Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1997-03-19N I ] N,\I 7:(10 lL.M. 5,1,%1~( II I% IC)07 R()O.%i21-I.( ()t \l'~ ()!ll(.I BL'II])IN(, 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Call to Order. Hedge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Con-sent Agenda (on next sheet). Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax of the Code of Albemarle to increase the transient occupancy tax rate from two percent to five percent. ZTA-96-04. J. Page Williams. Public Hearing on a petkion to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, re:. setback provisions of the R-4 Residential (section 15.3), R-6 Residential (section 16.3), R-10 Residential (section 17.3) & R-15 Residential (section 18.3) Districts to permit "zero lot" lines. This will also require amendment to Section 3.0, Definitions, & Section 4.11, Uses & Structures Permitted m Required Yards. SP-96-52. Hurt Investment Corporation (Signs #15& #16). Public Hearing on a request for a day care center on 1.7 ac zoned R-1 in SE corner of Worth Crossing & Proffit Rd. TM32,P36G. Rivanna Dist. SP-96-53. University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation (Sign #17). Public Hearing on a request for a special use permit for existing Birdwood Golf Course to allow expansion of the facilities. TM75,P's63&63A. Samuel Miller Dist. SP-96-55. Robert Colley (Sign. #18). Public Hearing on a request to establish commercial recreation on 0.4 ac zoned C-1 located on S sd of Westfield Rd W of Rt 29 (former location of Holiday Health Club). TM61W, Sec 1, BlkA, P2. Rio Dist. Discussion: Regional Competiuveness Program - Resolution to Support the Formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Discussion: Ivy landfill Options. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Adjourn to March 24, 1997, 1:00 p.m. ( ()NSI. N I ..\(iI. Nl) FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Appropriation: County-wide Traffic Enforcement Grant, $8,000 (Form #96055). 5.2 Appropriation: Route 29 North Traffic Enforcement Grant, $1,470 (Form #96056). 5.3 Appropriation: Traffic Unit Expansion Grant, $10,53'6.30 (Form #96057). 5.4 Appropriation: Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grant, $57,326 (Form //96058). 5.5 Appropriation: Education Division-Donation from Luck Stone Foundation, Inc., $250 (Form//96059). 5.6 Appropriation: Law Enfo%cement Blocl~ Grant, $22,545 (Form//96060). 5.7 Appropriation: Church Arson Prevention Grant, $4,600 (Form//96061). 5.8 Appropriation: Federal and State Drug Seized Assets, $67,191.88 (Form//96062). 5.9 Proclamation prodairning March 20, 197 through March 23, 1997 as the "Third Annual Virginia Festival of the Book". 5.10 Proclamation proclaiming March, 1997, as Mental Retardation Awareness Month. 5.11 Emergency Communications Center Ground Lease Agreement. FOR INFORMATION: 5.12 1996 Annual Report of the Albemarle County Planning Commission. 5.13 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for February 18, 1997. 5.14 Copy of minutes of the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Authority Board meeting of January 9, 1997. 5.15 1997 Estimated Valuation of Railroad Roadway and Track as prepared by the Department of Taxation. 5.16 Copy of m~morandum dated March 5, 1997, to J. W. Brent, Executive Director, Albemarle County Service Authority, from David~Benish, Chief of Community Development, re: 15.1- 456 Review for Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan--Installation of a Sanitary Sewer Collection Line to Serve Properties within the Development Area Located West of Route 29 (Seminole Trail) and North of Route 649 (Airport Road). 5.17 Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) monthly bond and program report for the month of February, 1997. -- 5.18 Copy of letter dated March 13, 1997, to John S. Salmon, Acting Register Program Manager, to Watha J. Eddins, Jr., re: Red Hills, Albemarle County. COUNTY OF ALBEMARI,E MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance / Ella W. Carey, CMC, Clerl~0~ March 20, 1997 Board Actions of March 19, 1997 At its meeting on March 19. 1997. the Board of Supervisors took the following actions: Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend Chapter 8. Finance and Taxation, Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax of the Code of Albemarle to increase the transient occupancy tax rate from two percent ro five percent. ADOPTED the attached Ordinance. Item No. 5.1. Appropriation: County-wide Traffic Enforcement Grant, $8,000 t Form #96055). APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Route 29 North Traffic Enforcement Grant, $ 1,470 [Form #96056'1. APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Item No. 5.3. Appropriation: Traffic Unit Expansion Grant. $10.536.301 Form #96057). APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Item No. 5.4. Appropriation: Community Oriented Policing Services (COPSI Grant, $57,326 ~Form #96058). APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Item No. 5.5. Appropriation: Education Division-Donation from Luck Stone Foundation, Inc., $250 (Form #96059j. APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Memo To: Melvin A. Breeden Date: March 20. 1997 Page 2. Item No. 5.6. Appropriation: Law Enforcement Block Grant. $22.545 tForm 4*96060), APPROVED, Attached is the signed appropriation form. ItemNo. 5.7. Appropriation: Church Arson PreventionGrant, $4,600 (Form #96061L APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. Item No. 5.8. Appropriation: Federal and State Drug Seized Assets. $67.191.88 (Form #96062L APPROVED. Attached is the signed appropriation form. 5.11 Emergency Communications Center Ground Lease Agreement. APPROVED. /ewc Attachments (8) cc: Richard E. Huff. II Roxanne W. White Robert Walters Kevin Castner Jackson Zimmerman John Miller APPROPRIATION FISCAL YEAR 96/97 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION OF DONATION FROM EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY REQUEST NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRAi~SFER NEW YES NO SCHOOL X X 96059 LUCK STONE FOUNDATION, INC. DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1221061101800200 FURNITURE/FIXTURES $250.00 TOTAL $250.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2200018100181109 DONATIONS $250.00 TOTAL S250,00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR S I GNATURE / DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96055 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: DMV TRAFFIC SAFETY GRANT EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1153331145120000 OVERTIME WAGES $7,431.00 1153331145210000 FICA 569.00 TOTAL $8,000.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2153333000330011 FEDERAL DMV GRANT $6,000.00 2153333000330011 LOCAL GOV'T TRANSFER 2,000.00 TOTAL $8,000.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE / DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96056 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TP~Z~N~FER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: DMV MINI GPJ~NT. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1153231145120000 OVERTIME WA~ES $1,366.00 1153231145210000 FICA 104..00 TOTAL $1~470.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2153233000330011 FEDERAL DMV GRANT $1,470.00 TOTAL $1,470.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE / / / DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96057 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR TRAFFIC UNIT EXPANSION GR3LNT. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1153031145120000 OVERTIME WAGES $6,661.56 1153031145210000 FICA 509.64 11530311458C0100 MACH. & EQUIP. 3,365.10 TOTAL $10,536~30 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2153033000330306 DMV-TRAFFIC UNIT EXPANSION $6,042.81 2153G51000512004 LOCAL GOV'T TRANSFER 4,493.49 TOTAL $10,536.30 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 NUMBER 96058 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR COMMUNITY ORIENTED POLICING SERVICES. (COPS) EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1152131010120000 OVERTIME WAGES $18,417.00 1152131010210000 FICA 1,409.00 1152131010800700 ADP EQUIPMENT 37,500.00 TOTAL $57,326.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2152133000330001 FEDERAL GRANT REVENUE $42,994.00 2152151000510110 LOCAL GOV'T TRANSFER 14,332.00 TOTAL $57,326.00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE DATE / / FISCAL YEAR APPROPRIATION REQUEST 96/97 NUMBER 96060 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSPER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GR3LNT. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1153131010110000 SALARIES $20,943.00 1153131010210000 FICA 1~602.00 TOTAL $22,545.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2153133000330001 FEDERAL GRANT $20,290:00 2153151000510110 LOCAL GOV'T TRANSFER 2,255.00 TOTAL $22,545,00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPRoVALs: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE DATE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 96/97 ~BER 96061 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSPER NEW X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GR3~NT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: CHURCH ARSON GRAik~f. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1153431010601000 POLICE SUPPLIES $4,600 00 TOTAL $4,600.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2153433000330001 FEDEP_AL GP_ANT $4,600.00 TOTAL $4,600.00 REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR SIGNATURE / DATE FISCAL YEAR 96/97 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION APPROPRIATION REQUEST ~BER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X 96062 ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: EXPENDITURE OF DRUG SEIZED ASSETS. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 1123539000580902 FEDERAL DRUG SEIZED ASSETS $64,242.06 1123639000580905 STATE DRUG SEIZED ASSETS 2,949~82 TOTAL $67,191.88 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2123515000150101 INTEREST $1,000.00 2123533000330205 FEDERAL REVENUES 22,945.93 21235510G0510100 FUND BALANCE 40,296.13 2123624000240403 STATE REVENUES 1,248.22 2123651000510100 FUND BALANCE 1,701.60 TOTAL S67,191.88 REQUESTING COST CENTER: POLICE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISOR S I GNATURE DATE / / David P. Bowerman Chafio~e Y. Humphfis Forrest R. Mamh~ Jr. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mdnfim Road Charlottesville, V'm2inia 22902-4596 {804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins S~ly H. Thomas MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V.Wayne Citimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development Ella W. Carey, CMC, Clerk,;~/__~ March 25, t997 Board Actions of March 19, 1997 taken: At the Board of Supervisors' meeting held on March 19, 1997, the following actions were Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. Called to order at 7:00 p.m. Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Ms. Patricia Pullen, President, Ivy Steering Committee; Mr. Michael Webber, co-owner of a farm next to the Ivy Landfill; Mr. Ed Strange, Ivy resident; and Mr. Randy Layman, of Waste Haulers Association, spoke about the disposkion of the Ivy Landfill and the consultant's report (GBB) on solid waste. Item No. 5.1. Appropriation: County-wide Traffic Enforcement Grant, $8,000 (Form #96055). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.2. Appropriation: Route 29 North Traffic Enfomement Grant, $1,470 ('Form #96056). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Printed on recycled paper Memo To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: March 25, 1997 Page 2 Item No. 5.3, Appropriation: Traffic Unit Expansion Grant, $10,536.30 (Form #96057). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.4. Appropriation: Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) Grant, $57,326 (Form #96058). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Bmeden. Item No. 5.5. Appropriation: Education Division-Donation from Luck Stone Foundation, Inc., $250 (Form #96059). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden, Item No. 5.6. Appropriation: Law Enforcement Block Grant, $22,545 (Form #96060). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.7. Appropriation: Church Arson Prevention Grant, $4,600 (Form #96061). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No. 5.8. Appropriation: Federal and State Drug Seized Assets, $67,191.88 (Form #96062). APPROVED. Original form forwarded to Melvin Breeden. Item No~ 5.9. Proclamation proclaiming March 20, 197 through March 23, 1997 as the "Third Annual Virginia Festival of the Book". ADOPTED the proclamation. Item No. 5.10. Proclamation proclaiming March, t997, as Mental Retardation Awareness Month. ADOPTED the proclamation. Item No. 5.11. Emergency Communications Center Ground Lease Agreement. APPROVED. Agenda Item No. 6. Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax of the Code of Albemarle to increase the transient occupancy tax rate from two percent to five percent. ADOPTED the attached ordinance effective July 1, 1997. Memo To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: March 25, 1997 Page 3 Agenda Item No. 7. ZTA-96-04. J. Page Williams. Public Hearing on a petition to amend the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, re: setback provisions of the R-4 Residential (section 15.3), R-6 Residential (section 16.3), R-10 Residential (section 17.3) & R-15 Residential (section 18.3) Districts to permit "zero lot" lines. This will also require amendment to Section 3.0, Definitions, & Section 4.11, Uses & Structures Permitted in Required Yards. DEFERRED ZTA- 96-04 indefinitely and referred to the Development Ama Initiatives Steering Committee to review and determine how to incorporate the same into their recommendations. Agenda Item No. 8. SP-96-52. Hurt Investment Corporation (Signs #15& #16). Public Hearing on a request for a day care center on 1.7 ac zoned R-1 in SE comer of Worth Crossing & Proffit Rd. TM32,P36G. Rivanna Dist. APPROVED SP-96-52 subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: 1. Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: No such use shall operate without any required licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the Zoning Administrator a copy of the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the zoning administrator of any license expiration, suspension or revocation within three (3) days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County Fire Official at his discretion. Failure to promptly admit the Fire Official for such inspection shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Welfare, Virginia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state or federal agency; Site shall be developed in general accordance with the site plan prepared by W. Aubrey Hoffman & Associates, Ltd., dated December 10, 1996, and revised January 27, 1997; Maximum enrollment shall not exceed ninety (90) students or such lesser number as may be approved by the Health Department; additional enrollment shall require amendment to the special use permit. Agenda Item No. 9. SP-96-53. University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation (Sign #17). Public Itearing on a request for a special use permit for existing Birdwood Golf Course to allow expansion of the facilities. TM75,P's63&63A. Samuel Miller Dist. APPROVED Memo To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: March 25, 1997 Page 4 SP96-53, subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: Approval is for the existing golf course facility (including buildings, parking an~d all site improvements) and the building enclosure/addition only. Any new construction, other than minor changes (such as additional practice tees, modifications of greens and other changes that do not require a site plan) to the existing buildings and site, and any expansion outside of the current boundaries of the existing golf course would require an amended special use permit; A field verified plan of the golf course shall be provided by the applicant showing the location of buildings, drives, parking lots and other constructed improvements. This field verified plan or "as-built" plan should be provided in conjunction with the Birdwood/Faulconer Neighborhood Plan which is part of the Area B Study; Continued implementation of an Integrated Pest Management/Nutrient Management Plan to reduce adverse water quality impacts. Agenda Item No. 10. SP-96-55. Robert Colley (Sign. #18). Public Itearing on a request to establish commercial recreation on 0.4 ac zoned C-1 located on S sd of Westfield Rd W of Rt 29 (former location of Holiday Health Club). TM61W,Sec 1, BlkA, P2. Rio Dist. APPROVED SP- 96-55, subject to the following conditions recommended by the Planning Commission: Use shall be limited to indoor activities only; No sale of alcohol shall be permitted~ Agenda Item No. 11. Discussion: Regional Competitiveness Program - Resolution to Support the Formation ora Regional Parmership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District: ADOPTED the attached Resolution to Support the Formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Agenda Item No. 12. Discussion: Ivy landfill Options. APPROVED Option VIIA, with the following caveats: accept only CDD (construction waste and demolition debris) from the Charlottesville-Albemarle area and monitor the CDD for contaminants, i.e., paint cans, etc.; * continue collection of household hazardous waste; Memo To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Citimberg Date: March 25, 1997 Page 5 monitor the landfill to limit the County's liability from mega landfills based on any contaminants in their landfill should the County be sued in the future; and how to best assure that recyclables (i.e., blue bags, etc.) are still collected at Zion Crossroads or at Ivy by private haulers. Mr. Bowerman requested that if issues come up at the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority's meeting on Monday, March 24, 1997, in which they are unable to address, Rivanna defer action and come back to the Board for further discussion, Agenda Item No. 13. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Mr. Martin informed the Board that the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee will interview consultants on April 21, 1997. APPOINTED Cindy Perry and Eric Struko to the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee. Mrs. Thomas requested that staff move forward on the Mountain Protection Plan. Agenda Item No. 14. ADJOIJRNED to March 24, 1997, 12:00 noon, Room 241 for Budget Work Session. EC/tbh Attachments: 2 cc: Richard E. Huff, II Roxanne Whke Kevin C. Castner Larry Davis Amelia McCutley Jack Kelsey Bruce Woodzetl R/chard Wood Jan Sprinkle Yadira Amari File ORDINANCE NO. 97-8(i) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 8. FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE IX, TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE 1T ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 8-4 I, Imposed; amount of tax, as follows: Sec. 8-41. Imposed; amount of tax. There is hereby imposed a tax on the occupancy of all rooms in hotels, motels, boardinghouses and travel campgrounds within the county. Such tax shall be assessed at the rate of five (5) percent of the amount charged for such occupancy; provided, however, that nothing herein shall be construed as imposing any tax upon rooms or spaces rented for continuous occupancy to the same individual, person. firm. or corporation for thirty (30) or more days in hotels, motels, boardinghouses or travel campgrounds. (I 1-28-73; 8-15-74; 4-13-88.) The revenue collected from the portion of the tax over two (2) percent shall be designated and spent for promoting tourism, travel or business that generates tourism or travel in the county. This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1997. *State law reference--Authority of county to adopt this artide, Code of Va., §58.1-3819. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on March 19. 1997. Clerk, Board of County Superv/~ors / / 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE FORMATION OF A REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP IN THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors /hereafter "Board") acknowledges that. although Albemarle County enjoys economic strength, other jurisdictions in the region may have greater economic challenges and needs: and ' WHEREAS, the economic development policy in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan does not support the stimulation of population growth by economic development but does recognize the County's role and place in a regional economy; and WHEREAS, the Board favors a cooperative effort by the member jurisdictions of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to develop a regional strategic plan to assess the region's strengths and weaknesses and to explore the possibility of obtaining funding pursuant to the Regional Competitiveness Program, as defined in the Regional CompetitivenessAct. to address any such weaknesses and to implement plans to enhance the region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors states its support for the formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to address the strengths and wealmesses of the region. including issues such as education, housing, transportation and the environment, as follows: 1. The Regional Partnership should consist of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (hereafter "TJPDC") as the core members plus members appointed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 by TJPDC to provide additional representation from each member jurisdiction and its educational entities, businesses, and other groups such as historic preservation, environmental, rural conservation, and housing organizations; 2. Before the Regional Partnership begins work, each member jurisdiction shall by resolution approve the members ~vhich come from its jurisdiction; 3. As its first endeavor, the Regional Partnership shall write bylaws for the conduct of its business, as stipulated in the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development Guidelines. Prior to the formal commencement of strategic planning, Albemarle County shall by resolution approve the bylaws; 4. The TJPDC should provide the support staff for the strategic planning process to avoid the creation of a duplicate regionally funded staff; 5. The Regional Strategic Economic Development Plan (hereafter "Strategic Plan") devised by the Regional Partnership must: (a) recognize and support each member jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, including the scale and character of the region, the preservation of its historic places, its rural land and its natural resources. (b) consider agricultural, forestry, and tourism opportunities and opportunities of protected landscapes in addition to commercial and industrial opportunities. (c) be developed in a public process which includes local public hearings and other opportunities for public participation; (d) identify specific programs to be supported by any incentive funds obtained by the Regional Partnership and a method to assess the success of such programs; and, as far as practicable~ consider the consequences of the programs to the regional economy, natural and fiscal resources, and population. 2 t 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 i0 I1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. Prior to the submittal to the Virgirua Department of Housing and Community Development of any application for the creation of the Regional Partnership and the submittal of the Strategic Plan, Albemarle County shall by resolution approve: (a) the Strategic Plan and the specific application for incentive funding; and (b) the formulas for the distribution of incentive funds within the region. I. Ella W. Carey. do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true. correct copy of a Resolution unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia. at a regular meeting held on March 19, 1997. Clerk. Board of County Sup~Asors REGPAR2.WPD 3 05-~4-97A08:36 RCVD AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Countywide Traffic Enforcement Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96055 in the amount of $8,000.00. STAFF ~: Ms. White, Messrs. Tucker, Walters, Miller ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: March 19, 1997 ACTION: C -NSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: Yes ½ BACKGROUND: Traffic activity is increasing in Albemarle County. Patrol Officers on regular assignment do not have the opportunity to do much traff'= enforcement. The primary proposed solution is to increase traffic enforcement through selective enforcement assignments employing officers working overtime. This is a companion grant to the 29N traffic- enforcement grant. DISCUSSION: The overtime work to be performed by the County of Albemarle Police Department will be funded by a $6,000.00 federal grant. There is a $2,000.00 local match. The local match will be funded out of the current Police Administrative Services Division budget. No additional funds are required. RECOM~: Staff recommends approval Appropriation 96055 in the amount of $8,000.00. 