem of Housing and Community Development is soliciting applications for Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grants; and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the region's economic base and improve the physical and social conditions of its low- and moderate-incomecitizens. Nelson County, under the guidance of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. has prepared an application; and WHEREAS, the current MicroLoan Program of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has gotten off to a successful start; and VvltEREAS. in an effort to expand the MicroLoan Program throughout the region, the Nelson- Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program is designed to help lo~v- and moderate-income individuals start or expand small businesses; and WHEREAS, Nelson County's application includes matching funds from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District/Virginia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program's budget and the region's banks; NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to public hearings,the Board of Supervisms of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, sitting in regular session on March 18, 1998, authorizes the submission of an application seeking a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for $165.000 for Microenterprise Loan capitalization, training, support, and staff for the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microemerprise Program and that the County' Executive is authorized to submit all information necessary to apply for the grant and to meet other program administrative and reporting reqmrements. l'his Resolution is effective upon adoption, and is adopted this 18th day of March, 1998, by the recorded vote of the Board of Supervisors as follo~vs: David P. Bowerman Yes Charlotte Y. Humphris Yes Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Yes Charles S. Martin Absent Walter F. Perkins Yes Sally H. Thomas Yes Attest: ATTACHMENT #2 - PROJECT SERVICE AREA CIG-19 Microloan Community Development Block Grant Area Nelson N 0 10 30 Miles / / Not Included in Block Gran~ Area Induded in Block Grant Ares Microloan 300 East [V~n Street Charlottesville. Vi~nia ATTACHMENT #3 - DATA SOURCES 1990 United Census of Population and Housing, Commonwealth of Virginia, County and City STF 4 Profiles. A Demo~aphic Profile of Virginia Transit Dependent Populations, Kansas University Transportation Center, prepared for Rural Virginia, Inc., October 1996. Boshara, Ray; Robert E. Friedman and Barbara Anderson, Realizin~ the Promise of Microenterprise Development in Welfare Reform, Center for Enterprise Development, April 1997. Financial Analysis Report, Fluvarma County Business Plan Project, Fluvarma County Economic Development Commission, October 1997 Growing Our O~vn Businesses~ Report on the Commonwealth's First Statewide Microenterpnse Program, Virginia Enterprise Initiative, January 1996. Guterbock, Thomas M., 1994 Albemarle County Plarmin~ Needs Survey, Report of Results, Center for Survey Research, University of Virginia, August 1994. Knapp, John, Samuel R. Kaplan and Joon-Kyu Park, 1994-1996 Income Proiections: Families & Households Virainia Localities, University of Virginia Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service, 1994. Nelson County Comprehensive Plan, adopted November 8, 1994, Prepared by The Nelson County Planning Commission. Thomas Jefferson Planning District Regional Economic Development and Community Development Plan, Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commtssion, November 1996. Welfare Reform in the Thomas Jefferson Plannina District, A Report to the Region from the VIEW Steering Committee of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District, July 1997. CIG-19 ATTACHMENT #4 - LETTERS OF COMMITMENT CIG-19 PO 1505, VA 2902-1505 {804) 97%PD10 {7810) + {80q) 979-1597 City of Charlottesville Susan M. Cabell Meredith M. Richards Albemarle County Walter F. Perkins Sa!l> H. Thomas. Chair Fluvanaa County Thomas E. Payne Stafford M. Pace Greene County Fnomas C. Powell Randall P. Freund Louisa County F[tzgerald A. Barnes Jane H. Poore Nelson County Samuel C. DeLaura. Jr Fred M. Boger Nancy K- O'Brien. Executive Director March 24, 1998 Mr. Thomas D. Harvey Nelson County PO Box 336 Lovingston, VA 22949 Dear Mr. Harvey, I am pleased to conmnt on behalf of the Planning District Commission support for the Community Development Block Grant for regional Microenterprise Assistance for the localities of Nelson, Fluvanna, and Albemarle. In view of the recem budget fi:om the General Assembly, State funds available are at the discretion of the Depar~ent of Housing and Community Development's Virginia Enterprise Initiative program. The Planning District support extended to this program includes grant administration and in-kind and cash support fi:om the TJPDC/VEDC MicroLoan Program in the amount of $37,500. These funds are the region's share of the anticipated MicroLoan Program budget for Years 98/99 and 99/2000. Further funding and program details are currently being developed and the VEI funds are nor guaranteed, though reasonably expected. Sincerely, Nancy K. O'Brien Executive Director FAX NO, 8049798087 P, 02 By: Facsimile 804 979-1597 March 25, 1998 Janet Dob, Director Thomas Jefferson Planning District Virginia Economic Development Corporation P O Box 1505 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: Virginia Economic Development Corporation Microemeqxise Project Dear Ms. Dob: Crestar Bank is pleased to consider our participation in the proposed Microenterprise Project to the Virginia Economic Development Corporation (VEDC). If formally approved in writing by Crestar the involvement wSlI be to provide a loan facility to be defined for the proposed project for the Nelson-lquvanna-Albemarle area. This participation and involvemem is based upon f'd~her information to be obtained from the YEDC out lining details acceptable to Crestar Bank. A formal commitment in writfiag will need to be extended by Crestar detailing the ~mcmre and conditions of such a loan as the VEDC Microenterprise program develops. Thank you for your effort and hard work in such a needed community program. Crestar is looking forward tc becoming an active participant in this program. Sincerely, William C Dirickson Vice President cc:VondaEanes Marlene Edl~- Robea A Moorefield FIRST VIRGINIA BANK I~ LUE RIDGE March 26, 1998 Janet Dob~ Director MicroLoan Pro,ram Virginia Economic Development Corporation Y 0 Box 1505 Charlottesville, Va ~2902-1505 Re Microenterprise Projecu Dear MS Dob: I am pleased co inform you that First Virginia Bank-Blue Ridge intends to participate in the $200,000 Loa~ Pool ~hat will be established for the Nelson-Fluvan~la-Albemarle Microenterprise Project as you outlined to me recently. I understand that further details of the prO,ram and the Loan Pool are bein~ developed. Of course our pa~ticipation would be contingent upon our approval of these final details. S~,ncerely, Cynthia A. Williams Senior V~ce Presiden~ NationsBank N.A Business Banking Depar~men~ 300 East Main Street Chm'lottes~dlle. VA 22902 Tel 804 977-2219 800 782-6099 Fax 804 977-2333 NafionsBank Thomas Jefferson Planning District Virginia Economical Development Corporation PO Box 1505 Charlottesville, Va. 22902-1505 Dear lanet: Per our conversation, this letter serves to commun/cate NationsBank's interest in participating in a $200,000 micro loan pool in partnership ,with the Vkginia Ecor_amic Development Corporation (VEDC) and other local financial institutions. This loan pool would be subject to similar credit criteria used in the current VEDC loan pool. This letter does not serve as a commitment to lend, but simply expresses NationsBanks' ~nterest in participation subject To further review of all loan pool parameters. NationsBank is pleased to help support this effort and we look forward to a successful grant application. Sincerely, Chris Shrom Senior Vice President (80-,) 977-2~9~ Member FDiC ATTACHMENT #4-A Pro-rata Calculation of NFA Region:TJPD CIG-19 PROJECT MATCHING FUNDS: CDBG Region's Share of Thomas Jefferson Planning District/V|rglnia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program (Calculated by LMI Families) 1996 Median LMI (80¥, County Income Median)l #Families % Below #LMI Albemarle 50,442 40,354 18,771 35% 6,570 Fluvanna 44,893 35,914 4,217 35% 1,476 Nelson 35,200 28,160 3,812 40% 1,525 AoF-N Region 9,571 Greene 42,863 34,290 3,508 35% 1,228 Louisa 39,6~3 31,698 8,215 35% 2,175 Chado[tesville 40,058 32,046 8,424 40% 3,370 Remaining TJPB 6,773 Region's Share LMI . 