Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-02-12 I'l N,\I '~ :0() P.M. I'I'BI,~L,Mt'~ 12 199~ RO()M 2-1-1. (:t)t'X'I'Y ()11 R:I. I'lL '11 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. 10a 10B, 12. 13. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Crnsent Agenda (on next sheet). Public hearing on request from Lochallen Land Trust to amend service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for Limited Sewer Service to Existing Structures on Tax Map 58, Parcels 6B & 6C located between Rt 250 W (Ivy Rd) & Rt 853 (AllendaleDr) just S of Glenaire Sub& Public hearing on an ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code by amending Chapter 1, General Provisions, to require a $20 fee for returned checks received for any payment other than for taxes and by amending Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, to require a $20 fee for returned checks received for the payment of taxes. ZMA-96-21. Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust (Owner), The Peabody School (Applicant) (Signs #65 & $66). Public Hearing on a request to amend the dvlp plan for Mill Creek PUD as established with ZMA-85-29, to change a 5 ac portion from Industrial to Commercial to allow dvlp of pvt.school by SUP. Property on Stoney Ridge Rd on N sd of Southern Parkway adj to Carolina Bldrs. (Property is designated for industrial Service in Urban Neighborhood 4 by the Comprehensive Plan.) TM76M1,P15. Scottsville Dist. SP-96-46. Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust (Owner), The Peabody School (Applicant). Public Hearing on a request to establish private school with ultimate enrollment of 140 students. For description of property, see ZMA-96-21 above. SP-9641. Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot (Signs #13,14). Public Hearing on a request to establish outdoor storage & display of mobile homes for sale on approx 7.9 ac zoned HC in addition to existing auto sales on property located approx 1/4 mi S of Rt 649 on W sd of Rt 29 N. TM32,P43 is zoned RA, HC & EC; TM32,P43A is zoned HC & EC. (This action is related to SDP-96-097, Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Center Major Site Plan Amendment which provides for outdoor storage & display of mobile homes.) (This site is recommended for Regional Service in the Hollymead Community:) Rivanna Dist. Discussion: Revised Resolution in Support of Regional Competitiveness Program in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District (deferred from February 5, 1997). Discussion: Request from the League of Women Voters to participate in their public forum on reversion (deferred from February 5, 1997). Approval of Minutes: November 15, 1995 and January 2, 1997. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD, Adjourn to February 13, 1997, 7:00 P.M., The Senior Center, for Joint Meeting with Charlottesville City Council and the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority. I FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Appropriation: General Fund - Towe Park, $7,690 (Form #96050). 5.2 Appropriation: Aduk Education Fund Balance, $4,316.60 (Form #96051). 5.3 Appropriation: Education - Carryover Funds, $120,091.52 (Form #96052). 5.4 Adopt resolution to change street names in Phases 2-C and 3-A of Redfields Subdivision. FOR INFORMATION: 5.5 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for January 7 and January 28, 1997. 5.6 Copy of application filed with the State Corporation Commission by Appalachian Power Company to implement advanced time of day rate experiment. 5.7 Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority for December 19, 1996 5.8 Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority for December 16, 1996. TO: FROM: DATE: RE: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM Robert W. Tucker, jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and t Ella W. Carey. CMC, Cle~ February 19. 1997 Board Actions of February 12, 1997 At its meeting on February 12, 1997, fire Board of Supervisors took the following actions: Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. 1'he meeting was called to order at 7:04 p.m., by the Chairmmr. (All Board members were present.) Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Dr. John Ashley, a resident of 1940 Stillhouse Road, Charlottesville, 22901. said he signed the petition for the City to revert back to town status. He believes the current separation of the Charlottesville and Albemarle communities is not in the best interest of most citizens. He believes the principal, separation is around the issue of schools, and he thinks the schools need to be consolidated. He asked the Board to modify its current position, fire the consultants and lawyers who have been hired and find a way to come together with City Council to bring this community together and make it a unified, integrated commtmlty. He asked the Board to assume the mantle of leadership and sit down with City Council. He thinks that is tire Board's responsibility. Item No. 5.1. Appropriation: General Fund - Towe Park, $7,690 (Form #96050). Approved. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Adult Education Fund Balance, $4,316.60 (Form #96051). Approved. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.3. Appropriation: Education - Carryover Funds. $120.091.52 (Form #96052). Approved, Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.4. Adopt resolution to change street names in Phases 2-C and 3-A of Redfields Subdivision. Adopted the attadxed resolution. Memo To: Robert W. Tucker. Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: February 19. 1997 Page 2 Agenda Item No. 6. Public hearing on request from Lochallen Land Trust to amend service area botmdaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for Limited Sewer Service to Existing Structures on Tax Map 58. Parcels 6B & 6C located between Rt 250 W (Ivy Rd) & Rt 853 (Allendale Dr )iust S of Glenaire Subd. Amended the service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority for limited sewer service to existing structures for two apartment buildings (total of nine rental tmlts only) located on Tax Map 58, Parcels 6B & 6C (by a vote of 6:0). Connection to the Crozet interceptor will be provided by private sewer lines sized to serve the nine rental units only and will utilize cleanouts in lieu of manholes. The Board clarified the reason it was taldng this action since this is a precedent. The Board is going on the advice of the Health Department. the County's Water Resonrces Manager and the Planning staff that this is a precedent only for moderate cost rental milts, meeting a need identified in the County's housing plan. and posing an immediate health threat to occupants, neighbors and the watershed, with no alternatives except pump and haul. The appllcaut will pay all the hookup charges as wonld a new entity. Agenda Item No. 7. Public heating on an ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code by amending Chapter 1. General Provisions, to require a $20 fee for returned checks received for any payment other than for taxes and by amending Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, to require a $20 fee for returned checks received for the payment of taxes. Adopted the attached ordinauce to amend the Albemarle Cotmty Code by amending Chapter 1. General Provisions, to require a $20 fee for returned chedcs received for any payment other than for taxes and by amending Chapter 8, Finauce mad Taxation. to require a $20 fee for returned chedcs received for the payment of taxes (by a vote of 6:0). Agenda Item No. 8. ZMA-96-21. Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust (Owner), The Peabody School (Applicant) (Signs #65 & $66). Public Hearing on a request to amend the dvip plan for Mill Creek PUD as established with ZMA-85-29. to chauge a 5 ac portion from Industrial to Commercial to allow dvlp of pvt school by SUP. Property on Stoney Ridge Rd on N sd of Southern Parl~vay adi to Carolina Bldrs. (Property is designated for Industrial Service in Urban Neighborhood 4 by the Comprehensive Plan.) TM76M1,P15. Scottsville Dist. Approved ZMA-96-21. as proffered (copy attached) (by a vote of 5:0) ). Agenda Item No. 9. SP-96-46. Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust (Owner), The Peabody School (Applicant). Public Hearing on a request to establish private school with ultimate enrollment of 140 students. For description of property, see ZMA-96-21 above. Approved SP~96-46 subject to the following condition recommended by the Planning Commission (by a vote of 5:0): 1. The school shall be limited to a maximum of 140 students, Memo To: Robert W. Tucke~. Jr. V. Wayne CiIimberg Date: February I9, I997 Page 3 Agenda Item No. 10. SP-96-41. Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot (Signs #13,14). Public Hearing on a request to establish outdoor storage & display of mobile homes for sale on approx 7.9 ac zoned HC in addition to existing auto sales on property located approx 1/4 mi S of Rt 649 on W sd of Rt 29 N. TM32,P43 is zoned RA, HC & EC; TM32,P43A is zoned HC & EC. (This action is related to SDP-96-097, Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Center Major Site Plan Amendment which provides for outdoor storage & display of mobile homes.) (This site is recormnended for Regional Service in the Hollymead Commtmity.) Rivarma Dist. Deferred SP-96-41 until February 19. 1997, to get a legal opinion from the County Attorney regarding reasonable use of the site, and requested a transcript of the minutes of the Architectural Review Board on this item/by a vote of 6:0). Agenda Item No. 10a. Discussion: Revised Resolution in Support of Regional Competitiveness Program in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District (deferred from February 5, 1997). Set a public heating for March 5. 1997. at I0:00 a.m. Mrs. Thomas suggested that William Shelton from the Virginia Department of Housing and Conmtunity Development attend the public heating to respond to questions about the Program. She also suggested that citizens be given the opportunity to provide written comments on the Cotmty's web page. Executive Session: - At 9:50 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, that the Board go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code of Virginia under Subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters concerning reversion. Mr. Perkins seconded the motion. The Board reconvened into open session at 10:34 P.m. Agenda Item No. 10b. Discussion: Request from the League of Women Voters to participate in their public forum on reversion (deferred from February 5, 1997). VOTED to participate in the public fortun on reversion (by a vote of 5:0). Agenda Item No. 12. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Mrs. Thomas said it will be important for a decision to be reached quickly after the public hearing tomorrow concerning solid waste options and the Ivy Landfffi. Mrs. Thomas said the MPO will take a tour of the Highway Department Research Council on April 14. If anyone ~vants to come. let her kxrow. Memo To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: February 19, 1997 Page 4 Agenda Item No. 13. Adjourn to February I3, 1997, 7:00 P.M., The Senior Center, for Joint Meeting with Charlottesville City Council and the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority. At 10:30 p.m., the Board adjourned to February 13, 1997, 7:00 p.m., at The Senior Center in Room C, for a joint meetlng with City Council and RSWA to take public coraments on the GBB report regarding the Ivy Landfill /ewc Attachments (6) cc: Richard E. Huff, II Roxanne White Kevin C. Castner Larry Davis Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Bruce Woodzell Richard Wood Jan Sprinkle File APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW YES NO GENERAL/TOWE FEMA FUNDS FOR D~d~LAGE FROM HURICANE FP~AN. 96050 X X PARK EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1420071002600700 TOWE PARK REPAIRS & MAINT. $1,510.00 110007101212000 PARKS & REC. OVERTIME WAGES 3,115.00 1100071012600700 PARKS & REC. REPAIRS & MAINT. 3,065.00 TOTAL S7,690.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2100024000240419 2100033000330106 2420024000240419 2420033000330106 GENERAL-STATE-FEMA GENERAL-FEDERAL-FEMA TOWE PARK-STATE-FEMA TOWE PARK-FEDERAL-FEMA $1,112.00 5,068.00 272.00 1,238.00 TOTAL $7,690.00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR FINANCE SIGNATURE DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96051 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED YES NO X FUND ADULT EDUC. PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADULT EDUCATION FUND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1311563321601300 1311563322132100 1311563322210000 1311563322601300 1211563323550100 1311563326580000 INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS PART TIME WAGES-TEACHER FICA INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS TRAVEL-MELEAGE MISC. EXPENSES $816.30 1,382.94 114.56 719.25 569.26 714.29 TOTAL S4~316.60 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2311551000510100 ADULT EDUC. FUND BALANCE $4,316.60 TOTAL $4,316.60 REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINAIqCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NLTMBER 96052 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRAi~SFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND SCHOOL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ALLOCATION OF CARRYOVER FUNDS TO SCHOOL-BASED ACCOUNTS. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1220161101601300 1220261101601300 1220361101601300 1220461101601300 1220561101601300 1220761101601300 12209611£1601300 1221061101601300 1221161101601300 1221261101601300 1221361101601300 1221~61101601300 1221561101601300 1221661101601300 1225161101601300 1225261101601300 1225361101601300 t225461101601300 1225561101601300 1230161101601300 1230261101601300 1230361101601300 BROADUS WOOD ED/REC SUPPLIES S738.70 BROWNSVILLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 4,964.83 CROZET ED/REC SUPPLIES 8,013.59 GREER ED/REC SUPPLIES 1,174.82 HOLLYMEAD ED/REC SUPPLIES 10,965.50 RED HILL ED/REC SUPPLIES 4,779.00 SCOTTSVILLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 1,938.58 STONE ROBINSON ED/REC SUPPLIES 10,780.20 STONY POINT ED/REC SUPPLIES 250.64 WOODBROOK ED/REC SUPPLIES 2,119.59 YANCEY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,543.49 CALE ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,271.29 MURRAY ED/REC SUPPLIES 2,288.72 AGNOR HURT ED/REC SUPPLIES 6,182.64 BURLEY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,852.94 HENLEY ED/REC SUPPLIES !3~408.00 JOUETT ED/REC SUPPLIES 5,848.45 WALTON ED/REC SUPPLIES 1,568.32 SUTHERLAlqD ED/REC SUPPLIES 12596.7 ALBEMARLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 7191.46 WESTERN ALBEMARLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 10699.47 MURRAY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3914.59 TOTAL $120,091.52 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2200051000510100 SCHOOL FI/ND BALANCE $120,091.52 TOTAL S120,091.52 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINDAxTCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE DATE RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the final subdivision plat for Phase 2-C and Phase 3-A of the Kedfidds Subdivision was recently approved, and the plat assigned two street names -- ''Devon court" and "Wood Duck Lane" -- which duplicate existing street names; and WHEREAS, Section 18-39(h) of the Subdivision Ordinance provides that the names of proposed streets shall not duplicate the names of existing streets either in the County or the City of Charlottesville; and WHEREAS. altemarive street names have been proposed that do not duplicate existing street names. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors approves the change of the street name "Devon Court" to "Devon Spring Court," and approves the change of the street name "Wood Duck Lane" to "Canvas Back Drive," on such plat; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that staff is directed to coordinate modification of the plat with the developer and to assure that the modified plat is recorded. I. Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors, of Albemarle County, Virginia, by vote of six to zero on February 12, 1997. irk, Board of County~rvisors ORDINANCE NO. 97-1 (I) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER I, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND CHAPTER g. FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the Cotmty of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 1. General Provisions is hereby amended and reordained by adding section 1-9, Fee for returned ched<s, and that Chapter 8. Finance and Taxation, Article 1, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 8-1,2. Penalty for returned checks, as follows: Sec. l-9 Fee for rettmted ched<s Any person who utters_ publishes or passes a check or draft for any sum due, other than for payment of taxes, wtdch is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been closed, shall pay a fee of twenty dollars ($20.00). Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. State law reference - Authority for fee, Code of Virginia § 15.1-29.4. Sec. 8-1.2 Penalty and fee for returned checks If any check tendered for any tax due under this chapter is not paid by the bani< on which it is drawn, the taxpayer for whom such check was tendered shall remain liable for the payment of the tax the same as if such check had not been tendered. If such person referred to in paragraph (a) of this section fails to pay the amount shown on the face of the check within five (5, days after notice of such nonpayment has been mailed to the taxpayer by the director of finance, a penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) shall be added to the tax due. Such penalty shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. © Any person who utters, publishes or passes a check or draft for payment of tmxes, which is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been dosed, shall pay a,fee of twenty dollars ($20.003. Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. State law references - Authority for liability of taxpayer and penalty, Code of Virginia § 58. I - 12; authority for fee. Code of Virginia § 15.1~29.4. I, Ella W. CareT, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, con'ect copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of slx to zero, at a regular meeting held on February 12. 1997. ~ler[, Board of Co'mW lgu¢ervisors PROFFER FORM ZMA # Original Proffer .... Amended Proffer (Amendmeni ~.-.~'-~T' Tax Map Parcel(s) ~ 5. m~/ Acres !.o be rezoned from Pursuant to Sec[ion 33.3 of tho Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance; the owner, or its duly ,~uthorized agent, hereby vol~tmUy pro~e~ the ~nditi~ns listed below which shall be applied ~o [h~ properly, if rezoned. These cond[[ion~ are pmffared as a part of requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (t) the razoning [ts~l~ gives rise to the need for the condiUons; and [2) sucl~ condiiions h~v~ a reasonab~ relation to ihs re2anlng requested. Uses provided for in S¢~on 20.4 ] [I) of the Albemarle County Zoning Orciin~ncc ~s it exists on · ]anua,Ty 15. 1997. a copy attached, sh~ll not be p~rmiitc& ~:i~n~utee of All Owners P~inted Nam~ o! ~ Owna~s Date Proper Power 20.3.2 20.4 20,4.1 20.4.2 Accessory uses and structures including home occupa- tion, Class A (reference 5.2) and storage buildings. 10. Homes for developmentally disabled persons (reference 5.1.7). BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit, provided that no separate application shall be required for any such use included in the original PUD rezoning petition: 1. Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference 5.1.6). 2. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.9~. 3. Rest home, nursing home, convalescent hdme, orphanage or similar institution (reference 5.1.13). Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmisson lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances (reference 5.1.12). 5. Home occupation, Class B (reference 5.2). 6. Churches. (Added 9-2-81) Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade. (Added 11-7-84) PERMITTED USES - COMMERCIAL/SERVICE Within areas approved as commercial/service on the appli- cation plan, uses permitted shall be as follows: BY RIGHT Uses permitted by right in section 22.0, commercial, 2. Uses permitted by right in section 23.0, commercial office CO. BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted only by special use perm~ provided that no separate application shall be required for an? such use included in the original PUD rezoning petition: Uses permitted by special use permit in section 22.0, commercial.. C-1. 2. Uses permitted by special use permit in section 23.0, commercial office, CO. -117- (Supp. ~24, 11-7-84~ 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.2.1 CO~ERCIAL - C-1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED C-1 districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning' map to permit select%d retail sales, service and public use ~stahlishments which are primarily oriented to central business concentrations. It is intended that C-1 districts be estab- lished only within the urban area, communities and villages in the comprehensive plan. (Amended 9-9-92) PERMITTED USES BY RIGHT The following uses shall be permitted in any C-1 districn subject to the requirements and limitations of these regulations. The zoning administrator, after consultation with the director of 'planning and other appropriate officials, may permit as a use by righ%, a use not specifically permitted; provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by right in general character and more specifically, similar in terms of locational requirements, operational character- istics, visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning administrator's decision shall be as generally provided in section 34.0. a. The following retail sales and service establishments: 1. Antique, gift, jewelry, notion and craft shops. 