97.054 AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - 29N Traff~c Enforcement Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96056 in the amount of $1,470.00. STAFF CONTACTfSI: Ms. White, Messrs. Tucker, Waiters, Miller AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes ./ BACKGROUND: U.S. Route 29 North of Charlottesville is the busiest and most crash prone area in the County. Patrol Officers on regular assignrnent do not have the opportunity to do much traffic enforcement. The pdma~ proposed solution is to increase traffic enforcement through selective enforcement assignments employing one or two officere working overtime. DISCUSSION: The¢overtime work to be performed by the County of Albemarle Police Department will be funded by a $1,470.00 fedet'al grant. There is no local match. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval Appropriation 96056 in the amount of $1,470.00. 97.055 COUNTY OF ALBEMAR£ r- ---~. OARD OF SUPERVISORS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Vi rib ed AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Traff~c Unit Expansion Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96057 in the amount of $10,536.30. STAFF CONTACT(SI: Ms. White, Messrs. Tucker, Walters, Miller AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Ye~~ REVIEWED BY: '//~*/~'~/ / BACKGROUND: The County of Albemarle has been experiencing rapid growth especially in the areas of retailing and residential development. This growth has placed increasing demands on the County Police Department. Major areas of demand are traffic related. In 1992, a Traffic Unit was established. A $16,839 DMV grant for the period October 1, 1994 through September 30, 1995 was received to expand the Unit to a more functional level by funding overtime for traffic checkpoints, selective enfomement, and education operations. The grant was renewed for $'10,400 for the period October 1, 1995 through September 30, 1996. This request asks that the remaining funds be reappropriated for the period July 1, 1996 through September 30, 1996. There is a local match of $4,493. DISCUSSION: The overtime work to be performed by the County of Albemarle Police Department will be funded by the $6,042.81 balance of this Federal Grant. The local match consists of $4,493.49. The local match will be funded out of the current Police Administrative Services Division budget, No additional funds are requrred. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval Appropriation 96057 in the amount of $10,536.30. 97.056 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE : BOARD OF SLTPEP V r$OR$ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ~istributed AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Community Odented Policing Services (COPS) Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96058 in the amount of $57,326.00. STAFF CONTACT[SI: Messrs. Tucker, Miller, Walters; Ms. White AGENDA DATE: March '19, 1997 ACTION: CONSENT 'AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: ~FORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes The U.S. Department of Justice has approved a grant to increase community oriented policing through increased overtime and use of hand held notepad computers. The County of Albemarle proposes to purchase 15 notepad computers and pay for 1,000 hours of overtime under the COPS MORE program to increase the presence of existing sworn officers in community policing activities. DISCUSSION: The COPS MORE grant will be funded by a $42,994.00 U.S. Department of Justice COPS grant and a $14,332.00 local match. The local match is funded by the police operating budget. Additional funds are not required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of appropriation 96058 in the amount of $57,326.00. 96.053 COUNTY OF ALBE OF SUPERVISOR$ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education Division SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of appropriation #96059 to appropriate a $250.00 donatior received from Luck Stone Foundation, Inc. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Castner, Breeden AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes _ REVIEWED BY: ~/~~ BACKGROUND: At its meeting on February 24, 1997, the School Board approved the appropriation of $250.00 from the Luck Stone Foundation, Inc. DISCUSSION: Stone Robinson Elementary School received a donation in the amount of $250.00 from the Luck Stone Foundation, Inc. This donation is to be used to purchase furniture for the new volunteer coordinator at Stone Robinson Elementary School. RE CO M MENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the appropriation as detailed on the attached form #96059. 97.052 ALREMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Memorandum 03-13-97A'i0:45 RCVD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DATE: March 11, 1997 TO: Robert /. T~ker, Jr., County Executive FROM: Kevin ~s~r, Division Superintendent RE: Requesn for Approprianlon At its meeting on March 10, 1997, the School Board approved the following appropriations: Appropriation of $5,000.00 for Stone Robinson Elementary School. Stone Robinson Elementary School received an anonymous donation mn the amount of $5,000.00. This donatmon is to be used to purchase shoes for the marching band, refurbishing band uniforms, and a drum set. Appropriation of $250.00 from the Sycamore House Studio Art Shop. Albemarle County Schools has received a donation from the Sycamore House Studio Art Shop in the amount of $250.00. This donati2n is to help defray the cost of the Fine Arts Festival held February 23 through March 9 an Fashion Square Mall. Appropriation of $4,923.66 for the EDWAA GED Grant. Piedmont Community College, Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjusnment Assisnance Act, General Education Grant (EDWAA GED) would like to extend the EDW~3% GED preparation classes provided by Albemarle County Adult Education for their clients. These classes have k~en offered for the last several years ending in November 1996. Due to an increase in available funds an exnension of these classes is requested through June 1997. Re-approprlatmon of $1,645.95 for the EDWD~ GED Grant. The Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustmenn Assistance Act, ~eneral Education Grant (EDWAA GED has a fund balance mn the amoun£ of $1~645.95. These funds will be used to support EDWAA GED classes that were held July through Augusn 1996. It ms requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation ordinance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed on the annachment. Attachment xc: Melvin Breeden Ella Carey ALBEMARLE COIYNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS DONATION-BURLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL REIqENI/E: 2-2000-18100-181109 EXPEAIDITLrRE: 1-2251-61101-580000 Donation Miscellaneous Expense $5,000.00 $5,000.00 DONATION-ALBEMARLE COUA~fY SCHOOLS REVEi~JE: 2-2000-18100-181109 Donation EXPENDITURE: 1-2111-61311-601300 Ed/Rec Supplies $250.00 $250.00 EDWAA GED GPJL~T REVENUE: 2-3116-33020-330019 EXPENDITLrRE: 1-3116-63348-132100 -210000 -601300 REVENUE: 2-3116-51030-510100 EXPENDITI/RE: 1-3116-63348-132100 -210000 EDWAA GED Grant PT/Wages-Teacher FICA Ed/Rec Supplies EDWAA GED REAPPROPRIATION Appropriation Fund Balance PT/Wages-Teacher FICA $4,923.66 $4,510.48 S365.18 $4s.o0 $4,923.66 $1,645.95 $1,529.02 3116.93 $1,645.95 DATE: February 25, 1997 TO: Robert W~er, Jr., County Executive FROM: Kevin C~, Division Superintendent RE: Request for Appropriation At its meeting on February 24, following appropriation: 1997, the School Board approved the Appropriation of $250.00 from the Luck Stone Foundation, Inc. Stone Robinson Elementary School received a donation in the amoun~ of $250.00 from the Luck Stone Fouiqdation, Inc. This donation is to be used to purchase furniture for'the new volunteer coordinator at Stone Robinson Elementary School. The funds will be received and disbursed as follows: 2-2000-18100-181109 Donation $250.00 Expenditure: Furniture/Fixtures-New $250.00 It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation ordinance to receive and disburse these funds as displayed above. Attachment xc: Melvin Breeden Ella Carey COUNTY OF ALBEMAR .E -97^0 :3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Law Enforcement Block Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96060 in the amount of $22,545.00. STAFF CONTACT(S): · Ms. White. Messrs. Tucker, Waiters, Miller BACKGROUND AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: ~//~~ The purpose ofthe grant program isto reduce crimes andimprove public safety. This grant will utilize one officer on a part-time basis in the Esmont and Scottsville areas to provide a part-time neighborhood police officer. DISCUSSION: The workto be performed by the County of Albemarle Police Department will be funded by a $20,290.00 federal grant. There is a $2,255.00 local match which will be funded from current operations. No additional funds are required. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation 96060 in the amount of $22,545.00. 97.059 COUNTY OF ALBEMARL E97^o :3, RcvD BOARD OF SUPERVISORS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Church Arson Prevention Grant SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96061 in the amount of $4,600.00. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Walters, Miller, Ms. White AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENTAGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes/ REVIEWED BY: ~'/'~~ BACKGROUND: '/ The Church Arson Prevention Grant Program was authorized under the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act. The purpose of the program is to prevent furl. her attacks on houses of worship and end racial and religious intolerance in America. The proceeds of the grant will be used to purchase hardware for distribution to churches within the County of Albemarle. DISCUSSION: The hardware purchases will be funded by a $4,600.00 federal grant. There is no local match. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of appropriation 96061 in the amount of $4,600.00. 97.057 COUNTY OF ALBEMARI° 4-97^°8:36 RCvD EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: APpropriation - Federal and State Drug Seized Assets SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/RI [QUEST: Request approval of Appropriation 96062 in the amount of $67.191.88. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Waltem, Miller, Ms. White AGENDA DATE: March 19, 1997 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ITrr~ NUMBER-' ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes ~ / BACKGROUND: Periodically, the Count,/receives revenues for assets seized in 1ederal and ~tate drug enforcement actions, The proceeds are ut I~zed for additional law enforcement acidities. DISCUSSION: This appropriation requests approval of the receipts and expenditures for federa~ and state drug seized assets for the period July 1, 1996 through June 30, 1997. This appropriation requests approval of the expenditure of the unrestricted July 1, 1996 i:und balance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of appropriation 96062 in the amount of ,$67.191.88. 97.058 PROCLAMATION VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK WHEREAS, our love of literature and writing has led our community to rank first in the nation in book reading households; and WHEREAS, the Virginia Festival of the Book has celebrated the extraordinary writers who grace Albemarle County, and the children and adults who read books; and WHEREAS, over one hundred and forty gifted writers will participate in more than two hundred programs; and WHEREAS, numerous local businesses and individuals, civic groups and cultural organizations, have contributed time and resources to make this event possible; NO W, THEREFORE, I, Charlotte Y. Humphris, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby proclaim THURSDAY, MARCH 20, 1997 THROUGH SUNDA Y, MARCH 23, 1997 as the Third Annual VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK and encourage community members to participate fully in the wide variety of available events and activities. Signed and sealed this 20th day of March, 1997. CHAIRMAN ALBEMARLE BOARD OF COUNTY' SUPER VISORS PROCLAMATION MENTAL RETARDATION AWARENESS MONTH WHEREAS mental retardation is a condition affecting more than 198,000 children and adults in Virginia; and WHEREAS, 50 percent of mental retardation cases could be prevented if current knowledge were fully zmplemented; and WHEREAS people with mental retardation have the capacity to learn, develop and grow like all other citizens of our community; and WHEREAS Virginians with mental retardation are valuable members of our society and can gain greater independence and productivity through community support; and WHEREAS families, friends, neighbors, congregations and local community groups provide significant, and often unheralded support to Virginians with mental retardation; and WHEREAS over 300 citizens with mental retardation in the City of Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa and Nelson are without necessary services and supports; and WHEREAS, Mental Retardation Awareness Month provides the opportunity for all Americans to recogmze the tremendous value and potential of people with mental retardation and to recommit and dedicate ourselves to the empowerment, integration, employment and inclusion of every one of our citizens with mental retardation; NOW, THEREFORE, I, Charlotte Y. Humphris, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors, do hereby recognize the month of MARCH, I~7as MENTAL RETARDATION AWARENESS MONTH in the County of Albemarle and call this observance to the attention of all our citizens. The Arc of Charlottesville/Albemarle 509 Park Street Charlottesville, Va 22902 (804) 977-4002 Fax (804) 984-0577 (800) 732-9507' e-mail theareca@aol.com EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Christina Delzingaro OFFICERS President Jim Boyd Vice President Carol Terry Helen Holdren BUI Bush Member at Large Jim Grigg Past President Lloyd Raupp DIRECTORS Martha Baganz Glenn Catalano Tom Hartman Sue Raupp Herb Stewart C. Harmon Williams, Jr, BOARD MEMBERS EMERITUS Helen Paige Anne Stevens February 14, 1997 Ms. Ella Carey Clerk of the Board of Supervisors Albemarle County 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Carey: For the past 19 years, The Arc of the United States has declared March as Mental Retardation Awareness Month, to call attention to the needs of individuals with mental retardation, the unique benefits these citizens can bring to their communities, and the importance of prevention efforts ha reducing the instance of mental retardation. During the month of March, The Arc of Charlottesville/Albemarle, Region Ten Community Services Board and WorkSource Enterprises will sponsor public education efforts regarding community acceptance of persons with mental retardation; the success of self-sufficiency programs in i~proving the quality of life of persons with mental disabilities; and the devastating, yet completely preventable, effects ~ Fetal Alcohol Syndrome. ~ As part of these efforts, we join The Arcs in 25 other communities in Virginia in requesting that the local governments proclaim March as Mental Retardation Awareness Month. Please present the enclosed proclamation to your Board of Supervisors for consideration at their next meeting. Bypassing this proclan~ation, Albemarle County can acknowledge its support for services for persons with mental retardatior~, by both pt[blic and private community groups; the continuing need for public education about[he abilities of persons with mental retardation; and the /mportauee ofprev~ in reducing mental disabilities. Please contact us if you have any questions about Mental Retardation Awareness Month or the services provided by the many caring individuals in our community. Sincerely, The Arc WorkSource Enterprises Ann White Region Ten CSB serving citizens with or at risk of mental retardation and developmental disabilities since 1954 formerly the Association for Retarded Citigens FOR IMMt~DIATE RELEASE For more information, contacT: Christina Delzingaro (804) 977-4002 w (540) 456-6160 h March is Mental Retardation Awareness Month The Arc, Region Ten and WorkSource Enterprises Sponsor Events The Arc of Charlottesville/Albemarle, Region Ten Community Serv/ces Board, and WorkSource Enterprises wilt recognize March 1 - 31 as Mental Retardation Awareness Month, in the tgth consecutive year for the nationwide observance. Using *.he theme, "Within the heart of each commum~, everyone belongs," The Arc, Region Ten and WorkSource are jointly sponsoring several public awareness activities. These three organizations have been working together for over 30 years to serve local children and adults with mental retardation and their families. One in t0 Americans has a family member with mental retardafion~ Over 7.2 milhon Americans, including about 6,000 of our friends and neighbors in the Charlottesville/Albemarle area have mental retardation. "People with mental retardation comprise one of the largest disability groups, and yet the condition is often misunderstood," said Christina Delzingaro, Executive Director of The Arc of Charlottesville/Albemarle. "We hope our March activities can help the community see the tremendous value and potential of people with mental retardation. We're especially emphasimg the gifts that people with mental retardation have to con~lbute to their neighborhoods, schools, workplaces and congregations." According to The Arc, mental retardation is an intellectual disability. A person is said to have mental retardation if he or she has an IQ measured below 70-75 and significant limitations in two or more adaptive skills. Also, mental retardation begins in childhood (before age 19) and continues as a life-long condition. Mental Retardation A~areness Month activities jointly sponsored by The Arc, Region Ten and WorkSource include a Communi~~ Breakfast and the Mental Retardation Sabbath/Sunday Project. The Community Breakfast will be held on Thursday March 27 from 8 to I0 a.m. at Options, which is Iocated at 534 East Main Street in Charlouesville. The Breakfast will honor ten individuals with mental retardation who are making a difference in their communities. For more information about the Commur/ty Breakfast, con, ct Ann White at Region Ten (972- 1800). The Mental Retardation Sabbath/Sunday Project is a voluntary, cooperative public awareness effort to acquaint the commumty ~Sth the needs and abilities ofpeopte with mental retardation. Over 200 local churches, synagogues and other religious organizations have been asked to focus some part of their religious services on March 15 and 16 on ministry to people with mental retardation or other disabilities and their families. The Project is designed to encourage inclusion of persons with disabilities in the activities of the religious community, from worship services to study groups to recreational acfiwties. The Arc will also hold is annual Spring Benefit Gala on Saturday March 22 at 6:00 p.m. at the Greencroft Club. This annual event raises funds for the programs of The Arc, which include the Adult Activity Center and the Infant Development Project The Adult Activity Center is a day support program for adults with mental retardation who require intensive services. Activities and experiences at the Adult Activity Center are designed to enable individuals to achieve their highest potential in independence and participation in the community. The Infant Development Project serves over 150 families each year with infants with disabilities, developmental delays, or who are at risk of develop'mg delays. The goal ofth/s in-home early/ntervenfion program is to prevent or reduce the severity of developmental delay [ainfan~s. The ,~c also o'wns three home w,hJch are operated by Region Ten as group homes for adults with mental retardation. For more information about the services of The Arc, call 977- 4002. Founded in 1954 by a small group of parents and friends of people with mental retardation, and known for many years as the Association for Retarded Citizens, The Arc of Chartouesvitle/Albemarle is one of the 1,100 affiliated chapters of The Arc of the U.S. The Arc is the nation's largest volanteer organization solely devoted to improving the lives of children and adults w/th mental retardation. Founded in 1969, Region Ten Commtmity Services Board was one of the first mental health, mental retardation, and substance abuse centers in Virg/ma. Region Ten provides a wide army of services to Individuals with mental retardation. Services include case management, family support, residential and day support; supported employment, and psychiatric and mental health services. Through case management services, individuals can be linked to other needed community resources and supports, including respite services. Because the need for residential, day support, and supported employment services far exceeds Region Ten's financial capability, a waiting list does ex/st for these services. For more Information about Region Ten's services, call the Intake Team at 972-1800. WorkSource Enterprises (formerly Workshop V) provides job Ixaining and employment oppommities to people with disabilities. Menial retardation is the pr/mary disability of one-third of WorkSource clients and is the highest incidence of any single disability. Employment options include placement in jobs in the commum~,, supported employment and paid work with WorkSource. On-site supported employment consists of a large production facility that performs packaging and assembly jobs for regional compan/es. Off-site supported enterprises include A Touch of Class Janitorial Services and BreadWorks Bakery at 923 Preston Avenue. WorkSource also sponsors a day support program and classes in Adult Basic Educauon. For more information about the services of WorkSource Enterprises, call 972-1730. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 03-17-97P04:48 RCVD MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive~~-'---~-'-~-~ March 17, 1997 Emergency Communications Center Ground Lease Agreement As you know, the County of Albemarle, City of Charlottesville and UVA have been in contract negotiations regarding a Ground Lease Agreement for the new Emergency Communications Center building located on Uulversity property near the by-pass and 250 West. I have attached Mark Trank's overview of the agreement as it has been negotiated m-date for your information and approval The lease agreement itself is fairly lengthy bm you can review a copy of the lease in the Clerk' s officeif you would like to study it more in depth. However, I think the comments in Mark's transmittal memorandum will suffice to explain some of the issues that we have been discuss'rog over the last several months. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. RWTjr/bat 9%2 Attachment MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive Mark A. Trank, Deputy County Attome~ March 12, 1997 ECC Ground Lease Agreement Attached is the final draft of the proposed Ground Lease Agreement (the "Lease'"~ between UVA, the County and City of Charlottesville concerning the Emergency Communications Center project. The following are the highlights of the Lease: 1. term/Payment: the lease period is 50 years (¶ 1.02). You may recall that, as originally proposed, the lease called for a smgle 99-year term; subsequent drafts shortened this to an initial 50-year term with an option ro renew (at the County and City's discretion) for one additional 50-year period; this has been deleted from the final version. Article 16 ~¶ 16.01) provides that if the parties desire an extension to the lease beyond the 50-year term, then two years prior to the expiration date of the agreement, the parties agree to meet and "negotiate in good faith." Rent is to be $1.00 per year. 2. Title to Imorovements and Termination: the fmal draft (¶ 4.04(a)) provides that title to the improvements and alterations shall pass to UVA without cost at the expiration of the 50-year term, unless extended by mutual agreement of the parties. '~ 4.04(b) provides that, in the event during the 50-year term the County and City rand, by ~mplication, the ECC Board) decide to discontinue use of the facility as an emergency commurfications center or for related public safety purposes, one-year notice of the intent to vacate ~s required. UVA would then have the option to purchase the improvements and alterations ar a cost of 65% of the then current fair market value as determined by two independent appraisals. This Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive March 12, 1997 Page 2 would exclude the value of any improvements constructed at UVA's expense, including the UVA Police motorcycle storage area. UVA would also have the option of leasing the facility at market rent at the expiration of the 50-year term. IfUVA declines to exercise this option to purchase or lease, then the County and City would be permitted to assign or sublease the facility in accordance with cerffm restrictions on use set forth in Article 2 (¶ 2.02) for the remainder of the term. As you know. this provision has been the subject of much discussion among the parties. One of the County's and City's pr'nnary concerns has been the probability of escalating costs of construction of the new center. As originally proposed, the Lease -- whereby UVA would contribme the value of the land in exchange for the County and City building the facility -- was based upon an approximate construction cost of no more than $1 million. That figure is now believed to be substantially higher. The value o£the land has nor, however, increased proportionately. 