59% Region's Share of Thomas Jefferson Planning District (by LMI Families) 6,773 9,571 (59%) E3 A-F-N Region · Remaining TJPD (Source: 1994-1996 Income Projections - Families/Households Virginia Localities. Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service University of Virginia, September, 1994.) , '! Thomas Jefferson Planning Distdct Commission Virginia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program Janet Dob Program Director 'Nancy K. O~Bden Executive Director, TJPDC Secretary/Treasurer, VEDC PO Box 1505 300 East Main Street Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 804-979-0114 804-979-1597 (Fax) mkroloan.t: @s~e,va,us Mission Statement It is our m~ssion to support the achievement of economic growth of micro- enterprise by providing entrepreneurship training, business education and counseling, technical assistance, and lending options to Iow-income entrepreneurs. We believe that support for even the smallest start-up or expanding businesses increases opportunities for success and self-sufficiency and enriches .our communities through grass-roots economic expansion and individuaJ asset development. Introduction Small businesses and micro-enterprises represent one of the fastest growing sectors of the econ~-ny and are an importan[ element of our community economic mix. Without the small mom-and-pop ea;~eries, the comer dry cleaner, the baker, butcher, and candle-stick, maker, our communities would not have a "quality-of-llfe,, that is important to support larger economic development growth. Would a Fortune 500 company relocate their corporate headquarters in a community that does not have quality daycere or quality retail and service businesses? No. Therefore, our goal-- to provide support to micro-businesses and the proprietors who run them-- aids in the overall growth and well-being of our local economies. 1996-98 Loans Made Micro Business Started/Expanded Simply Organic Supply Enterprise Editorial Services TLC Publishing Singing Spatula Total Albemarle Market Street Inc. Urban Stitches Blue Ridge Importers, Inc. Shannon Dowe]l Lamps Reborn Petites PJus Total Charlottesville Wahlder St. Music & Books Total Fluvanna Architectural Accents Total Greene Select Home Improvements J W Sealing HeavenJy Creations Total Louisa · Loan Amount 20,000 15,000 15,000 25,000 $ 75,000 16,500 15,000 25,000 7,650 2,000 15,557 $ 81,707 17,000 $17,000 12~500 $12,500 7,500 11,235 15,000 $ 35,735 Locality Albemarle Albemarle AJbemarie Albemarle Charlottesville' Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Charlottesville Fluvanna Greene Louisa Louisa Louisa ;0= P-:' ' M- S_' VEDC 10,000 AIM .35,000 Central Fidelity Bank 25,000 Crestar Bank 25,000 F & M Bank 25,000 First Virginia Bank 25,000 Guaranty Bank 25,000 Jefferson National Bank 25,000 First Union Bank 25,000 NationsBank 25.000 Total Loan Pool $ 245,000 RESOLUTION Authorizing Application for a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for Mieroanterprise Loan Capitalization in the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development is soliciting applications for Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grants; and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the region's economic base and improve the physical and social conditions of its low- and moderate-income citizens, Nelson County, under the guidance of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District, has prepared an application; and WHEREAS, the current MicroLoan Program of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District has gotten off to a successful start; and WHEREAS, in an effort to expand the MicroLoan Program throughout the region, the Nelson- Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program is designed to help low- and moderate-income individuals start or expand small businesses; and WHEREAS, Nelson County's applicationincludes matching funds from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District/Virginia Economic Development Corporation MicroLoan Program's budget and the region's banks; NOW. THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to public hearings, the Board of Supervisom of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, sitting in regular session on March 18, 1998, authorizes the submission of an application seeking a Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant for $165,000 for MicroenterpriseLoan capitalization, training, support, and staff for the Nelson-Fluvanna-Albemarle Microenterprise Program and that the County Executive is authorized to submit all information necessary to apply for the grant and to meet other program administrative and reporting requirements. This Resolution is effective upon adoption, and is adopted this 18th day of March, 1998, by the recorded vote of the Board of Supervisors as follows: David P. Bowerman Yes Charlotte Y. Humphris Yes Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Yes Charles S. Martin Absent Walter F. Perkins Yes Sally H. Thomas Yes C OUNTYA2)F ALBEMARLE, VJtt~GINIA "g-flaTvV. Carey, Cl~rk Attest: ', ~-0~-~995 '':3SA~ FRO~ TJPDC 9V~sgv P, ~ Ctty o f Charl~'tesville Susan M, Calma Meredith M. R~chm~ds Albemnr]e Coan~ Wal~ F, Perki~ ~vaaaa County DATE: TO: COMPANW': FAX: gilt CO~ S: Number of pages in fax (including cover sheet): q FROM: __ Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Director Hannah Twaddell. Sen/or Planner Bruce Carveth, Criminal Justice Planner William Wanner, Senior Planner Tina Sherman, Ri ~deShare Coord. Rochelle Ganvood, GIS Planner Dave l~ber~s. Planning Technician · ,, 8onn/e Fronfelter, Legislative Liaison Debi Detamore. Executive Secretory Janet Dob. Microloan Director Any problems regarding receipt of this fax, please call (804'~ 979-7310 Thank you. '~ ? FROM TJPDC 9791597 P. 2 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM COMMUNITY IMPROVEMENT GRANT TO SUPPORT MICROENTERPRISE THROUGH THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PL.~NNING DISTRICT'S MICROLOAN PROGRAM Proposed Applicants: Nelson County (lead locality) Albemarle County Flnvaana Count>, Grant Amount: $100,000 (loans and/or to leverage loan funds) 60,000- 65,000 (operating costs) DeadHne: Ma~h27, 1998. Elig/ble local governments ma)- apply for CDBG funds under five broad objectives for anyoftwenty project types. CDBG applications are encouraged for eligible project types that meet Department of Housing and Commttnity Development objectives. Objective gl: To assist local governments in increasing business and employment opportunities through economic development projects. Microcnterprise Assistance I~rojeets - Assistance to small businesses with 5 or less employees, one or more of whom are the owncm. Assistance takes the fern of business support activities and Suiting. Loans are limited to $25,000; CDBG may support a fall4itne staffperzon for two years. Under an EXCEPTION to the two-grant eligibility role, _,ir.