2. Clothing, apparel and shoe shops. 3. Department snore. 4. Drug store, pharmacy. 5. Florist. 6. Food and grocery snores including such specialty shops as bakery, candy, milk dispensary and wine and cheese shops. 7. Furniture and home appliances (sales and service). g. Hardware store. 9. Musical instruments. 10. Newsstands, magazines, pipe and tobacco shops. 11. Optical goods. 12. Photographic goods. -145- (Supp. #68, 9-9-92) be The 13. Visual and audio appliances. 14. Sporting goods. 15. Retail nurseries and greenhouses. following services and public establishments: 1. Administrative, professional offices. 2. Barber, beauty shops. 3. Churches, cemeteries. 4. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic 5.1.2) . 5. Financial institutions. 6. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.9). 7. Funeral homes. 8. Health spas. 9. Indoor theaters. 10. Laundries, dry cleaners. (reference 11. 12 · 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Laundromat (provided that an attendant shall be on duty at all hours during operation). Libraries, museums. Nurseries, day care centers (reference 5.1.6). Eating establishments. Tailor, seamstress. Automobile service stations (reference 5.1.20). Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities ex- cluding tower strucnures and including poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines, pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service Authority. (Amended 5-12-93) -146- (Supp. ~72, 5-12-93) 22.2.2 18. Public uses and buildings including temporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices, parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, state or federal agencies ~referenee 31.2.5); public water and sewer ~rans- m~ssion, main or trunk lines, treatment facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated ~y the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (reference 31.2.5; 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-9) 19. Temporary construction uses (reference 5.1.1). 20. Dwellings (reference 5.1.21). 21. Medical cen~er. 22. Automobile, truck repair shop excluding body shop. (Added 6-3-81; Amended 9-9-92) 23. 24. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes ( referene~ 5.8 ) . 3-5-6) Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93) (Added 25. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95) BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT Commercial recreation establishments including but not limited uo amusement centers, bowling alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83) Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related ~owers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and ~elay towers, substations and appurtenances. 3. Hospitals. 4. Fast food restaurant. 5. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11). Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in section 18.0, residential - R-15~ in compliance with regulations set forth therein~ and such conditLons as may be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4. 7. Hotels, motels mnd inns. Motor vehicle sales and rental in communities and the urban area as designated in the comprehensive plan. (Added 6-1-831 9. Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade. (Added 11-7-4) -147- (Supp. #80, 10-11-95) 22.3 10. Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses.' (Added 11-7-84; Amended 9-9-92) 11. Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic washes. (Added 6-14-g9) 12. Body shop. (Added 9-9-92) ADDITIONAL REQUIR~4ENTS In addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section ll.0, commercial districts, generally, shall apply within all C-1 districts. (Amended 3-17-8!; 7-10-85) -147.1- (Supp. #68, 9-9-92 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance Ella W. Carey, CMC, Cle~ February 21, 1997 Board Actions of February 12, 1997 At its meeting on February 12. 1997, We Board of Supervisors took the following actions: IternNo. 5.1. Appropriation: GeneralFund- Towe Park, $7,690 (Form g96050). Approved. Attachedis the signed form Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Adult Education Fund Balance, $4,316,60 (Form #9605 t) Approved. Attached is the signed form. Item No. 5.3. Appropriation: Education ~ Carryover Funds, $120,091.52 (Form #96052). Approved. Attached is the signed form. Agenda Item No. 7. Public hearing on an ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code by amending Chapter 1, General Provisions, to requke a $20 fee for returned checks received for any paymanT other than for taxes and by mending Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, to requke a $20 fee for returned checks received for the payment of taxes. Adopted the attached ordinance to amend the Albemarle County Code by amending Chap[er 1, General Provisions, to require a $20 fee for zemmed checks received for any payment other than for taxes and by mending Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, to require a $20 fee for returned cheeks received for the payment of taxes. /ewe Attachments (3) cc: Richard E. Huff, II Roxaane W. White Robert Wakers Kevin Castner Jackson Zimmerman Pat Mullaney APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NI/MBER 96050 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED YES NO X FUND GENERAL/TOWE PARK PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FEMA FUNDS FOR DAMAGE FROM HURICANE FRA/q. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT i~20071002600700 TOWE PARK REPAIRS & MAINT. $1,510.00 110007101212000 PARKS & REC. OVERTIME WAGES 3,115.00 1100071012600700 PARKS & REC. REPAIRS & MAINT. 3,065.00 TOTAL $7,690.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2100024000240419 2100033000330106 2420024000240419 2420033000330106 GENERAL-STATE-FEMA GENERAL-FEDER_AL-FEMA TOWE PARK-STATE-FEMA TOWE PARK-FEDERAL-PEMA S1,t12.00 5,068.00 272.00 1,238.00 TOTAL $7,690.00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR FINANCE SIGNATURE DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96051 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND ADULT EDUC. PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADULT EDUCATION FIIND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1311563321601300 1311563322132100 1311563322210000 1311563322601300 1311563323550100 1311563326580000 INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS PART TIME WAGES-TEACHER FICA INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS TP~AVEL-MELEAGE MISC. EXPENSES $816.30 1,382.9~ 11~~56 719.25 569.26 714.29 TOTAL $4,316.60 REVENUE DESCRIPTION A-MOUNT 2311551000510100 ADULT EDUC. FI/ND BALANCE S4,316.60 TOTAL $4,316.60 REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR S I GNATURE DATE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - General Fund / Towe Park SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of appropriation #96050 in the amount of $7,690 replacing funds expended for Hurricane Fran cleanup and repairs. STAFF CONTACT~S): Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Breeden AGENDA DATE: February 12, 1997 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND.: Application was made to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for damages resulting from Hurricane Fran. DISCUSSION: The primary damage incurred by the County was in the Parks, Greenwood Community Center, and general cleanup of debris. Expenses for the cleanup and repairs were paid from the Parks & Recreation budget and reimbursement from FEMA in the amount of $8,179 has been received. This amount represents $7,690 for damages with the remainder to cover administrative cost for collecting and submitting the claim. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of an appropriation in the amount of $7,690 to replace the funds expended from Park's operating budget as detailed on attached form #96050. 97.033 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96052 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND SCHOOL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ALLOCATION OF CARRYOVER FUNDS TO SCHOOL-BASED ACCOUNTS. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1220161101601300 1220261101601300 1220361101601300- 1220461101601300 1220561101601300 1220761101601300 1220961101601300 1221061101601300 1221161101601300 1221261101601300 1221361101601300 1221461101601300 1221561101601300 1221661101601300 1225161101601300 1225261101601300 1225361101601300 1225461101601300 1225561101601300 1230161101601300 i230261101601309 1230361101601300 BROADUS WOOD ED/REC SUPPLIES S738.70 BROWNSVILLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 4,964.83 CROZET ED/REC SUPPLIES 8,013.59 GREER ED/REC SUPPLIES 1~174.82 HOLLYMEAD ED/REC SUPPLIES 10,965.50 RED HILL ED/REC SUPPLIES 4,779.00 SCOTTSVILLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 1,938.58 STONE ROBINSON ED/REC SUPPLIES 10,780.20 STONY POINT ED/REC SUPPLIES 250.64 WOODBROOK ED/HEC SUPPLIES 2,119.59 YANCEY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,543.49 CALE ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,271.29 MURRAY ED/REC SUPPLIES 2,288.72 AGNOR RI/RT ED/REC SUPPLIES 6,182.64 BURLEY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3,852.94 HENLEY ED/REC SUPPLIES 13,408.00 JOUETT ED/REC SUPPLIES 5,848.45 WALTON ED/REC SUPPLIES 1,568.32 SUTHERLAND ED/REC SUPPLIES 12596.7 ALBEMARLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 7191.46 WESTERiqALBEMARLE ED/REC SUPPLIES 10699.47 MURRAY ED/REC SUPPLIES 3914.59 TOTAL $120,091.52 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2200051000510100 SCHOOL FUND BALANCE $120,091.52 TOTAL $120,091.52 REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR S I GNATURE DATE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Appropriation - Adult Education SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST.: Request approval of appropriation #96051 in the amount of $4,316.60 reappropdating the Adult Education Grant Fund Balance from FY 95/96. Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Castner, Breeden AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER: February 12, 1997 ACTION: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFJ;:)RMATION: REVIEWED BY: At its meeting on January 27, 1997. the School Board approved the re-appropriation of $4,316.80 from the Ad[ Education Grant Fund Balance. The Adult Education Grant fund balance includes Regional Adult Education Spec alist in the amount of $569 Regional Litera¢-y Coordinating Committee in the amount of $714.29. Adult Basic Education (ABE) in the of $2,216.75 and General Adult Education (GEA) in the amount of $816.30. The funds will be used to support education classes, GED instruction and family literacy initiatives. Staff recommends approval of the appropriation in the amount of $4~31&60 as detailed on form #98051 DATE: TO: FROM: RE: ~L~EMARL~- COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Memorandum January 28, 1997 Robert W.~er, Jr., County Executive Kevin Ca, Division Superintendent Request for Appropriation At its meeting on January 27, 1997, the School Board approved the following appropriations: Re-appropriation o~ $4,316.60 from the Adult Education Grant Fund Balance. The Adult Education Grant fund balance includes Regional Adult Education Specialist in the amolran of $569.26, Regional Literacy Coordinating Committee in the amount of $714,29, Adult Basic Education (ABE) in the amount of $2,216,75 and General Adult Education (GEA) in the amount of $816.30. The funds will be used to support adult education classes, GED instruction and family literacy initiatives. c Transfer of $127,984.52 to the schools from the fund balance for carryover funds and distribution of buildin~ rental fees collected. School Board Policy DB-E allows for school-based acco~mn~s ~o carry forward no more than 10% of their unexpended funds from one fiscal year to another. The total school-based carryover from FY95-96 equals $120,091.52. School Board Policy KG-R stipulates that 40% of building rental fees that are collected, are to be distributed to the rented facility to be used toward equipmen~ replacement, ks of June 30, 1996, a total amount of $19,732.50 had been collected fIom building rental fees. Of this amounn, $7,893,00 (40%) should be transferred to the schools per School Board Policy. The funds will be received and disbursed as shown on the attachment. It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the approprlanlon ordinance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed above. Attachment xc: Melvin Breeden Ella Carey ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS RE-APPROPRIATION - ADL~T EDUCATION GRANT FI/ND 2-3115-51000-510100 Appropriation Fund Balance Expenditure: 1-3115-63321-601300 -63322-132100 -63322-210000 -63322-601300 -63323-550100 -63326-580000 Instructional Materials Part-time Wages-Teacher FICA Instructional Materials Travel-Mileage Miscellaneous Expense $4~316.60 $816.30 $1,382.94 $114.56 $719.25 $569.26 $714.29 S4,316.60 RE~NI/E: 2-2000-51000-510i00 EXPENDITURE: 1-2201-61101-601300 1-2202-61101-601300 1-2203-61101-601300 1-2~04-61101-601300 1-2205-61101-605300 1-2207-61101-601300 1-2209-61101-801300 1-2210-6t101-601300 1-2211-61101-601300 1-2212-61101-601300 1-2213-61101-601300 1-2214-61101-601300 1-2215-61101-60t300 1-2216-8t101-601300 1-2251-61101-601300 1-2252-61101-601300 1-2253-61101-601300 1-2254-61101-601300 1-2255-61101-60t300 1-2301-61101-601300 1-2302-61101~601300 1-2303-61101-601300 CARRY OVER FI/ND BALANCE Transfer Fund Balance-Carry Over Broadus Wood Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Brownsville Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Crozet Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Greer Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Hollymead Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Red Hill Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies S~ottsville ElemlEd/Rec Supplies Stone-Robinson Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Stony Point Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Woodbrook Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Yancey Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Cale Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Murray Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Agnor Hurt Elem-Ed/Rec Supplies Burley Middle-Ed/Rec Supplies Henley Middle-Ed/Rec Supplies Jouett Middle-Ed/Rec Supplies Walton Middle-Ed/Rec Supplies Sutherland Middle-Ed/Rec Supplies Albemarle High-Ed/Rec Supplies Western Albemarle High-Ed Rec Supplies Murray ~igh-Ed/Rec Supplies $120 091.52 S738.70 $4,964.83 $8,013.59 $1,174.82 $10,965.50 $4,779.00 $1,938.58 $10 780.20 ~250.64 ~2~119.59 $3~543.49 $3 271.29 $2~288.72 $6,182.64 $3,852.94 $13,408.00 $5 848.45 $1~568.32 $t2,596.70 $7~191.46 $10,699.47 S3,914.5) Total $120,091.52 _FUND BALANCE - BUILDING RENTAL FEE DISTRIBUTION REVENUE 2-2000-51000-510100 EXPEAVDITURE 1-2201-61101-800101 1-2203-61101-800101 1-22C5-61!01-800101 1-2209-61101-800101 1-2212-61101-800101 1-2214-61101-800101 1-2215-61101-800101 1-2216-61101-800101 1-2251-61101-800101 1-2252-61101-800101 1-2253-61101-800101 1-2254-61101-800101 1-2301-61101-800101 1-2302-61101-800101 Transfer Fund Balance-Building Rental Broadus Wood Mach/Ec/uip-Replacement CrozeE Mach/Equip-Replacemen5 Hollymead Mach/Equipment-Replacement Scottsville Mach/Equip-Replacement Woodbrook Mach/Equip-Replacement Cale Mach/Equip-Replacemen5 Murray Elem Mach/Equip-Replacement Agnor-Hurt Mach/Equip-Replacemen5 Burley Mach/Equip-Replacement Henley Mach/Equip-Replacemen~ Jouett Mach/Ec/uip-Replacemen5 Walton Mach/Equlpment-Replacement AHS Mach/Equip-Replacement WAIqS Mach/EquiprReplacemenu Total $7,893.00 $28.00 $4.00 $3O.O0 $6O.00 $146.00 ~96.00 ~10.00 $697.80 $158.40 S187.20 $1,788.00 $2!.00 S4,642.60 $24.00 $7,893.00 COUNTY OF ALBEMARt EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of appropriation #96052 in the amount of $120,091.52 allocating carryover funds to school-based accounts. STAFF CONTACT,S): Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Castner, Breeden AGENDA DATE: February 12, 1997 ACTION: CONSENTAGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes £ BACKGROUND: At its meeting on January 27, 1997, the School Board approved the transfer of $120.091.52 to the schools from the fund balance for carryover funds and distribution of building rental fees collected. DISCUSSION: School Board Policy DB-E allows for school-based accounts to carry forward no more than 10% of their unexpended funds from one fiscal year to another. The total school-based carryover from FY 95/96 equals $120,091.52. School Board Policy KG-R stipulates that 40% of building rental fees that are collected are to be distributed to the rented facility to be used toward equipment replacement. As of June 30, '1996, a total amount of $19,732.50 had been collected from building rental fees. Of this amount, $7,893.00 (40%) should be transferred to the schools per School Board Policy. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the appropriation in the amount of $120,091.52 as detailed on form #96052. 97.034 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Street Name Changes SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request for Board approval of road name changes in new sections of Redtields subdivision STAFF CONTACT(Si: Messrs. Tucker, Cilimber~l AGENDA DATE: February 12~ 1997 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: Staff recently approved a final subdivision plat for Phase 2-C and Phase 3-A of Redflelds subdivision which assigned two road names duplicating existing road names. Subsequent to this final approval, staff contacted the developer and requested alternate names for these two roads which are not duplicative of any existing names. The developer, through his representative, has submitted the two names recommended below (see attached letter). DISCUSSION: Section 18-39(h) of the Subdivision Ordinance provMes that once a final plat has been approved, approval of the Board is required to change the name of a proposed read. Once the Board has approved the change proposed, staff va'Ii coordinate modification of the plat with the developer and re-record the plat to ensure that the change is reflected in the Court's records. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt a resolution to change the road names =Devon Court" and ~Wood Duck Lane", located in Redflelds SubdMslon to =Devon Spring Cou~ and ~Canvas Back Drive" respectively and; grant authority to staffto implement these read name changes. RESOLUTION WHEREAS. the final subdivision plat for Phase 2-C and Phase 3-A of the Redfields Subdivision was recently approved, and the plat assigned two street names -- "Devon Court" and "Wood Dude Lane" -- which duplicate existing street names: and WHEREAS, section 18-39(hl of the Subdivision Ordinance provides that the names of proposed streets shall not duplicate the names of existing streets either in the County or the City of Charlottesville: and WHEREAS, alternative street names have been proposed that do not duplicate existing street names. NOW, THEREFORE, it is resolved that the Board of Supervisors approves the change of the street name "Devon Court" to "Devon Spring Court." and approves the change of the street name "Wood Duck Lane" to "Canvas Back Drive," on such plat. IT IS FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is directed to coordinate modification of the plat with the developer and to assure that the modified plat is recorded. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of SupervTsors of Albemarle County by vote of __ to __ on ., 1997. Cleric. Board of County Supervisors .j- THE COX COMPANY Phnn~rs · L~n~scape Archlt~ds Civi' Eni~necrs, Urban Des,gner~ January 6, 1997 IqI~2,10~NDUM Dep.rtment of Plnnnln~ Th~ C~ Company CC~ Mr, Gay{on Beigl,t~, Filo P~ovious Namo: Boron Court R0viooJ Nnmo: D~von 8prin~ Court R~viuo] Na,nc: Canva~ Bush Drive 804 343-5023 INTERNET: quinan~woodsroger s.cora WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE[ A~orneys a~ Law January 30, 1997 In re: Application of Appalachian Power Company to Implement Advanced Time of Day Rate Experiment; Case No. PUE960363 Dear Madam or Sir: On behalf of Appalachian Power Company ("Company"), and pursuant to paragraph (9) of the Virginia State Corporation Commission's Order entered on January 23, 1997, in this proceeding, we serve you with a copy of that Order. Very truly yours, WOODS, ROGERS & HAZLEGROVE, P.L.C. AG/cmc Enclosure M#376638 823 East Main Sh-eet Suite 1200, Richmond Virgima 2.3219 804 343-5020 Fax 804 343-502I lnternet- mail@woodsrogers,com Oflflic~ also in Roanok~ Charlottesv#le and Danville ~:Sgtma COlVIlvIONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA s'r,,~ co~o,~.'~o~, ~o,,~ss~o,,, 9 ? 01 3 0 0 5 1 AT RICHMOND, JANUARY 23, 1997 APPLICATION OF APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY To implement advanced time of day rate experiment CASE NO. ORDER PRESCRIBING NOTICE PUE960363 On December 19, 1996, Appalachian Power Company ("APCO" or · the Company") filed an application with the State Corporation Commission ("Commission~') for approval of the Company's proposecl Schedule ATOD, advanced time of day rates, on an experimental basis. Schedule ATOD is proposed to be implemented on an experimental basis for new load for interruptible customers wit/~ operating characteristics that allow flexibility in energy consumption. Service under Schedule ATOD will be available new commercial and industrial customers with a normal maximum electrical capacity of at commercial and industrial normal maximum electrical least 5,000 kW and to existing cusuomers who increase their existing capacity by at least 5,000 kW. APCO anticipaues that this experimenu will offer cusuomers the ability to control consumption patterns and maximize the efficiency of energy uses. The ATOD rate will provide the customer with four pricing periods, each with increasing energy charges. The determination of the pricing periods will be based upon projected hourly American Electric Power ("AEP") system internal load as a percentage of the AEP all time internal peak load. APCO will provide the customer with specific pricing period information for each hour of the following day, no later than four o'clock p.m. local time each day. Pricing tier information will be provided for a minimum twenty-four period. APCO wishes to experiment with ATOD pricing and will evaluate the feasibility of expanding this pricing option. NOW, the Commission, upon consideration of the foregoing, is of the oplnion and finds that APCO's application should be docketed; that the Company should provide notice to the public of its proposed program; and that a period of time where~n interested persons may comment or request a hearing from the application should be established. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: (1) The Company's application shall be docketed and assigned Case No. PUE960363. (2) On or before February 3, 1997, APCO shall make copmes of its application and supporting information available for public inspection during regular hours at all of its offices in its service territory where customer bills may be paid. (3) within five (5) business days after receipt of a written request for a copy of the application, the Company shall serve upon any person making such a request, a copy of its application and all relevant materials now or hereafter filed i~ support thereof with the Commission. Requests for copies of the application shall be served upon the Company through its counsel, Michael J. Quinan, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & ~azlegrove, P.L.C., 823 East Main Street, Suite 1200, Richmond, Virginia 23219. (4) On or before March 7, 1997, any person desiring to comment on the Company's application or request a hearing herein shall file with the Clerk of the Commission an original and fifteen (15) copies of such comments or requesus as provided irz Rule 5:12 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure ("Rules") referring to Case No. PUE960363, and shall on the same daue serve a copy on APCO through its counsel, Michael J. Quinan, Esquire at the address listed above. Requests for hearing must set forth specific reasons why the Commission should grant a hearing in this proceeding. (5) If requested as provided in {4) above, this application may be set for a public hearing; otherwise the Commission may act on the papers filed in this case without convening a hearing. (6) Procedure Rule 6:4 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and is modified and supplemented as follows: ao APCO shall serve answers to interrogatories or requests for the production of documents within ten (10) days after receipt of the interrogatory request; bo Objections to specific questions shall be served within five (5) days after the receipt of the interrogatory request; Participants in the proceeding may agree on alternate schedules for serving answers and objections. (7) The Commission Staff shall Investigate the reasonableness of APCO's application and file a report with the Clerk of the Commission on or before March 28, 1997, shall serve a copy of the same upon counsel for APCO and all other parties in this proceeding. (8) On or before February 10, 1997, APCO shall complete therein and classified publication of the following notice once in newspapers of general circulation throughout its territory: NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC OF AN APPLICATION BY APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY FOR APPROVAL OF EXPERIMENTAL TIME OF DAY RATE SCHEDULE CASE NO. PUE960363 On December 19, 1996, Appalachian Power Company ("APCO" or "the Company") filed an application with the State Corporation Commission ("Commission") for approval of the Company's proposed Schedule ATOD, advanced time of day rates, on an experimental basis. Schedule ATOD is proposed to be implemented on an experimental basis for new load for interruptible customers with operating characteristics that allow flexibility in energy consumption. Service under Schedule ATOD will be available to new commercial and industrial customers with a normal maximum electrical capacity of at least 5,000 kW and to existing commercial and industrial customers who increase their existing normal maximum electrical capacity by at least 5,000 kW. APCO anticipates that this experiment will offer customers the ability to control consumption patterns and maximize the efficiency of energy uses. A copy of APCO'S application is available for public! inspection during regular business hours at all APCO offices in its service area where customer bills may be paid and from 8:15 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, at the State Corporation Commission's Documen= Control Center located on the first floor of the Tyler Building, 1300 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219. Within five (5) business days of receipt of a written request for a copy of its application, APCO shall serve upon any interested person making such request a copy of the application and all relevant materials now or hereafter filed with the Commission in support thereof. Requests for copies of the 5 application shall be served upon APCO through its counsel, Michael J. Quinan, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.L.C., 823 East Main Street, Suite 1200, Richmond, Virginia 23219. Any interested person who wishes to file comments or a request for hearing shall file with the Commission an originaI and fifteen (15) copies of the comments or request, at the addresses set forth below, on or before March 7, 1997, and shall on the same date serve a copy of such request or comments upon counsel for APCO at the address listed above. Requests for hearing must set forth specific reasons why the Commission should grant a hearing in this proceeding and shall refer to Case No. PUE960363. If no requests for hearing are received, the Commission may act on the papers field in this case without convening a hearing. Ail written communications to the Commission regarding this proceeding shall refer to Case No. PUE960363 and shall be directed to William J. Bridge, Clerk of the State Corporation Commission, c/o Document Control Center, P.O. Box 2118, Richmond, Virginia 23218. APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY (9) On or before February 3, 1997, APCO shall serve a copy of this order on the chairman of the board of supervlsors of each county and on the mayor or manager of each city and town or equivalent officials in which the Company provides service. Service on these officials shall be made by first-class mail to the customary place of business or residence of the person served. (10) the prescribed notice and proof of its delivery or serving of copies of this order as required in ordering paragraph (8) and (9) . On or before March 28, 1997, APCO shall file proof of AN ATTESTED COPY hereof shall be sent by the Clerk of the Commission to: Michael J. Quinan, Esquire, Woods, Rogers & Hazlegrove, P.L.C., 823 East Main Street, Suite 1200, Richmond, Virginia 23219; Edward L. Petrini, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Division of Consumer Counsel, 900 East Main Street, Richmond, Virginia 23219; and the Commission's Divisions of Economics and Finance, and Public Utility Energy Regulation, Accounting. 7 P COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Lochallen Land Trust- Request for Jurisdicaonal Area Designation for Umited Service (Sewer) to Existing Structure(s) SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Public Hearing for a Request to Consider Limited Service (Sewer) to Existing Structures on Tax Map 58, Parcels 6B & 6C. AGENDA DATE: February 12, 1997 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT/Si: Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: / BACKGROUND: The applicant, Lochaiten Land Trust, requests Jurisdictional Area designation for Limited Service (Sewer) to Existing Structures (See Attachment A). The request is for service to nine rental units (13 bedrooms), of which six units are Iocatedin one building and three units are located in a second building. The two buildings located on Tax Map 58 Parcels 6B & 6C are between Route 250 West (Ivy Roadl and Route 853 (Allendale Drive), just south of Glenaire Subdivision. These parcels are 1.035 acres and .574 acres respectively. The pamels are not within a designated Development Area, and are located within the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir waterehed (See Attachment B). The applicant has stated in a letter dated November 18, 1996 that the two apartment units have been located on this property for appro~dmately 30 years and that the septic fields that have served these two units over that time have failed ' (See Attachment C). The applicant further stated that these systems are presently incapable of serving even one rental unit. There is insufficient land on the existing parcels to locate new septic fields. Attempts have been made to locate a sepfic field to sewe these units on adjacent properties; however, either the adjacent property owners are unwilling to grant an easement or there is insufficient land area available on the adjacent properties to locate a new septic field. Also, the applicant has explored the possibility of installing an alternative type system on the existing parcels; however, again, adequate land area is not available. The owner is currently using the pump and haul method to remove the waste. In a letter dated December 20. 1996 from Gary Rice of the Thomas Jefferson Health District, the information regarding the condition of the septic fields and the infeasibility of providing an alternative system was contirmed. Also, the Thomas Jefferson Health District has indicated that the best alternative to serve the property is a connection to the Crozet Interceptor (See Attachment D). A senneddon to the Crozet interceptor would require a duplex pump station with approximately 1,000 feet of force main and another 1,D00 feet of gravity line. The applicant has stated that this would be a pdvate system and cleanouta would be used in lieu of manholes to discourage any additional connections to the system, The applicant has indicated that ail the necessary easements can be obtained. DISCUSSION In prepam~n for the Board of Supewisors February 12, 1997 consideration of this request, staff has provided a summary of all requests to amend the ACSA jurisdictional area map to allow a connection to the Crozet Interceptor (See Table I) and comments from David Hirschman, Water Resources Manager, concerning this request (See Attachment E). In the attached memorandum, Mr. Hirschman states that he supports connection to the Crozet Interceptor for the property in questionas the best technical and long-term solution to a public health and safety problem. Summary of Requests to Amend the ACSA Jurisdictional Area Map to Allow Connection to the Crozet Interceptor Table I Applicant Date TM/Parcels Action Comments Christian Aid Mission 7/13/83 TM59, Parcel 23G Denied Request not consistent with goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. No verification of endangerment to public heaith and safety. Sieg/Ki~ey & Javor 7/f 4/84 TM 59, Parcels Approved Board establishes policy regarding 23C, 23 B, 23 (B) sewer service in the Rt. 250VV area by 1 and 23 F allowing those properties with pre- (Portions) existing zoning, which could be served by gravity flow and which drain away fromthe S. Fork Rivanna Watershed to be designated for sewer service. Albemarle County-Area 3/21/89 TM 55 &56- Approved Umited service to existing atruotums north of Route 240 in multiple pamels only. Crozet Ridge Restaurant 9F//92 TM 57, Parcel 31A Approved Odgioal septic system washed away in 1969 flood. The size of the site would not accommodate a new septic field and reserve area. Service approved to the existing structure, existing use and existing capac'~ only. Charlottesville Oil 9/7/94 TM 59, Parcels 77 Approved Septic field failed. The size of the site & 80B would not accommodate new septic field and reserve area. Verification was made that this was a public health and safety issue. Cafe No Pmbiom- 7/7/95 TM 57, Parcel 31A Approved Approved amendment of the ACSA (Previously referred to as jurisdictional designation for the the Ridge Restaurant) restaurant formerly known as the Ridge to allow sewer service to an associated employee apartment above the restaurant. Virginia Department of 12/6/95 TM 73, 1~64 Right- Approved Existing mineral oil sewage system Transbertation-1~4 Rest of-Way failed. Limited Service to existing rest Stops stop struotures only. Rivanna Solid Waste 12/6/95 TM 73, Parcel28 Approved Approved as a solution to safely Facility-Ivy Landfill transport leachate. Christian Aid Miseion 8/7/g6 TM 59, Parcel 23G Not taken to Public PropertylocatedwlthinS. ForkRivanna Hearing. Watershed. Nocimumatances had changed since the 1983 request. The subject property for this request is not within a Development Area. The Comprehensive Plan provides the following concerning sewer service in the Rural Area: General Principle: Utilization of central water and/of sewer &yst~t~ Of the extension of public water or sewer into the Rural Area is ~trongly discouraged except in cases where public health and safety are at issue. RecommendaUon: Only allow changes in jurisdictional areas outside of designated Development Area boundaries in cases where the propeK3/ is: (f) adjacent to existing lines; and (2) public health or sefety is endangered" (p. lf2). Recommendation: Prohibit access to the Crezet Interceptor between the boundary of the Croze! Community and the Urban Area (p. f f2). W~ the applicant's septic system backing up through the distribution box, the request for jurisdictional area designation seems to meet the health and safety requirement. The subject request is located approximately 2,000 feet from the Crozet Interceptor, therefore, the request does not satisfy the adjacent existing line requirement. RECOMMENDATION: This is an unique and potentially precedent-setting request. A connection to the Crozet sewer for a residential property deserves parliculariy careful consideration in that, while not fully meeting the Comprehensive Plan intent for such se~ce in the Rural Area and connection to the Crozet Interceptor, it does.address an existing waste disposal problem and apparent health and safety problem within the South Fork Reservoir Rivanna River watershed. The applicant has actively sought altemative solutions to provide a replacement system for the apartment units without success. The Thomas Jefferson Health District and the Water Resources Manager have indicated that the best alternative to serve the property is a connection to the Crczet lntemeptor. Also, staff believes that the effect on the intent of the Comprehensive Plan of an amendment to the jurisdictional area map to allow public sewer service limited to that necessary to address this problem is not compromised since no additional development will result from such change. For these reasons staff recommends amendment ofthe jurisdiclionalarea mapto allow for Limit Service (Sewer) to Existing Structures for two (2) apartment buildings (total of 9 rental units) located on Tax Map 58, Parcels 68 & 6C. cc: Kurt Gleeckner Art Petrini BE Brant David Hirschman Gary Rice APPLICATION TO AMEND TIlE SERVICE AUTHORITY JURISDICTIONAL AREAS co~- o~ 'l~ ATTACHtqENT A ty [-/'x marie Depirtment of Planning and Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 229024596 804 296-5823 JURISDICTIONAL AREA DESIGNATION REQUESTED: [] Water and Sewer [] Water Only [] Water Only to Existing Structure(s) '~ Limited Service (Describe in Justification below) '~xtO¢~ PROPERTY LOCATION (Address) Tax Map(s)/Parcel Number(s): CURRENT SERVICE AREA DESIGNATION (If any): [] Water and Sewer [] Water Only [] Water Only to Existing Structures [] Limited Service JUSTIFICATION FOR REQUEST: 4-~ P~ ~2>~. ~ .? ~. For Staff Use Only DATE SUBMITTED: //-2,~-f,~ . D.AyE $130.FEE PAID: //]//,9//. ,>2~//./~p/~ ~'~. PROPERTY IS LOCATED (Check Appropriate): [] Inside or []Outside a Growlh Area? [] Adjacent to SAJA? [] Inside or [] Outside a Water-Supply Watershed? [] Adjacent to a Orowth Area? Location and distance of water/sewer line proposed to provide service REQUEST FOR AMENDMENT ADOPTED: [] Yes [] No Date of Action SL 42 74 -' .... ~ ".'-----~,r. ',,~'.~---~.. SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT SECTION 58 GLOECKNER ENGINEERING/SURVEYING, INC Engineers - Surveyors - Land Planners Kun M, GloeckneL RE.. EL.S. President IATTACHMENT C I I~uv Z § November 18, 1996 Ms. Claudia Paine Planning and Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Re: Lochallen Residential Units Septic Field Failures Dear Ms. Paine, I have been asked by my clients (Lochallen Land Trust) who are the owners of the above referenced property to partition the Board of Supervisors to extend the jurisdictional area to allow one single private connection to the Crozet sanitary sewer interceptor. The request is made based on hardship.:'-The units on the property have been in place for over 28 years and at this time, both septic fields have failed. The owner, for health reasons, has been using the pump and haul method to relieve the health hazard. In the meantime efforts have been made for many months to seek solution replacement systems and adjacent lands to receive new distribution fields. Neither systems or sufficient land is available. The Crozet interceptor is approximately 2,000 linear feet from the failed systems. To reach the receiving manhole would require approximately 2,000 linear feet of sewer line. Because of topography, a pump station will be required along with 1,000 feet of 3 inch force mail] and then the rest would be gravity (with cleanouts/no manholes) to the receiving manhole at the dry bridge area. The enclosed are copies of letters from the Health Department which are strongly in support of this course of action to alleviate the health hazard. I look forward to appearing before the Board of Supervisors as soon as possible in order to proceed with the remedy. Ms. Claudia Paine November 18, 1996 Page 2 Thank you for your assistance in his matter. Sincerely, k ~ Kurt M. Gloeckner, P.E., P.L.S. President KMG:tpm co: Doug Caton Connie Dunn IATTACHMENT D I COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA In Cooperation with the State Department of Health Office of Environmental Health Phone [804) 972-6259 FAX [804) 972-4310 Thomas Jefferson Health D~strict 1138 Roae Hill Drive P. O, Box 7546 Charlottesville, Virginia 22906 December 20, 1996 Ken Baker Albemarle County Planning DepmUnent 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Baker: As a follow up to a recent site yislt on December 18, 1996, to the property located at the intersection of Rt. 676 and Rt. 250, I am writing to reiterate previous concerns with regard to the malfunction of the existing dralnfield serving the residences on the property as outlined in a letter ~o Mr. Kart Ctloeekner from Dwayne Roadcap, Environmental Health Specialist Senior. Mr. Roadcap and I, as well as other health department staff, have carefully examined the premises in hopes finding suitable area to install conventional dralnfield ditches to alleviate the problem, but can not find sufficient ar~a to meet the Sewage Handling and Disposal regulations. The possibility of installing "unconventional" sewage disposal systems (i.e,, Low Pressure Distribution, Peat Moss system, sand filtration, etc.) has also been given serious consideration, but minimum requirements needed to propose the use and installation of these systems do not seem to be a viable solution. Mr. Tom Ashton, American Manufacturing, has proposed a preliminary plan to install a drip irrigation system incorporating sand filtration in addition to drip lines being installed. However the proposal calls for the installation of drip irrigation lines on top of existing dralnfield that has already failed. This Depaxhnent does not feel that this is a desirable option for consideration, in addition to the fact that the cost for his proposed installation exceeds the estimated costs for possibly constructing a sewer line to connect to a nearby public sewer manhole, if available. With this in mind, this department would like to express its support for consideration that Management Services Corporation be allowed to connect these apmtment units to public sewer. It is our feeling that this is the best ~ solution, given the costa entailed in addressing needed repairs and the desperate need for a ~ means for proper sewage disposal for the res dentes on lh~s property, If no viable means of repair for this property can be found, it may be necessary to 6rastieally reduce or even eliminate use of theses units as apartments, Should you need to discuss this matter or have any other questions, please feel free to contact me at the Charlottesville-Albemarle Health Department (972-6259). Sincerely, O. Stephen Rice Senior Field Advisor Kurt Gloeckner Dwayne Roadeap, SEHS Connie Dunn, Management Services Corporation COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ken Baker - Senior Planner David Hirschman - Water Resources Manager(~,~ January 13, 1997 Lochallen Land Trust Jurisdictional Area Request for Sewer Similar requests in the past have revolved around the issues of: (1) remedying a public health and safety concern, and (2) allowing the continued use of property when state local or state policies may limit or eliminate that use in-response to a wastewater problem. This was the reasoning in both the Caf6 No Problem and VDOT Rest Area situations. The Lochallen case is similar. Prior to tile temporary pump and haul, the situation posed an on-site public health and safety problem in addition to discharging partially treated sewage into a tributary stream to the South