3. Restrictions on Use: ~ 2.02 provides that the property shall be used solely for "activities relat'mg to public safety, including but not iimked to emergency communications, f~re and emergency medical services and storage space." With UVA's prior written consent, the property may be used by the County and/or City for other purposes that are "compatible" with the then- existing uses of surrounding property by UVA, which covenants not to withhold its consent "unreasonably." Any other uses would be subject to prior approval by UVA, which could reject them at its option. 4. Environmental Issues: * 3.07 deals with environmental liability. Subsection (b) provides that it is UVA's responsibility to clean-up any toxic or hazardous waste contamination on- sire (including but not limited to asbestos and lead in the building to be demolished), but limits UVA's obligationto clean-up the site to $50.000. IfUVA does not undertake clean-up, or if other conditions prohibit the development of the property as an emergency communications center, then the County and City may terminate the lease by giving written notice at any time. whereupon the County and City would be responsible for rough-grading the site but the parties would then have no further obligation or liability to each other. Under the final draft, the City and County have no financial obligation to pay for any clean- up costs (other than initial testing costs). In addition, it is my opinion that UVA would remain a responsible parry in any proceeding brought by EPA, DEQ or private party arising our of contamination at the site. I had earlier proposed inclusion of language in the Lease to state this explicitly, but UVA's attorney was not willing to agree to this. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive March 12, 1997 Page 3 UVA is anxious to submit the Lease to the Governor's staff and Attorney General's office for review as soon as possible. UVA has proposed that, as a means of expedit'mg state approval, the chief executive officers (i.e., you and Gary) each write a letter to Leonard stating that you have reviewed the Lease and fmd it acceptable. I realize that you may wish to bring this to the Board for information and discussion prior to agreeing ro do so, and have advised the City and UVA of this. Please let me lmow if you have any questions concerning the Lease or as to how you would like to proceed at this point. cc: Larry Davis I'w/enc3 Rick Huff (w/enc.) MAT/ECCLEASE.MM2 GROUND LEASE AGREEMENT by and between THE RECTOR AND VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA and THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE and THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE. VIRGINIA Table of Contents ArflCle 1. Demise, Property, Term. Rem 1.01 1.02 1.03 Article 2. Use 2.01 2.02 Demise and Premises .................... Term .................................... Rent .............. . ...................... Use Restrictions on Use Anicte 3. Rezoning and Admiaisrrative Land Use Approvals 3.01 3.02 3.03 3.04 3.05 3.06 Expenses of Approvals 3.07 Soil Tests and Toxic Wastes Article 4. Construction of Improvements 4.01 4.02 4.03 Application for Rezoning Consent to Rezoaing Administrative Approvals Compliance wi~ Conditions Inability m Obtain Rezoning, Subdivision. Sire Plan. or Special Use Approvals ........... Tenant's Duty ro Construct Improvements .......... Changes, Alterations and Additional Consrraction ...... Manner of Completion .................... Page 2 2 3 3 4 & 4 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 8 8 9 9 4.04 Title to Improvements and Alterations ........... 4.05 Landlord's Right to Inspect New Construction ...... Article 5. Impositions and Payment Thereof ................ 5.01 Capital Expenditures ..................... 5.02 Evidence of Payment ..................... 5.03 Connection Charges ..................... 5.04 Ongoing Operating Costs ..................... Article 6. Surrender .............................. 6.01 Delivery of Possession ................ 6.02 Retention of Personal Premises ................ 6.03 Survival ............................... .aa~6.cte 7. Insurance 7.01 Insurance During Construction 7.02 Fire Insurance 7.03 Other Insurance 7.04 Insurers 7.05 Insureds 7.06 Bl~ker Insurance Policies 7.07 Notice of Cancellation 7.08 Certificate of Insurance Article 8. Performance of Covenants Article 9. Compl/auce with Laws, Ordinances, Etc. 1t 12 12 t2 13 13 13 14 14 14 15 15 15 15 16 16 t6 16 17 17 17 18 9.01 9.02 Article 10. Article 11. Permits Mechanic's Liens Inspection of Premises by Landlord ............... Compliance with Laws ..................... Article 12. Tenant's Acceptance of Condition of Premises ........... Article !3. Dehult by Tenant .......................... 13.01 Event of Default .......................... 13.02 Landlord's Remedies for Tenant's Default ...... 13.03 Force MaJeure .......................... 13.04 Remedies Not Exclusive ..................... 13.05 Waiver of Performance ..................... Article 14. Condemnation ........................... 14.01 Total Taking .......................... 14.02 Appor-donment of Award on Total Taking ...... t4.03 Partial Taking .......................... 14.04 Reconstruction .......................... 14.05 Apportionment of Award on Partial Taking ...... 14.06 Temporary T -mt4ng .......................... t4.07 Settlement A~reement ..................... Article 15 AssigTanent and Subletting ..................... Assignment or Other Transfer of Lease ........... Subletting .......................... 15,01 15.02 Article 16. Extension Privileges 18 19 19 20 20 21 21 21 22 22 23 23 23 24 24 25 25 26 27 27 27 27 28 16.01 Article 17. 17.01 Option ........................... Notices and Approvals ..................... Notices ................................ 17.02 Approvals ............................... Article 18. Successors and Assigns of the Parties. Controlling Law 18.01 Successors .......................... 18.02 Conveyance by Landlord 18.03 Controlling Law. Article 19. Estoppel Certificates 19.0t Tenant's Estoppel 19.02 Landlord's Estoppel Article 20. Miscellaneous Provisions 20.0t 20.02 20.03 Separability 2G.04 Counterparts 20.05 Head'rags Article 21. UVA Status 21.01 State Law inte~ation .......................... Memorandum of Ground Lease ................ 28 28 28 29 29 29 29 3O 30 3O 30 31 3I 31 32 32 32 32 32 GROUND LEASE AGREEMENT THIS GROUND LEASE AGREEMENT (hereto called "Ground Lease") made and executed this day of 199 by and between THE RECTOR AND VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VrRGINL~_ d~erein the "Landlord" or "UVA") and the CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA ("City'*) and the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA ("County") (herein together called the "Tenant"); WITNESSETH THAT: Landlord and Tenant do hereby mutually covenant, promise and agree as follows: ARTICLE 1. DEMISE. PROPERTY. TEtLM. RENT 1.01 Demise and Premises. Landlord does hereby demise and let unto Tenant, and Tenant does hereby lease and take from Landlord, for the term and upon the covenants, terms and conditions herehnafter set forth: Parcel 'X'. 2.078 acres, more or less. as shown on a plat by Roudabush. Gale and Associams, dated November-19, t996, tided. Plat Showing Parcel 'X', 2.078 Acres and Parcel 'Y', 2.446 Acres. A Redivismn of Parcels 30C. D. E, & F of County Tax Map 60, BEGINNING at an Lron set in the southern margm of the U.S. Route 250 right-of-way, said iron being the common corner of Parcels 30E and 30C and being Iocared along the curve of the Route 250 right-of-way and Arc Distance of 210.02 feet from an iron found, said iron being the common corner between Parcel 30D and Parcel 31, thence along the property line of Parcels 30E and 30C S 28° 42' 00" W a distance of 202.40 feet to a poinr, said point being the rear corner of Parcels 30E and 30C, continuing 88.55 feet, in at/ 2 290.95 feet ro an Iron s~'/, smd'rrO~.lSii~'~'a' neW corner to Parcel 'X', thence continuing along a new line: N 83:° 53' 20'~ W~153:19 feet to an iron found, said iron being on the eastern proi~erty Iine Of Pard~l ~J along a 60 foot right-of-way to Parcel 30B, thence along the .eas_re~ boundary Qf Pa, rcet 30 N 08°23'00"W 143.50~ feet to an iron found, 'th~e Continuing along said boundary N 06°22 '00" W 205.55 feet to an iron set in the eastern property line of Parcel 30, thence continuing along said boundary along a curve to the right having a Radius of 52.27 feet and a Delta of 131°48, 13" for an Arc Distance of 120.24 feet to an iron set in the southern margin of the U.S. Route 250 right-of-way, said iron being east an Arc Distance of 14.50 feet from a Highway Monument found. thence along the southern right-of-way of Route 250. along a curve to the left having a Radius of 2.202.00 feet and a Delta of 07°44'50'' for an Arc Distance of 297.74 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING, containing 2.078 Acres. more or less. said Parcel 'X' bein~ a combination of Parcel 30E, 0.412 Acres. Parcel 30F. 1.010 Acres and a 0.656 Acre portion of Parcel .30D. TOGETHER WITH each and every appurtenance, right, privilege and easement unto the aforesaid tract or parcel of ~ound belonging or in any wise appertaining (the aforesaid tract or parcel of ground and said appurtenances, rights, privileges and easements as Welt as any improvements thereon are herein collectively called the "Premises".) 1.02 Term. The term of th/s Lease t"Term") shall commence upon the dare of execuuon (the "Commencement Date") and shall expire 50 (fifty) years after the Commencement Date (herein called the "Expiration Date") ~mless extended or sooner terminated as hereinafter provided. 1.03 Rent. Tenant shall pay ro Landlord as the annual rent for the Term of this Lease the sum of one dollar ($1.00) per year, paid in advance, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged. ARTICLE 2. USE 2.01 U~e. Tenant shall have the right, ar ks own cost and expense except as otherwise provided in this A~eemenr. ro construct on any pai't or all of the Premises, ar any . time and'from time to time and in accordance with the terms of this Lease Agreement, such improvements as Tenant shall from rime m time determine, if Tenant has satisfied the other provisions of this Ground Lease. Tenant may at its option and ar its own c~st and expense, ar any time and from rime m time, make such alterations, changes, replacements, improvements and addkions m and m the Premises ("Improvements"), as it may deem desirable, including the demolition of any Improvement(s), provided the Tenant has satisfied the other provisions of this Ground Lease. 2.02 Resr. rictions on Use. (a) The Premises shall-be used solely for the purpose of constructing Improvements thereon and using the Improvements for acti?ities related m public safevj. including bm not limited m emergency communications, f~re and emergency medical services and storage space. With the prior written consent of the Landlord the Premises may be used for a different purpose that is compatible with the then existing use by the Landlord of the surrounding property, which consent shall nor be unreasonably withheld. Any other use requires the prior written consent of the Landlord. which consent Landlord reserves the right m withhold in Landlord's sole and absolute discretion. (b) Tenant hereby agrees that Tenant shall oversee the maintenance of the Premises and any Improvements constructed thereon, m insure that the Premises are kept in good condition and repair, during the term of this Lease. 4 ARTICLE 3. REZONING AND ADMINISTRATIVE LAND USE APPROVALS 3.01 Application for Rezoning. If Tenant, for the purposes of constructing the Improvements or using the Premises as provided in Article 2 of this Agreement, requires or prefers that any parr of the Premises be rezoned, the Tenant shall prepare for filing by the Landlord, an appropriate application to rezone. In addition, Tenant shall, for the purposes of constructing the hnprovements on Premiges, have prepared a revised plat of the Premises with the lot lines redrawn so that the Improvements, when built, will be located on one lot, with the exception of the motorcycle storage facility. 3.02 Consent to Rezoning. The Landlord hereby consents to rezomng and revision of the plat or subdivision as may be required for the purposes of Tenant constructing the Improvements, and agrees to execute promptly any documents reasonably required and/or requested to accomplish said rezoning and re-surveying, or-subdivision, including but nor limited ro proffered condition statements, affidavits, notice statements, confnTnation of consent, and the tike, which are not in derogation of Landlord's rights in the Lease. 3.03 Administrative Approvals. The Tenant shall execute promptly any and at] applications for site plan approvals, grading permits, building permits and special use permits, and any and alt such other applications or documents necessary ro obtain all approvals ro construct, occupy and use -a building or buildings of sufficient size and dimensions to house an emergency communications center, a police, fzre and emergency medical services dispatch center and storage space, including a 1600 square foot storage area for use by Landlord, as is more fully described in Exhibit A, attached hereto and made a part hereof. 3.04 Compliance with Conditions. In the event any condition shah be imposed by governmental authorities with respect ro the granting of any and all said approvals which require improvemems to be made to the Premises° then Tenant shall comply, at Tenant's expense, with said condition. 3.05 Inability. to Obtain Rezoning. Subdivision. Site Plan. or Special Use Approvals. Landlord and Tenant shall cooperate with efforts to obtain said rezoning or subdivision, if necessary, and building permk and special use permk approvals ("Approyals"), In the event Tenant shall be unable to obtain any necessary approval then at any time thereafter Tenant may elect m ~erminate and cancel this Ground Lease by giving notice of such election ro the Landlord. If Tenant does eot obtain necessary Approvals and begin consa-uction on the Premises within five years of final approval of the Site Plan, then Landlord shalt~have the right to terminate the lease. Neither party shall be liable to the other for any dam~es which the other party nmy sustain by reason of the inability, to obtain said Approvals. 3.06 ]Expenses of Approvals. Any expense incurred by Landlord in obtaining said Approvals shall be paid by Tenant. 3.07 Soil Tests and Toxic Wastes. (a) The Tenant shall have the right ro enter upon the Premises for the purpose of making, at Tenant's expense, such engineering studies, rests and surveys (collectively the "Studies") as Tenant deems desirable in cormecrion with the proposed development of the Premises including, but not limited ro test bormes and other soil tests and investigations to determine if the Premises are suitable for development or there ex/sts upon or beneath the surface of the Premises hazardous or toxic wastes as defined in Federal Law 6 ("hazardous or toxic waste shall include asbesti~S and other contaminants contained in the existing structure.) The Tenant shall provide to the Landlord, without cost. copies of the Studies. The Tenant shall pay any and all costs incurred by the Landlord resulting from Tenant's entry upon the Premises and the conducting of the Studies. except as provided for in subsection (b), below: (b) In the event that the Studies and/ or on-slte construction activities disclose evidence of existing hazardous or toxic wastes. Tenant shall promptly notify Landlord' and Landlord shall ameliorate any toxic or hazardous waste conmmmation, but Landlord shall nor be obligated ro expend in excess of $50,900 ro ameliorate toxic or hazardous waste on the Premises. If the Landlord does not ameliorate the toxic or hazardous waste because the cost to do so exceeds $50,000, then Tenant shall have the right to terminate this Lease by giving written notice ro Landlord within 90 days. of notice from Landlord, whereupon, except for the obligation of the Tenant to the Landlord to rough-grade and stabilize the sire, neither parry shall have further liability to the other under this Lease. If the Tenant determines that any other site conditions prokibk development of the Premises in accordance with its plans, k shall notify Landlord within 30 days of such site conditions coming to its attention. If the Landlord does not elect to ameliorate the conditions, the Tenant or Landlord may terminate the Lease upon written notice to the other within 90 days of the Landlord's election not to so ameliorate. 7 ARTICLE 4. CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS 4.0t Tenant's Du.ty to Construct Improvements. (a) Tenant. at Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall cause an architect or enghneer, as appropriate, ro prepare a graphic plan of the Premises, preliminary plans. sections, elevation and other materials including but nor limited to the Site Plan (herein collectively called "Preliminary Plans") with respect m the proposed Improvements, which shall be executed by an architect or engineer, as appropriate, licensed to practice in the Commonwealth of Vir~ua. disclosing the matters and details of the~ Project. Landlord shall have the right ro approve the Preliminary plans, which approval shall nor be unreasonably withheld or delayed. (b) Ten~t. ar Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall cause actual working drawings and specifications (including drawings of a motorcycle storage facility.) with respect to the proposed Improvements (herein called "Final Plans"), which shall be logical extensions of the approved Preliminary Plans. to be prepared and shall submit the same ro Landlord. for Landlord's information and approval, which approval shall nor be unreasonably withheld or delayed~ (c) Landlord hereby agrees to seek the necessary state approvals for the demolkion of the existing structures located on the Premises. State approvals for demolition of a structure on stare land are required under Code of Virginia § 2A488.4B. Upon Landlord's written notice of approval, including any stipulated conditions of said approval, Tenant shall proceed, at Tenant's sole cost and expense except as otherwise provided in this 8 Lease Agreement, to demolish the existing structures in accordance with any stipulations made by Landlord. (d) Landlord hereby grants Tenant permission, and Tenant, ar Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall construct the building and other improvements upon the Premises substantially in accordance with the Final Plans, and shall install therein f~xtures, equipment and apparatus ro be used in cormection with the operation and maintenance thereof, except the motorcycle storage facility, which, if constructed in accordance with plans approved by the Landlord, shall be at the cost and expense of Landlord. 4.02 Changes- Alterations and Additional Construction. Tenant covenants and a~ees tlmt. except as shown on the Final Plans. no additional building or other structure or improvement shall be commenced, erected or maintained on the Premises without first obtaining Landlord's written approval, which shall not be unreasonably withheld. No change, alteration or addition (hereinafter "Alterations") in or to the Improvements or such additional building or other structure or m~provemenr shall be commenced, erected or maintained on the Premises except for interior changes, alterations and addkions which do not affect the exterior of the structure or the Premises (which Tenant shall be permitted m make without Landlord's approval) without Landlord's prior written approval. Final Plans for erection of a f~re station must be approved by the Landlord prior to construction of the fire station. 4.03 Manner of Completion. (a) All Improvements and Alterations prior to occupancy shall be constructed and completed by Tenant, without expense ro Landlord except as specifically 9 stated in this Lease. agreement, in a good, ftrst class and workmanlike manner, and substantially in compliance with the approved Final Plans therefor and'all applicable permits and authorizations and building and zoning laws and with all other applicable taws, ordinances, orders, rotes, regulations and other requirements of all federal, stare, and local governments, departments, commissions, boards, and officers, and in compliance with the renns and conditions of this Lease. (b) The cost of the Improvements and Alterations shall be paid by Tenant so that the Premises, Improvements and Alterations shall at alt times be free of liens for labor and materials supplied or claimed ro have been supplied ro the Premises. Improvements, and Al~erations. (c) Upon completion of the construction of each Alteration in accordance with the provisions hereof, each such Alteration shall be deemed to be and shall constitute parr of the Improvemems for all purposes of tiffs Lease. (d) Promptly upon completion of the Improvements and each Alteration, Tenant shall deliver to Landlord one pnnr set of "as-built" drawings thereof. (e) If Tenant. for any reason, fails ro contract with a contractor and begSn construction of the Improvements within five years of final approval of the Site Plan, Landlord reserves and has the fight to cancel this Lease without any further cost or obligation ro Tenant. (f) If either the City or the County. fails ro appropriate the necessary funds to construct the Improvements. then this Lease Agreement shall automatically terminate without any further cost or obligation to the Landlord. 4.04 Title to Improvements ai~d AltemtFon§. (a) Title to all Improvements and Alterations when made, erected. constructed, installed or placed upon the Premises shall be held by and remain in Tenant until the expiration of the Term hereof, which is specified in Section 1.02 of this Lease Agreement. unless this Lease shall be sooner terminated as herein provided. Co) If during the Term of this Lease. Tenant no longer needs or can use the Improvemems and Alterations for the use specified in Article 2 of this Lease Agreement, Tenant shall notify Landlord one year in advance of Tenant's intention to vacam the Premises. In such event, Landlord shall have the option m purchase the Improvements and Alterations ar a cost of 65 % of the then fair market value of the Improvements and Alterations as determined by two independent appraisals (excluding the value of any Improvements and Alterations constructed at Landlord's expense), or to lease the Improvements and Alterations at market rams. If Landlord does not notify Tenant within six months of the notice of Tenant's intention ro vacate the Premises, of its intention to purchase or lease the Improvements and Alterations, then Tenant may sublease or assign the Lease in accordance with the restrictions on use contained in Article 2 of this Lease Agreement, for the rema'mder of the Term. tf Tenant subleases the Premises, then Tenant shall rernam responsible for the performance under this Lease, including liability for any default by its sublessee. Any sublease or assignment must conform with the requirements of Article t5 of this Lease Agreement. and alt ouher terms and conditions of this Lease. 1! (c) The lease shall expire ar the end of the Term. Upon expiration of the lease, title to all Improvements and Alterations shall pass to. vest in and belong ro Landlord without remuneration to Tenant for the value of the Improvements and Alterations. (d) During the Term hereof, Tenant alone shall be able to claim depreciation on the Improvements and Alterations for all purposes. 