- ~ ' - ? ~ - pro_ients will not be counted against either the two-~rant or_the ~' ' -c-_ -, '__-', .. Requirements for Public Hearings: In order to meet federally mandated citizen participation requirements, local governments must make specific types of information available to the public and hold at least two public hearings. (See Appendix 6- CDBG Instruction Manual, attach~l) Requirements for Resolutions: Resolutions must be prepared and passed by the locality's governing body anthorizSng the application and funding request. (See Page 3- CDBG Instruction Manual, attached) Guidelines for Microenterprise Loan Capitalization: Data from the existing MicroLoan Program of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District will be ~ed to fulfill the requirements for the application and demonstrate a need in each locality (see Page 20- CDBG Instmcfio~ Manual. attached). A dral~ oft.he proposal, that includes this information will be available at the time of Public Hearing ¢2. . ,~-0~-1998 '':37A~ FRO~ TJFDC 9791S97 APPENDIX 6 CITIZEN PARTICII~ATION REQLrIR~MENTS In order to meet federally mandated citizen participation requirements, local governments must make specific types of information available m the public and hold at least two public hearings. In the case of a regional application, each participating local government must meet all of the citizen participation requirements outlined in this'Appendix. Each partizipating locality must hold separate public, hearings. Guidelines on the types of information to be made available._ on public input to be solicited, and on holding public bearings are provided below: Information RequireraevZ~ Local governments must provide citizens information on: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The amount of funds available for proposed community development and housing activities; The range of eligible CDBG activities as well as those proposed to be undertakem The estimated amount proposed for activities that will benefit low- aM moderate-income persons; The local government's plan to minfi'rdze displacement resulting from CDBG-assisted activities; The lo'cai government's plan to assist persons displaced as a result of CDBG-assisted activities; and The local government's past use of CDBG funds, if applicable. Public Input Reqmrements Applicant loc,~itie~ must solicit the views of their citizens on the following: General local housing and community development needs; The locality's past use of CDBG funds over the last 5 years, if applicable: and The locality's proposed CDBG project. Citizens should be provided a reasonable period of thee before CIG application deadline in order to have the opportunity to influence the typeand location of the CDBG project for which the community applies. Oral and written comments should be accepted. The locality should. make available to the public files relating to previous CDBG projects and the current project, including the draft and final revisions of the CIG proposal, and the name, address, and phone number of a local government contact person wit~. whom m communicate comments and/or complaints about past use of CDBG funds. Appendix 6, Page 1 FRO~ TJPDC 9~9'597 Local I. Public Hearing Requirements governments must meet the following public hearing requirements: Hold at least two public hearing: one on general local community development and houshag needs no earlier than six monUhs prior to the application deadline, the other on the proposed VCDBG application, each one covering the availability of tb.e items spec[fled above under Information Requirements (DHCD may waive the requirement for the first public hearing for proposals not funded and re-subtitled in the following year); AdverSe the public hearings at least seven days prior to the date of each hearing in the non-legal section of a local newspaper of general circulation and at least one other.type of announcement for each hearing; Maintain files which contain documentary evidence that the hearings were held. The files should contain proof of publication of the hearing notices, written and/or recorded minutes of the hearings, and a list of citizens attending the hearings; Hold flue fkst public hearing early in the proposal development process to allow serious consideration of citizens' ~views. The second public hearing should occur after a draft of the proposal has been prepared for public comment; Solicit comments at the hearings on the loeality's past use of CDBG funds in tahe past 5 yea. rs, if applicable; Accommodate handicapped citizens wishing to participate in the proposal developmenr process; and Accommodate the needs of non-English speaking residents, wkere 5 % or more of public he. arkig parucipants ca.u be reasonably expected to fall into th/s category. Model Public Hearing Advertisement: First Public Hearing (~) witl hold a public hearing on (date) at ~'time) at (l.p,.cadon) to solicit public input on local community development and housing needs in relation to Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) fan. ding for a project in our community. Information on the &mount of funding available, the requirements on benefit to low'- and moderate-income person, eligible activities, and plans to minimize displacement and provide displacement assistance as necessary will be available. Citizens also ~'e given the opportunity m comment on ~) 's past use of CDBG funds. All interested citizens are urged to attend. For additional information contact (11~. Appendix 6, Page 2 9-~-1998 ~¢38AM FRO~ TJPDC S¢';91597 Model Public Hearing Advertisement: Second Public Hearing (insert }oeality's name~ w/ll hold a public hearing on (insert date) at {insert time'~ at (insert location) to solicit public input on the propos~ Community'Development Block Grant (CDBG) application ~o be submitted to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Developraent on the (insert pro. iect nurse) project, Residents of the project area are encouraged to attend. The draft CDBG application will be presented tbr comment along with information on projected beneficiaries, number of Iow- and moderate-income residents to benefit from the project, and plans to m~nimize displacement. Citizens also will be given an opportunity to comment on (locality's namer's past use of CDBG funds, A fact sheet on the proposed project and the draft application is available at ~ocalJ .ty)'s administration building. For additional information, please contact: (insert name of loc~l contact per,on). Other Citizen Participation Requ~remenm Appticam commurddes also mast fulf'dl the following reqmrements: Encourage the participation of low- and moderate-income residents of ~e community and of the project service area; Provide local cidzens with reasov-ablc and timely access to meetings, information, and records relating to thc locatity's proposed use of CDBG Provide technical assistance to groups representative of persons of Iow- slid moderate-income that request such assistance in developing proposals for the use of CDBG funds, with the levd and type of assistance to be determined by the applicant ].ocality; and Provide timely written answers m written complaints and grievances, within 15 working days where practicable. NOTE: ALL POTENT/.A.L CDBG APPLICANTS ALSO SHOULD CONSULT TI{E VCDBG CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PL.&N (i:'AGES 4 AND 5 OF THIS APPENDIX). NONE OF TIlE FOREGOING MAY BE CONSTRUED TO RESTRICT TE[E RESPONSIBILITY OR AL~I'I-IOR1T¥ OF TFfg LOCAL GOVERNMENT APPLICANT IN THlg DE~LOPI~fENT AND EXECLrFION OF ITS COM3ilLN'ITY EViPROVEMF_~T GRANT PROJECT, Appendix 6, Page 3 ,~-04-1998 11:39AM FROM TJPDC 9-,'/91597 P. 6 FY 1998 VIRGINIA CO~M'L~VITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN It is important that community development projects carried out wholly or in part with Virginia Community Development Block Grant ('VCDBO) funds involve extensive citizen participation - especially low- and moderate-income citizen participation - during the Con,xaumty Improvement Grant proposal development stage. In pursuit of this goal the following steps are required of each local government applying for a VCDBG Community Improvement Grant. Local citizen participation should be encouraged throughout the process of developing a Community Improvement C-rant (CIG) proposal. In particular, participation by Iow- and moderaV'-'mcome (12eII) residents of the projec~ s~rvicc area or a slum and blight area should be encouraged. To meet this requirement, applicant communities must inform citizens of public hearings and other meetings and opportunities for participation in CDBG proposal development through at le0st two of the following methods. 