Fork Rivanna R~servoir. As documented by Gary Rices' 12/20/96 letter to Ken Baker, the tlealth Department has not found any feasible on-site alternatives. In cases such as this, the properly owner must make a capital investment to correct the problem. For the sake of this investment and for reservoir watershed objectives, the chosen solution should represent the best feasible long-term solution, if alternative on-site options pose too high a risk due to site conditions, theu the best option is often hooking up to the public system where proximity to a sewer line makes this feasible. As stated in the Health Department letter, this is the ease with the Lochallen request. At this point, the Couuty has received this type of request for residential (Lochallen), institutional /VDOT Rest Area), and commercial [Caf6 No Problem) properties within the reservoir watershed area. Noue of these cases have conformed to all pertiueot Compreheosive Plan recommendations (e.g., adjacent to an existing liue, access to Crozet Interceptor). We have found that with these real-world situatious, we cannot allow uusafe conditions to prevail iu the reservoir watershed or promote partial or temporary solutions. At the same time, we are compelled to consider land use implications. One thing we know for certain is that we have not heard the last of this type of case. Perhaps the Lochallen request is our cue to modify the Comprehensive Plan language to make it more realistic while still upholding the land use objectives. In the meantime, I support connection to the Crozet Interceptor for the property in question as the best technical, long-term solution to a public health and safety problem. DJH~g Copy: Jack Kelsey, Chief of Engineering COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: LoehalIen Land Trust- Request for Surisdietional Area Designation for Limited Sex-vice (Sewer) to Existing Structure(s) SUBJE CT/PROPOSAL/RE CUE ST: Request Proceed;nE to Public Heuring to Consider Limited Service to Existing Structure(s) for Tax Map 58, Parcels 6B & 6C STAFF CONTACT(S}: Mesars. Tucker, Cil/mberg AGENDA DATE: January 2, 1997 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: A~'rACHMENTS: REV/EWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: The applicant, Lochallen Land Trust, requests Jurisdictional Area designation for Limit Service (Sewer) to Existing Sauctures (See AO~lmaent A). The request is for service to nine rental units (13 bedrooms), of which six uuits are [ueated in one building and three units are located in a second building. The two buildings located on Tax Map 58 Parcels 6B & 6C are between Route 250 West (Ivy Road) and Route 853 (Allendale Drive), just south of Olermire Subdivision. These parcels are 1.035 acres and .574 acres respectively. The parcels are not within a designated Development Area, and are located within the South Fork Rivaona River Reservo/r watershe& The applicant has stated in a letter dated November 18, 1996 that the two apartment units have been located on this property for approximately 30 years and that the septic fields that have served these two units over that time have failed (See Attachment B). The applicant further stated that these systems are presently incapable of serving even one rental unit. There is immfficient land on the existing parcels to locate new septic fields. Attempts have been made to locate a septic field to serve these units on adjacent properties; however, either the adjacent property owners are unwilling to grant an easement or there is insufficient land area available on the adjacent properties to locate a new septic field. Also, the apphcant has explored the possib//ity of installing an alternative lype system en the exisfingparcels; however, again, adequate land area is not available. The owner is currently using the pump and haul method m remove the waste. Iu a conversadon with Gary Rice of the Thomas Jefferson Health District, the information regarding the eendifion of the septic fields and the/nfeasibility of providing an alternative system was confirmed. Also, the Thomas Jefferson Health District has indicated that the best alternative to serve the property is a connection to the Crozct Interceptor (See Attachment C). A connection to the Crozet interceptor would require a duplex pump station with approximately 1,000 feet of force main and another 1,000 feet of gravity line. The applicant has stated that this would be a private system and cleanouts would be used in lieu of manholes to discourage any edd/fional connections to the system. The eppl/cant has indicated that al/the necessm3 easements can be obtained. DISCUSSION: The subject property is not within a Development Area. The Comprehensive Plan provides the following concerning sewer service in the Rural Area: General Principle: Utilization of central water and/or sewer systems or the extension of public water or sewer into the Rural Area is strongly discouraged except in cases where public health and safety are at issue Recommendation: On& allow changes in jurtsdic~ional areas outside of designated Development Area boundaries in cases where the property is: (1) adjacent to existing lines; and (2) public health or safety is endangered" (p. 112), Recommendation: Prohibit access to the Crozet Interceptor between the boundary qf the Crozet Community and the Urban Area (p.~29. With the applicant's septic system back/ng up through the distribution box, the request for jurisdictional area designation seems to meet 804 296-5823 Tax Map(S)/Parcel s Rwc AR ^ ~U Wate~ ~d Sewer' ~ Waier Only to Exist~g Structures [] Water Only []: Limited Service For Staff Use Onl~_~ DATE SUBMITTED. //_ ~ :5--- '~' ' ...... , ~,,~,,:._..~-_' .7~ I~A.'T.'.E..$1:3~).FEE PAID- /~/"2;i/ -~,5 ~ hside. °r UOmside. a:Or°~hMea? ~ Adj~ent. to SMA~ P P provide se~me ~Q~EST FOR No Date of Action GLOECKNER ENGINEERING/SURVEYING. INC. Engineers - Surveyors - Land Planners Kurt M. Gloeckner. RE.. ELS. President November 18, 1996 Ms. Claudia Paine Planning and Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Re: Lochallen Residential Units Septic Field Failures Dear Ms. Paine, I have been asked by my clients (Lochallen Land Trust) who are the owners of the above referenced property to partition the Board of Supervisors to extend the jurisdictional area to allow one single private connection to the Crozet sanitary sewer interceptor. The request is made based on hardship. The units on the property have been in place for over 28 years and at this time, both septic fields have failed. The owner, for health reasons, has been using the pump and haul method to relieve the health hazard. In the meantime efforts have been made for many months to seek solution replacement systems and adjacent lands to receive new distribution fields. Neither systems or sufficient land is available. The Crozet interceptor is approximately 2,000 linear feet from the failed systems. To reach the receiving manhole would require approximately 2,000 linear feet of sewer line. Because of topography, a pump station will be required along with 1,000 feet of 3 inch force main and then the rest would be gravity (with cleanouts/no manholes) to the receiving manhole at the dry bridge area. The enclosed are copies of letters from the Health Department which~are strongly in support of this course of action to alleviate the health hazard. I look forward to appearing before the Board of Supervisors as soon as possible in order to proceed with the remedy. 2246 Ivy Road. Suite 11 · Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 · Tel: (804 971-1591 · Fax: (804) 293-7612 Ms. Claudia Paine November 18, 1996 Page 2 Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Sincerely, k { Kurt M. Gloeckner, P.~.., P.L.S. President KMG: tpm cc: Doug Caton Connie Dunn I~ Cooperation with the Stats Deparb~ent of Heal~ ~lce ol Environment Health ~e (8~) ~72~259 FAX (~) 972~31D 8049724~10 THOMAS JEFFERSON HEALTF DISTRICT P.02 COMMONWEALTH of VIRqINIA:: Thomas Jefferson Health District 113~ Rose Hill Drive R O. Box 7546 Charlonesvilb, Virginia 2291~ December 20, 1996 Ken Baker Albemarle County Plann'mg Deparmaem 401 M¢Intire Road Charlottesville, YA 22901 Dear Mn Baker: As a follow up to a recent site visit on December 18, 1996, to the property located at the intersection of Rt_ 676 and gt. 250, I am writing to reiterate previous concerns with regard to the malfunction of the existing dralrdietd serving the residences on the property as outlined in a letter to Mr. Kurt Oloeckner from Dwayne Roadeap, 13nvironmental Health Specialist Senior. Mr. Roadcap and I, as well as other health department staff, have carefully examined the premises in hopes finding suitable area to install conventional drainfield ditches to alleviate the problem, but can not find sugr~cient area to meet the Sewage Handling and Disposal regulations. The possibility ofimtalling "unconventional" sewage disposal systems (Le., Low Pressure Distribution, Peat Moss system, sand filtration, etc.) has also been given serious consideration, but mifftmum requirements needed to propose the use and installation of these systems do not seem to be a viable solution. Mr. Tom Ashton, Americma Manufacturing, has proposed a preliminary plan to install a drip irrigation system incorporating sand filtration in addition to drip lines being installed. However the proposal calls for the installation of drip irrigation lines on top of existing drainfield that has alreadv failed. This Department does not feel that this is a desirable option for consideration, in addition to the fact that the cost for his proposed installation exceeds the estimated costs for possibly constructing a sewer line to connect to a nearby public sewer manhole, if available, With this in mind, this department would like to express its support for consideration that Management Services Corporation be allowed to connect these aparmaent units to public sewer. It is our feeling that this is the best viable solution, given the costs entailed in addressing needed repairs and the desperate need for a ~ means for proper sewage disposal for the residences on this property, If no viable mear~s of repair for this property can be found, it may be necessary t~ ~'~stically r~duce or ~van eliminat~ use of theses units as ~partmants. Should you need to disouss this matter or have any other questions, please £~el ~ee to contact me at the Charlottesville-Albemarle I~alth Deparanent (972-6259). Sincgrely, O, Stephen Rice Sen~or Field Advisor Kurt Olo¢ckner Dwayn~ Roadcap, SEHS Connie Duma, Management Services Corporation ALBEMARLE COUNTY 42 74 SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT I'ATTACHMENT D I 59 SECTION 58 To: TO WHOM ADDRESSED From: Ella Washington Coxey, Clerk, CMC Subject: Ordinance Adopted by Board on Febmary 12, 1997 [}at~: February 25, 1997 Attached for your use is a copy of an ordinance which was adopted by the Board on February 12, 1997: (1) An ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 1, General provisions, to require a $20 fee for returned chedcs received for any payment other than for taxes and by amending Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, to require a $20 fee for returned chedcs received for the payment of taxes. /EWC Attachment (1) cc: Stephen Helvin Melvin Breeden Robert Walters, Jr. Larry Davis Municipal Code ORDINANCE NO. 97-I I~ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER I. GENERAL PROVISIONS AND CHAPTER 8- FINANCE AND TAXATION ARTICLE L IN GENERAL BE IT ORDAINED by fire Board of Super~sors of the County of Albemarle. Virginia, that Chapter I, General Provisions is hereby amended and reordalned by adding section 1-9. Fee for returned ched<s, and that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation. Article I. In General, is hereby amended and reordalned by amending section 8-1.2. Penalty for returned checks, as follows: Sec. 1-9 Fee for returned checks Any person who utters, publishes or passes a check or draft for any sum due. other than for payment of taxes, which is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been dosed, shall pay a fee of twenty dollars ($20.00). Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. State law reference - Authority for fee. Code of Virginia § 15. I-29.4. Sec 8-1.2 Penalty and fee for returned checks (a) If any check tendered for any tax due under this chapter is not paid by the bank on which it is drawn_ the taxpayer for whom such check wa~ tendered shall remain liable for the payment of the tax the same as if such check had not been tendered, (b) If such person referred to in paragaph (a) of this section falls to pay the amount shown on the face of the check within five (5) days after notice of such nonpayment has been mailed to the taxpayer by the director of finance, a penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) shall be added to the tax due. Such penalty shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. © Any person who utters, publishes or passes a check or draft for payment of taxes, which is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been dosed. shall pay a fee of twenty dollars ($20.001,. Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. State law references - Authority for liability of taxpayer and penalty, Code of Virginia § 58.1-12: authority for fee, Code of Virginia § 15.1-29.4. I. Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the £orego'mg writing is a true. correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virg4nia, by a vote of six to zero, at a regular meeting held on February 12. 1997 er <, Board of County?upervisors / / COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Set Public Hearing to Amend Chapter 1 General Provisions and Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation of the Albemarle County Code SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request a public hearing to be set to amend the above Albemarle County Code sections to establish a $20.00 service fee on all returned checks tendered to the County. STAFF CONTACTIS}: Meesm. Tucker, Huff, Breeden BACKGROUND: AGENDA DATE: January2,1997 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: ATFACHMENTS: ,/~ ~ R V,E. D BY 'I Se~on 8-12 of the Albemarle County Code currently imposes a penalty of $25.00 for returned checks tendered for payment of taxes. There is currently no provision in the County Code for imposing a fee for returned checks received for any other purpose. DISCUSSION: VVhile the majodty of checks received by the County are for taxes, we are experiencing increased problems with returned checks for other activities. This is likely due to the increase in fees charged for various activities such as Parks and Recreation programs, after school programs, school lunches, etc. The proposed amendments would provide for a $20.00 service tee on all checks; the $25.00 penalty would apply in addition to this service fee if the check was in payment of taxes and the taxpayer fails to remit payment within 5 days after notification. Due to the staff time involved to contact the person who issued the return check and if necessary, reverse transactfons and take legal action, the fee and penalty would appear to be appropriate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that a public hearing be set to amend the Albemarle County Code imposing this additional service fee. 96.232 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER i, GENERAL PROVISIONS AND CHAPTER 8, FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 1. General Provisions is hereby amended and reordained by adding section 1-9, Fee for returned ched<s, and that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, Article i, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 8-1.2. Penalty for returned checks, as follows: Sec. 1-9 Fee for returned checks Any verson who utters, publishes or passes a check or draft for any sum due, other than for Davment of taxes, which is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been dosed, shall pay a fee of twenty dollars ($20.00). Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees l~rovided by law. State law reference - Authority for fee. Code of Virginia § 15.1-29.4. Sec. 8-1.2 Penalty and fee_ for returned checks (a) If any check rendered for any tax due tmder this chapter is not paid by the bank on which it is drawn, the taxpayer for whom such check was tendered shall remain liable for the payment of the tax the same as if such check had not been tendered. (b) If such person referred to in r)ara~raDh (a) of this section fails to pay the amount shown on the face of the check within five (5) days after notice of such nonpayment has been mailed by ~c~tiflcd m mgi~Cemd mail to the taxpayer by the director of finance, a penalty of twenty-five dollars ($25.00) shall be added to the tax due. Such penalty shall be in addition to any and all other penalties .and fees provided by law. ( c ) Any r)erson who utters, publishes or passes a checl, or draft for payment of taxes, which is subsequently returned for insufficient funds or because there is no account or the account has been dosed, shall pay a fee of twenty dollars ($20.00). Such fee shall be in addition to any and all other penalties and fees provided by law. State law references - Authority for liability of taxpayer and penalty, Code of Virgima § 58.1-12; authority for fee, Code of Virginia § 15.1-29.4. STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONPLICT OF INTERESTS ACT TRANSACTIONAL DISCLOSURE STATEMENT for Officers and Employees of Local Government [Section 2.1-639.14 (E) ] 2. 3. 4. 5. Name: Title: Transaction: ~ -9~-A~ ~ g/~9~-=;~ m,== Nature of Personal Interest Affected by Transaction: e I declare that: I am disqualifying myself from participating in this transaction and request that this fact be recorded in the appropriate public records for a period of five years. January 9, 1997 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & CornmuniW Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virgirfta 22902-4596 (804} 296-$823 Hunter E. Craig, Trustee Mill Creek Industrial Land Tr P 13 Box 615 Charlottesville, VA 22906 ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust SDP 96-113 Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan Dear Mr. Craig: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 7, 1997 took the following actions regarding the above-noted items: ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust - Recommended approval, by a vote of 6-1. The applicant is to develop proffers as discussed at the Planning Commission meeting prior to the Board meeting of February 12, 1997. SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust- Unanimously recommended approval subject to the following condition: 1 The school shall be limited to a maximum of 140 students. The Commission also approved a modification of Section 5.8 for the use of temporary non-residential mobile homes. SDP 96-113 Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan - Unanimously deferred to February 18, 1997 in order to allow the Board of Supervisors to take action on ZMA-96~21 and SP 96-46. Page 2 January 9, 1997 Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on FEBRUARY12. 1997. 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 schedule hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, William D. Fritz Senior Planner ce: Ella Carey Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley Harriet D. Kaplan W. Thomas Muncaster ~RONTEINE TEST PROF,=ER FORM Original Proffer Amended Proffer ZMA ff ¢6-z/... Tax Map Parco(s) ~,¢9 Acres Io be rezoned from Pursuant to See. lion 23,3 of th,', Albemarle Courtly Zontng Ordinance, tile owner, or Its: ~.aly authorized agen[, hereby voluntarily pro,ri'ars lite conditions listed below whlcb shall be applied to the properly, i~ rezone& Ti)ese condflions nm proffered as a ~ar[ of ibm requested rezonin; and it is agreed thai: ('t) the rezoning ilsel[ gives rise to lhe need for the conditions; arcJ (2) such conditdons hav~ a reasonable relation [o lhe razonlng requesied Uses provided for in Sec4on 20.4,1 (1) of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance ~ it exists on ]anuoxy 15, 1997, ~ copy a~chcd, sh~ll not be p~rmittcd. ~i,~al[~'lee or All Owners P~in'~eO ~me~ o! Ali Owner~ OR (Attach Proper Powe~ or'Attorney) B r ~ ~ .o o su. .ws ,_sl 20.3.2 20.4 20.4.1 20.4.2 Accessory uses and structures including home occupa- tion, Class A (reference 5.2) and storage buildings. 10. Homes for developmentally disabled persons (reference 5.1.7). BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted only by special use permit, provided that no separate application shall be required for any such use included in the original PUD rezoning petition: Day care, child care or nursery facility (reference 5.1.6). 2. Fire and rescue squad stations (reference 5.1.9). Rest home, nursing home, convalescent h6me, orphanage or similar institution (reference 5~1,~3). Electrical power substations, %ransmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmisson lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-wave and radio-wave transmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances (reference 5.1.I2)i 5. Home occupation, Class B (reference 5.2). 6. Churches. (Added 9-2-81) Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade. (Added 11-7-84) PERMITTED USES ~ COMMERCIAL/SERVICE Within areas approved as commercial/service on the appli- cation plan, uses permitted shall be as follows: BY RIGHT Uses permitted ~ right in section 22.0, commercial, C-1. 2. Uses permitted by right in section 23.0, commercial offic CO. BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT The following uses shall be permitted only by special use per; provided that no separate application shall be required for a such use included in the original PUD rezoning petition: 1. Uses permitted by special use permit in ~ection 22.0,~ commercial, C-1. ~_~ 2. Uses permitted by special use permit in section 23.0, commercial office, CO. -137- ($upp. ~24, 11-7-84] 22.0 22.1 22.2 22.2.1 C,O{.