4.05 Landlord's Right to Inspect New Construction. Landlord shall have the right from time ro time durin~ the course of construction of the Improvements or any Alteration to inspect the work being done ro ensure that the same is being constructed in substantial accordance with the approved Final Plans therefor. ARTICLE 5. IMPOSITIONS AND PAYMENT THEREOF 5.01 Capital Expenditures. In addition to construction costs of Improvements. Tenant ar Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall pay all charges and assessments for installation of water and sewer lines, telephone service and telephones, electricity., gas lines, and any and all other utilities and fixtures necessary for beneficial occupancy of the Premises. Tenant. ar Tenant's sole expense, shall also arrange for payment of all other fees. including license and permit fees and other governmental charges, general or special, ordinary or extraordinary, unforeseen and foreseen. -of any kind and nature whatsoever (including any penakies and interest thereon) which at any time may be assessed, levied, imposed upon, or become due and payable our of or in respect of the construction of the Improvements on the Premises, or any part thereof or any appurtenance thereto (alt such assessments, charges, installation of public 12 utilitieS, license and permit fees and other g09e~ef~hl charges being hereinafter collectively called "Impositions." and any of the same being hereinafter individually called "Imposition. 5.02 vide e . f P.~vm. n. The Tenant shall furnish to Landlord, upon written request, for inspection within thirty (30) days after the date when any Imposition would become delinquent, a photocopy of the official receipt of the appropriate authority, or, in lieu thereof, other proof satisfactory, to Landlord evidencing paymem of such Imposition. 5.03 Com!__ection Charges. The Tenant shall promptly reimburse Landlord for any sewer or other connection charges paid by Landlord and allocable to the Premises. Any credits or refunds made on account of the payment of such charges allocated as aforesaid, shall belong to the Tenant to the extent the Tenant has reimbursed Landlord for such charges. 5.04 Ongoing Operating Costs. (a) Representatives of the County, the City, and UWA, entered' into an agreement for managing a Joint Dispatch Center and "911" 'telephone system, and set up a "Management Board" to manage these functions. This a~eement~ dated January. 20. 1984. which is attached to and incorporated in this Lease A~eement as Exkibit B, shall control operation of the Emergency Communications Center ("ECC"), including allocation among the County, City and UVA of the ongoing operating costs of the ECC, unless superseded by another a~eement between the parries, in which case the superseding agreement shall become a parr of and incorporated into this Lease Agreement. Ongohig operating costs shall include but are not lira/ted to any required major repairs and capital improvements that the parries a~ee are necessary for operation of the ECC, maintenance costs, repair and replacement of equipment and fixtures, water and sewer rental charges and all ongoing charges for gas, 13 electricity, telephone and communication services and other utility services used. rendered or consumed upon the Premises and Improvements during the Term hereof~ (b) If and when a fire station is erected on the Premises, ongoing operating costs of the fn:e station shall be negotiated among the County, City and UVA and shall be set our in a written agreement. ARTICLE 6. SURR.ENDER 6.01 Delivery_ of Possession. Tenant shall and will on the last day of the Term, or upon any earlier or later termination of this Lease. or upon any re-entry by Landlord upon the Premises as provided herein, well and truly surrender and deliver up the Premises and Improvements toro the possession and use of Landlord without delay and in the condition in which Tenant has agreed to maintain them pursuant ro the provisions of this Lease, free and clear of all !enings and occupancies, and free and clear of all liens and encumbrances other than those authorized by Landlord. 6.02 Retention of Personal Premises. Any such personal property of Tenant, Tenant's employees or of any sublessee, which shall remain in or on the Premises for more than sixty (60) days after the expiration of the Term or earlier or later termination of this Lease and the removal of Tenant or such sublessee from the Premises, may, at the option of Landlord, either be deemed ro have been abandoned by Tenant, Tenant's employees or' such sublessee in which case the same may be retained by Landlord as Landlord's property, or be disposed of, without accountability., in such manner as Landlord may see fit. or Landlord may require Tenant to remove the same at Tenant's expense. In case of any such removal, the.cost 14 of repairing any damage to the Premises or Improvements arising from such removal shall be borne by Tenant. 6.03 Survival. The provisions of this Article 6 shall survive any termination of this 7:0t ARTICLE 7. INSURANCE Insurance During Construction. From the dare on which demolkion of any existing structures is commenced, and continuing through the construction of any Improvements or any Alterations until the date of completion thereof. Tenant shall effect and maintain, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, builder's all risk and extended coverage insurance covering liability for any claim that may arise in connection with the demolition of the existing buildings and, with respect to any Improvements or Alterations being constructed, ro 'one hundred per cent (100%) of the insurable value thereof, such insurance to include coverage of items of labor and materials connected therewith, whether in or adjacent thereto, and materials and equipment in place or to be used as parr of the permanent construction thereof. This insurance shall provide coverage against any claims arising out of the work performed by or on behalf of Tenant pursuant ro sections 4.01(c) and 4.01(d) of this Lease. To the extent that Landlord performs work on the leased premises, Landlord shall provide liability coverage for its activities. 7.02 Fire Insurance. During the Term hereof, the Management Board, ar the Board's sole cost and expense, shall keep all buildings and Building Equipment constituting parr of the Improvements and all Alterations immediately from and after the completion of 15 each of them, insured against loss or damage by fire or by any other cause through a program of self insurance or comparable commercial policies. 7.03 Other Insurance. The Management Board, at the Board's sole cost and expense shall also during the Term self-insure or purchase comparable commercial coverage as ro general or comprehensive public liability insurance against any claims for bodily injury, death or property aamage, occurring on, m or about the Premises and the Improvements. and against contractual liability of any such claims. 7.04 Insurers. Ali ~nsurance provided for in this )~rticle 7, except in the ~nsrances of self insurance, shall be effected under valid and enforceable policies issued by insurers of recognized responsibility which are licensed to do business m the Commonwealth of Vkgmia and are well rated by national rating organizations. 7.05 Insureds. All policies of knsurance provided for in this Article 7 shall name Landlord as an additional insured. 7.06 Blanket Insurance Policies. Nothing in this Lease shall prevent Tenant or the Management Board from taking out insurance of the kinds required by this Article 7 under a blanket insurance policy or policies maintained by Tenant or the Management Board in respect ro other property owned or operated by Tenant or the Board, as well as the Premises and Improvements: provided, however, that (i) any such policy of blanket insurance shall specify ~erein, or Tenant or the Board shall furnish Landlord with a written statement from the insurer under such policy so specifying, the amount of the total insurance allocated to the Improvemems. which amount shall be nor less than the amount required herein. (ii) any such policy of blanket insurance of the kind provided for by Section 7.01 and 7,02 hereof shall 16 specify that any loss payable thereunder shall be payable first in respect of the Improvements without regard to the contents thereof, (iii) any policy of blanket insurance hereunder shall comply in all respects with the other provisions of this Article 7, and (iv) the protection afforded Landlord, Tenant and the Management Board pursuant to Section 7.03 under any policy of blanket insurance hereunder shall be no less than that which would have been afforded under a separate policy or policies relating only to the Premises and the Improvements. 7.07 _Notice of Cancellation. Each policy or certification therefor obtained by Tenant or the Board pursuant m this Article 7 shall contain an express agreement by the insurer that such policy shall nor be canceled or modified without at least thirty (30) days' prior written notice m Landlord. 7.08 Ce_gificare of Insurance. During the term of the Lease, Tenant shall provide Landlord with the certificates of insurance as evidence of Tenant's compliance with Article 7 of this Lease. ARTICLE 8. PERFORMANCE If the Tenant shah ar any time fail ro ,pay any Imposkion m accordance with the provisions of Article 5 hereof, or to take our, pay for, mainram or deliver any of the insurance policies (or certificates of the insurers) required by Article 7 hereof, or shall fall to make any other payment or perform any other act on the Tenant's parr m be made or performed under this Lease and (i) such default shall continue for a period of thirty (30) days after written notice as to a default in the payment of any sum of money or (ii) as to any default other thau in 17 the payment of money, if within sLxty (60) days after notice by Landlord to the Tenant, the Tenant shall nor have cured such default or shall not have commenced and is nor diligently proceeding ro cure k. or (iii) without notice if an emergency ex/sts~ Landlord may but shall be under no obligation to): (a) (c) Pay such Imposition, Take our, pay for and maintain such insurance policy or policies, or Make sure of payment or perform such other act. as the case may be, and take all such action as may be necessary with respect thereto. Ail sums paid by Landlord and ail costs and expenses incurred by Landlord pursuant to th/s Article 8, together with interest thereon at the annual rate of six percent (6%) (but not in excess of the rate which would consrimta usury) from the respective datas of payment of such sums or incurring of such costs and expenses shall constitute Addkionat Renu pa~able by the Tenant under this Lease and shall be payable by the Tenant to Landlord on demand. ARTICLE 9. COMPLIANCE WITH LAWS. ORDINANCES. ETC. 9.01 Compliance with Laws. Landlord warrants /md represents that, ro the best of its knowledge, as of the date hereof, the 'Premises is in compliance with ali applicable laws, statures, ordinances, orders, rules, regulations and requirements of any governmental enury having jurisdiction including, without limiting the generality hereof, those relating to toxic and/or hazardous wastes, is defined in Federal law. Throughout'the Term of this Lease, Tenant and the Management Board will conform to,,comply with and take any and ali action necessary to avoid or eliminate any violation of, any present or future law, statute, order, rule, [8 regulation or requirement of any federal or state government, deparunent, commission, board or officers having jurisdiction~ .foreseen or unforeseen, ordinary as well as extraordinary, which shall be applicable to the Premises, Improyemenrs, Alterations or the sidewalks, curbs. driveways and passageways and parking areas constituting part of the Premises or the Improvements or Alterations. or to the use or manner of use thereof by the lessees or occupants thereof whether or not such law, ordinance, order, rule, regulations or requirement shall necesskare su:uctural changes or improvements or interferes with the use and enjoyment of the Premises or the Improvements or Alterations. 9.02 Permits. Throughout the Term of th/s Lease. Tenant and the Management Board at their sole cost and expense, will procure and mahatain all permns, licenses and authorizations required for any use of the Premises and the Improvements. or any part thereof. then being made, and for the lawful and proper operations and maintenance thereof. ARTICLE 10. MECHANIC'S LIENS Tenant shall nor suffer or permk any mechanic's lien to be filed against the interest of Landlord or Tenant in the Premises or Improvements by reason of work, labor, services or mater/als supplied ro Tenant, the Premises, or the Improvements or Alterations, or any parr thereof and agrees m protect and defend Landlord against any such lien, with the understanding that none of the parries to tlfis Agreement are subject ro mechan/c's liens. ARTICLE 11. INSPECTION OF PREMISES BY LANDLORD Tenant agrees to perrmr Landlord and the duty authorized representatives of Landlord ro enter the Premises and the Improvements at all reasonable, times during usual business hours upon forty-eight (48) hours written notice for the purpose of.' (a) impecring the same, and/or (b) performing any work for which Tenant or the Management Board shall be responsible under the terms of this Lease not performed by Tenant or the Management Board after notice to Tenant or Board as set forth herein, provided, however, that Landlord shall not perform any such work if Tenant or Board has commenced and is diligently pursing the work within thirty (30) days after such notice. Landlord agrees, however, in connection with the. inspection and/or doing of any such work to cause as little inconvenience, annoyance, disturbance, loss of business or other danmge to the Premises and/or the Improvements as may reasonably be possihie under the circumstances. Nothing herein contained shall imply any duty. or obligation upon Landlord to make any repak or to perform any work which under any provision of this Lease Tenant or the Board is required to make or perform, and the making or performing thereof by Landlord shall not constitute a waiver of Tenant's and the Board's' default in failing to make or perform the same. ARTICLE 12. TENANT'S ACCEPTANCE OF CONDITION OF PREMISES Tenant agrees that Tenant is fully familiar with the physical condition of the Premises and any Improvements presently erected thereon. Landlord has made no representation of 20 whatever nature in connection with the condition Of any of the foregoing, and except as specifically agreed to in this Lease, Landlord shall not be liable for any latent or patent defect therein. ARTICLE 13. DEFAULT BY TENANT 13.01 _Event of Default. Tenant shall not be deemed to be in default hereunder unless an Event of Default, as hereinafter specified, has occurred. Each of the following shall constitute an "Event of Default~' by Tenant hereunder: (a) Failure on the part of Tenant to pay the Rent or any other sum of money called for herein, or any parr thereof, when due, and cominuance of such failure for sixty (60) days after written notice from Landlord to Tenant: (b) Failure on the part of Tenant tb comply with or perform any other term, covenant, condition or agreement m be complied with or performed by Tenant and continuance of such failure for sixty (60) days after written notice from Landlord to Tenant, or, if the failure is of such a character as cannot reasonably be cured within said sixty (60) days, failure to initiate within said sixty (60) day period such action as reasonably can be taken toward curing the same and/.or failure to prosecute such action as promptly as is reasonably possible after said actioa is initiated. 13.02 Landlord's Remedies for Tenant's Default. If any Event of Default as defined in Section 13.0I shall have occurred and shall be continuing beyond ~ose periods of time herein granted to cUre the same, then Landlord may give Tenant notice of Landlord's 21 intention to terminate this Lease on a date specified ~n such nor. ice. which date shall not be less than met3' (90) days after the date of giving of such notice, and upon the giving of such nouce and the expiration of said period, the Term hereof and the estate hereby granted with respect to the Premises shall expire on the date so specified in said notice with the same effect as if the dare specified in said notice were the date hereinbefore fixed for the expiration of the Term of this Lease. t3.03 Force Ma.ieure. It is covenanted and agreed that the t/me or rimes hereto specified within which either party is required to perform any act or ro do any thing in order to comply with the hereby' terms and provisions of this lease shall be and they are each hereby extended to the extent that such party, is delayed or hindered bY anY cause or causes beyond such party's control, which shall include, without limitation, all labor disputes, the elements, civii commotion, war, war-like operations, invasion, rebellion, hostilities, military or usurped power, sabotage, governmental orders, regulations or controls, f~re or other casualty, inability to obtain any material or services, acts of God, or other causes and conditions beyond such party's control° t3.04 Remedies Not Exclusive. Except as herein specifically provided, no right or remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to Landlord is intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy, and every right and remedy shall be cumulative and in addition ro any other right or remedy given hereunder or now or hereafter exisring at law. Landlord shall be entitled, ro the extent permitted by taw, to injunctive relief' in case of the violation, or attempted or. threatened violation, of any covenant, agreement, condition or provision of this 22 Lease. or to a decree compelling performance Of any covenant, agreement, condition or provision of this Lease. or ro any other remedy allowed by law or in equity. 13.05 Waiver of Performance. No failure by Landlord or Tenant ro insist upon the strict performance of any covenant, agreement, term or condinon of tiffs Lease on the parr of either party to be performed, or to exerc/se any permitted right or remedy consequent upon a default [herein. and no acceptance of payment of full or partial Rent by Landlord during the continuance of any such default shall constitute a waiver by either party of such default or of such covenant, agreement, term or condition. No covenant, agreement, term or condition of this Lease to be performed or complied with by either parry and no default therein, shall be waived, altered, modified or terminated except by written insrrumem executed by the other parry. No waiver of any default shali otherwise affect or alter this Lease. but each and every covenant, agreement, term and condition of this Lease shall cominue in full force and effect with respect ro any other then existing or subsequent default therein. ARTICLE 14. CONDEMNATION 14.01 Total Taking. In the event that the whole of the Premises and the Improvemems. or the entire Improvements on the Premises. shall be taken by any governmental body under the exercise of the power of eminent domain or by agreement with any such goverrrmenmt body in lieu of such taking (herein called a "Total Taking"), then rids Lease shall rermJxmte as of the date when possession thereof shall be delivered to the conderrmor. 23 14.02 Apportionment of Award on Total Taking. The award with respect to any Total Taking shall be paid over to Tenant and shall be apportioned between Tenant and Landlord as follows: (a) Tenant shall first receive an amount equal to the fair market value, at the time of taking, of the Improvements; and the remainder of the award, if any, shall be paid to Landlord. In the event the amount o~ the award attributable ro the Improvements shall not be detenuined in the proceedings for the establishment thereof, then such amount shall be determined by the average of two independent appraisals, All costs and expenses incurred by Landlord and Tenant in establishing the amount of the award shall be shared by Landlord and Tenant in the same proportion in which the entke award is apportioned. 14.03 Partial Taking~ In the event that any portion or portions of the Prermses or the Improvements and any Alteration thereon shall be taken by any governmental body under the exercise of the power of eminent domainor bY agreement with any such governmental body in lieu of such taking (herein called a "Partial Taking"), then this Lease, as to the portion or portions so taken, shall terminate as of the date the possession thereof and shall be delivered to the condemnor, provided, however, that if, in Tenant's sole discretion, as a result of such Partial Taking? it is economically unfeasible to reconstruct or operate the Lmprovements on the remaining portion of the Premises and Tenant so certifies to Landlord. then this Lease shall terminate thirty (30) days from the date of possession of the part taken shall be delivered to the condenmor. 24 t4.04 Reconstruction. If during the tern~ ftiete shall be a Partial Taking and if this Lease shall not be terminated on account thereof pursuant ro the provisions of Section 14.03, then Tenant. at Tenant's expense, may elect to repair and restore the building constituting parr of the Improvements on the remaining portion of the Premises so that k constitutes an architectural unit with the same general character and condition to a reasonable extent in Tenant's sole discretion, under the circumstances as the previous building, and this Lease shah remain m full force and effect with respect m such remaining portion of the Premises and Improvements. 14.05 Apportionment of Award on Partial Taking. The award with respect ro any Partial Taking shall be paid to Tenant and shall be apportioned between Landlord and Tenant as follows: (a) In the event Tenant skall be obliged'to repair and reconstruct the Improvements as provided in Section 14.04. then the net amount of the award, after the payment of all costs and expenses incurred in the establishment thereof, shall be paid ro and applied by Tenant te the cost of such repair and reconstruction: and if the net amount of any such award shall exceed the total cost of such repair and reconstruction, the balance thereof', upon the completion of such reconstrucnon shall be apportioned as follows: Landlord shall be entitled to a proportionate ins determined by the; amount of the Premises taken divided by the Premises) payment, and the remainder of the award, if any, shall be paid to Tenant. (b) In the event that Tenant shall not be obliged ro repair and reconstruct-the Improvements. then the net amount of the award, after deducting the costs and expenses incurred in the establishment thereof, shall be paid ro Tenant ro the extent of: (i) the 25 unamortized original cost of construction of the irnprovemems; and (ii) the cost incurred by Tenant in complying with the provisions ~)f Section 14.04 hereof: and the balance after the payment of such costs shall be paid to Landlord. All costs and expenses incurred by Landlord and Tenant in establishing the amotmr of the award shall be shared by Landlord and Tenant in the same proportion in which the entire award is apportioned. 14.06 Temporary. Taking. In the event the taking or condemnation of the"Premises, or the Lmprovemenrs. or any parr thereof, shall be for temporary use or occupancy or for a term of years only, then this Lease and all of Tenant's obligations hereunder shall continue in fall force and effect [except to the extent that performance by Tenant of Tenant's covenants and agreements is prevented by such taking), and there shall be no reduction or abatement of the Rent; Tenant shall be entitled to the entire award with respect to any such taking 'except that Landlord shall be entitled to any pomon of such award allocable to any period of time beyond the Expiration Date, and the rights of Landlord and Tenant shall be unaffected by the other provisions of this Arrici~~ t4 and shall be governed by applicable law. Tenant covenants that, upon the termination of any such period of temporary use or occupancy (only if prior ro the expiration or termination of this Lease), Tenant, at Tenant's sole cost and expense, shall restore the Premises and the Improvements as nearly .as may be reasonably possible to the condition in which the same were immediately prior to such takings. Unless an award is made to Tenant by the condemning authority, ,for such purposes, if Landlord receives any award by way of the aforesaid apportionment, Landlord will pay such sum to Tenant to' the extent necessary to reimburse Tenant for the cost of suct~ restoration. 