3, 4, 5. advertisement in the locally-circulated newspaper with the largest general circulation (the required public hearings must be announced using this method and at least one other method); advertisen~nt through.locally-received radio and/or television stations; distribution of flyers'in LMI areas and in the proposed service area(s); announcements at local community organization m~tmgs; and announcements through local churches and community, centers located in and proposed project areas. Applicants must keep documonmtion of how they met the above requirements in their CDBO files for v~r'ff:eation. This requirement for two types of announcements for each CDBG proposal development event should not be confused with the requirement in #4 below for two public hearings. Local citizens shnuld b¢ provided with reasonable and timely access to local meetings, information, and records relating to the applicant localky's proposed use of VCDBG funds. Meetings should b¢ conducted according to the standards established for the public hearings cited below (#4). CDBG-r~lated information and records must b¢ made available to interested citizer, s with the availability of such items announced, at a rnlnirtltl~, in the sallie manner as the public hearing advertisements, At a minhnum citizens should be furnished with information concerning the mount of funds available (including program income) for proposed activities and the range of activities that may be undertaken, incIuding the estimated amount to be used for activities that will benefit low- and moderate-income persons, the proposed CDBO activities likely to result in displacement, and plans for minimizing displacement of persons as a result of the CDBG project and plaus to assist persons actually displaced by the project. Appendix 6, Page 4 3. T~clmical assistance must be provided to groups representative of persons of low- and modern,e-'raceme that request such assistance in developing proposals for use of VCDBG funds. with the level and type of assistance to be determined by the applicant locality, but including at least consulmftons and written communications between a local contact person responsible for the CDBG proposal*s dev¢lopmer~ and interested groups. The name, address, and telepi~oae amber of the contact person(s) must be made available upon request and announced at all public, meetings held on the CDBG proposal. At least two public hearings must be held.during the CIG proposal development period. One hearing must be held early in the CIG proposal development process m review the applicant's community development needs and the range of eligible project types funded ~rough the VCDBG program, as well as the applicant's past peffomnce (if applicable) in the CDBG program during the previous five year~. Another hear'rog mst be held for public review of and comment on the final draft of the CIG proposal. These hearings must be held a~er adequate notice (non-legal newspaper advertiseme~ at least seven {lays prior to the heating and at least one other t3~e of announcement - see #1 above), at times and locations convenient to potential or actual beneficiaries, and with accommodation for .the l~ndicapped. Both public hearings should be held witl~n six montl~ of the first mum application deadline (i.e,, after September 27, 1997); the two hearings must, at a mum. be held one week apart. In the case of the same proposal being resubmitled from abe prior competitive year, DHCD may waive the public hearing reqai~ on community development needs. Files must be maintained con,sLuing documentary evidence that the hearings were held. For regional proposals, each participating locality must bold two public hearings as described above. An applicant ~Sth a current CIG project to which activities are to be added, deleted, or substantially changed (that ~s, substantial changes made in terms of purpose, scope, location, or beneficiarieO m~t provide l~ca! ¢itLzem through a public hearing wi'& an opporturdty for comment on such changes, after the locality has ir~ormed citizens of the changes at least seven days prior to the hearing. o Applicants must provide, La the public hearing notices, the address, phone number, and times for submitting complaints and grievances to the applicant locali~, and provide timely written answers to written complaints and grievances, within 15 worlcing ~lays where practicable. 6. Where 5 ~ or more et' public hearing participants cam be reasonably expected to he non-English speaking residents, applicants must take measur~ to accommocla~e their needs. Census data on the proposed project area and on the Iocali .~ as a whole should be consulted to deren'aiae if this provision applies in a particular instance. Meefmg this provLsion requires, at a minimum, having p~inted material available in ~e non-English language(s) and r=tair~ng the services of an interpreter(s) for all CDBC~-related meetings and public hearings. None of the forego.Lng may t~ comtmed to restrict tl~ rcspoasibLliv or au~oriV o~ the Itc. al govemm~r~t applicant ia the d~velopmea~ and c~ution of i~ Communi~- Improvement Grant projex:t, Appendix 6, Page 5 I~,&1AM FROM TJPDC 9~91597 ENSTRUCTIONS FOR PART I - PROPOSAL SUMMARY Minimum Resolution Requirements Each appl~¢a~ locality sl~oukt s~bmk a resolution £hat contains the following (requked resolution components in bo!d): o That the locality wishes to apply for Virginia Community Development Block Grant (VCDBG) funds; Project type and title; Amount of VCDBG funk requested; A.mount of lo~al, ~tat¢, or federal funds that are also part of the ~otaI project COS~, if the project is meeting the national objective of benefitting low- and moderate- income persons (LNI~) th~n prov/de thc number of total LMI projected beneficiarks (e.g. number of jobs Create. d, number of hou/ehold$ ~o be connected w wat~r service, number of hous~ Authorizes the chief administrative officer to sigll and subm/i all appropriate information necessary t/) apply for ¥CDBG funds; and Citizen participation requ/r~men~ have be~n mci (by hokiing at least nvo public hear/rigs and ru~nin~ the required newspaper ad ~ at lcasI one other advertisemem or other public notice). ~AMPL~ RESOLUTION Be it resolved that p~rsuant to two public heatings, ~ wishes to apply for /~u~am~ of Virg~.ia Comm~l~,/ty Development Block Grant funds for ~, Whcl~as ilistamonnts and sourers o~ther funds) will also be expended on ~ project, it is projected rkazt {mlmber and tvl~e ofb~n~f/eiariest will result from the implementation of th5 project, of wb. Jeh ~ will be Iow- and moderate-income persons. Be it fi.rrth~r resolved that ao~ato~raatl is hereby authorized to sign and submit the appropriate documents for submittal of Ei~ Virginh Community Development Block Grant application. INSTRUCTIONS, PAGE 3 , ~-0z$-1998 11 ,'~.2AN1 F'F~OM ra~e and INSTRUCTIONS FOR ECONOI~[C DEVELOPMENT ('MICROENTERPRISE LOAN CAPITALIZATION) Complete question #11 om'~, if the project is for roicroemerpfise loan capitalization. For the purposes of the CDBG program, microenterprises are considered to be enterprises w/th 5 or fewer ~mploy~s, one or room of Whom are the owners. Eli~ible costs for such projects are limited to loan capitalization costs (up to $100,000) and the costs for one staff person for the two year contract period. Individual loans roay not exce~l $25,000. 