~II!~{CL/tL - C-1 INTENT, WHERE PERMITTED C-1 districts are hereby created and may hereafter be established by amendment to the zoning map to permit select%d retail sales, service and public use establishments which are primarily oriented to central business concentrations. It~is intended that C-1 districts be estab- lished only within the urban area, communities and villages in the comprehensive plan. (Amended 9-9-92) PERMITTED USES BY RIGHT The following uses shall be permitted zn any C-1 district subject to the requirements and limitations of these regulations.. The zoning administrator, after consultation with th~ director of 'planning and other appropriate ~fficials, may permit as a use by right, a use not specifically permitted; provided that such use shall be similar to uses permitted by right in general character and more specifically, similar in terms of locational requirements, operational character- istics, visual impact and traffic generation. Appeals from the zoning administrator's decision shall be as generally provided in section 34.0. a. The following retail sales and service establishments: 1. Antique, gift, jewelry, notion and craft shops. 2. Clothing, apparel and shoe shops. 3. Department store. 4. Drug store, pharmacy. 5. Florist. 6. Food and grocery stores including such specialty shops as bakery, candy, milk dispensary and wine and cheese shops. 7. Furniture and home appliances (sales and service). 8. Hardware store. 9. Musical instruments. 10. Newsstands, magazines, pipe and tobacco shops. 11. Optical' goods. 12. Photographic goods. -145- (Supp. #68, 9-9-92) 13. Visual and audio appliances. 14. Sporting goods. 15. Retail nurseries and greenhouses. The following services and public establishments: 1. Administrative, professional offices. 2. Barber, beauty shops. 3. Churches, cemeteries. 4. Clubs, lodges, civic, fraternal, patriotic (reference 5.1.2). 5. Financial institutions. 6. Fire and rescue sq~ad~stations- (reference 5.1.9). 7. Funeral homes. 8. Health spas. ~ 9. Indoor theaters. 10. Laundries, dry cleaners. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Laundromat (provided that an attendant shall be on duty at all hours during operation). Libraries, museums. Nurseries, day care centers (reference 5.'1.6). Eating establishments. Tailor, seamstress. Automobile service stations (reference 5.1.20). Electric, gas, oil and communication facilities ex- cluding tower structures and including poles, lines, transformers, pipes, meters and related facilities for distribution of local service and owned and operated by a public utility. Water distribution and sewerage collection lines, pumping stations and appurtenances owned and operated by the Albemarle County Service Authority. (Amended 5-12-93) -146- (Supp. ~72, 5-12-93) 22.2°2 18. Public uses and buildings including =emporary or mobile facilities such as schools, offices, parks, playgrounds and roads funded, owned or operated by local, sta=e or federal agencies (reference 31.2.5); public water and sewer trans- mission, main or trunk lines, treatment facilities, pumping stations and the like, owned and/or operated ~y the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority (~eference 3t.2.5~ 5.1.12). (Amended 11-1-9} 19. Temporary construction uses (=eference 5.1.1). 20. Dwellings (reference 5.1.21)o 21. Medical cen=ero 22. Automobile, truck repair shop excluding body shop. (Added 6-3-81; Amended 9-9-92) 23. Temporary nonresidential mobile homes (reference 5.8). (Added 3-5-6) 24. Indoor athletic facilities. (Added 9-15-93) 25. Farmers' market (reference 5.1.36). (Added 10-11-95) BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT Commercial recreation establishments including but not limited to amusement cen=ers, bowling alleys, pool halls and dance halls. (Amended 1-1-83) Electrical power substations, transmission lines and related towers; gas or oil transmission lines, pumping stations and appurtenances; unmanned telephone exchange centers; micro-wave and radio-wave ~ransmission and relay towers, substations and appurtenances. 3. Hospitals. 4. Fast food res=auran~. 5. Veterinary office and hospital (reference 5.1.11). Unless such uses are otherwise provided in this section, uses permitted in section 18.0, residential - R-15, in compliance with regulations set forth therein, and such conditions as may be imposed pursuant to section 31.2.4. 7. Hotels, motels and inns. Motor vehicle sales and rental in communities and the urban area as designated in the comprehensive plan. (Added 6-1-83) 9. Parking structures located wholly or partly above grade. (Added 11-7-4) -147- (Supp. #80, 10-11-95) 10. Drive-in windows serving or associated with permitted uses. (Added 11-7-g4; Amended 9-9-92) Uses permitted by right, not served by public water, involving water consumption exceeding four hundred (400) gallons per site acre per day. Uses permitted by right, not served by public sewer, involving anticipated discharge of sewage other than domestic wastes. (Added 6-14-89) 12. Bodyshop. (Added 9-9-92) 22.3 kDDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS In addition to the requirements contained herein, the requirements of section 21.0, commercial districts, generally, shall apply within all C-1 districts. (Amended 5-17-82; 7-10-85) -147.1- (Supp. tt68, 9-9-92) STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ JANUARY 7, 1997 FEBRUARY 12, 1997 MILL CREEK INDUSTRIAL TRUST AND THE PEABODY SCHOOL Applicant's Proposal: The applicant proposes to establish a private school for up to 140 students. The school would initially be located in mobile classroom units with permanent facilities to be built at a latter date. Petition: ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School - Proposal to amend the Development Plan for the Mill Creek Planned Unit Development, as established with ZMA 85- 29, to change a 5 acre portion from an Industrial designation ;o a commercial designation to allow development ora private school by special use permi, t. Property, described as Tax Map 76M1, Parcel 15, is on Stoney Ridge Road on the north side of Southern Parkway, adjacent to Carolina Builders, in the Scottsville Magisterial District. The property, is zoned PUD-LI (planned for light industrial use), with proffers and is designated for Industrial Service development in Urban Neighborhood 4. SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School -Proposal to establish a private school with an ultimate enrollment of 140 students on a 5 acre portion of the Mill Creek Planned Unit Development presently designated for Light Industrial development. Property, described as Tax Map 76M1, Parcel 15, is on Stoney Ridge Road on the north side &Southern Parkway, adjacent to Carolina Builders, in the Scottsville Magisterial District. The property, is zoned PUD-LI (planned for light industrial use), with proffers and is designated for Industrial Service development in Urban Neighborhood 4. SDP 96-113 The Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan - Proposal to locate 10 modular classroom traits, totaling 12,540 square feet, on a 5 acre parcel in the Mill Creek Industrial Park. Property, described as Tax Map 76M1, Parcel 15, is on Stoney Ridge Road on the north side of Southern Parkway, adjacent to Carolina Builders, in the Scottsville Magisterial District. The property, is zoned PUD-LI (plmmed for light industrial use), with proffers and is designated for Industrial Service development in Urban Neighborhood 4. Character of the Area: This site is located on Stoney Ridge Road which provides access to a portion of the industrial area of Mill Creek. Currently the road serves a day care/preschool (Bright Beginnings) and a builders supply business (Carolina Builders). The area proposed for development is located at care/preschool, the residential areas of Mill Creek are located on the south side of the Southern Parkway and have limited visibility from the industrial areas. RECOMMENDATION: ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School - Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the approvals for the Mill Creek P.U.D. and recommends denial. SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School - Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends denial. SDP 96-113 The Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan - Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval, of the site plan. [This recommendation assumes approval of the rezoning and special use permit.] Planning and Zoning History_: May 1986 - The Board approved ZMA 85-29 which established the Mill Creek P.U.D. The area under review was included as industrial in the plan of development. February 1990 - The Board approved ZMA 89-22 which modified the required buffer around a portion of the industrial area. [The area under review was not affected by this modification.] July 1995 - The Board approved ZMA 94-25 which rezoned approximately 80 acres from industrial, LI and P.U.D. to residential. This permitted the Foxcroft development. This action removed approximately 20 acres of the original industrial area of the P.U.D. February 1996 - The Board approved ZMA 95-19 which added approximately 23 acres of land to the industrial area of the P.U.D., the area added was previously zoned LI. At this time the Board also approved commercial/service use for approximately 2 acres of the industrial area, this permitted the day care/preschool to be constructed. Comprehensive Plan: This area is recommended for Industrial Service in Neighborhood 4. The Comprehensive Plan adopted in 1989 noted that a total of 149 developable acres of industrial service land were located in this Neighborhood. Since the adoption of the 1989 plan a total of approximately 82 acres of undeveloped and industrially zoned land has been lost in Neighborhood 4 due to rezoning. The remaining inventory of undeveloped indnstrially designated land is 60 acres ~ 21 acres of which is in a former sanitary, landfall site and may be of limited development potential). Staff feels that it is important to provide a full range of land use opportunities within each 2 neighborhood to provide the necessary mix of uses/activities needed to serve the commumty in an efficient/effective manner. The loss of available land designated for industrial development may create a need toidentify additional areas for industrial service. Historically, locating industrial land in the Comprehensive Plan and rezoning to an industrial designation have been difficult. Therefore, staffis generally reluctant to recommend the reduction of available industrial land unless the area is recommended for another use in the Comprehensive Plan or the change in use is appropriate due to uses in the surrounding .area, The area to the west has been converted into residential uses, but is separated with a substantial vegetative buffer. Based on the character of the surrounding area, the loss of industrial land in neighborhood 4 and the recommendations for this area in the Comprehensive Plan staff opinion is that the use of this site for a private school would be inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: In the review of this request staffhas considered that the P.U.D district provides for flexibility in land use and is intended to provide for a wide range of uses. Staff will review each of the three items individually. ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staff has previously commented that changing the designation of this area fzom industrial to commercial is inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The existing character of the area is primarily industrial. Stoney Ridge Road was constructed with Industrial Access Funds in recogniziton of the designation of the area. [These funds must be remmedto the state if qualifying industrial users are not located on the road.] The day care/preschool located on Stoney Ridge Road while not an industrial use may provide a direct support service to both the industrial and residential development of the area. A private school may be less likely to serve the same direct benefit to the adjacent community. The location of the proposed school adjacent to the builders supply center may create conflict in the future due to the operation of the supply center. Staffnotes that in the HC district that Building Material Sales and Educational, technical and trade schools are permitted by right. The vehicles in the supply center consist of large trucks and vehicles with back up warning devices. A supply storage building is located near a common boundary with the proposed school site. The sound generated by these vehicles may interfere with the operation of the school. The location, configuration and topography of the parcel under review do not present obstacles to industrial development. While the provision of additional school space in the County may be consistent with the provision of varied educational opportunities in the County~ other more suitable locations likely exist. 3 SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staff has limited the review of this request to the physical impact of the proposed use. However, staff does note that some uses contribute to the moral fibre of the community. These uses include schools, day care and churches. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of/he Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in .this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Sunervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property_. Staff opinion is that/he proposed use will not directly impact the adjacent properties. However, due to the nature of the adjoining building supply conflict could occur due to sound and Ixaffic types. This 'conflict may result in requests by the school to amend the operations of/he supply center or opposition to future development in the industrial area. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, Approval of this request would change the character.of this industrial area by introducing a use which has no relationship to any industrial uses. 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 ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 of the Zon'mg Ordinance. [Copy attached] Smffopimon is that this request is inconsistent with the provisions of Section 1.6 Relation to the Comprehensive Plan and Section 1.4.3, To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; This opinion is based in the items addressed in prior portions of this report. with the uses permitted by fight in the district. While this use will not prohibit by-fight uses of other properties, the nature of. this use may result in requests for modification of existing operations or opposition to new uses. with additional rec, ulations orovided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.8 contains regulations for the use of temporary nonresidential mobile homes. (Attachment D) Th'rs provision has been used by Albemarle County Schools, Montessori School, (located on Pantops Mountain) and Trinity Presbyterian Church. Staff is unaware of any request which made use of nonresidential mobile homes in the initial phase of development. [Staff notes that temporary nonresidential mobile homes were used at the Burgess Lane school at CATEC on Rio Road. While these units were for a new school they were located on the site of an existing school and have the appearance of an expansion ofthe existing school.] It is the opinion of staff that Section 5.8 is intended to allow for the expansion of existing uses and is not intended for the initial establishment of a use. This is supported by the language of Section 5.8 which allows the Zoning Administrator to administratively approve the use of temporary nonresidential mobile homes and which requires removal of the units at suchtime as the main structure ~s expanded. The Planning Commission may amend the provisions of Section 5.8 and allow the temporary nonresidential mobile homes prior to the establishment of the primary use and for any time period. [The Board does not need to act on this modification,] The applicant has not determined a time period for the construction of permanent structures on site. Staff does not support the use of temporary nonresidential mobile homes for the establishment a use because there is no clear time frame for the use of the temporary structures. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The only issue staff has identified which may be inconsistent with the public health, safety and general welfare is the potential conflict between the school and industrial traffic/uses. Typically industrial areas are located such that truck and passenger vehicle traffic is minimized. Staff recognizes that the existing day care/preschool has established a mixture of vehicle types. However, approval of this school will increase the potential of conflict which may be considered to be inconsistent with the public safety. SDP 96-113 The Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan An abutting property owner has requested Planning Commission review of the site plan. [The Board of Supervisors does not need to act on the site plan.] The abutting property owner's letter is included as Attachment E. The site plan has been reviewed by the Site Review Committee and found to be consistent with the requirements of the ordinance. The site plan may be approved subject to approval of the rezohing and special use permit request. SUMMARY: ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staffhas identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: Approval of this request will provide for separation of industrial and residential areas; The site is in proximity to other schools, P¥CC and Monticello High School; Day Care/Private Schools have proven difficult to locate in residential areas. Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: 1. Commercial use of this site is not recommended by the Comprehensive Plan; 5 Use of this site for a school could result in conflict with exisfmg and potential industrial users; The site has no characteristics which indicate that the site couldnot be used for an industrial use consistent with the existing zoning; The access road was constructed with industrial access funds which establishes a public intent to develop the area with, industrial users. Staff opinion is that the industrial area of Mill Creek Planned Development should be retained for industrial users. The incremental loss of industrial land may lead to request for the location of industrial land in areas not as well suited for industrial as the Mill Creek indnslrial area. In addition the placement of a school on this site may affect the placement of additional industrial users in the area due to potential conflict and may result in request to modify the operation of existing industrial development. SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. Approval of this request will increase the variety of educational opportunities in the County; 2. Approval ofthis request will provide for separation of industrial and residential areas. Staffhas identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: 1. Approval of this request may result in conflict between the school and adjacent industrial users; 2. Approval of this request may result in a change in the indus/rial character of the area; 3. Approval would be inconsistent with the purpose and in intent of the ordinance; 4. The proposal requires a modification of supplemental regulations to permit the use of temporary nonresidential mobile homes for~the establishment a use. These units are intended to permit rapid and easy expansion of exisfmg uses. The negative factors identified in the review of the special use permit are similar to those identified in the analysis of the rezoning and staff will not restate them here. In the review of the special use permit staff did identify an additional negative factor which is the modification to permit temporary nonresidential mobile homes. These units are intended to permit expansion of existing uses and allowing these units for the imT~al establishment of a use is inconsistent with the intent of the provision. SDP 96-113 The Peabody School Preliminary_ Site Plan Subject to approval of the rezoning and special use permit req~test the site plan satisfies the requirements of the ordinance and staff recommends approval. RECOMMENDED ACTION: ZMA 96-21 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staffrecommends denial of this request. Should the Board choose to approve this request no changes to the existing agreements are required: Only the application plan has to be amended, Staff has attached a reduced copy of the original application plan which reflects all changes made since the original approval. In accord with the provisions of Section 8.5.5 of the Zoning Ordinance the applicant shall be required to submit a revised application plan within 60 days of the board approval or such approval shall be deemed to be null and void. SP 96-46 Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust and The Peabody School Staff recommends denial of the special use permit. Should the Board choose to approve the rezoning and this special use permit application staff offers the following conditions: 1. The school shall be limited to a maximum of 140 students; As an additional action the Planning Commission must act on the modification of Section 5.8 for the use of temporary nonresidential mobile homes. [The Board does not need to act on this modification.] SDP 96-113 The Peabody School Preliminary_ Site Plan Staff recommends approval of this request subject to approval of the rezoning and special use permit. As approval of the site plan cannot occur until the rezoning and special use permit are approved staffrecommends that the Planning Commission approve the preliminary site plan subject to Site Review Committee Approval. The Site Review Committee will develop appropriate conditions of approval for the preliminary based on the Boards action ,on the rezoning and special use permit. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance D- Section 5.8 of the Zoning Ordinance E - Comment from abutting owner F- Applicant's information and site plan 7 L SP 96-46 PEABODY scHOOL · / ALBEMARLE COUNTY 96-46 PEABODY SCHOOL SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT SECTION 76M(I) 1,~> 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 Ab'THORITY~ ,F~STABLIS~T~ PI~POS~. AND O~&CIAL ZO~NG MAP AUTHORITY AND ENACTMENT This ordinance, ~o be cited as the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle County, is hereby ordained, enacted and published by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle ~County, Virginia, pursuant to the provisions of Title 15.1, Chapter 11, Article 8, Code of Virginia, 1950, and amendments thereto, AMENDMF2~ TO ADOPT An ordinance to reenact and readopt the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance and the Albemarle County Zoning Map. Be it 6rdained by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia: That the following ordinance known as the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia, together with the Zoning Map attached thereto, be and the same are, readopted and reenacted effective immediately upon adoption of this ordinance. EFFECTIVE DATE, REPEAL OF CONFLICTING ORDINANCES This Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle County, Virginia, shall be effec- tive at and after 5:15 P.M., the 10th day of December, 1980 and at the same time the tlbemarle County "Zoning Ordinance" adopted December 12, 1969, as amended, is hereby repealed. PURPOSE AND INTENT This ordinance, insofar as is practicable, is intended to be in accord with and to implement the Comprehensive Plan of Albemarle County adopted pursuant to the provisions of Title 15.], Chapter 11, Article 4, Code of Virginia, 1950, as emended, and has the purposes and intent se~ forth in Title 15.1, Chapter i1, Article 8. As set forth in section 15.1-427 of the Code, this ordinance is intended to improve public health, safety, convenience and welfare of citizens of Albemarle County, Virginia, and to plan for the future development of con%~unities to the end that transportation systems be carefully planned; that new community centers be developed with adequate highway, utility, health, educational and recreational facilities; that the needs of agriculture, industry and business be recognized in future growth; that ~residential areas be provided with healthy surroundings for family, life; that agricultural and forestal land be preserved,- and that the growth of the community be ~consonant with the efficient and economical use of public funds. (Added 9-9-9l) Therefore be it ordained by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, for the purposes of promoting the health, safety, convenience and general welfare of the public and of planning for the (Supp. #68, 9-9-92) 1.4.1 1.4.2~ 1.4.3 1.4.4 1.4.5 1.4.6 1.4.7 1.4.8 1.4.9 1.4.10 1.4.11 1.5 future development of the co~mmmit]~ that the zoning ordinance of Albemarle County, together with the official zoning map adopted by reference and declared-to be a part of this ordinance, is designed: To provide for adequate light, air, convenience of access and safety from fire, flood and other dangers; To reduce or prevent congestion inthe public streets; To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community; To facilitate the provision of adequate police and fire protection, disaster evacuation, civil defense, transportation, water, sewerage, flood protection, schools,, parks, forests, playgrounds, recreational facilities, airports and other public requirements; To protect against destruction of or encroachment upon historic areas; To protect against one or more of the following: overcrowding of land, undue density of population in relation to the co~mmanity faci- lities existing or available, obstruction of light end air, danger and congestion in travel and transportation, or loss of life, health, or property from fire, flood, panic or other dangers; To encourage economic development activities that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base; (Amended 9-9-92) To provide for the preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and other lands of significance for the protection of the natural environ- ment; (Amended 9-9-92) To protect approach slopes and other safety areas of licensed air- ports, including United States government and military air facilities; (Added 11-1-89; Amended 9-9-92) To include reasonable provisions, not inconsistent with the applicable state water quality standards to protect surface water and groundwater defined in section 62.1-44.85(8) of the Code of Virginia; and (Added 11-1-89; Amended 9-9-92) To promote affordable housing. (Added 9-9-92) RRI.ATION TO ENVIRONMENT This ordinance is designed to treat lands which are similarly situated and environmentally similar in like manner with reasonable considera- tion for the existing use and character of properties, the Comprehen- sive Plan, the suitability of property for various uses, the trends of growth or change, the current and future land and water requirements of the community for various purposes as determined by population and economic studies and other studies, the transportation requirements of the community, and the requirements for airports, housing, schools, parks, playgrounds, recreation areas and other public services; for -2- (Supp. ~68, 9-9-92) 1.6 1.7 1.g the cpnservation of natural resources; and preservation of flood plains, the preservation of agricultural and forestal land, the con- servation of properties and their values and the encouragement of the most appropriate use of land throughout the county. (Amended ll-l-gP) RELATION TO COMPR~t~N$IVE PLAN In drawing the zoning ordinance and districts with reasonable .consi- deration of the Comprehensive Plan, it is a statedan~ express purpose of this zoning ordinance to create land use regulations which shall encourage the realization and implementation of the Comprehensive Plan. To this end: development is to be encouraged in Villages, Communities and the Urban Area; where services and utilities are available and where such development will not conflict with the agricultural/forestal or other rural objectives; and development is not to be encouraged in the Rural Areas which are to be devoted to preservation of agricultural and forestal lands and activities, water supply protection, and conservation of natural, scenic and historic resources and where only limited delivery of public services 'is intended. (~nended 11-1-89) OFFICIALZONING MAP The unincorporated areas of Alb~mmrle County, Virginia, are hereby divided into districts, as indicated on a set of map sheets entitled "Zoning Map of Albemarle County, Virginia" which, together with all explanatory matter thereon, is hereby adopted by reference and de- clared to be a part of this ordinance. The Zoning Map shall be identified by the siTnature or the attested signature of the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, together with the date of adoption of this ordinance. The zoning administrator shall be responsible for maintaining the Zoning Map, which shall be located in his offices, together with the current zoning status of land and water areas, buildings and other structures in the county. The zoning administrator shall be authorized to interpret the current zoning status of land and water areas, buildings and other structures in the county. No changes of any nature shall be made on said Zoning Map or any matter shown thereon except in conformity, with the procedures and requirements of this ordinance, It shall be unlawful for any person to make unauthorized changes on the official Zoning Map. Violations of this provision shall be punishable as provided in section 37,0. CERTIFIED COPY, FILING A certified copy of the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map of Albemarle County, Virginia, shall be filed in the office of the zoning admini- strator and in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albe- marle County, Virginia. -3- (Supp. #68, 9-9-92) 5.7 5.7.1 5.8 TEMPORARY MOBILE HOME PERMIT Temporary mobile home permits may be authorized by the zoning administrator provided the mobile home lS used only -ms an interim means of housing during construction of a permanent dwelling. The mobile home shall beremoved within thirty (30) days of issuance of a certificate of occupancy for the permanent dwelling. Temporary mobile home permits shall be subject to the following conditions: Albemarle County building official approval; The applicant and/or owner of the subjec~ property shall Certify as to the intent for locating the mobile home at the time of application; Minimum frontage setback and side and rear yard setbacks shall be determined by the zoning administrator; de Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the reasonable satisfacuion of the zoning administrator and the local office of the Virginia Department of Health. EXPIRATION, RENEWAL Any permit issued pursuant to section 5.7 shall expire eighteen (18) months after the date of issuance unless consuruction shall have commenced and is thereafter pros- ecuted in good faith. The zoning administrator may revoke any such permit after ten (t0) days written notice, at any time upon a finding that construction activities have been suspended for an unreasonable time or in bad faith. In any evenu, any such permit shall expire three (3) years from the date of issuance; provided, however, that the zoning admin- istrator may, for good cause shown, extend the time of such expiration for not more than two (2) successive periods of one (1) year each. (Amended 6-3-81) TEMPORARY NONRESIDENTIAL MOBILE HOMES A uemporary nonresidential mobile home may be authorized by the zoning administrator provided the mobile home is necessitated uo provide additional space for employees, students or other people and is to be an activiuy area as opposed to being employed for storage purposes or equip- men~ which could be accommodated in an accessory suruc- ture. Such mobile home shall be located on the same site as the main esuabtished use for which additional space is needed. In the event of the expansion of the main permanenu structure, the mobile home shall be removed -77.4- (Supp. ~59, 12-5-90) Pea~oary $C/iOO£)'br lntei~ctvaKy .~e~ C~n~ Peabody School Board Of Advisors Carolyn Ar, Cai[Shah, P[~.D. Professor ef Educa_tlonal Studies (GiRed £ducadon) university of Virginia Deborah M. DJCroce, Ph.D, ~it'v College ~ita Dove, Former Poet Laureate of the United States Professor ~f University of Virginia Pro[essor or Educational Studies (GIf[ed Educaiton] Un~ver$)ty DE Virginia Wflllam 5. Gray, Attorney at Law W~llJam J. Kehoe, PH.D. O'Dell Professor of Corn- University of Virginia Carol A, Tomlinsoa. EE.D. Assistant Professor of Edu- cational Studies (Gifted cadon] ~ Rick Tur. e6 Ph.~ Dean of African. American A~airs ~nivers~ of Virginia November 25. 1996 Mx. Bill Fritz Albemarle County Planning Commission via FAX (972-4035) N ¥2 5 1996 Planning Dept. RE: SDP 96-113 - Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan Dear Bill: Prior to constructing our permanent facilities, Peabody School would like to place temporary, modular classrooms on ~hc site so that we may begin to use thc site for classes in the Fall of 1997. We plan two tcmporavy buildings, each building approximately 120' x 45~ (5,760 square feet). As you can tell from the size, these buildings, though temporary and modular, aren't very mobile, Howe.v? thcbuildings arc delivered in sections, and each section does have a chassis, Therefore, as we understand, based on information from the zoning department, these temporary buildings are subject to Section 5.8. We request that.the Planning Commission waive the provisions of SectionS.8 and permit us 'to use these buildings as our pnma~ structures until our permanent facilities are built. Sincerely, Harriet D, Kaplan Director Phone: 8o4-2g(~-$901 Fax:' 804-984-4S00 hdk~s4~virginla.edu Peabody School 2114 Angus Road, Suite 200 Charlottesville, VA 22901 804/296-6901 Attachment for Application for Special Use Permit Description of Request We are requesting the rezoning of revised parcel 5, Mill Creek Industrial Park, as shown on the plat dated 2/19/93 last revised 9/8/93 (tax map 76M(1)15) located on the north side of Southern .Parkway, west side of Route 742 (Avon Street) in the Scottsville Magisterial District from PUD with LI (Light Industry) designation to allow for the construction of an elementary/middle school. Peabody School, an independent, nonprofit, nondenominational school for academically advanced children, currently in its third year of operation, serves thirty-eight children with a full-time faculty o£three and a part-time staff of seven. With the addition of one grade per year m each of the next three years, we expect to reach grade eight by September of 1999. Over the next several years, we expect to add between twelve and fifteen students per year, eventually achieving our expected maximum enrollment (in kindergarten through grade eight) of 140 students. Regular school hours are Monday through Friday from 8:30 A.M. until 3:00 P.M. A small percentage of students take advantage of our before-school care (from 8:00 A.M. to 8:30 A.M.) and after-school care ffrom 3:00 P.M. until 5:30 P.M.). Justification of Request This rezoning will have no adverse impact on the Mill CreekIFoxcroft communities. In fact, with it's traditional Jeffersonian architecture, it would present an attractive gateway to the neighborhood. In addition, the design of the entrance and drop-off/pick up areas would minimize traffic disruption. Finally, the school would fit the family-oriented character ofthe neighborhood that already boasts a day care facility. The FoxcroflJMill Creek area would be a good location for the school because of its quiet, country- like setting and its proximity to the University, the University of Virginia Medical Center and Martha Jefferson Hospital, where many of our students' parents work. In addition, locating the school near Piedmont Virginia Community College would enhance our already-established relationship. Each year, Peabody provides community service opportunities to PVCC honor students, and we share faculty. In addition, Deborah DiCroce, President of PVCC, is a member of Peabody's Board of Advisors along with many other distinguished community members including Albemarle County residents Carolyn Callahan, Professor of Education at the University of Virginia, and William Kehoe, Professor of Commerce at the University of Virginia. Peabody School 2114 Angus Road, Suite 200 Charlottesville, VA 22901 804/296-6901 AttaChment for Application for Rezoning Description of Request We are requesting the rezoning of revised parcel 5, Mill Creek Industrial Park, as shown on the plat dated 2/19/93 last revised 9/8/93 (tax map 76M(1)15) located on the north side of Southern Parkway, west side of Route 742 (Avon Street) in the Scottsville Magisterial District from PUD with LI (Light Industry) designation to allow for the construction of an elementary/middle school. Peabody School, an independent, nonprofit, nondenominational school for academically advanced children, currently in its third year of operation, serves thirty-eight children with a full-time faculty of three and a part-time staff of seven. With the addition of one grade per year in each of the next three years, we expect to reach grade eight by September of 1999. Over the next several years, we expect to add between twelve and fifteen students per year, eventually achieving our expected maximum enrollment (in kindergarten through grade eight) of 140 students Regular school hours are Monday through Friday from 8:30 ,A.M. until 3:00 P.M. A small percentage of students take advantage of our before-school care {from 8:00 A.M. to 8:30 A.M.) and after-school care (from 3:00 P.M. until 5:30 P.M,). Justification of Request This rezoning will have no adverse impact on the Mill Creek/Foxcroft communities. In fact. with it's traditional Jeffersonian architecture, it would present an attractive gateway to the neighborhood. In addition, the design of the entrance and drop-ofrdpick-up areas would minimize traffic dismpnon. Finally, the schi3ol would fit the family-oriented character of the neighborhood that already boasts a day care facility. The Foxcrofl/Mill Creek area would be a good location for the school because of its qmet, country- like setting andits proximity to the University, the University of Virginia Medical Center and Martha Jefferson Hospital, where many of our students' parents work. In addition, looming the school near Piedmont Virginia Community College would enhance our already-established relationship. Each year, Peabody provides community service opportunities to PVCC honor students, and we share faculty. In addition, Deborah DiCroce, President of PVCC, is a member of Peabody's Board of Advisors along with many other distinguished community members including Albemarle County residents Carolyn Callahan, Professor of Education at the University of Virginia, and William Kehoe, Professor of Commerce at the University of Virginia. 635 B Hillsdale Dr. Charlotl'esville, Va. 973-0626 R, I GI-IT lure Route 743 Earlysville, Va. 973-21,59 November 15, 1996 Ronald Lilley Senior Planner County of Albemarle 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA. 22902 Dear Mr. Lilley, As an abutting property owner please be informed that we are requesting a review of the development proposal for Peabody School Preliminary Site Plan tSDP96-113~ by the Planning Commission. We would also like to receive information regarding SP96-46, ZMS96-Z and SDP96-112 as soon as written or verbal information becomes available. Additionally, please put us on an interested par~y list for any proposal or acuvity considered for the Mill Creek Industrial Park. Kathe and Bob Petchel 123 Bolling~vood Road Charlottesville, VA. 22903 RE. CEJV D NUV 2 0 1996 Planning Dept. % ~li~ I!i ',',, ....... :,, PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN DATE AGENDA ITEM NO. AGENDA ITw. M NAME DEFERRF-D UNTIL Form. 3 7/2S/86 4419 Chris Greene Lake Rd Charlottesvile, VA 229t t Feb. 12, 1997 To the Board of Supervisors: Re: SP-96-41-Forest Springs Mobile Home Park Sales Let I am strongly opposed to the outdoor storage and display of mobile homes on the sales lot being approved at this time. There are many reasons for my concerns. First, the Comprehensive Plan Update 1996, p.52, states that 100 mobile home units must be in place before the development of the 50 acres of commercial area adjacent on Rt. 29. Yet, this developer has Wheels for Less auto sales on part of the 50 acres and there are not 100 mobile home units in place. Now he wants to establish the display and sales of mobile homes in the same area. Yet, today there are no mobile home units in place. We are violating our owm Comprehensive Plan if we approve anything before ! 00 mobile homes are in place. ! urge you to follow the Comprehensive Plan and not permit the mobile home sales lot before 100 units are in place. Second, the minutes from the 1993 Board of Supervisors meeting indicate discussion of this very point. Mrs. Humphris was concerned about this issue. Mr. Forest Marshall said "he thinks the [4th] proffer is trying to ensure that there will be t00 homes in place" according to the July 14, 1993 Board minutes. ,Mr. Cilinberg explained that the proffer was to ensure that the park and the mobile home sales lot were developed together. You must decide tonight whether you will adhere to the Comprehensive plan on this issue, or the lesser standard of site plan for 100 mobile home units. Third, there are other nearby sources of mobile homes. The original iusfificafion for the mobile home sales lot was the special modifications for noise control needed in the mobile homes due to the airport noise impact area. However, in 1994 the noise impact area was modified and this requirement no longer exists. Therefore, the special mobile home sales lot is not necessary for the success of the mobile home park. O*daer sales lots are in the area and can handle the sales until 100 mobile home units are in place. In addition, these sales lots are fully screened 'from Rt. 29. Fourth, the VDOT letter in the Planning Commission report states preliminary plans for improvements to this part of Rt. 29 will ha~'e significant impact on this site. I believe the widening of Rt. 29 will be completed by 1998. So, I question why would the Board approve this permit in light of VDOT's comments. Fifth, I am concerned with the development of Rt. 29 from Hollymead to GE;~Fanuc. T_his sales lot is again fostering piecemeal development with no overall Master Plan. Rt. 29 North will become a repeat of the roadway between Barracks Road and Wal-Mart with multiple driveways, lights and turning traffic. The Board has told the residents of the Hollymead growth area that they will comrol Rt. 29 better and not repeat the same problems. I checked and there are already 5 driveways to businesses or homes in the .2 mile between the Airport Road light and the Forest Lake light on Rt. 29. The short distance from Forest Lakes to Wheels for Less (about .1 mile) currently has 3 driveways including 2 driveways for Wheels for Less. This is already a dangerous roadway for drivers and truckers who go 55 mph. Sixth, I was on the County Redistricting Advisory Committee that worked on redistricting last year. We were concerned about the number of students to be expected from Forest Springs and how quickly the students would arrive in the school system. Mr. Wood told the Rio representative, Mrs. Gallion that he would place about 50 mobile homes in the Forest Spring Park every year over the next 5 years. Yet, at the Planning Commission public hearing last month he told the C6mmission that he planned to bring 115 units on line at once. This will generate students much quicker than anticipated for the local school which already is above capacity. Seventh, a rezoning request has been submitted by Mr. Wood, the developer, to renege on his proffer #5 - the connector access road between the sales lot and the mobile home park. This rezoning request asks that he not be required to build the access road. Per the July 1993 Board minutes noted above, proffer #5 says the access road is for the movement of mobile homes between the sales lot and Forest Springs Park and for emergency access. I would ask you how will the mobile homes be moved to the Park - by doing a U-Turn at Hollymead or driving into town and up Rt. 743?? There must be an access road to move the trailers, or set the sales display up actually within the Park itself. For emergency reasons I believe all new housing developments must have two points of access. The fire and rescue departments must have an alternative exit in case ora fire or plane crash. Finally, this is an entrance corridor for the county. The display of mobile homes should be totally screened from public view. These sales will not be for the tourists or other local residents. It is commeroial sales for the mobile home park located near the airport. Other businesses have been driven from the corridor because they were inappropriate, otherwise called tacky,. Personally I liked the concrete figure sales place because it signified "county gardens" to me. As people travel to Albemarle from the Airport or on Rt. 29, I would imagine they will find a mobile home sales lot to be "unexpected" in such a prominent location. It should be totally screened if you approve it tonight. (Page 36) Mr. St. John remarked that there Could be a condition which indicated ~hat no other business would be permitted on this proper~y, except as part of a plan Of development. Mr. Martin suggested that a condition state that the mobile home sales lot will not have any trailers on it that do not meet the standards required indicate that mobile homes will be offered for Bale which meet the ~oise mai~i~ area designated office and regional sez~i~e in thm Comprehensive Plan. 3. The frontage on Route 29 oontaining Tax Map 32, Parcels 43A, number of entrances does not exceed three. 