26 t4.07 Settlement Agreement. For the ~SU~0ses of this Lease, all amounts paid pursuant m an agreement with any condemning parry which has been made in settlement of any condemnation or any eminent domain proceeding affecting the Premises or Improvements shall be deemed to constitute an award made in such proceeding. ARTICLE 15. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBLETTING 15:01 Assignment Or Other Transfer of Lease (a) Tenant shall not assign this Lease without the prior written consent of Landlord, which con~ent shall not be unreasonably witlfaeld. No such assigaxment, with consent, shall be valid unless there shall be delivered to Landlord in due form for recording, within thirty (30) days after the date of the assignment: (i) a duplicate original of the insrrurnent of assignment, and (ii) an instrument of assumption b~ the transferee of all of Tenant's obligations under this Lease. (b) The obligations of this Lease shall bind and benefit the assignees and transferees of Tenant with the same effect as if mentioned in each instance where Tenant herein is named or referred m. 15.02 Subletting. Tenant shall not sublease all or any part of the Premises and/or Improvements without the prior written consent of Landlord. 27 ARTICLE 16. EXTENSION PRIVILEGES 16.01 Option. If the parties desire an extension of the Lease beyond the Term set out in Section 1.2 hereof, two years prior to the Expiration Date. the pames shall meet concerning an extension and negotiate in good faith. ARTICLE t7. NOTICES AND APPROVALS 17.01 Notices. Ali notices, approvals, consents, demands and requests which may or are .required to be given by one part],' to the other party shall be in writing and shall be deemed m have been properly given if and when delivered personally or sent by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: (a) If to Tenant: or ar such other place and to notice to Landlord; and (b) Office of the County Attorney 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 and Office of the City Attorney P.O. Box 911 Charlottesville. VA 22902 such other persons, as Tenant may from time to time designate by If to Landlord, University of Virginia Vice President for Management and Budget Madison Hall, Lower Level P. O. Box 9014 Charlottesville, Virginia 22906-9014 28 or at such other place, and to such other persons, as landlord may from time to time designate by notice to Tenant. 17.02 Approvals. No approval or consent of any parry hereto or of any other person wkich is required by any provision of this Lease shall be unreasonably delayed or withheld. unless the context hereof shall expressly state to the contrary. ARTICLE 18. SUCCESSORS AND ASSIGNS OF THE PARTIES, CONTROLLiNG LAW 18.01 Successors. The covenants and agreements herein contained shall bind and inure ro the benefit of Landlord, and Landlord's successors and Tenant and Tenant's successors and assigns, subject to the provisions of this Lease. Each reference in this Lease ro Landlord or Tenant shall be deemed to include any and ail of their respective successors and assigns, and. in the case of Landlord, each and every present or furore joint tenant or'tenant in common of the fee title m the Premises or any part thereof, tf ar any time during the Term hereof there shall be more than one person or entity, or a combination thereof, as Tenant hereunder, then the liability and obligations of each such person and entity shall be joint and several. 18.02 Corlveyallce by Landlord. If Landlord or any successor owner of the Premises shall convey or otherwise dispose of the Premises. thereupon all liabilities and obligations on the part of Landlord or such successor owner under this Lease shall be binding upon the transferee of the Premises. and if. in addition, Landlord or such successor owner shall turn over m such transferee any and ali funds held by Landlord or such successor owner hereunder 29 in which Tenant has an interest hereunder, and such transferee shall in writing expressly assume Landlord's obligatio~ts hereunder with respect ro such funds, thereupon all such liabilities and obligations on the parr of Landlord or such_successor owner under tiffs Lease accruing after such conveyance or disposal and assumption shall terminate. 18.03 Controlling Law. This Lease has been delivered in. and shall be construed and enforced in accordance with. the laws of the Commonwealth of VkgLaia. ARTICLE 19. _ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES 19.01 Tenant's Estoppel. Tenam a~ees, ar any time and from time ro time, upon no less than thirty (30) days' prior notice by Landlord, ro execute, acknowledge and deliver to Landlord a statement in writing certifying (i) that this Ground Lease is unmodified and in full 'force and effect (or if there have been modifications, that the same is La full force and effedt as modified and stating the modifications), and (ii) the dams to which the Rent and other charges have been paid in advance, ff any, it being intended that any such statement dehvered pursuant to this Section may be relied upon by any prospective purchaser of the Premises. 19.02 ~. Landlord agrees, at any time and from tLme to time. upon not less than thirty (30) days' prior notice by Tenant. m execute, acknowledge and deliver ro tenant a statement La wrkLag certifying (i) that this Groined Lease is unmodified and in full rome and effect (or if there have been modifications, that the same is in full force and effect as modified and sating the modifications), (il) the dates to which the Rent and other charges have been paid La advance, if any, and (iii) stating whether or not. ro the best knowledge of Landlord, Tenant is in default in performance of any covenant, agreement or condkion 30 cona'med in this Ground Lease and, if so. specifying each such Event of Default of which Landlord may have knowledge and also sating whether or not any notice of default has been given under this Ground Lease which default has not been remedied, and if so, stating the nature Of said Event of Default and the date of the givmg of said not~ce, it being intended that any such statement delivered pursuant to this Section may be relied upon by any prospective assignee or mortgagee of this Ground Lease, or any portion thereof, or by any assignee or prospective assignee of any such mortgages or by any other tenant or prospective sublessee of the whole or any part of the Premises or Improvements. ARTICLE 20. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS 20.01 Inte~adon. This Ground Lease and the documents referred to herein set forth alt the promises, agreements, conditions and understandings- between Landlord and Tenant relative ro the leasing of the Premises. and there is no promise, agreement, condition or understanding, either oral or written, between them other than as are herein set forth. It is further understood and a~eed that, except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequem alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Lease shall be binding upon Landlord or Tenant unless reduced to writing and signed by them. 20.02 Mem_grandum of Ground Lease. The parties may execute and deliver in rec0rdable form a short form or memorandum of this Ground Lease which Tenant may record at Tenant's sole expense in the Clerk's Office of the Circuk Court of the County of Albemarle, Virgima. 31 20.03 Separability.. Each covenant and agreement contained in this Ground Lease shall for all purposes be construed to be a separate and independent covenant and agreement. If any term or provision of this Ground Lease or the application thereof m any person or circumstance shall ro any extent be invalid and unenforceable, the remainder of this Ground Lease or the application of such term or provision ro persons or circumstances, other than those as m which ir is invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected.thereby, and each term and provision of this Ground Lease shall be valid and shall be enforced to the extent permitted by law. 20.04 Counterparts. This Lease shall be executed in __ counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original. 20.05 Headings. The headings to the various Articles and Sections of this Lease have been inserted for convenient reference only and shall not modify ~ amend or change the ex-press terms and provisions of this Lease. ARTICLE 21. UVA STATUS 21.01 State Law. Notwithstanding that certain issues are addressed in provisions of this Ground Lease. the City and County acknowledge that said provisions relating to mechanics liens, zoning applicability, insurance and real estate taxes do not subject UVA to liability, exposure or obtiganon m third parties under Federal, State and/or local law and any rotes and regulations promulgated therefrom. This declaration and agreement does not excuse any obligation UVA may have to the City and County pursuant to this Ground Lease; rather it 32 addresses only the potential creation of Liability, exposure or obligation to others as a result of this Ground Lease. tN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parries have executed this Lease the day and year first above written. THE RECTOR AND- VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA By: STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY/COUNTY OF Tide: · to-wit: Executive Vice President and Ctfief Financial Officer The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 , by as of THE RECTOR AND VISITORS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA, on behalf of the University. Notary Public My Commission Exprres 33 .T .c Tr V- ' APPROVED AS TO FORM: Paul J Forch'-' General Counsel and Special Assistant Attorney General Date RECOMMEND APPROVAL: DIVISION OF ENGINEERING AND BLrlLDINGS Director Date RECOM/vtEND APPROVAL: DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES Director Date 36 Approved asroform: Ci~ Attomey THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE~ VIRGINIA By: NalTle: Title: STATE OF VIRGINIA CiTY/COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of 19 , by as of the City. of Charlottesville, Virginia on behalf of the City. Notary Public My Commission Expires 34 APPROVED BY THE GOVERNOR Pursuant to § 2.1-504.3 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, and by the authority, delegated to me under Executive Order 3t (94) dated October 25, 1994, I hereby approve the disposition of the property above described located in Albemarle County, yirginia and the execution of this instrument for and on behalf of the Governor of Virginia. Secretary of Administration Date 37 Approved as tc form: County Attorney THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE. VIRGINIA By: Name: Title: STATE OF VIRGINIA CITY/COUNTY OF , The foregoing insrrurnent was acknowledged before me this day of 19 , by as of the County..of Albemarle, Virginia, on behalf of the County. Notary Public My Commission Expires: 35 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 40! ]Viclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director ofPlamfing & Community Developmen~f March 13, 1997 Albemarle County Planning Commission - 1996Aunual Report Attached please fred a copy of the 1996 Annual Report approved by the Albemarle County Planning Commission at their meeting on March 11, 1997. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to comact me. VWC/jcf ATTACHMENT 1996 ANNUAL REPORT ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION I. INTRODUCTION The Code of Virginia states that local Planning Commissions shall make recommendations and an annual report to the governing body concerning the operation of the Commission and the status of plam~ing within the jurisdiction. This report is a brief smmnary of what the Albemarle County Planning Commission accomplished during 1996 and some of the issues which are being addressed during 1997. II. PERSONNEL The Commission is composed of seven members, one member from each of the six magisterial districts, and one member "at large." The Commission members during 1996 were: COM\IISSI¢)~.I:I{ I)1,'4 IRICT '1 I'RM Hilda R. Lee-Washington Rivanna 2/7/96 - 12/31/99 William W. Finley White Hall 1/3/96 - 12/31/99 Jacquelyn N. Huckle Jack Jouett 1/03/90 - 12/31/97 William J. Nitchmann, Scottsville 1/08/92 - 12/31/99 Chairman A. Brace Dotson, Samuel Miller 1/12/94 - 12/31/97 Vice-Chairman David A. Tice Charlottesville 1/3/96 - 12/31/97 Jared Loewenstein At-Large 2/7/96 - 12/31/97 III. EXPENSES The Commission does not have a separate budget. Expenses for commission members were a total of $24,600.00 all of which was spent on commissioner salaries. IV. REGULAR ITEMS The Planning Commission held 39 regular meetings in 1996 primarily to review development proposals. A total of 136 items were rewewed · Maior zoninp_/special use permit reviews included: ZMA-95-04 The University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation - Petition to rezone approximately 300 acres from RA, Rural Areas to PD-IP, Planned Development Industrial Park. PLANNING COMMISSION (4-2) RECOMMENDED DENIAL. ZMA-95-2] Cathcart Propertie~ and Denico Development - Petition to rezone approximately 11.6 acres from R-l, Residential to PD-SC, Planned Development Shopping Center. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. ZMA 95-23 Berkmar Land Trust and First Interstate Charlottesville, Ltd. Ptr - Petition to rezone approximately 2.6 acres from R-6, Residential to C-l, Commercial PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. ZMA 95-25 Gilray, L. LC. - Petition to rezone approximately 2.2 acres from R-6, Residential to C-l, Commercial. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH PROFFERS. ZMA-96-04 Encore Investments Ltd Partnership - Proposal to rezone approximately 11 acres from CO, Commercial Office and R-10, Residential to PD-MC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL. ZMA-96-05 Kenneth J.. NeweH (ApplicanO, CCAT2/University Limited Liability Company (Owner) - Proposal ro amend the proffers for the University Village development, as established with ZMA-87-08, to allow development on the portion of the property closest to Old Ivy Road, previously designated as landscaped and recreation area and instead provide landscape and recreation area toward the rear of the proper~y, previously designated for future development. PLANNING COMMISSION (5-1) RECOMMENDED DENIAL. ZMA-96-08 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, - Monticello High School and Associated Public Facilities - Proposal to rezone approximately i01 acres from R-l, Residential to R-15, Residential. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. ZMA-96-12 Forest Lakes Associates - Proposal to add approximately 120.6 acres of land currently zoned Rural Areas to the Forest lakes South Planned Unit Development. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. ZMA 96-20 - Kenneth J. Newell (Applicant), CCAT2/University Limited Liability Company (Owner) -_Proposal to amend the proffers for the University Village development, as established with ZMA 87-08, to allow development of an assisted living facility on the portion of the property immediately east of the main residential building, previously designated as townhouse-style residences and open space. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH PROFFERS. SP-96-03 Sprint Cellular - Petition m allow a 185 foot tower and an equipmem building on a port/on of an 8.037 acre parcel zoned Rural Areas. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL. SP~96-04 Sprint Cellular - Petition to allow a 185 foot tower and an eqnipmem building on a portion of a 9.536 acre parcel zoned R-1 Residential. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED DENIAL. S£-96-06 The Tandem School - Petition to allow for expansion of facilities for a private school in the R-1 district. The Tandem School proposes construction of a 10,000 square foot building to be utilized as auditorium classroom, dining hall, and faculty lounge space on 21.77 acres zoned R-l, Residential. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP-96-11 Bentivar Land Trust - Proposal to create a 58 lot Rural Preservation Development on approximately 264 acres zone Rural Areas. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP 96-19 John Hocutt - Petition to establish a hotel on approximately 2.6 acres zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP 96-23 C.W. Hurt Contractors, Inc. - Petition m establish a private school on approximately 5.4 acres zoned R-6, Residential. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP 96-24, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. - Petition to extend the time frame for outdoor garden center sales/display [rom February 15 thru .July 5 to February 15 thru September 15 each year, and to expand the area allowed for outdoor storage and display m allow merchandise display on the sidewalk in front of the store and to allow storage in contahners on the south side of the store, within view of the Entrance Corridor, Route 29 ISection 30.6.3.2 (b) of the Zoning Ordinance]. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP-96-29 Lowe's Companies Inc.- Proposal to establish outdoor storage and display in conjunction with the proposed building [30.6.3.2(b)] on 22.13 acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District; PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP-96-32 N.T. Brinkman, Inc. - Petition to permit fill in the floodplain in order to reestablish a pond. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP-96-35 Matthew& Suzanne Crane - Petition to establish two home occupations (class b) for a pottery shop and equipment storage or a home building business (Section 12.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP-96-36 Matthew Crane - Petition to establish a home occupation (class B) for equipment storage for a home building business (Section 12.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL SP-96-38 UVA Employees Credit Union - Petition to allow drive through windows in connection with a financial institution on approximately 4 acres zoned HC, Highway Commercial. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP 96-40 Angus and Brenda Arrington - Petition to establish a home occupation class B on 4.68 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. SP 96-46 - Mill Creek Industrial Land Trust (Owner), The Peabody School (Applicant) -Proposal to establish a private school with an ultimate enrollment of 140 students on a 5-acre portion of the Mill Creek Planned Uuir Development presently designated for Light Industrial development (ZMA 96-21 to change the PUD designation is under concurrent review). PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. Zoning text amendments addressed such issues as: ZTA-96-Oi Resolution by Planning Commission m amend Zoning Ordinance to reqmre posting by staff of public hearing notice signs for rezoning and special use permit petitions. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. ZTA-96-03 Pavilion at Riverbend - Petition to amend the zoning ordinance to add outdoor amphitheater as a use by special use permit m the PD-MC, Planned Development Mixed Commercial district. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. An important procedural measure implemented in March, 1988 was the Consent Agenda. In 1996, the Planning Commission authorized approval of all of the items which appeared on the Consent Agenda, resulting m an agenda time savings of about 4 hours or the equivalent of about 2 meetings. The Commission also took action on other proposals outside of the development review area. These included: A~_ricultural/Forestal Districts - There were no new districts created in 1996 nor any additions to existing districts. Withdrawals: September 10, 1996 - Withdrawal fi:om Jacob's Run District (automatic upon request after owner's death) 107.73 acres. June 24, 1996 - Withdrawal fi:om Yellow Mountain District (automatic upon request after owner's death) 275.55 acres. Review: February 14, 1996 - Review of Ivy Creek District. Continued 494.86 acres for seven years. Comnliance with Comprehensive Plan (456 Reviews): July 1, 1996 - Administrative Approval As Per Planning Commission Policies - Installation of a sanitary sewer collection line to serve the development portion of Deerwood Estates (Tax Map 32, Parcel 32C) located south of Route 649 (Airport Road) and east of Route 606 IDickerson Road). August 5, 1996 - Administrative Approval As Per Planning Commission Policies - Installation of a sanitary sewer collection line to serve several homes in Old Woolen Mill area, located at the end of Market Street.. - V~ ACTION SUMMARY Thc number of actions considered by the Commission during 1996 and in each of the previous four years is shown by category in the following table. C6nsem agenda items arc listed separately. Comprehensive Plan Amendments/5 Year Review 1 4 4 6 6 Zoning Text Amendments 2 7 5 4 8 Subdivision Ordinance Amendments 0 1 0 ~ 0 0 Comprehensive Plan Compliance Reviews 0 1 4 1 7 (456 Reviews) Zoning Map Amendments 34 32 27 18 12 Special Use Permits 52 48 40 38 55 Preliminary Site Plans 6 3 9 12 20 Final Site Plans 0 2 0 0 1 Preliminary Plats 12 6 3 4 14 Final Plats 5 0 1 0 1 Site Plan Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 Site Plan Waivers 5 2 0 ' 1 3 Site Plan Amendments 3 3 7 8 4 Final Plat Extensions 0 0 0 0 0 Subdivision Waiver I 0 1 2 0 Agricultural/Forestal Districts 3 8 9 10 2 (. OIl-till ;~g~'llda I1~'111~ (%cpaJ'~llc' I'1'o111 :~¢1ioll t,'orlqidcrcd \boxc I Preliminary Site Plans 2 4 5 0 0 Final Site Plans 9 9 4 0 2 Preliminary Plats 0 3 0 0 0 Final Plats 4 3 0 0 2 Agricultural/Forestal Districts 0 6 9 8 4 (Referral of application) planning Commission Annuai Rpt I 1 I 1 I 1 I 1 I1 · VI. OTHER PLANNING ACTIVITIES · he Commission discussed a number of immediate mad long-range planning issues in 1996. Fourteen (14) worksessions, typically of 1.5 - 2 hours duration, were held in addition to regular items to address the following: -Six Year Secondary Road Plan (3 worksessions) -Comprehensive Plan - Human Services (1 worksession) -Comprehensive Plan - Water Resources (1 worksession) -Zoning Text Amendment - Industrial Square Footage (1 worksession) -Noise Ordinance (1 worksession) -Mountain Protection Plan (3 worksessions) -Amendment to Site Plan Section of Zoning Ordinance for Administrative Approval (1 worksession) -Development Area Initiatives (1 worksession) -Capital Improvements Plan (2 worksessions) Planning Commission members also served on the following committees: Jacquelyn Huckle: Western Bypass Committee Rural Area Transportation Study (RATS) Bill Nitchmann: Rt. 29 Corridor Development Study Local Evaluation Committee CIP Technical Committee City/County/University Planning & Coordination Council (PACC Tech) Fiscal Impact Committee Bruce Dotson: Charlottesville Area Transportation Study (CATS) Fiscal Impact Committee ~Villiam Finley: Communication Tower Task Force Committee David Tice: Mountain Protection Committee Meadow Creek Parkway Design Committee Jared Loewenstein: Historic Preservation Committee VII. PLANNING ACTIVITIES FOR 1997: These activities are over and above the normal case workload and annual projects. -Complete review and make recommendations regarding Chapter 2 (Natural Environment Section) of the Comprehensive Plan. -Review work of the Development Area Initiatives Steering Commitfee. -Begin rewew of Rural Areas section of Comprehensive Plan. -Hold public hearing and make recommendation regarding amendments to Zoning Ordinance (Site Plan section} and Subdivision Ordinance to provide expanded administrative approval. -Make decisions regarding Zoning Text amendment(s) for Industrial Square Footage regulation. A:XPC 1996.RPT COMMONWEALTH of VIR( Department of Taxation MEMORANDUM To: From: Councils of incorporated Cities and Towns Boards of Supervisors of Counties Commissioners of the Revenue and Supervisors of Assessments Danny M. Payne .~'~ ~. ~ .~Az/~...