11. a. Describe the proposed roicroenterprise loan pool. Factors that should be discussed ~nclude: forms of financial assistance, including lend/rig model (~raduated loans, single loans etc.), term(s)./nterest rate(s), lending criteria (el/g~ble borrowers, collateral tequ/rero~nts, etc.), sizes of loans, and contractual atraagements with borrowers, Describe the training, support and business assistance coroponent of the proposed loan program. Discuss what support will be provided to participants, the sources of this assistance, bow it will be structured and who will provide it. How will participating jtmsdictions contract administratively for techr~cal assistance, loan servicing~ and processing, Describe the target population for which this loan program is designed. Include thc ~ypes and nan.we of enterprises that are targeted. Discuss what steps will be taken to ensure that borrowers or 51% of each enterprise's employees will be LMI, Note: Regulations require *~aat either mioroenterpf~se owners and persoas developing roicroenterpfi~,s be low~and moderate-incoroe person~, or that of the number of jobs to be created, at least 5!% meet the LMI standard. Identify any part~s that have expressed an interest in a m/cro loan(s) and the approximate amount of the loan(s). Explain the organJzaQonal structure of the adrnin/strative entity~ include how this s~ucture relates to the business assistance functions and how CDBG administrative responsibilities will be aceomrnodated. List the amounts of other available resources for business assistance, by source, and the stares of the availability of those resources. INSTRUCTIONS, PAGE 20 1 I t 1 I ! I I I I i ! COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Public hearing for approval of sanitary Hilictest Land Trust SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: sewer easement to Public hearing for approval of sanitary sewer easement across County-owned property (TMP 91-2) near Monticello High School. STAFF CONTACT{S): Messrs. Tucker~ Huff, Kelsey, Davis, Trank . ITEM NUMBER: AGENDA DATE: March18,1998 ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENT~: Yes REVIEWED BY: ./ BACKGROUND: TMP 77-47, owned by Hillcmst Land Trust, was rezoned to Planned Development Shopping Center (PD-SC) and the developer is preparing design plans for the proposed shopping center to be constructed at that site. The proposed shopping center would be served by public water and sewer, The only available connection to an existing sanitary sewer manhole is located on the Lakeside Apartments property. This requires that the proposed sanitary sewer extension cross either parcel TMP 7743, owned by Calvary Baptist Church, or the County-owned property. The Purchase Agreement for the Monticello High School property contains a provision that states that the County agrees to grant "utility' easements necessary to provide utility service to certain other parcels owned by the sellers (including TMP 7747), but a separate provision dealing with sanitary sewer easements d(~es not specifically obligate the County to grant such easements. The 20' wide sanitary sewer easement, as shown on the attached plat and sketch, runs along the property line and. according to the Engineering and Public Works Department, will not have a negative impact upon future development of the County parcel. Va. Code § 15.2-1800(B) requires the Board of Supervisors to hold a public hearing prior to conveying any interest in County- owned property, including easements, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that after this public hearing the Board authorize the County Executive to execute proper documents to grant the proposed sanitary sewer easement. 98.042 TAX MAP 77. PARCEL 44 LAKESIDE APARTMENTS EXISTING EASEMENT % TO BE VACATED ~-~ 38,98 N84'52'26"E CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH TAX NAP 77 PARCEL 43 34.11 S33°39 24"W TAX MAP 77 PARCEL 47 HILLCREST L.L.C. FEX [ST'ING ~H / MAINT. BLDG I IRON F,gJJt~ TAX PROPOSED MAP 9~, PARCEL SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT PLAT SHOWING PROPOSED 20' WIDE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT ACROSS PARCEL2. SHEET 9! AND PARCEL 44, SHEET 77, TAX MAPS SCALE: t" BO,O0 ALBEMARLE COUNTY. VTRGINIA FEBRUARY t6, ~998 B. AUBREY HUFFI4AN E, ASSOCIATES, LTD. CIVIL ENGINEERING - LAND SURVEYING - LAND PLANN.TNG CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 1998, by in Deed Book 1382, page 510; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle, Virginia, is the owner of Albemarle County Tax Map 91, Parcel 2, containing 107.026 acres, more or less, having acquired such property by deed of the Hillcrest Trustees and Hurt Investment Company, dated September 18, 1995, of record in the aforesaid Clerk's Office, in Deed Book 1492, page 678; WHEREAS, the Hillcrest Trustees are the .owners of Albemarle County Tax Map 77, Parcel 47, containing 6.717 acres, more or less, having acquired such Property by deed of Hurt Investment Company, a Virginia corporation, dated November 1, 1990, of record in the PRePAReD BY: MCCALLUM & KUDRAVETZ, T~IS DERD OF EASEMENT dated this 23~-'day of April, and between LA/rESIDE ASSOCIATES LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, a Virginia limited liability company, ~he First Grantor ("Lakeside Associates"); the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, the Second Grantor ('Albemarle County") and CHARLES WM. HURT and SHIRLEY L. FISHER, as TRUSTEES for the HILLCREST LAND TRUST, pursuant to the terms of a certain Land Trust Agreement dated November 1, 1990, the Grantees (the "Hillcrest Trustees"); W I TNESSETH ~' WHEREAS, Lakeside Associates is the owner of Albemarle County Tax Map 77, Parcel 44, containing 12.476 acres, more or less, having acquired such Property by deed of the Charles Wm. Hurt and Shirley L. Fisher, as Trustees for the Hillcrest Land Trust (the "Hillcrest Trustees"), dated November 2, 1993, of record in the Clerk's office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Bo~k t128, page 103; WHEREAS, Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County have agreed to grant unto the Hillcrest Trustees an easement to permit the Hillcrest Trustees to install ~anitar~' sewer facilities across the land of Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County in order to serve the lands of the Hillcrest Trustees. NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION of the foregoing premises and TEN DOT~uRS ($I0.00) and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of all of which is hereby acknowledged, Lakeside Associates does hereby GRANT and CONVEY with GENERAL WARRANTY AND ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE and Albemarle County does hereby GRANT and CONVEY with SPECIAL WARRANTY OF TITLE, as regards their respective properties, unto the Hillcrest Trustees, a perpetual, non-exclusive right-of-way and easement twenty feet (20') in width (the "Easement") to construct, install, maintai~ repair, replace extend SANITARY SEWER LINES AND FACILITIES, consisting of pipes, manholes, and appurtenances thereto, within those certain areas designated "Proposed 20' Sanitary Sewer Easement", as shown and described on the plat prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman & Associates, Ltd., dated April 20, 1998, entitled "Plat Showing Proposed 20' Wide Sanitary Sewer Easement Across Parcel 2, Sheet 91 and Parcel 44, Sheet 77, Tax Maps Albemarle County, Virginia" attached hereto and made a part hereof (hereinafter the "Plat"). Reference is made to said Plat for the exact location and dimensions of the Easement as it crosses the properties of Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County. As a part of ~his Easement, the Hillcrest Trustees shall have the right to enter upon the above-described property within the Easement for the purpose of installing, constructing, maintaining, repairing, replacing and extending sewer lines and facilities and appurtenances thereto, within the Easement, and the right of ingress and egress thereto as reasonably necessary to construct, install, maintain, repair, replace and/or extend such lines. If the Hillcrest Trustee~ are unable reasonably to exercise their right of ingress and egress over the right of way, the Hillcrest Trustees shall have the right property of Lakeside Associates the