4. The site plan for the mobile home sales lot will nob be signed until the site plan for a minimum of 100 mobile home Mrs, Humphris st&te~ that she does not ~hink this use will do ~hing at all ho enhance the entrance =or~idor, and she thinks that the Supervisore should adhere to the original agreement that nothing like this would happen until 100 units were already in place, and there was a Master Plan for the site. Mr. Marshall called Mrs. Humphris' atten%ion to Proffer Number Four. He said that this proffer relates to Mrs. ~umphris comments. Mrs. Mumphris disagreed. She stated that the fourth proffer only says that the site plan for the mobile home sales lot will not be signed until the site plan for a minimum of 100 mobile home units is signed. Mr. Cilimberg explained that the fourth proffer was to ensure that the park and the mobile home sales lot were being developed together. Mrs. Rumphris recalled that the stipulation uo which she referred was thaf au least 100 mobile homes would be in place. Mr. ~ain responded to Mrs. MUmphrls' comment that he is not sure that is what was intended. Mr. Marshall said he thinks the proffer is tryin~ to ensure that there will be I00 homes in place. Mr. Cilimberg read from the Comprehensive Plan and stated that according to the Comprehensive Plan, there has to be a minimum of 100 mobile home sites developed before developing a commerc£al area, and that it shoutd ~ developed under an overall plan of d~velopmen=. Roll was called on the foregotn§ motion which carried by the followlng recorded Piedmont Environmental Council Statement Regarding SP-96-41 - Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot Presented to the Board of Supervisors, February 12, 1997 Citizens' groups are sometimes criticized for just saying no. Critics say we are too quick to oppose development proposals instead of working with developers and landowners to negotiate a mutually acceptable project. Weih we spent a lot of time several years ago doing just that--working with Mr. Wood and County staff on a major affordable housing project. When Mr. Wood claimed that he needed the commemial development on Route 29 North to make the project feasible, we supported the designation of nearly 50 acres for commemial use after he committed to providing first a well-designed mobile home park on land adjacent to this area. With the applicant's support, the Comprehensive Plan was amended to allow commemial development on these pamels under two conditions: 1) commercial development would be prohibited until a minimum of 100 mobile home sites had been established in the park and 2) development of the commercial area would proceed under a master plan for the entire 50 acres, To the best of my knowledge, the applicant has neither established the mobile home sites nor presented a unified plan of development for the entire parcel. Yet the Board of Supervisors in 1993 approved the sale of mobile homes on this site. allowing the commercial use to begin before the applicant had met the conditions set forth in the Comprehensive Plan. One of the reasons given in the minutes for that decision was the difficulty in finding mobile homes which met the noise levels required for dwellings in the airport's noise Impact overlay district, In fact, that was the reason Mr. Wood offered in the minutes for his request to use the property as a sales center. The special use permit was approved with a condition added by the supervisors during the meeting. That condition read: "The inventory shall include mobile homes which meet the noise attenuation standards on ZMA-92-14.' Things have changed since 1993, weakening what little connection may once have held between the sales and display of mobile homes and the development of the mobile home park. According to County planning staff, the airport substantially revised its noise ~mpact overlay area, which now excludes most if not all of the mobile home park. If noise attenuation is no longer necessary, then prospective residents of the park can buy their homes from anybody they want, including the manufactured housing business just up the road on Route 29 North. Another change '~s Mr. Wood's recent rezoning request to delete the road between the mobile home sales center and the mobile home park. According to the rezoning application, the road would cost too much and would be used infrequently. Without that physical connection between the mobile home park and the sales center, the link between the two uses becomes even more tenuous. In the absence of a direct and unique connection to the mobile home park and a unified plan of development for the commemial area, this application ~s inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose of the underlying zoning. These changes in circumstance raise the fundamental question of whether the expressed intent of the County in granting the underlying zoning can be achieved or is even relevant. That issue can best be addressed when the Board considers Mr. Wood's request to amend the proffers associated with the zoning. Until that request has been considered and decided, it seems to us that the pending special use permit is premature. Please defer action until the rezoning application, which would delete the fifth proffer, makes its way to you. January 9, 1997 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 M¢lntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Wendell Wood P O Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22911 SP 96-041 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot Tax Map 32, Parcel 43 Dear Mr. Wood: At the Albemarle County Planning Commission, meeting on January 7, 1997, a motion to approve the above-noted petition failed. Therefore, by the Commissions' Rules of Procedure, this petition is recommended to the Board of Supervisors for denial. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors wilt review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on February 12, 1997. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior m your schedule hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, William D. Fritz Senior Planner WDF/jcf CC: Ella Carey Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley T.M. Batchelor, Jr STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: CLAUDIA L. PAINE JANUARY 7, 1996 FEBRUARY 12, 1996 SP 96-41 - FOREST SPRINGS MOBILE HOME SALES LOT A~_p_]~_ant's Pro~: The applicant proposes to establish a mobile home sales lot on the portion of the 7.9 acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial, that is now occupied by Wheels for Less. The existing residential structure will be used as a sales office. An access road connection between the mobile home sales lot and the mobile home park will be shown on the final site plan. IA rezoning request has been filed which proposes deletion of this roadway which was required by a proffer.] A detailed description and justification for this use is included as Attachment A. Petition: Petition to establish outdoor storage and display of mobile homes for sale in addition to exist'mg auto sales on approximately 7.9 acres. Property, described as Tax Map 32, Parcel 43, zoned RA, Rural Areas, HC, Highway Commercial, and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District, and Parcel 43A, zoned HC, Highway Commercial, and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District, is located approximately 1/4 mile south of Rte. 649 on the west side of Rte. 29 North in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Regional Service in the Hollymead Community. This action is related to SDP 96-097 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Center Major Amendment, which provides for outdoor storage and display of mobile homes. Also, this action is related to ZMA 96-25 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot, which proposes to amend the proffers for this site to eliminate the service road connection to the mobile home park. (See Attachments B & C) Character of the Area: Currently, this site is occupied by a single family dwelling and an auto sales business (Wheels for Less). Tkree (3) single family dwellings are located on the portion of Parcel 43 zoned RA, Rural Areas, which is not part of this request. The site under consideration is mostly wooded. Access to the property is on a private driveway dh'ectly off of Route 29 and the Wheels for Less parking lot. A site plan (SDP 95-092 Forest Springs/Airport Mobile Home Park Final Site Plan) for 122 units was approved 10/10/95 for the mobile home park, which is located west of this site. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed the special use permit for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval, with conditions. Planning and Zoning History_: July 26° 1972 - SP-158 was approved to allow the expansion of the general store on this site. July 14~ 1993 - ZMA 93-06 was approved by the Board of Supervisors. This was a request to rezone 7.9 acres, Tax Map 32, Parcel 43A and 43 (part), from RA, Rural Areas, to HC, Highway Commercial(proffered). July 14, 1993 - SP 93-14 was approved by the Board of Supervisors, subject to one condition. This was a request to establish outdoor storage and display and sales of mobile homes on 7.9 acres zoned Rural Areas and Entrance Corridor Overlay District. November 15. 1995 - ZMA 95-17 was approved by the Board to amend the proffers of ZMA 93-06 to allow establishment of outdoor storage and display of autos on 7.9 acres zoned Highway Commercial and Entrance Corridor Overlay District (proffered). The proffers were as follows: The area outlined in yellow (350' x 180') on the attached plan titled "Pine Grove" dated 8/29/95, may be used as a convenience/grocery store and gasoline sales. In addition this area may be used for mobile home sales and/or automobile sales subject to approval of the appropriate special use permits. The remainder of the site may be used only for mobile home sales subject to the approval of the appropriate special use permks; The entrances on this site will be closed or altered if required by the future plan of development for the remaining adjacent areas designated office regional service in the Comprehensive Plan; The tSontage on Route 29 containing Tax Map 32, Parcels 43A, 43, 42E, 42D, 42C, 42B, 42A and Tax Map 46, Parcel 5 shall contain not more than three combination entrance & exits. The COunty may require closure of any existing entrances at the time of establishment of any new entrances such that the total number of entrances does not exceed three; An access road between the mobile home sales area and mobile home park shall be developed at the time of the establishment of any mobile home sales use. This access road shall be used only for the movement of mobile homes between the two uses and for emergency access. November 15. 1995 - SP 95-31 was approved by the Board to allow outdoor storage and display of autos, subject m conditions. Comprehensive Plan: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment was approved in 1992 which designated the area including this site as Regional Service. The mobile home sales use is allowed by ZMA 93-06 and, subsequently, by ZMA 95-17. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that the current proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: The proposed use, mobile home sales, is by special use permit due only to its location in the EC district. Therefore. staff comment is limited to the impact of the use on the EC district. Staff w/Il 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 fmrling by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to ad)acent property. Staff has nol focused on the impact on abutting properties since this use is by special use permit due only to its location in the EC district. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby. Impact on the character of the EC district is addressed by the Arclfitecmral Review Board (ARB). The ARB has reviewed this request and Ires recommended approval subject to conditions. Those conditions are reflected in the conditions of approval for this special use permit. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance. Staff has reviewed this request for compliance only with the purpose and intent of the EC district. Staff relies on the ARB to provide an analysis of the appropriateness of the use. Based unthe comments of the ARB staff opinion is that this use is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the EC district. with the uses permitted by right in the district. This use will have no impact on uses permkted by-right on adjacent properties. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this Ordinance. Section 5.0 contains no additional recommendations. and with the public health, safety and ~eneral welfare. This site is located along Rte. 29 North. The Virginia Department of Transportation states: ~'The existing entrances do not meet minimum 550' sight distance. The sight distance can be improved by raising the grade in the entrances approximately 8". Although a right turn lane may not be required by sheer numbers, it will be very strongly recommended for safety reasons. The turn lane will help in giving greater sight distance along with a separate lane for large slow turning traffic." (see Attachment F) VDOT has required the right turn lane as part of site plan approval. Based on this, this use will have no impact on public health, safety or general welfare. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1 This use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has not identified any negative factors resulting from this request. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above comments, staffrecommends approval of SP 96-41 subject to the following conditions: 1 All areas shown on plan (stamped Exhibits presented to ARB 10/21/96 initialed by MJ) noted as display areas, other than the area to the right of the entrance showing the four units, to be screened from Route 29. 2. Number of units visible from Route 29 North to be a maximum of four with the final number To be decided as part of the final ARB approval of the certificate of appropriateness. 3. The screening of the other display areas shall be permanent. 4. Installation of right mm and taper lane as required by the Virginia Department of Transportation in its October 23, 1996 letter. ATTACHMENTS: A - Applicant's Description and Justification B - Location Map C - Tax Map D - VDOT Cormnents A:\SP9641,PdPT :st Springs Mobile Home Sales Major Site Plan Amendment ALBEMARLE COUNTY 4J 46 WHITE HALL ~ ~AL[ IN '~:~-- ' ........ ~"° RJVANNA DISTRICTS SECTION 32 November Il. 1996 3505 Marlboro Court Charlottesville. VA 22901 Ms. Claudia Paine Department of Planning 401 Mclntim Road Charlottesx411e. VA 229024596 Re: SDP 964197 Forest Springs Mobile home Sales Center Dear MS Paine: I am ,~*ifing in regard to the site review counnents on this site. The engineering department's comment #1 requested proposed contours and/or spot elevation to demonstrate conceptual drainage. We are proposing no grading on the site_ Therefore. the proposed contours are the same as the existing contours shown on the plan. The 550' site distance and deeel lane are not delineated becanse we are proposing less traffic into this area and to Wheels for Less than existed under the previous use (Manpin's Groce~ Store and Gas Stafion~. This was not a requirement when the site was approved for a sales center previously. The proposed access road will be shown on a plan before this final site plan is approved in accordance with the Zoning Department's comment #5. The property, line to the muth of this site is not the same as the tax map because this site is not using all of parcel 43. The property line between parcels 43 and 43A is not shown because both parcels are under the saine ownership and control. Sincerely, ~ ~ ~ T.M. Batchelor. Ir. ~ DAVID R. GEHR COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRqIN a nin9 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 701 VDOT WAY CRARLO]q-ESVILLE. 22911 A. G. TUCKER RESIDENT ENGINEER RECEIVED October 16, 1996 November Rezonings Mr. Ron Keeler Dept. of Planning & Community DevelopmenE 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA. 22902 Dear Mr. Keeler: Please find our comments listed below for the November submittals of public hearings. SP-96-041 Forest Sprinqs Mobile Home Sales, Route 29 North The existing entrances do not meet minimum 550' sight distance. The sight distance can be improved by raising the grade in the entrances approximately 8". Although a right turn lane may not be required by sheer numbers, it will be strongly recommended for safety reasons. The turn lane will help in giving greater sight distance along with a separate lane for large slow turning traffic. Very preliminary scoping plans for the improvement of Route 29 indicate significant impact to the site by the road design. SP-96-40 A~qus & Brenda Arrinqton, Route 842 This should not be a ma]or impact to infrastructure of roadway. The sketch indicates the use of this existing entrance and we concur, however it appears there is usage off of the T-Turn around without a proper entrance. HWM/ldw Cc: Irma vonKutzleben If you have any concerns with these comments, please discuss with me prior to sharing with the developer. Assistant Resident Engineer TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY Building Code Information (804) 296-5832 COUNq'Y OF ALBEMARI .E Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 Mclntim Road, Boom 223 Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 FAX (804) 972-4126 'lTD (8041 972-4012 Zoning Information (804) 296-5875 To: Claudia Paine, Senior Planner From: Marcia Joseph, Design Planner 'iL~ Re: ARB-P(SDP)-96-16 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lol Tax Map 32 Parcels 43 & 43A Date: November 19, 1996 The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed this item at its meeting on October 21, 1996. The ARB will require screening of all the areas annotated as display in the west of the property behind the building. The applicant stated during the ARB meeting that the vegetation exisung behind the building would be used for screening. To determine if the screening would be adequate, the ARB would reqmre a section drawn illustrating the area from the display area to Route 29N. The applicant has revised the drawing after the review by the ARB to illustrate a parking area directly behind the existing Wheels for Less building. If the parking is located in this area some of the wooded area will be removed and screening of the mobile home display area will be difficult. The plan is inconsistent with the suggestions made by the ARB. RECEIVED NO¥ 1.9 1996 Planning Dept. October 22, 1996 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Depar[rnent of Zoning 401 M¢[ntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 972-4060 TDD (804) 972-4012 Wendell W. Wood P. O. Box 5548 Charlottesville. VA 22905 RE: Architectural Review Board Review ARB#P(SDP)-96-16 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Lot Tax Map 32, Parcels 43 & 43A Dear Mr. Wood: The above-noted item was reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board on Monday, October 21, 1996 The Board recommended approval of the special use 2ermit based on the staff's 'ecommendations with the following conditions: That all areas shown on this plan (stamped Exhibits presented to ARB 10/21/96 initialed by M J) noted as display areas, other than the area to the right of the entrance showing the four units would be screened from Route 29. The number of configurations of units visible from Route 29 North to be a maximum of four with the final number To De decided as part of the final ARB approval of tne certificate of appropriateness. The screening of the other display areas shall be permanent If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, Design Pla nner MJ/st cc: Tom Muncaster Tom Batchelor FSPRING. APP 4419 Chris Greene Lake Rd, Charlottesvit] e, VA 22911 November 22, 1996 TO: The Albemarle cry Planning Commission RE: SP-96-4t The'owner of Autos For Less on Rt. 29 is requesting a special permit zoning amendment #SP-96-41 to allow mobile home sales in addition to existing auto sales on his Rt. 29 location opposite the Forest Lakes McDonalds Restaurant. The Planning Commission has scheduled the public hearing [hr Dec. 3, 1996 for this item. We oppose this special permit amendment. We ask that you den,; this request based on these reasons. 