~- Tax Commissioner Date: March 7, 1997 Subject: 1997 Estimated Valuation of Railroad Roadway and Track As you may recall, the 1993 Session of the General Assembly passed legislation which is codified at the Code of Virginia, Section 58.1-2656 (enclosed). This requires the determination of values for the roadway and track belongin~ to railroad companies operating in Virginia by statutory formula. Beginning in 1993, increases as a result of this legislation were permitted, while decreases were postponed until tax year 1997. The 1992 level of assessment, excluding retirements, were used as required in lieu of decreases that would have resulted for the period 1993 through 1996. The enclosure shows the likely reduction in assessed values before equalization resulting in 1997 in parentheses. Increases over the 1992 level of assessment are shown as positive entries, if applicable, for those localities that, while realizing a decrease in 1997, have enjoyed increases since 1993 as a result of this legislation. To emphasize, the decreases are the only changes for 1997 that have not already been reflected in past assessments. If I may be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to contact me or Mr. Keith Mavvyer at (804) 367-8020. § 58.1-2656. Valuation of sidetracks, double tracks, etc. In making report of and assessment of the property included in the class described in § 58.1-2655, there shall be found for each railroad, for its main line or lines and for each branch line, for single and, where existing, double, triple and quadruple track and for sidetrack, the average value per mile in this Commonwealth of its track, track appurtenances and track structures, including cuts, fills, track surfacing, excavation, ballast, bridges, trestles and tunnels, but not including right-of- way lands or buildings or structures thereon other than track structures, or improvements required to be reported in other classes, and in any county, corporation or school district, the assessment of all property of such railroad included in the calculation of such average, as above provided, shall be the number of miles of its single, double, triple, quadruple or sidetrack therein, as the case may be, multiplied by the assessed average value thereof per mile. The assessed value ora railroad's track, track al~purtenances and track structures in this Commonwealth shall be determined by multiplying the average of (i) the cost of such property recorded in the applicable Interstate Commerce Commission road accounts, less accumulated depreciation, and (ii) the depreciated basis of such property for federal income tax purposes by a fraction determined by ~viding the railroad's track miles within the Commonwealth by its total track mile~ Notwithstanding the foregoing sentence, in each of the tax years 1993, 1994, 1995 and 1996, the assessed value of a railroad's track, track appurtenances, and track structure in any county, city or town shall not be less than the 1992 assessed value therein of such property, excluding retirements BUCKINGHAM BRANCH RAILROAD COMPANY Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track Dillwyn, Town of (43,958) BUCKINGHAM COUNTY (524,930) FLUVANNA: (6,505) CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. CITY CHARLOTTESVILLE: (123,429) CHESAPEAKE, CITY OF (94,213) CLIFTON FORGE: (175,891) COLONIAL HEIGHTS: (34,187) COVINGTON: (172,302) EMPORIA: (87,125) FRANKLIN CITY: (45,006) HAMPTON: (31,452) HOPEWELL: (110,012) LYNCHBURG: (200,321) NEWPORT NEWS: (755,501) PETERSBURG: (209,246) CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. Estimated Change CITY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track PORTSMOUTH: (138,621 ) RICHMOND: (915,459) STAUNTON: SUFFOLK, CITY OF (141,933) (412,536) WAYNESBORO: (133,229) WILLIAMSBURG: (107,162) WINCHESTER: (38,980) COUNTY Scottsville, Town of (7,883) ALBEMARLE COUNTY (1,287,364) Iron Gate, Town of (26,506) ALLEGHANY COUNTY (1,211,688) AMHERST: (474,559) Craigsville, Town of (35,255) AUGUSTA COUNTY (944,455) BATH: (422,550) BEDFORD COUNTY: (426,689) Buchanan, Town of (13,521) BOTETOURT COUNTY (1,003,433) CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track BUCHANAN: (31,338) CAMPBELL: (158,758) CHARLES CITY: (114,725) CHESTERFIELD: (845,118) CLARKE: (23,112) Haysi, Town of (108,187) DICKENSON COUNTY (2,223,564) DINWlDDIE: (259,820) Columbia, Town of Scottsville, Town of FLUVANNA COUNTY (11,826) (8,159) (533,876) Stephens City, Town of (7,222) FREDERICK COUNTY (136,669) GOOCHLAND: (974,483) Jarratt, Town of (4,920) GREENSVILLE COUNTY (391,065) HANOVER: (1,082,556) HENRICO: (846,250) ISLE OF WIGHT: (144,425) JAMES CITY: (625,406) 3 CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track Pennington Gap, Town of (56,394) LEE COUNTY (806,781) ISLE OF WIGHT: (144,425) JAMES CITY: (625,406) Pennington Gap, Town of (56,394) LEE COUNTY (806,781) Louisa, Town of (60,269) Mineral, Town of (26,865) LOUISA COUNTY (989,140) NELSON: (736,966) NEW KENT: (377,480) Gordonsvitle, Town of (43,546) Orange, Town of (55,953) ORANGE COUNTY (310,218) PRINCE GEORGE: (68,251) Glasgow, Town of (43,715) ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY (523,528) St. Paut, Town of (11,111) RUSSELL COUNTY (653,254) Dungannon, Town of (39,813) SCOTT COUNTY (1,549,306) SHENANDOAH: (32,435) 4 CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC. Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track Boykins, Town of Branchville, Town of Newsoms, Town of SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY Jarratt, Town of Stoney Creek. Town of SUSSEX COUNTY (10,363) (13,055) (14,066) (3~3,420) {51,802) (22,068) (447,504) Appalachia, Town of Big Stone Gap, Town of St. Paul, Town of WISE COUNTY (15,170) (59,699) (43,873) (318,536) YORK COUNTY (143,613) CHESAPEAKE AND ALBEMARLE RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. CITY CHESAPEAKE, CITY OF (1,595.076) CHESAPEAKE WESTERN RAILWAY CITY HARRISONBURG: (516,626) 5 CHESAPEAKE WESTERN RAILWAY Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track Broadway, Town of Dayton, Town of Elkton, Town of Timberville, Town of ROCKINGHAM COUNTY (146,925) (169,808) (lo,59 ) (125,665) (1,993,950) Mt. Jackson, Town of (226,625) SHENANDOAH COUNTY (849,019) COMMONWEALTH RAILWAY, INCORPORATED CITY PORTSMOUTH: 10,281 SUFFOLK, CITY OF 27,281 INTERSTATE RAILROAD COMPANY COUNTY Appalachia Town of 169,721 WISE COUNTY 2,976,219 NORFOLK AND PORTSMOUTH BELT LINE RAILROAD COMPANY Estimated Change CITY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track CHESAPEAKE, CITY OF (270,584) NORFOLK: (48,982) PORTSMOUTH: (156,819) NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY CiTY ALEXANDRIA: 215,835 CHARLOTTESVILLE: 280,542 CHESAPEAKE, CITY OF 302,191 LYNCHBURG: 643,907 NORFOLK: 147,223 RICHMOND: 444,351 COUNTY ALBEMARLE: 1,510,660 AMHERST COUNTY 1,036,151 CAMPBELL COUNTY 1,024,953 CHESTERFIELD: 577,659 NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY Estimated Change COUNTY n Assessed Value of Roadway & Track FAIRFAX COUNTY 1,045,334 HENRICO COUNTY 394,605 NELSON: 1,064,349 NEW KENT: 466,540 NOTTOWAY COUNTY 378,404 Orange, Town of 109,810 ORANGE COUNTY 1,124,775 PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY 936,568 SHENANDOAH COUNTY 784 909 NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY CITY BRISTOL: 345,168 CHESAPEAKE, CITY OF 2,540,526 8 NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY Estimated Change CITY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track EMPORIA: 21,684 FRANKLIN CITY: 12,180 HOPEWELL: 191,201 LYNCHBURG: 1,012,410 NORFOLK: 2,971,674 PETERSBURG: 1,211,315 SUFFOLK, CiTY OF 1,978,759 WAYNESBORO: 236,910 COUNTY AUGUSTA COUNTY 1,209,899 BEDFORD COUNTY: 4,549,880 Buchanan, Town of 65.267 BOTETOURT COUNTY 2,003,057 BRUNSWICK COUNTY 77,893 BUCHANAN COUNTY 4,097,481 CAMPBELL COUNTY 4,090,673 CHARLOTTE COUNTY 2,579,057 9 NORFOLK AND WESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track CLARKE COUNTY 615,260 DICKENSON: 345,610 DINWlDDIE: 3,096,952 GREENSVILLE: 53,908 ISLE OF WIGHT 1,017,474 LUNENBURG: 28,603 NOTTOWAY COUNTY 3,189,111 PRINCE EDWARD COUNTY 3,918,321 PRINCE GEQRGE: 1,192,448 Glasgow, Town of 113,743 ROCKBRIDGE COUNTY 1,341,917 ROCKINGHAM COUNTY 788,337 RUSSELL COUNTY 2,773,069 SMYTH COUNTY 1,325,034 SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY 1,078,052 SUSSEX COUNTY 1,845,353 St. Paul, Town of 82,693 WISE COUNTY 1,231,541 10 NORTH CAROLINA AND VIRGINIA RAILROAD COMPANY, INC. Estimated Change COUNTY In Assessed Value of Roadway &' Track Keysville, Town of (200,967) CHARLOTTE COUNTY (1,468,141) LUNENBURG: Chase City, Town of Clarksville, Town of MECKLENBURG COUNTY (777,820) (229,572) (136,146) (2,982,251) NOTTOWAY: (106,468) PRINCE EDWARD: (1,070,607) Boykins, Town of (11,312) SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY (81,581) RICHMOND, FREDERICKSBURG AND POTOMAC RAILROAD COMPANY CITY ALEXANDRIA: 60,200 COUNTY ARLINGTON: 262,056 11 RICHMOND, FREDERICKSBURG AND POTOMAC RAILWAY COMPANY Estimated Change CITY In Assessect Value of Roadway & Track ALEXANDRIA: (224,125) FREDERICKSBURG: (98,573) RICHMOND: (225,462) COUNTY ARLINGTON: (102,038) CAROLINE: (1,005,001) FAIRFAX COUNTY: (504,856) Ashland, Town of (135,869) HANOVER COUNTY (530,005) HENRICO: (521,752) KING GEORGE: (18,181) Quantico, Town of (11,290) PRINCE WILLIAM COUNTY (479,667) SPOTSYLVANIA: {339,244) STAFFORD: (764,097) 12 SHENANDOAH VALLEY RAILROAD COMPANY Estimated Change CITY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track STAUNTON: (131,600) COUNTY AUGUSTA COUNTY (267,140) ROCKINGHAM: (153,039) VIRGINIA AND SOUTHWESTERN RAILWAY COMPANY CITY BRISTOL: (145,088) COUNTY St. Charles, Town of LEE COUNTY Clinchport, Town of Duffietd, Town of Gate City, Town of Weber City, Town of SCOTT COUNTY (94,821) (2,985,268) (52,881) (177,789) (367,660) (172,091) (3,798,312) Appalachia, Town of (94,365) Big Stone Gap, Town of (235,001) WISE COUNTY (1,996,028) 13 WINCHESTER AND WESTERN RAILROAD COMPANY Estimated Change CITY In Assessed Value of Roadway & Track WINCHESTER: 6,322 COUNTY FREDERICK: 73,053 14 ^ D SUPER¥ $©gS BO~*R 0~: TO: FROM: J.W. Brent, Executive Director, Albemarle County Service Authority David Benish, Cl~ef of Community Developmem DATE: March 5, 1997 15.1-456 Review for Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan--Installation ora Sanitary Sewer Collection Line to Serve Properties within the Development Area Located West of Route 29 (Seminole Trail) and North of Route 649 (Airport Road). Staff has reviewed your request of February 20, 1997 to install a sanitary sewer collection line to serve properties located within the Development Area located west of Route 29 (Seminole Trail) and North of Route 649 (Airport Road). Section 15.1 I456 of the Code of Virginia requires that the extension, enlargement or consumction of water and/or sewer lines in the County be reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Prior to June 1993, all requests for review for Compliance with the Comprehensive Plan were forwarded to the Planning Commission for their approval/disapproval. However, on June 9, 1993 the Board of Supervisors based on the Planning Commission's recommendation, granted staff administrative approval for 15.1-456 reviews for water and/or sewer projects which meet the following criteria: The proposed water and/or sewer project is located solely within a designated Development Area; and. The proposed utility service is within the appropriate jurisdictional area for the type of services requested; and The proposed utility service for water distribution and sewage collection lines, pumping stations and appurtenances, not to include water and sewer transmission, main or tnmk lines, treatment facilities and the like. Page 2 March 5, 1997 Staffhas determined that this proposed sanitary sewer collection line meets the above criteria for adm'lnislzative review and that the project ~s in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me. DB/kmb CC: Planning Commission Board of Supervisors Arthur Petrini, RWSA Larry Davis, County Attorney File ~FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. March 12, 1997 03-17-97A10:58 RCVD P.O. Box 8 ~D © SUPERVISORS 410-879o9918 F^X 410-858-5360 Ms. Arlene Hemandez Assistant Treasurer The Bank of New York 101 Barclay Street, 21W New York, New York 10286 Re: Arbor Crest Aparunems (Hydraulic Road Apts.) Dear Ms. Hemandez: Enclosed please find a copy of the Bond Program Report for the above referenced project for the month of February 1997. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Sincerely, Sheila H. Moynihan Project Monitor /sbm enclosure cc: Ms. EllaW. Carey, Clerk, CMC Albemarle County_ Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Effective February 28, ]997 ~ONTRLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION ?{a) OF THE DEED RESTRICTIONS ABG Associates, Inc. 300 E.L:mh~rdStree= Baltimore, Maryland 21202 RE: Hydraulic Road Apartments - Arbor Crest Apa~=,~nts Charlottesville, Virginia Pursuant to Section 7(a) of the Deed Restrictions (the "Deed Restrictions"), as defined in an Indenture of Trust dated as of April 1, 1983, between the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County, Virginia :(the 'AuthOrity"), and your bank, as trustee, the undersigned authorized representative of Richmond-Albemarle Limited Partnership, a Virginia Limited Partnership (the "Purchaser"), hereby certifies with respect to the operation and management of Hydraulic Road Apartments, Charlottesville, Virginia (the "Project"), Chat as of the dace shown below: 1) The number of units in the Project occupied by lower income tenants is 16 2) The number of units in the Project unoccupied held available for Lower Income Tenants is 3) The number of units rented and the number of units held available for rental other than as described (1) and (2) is 50 . in 4) The percentage that the number of units described in (1) and (2) hereof constitute of the total number of units in the Project is 24% . 5) The information contained in this report is true, accurate and correct as of the date hereof. 6) As of the date hereof, the Purchaser is not in default under any covenant or agreement contained in the Deed Restrictions or in an Agreement of Sale dated as of April 1, 1983, between the Authority and the Purchaser. IN WITNEES WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed this Report as of ~farch 5, 1997 ~ RICHMOND-ALBEMARLE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, a Virginia limited partnership By: '. ~ Authorized KepresenCative pm~erty: l.o¢lt~on: Charlottesville, VA Subra,11ea ~¥: Loretta Wyatt ~%o,th Eebrua~ y~1997 Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) ~% ~: Num~z of Ufllll ,, , March 5, 1997 ~ond I. LOW[~ INCOME 'The Iollow*~g I.~l~l$ h.l','e De. an (3e$*~r~aled ~ "JO'.mir ~ncome" un,ts 051-35371 66 Effective 2/28/97 66 16 4 Arbor Crest Dr 21 ~ Beverly. T. Lane 2 6 Arbor Crest Dr 22 Wilma M. Atkinson 3 7 Arbor Crest Dr . 23 Ruth M. 3ones 4 9 Arbor Crest Dr 24 Virginia Burton ~ 12 Arbor Crest Dr 2S -~' Robert Stone 6 14 Arbor Crest D~ 26- Betty. L. Reed ? 18 Arbor Crest Dr , 27 ,.~nn S. Kemp ~ 30 Arbor Crest Dr 25. Mary Cox Allen .9~4 Arbor Crest Dr 29, Sam Atherton Narlan W. Hooe %0 56 Arbor Crest Dr 3~., 11 76 Arbor Crest Dr 31..Ann G. Saylor Ernest M. Nease 12. 78 Arbor Crest Dr 32, ~3 84 Arbor Crest Dr 33 _ 3uanita Boliek ~ 88 ~rbor Crest Dr 34 Nancy G. Foley ~S 9Q Arbor Crest Dr SS Betty B. Elliott ~ 94 Arbor Crest Dr 35 M. Eileen Knick i7 ~B 38 .... t9 39 ,., 20 , 40 41 43 44, 4S 4~ 47 4g ~0. $2 $3 ~l ~3. ~4. ~4. 67.~, 71.. , 72 73. , 74. ?S. 76. 7~ t 11 , I., 2 12 _ 2 3 13 3 4 ~J4 4., 5 I$ 5 6 16.,, 6 7 17 7 , 8 t8 8 ! 19 9 10 20 tO. 11, 12, 13 , 14. 15. 16_ 17. 16.._ 19. 20, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 03-17-9~A!0:58 RCV~ COMMONWEALTH of V RGIN [A H Alexander Wise Jr.. Director Department of Historic Resources 221 Governor Street Richmond. Virginia 23219 March 13, 1997 Mr. Watha J. Eddins, Jr. Mrs. Ann Clark Edd'ms 2051 Polo Grounds Road Charlottesville, VA 229 ! 1 RE: Red Hills, Albemarle County Dear Mr. and Mrs. Eddins: Thank you for the recent submission of a Prelim'mary Infomaation Form for Red Hills. I have passed the;fo_r~ on to th_eaU, egister Evaluation Team for consideration. This team, which consists of staff ~e. presenting a variety of disciplines and agency programs, will review the information within the next thirty days. l:he team will apply the-criteria for historic significance established by the National Park Service and make a recommendation as to the property's eligibility for the Virginia Landmarks Regis, ter and the National Register of Historic Places. [ will send you a letter shortly after the team s meeting informing you of its opinion. ~y:~l~y~'f,:t:his l~t~r ~j~ 0ff~C}a-~s are being notified of your request. I appreciate your interest in recognizing the state's historic resources. Sincerely, John S. Salmon Acting Register Program Manager C: - J. Daniel Pezzoni Capital Region preservation Office TELEPHONE: (804) 786-3143 TDD: (804) 786-1934 An Equal Opportunity Agency FAX: (804) 225-4261 27'30" 723 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA DIVISION' OF MINERAL RESOURCI!D3 lro: TO WHOM ADDRESSED From: Ella Washington Carey, Clerk, CM~ SUbject: Ordinance Adopted by Board on Marchl9, 1997 [}ate: Max-ch 20, 1997 Attached for your use is a copy of an ordinance which was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on March 19, 1997: An ordinance to amend Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation,Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax of the Code of Albemarle to increase the transient occupancy tax rate from two percent to five percent. /EWC Attachment (1) CC: The Honorable James L. Cambtos; III Larry Davis, Esq. Melvin A; Breeden Robert Walters Municipal Code Corporation Fite ORDINANCE NO. 97-8(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 8, FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE IX, TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, Article IX, Transient Occupancy Tax, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 8-41, Imposed; amount of tax, as follows: Sec. 8-41. Imposed; amount of tox. There is hereby imposed a tax on the occupancy of all rooms in hotels, motels, boardinghouses and travel campgrounds within the county. Such tax shall be assessed at the rate of five (5) percent of the amount charged for such occupancy; provided, hmvever, that nothing herein shall be construed as imposing any tax upon rooms or spaces rented for continuous occupancy to the same individual, person, firm, or corporation for thirty (30) or more days in hotels, motels, boardinghouses or travel campgrounds. (11-28-73; 8-15-74; 4-13-88.) The revenue collected from the portion of the tax over two (2) percent shall be designated and spent for promoting tourism, travel or business that generates tourism or travel in the county. This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1997. *State law reference--Authority of county to adopt this artide, Code of Va., §58.1-3819. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on March 19, 1997. S BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE 03- ?^ i 0: Distributed ~ ~rc EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing on County Ordinance to Increase the Transient Tax Rate from Two Percent to Five Percent. SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: To solicit public comment on amending the County Code to increase the transient tax rate from two pement to five percent effective July 1, 1997 STAFF CONTACT~S}: Messrs. Tucker, Davis, White BACKGROUND: AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER: March 19, 1997 ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: X ATTACHMENTS: Yes (1) ~ REVIEWED BY: The 1996 General Assembly amended Va. Code 58.1-3819 to enable Albemarle County and five other counties to raise the transient occupancy tax rate cap from two percent (2%) to five percent (5%). The amendment also specified that the "revenues collected from that porlion of the tax over two pement shall be designated and spent for promoting tourism, travel or business that generates tourism or travel in the Iocali[y" DISCUSSION: The altached proposed ordinance would enable Albemarle County to set the transient tax rate at 5% effective on July 1, 1997. It is estimated that the 3% increase would generate an additional $585,600 that could be used for tourism and tourism related projects, and will kept in a separate fund. Examples of tourism related projects would be the Visitors Bureau, tourism marketing, capital projects such as the Rivanna Greenway, and other increased local efforts to promote toudsm. RECOMMENDATION: The public hearing is to solicit public comment and if adopted would become effective July i, 1997. 97.060 DRAFT: March 12, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 8. FINANCE AND TAXATION_ ARTICLE IX. TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of fire County of Albemarle. Virginia. that Chapter 8. Finance and Taxation. Article IX. Transient Occupancy Tax, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 8-41. Imposed: amotmt of tax, as follows: Sec. 8-41. Imposed: amount of tax. There is hereby imposed a tax on the occupancy of all rooms in hotels, motels, boardinghouses and travel campgrounds within the county. Such tax shall be assessed at the rate of two (2) five (5) percent of the amount charged for such occupancy; provided, however_ that nothing herein shall be construed as imposing any tax upon rooms or spaces rented for continuous occupancy to the same individual, person, firm. or corporation for thirty/30) or more days in hotels, motels_ boardinghouses or travel campgrounds. (11-28-73; 8-15-74; 4-13-88.) The revenue collected from the uortion of the tax over two (2) percent shall be desitmated and spent for promotin~ tourism, travel or business that eenerates tourism or travel in the county. This ordinance shall be effective on and after [ul_v 1, 1997. *State law reference--Authority of county to adopt this artide. Code of Va.. §58.1-3819. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Transient Occupancy Tax SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Resolution of Intentto Raise Transient Occupancy Tax to five percent (5%). STAFF CONTACT~SI: Messrs. Tucker, Davis AGENDA DATE: February 19, 1997 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: INFORMATION: Ordinance BACKGROUND: The 1996 General Assembty amended Va. Code § 58.1-3819 to enable Albemarle and five other counties to raise the transient occupancy tax rate cap from two percent (2%) to five percent (5%). The amendment also specified that the revenue collected Eom that portion of the tax ever two percent shall be designated and spent for promoting tourism, travel or business that generates tourism or travel in the Iocali[y. DISCUSSION: Loudoun, Spotsylvania, York, and Pdnce William counties have now set their transient occupancy tax rate at five percent (5%) pursuant to Va. Code § 58.1-3819. It is estimated tttat an add~onal $585,600.00 of revenue would be generated by a three percent (3%) increase in Albemarle's transient occupancy tax rate. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Resolution of Intent to cons'~ler adoption of an ordinance to set the transient occupancy tax rate at five percent (5%). 97.037 RESOLUTION OF INTENT TO ADOPT AN ORDINANCE WHEREAS. section 58.1-3819 of the Code of Virginia enables the County of Albemarle to enact a transient occupancy tax at a rate not exceeding five percent (5%); and WHEREAS, the current transient occupancy tax rate in the County is two percent (2%); and WHEREAS. it may be necessary or desirable to increase revenue generated by the transient occupancy tax. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia hereby states its intent to consider setting the transient occupancy tax rate at five percent 15%~ and directs that a public hearing to consider an ordinance to amend County Code Section 8-41 to effectuate such rate increase be advertised for March 19, 1997. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing ~vriting is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County by a vote of __ to __ on February 19. 1997. Clerk. Board of County Supervisors REQUEST TO THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR ADDITIONAL FUNDING ~FO PROVIDE THE CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE CONVENTION AND VISITOR BUREAU WITH A COMPETITIVE TOURISM MARKETING PROGRAM This request is submitted by the Charlottesville Regional Tourism Council. Submitted By: Jack Bickart - Vice Chairman, Charlottesville Regional Tourism Council The Case For Additional Investment In Tourism Marketing: Among the Council members there is no question about the need for more funding for the CACVB. Exhibit 1 (attached) demonstrates that we are under spending the competition by close to sixty percent. The ke7 comparison is the amount the CACVB is spending per hotel room compared to the amount spentl by other localities. According to the Virginia Association of Convention and Visitors Bureaus (VACVB) i995 Member Survey, there are 2,400 hotel rooms supported by the marketing activities of the CACVB. Based on that figure, we spend a total of about $107 per room annually -- which is half as much as the average of $205 spent by the twenty other Virginia convention and visitor bureaus which do not operate convention facilities, If we just focus on the "operations" part of the budget which reflects promotional activities 1/ke advertising and ~ade shows, as opposed to the personnel expense section of the CACVB's budget, the gap is even greater. The CACVB spends 60% less ($46.56 vs $109.77) on advertising, trade shows, and other marketing initiatives than the a~erage Virginia locality without convention center facilities. After deducting $158,000 ro staff and operate the CACVB, less than $17,000 is left in the CACVB budget for advertising and other marketing activities. The marketing budget is practically nonexistent. Other cities like Fredericksburg, Lexington, and Roanoke, are spending up ro sixteen rimes as much as Charlottesville on marketing (Fredericksburg = $196,000; Roanoke = $128,000, see the attached budgets. And. they are generally experiencing more rapid growth in "traveler spending" as measured by the state: · Fredericksbura: "traveler spending" has grown by 11.9% per year since 1988. The Fredericksburg CVB budget is $565. 