right of way. of ingress and egress over the and Albemarle County adjacent to Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County, assigns agree that new trees, shrubs, fences, or other improvements or obstructions shall the Easement conveyed herein. Whenever it is necessary to ~excavate earth within the Easement area, the Hillcrest Trustees agree to backfill such excavation in a proper and workmanlike manner so as to restore surface conditions as nearly as practical to the same condition as prior to the excavation. In the event that any damage results from said access, the Hillcrest Trustees agree to correct and repair such damage in a proper and workmanlike mannerf including the restoration of any such damaged or disturbed grass surfaces. The Easement shall include the right of the Hillcrest Trustees to cut any trees, brush, and shrubbery, remove obstructions and their successors or buildings, overhangs not be placed within take other similar action reasonably necessary to provide economical and safe installation, operation, and maintenance. The Hill~rest Trustees shall have no responsibility to Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County to re~iace or reimburse the cost of said trees, bz~/sh, shrubbery or obstructions if cut, removed or otherwise damaged. The facilities constructed within the Easement shall be the property of the Hillcrest Trustees, who shall have the right to inspect, rebuild, remove, repair, improve and make such changes, alterations and connections to or extensions of the facilities within the boundaries of the Easement as are consistent with the purposes expressed herein. The Easement shall further include the right of the Hillorest Trustees to dedicate the Easement to the Albemarle County Service Authority for the public use and Lakeside Associates and Albemarle County agree to execute such further Deeds of Easement or other documents as may reasonably be.required by the Albemarle County Service Authority to effect such dedication. The Grantees shall at all times indemnify and save harmless the County of Albemarle, Virginia, its officers from any claim whatsoever arising of rights and privileges stated herein. employees, agents and from Grantees'exercise This Deed of Easement may be executed in one or more counterpart copies, each of which, when executed and delivered, shall be an original, but all of which shall constitute one and the same Deed of. Easement. Execution of this Deed of Easement at 4 different times and places by the parties hereto shall not affect the validity thereof. / / / / / / / / ? ? / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / · / / / / / / / 5 WITNESS the following signatures and seals° LAKESIDE ASSOCIATES LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY B~'its Ma~'aging Member STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY/COUNTY OF Albemarle DENICO D~¥ELOPMENT CO., a Virginia corpor~ionr ~  e E. LaCo~r, President The Coun~of Albemarle, Virginia: 'Ro~ert W. uck , '~ // Co~ty Executive '~ to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged 23rd day of April , 1998, by Denise President of Denico Development Company, a Virginia corporation, on its behalf as managing member of Lakeside Associates Limited Liability Company. -~/ Notary/Public before me this E. LaCour, as STATE OF VIRGINIA~ ~ CITY/COI/N~Y OF /~/Y~/2~ , to-wit: The foregoing .instrument was acknowledged before me this ~c~ day of /~4z~/ ~ , 1998, by Robert W. Tucker as County Executive on be~f of the County of Albemarle, Virginia. My commission expires: j/dO / Notary ~Publ ic LAKESIDE ASSOCIATES LTD TAX HAP 77. =ARCEL 44 CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH TAX NAP 77, PARCEL 43 COUNTy OF ALBEMARLE TAX MAP 91, PARCEL OB 1492 P 67B TAX NAP 77, PARCEL 47 HILLCREST LANO tRUST ACKNOWLE[:~,ED DEFO~E ME THIS PROPO~D 20' WIDE SANITARY SEWER EASEMENT ACROSS PARCEL 2, SHEET gt AND 'PARCEL 44. SHEET 77, TAX MAPS B. AUBREY HUFFt~AN $ A$SOCT-ATES, LTD. COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA m OFFICIAL RECEIPI ALBEMARLE CIRCDIT COU~T ~EEO RECEIPT DATE: 0~1B~198 TIME: I~:~3:H ACCOOMT: 003CLR98005~8 ~ECEIPT: 98000007818 C~$NIER: PIN gEG: AB05 IYPE: DEED PAYMENT: FULL PAYMENT IMSTRU~ENT : 98005~58 DOOK~ ~AMTOR NAME ~ LAKESIDE ASSOCIATES LTD LIA~IL EI: ~ LOCALITY: CO ORAMTEE HAME: HURT, CHARLES WM~ TRUSTEEES EI: H PERCENTt !OO~ AHD ADDRESS : CHECK ~ OESCRIPTIO~ l~ ~NBIDERATIOM: .00 AGSDME/VAL: .00 MAP: CODE ~ESCR~PTION PAID C~OE DESCRIPTION PAI0 301 DEEDS If.bO 1~5 9SLF 1,00 TE~BERE9 , A~OUNT PAID~ CHA~6E AMT r CLERK DF CDUR?~ SHELBY I. MARSHALL m David E Bowerman Rio Charlotte Y. Humpht~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARI ,E Offi~ of l~ard of Supe~m 401 McIntim Road Charlottesville, Vi~inia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 2965800 March 17, 1998 Charles S. Martin . The Honorable Robert K. Spencer, Mayor Ms. Sara Gentlmer, Town Administrative Official Town of Scottsville P. O. Box 395 Scottsv'flle, Virginia 24590 Dear Mayor Spencer and Sara: I was made aware recently that the Town of Scottsville on October 20, 1997 passed an ordinance which, among other things, appoints the Albemarle County Fire Marshall as the fire marshall for the Town of Scottsville and outlines a five point agreement with the County. I must say that I am somewhat surprised in that the County has neve~ signed any such agreement nor agreed to provide arson investigation services. I have attached a copy of a letter dated November 14, 1997 to Mr. Tucker that references a discussion held between lgmdsay Donier and Larry Davis onNovember 13, 1997 regarding a proposed ordinance and agreement for our signature. On December 9, 1997, Mr. Breeden received a letter (attached) indicating that the Town had decided not to pursue our handling of arson investigation services. Based on this letter, we did not pursue any further discussions on the matter. In any event, it is my understanding that an agreement must be in place between the County and the Town in order to appoint the County's Fire Marshall for the Town. Until such time as that is agreed to by both governing bodies, we will be unable to provide services of the County's Fire Marshall office to the Town of Scottsville. I would ask that the Town's ordinance be amended accordingly so that Town residents are properly informed as to that relationship. I would be happy to discuss this issue with you if you choose and trust that any misunderstanding can be quickly cleared up. Sincerely, Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Chairman FRM, Jr/dbm 98.005 pc: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Mr. Carl J. Pumphrey, Division Chief, Fire/~ue Administration Printed on recycled paper 395 Council GEORGE W. O~SE¥ DUANfi D. KPJ~R CHRISTOPHER J. LONG TIMOTHY M. SMALL CRAIG N. STRATTON LUC]NDA B. WHEELER December 9, 1997 Melvin A. Breeden Director of Finance County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Dear Melvin, TLis letter is to confmn that the Town of Scottsville will be collecting the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax beginning January 1, 1998 and will be selling our own vehicle decals for the upcoming year. In addition, we are in the process of drafting a policy for our Police Agreement with the Sheriff and the County which will restrict the amount of assistance that our officers provide to the County Police outside our town limits. It is the general consensus here in Scottsville that the offers from the County of Albemarle to handle the decal sales or provide arson investigation services in trade for the use of 50% of 6ur law enforcement officers f~rne is not remotely equitable. Therefore, we are taking these measures in order to make a more cost effective situation for the town and to increase our revenue. Should you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call. Town Administrative Official cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. ~.