1. Rezoning Action is not supposed to take place for this 50 acres of commercial area until after the development of the high density residential area, specifically mentioned in the Comprehensive Plan as 100 mobile home unit sites. This amendment puts the commercial development before the high density residential area. As of this date, there are no_ mobile homes located on the airport high density residential site. Therefore, this special permit should not be considered until there are 100 units located in the mobile home park in compliance with ()ur Comprehensive Plan. 2. Pemfitting the sales of mobile homes on Rt. 29 opposite Forest Lakes is inconsistent with the Route 29 entrance corridor concept tbr Albemarle County. 3. There is no overall plan of development for the 50 acres as required by the Comprehensive Plan. No special permi! amendmenls should be considered until an overall plan of development has been subtnitled and reviewed. This area is too critical to be piecemeal development, and a duplicate of Rt 29 below the South Fork river. 4. There are already nearby sources tbr sale of mobile home units. The high densi .iy residential zoning area near the airport does not require this additional sore-ce of sales at this nme. 5. This special permit request is simply puning the propietary imerests of the individual owner of Autos For Less first regardless of the County priorities. It ignores the Comprehensive Plan and the general health, satbty, and welfare of the people of Albemarle Counb,. Sincerely, }% / / t r DATE:. LOCATION: MINUTES OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD October 21, 1996 Meeting Room 241, Second Floor County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia BOARD MEMBERS: Diane Miller, Chairman Steve Runkle Timothy Lindstrom Rudolph Beverly, Vice-Chairman Timothy Michel COUNTY REPRESENTATION: Marcia Joseph, Design Planner (An A after a name indicates their absence from the meeting.) I. CALL TO ORDER II. E~TABLISH A QUORUM A quorum was established, III. For Your Information Monticello High School Lighting Contact Persons: Jack Clark & Andy the meeting was convened at 1:30 p.m. Sterling "MONTICELLO HIGH SCHOOL For Your Information LIGHTING DATE: October 21, 1996 STAFF PERSON: Marcia Joseph The Architect designing the school site has been working with a lighting design company to develop a plan to illuminate a playing field, the stadium and the parking area around the school. The Page 1 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural A960CT21.MIN Review Board proposal includes all shielded light fixtures. The intensity of the light proposed on both the baseball field and the stadium measures fewer footcandles than we have measured under the canopy at the Amoco station on Pantops. The maximum intensity measures 72.6 footcandles on the stadium floor, and 58.6 on the pitchers mound. The~highest intensity around the parking areas measures 6.~67 footcandles. All of these lights are shielded to direct the light down onto the site. The applicant has included sheets from the manufacturer that illustrate the shielded lighting. Staff can support the lighting proposed, and suggests that the Architectural Review Board recommend that the Planning Commission approve the lighting proposed with the following revision: 1) TO comply with the Zoning Ordinance, keep the lighting intensity 0.5 footcandles or below at all property lines and right-of-ways. The Planning Commission had reserved the right to review the lighting as part of its site plan review." Mr. Lindstrom arrived at 1:40 p.m. Andy Sterling, representative for the Engineering Department, was present. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the lighting includes wall packs. Mr. Sterling stated that he was unsure, but would check. Sally Thomas, Board of Supervisor's member, was present. Staff stated that a lighting work session by Dr. Ianna will be held on November 1st from 10:30 - 12:00 at the County Office Building. After discussion, the Board agreed with the staff's recommendation that the spillover needs to be corrected, no formal recommendation. but made IV. Preliminary Conference ARB-P(SDP)-96-16 Forest Springs Mobile Home Sales Contact Person: TomMuncaster Page 2 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural Review Board A96OCT21.MIN "FOREST SPRINGS MOBILE HOME SALES LOT PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE STAFF PERSON: Marcia Joseph DATE: October 21, 1996 PROJECT NUMBER: ARB-P ISDP) -96-16 LOCATION: Tax Map 32 Parcels 43 & 43A, Zoned HC Highway Commercial, Rivanna Magisterial District, total 7.49 acres. Located on the west side of Route 29N just south of the intersection of Airport Road and Route 29N. HISTORY: Pine Grove Auto Sales is located on a portion of the parcel to the south. It was approved by the ARB in 1995 (ARB-P-SDP-95-12). The ARB reviewed a proposal for the entire site in 1993 (ARB-P-SDP-93-05) for Airport Mobile Home Sales. STAFF REPORT: The applicant proposes placing 4 units elevated above Route 29N. These will be the model units available for sale. The verbal proposal from the applicant includes placing vegetation and pathways around the units to make them appear more permanent. The bulk of the display will then occur to the west of the auto sales and the model units. Staff can not support displaying all 4 model units and the bulk of the display from the Entrance Corridor because the units proposed do not use materials and details found on historic structures in Albemarle County. Therefore, staff suggests that the majority of the display be screened from view from the entrance corridor. The prior approval (ARB-P-SDP-93-05) allowed one unit to be displayed. The rest of the inventory was to be placed behind a tree-topped berm. The Board's suggestions made to the owner at its meeting in 1993 when it discussed the Airport Mobile Home Sales are still appropriate. They suggested the following: Page 3 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural Review Board A96OCT21.MIN 1) Provide two (2) sections one N/S and one E/W on the site. 2) Provide an elevation illustrating the view of the. site from the roadway. 3) Provide detailed information on the berm proposed. 4) Provide a grading plan. 5) Provide screening with a fence in conjunction with vegetation. 6) Simplify the 'fence treatment separating the existing store from the display area. 7) The property line should be adjusted to show the correct acreage allowed within the rezoning approval of this proposal. 8} Dimension travelways, radii, and large gravel storage area. 9) Label contour lines. lO) Provide information concerning lighting, taking care to provide lighting that is shielded and directed down onto the site. In addition: 11) Limit the display to one unit. Other recommendations made by the ARB were made when this site was reviewed as a rezoning request in 1993. The ARB made the following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors: 1) The plan should provide organization to the site in pavement and mobile homes in juxtaposition with the existing a sense of locating the a harmonious building; 2) The plan should reduce the amount of pavement visible to the Entrance Corridor; Page 4 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural Review Board A96OCT21.MIN 3) 4) 5) The plan should visually mitigate the expanse of pavement by breaking it up by using vegetation, walls, fences or arrangement of the mobile homes on the site; The plan should provide a visual continuity on the site by anchoring the building to the site by using vegetation, walls, fences or arrangement of the mobile homes on the site; and The plan should provide a transition from the more commercial sites-to the north~to the more rural sites to the south. For the Certificate of Appropriateness the applicant should include: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Illustration of the units that will be sold on the Photometric plan Landscape Plan Grading Plan Application and fee for the Certificate of Appropriateness." SPEAKERS FOR REQUEST: Tom Batchelor and Wendell Wood spoke for the request. MOTION: Mr. Runkle moved to recommend approval of the special use permit based on the staff's recommendations with the following conditions: · That all areas shown on this plan (stamped Exhibits presented ~o ARB 10/21/96 initialed by M J) noted as display areas, other than the area to the right of the entrance showing the four units, would be screened from Route 29. · The number of configurations of units visible from Route 29 North to be a maximum of four with the final number to be decided as par5 of the final ARB approval of the certificate of appropriateness. · The screening of the other display areas shall be permanent. SECONDED: Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. permanent. He asked that the screening be Page 5 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural Review Board A96OCT21.MIN The motion was unanimously (5:0) approved as follows: Mr. Lindstrom suggested that staff attend the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisor's public hearing on this issue. V. OLD BUSINESS Approval of Minutes: September 16, August 5, and October 7, 1996 MOTION: Mr. Michel moved for approval of the minutes of August 5th. SECONDED: Mr. Runkle seconded the motion. The motion was approved. (Ms. Miller abstained) MOTION: Mr. Beverly moved for approval of the minutes of September 16th. SECONDED: Mr. Michel seconded the motion. The motion was approved. MOTION: Mr. Michel moved for approval of the minutes of October 7th. SECONDED: Mr. Beverly seconded the motion. The motion was approved. VI. New Business VII. Adjournment The Board meeting was adjourned at 2:35 p.m. (Recorded and Transcribed by Sharon Taylor, office Associate IV) Respectfully Submitted, Diane Edgerton Miller Page 6 Minutes of October 21, 1996 Albemarle County Architectural Review A960CT21.MIN Board STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: CLAUDIA L. PAINE JANUARY 7, 1996 FEBRUARY 12, 1996 SP 96-41 - FOREST SPRINGS MOBILE HOME SALES LOT ! Applicant's Proposal: The applicant proposes to establish a mobile home gales lot on the portion o£the 7.9 acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial, that is now occupied by Wheels for Less. The existing residemial structure will be used as a sales office. An/access road connection between the mobile home sales lot and the mobile home park will be sl~wn on the final site plan. IA rezoning request has been filed which proposes deletion of thins to%alway which was required _ / Petition. Petition to establish outdotr storage and display of mob}lc homes for sale in addition tO existing auto sales on approximately 7.9 acres. Property, desc~ibed as Tax Map 32, Parcel 43, zoned P.A, Rural Areas, HC, Highway Commercial, and EC, E~rance Corridor Overlay District, and Parcel 43A, zoned HC, Highway Commercial, and EC, Enhance Corridor Overlay District, is located approximately 1/4 mile south of Rte. 649 on the we~/t side of Rte. 29 North in the Rivanna Magisterial Dis~ct. This site is recommended for ~egional Service in the Hollymead Community. This action is related to SDP 96-097 Forest S]~ngs Mobile Home Sales Center Major Amendment, which provides £or outdoor storage anfdisplay o£mobile homes. Also, this action is related to ZMA 96-25 Forest Springs Mobile Ho~he~ Sales Lot, which proposes to amend the proffers for this site to eliminate the service road con~tection to the mobile}nome park. (See Attachments ~ & C) / / Character of the Area: Currently, this site is occupie~d/by a single rain'welling and an auto sales business (Wheels for Less). Three (3) single £a~ily dwellings ~ lo~ated on the portion of Parcel 43 zoned RA, Rural Areas, which is not part ~tf this request.,, T~te under consideration is mostly wooded. Access to the property is on a p~t~vate dr~e~way~cth~tly off of Route 29 and the Wheels for Less parking lot. A site plan (SDP ~5-092 F~ ~p~gs/Airport Mobile Home Park Final Site Plan) for 122 units was approved 110/10/95 for ~l~..~le home park, which is located west of this site. t ! SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: / Staff has reviewed the special use .4. of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends a Planning and ZoningHistory_: July 26, 1972 - SP-t 58 was approved to site. Ju_ly 14. 1993 - ZMA 93-06 was approved by the Board of Supervisors. This was a request to rezone 7.9 acres, Tax Map 32, Parce} 43A and 43 (part), from PA, Rural Areas, to HC, Highway Commercial(proffered). July 14, 1993 - SP 93q4 was approved by the Board of Supervisors, subject to one condition. This was a request to establish outdoor storage and display and sales of mobile homes on 7.9 acres zoned Rural Areas and Entrance Corridor Overlay District. November 15, 1995 - ZMA 95-17 was approved by the Board te amend the proffers of ZMA 93-06 to allow establishment of outdoor storage and display of autos on 7.9 acres zoned Highway Commercial and Entrance Corridor Overlay District (proffered). The proffers were as follows: 1. The area outlined in yellow (350' x 180') on the attached plan titled "Pine Grove" dated 8/29/95, may be used as a co~ivenience/grocery store and gasoline sales. In addition this area may be used for mobile home sales and/or automobile sales subject to approval of the appropriate special use permits. The remainder of the site may be used only for mobile home sales subject to the approval of the appropriate special use permits; 2. The entrances on this site will be closed or altered if required by the future plan of deve!oPment for the remainifig adjacent areas designated office regional service in the comprehenSive Plan; The frontage on Route 29 containing Tax Map 32, Parcels 43A, 43, 42E, 42D, 42C, 42B, 42A and Tax Map 46, Parcel 5 shall contain not more than three combination entrance & exits. The County may require closure of any existing entrances at the time of establishment of any new entrances such that the total number of entrances does no~ exceed three; 4. An access road between the mobile home sales area and mobile home park shall be developed at the time of the establishment of any mobile home sales use. This access road shall be used only for the movement of mobile homes between the two uses and for emergency access. November 15, 1995 - SP 95-31 was approved by the Board to allow outdoor storage and display of autos, subject to conditions. Comprehensive Plan: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment was approved in 1992 which designated the area including this site as Regional Service. The mobile home sales use is allowed by ZMA 93-06 and, subsequently, by ZMA 95-17. Therefore, it is staff's opinion that the current proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: ]"he proposed use, mobile home sales, is by special use permit due only to i(s location in the EC dist6ct. Therefore, staff comment is.limited to the impact of the use on the EC district. 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 u_pon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, Staffhas ~ot focused on the impact on abutting properties since this use is by special use permit ~ due only to its location in the EC district. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, Impact on the character of the EC district is addressed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) The APB has reviewed this request and has recommended approval subject to conditions. Those conditions arc reflected in the conditions of approval for this special use permit. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent o£ this ordinance, StalT has reviewed this request for compliance onty with the purpose and intent of the EC district. Staff relies on the ARB to provide an analysis of the appropriateness o£the use. Based on the comments of the ARB staffopmion is that this use is in harmony with the purpose and intent of the EC district. with the uses nermitted by right in the district, This use Will have no impact on uses permitted by-right on adjacent properties. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this Ordinance, Section 5.0 contains no additional recommendations. and with the ~ublic health, safety and general welfare. This site is.located along Rte. 29 North. The Virginia Department of Transportation states: "The existing entrances do not meet mimmum 550' sight distance. The sight distance can be improved by raising the grade in the entrances approximately g". Although a right SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. This use is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has not identified any negative factors'resulting from this request. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the above comments, staff recommends approval of SP 96-41 subject to the following conditions: 1. All areas shown on plan (stamped Exhibits presented to ARB 10/21/96 initialed by MJ) noted as display areas, other than the area to the right of the entrance showing the four units, to be screened from Route 29. 2. Number of units visible from Route 29 North to be a maximum of four with the final number to be decided as part of the final ARB approval of the certificate of appropriateness. 3. The screening of the other display areas shall be permanent. 4. Installation of right turn and taper lane as required by the Virginia Deparunent of Transportation in its October 23, 1996 letter. ATYACIelMENTS: A - Applicant's Description and 1ustification B - Location Map C - Tax Map D - VDOT Comments A:\SP9641.RPT Board of County Supervisors Albemarle County,Virginia Dear Supervisor: Thank you for pennimng me to speak to you last night. I am enclosing two non- professional drawings which illustrate what is possible if all work together to create a tree Entrance Corridor. The positive aspect of these designs is that just about any type of business can be accomodated yet the corridor remains attractive. Yours very tmty, ~'x~---; .~ John D.Macdonal ,.d-~'~ ~ ~ - 1910 Barron Court -J Chazlottesville Va. 22911 Form.3 7/25/86 FEBRUARY I ;2, 1997 EXECUTIVE SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION ;2. I ~344(A) .OF thE CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO CONSUlt WiTH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF REGARDING SPECIFIC LEGAL MA~-~ERS CONCERNING REVERSION. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Counw Executive- 401 Mclnfire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804-) 296-5841 FAX (804) 972-,1060 FAX: (804)2.96-5800 February 14, 199'/ Ms. KatioHobbs, President Ms. L'mda Seaman, vice-president for Local Affairs LeagUe of Women Voters 1928 ArYmgtunBlvd., ROOm 105 Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 RE: League of Women Voters' Forum on Reversion Dear Ms. Hobbs and Ms. Seaman: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors arc happy to participate in your upcoming forum on reversion. I have ~¢hed for your information a copy of the actualmotion that they adopted last evening. We applaud those, such as the League of Women Voters, 5vho are attempting to educate our citizemy regarding this matter. The County has actively engaged residents in the process to date and continues to seek opportunities tb help our citizens become better informed. I have attached a copy of the latest reversion pamphlet which we have also added to our Website. All of our Board Members as well as staffmembers are available to meet with various interest groups concerning this matter to, again, better inform them of the process as well as the Board's position. It seems that there is some question co ~n~cming the actual date, time and place of the forum so I would appreciate your informing Ms. Ella Carey, Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, or me once a firm time and place has been det~ .-inexl as well as confirming the exact format of your program so that we may prepare appropriately. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. KWT~lr/dbm 97.026 Attachments pc: Albemarle County Board of Superwsors MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ACCEPT THE INVITATION OF THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS TO PARTICIPATE IN ITS PUBLIC FORUM. OUR PARTICIPATION SHALL SPECIFICALLY BE TO ADDRESS AND TO CONTINUE TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ON THE COUNTY'S POSITION CONCERNING REVERSION OF THE CITY TO TOWN STATUS. TO THE EXTENT THAT OTHER ALTERNATIVE LOCAL GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES AND ORGANIZATIONS ARE PROPOSED TO BE DISCUSSED, THE COUNTY STATES IN ADVANCE, THAT SUCH DISCUSSIONS BY THE COUNTY ARE NOT APPROPRIATE UNTIL THE REVERSION ACTION IS DISMISSED. FURTHER, ANY FUTURE DISCUSSION OF ALTERNATIVE GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES MUST BE BASED SOUNDLY ON THE PREMISE THAT THERE CAN BE NO CHANGE IN THE FORM OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE COUNTY UNLESS SUCH CHANGE IS SUBJECT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY VOTERS BY REFERENDUM. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a tree correct copy of a motion passed by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held on May 1, 1996. /~ , / Clerk, County Board of Sup~sors To: Members, Board of Supervisors From: Ella Washington Carey, CMC, Subject: Reading List for Februay 12, 1997 Date: February 7, 1997 November 15, 1995 - ~ - Mrs. Thom,~s~' pages 13 (Irem # 10) - end - Mr. Martin january 2, 1997 - pages I - 7 (Item ~ 1 Sa) - Mr. Perkins