000 or about $565 for each of their 1.000 hotel rooms. · Lexington: Out spends Charlottesville by almost 2 to 1; growth in "traveler spending" has been 12.2% per year since 1988. · Charlottesville: "traveler spending" has grown by only 2.95% per year since 1988; lagging the state-wide average of 4.0% -Source: Virginia Tourism Corporation, Locality Economic Profiles) The CACVB budget has increased only marginally in recent years while hotel capacity expanded. Since July 1990, the budget has increased by 3% per year (FY 98 = $273,343); which actually results in a net annual decrease in marketing funds, due to the impact of normal salary increases and inflation. We believe the city of Charlottesville and Albemarle County have the opportunity to increase their tourism business and the assomared tax revenues by implementing a competitive - marketing program managed 'oy the CACVB. The flip side of this argument is also true: a failure to invest in tourism marketing combined with the near-term increase in the number of local hotel rooms may ultimately lead to an environment of too much hotel capacity with too little demand. 2 Over the short-term we would expect to see an immerFiate return from an increase in tourism advertising combined with the new hotel capacity coming on line. What's Needed... A Marketing Budget With An Incremental $300,000 Data from the survey of the Virginia Convention and Visitors Bureaus suggests that a total budget of $550.600 is the minimum amount required to make the Charlottesville region competitive with other Virginia localities This represents an increase of close to $300,000 over the CACVB's FY97 budget. The Council's marketing committee developed a prororypical budget (attached) that outlines how an incremental $300.000 in CACVB funds might be used. The expectation is that $150,000 of the incremental increase in the CACVB budget would come from Albemarle County. Why is this a good investment? Virginia localities that have made this kind of investment (Lexington and Fredricksburg) have experienced annual traveler spending growth of approximately 12 percent. According ro travel impact statistics provided by the Virginia Tourism Corporation. traveler spending in Albemarle County for 1995 was $136,510,000. A 12 percent increase ts $16,381.000, The Virginia Tourism Corporation estimates that $12.43 in taxes is returned to the Commonwealth of Virginia and localities for every $1 spent in tourism advertising by the State. If that return on tnvesrmem formula is applied to the requested incremental CACVB marketing funds, the new investment including similar funds contributed by the city would yield over $3,729,000 in new taxes for the county, city, and state. It is difficult m isolate the exact tax amount that is returned to the county, but it is clear that there is a significant return, which will fund other needs as well as tourism. Simply said, investing in tourism is good business for Albemarle County. E : C. IJ, ARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU 1997-1998 Overview Budget (COMBINATION VISITORS CENTER AND MARKETING OFFICE) Personal Services_ 51101 Salaries Director $41,225 Office Administrator 22,712 40-hour Counselor 17,704 20~hour Counselor 8,662 20-hour Counselor 8,421 20-hour Counselor 7,550 20-hour Counselor 3,667 20-hour Counselor 3,667 B04 18C 9C 9C 9C 9C 9C 9C $49,671 - Counselor's Salaries 34,168 - Rent 16,027 - Counselor' s Benefits $99,866 - (37% would be operating cost of Visitors Center) (seasonal Apr.-Oct.) (seasonal Apr.-Oct.) SUBTOTAL $ t 13,608 Overtime 51 t Substitute Salaries 3,348 Merit Increases 3,408 Holiday Overtime 2,186 ~Total Benefits 35,032 $12,830 - Hospitalization 9,415 - FICA 11,339 - Retirement 1,448 - Life Insurance $35,032 SUBTOTAL 44,485 TOTAL $158,093 51101 52101 52105 52125 52199 53101 53102 53103 53105 53106 53110 53111 53115 53116 53119 53140 53143 55101 Salaries Office Supplies Postage Food Other Supplies Professional Services Dues and Subscriptions Telephone Printing and Duplication Service Contracts Travel Local Travel Advertising Insurance Rent Medical Care Data Processing Office Equipment VB $158,093 1,784 9,911 800 285 2,560 4~423 4,029 29,350 150 4,895 698 11,840 1,730 34,168 135 2,390 1,220 $268,461 CB 200 231 100 100 300 1,675 200 100 1,876 100 $4,882 (273,343) 0 z · -J 0 ROANOKE VALLEY CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU EXPENSES 96/97 401 SALARIES 403 INSURANCE HEALTH, LIFE, LTD, 405 PAYROLL TAXES 409 RETIREMENT 410 LIABILITY INS 411 DIRECTORS LIABILITY 430 VISITOR INFO CTR STAFF 431 VIC SUPPLIES 432 AFFIL DUES & SUBS 439 OFFICE SUPPLY & EXPENSE 442 * OFFICE EQUIPMENT 443 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE 453 RECRUITMENT 465 PROMOTION 467 CONFERENCE CTR ADVERTISING 468 ADVERTISING 469 PRINTING 470 EXHIBIT REGISTRATION 471 TRANSPORTATION 473 HOTELS, MEALS. ETC 476 LOCAL MILEAGE 480 SERVICE TO CONVENTIONS 481 CONVENTIONS SALARIES 483 MEMBERSHIP INITIATIVE 485 LEGAL FEES 486 ACCOUNTING SERVICES 488 POSTAGE/SHIPPING 489 TELEPHONE 490 RENT 491 PAR~ING 492 UTILITIES 493 JANITORIAl SERVICES 495 MISCELLANEOUS 497 PROMOTIONAL PROJ. SPEC. 498 TEMPORARY HELP 500 CONSULTANT (3 MONTHS~ DENTAL) 222,073.48 23,956.42 25,292,26 8,671.92 1,804.00 2,350.00 20,784.00 5,000.00 5.640.00 13,500.00 8, 500.00 2, 000 . 00 2, 500 . 00 24~ 000.00 30,000.00 73,599.00 48,000.00 11,000.00 7,500.00 14,000.00 2,500.00 21,400.00 1,300.00 500.00 1,000.00 6,238.00 31,000.00 15,000.00 34,910 . 00 3,320.00 2,700.00 2,500.00 500.00 3,000.00 200.00 26,143.92 TOTAL $702,383.00 * CONTINGENT ON CITY APPROVAL OF COMPLETE INF®P~TION PROGRAM $73,437.00 Revised 9/18/96 ROANOKE VALLEY CONVENTION & VISITORS BUREAU INCOME 96/97 000 FROM MONEY MARKET 15,000.00 Rol!©ver 95/96 17,400.00 301 CITY OF ROANOKE 500,00(.00 321 ROANOKE COUNTY 107,500.00 322 CITY OF SALEM 1,000.00 323 CRAIG COUNTY 500.00 324 FRANKLIN COUNTY 2,000.00 371 MEMBERSHIP DUES 41,233.00 381 INTEREST INCOME 3,500.00 382 GIFT SHOP SALES 1,250.00 385 VIC DONATIONS 4,000.00 386 PROMOTIONAL PROJECTS INCOME 7,000.00 387 BROCHURE DISTRIBUTION 2,000.00 $702,383.00 MONEY MARKET EMERGENCY CONTINGENCY' S 682.88 PAYROLL ACCOUNT) s 1,500.00 CONVENTION PRESOLD BALANCE' $56,7t7.91 £HRRLBTTESUt_LE 83/E'1912833 ACCTt~ 1301 2100 22~0 22,10 2400 2710 3180 ~0 3~00 2600 ~2~0 ~220 ~230 ~0 ~0 5810 UR.CUB TEL:804-295-2175 Mar 06;57 17833726587 F~RGT[3JR~SM CI'~ OF FIm[EDERICKSBURG OFFICE or ECONOMIC DI~VELoPMENT/TOURIS~V BUDGET DESCRIPTION 8,31aries & We~es- Regular 8,~larJei & Wages - Part Time FICA Benefi[s ~etirement V,R.S. Hosp~tal/M~]~ai Professional Se~;es - Other Reoairs & Ma,ntensnce Maimenan~ SaP/ice C~trac~ ~r{nCn~ & Bl~ding A~ve~isinS Postage & Postal Telecommun~ion Less~ent~t of ~qmDmmnt Mileage Subsism~e & Convemlon & ~isitor AMOUNT ~7.7~7.00 $16,608.00 $18,37g.00 $i7.500.00 $244.00 .~.18.00 $43,725,00 $2,000.00 $1 ooo.o0 $45.575,00 $'~9~ 908,00 $26, ~0.00 ~4.200.o0 $7,?00,00 $500,00 ~lB.BO0.OO $6,580.00 $;~ ,700.(~ $~,~3~00 10,97 I7:52 No,O05 ~.02 PAGE 84 Y-T-D AMOUNT $168.760.09 $58,489.65 $16,694,41 $17 524.20 $13,639 95 $112A2 $$40,33 $3@,628.96 9t ,330.93 2323.89 $41.895,90 $194.893.83 $25,211.38 $4.t62.6! $9,308.27 $160.00 $ !. 374,65 $17,077.38 $6,473.25 $3 350.50 $2,944.86 CH¢~LOTTESV;[LLE VA.CVB TEL:804-295-2276 0~/89/lcJ~[3 86:57 17933726587 FBR~TOL~IS~4 8011 Unibrm~ & Wearing ~par~l $300,00 6015 Mercha~ise fct ~21 Pto~ona! ~e~ic,~s ~9.800.00 BIO~ Ma~in~ TOTAL Mar 10,97 17:53 No ,00~ PCC3E $220_4B $503.56 $480,19 $23.008,0i ~49.!69.62 $1,629.00 $3.0D0.00 $70~,10B,8t CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE CVB Incremental Marketing Budget Salaries: Full Time Marketin~ Sales Director (includes benefits) Sales Director Bonus (Subject to performance) Full Time Admin. Asst. ~9.50/lzr (includes benefits) $45,000 t5,000 18.720 Total Incremental Staff Salaries $ 78.720 *"Operauonal Expenses: Office rem Equipment rentals Telephone IX Iedia: Leisure Market/Special Event Conference Markets Group Tour Market Media Production Agency Fees tmonthly retainer) Direct Malt tConference & Group Tour) Trade Shows* Travel (4/days/mo. ~150/day) Enterrmnmenr (Local and Field) Dues/Subscriptions Printed Material Market Research Supplies Contingency 4,500 2,400 2,400 50,000 60.000 10,000 5,000 20,000 I8,000 12.000 7,200 6,000 1,000 I2.000 1,500 1,000 3.000 Total Incremental Operational Expenses $216,000 *Suggested Trade Shows: Southern Women's Shows (2~ $2400 GWSAE 2425 Meeting World 2400 AENC 600 VHTA 600 CI Travel Show 700 Data Pow Wow 2000 **One-time capital investment of $6.000~$7.000 required in addition to annual budget for purchase of computers and furniture. 2/7/97 Z £l'd 6~:gT 26, 9I 'MEMORANDUM COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 FROM: DATE: RE: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors William D. Fritz, Senior Planner t~~7 F February 21, 1997 ZTA-96-04 Page Williams The Albemarle County Planning Commission, ar its meeting on February 18, 1997, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted zoning text amendment. Attached please find a staff report which outlines this amendment. The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to review this amendment at its March 19, 1997 meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. WDF/jcf ATTACHMENT cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 03-74-97A?1:45 R~VD~, DRAFT: Marcn '1o, 1997 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 20_ ZONING. ARTICLE I, GENERAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE II, BASIC REGULATIONS, AND ARTICLE IIL DISTRICT REGULATIONS. OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 20. Zoning, Article I. General Provisions. Article II. Basic Regulations. and Article IH. District Regulations, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 3.0, Definitions; section 4.11.3, Reduction of Building Separation and Side Yards: section 15.3, Area and Bulk Regulations: secuon 16.3. Area and Bulk Regu2ations: section 17.3. Area and Bulk Regulations: and section 18.3. Area and Bulk Regulations as follows: ARTICLE I. GENERAL PROVISIONS 3.0 DEFINITIONS Zero Lot Line: The location of a dwelling unit or oortion thereof on a lot in such a manner that one of the sides rests less than the distance to the side lot line otherwise reouired in the district and may rest directly on that side lot line. Zero Lot Line DeveloDment: A single family detached develovment making use of zero lot lines in which a minimum separation of dwelling units of six (6) feet is maintained, 4.11 4.11.3 4.11.3.1 ARTICLE II BASIC REGULATIONS USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED IN REQUIRED YARDS Reduction of Building Separation and Side Yards Minimum building separation and side yards for main structures shall be reduced in accordance with the applicable district regulations in a particular case under the following circumstances: 4.11.3.2 4.11.3.3 Such structures are located within a four (4) mile radius of a responding fire station and in an area where available fire flows are adequate by Insurance Services~ Offices standards to permit such reduction: o~ and All such structures for which separation and/or side yards are reduced shall be constructed in accordance with ~ P~c$13talxce ~ ~:--o ........................ s ....... the current edition of the Vireinia Uniform Statewide Buildim, Code: and In the case of yard reduction, the Albemarle County fire offidal may require such guarantee as deemed necessary to insure compliance wath the provisions of this section inclusive but not limited to deed restriction disclosure, and other such instruments and the recordation of the san~e in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county. In the case of reduction as provided in section 4.11.3.1. the following additional regulations shall apply: No such structure shall encroach on any emergency accessway as may be required by the Albemarle County fire official; Unless constructed to a common wall. no such structure shall be located closer than slx (6) feet to any lot line: except as a zero lot line develot)ment as Drovided in Section 4.11.3.4: No such structure shall encroach on any utility, drainage or other easement, nor any feature required by this ordinance of other applicable law. Development approved prior to the effective date of this section shall be exempt from section 4. t 1.3 1 and shall comply with the side yard and building separation regulations of the zoning ordinance in effect at the time of such approval. For the purpose of this section. "development approved" shall mean: any final subdivision plat approved pursuant to Chapter 18 of the Code of Albemarle; any site development plan approved pursuant to section 32.0 of this ordinance or comparable provision of prior 2 zoning ordinances of any planned development district established pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance or prior zoning ordinance. 4.11.3.4_ Zero Lot Line Development A zero lot hne development shall meet the following minimum reonirements: A vemetual wall maintenance easement shall be established on each lot abutting the zero lot lng side of each zero lot line lot. The easement shall be of a necessary ~vidth to provide six (61 feet of clearance between dwelling units. Roof overhangs shall not be considered for the Durr)ose of determining the necessary width of the easement. No structures_or accesso~ structures, except roof over_hangs asprovided in section 4.1 1.3.4.b and fences which are perpendicular to the lot line, shall be located in the easement. The easement shall be for the benefit of the zero lot line lot and shall be shown on the final vlat and incorvorated in each deed transferring title to the abutting lot. Roof overhangs on the zero lot line side of the lot may oenetrate the easement on the abutting lot a maximum of twenw-four (24) inches, but the roof shall be designed so that the water runoff from the dwelling unit placed on the lot line occurs on the lot of that dwelling unit or within the easement area. Building footings on the zero lot line side of the lot may penetrate the easement on the abutting lot a maximum of eight (8~ inches. No accessory structure or portion thereof shall be located between the dwelling unit and the lot line on the zero lot line side of the lot. The provisions of section 4.11.1 shall not aoolv between the dwelling unit and the zero lot line side of the lot 3 ARTICLE III DISTRICT REGULATIONS 15.0 RESIDENTIAL - R-4 15.3 AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 4 da/acre 4 du/acm ¢ da/acre ¢ du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) I0,800 sq ft N/A 7,2¢0 sq ft N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side(a).(_l~ 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with section 4.11.3. (Amended 1-1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet in approved zero lot line develovments in accord with section 4.11.3 Maximum 35 feet 55 feet 55 feet 55 feet Structure Height 16.0 RESIDENTIAL - R-6 16.3 AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density ¢ da/acre ¢ du/acre 9 da/acre 9 da/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 7,2¢0 sq ft N/A 4,840 sq ft N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side (a).~_ I5 feet 15 feet 1~ feet lB feet Rear 20 feet £0 feet 20 feet 20 feet 4 (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10j feet in accordance with section 4.11.3. ~Amanded 1-1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet ha apl~roved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4. 11.3 Maximum $5 feet 05 feet 05 feet $5 feet Sttaxcture Height 17.0 RESIDENTIAL - R-10 17.3 AREAAND BULK REGULATIONS Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density I 0 du/acre 10 du/acre 15 du/acre 15 da/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 4,356 sq ff N/A 2,904 sq ft N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side (a)(b) 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than fen (10) feet in accordance with section 4.11.$. (Amended 1~1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet ha aporoved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4.11.$ Maximum 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet Structure Height 18.0 RESIDENTIAL - R-15 18.3 AREA AND BULK REGULATIONS Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 15 du/acre 15 du/acre 20 du/acre 20 du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 2,904 sq ft N/A 2,178 sq ft N/A 5 'STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ FEBRUARY 18, 1997 MARCH 19, 1997 ZTA - 96-04 PAGE WILLIAMS Description of Request: This proposal is to amend the ordinance to permit "zero lot lines". The applicant's request is defined more accurately as: ZTA 96-04 Page Williams - Petition to amend the setback provisions of the R-4, Residential (Section 15.3), R-6, Residential (Section 16.3), R-10, Residential (Section 17.3) and R-15, Residential (Section 18.3) Districts to permit "Zero Lot" lines. This proposal wilt require amendment to Section 3.0 Definitions and Section 4.11 Uses and Structures Permitted in Required Yards. Zero Lot Lines permit the location of a building on a lot in such a manner that one or more of the building's sides rests directly on a side lot line with no yard. Origin: Request by individual applicant Public Purpose to be Served: The proposed addition of"zero lot lines" to the ordinance will provide for an additional pattern o£residential development. Staff opinion is that the ordinance should provide for flexibility in housing patterns. Zero Lot Line Development will allow for the construction ora residential unit on the property line with maintenance of minimum building separation. Zero Lot Line Development can have the effect of increasing the density which would allow for a more efficient use of the Development Areas by allowing a developer to further cluster development. Clustering of development allows the development to be closer to the gross density of a conventional zoning district. Comnrehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan includes statements which are supportive of the effort to provide a variety of housing types and to allow for efficient use of land in the Development Areas. "Encourage greater utilization of land in designated Development Areas by achieving higher gross densities for residential and non-residential development than in the past. [p.21 ]" "Encourage infill development of vacant lands and development of under-used areas within the designated Development Areas. [p.21]" Strategies for Infill Development are stated on page 23 and include; "Provide greater flexibility in type of use and density of development, and Consider greater flexibility in development regulations which may limit development opportunities (without compromising issues of general health or safety). As a recommendation to achieve infill development the comprehensive plan states "Evaluate and amend zoning and subdivision regulations in a manner that results in opportunities for increased development densities (including, but not limited to: critical slope regulations; open space requirements; reduction of area requirements for planned developments; density bonus provisions; commercial parking ,; requirements, subdivision street and lot access reqmrements; possible impediments to 'alternative' development designs)." Staff opinion is theat the zero lot line concept is consistent with the aforementioned Comprehensive Plan strategies. Staff Comment: The provision of Zero Lot Line Development may have the result of increasing the density of development by allowing for reduced lot sizes. The minimum lot size is determined by the sum of the area of the required yards and the house size. By allowing the construction of dwellings up to the lot line the total width of the lot may be reduced when compared to the minimum lot size required by the current ordinance. In determining the appropriateness of Zero Lot Line Development within the County, staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6. In part, the purpose of the ordinance is to promote the public health, safety, convenience and welfare. The ordinance contains the following statements of intent which staffhas considered particularly relevant in evaluating this request: Section 1.4.1 Section 1.4.3 Section 1.4.4 To provide for adequate light, air, convenience of access and safety, from fire, flood and other dangers. To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community. To protect against one or more of the following: overcrowding of land, undue density of population in relation to the community facilities existing or available, obstruction of light and air, danger and congestion in travel and transportation, or loss of life, health, or property from fire, flood, panic or other dangers. The intent of the ordinance has traditionally led to the establishment of setbacks. Setbacks in general serve three purposes: 1)Insure adequate light and air, 2]Provide for adequate separation in case of fire or other emergency, and 3)Establish a character to a given area of development. Staff will address each purpose of setbacks in the evaluation of Zero Lot Line Development. Insure adequate light and air The allowance of Zero Lot Line Development will reduce the permitted distance between dwellings to a minimum of 6 feet. [Staff opinion is that reduction of lot sizes to the absolute minimum will be uncommon. This opinion is based on the fact that staff currently does not typically see the existing cluster provisions of the ordinance used to achieve the absolute minimum lot size. However, the ord'mance, if amended, will permit a 6 foot separation. Staff has considered a 6 foot separation in evaluation of the request.] The Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code requires that any building wall located within 3 feet of a property line be fire rated with no openings. A six foot separation allows two dwellings to each be located 3 feet from the property line and both will be permitted to have openings. For dwellings located less than 3 feet from the property line, Zero Lot Line Development will result in a structure with openings on only three sides. Currently, interior townhouse units have openings on only the front and rear. End townhouses and single family attached units have openings on three sides. Based on the existing types of development currently permitted in the County staff opinion is that Zero Lot Line Development will not detrimentally impact light and air availability. ~rovide for adequate protection from fire The requirements of the building code insure the adequacy of fire protection. [The provisions of the building code cannot be waived by the zoning ordinance.] Zero Lot Line Development must also allow for access to all four sides of a structure for purposes of fighting fires. Staff opinion is that Zero Lot Line Development does not represent an increased risk of fire. Establish a character to a given area of development Residential Zero Lot Line Development currently is possible only in Planned Developments. [Commemial and Industrial buildings currently can be constructed to the property line.] Setbacks for Planned Developments are established at the time of the approval of the Planned Development. [Staff notes that sections of the Four Seasons development make use of zero 1ol lines.] Zero Lot Line Development does have a character which is different from currently permitted conventional and cluster development in the R~4, R-6, R-10 and R-15 districts. Zero Lot Line Development results in a single family detached development which is more compact than other forms of single family detached developmem. In some instances, the use of Zero Lot Line Development can lead to a garage dominating the front view of a home from the road. Consideration has been given to requiring that, in order to make use of Zero Lot Line Development, the entire development, or an entire section or phase of development, would have to be designed as Zero Lot Lines to insure continuity of pattern of design. Staff opinion is that requiring an entire development, particularly larger developments, to be designed as Zero Lot Line Developments is unrealistic and could not readily be applied due to terrain, access, utilities and other considerations. To best address this matter, staff is instead recommending language which will require the use of Zere Lot Lines be noted onthe final plat and to which lots Zero Lot