~. ~:¢ 395 November 14, 1997 Cotmcil GEORGE W. DANSEY DUANE D. KARR CHRISTOPHER J. LONG TIMOTHY M. SMALL CEA[G N. STP. AlTON LUCINDA B. WHEELER Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Bob, Per Town Attorney Lindsay Dorrier's discussion with County Attorney Larry Davis yesterday, an Ordinance and an Agreement regarding Scottsville's use of the County's Fire Marshall have been drawn up by Lindsay. These two Documents are enclosed for your approval and presentation to those necessary for effect'mg this arrangement. As you might expect, the need for Fire Marshall services in the Town of Scottsville is quite infrequent; so Council has agreed that this is a suitable arrangement as permitted in Section 15.t - 20.3 of the Code of Virginia, 1950. as amended. 2I~n~~/~gn this matter. Mayor of Scottsville cc: Mr. Larry Davis Mr. Lindsay Dorrier Mr. Forrest Marshall; Jr. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE L. L'. ,- ................. ~x-,-,UTW~_ OFFICE September 20, 1997 Mark Spmer Assistant Fire Marshal, County of Albemarle Fire and Rescue Administration Division 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 Dear M~rk, On behalf of the Town of Scottsville, I would like to thank you for your time and expertise which you gave us on Tuesday. We have been working diligently to organize our town ogerations to function in a fair and consistent manner for all of our citizens, and we are grateful for the assistance of your deparrmenr~ Being a small town, our needs in the area of Fire Administration are few and infrequent; however, we feel k is of utmost importance to be prepared should a problem arise. As we discussed in our meeting, the Town is planning to train and certify our Building Official and Inspector, Paul Hostetler, in the area of Fire Inspection but would tike ro make an agreement with the Albemarle County Fire and Rescue Administration Division for Fire Marshal services. Our Town Attorney, Lindsay Dorrier, informs me that all the Town of Scottsvitle needs to do is to pass an ordinance which desi~nates the Fire Marshals of Albemarle County as having those same duties within our towll limits and thi~ ~ give you ju~'sd/ctiun to perform your duties legally here. Mr. Dottier is in the process of draffing that ordinance and will forward it to you for your review. Should th/s arrangement be agreeable to your depa~ [men~, our Council would be able to pass the ordinance at our next scheduled meeting on October 20, 1997. If you have any concerns about this or anything else, please do not hesitate to call me at the Town Office at 286-9267. - - Again, I thank you for your help. Sincerely, Sara Genthner, Town Admlni.qtmtive Official AN ORDINANCE APPOINTING THE ALBEMARLE FIRE MARSHAL AS THE FIRE MARSHAL FOR THE TOWN OF SCOTTSVtLLE WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle and the Town of S cottsville have reached an agreement concerning the appointment and the duties of the fire marshal for the Town of Scottsville; and WHEREAS, Section 15.1 - 20.3 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as mended, permits towns and countries to share the services of any person in the conduct of their governmental affairs; and WHEREAS, pursuant m Section 27-30 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the County of Albemarle has established the office of the County Fire Marshal; and WHEREAS, Section 9-1 er seq of the Code of Albemarle County codifies and sets forth the responsibilities and duties of the Albemarle County Fire Marshal and his assistants; and WHEREAS, it is in the best interests of the ~itizens of both the Town of Scottsville and the County of Albemarle to share the services of the Albemarle County Fire Marshal in the Town of Scottsville; and WHEREAS, the Town of Scottsville, pursuant to Section 27-30 of the Code of Virgin/a, 1950, as amended, intends to appoint a fire marshal for the Town of Scottsville, Virgima; and WHEREAS, the Agreement between the County of Albemarle and the Town of Scottsville, dated' , outlines the duties and responsibilities of the fire marshal in the corporate limits of the Town of Scottsville and is incorporated in this ordinance by reference; NOW THEREFORE, it is ordained that the Fire Marshal of Albemarle County be AGREEMENT BETWEEN COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE AND THE TOWN OF SCOTTSVILLE REGARDING FIRE MARSHAL The County of Albemarle, Commonwealth of Virginia, and the Town of Scottsville, Commonwealth of Virginia, hereby agree m the following: 1. Pursuant to Section 27~30 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, the Office of the Albemarle County Fire Marshall was established and Section 9-1 et seq of the Code of Albemarle County provides for the appointment of said fire marshal and his assistants. 2. Section 15.1-20.3 of the Code of Vkginia, 1950, as amended, provides that a county and a town may share the services of any officer or other employee in the conduct of their governmental affairs. 3.. The County of Albemarle and the Town of Scottsville agree tS utilize the services of the Albemarle County Fire Marshal and his assistants in investigations and other duties within the corporate limits of the Town of Scottsville. 4. In those fire investigations involving that portion of Scottsville located within the County of Fluvanna, the Town of Scottsville will seek the services of the Fluvanna County Sheriff's Department and the Virginia State Police for the conduct of investigations which would normally involve a local fire marshal. 5. The Town of Scottsville and the County of Albemarle agree to utilize the services of the Virginia State Police in the conduct-of arson investigations in the Town of Scottsville whenever such services are necessary and it is mutually agreeable among all of the parties. ~ea 38-1. Sec. 38-2. Sec. 38-3. Sec. 38-4. Sec. 38-5, Sec. 38-6. Sec. 38-7. Sec. 38-8. Sec. 38-9. Sec. 38-10. Sec. 38-tl. Sec. 38-12. Sec. 38-13. Sec. 38-14. Sec. 38-15. Sec. 38-16. Sec. 38-17. S. ec. 38-t8. Sec. 38-19. Sec. 38-20. Sec. 38-21. Sec. 38-22. Chapter 38 FII~E P~ON AND PROTECTION* Adoption of the Statewide Fire Prevention Code. Composition of fire department. Establishment of volunteer fire company. Operation of fire company, meetings, drills, powers. Fire marshal. Guard lines around fire areas. Interfering with frrefighters. Inspecting places of amusement. Inspection of premises. False fire alarm. Fire house regulations. Accumulation of combustible or flammable matter. Storage of powder. Storage of dynamite. Magazines for storing explosives. Fireworks. Defective chimney, roofs, stovepipe. Carrying an open flame into buildings. Carrying fire; deposit of ashes; s~orage of combustibles. Filling of motor vehicle tanks with gasoline while motors are rnnn/ng. Blasting or dynamiting within corporate limits. Burning flammable material; bonfires. *Cross references--Buildings and building regulations, ch. 22; smoking in theaters, § 58-32. State law references--Municipal regulation of the keeping of combustibles, Code of Virginia, § 15.1-14(6); guarding against danger from accidents by fire, Codeof Virginia, § 15.t-15(4); smoke detector~, Code of Virginia, § 15.1-29.9; explosive and inflammable sub- stances, fireworks, Code o£Virginia, § 18.1-865; fuel-burning equipment, Code of Virgihia, § 15.1-868: municipal regulation of the making of ~res, Code of V'~rgiaia, § 15.1-872: ~lecal f~re departments and fire companies, Code of Virginia, § 27-6.1 et seq.; local fire marshals, Code of Virginia, § 27-30 et seq.; relief for fxrefighters, Code of 'Virginia, § 27-39 et seq.; effect of Statewide Fire Prevention Code, Code of Virginia, § 27-97; exploaives, Code of Virginia, § $9.1-137 et seq.; ~reworks, Code of Virginia, § 59.1-142 et seq. Zoning references--Fire and safety requireraents, § 4.9.2; supplementary regulations for fire, ambulance, rescue squad, § 5.1.3; sale and]or storage of petroleum products including kerosene, gasoline, and heating oil, § 5. L12; fire protection, § 24.11.6. CD38:1 FIKE I~VENTION AND PR(YrEO~:ION Sec. 38-1. Adoption of the Statew'fde Fire Prevention Code. There ia hereby adopted and ia~a-pora~ as if fully aet out at le~,th in this seotion the Statewide Fire Prevention Ced~, also known as Volume 1I of the V'r~_'r~a Uniferm Statewide Building Code, as adopted and promulgated by the state board ofho,,~ing and wm~unity Cross r~erenee--.Buildin~s and buildin~ x~t*ulations, ch. 22. State law refe~-en~M--4~ption of Statewide Fire Prevention Code, Code of V'u~_'~ia, § 27-97; en£~-cemant of Fire Pm~mtion Code, Code of V'algnia, § 27-98. See, 38-2. Coml~dtton of fire department. The fire department of the town shall consist of the office~ ~./l members of ~he Cue company, and such officers and employees as shall be authorized by the council. (Code 1946. ~ ~,~) Cross reference 9fficer~ and employees generally, ~ 2-131 et seq. ~ :J~O. F~ablie~,-,ent Id'vol~mt~ ~ company. There shall be established in the t~w~ one volunteer fire company, which shall consist of net leas than 20 cittzen~ of the tOW~, and which comply ~hml! be formed in accordance with th~ laws of the s~at~ ,-J more particularly in accordance with Code ofV'v?',,~s. § 27-6.1 ~ seq. (Code 1946, § 15~) The volunteer ire compar~ provided for by ~ chapter shall operate a~d shall be clothed with such authority and perform such dui/es as provided for by the Charter and ordinances of the town, the laws of the state, and mare p~rticularly Code of Vh~'.i~, § 27-6.1 et se~ The coml~ny shall hold such meetings iLnd drills as provided for by ordinance, or by rile bylaws of the fire depar~ent, or the company's regtdations. (Code 1946, § 154) (a) Appointment; term. The town council shall appoint, at tho time o/'appoint/ng tixe other town officials mentioned in chapter 2, a fire marshal, who shah hold office at the pleasure of the council, for a term of two years. (b) County fire rnarsha/ des/gnated, The fire marshal of Albemarle County shall be aoOoint~od as the fire marshal for the town, and the fire marshal and his assistants shall have all of the powe~s, rights, duties and responsibilitie~ pursuant to Code of Vh'ginia, § 27-30 et se/l., arid the file marshal and his assistants shall be governed and l~,ulated by Ordinance No. 97-9(1) and cha~tee 9, p~'taining to/ire prevent/on, of the/~m~O oi~ ~ County of Albemarle. lru'ginia, which is hereby incorporated by reference within the corporate limits Of the town. CD38:3 FII~E PI~rENTION AND PROT~i~0N (a) The fire chief shall have the fight at any re/manable hour to ~r~m~ne i~to and ~ any l:~I/]ti~ Or pl~mi~e~ nO[ SI; that time ~eupied and used as s dwe]Jln_~ house for ss to c~nbusfible materhd ~ ~,r~mable conditions in any s~ch bui~rli-~ or (b) Whenever the c/fief shall find/n any such build/nE flammable con~fions, dangar~us to the safety of such he shall order the same to be removed or remedied by the owner or occup~ut ~f the dweRing or p .remise~_ ~tMn~s.?t~.h reasonable c~ne as m,y be ~ b~, tlie ~ef~ and upo~ f~iiure-of the owner or ocoupan~ to comply with the notice and remove and remedy the ~ubusfible substance and *~mm~ble wndit/~ns, he shall be gu/lty ora class 2 m/sdemeanor fur each offense. (Code 1946, § 162) Any person who shall, without knowl~lge of the exist~uco of a ~ turn in or ~ any ~ ~ tha fire departm~t ~ w~/n any way teumpers wlfll the fire ~ sy~ _b~m, or [mmk, destroy, disfigure or ,/~1~ any fire apparatus or equipment, shall be guilty of a class i misdemeanor. (C~de I.o46, § State law r~imilar }ro~Mons. C~e of ~r~i~_ia. § 18~-212. $~ ~IL F/re houa~ re~lt~s/on~ No per~on other than the members Of the fire department and the Of/con of the town shall enter the room in which is kept the engine and ~ apparatus bel~ff to the towu except by /nv/tati0n or perm/ssion of the of~co~ of the towv~ or m~mhers of the fire depax~anenL (Code t946, § 164) Sec~ 38-12. Aoaunulation of combustible or ~sMmable matte~ No person ~hall perm/t sha~n~, s~raw, ar ~uy otzar combus~Me any nacre or ~nd ~ ~fl~ ~ut Ms p~i~ ~ ~ ~ en~ n~h~ pmmi~. ~y ~n ~olafi~ ~y p~don ofth~ ~ sh~l ~ ~flty ora ~s 2 ~me~ar ~r ~eh ~afion theft Ea~ 24 ho~ such ~cles ~m~ ~r ~ ~e ~em s~ ~tu~ a sep~ ~en~, ~d ~ ~fion ~W the ~ w~l may ~ve ~e wmb~fible mater ~ at ~e ~e Of ~ pro~ CD35:5 PREVENTION AND PROTEGTION No person shall use any buiI,~-~ or premis ,es w~tm. the ~ (~ 1~, ~ ~) ~ ~ F~w~ ~hoM or ~ ~ ~d~..~ ~y o~ ~e ~ w~ ~ ~y ~ ~ ~y - ~ ~ ~ ~ h~ev~, shY'the ~ off sk~ ~ ~, ~ ~dles, ~ no~ m~ ~ $1,000.~ or impfi~nM f~ not ~ ~ ~ monks for ea~ ~ola~on {~e I~. ~ ~ en~ ~ ~ ~ ~y ~h~ p~ ~m ~; ~d no ~ s~l (b) ~y pe~on ~ola~ug ~y p~iou ~ ~ ~on ~ f~ e~h ~olafi~ ~h~ ~d ~ day ~ ~e sh~l a sep~ (~ ~6. ~ 170) ~b~ble matedE h sW~. ~y ~n ~o~ti~ ~y p~sMn of ~ of a cl~s 2 ~e~or for e~h ~ola~on (C~e 19~. ~ 1~1) c~s~ ~ssel, or de.it hot ~hes ~pt ~ me~ or o~ ~f~nt~. ~p ~ f~d~, she~oa~, sha~ or ~ ~ other ~b~ble a~a~c w a dwell~ ~ o~er house in ~M~ ~ ia ~]y made. (~e 1~6, ~ 172) CD38:7 Ms. Susan E. Thomas, Senior Plam~er Dept. of Planning and Community Development 401 Mclntire Road, Room 218 Charlotlesville. VA 22902-4596 Re: SP 97-1.1 January 23, 1998 Dear Sllsal~ I am writing to advise thc planning department that we would like to defer further heatings on our special use permil application for another sixty (60) days, We will advise you sooner if there are any cbanges before then. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions. Thank you. Sincerely, ~~ RECEI VED dfiN 2 8 1996 P!,.'.t~..qc! Der)t~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 7503 Citadel Drive College Park, Maryland 20740-3011 January 5, 1998 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Reference: SP 9%56 Angus Arrington To Whom It May Concern: Since the undersigned (owners of Parcel 75, Tax map 80 in the Rivanna Magisterial District) will he unable to attend the public hearings concerning the above referenced petition, we wish to register our STRONG objections to the request, As noted in your letter of Decemher 24, 1997, this is not a designated developmem area and the applicant already has been granted a zoning exemption. It was our understanding at the time of the previous hearing that the applicant would not ask for any further zoning exemptions. We were fearful that with "a foot in the door" the applicant would try to expand the business operations. And so he has. We object to the applicant's request for the following reasons: 1. Adverse effect on our property value. 2. Unsatisfactory noise level. 3. Increased traffic in the area. 4. Previous violations of the zoning code by the applicant. If you have any questions or need further information please feel free to contact us at (301) 474-6603. Yours truly, C. Norman W'~s Frances L. Willis Albemarle County Planning Commission Mr. Joseph Maney 4526 Deer Bonn Road Keswick, Virginia 22947 Martin Marietta Aggregates Eastern District 95.13 Hull Street Road, Suite A Richmond, Virginia 23236-1475 Telephone (804) 67'4-9517 Scott D. Alexander Vice President--General Manager December 16, 1997 Mr. Montgomery Bird Woods The Cabin 2075 Arrowhead Farm Lane Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 Dear Mr. Woods, Thank you for advising Martin Marietta of your concerns regarding U.S. Cellular's efforts to locate a cellular antenna at our Red Hill quarry. I regret that you have not been properly informed as to our company's position on this matter. U.S. Cellular had been instructed from the onset that Martin Marietta would not support their efforts if the community was-opposed to the antenna. We place a high value on our relationship with those that live and work around our operations. It is for this reason that U. S. Cellular was officially notified that we would noI grant their request tO locate their equipment on our property and that they would have to go elsewhere. If there is talk in the community to the contrary, I assure you that it is not tree. Please feel free to contact me if you would like to discuss this any further. Very Truly Yours, Scott D. Alexander( Cc: Mr. David Rojin Mr. David Bass