Lines will be available. This will enable individuals locating within a development to have knowledge as to the character of the development. Review of ordinances from other localities indicates that this approach is most appropriate. The existing setbacks contained in the ordinance establish a minimum yard area on all sides of a house. This area may be used for recreation or outdoor living. The elimination of as much as a total side yard allows the total lot size to be reduced. However, in all zoning districts when a lot is reduced to below the conventional minimum lot size an area equal to that reduction must be set aside in open space. This open space is then made available to all of the residents in a development. This open space may include active recreation facilities. The allowance of Zero Lot Line Development does reduce the area available for recreation or outdoor living and recreation on each lot individually, but replaces the lost area in open space. The desire to have outdoor living area available on an individual lot verses in common open space can best be considered by each individual when making their housing decision. As an example, some individuals choose to live in a townhouse or condominium development as opposed to a single family house which has a greater yard area to maintain. Technical Issues of Zero Lot Line Development In order for a dwelling to be located on the property line, easements for maintenance will be required on the adjacent property. Staff has included a requirement of up to a six (6) foot easement. The easement will need to be shown on the final plat. Staff has reviewed other ordinances which make provision for Zero Lot Line Development. Other localities typically 4 require either a 4 or 5 foot easement. One locality contacted by staff, Anchorage Alaska, requires a 10 foot easement. The applicant has suggested a 6 foot easement. Staff contacted three localities to discuss the easement areas they require. Those localities were Anchorage, Alaska [10 foot easement], Alexandria, Louisiana [5 foot separation no easement specified] and Myrtle Beach, South Carolina [4 foot easement]. In each of these localities no Zero Lot Line Developments have been reviewed in recent years. Neither Myrtle Beach or Alexandria had experienced any problems with existing Zero Lot Line Developments. Anchorage had established a 10 foot easement after approximately six (6) amendments to the ordinance. The easement area in Anchorage was to provide for fire separation, maintenance and to some extent allow for storage of snow. Staffhas determined that a 6 foot separation would be sufficient to protect the public safety based on the requirements of the building code. Stuff does note that the foot of an 18 foot ladder is recommended by the manufacturer to be located 13 ½ feet from the wall. This may require specialized equipment for the maintenance of some walls located on the property line. Similar circumstances can currently exist on conventional lots with a 10 foot sideyard where a fence is placed on the property line. Staff does not view this a public health or safety issue and provides the comment for information purposes only. The other localities contacted had no knowledge of diffictflties in maintenance caused by Zero Lot Line Development. Staffopinion is that a 6 foot separation is acceptable, Summary: Staffhas identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: Zero Lot Line development allows for the reduction in minimum lot size, resulting in increased amounts of open space available within the development. This can increase the preservation of resources such as wooded areas, floodplain, steep slopes and wildlife habitat. Zero Lot Line Development allows for increased flexibility in the siting of a dwelling on the property. Zero Lot Line Development may allow for developments of greater density to be constructed which may reduce housing costs and consumption of land. Zero Lot Line Development is generally consistent with the infill policy of the Comprehensive Plan. Staff has identified the following factors which are unfavorable to this request: Approval of Zero Lot Line Developments may require additional review time by staff to insure the adequacy of the lot layout. Staff provides the following additional observations as factors neither favorable or unfavorable Zero Lot Line Development may result in change in the appearance or pattern of development due to reduced building separation. Zero Lot Line Development does reduce the amount of land 5 available on each lot for outdoor activities. The amount of outdoor area available on a lot is a decision made by the consumer at the time of making a housing decision. Recommended Action: Staff recommends the addition of Zero Lot Lines to the ordinance and offers the following language. Proposed Zoning Text'Langmage: Add Section 3.0 Definitions: Zero Lot Line - The location of a dwelling unit or portion thereof on a lot in such a manner that one of the sides rests less than the distance to the side lot line otherwise required inthe district and may rest directly on that side lot line. Zero Lot Line Development- A single family detached development making use of Zero Lot Lines in which a mimmum separation of dwelling units of six feet is maintained. Add Section R-4, Residential, Section 15.3 Area and Bulk Regulations - Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 4 du/acre 4 du/acre 6 du/acre 6 du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 10,890 sq ft N/A 7,260 sq ft N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side(a)(b) 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with section 4.11.3. (Amended 1-1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet in approved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4.11.3 Maximum Structure 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet Height R-6, Residential (Section 16.3), Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 6 du/acre 6 du/acre 9 du/acre 9 du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 7,260 sq ft N/A 4,840 sq fi N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side (a)(b) 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced tO not tess than ten (10) feet in accordance with section 4. l 1.3. (Amended 1-1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet in approved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4.11.3 Maximum Structure 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet 35 feet Height R-10, Residential (Section 17.3) Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 10 du/acre 10 du/acre 15 du/acre 15 du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 4,356 sq ft N/A 2,904 sq ft N/A Yards, minimum: · Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side (a)(b) 15 feet t5 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with section 4.11.3. (Amended 1-t-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet in approved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4.11.3 Maximum Structure 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet Height 7 - '~,-15, Residential (Section 18.3) Standard Level Bonus Level Conventional Cluster Conventional Cluster Requirements Development Development Development Development Gross Density 15 du/acre 15 du/acre 20 du/acre 20 du/acre Minimum Lot Size (Added 7-17-85) 2,904 sq i5 N/A 2,178 sq fi N/A Yards, minimum: Front 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet 25 feet Side (a)(b) 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet 15 feet Rear 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet 20 feet (a) Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with section 4.11.3. (Amended 1-1-83) (b) Minimum side yards may be reduced to zero (0) feet in approved zero lot line developments in accord with section 4.11.3 Maximum Structure 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet 65 feet Height Add Section 4.11.3 Reduction of Building Separation and Side Yards 4.11.3.1 Minimum building separation and side yards for main structures shall be reduced in accordance with the applicable district regulations in a particular case under the following circumstances: Such structures are located within a four (4) mile radius of a responding fire station and in an area where available frre flows are adequate by Insurance Services Offices standards to penuit such reduction; oe and All such structures for which separation and/or side yards are reduced shall be constructed ~n accordance with .............................. the current edition of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building Code; and In the case of yard reduction, the Albemarle County fire official may reqmre such guarantee as deemed necessary to insure compliance with the provisions of this section inclusive but not limited to deed restriction disclosure, and other such instruments and the recordation of the same in the office of the clerk of the circuit court of the county. 4.11.3.2 In the case of reduction as provided in section 4.11.3.1. the following additional regulations shall apply: No such structure shall encroach on any emergency accessway as may be required by the Albemarle County fire official; Unless constructed to a common wall, no such structur¢ shall be located closer than six (6) feet to any lot liner except as a zero lot line development as provided in Section 4.11.3.4; No such structure shall encroach on any utility, drainage or other easement, nor any feature required by this ordinance of other applicable law. 4.11.3.3 Development approved prior to the effective date of this section shall be exemp~ fi'om section 4.11.3.1 and shall comply with the side yard and building separation regulations of the zoning ordinance in effect at the time of such approval. For the purpose of this section, "development approved" shall mean: any final subdivision plat approved pursuant m Chapter 18 of the Code of Albemarle; any site development plan approved pursuant to section 32.0 of this ordinance or comparable provision of prior zoning ordinances of any planned developmem district established pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance or prior zoning ordinance. 4.11.3.4 Zero Lot Line Development bo The wall of the dwelling unit located within 3feet of the lot line shall have no windows, doors, or any other type of openings unless permitted by the Virginia Uniform Stutewide Building Code. As necessary in a particular case a perpetual wall maintenance easement shall be provided on the lot adjacent to the zero lot line property such that, with the ~,cception offences, a total width between dwelling units of six feet shall be kept clear of structures. This easement shall be shown on the final plat and incorporated in each deed transferring title to the property. Roof overhangs may penetrate the easement on the adjacent lot a maximum of twenty-four (24) inches, but the roof shall be so designed that water runoff from the dwelling placed on the lot line is limited to the lot of the dwelling or the easement area~ Building footings may penetrate the easement on the adjacent lot a maximum of eight (8) inches. In review of this proposal staff consulted the ordinances from the following localities. Those noted "*" have detailed ordinances permitting zero lot line development. Other localities permitted zero lot line development, but contained little if any development standards. Staff reviewed ordinances from a total of 26 localities across the country. Alexandria LA* Anchorage AK* Charlotte NC* Dade County FL* Malibu CA Myrtle Beach SC* Orange County FL Stillwater OK* Tallahassee FL ASZTA9604.RPT 9 February 28, 1997 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Developmen[ 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Stephen M. Melton Hurt Investment Corporation 195 Riverbend Drive Charlottesville, VA 22911 RE: SP 96-52 Hurt Investment Corporation Tax Map 32, Parcel 36G Dear Mr. Melton: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 25, 1997, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1 Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: No such use shall operate without any required licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the zoning administrator a copy of the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the zoning administrator of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within three (3) days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County fire official at his discretion. Failure to promptly admit the fire official for such inspection shall be deemed wilful noncom pliance with the provisions of this ordinance; Page 2 February 28, 1997 These provisions are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements of the Virginia Department of Welfare, Virginia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state or federal agency. Site shall be developed in general accordance with the site plan prepared by W. Aubrey Hoffman & Associates, Ltd. dated December 10, 1996 and revised January 27, 1997. 3. Maximum enrollment shall not exceed ninety (90) students or such lesser number as may be approved by the Health Department; additional enrollment shall require amendment to the special permit. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 19, 1997. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days pdor 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, Senior Planner SET/jcf cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: SUS~ E. THOMAS FEBRUARY 25, 1997 MARCH 19, 1997 SP 96-52 NORTHSIDE DAYCARE CENTER Annlicant's Pronosal: Northside Christian Sdhools, Inc. proposes to construct and operate a 6,000 square foot day care center. The facihty ~s intended to accommodate a maximum of 90 students with a staff of 10, offering infant care (6 weeks through 12 months), day care (12 months through 36 months), and preschool (3 and 4 years old). Approxinaate hours will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Northside Christian Schools, Inc. also operates private elementary and high schools at other locations in Albemarle County. The applicant's description and justification are included as Attachmem C. Petition: Petition to allow construction of a 6,000 square foot day care center [13.2.2(7)] on approximately 1.56 acres zoned R-l, Residential. Subject property is located at the southeast comer of Proffit Road and Worth Crossing, approximately 1/10 mile east of the Route 29/ProffiI Road intersection. This site, described as Tax Map 32, Parcel 36G, is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District and in the Hollymead Community, which isa designated Developmem Area. Character of the Area: The proposed site is currently undeveloped: It is a comer parcel with frontage on Proffit Road and Worth Crossing, both of which are paved roads. Access is from Worth Crossing, utilJTing an existing commercial entrance serving the Apostolic Lighthouse Church, which is located adjacent to and southeast of the site.- Immediately south of the cApOstol!c Church on Worth Crossing is the Forest Lakes Child Development Cemer, also a day are facility. Land use proceeding east along Proffit Road is residential. A single family dwelling is located on the adjacent parcel to the east of the site The area to the west across Worth Crossing is undeveloped, with various existing commercial uses along Route 29. North across Proffit Road is a garden center, witha bank and lumber yard also lOCated in the northeast quadran~ of the Route 29/Proffit intersection. RECOMMENDATION: Staffhas reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval.: Plannine and Zonine History: This parcel was created through an administratively approved plat signed in March 1987. 3. Comprehensive Plan: The proposed day care center lies witlfin an area which is designated Transitional in the Land Use Plan. This Transitional designation extends along the east side of Worth Crossing from Proffit Road south to Timber Wood Boulevard. To the west and north, the property adjacent to Route 29 is designated Regional Service, extending South to an area of Community Service. Land immediately east of the proposed site is designated Urban Density Residential (6.01 - 34 DU/AC); east of that is a large area of NeighborhoodDensity (3 - 6 DU/AC). STAFF COMMENT: The Site Review Committee has reviewed the applicant's site developmem plan, which may be approved administratively once the special use permit has been approved. Staff opinion is that certain uses such as churches, day care, and schools contribute to the well-being and moral fiber of the community. In this posture, staff review is confined to issues of physical development while other considerations of appropriateness of the use to a given location are a matter of legislative discretion. 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 unon a finding bv the Board of SuPervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to ad_iacent property. Staffhas visited the area and is of the opinion that the impact bn surrounding uses will be minimal. Access will be from Worth Crossing, and will utilize the existing church emxance. Thus, traffic associated with Northside Daycare Center will not significantly affect adjacent residences because it will enter from non-residential roads. There will be no access directly to Proffit Road. Along the eastern property line, buffering m be provided by the applicant in the form of trees will further screen the day care facility (and particularly the fenced play area) from the residence and church. The applicant's preliminary site development plan also proposes a commercial setback adjacent to residential areas, that is, a 50 foot building setback l'me which incorporates the 20 foot landscaped buffer. Staff is of the opinion that this setback and landscaped buffer will provide an effective transition from this use to the adjacent residential area. There should be little or no conflict with the adjacent church due to their different hours of operation. Areas to the west and north are designated for Regional Service, and thus might be expected to eventually involve uses of equal or greater intensity than the day care eemer. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby. As mentioned above, the area on the east side of Worth Crossing is designated Transitional in the Comprehensive Plan, a designation which is intended to buffer uses of different intensity, specifically uses which are appropriate for areas making the transition from commercial/industrial to residential. With an existing child care facility approved for 120 children (Forest Lakes Associates, SP 88-115) located just to the south of the proposed site, and residential use to the east, activities characteristic ora day care center are very much those already occurring in the immediate area. Uses ora more intensive nature can be expected to eventually occupy the area across Worth Crossing to the west, currentlydesiguated for Regional Service and zoned E-1. 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. Staff finds no conflict with these provisions of the ordinance. Staff notes that this-request to establish a day care facility forwards the intent of the ordinance as stated in the following Sections: 1.4.3 "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community;" 1.4.4 "To facilitate, the provision of adequate police and fire protection, disaster evacuation, civil defense, transportation, water, sewerage, flood protection, schools, forests, playgrounds, recreational facilities, airports and other public requirements;" While this is not a public use, it does serve a public need which some localities provide governmentally. with the uses permitted by right in the district. The day care use as proposed will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent property. However, as previously mentioned, the landscaped area 20 feet in width shown on the prelim/nary site plan provides buffering between non-residential and residential uses. It appears to be compatible with other Transitional uses in the area. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, This use will be required to have state licensure as set forth in Section 5.1.6(a) of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinknce, provided below: 3 "No such use shall operate without any required licensure by-the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility of the owner/operator to transmit to the zoning administrator a copy of the original license and all renewals thereafter and to notify the zoning administrator of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within three (3) days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance;" and with the public health, safety and eeneral welfare. There are no major issues affecting public health and general welfare associated with this application. In fact, it should make a positive contribution to the above-cited criteria. The most significant potential safety issue is related to traffic. Based on data obtained from the Trip Generation Manual, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers, a day care use can be expected to generate approximately 408 vtpd (vehicle trips per day), 74 vtph (vehicle trips per hour) per peak morning hour, and 74 vtph per peak afternoon hour. In an R-1 district, a single residence (the maximum permitted on a parcel of this size) can be expected to generate 10 vtpd. While the traffic generated will be significantly greater than that anticipated with a residence, staff opinion is that it can be adequately accommodated in this area. It should be noted that generation of similar volumes can be expected from the existing day care center located just to the south of this site, with some impact to the intersections of Worth'Crossing at Timber Wood Boulevard and Proffit Road. The Proffit Road/Worth Crossing intersection has been recently improved and can accommodate traffic of this volume, as does the Timber Wood Boulevard/Worth Crossing intersection. The secti°n of Proffit Road (Route 649) located east of Route 29 North is included for improvement in the County's Proposed Priority for Secondary Road Improvements, in the year 2005. The day care use is identified as an appropriate use for a designated Transitional area in the Land Use Plan. Additionally, because of its location within aDevelopment Area adjacent to large tracts of Residential designation to the east and north, this facility may serve neighborhood as well as community child care needs. The proximity to Route 29 is an advantage, avoiding traffic impacts to residential neighborhoods. With public roads, water and sewer available, the site is well suited to the proposed use. SUMMARY: The proposed day care center is appropriately located, in an area designated Transitional on the Land Use Plan with good access from Route 29 North. Any adverse noise or visual impacts to the adjacent residence appear to be mitigated by the applicant's voluntary building setback and landscaping plan, and the fact that access is primarily from the west offWorth Crossing. The most significant potential concern for this use, traffic ~generation, is adequately addressed through the entrance off of Worth Crossing, a street less trav6i6~i than Proffit Road. Appropriate entrance improvements can be installed on Worth Crossing, m safely accommodate ingress or egress. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. Compliance with Section 5.1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance: No such use shall operate without any required licensure by the Virginia Department of Welfare as a child care center. It shall be the responsibility ofthe owner/operator to transmit to the zoning administrator a copy of the original iicens~ and all renewals thereafter and to notify the zoning adm'mistrator of any license expiration, suspension, or revocation within three (3) days of such event. Failure to do so shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisionsofthis ordinance; Periodic inspection of the premises shall be made by the Albemarle County fLre official at his discretion. Failure m promptly admit the fire official for such inspection shall be deemed wilful noncompliance with the provisions of this ordinance; These provision are supplementary and nothing stated herein shall be deemed to preclude application of the requirements Of the Virginia Department of Welfare, Virg'mia Department of Health, Virginia State Fire Marshal, or any other local, state or federal agency. Site shall be developed in general accordance with the site plan prepared by W. Aubrey Hoffirmn & Associates, Ltd. dated December 10, 1996 and revised January 27, 1997. Maximum enrollment shall not exceed ninety (90) students or such lesser number as may be approved by the Health Department; additional enrollment shall require amendment to the special permit. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicant's Description D -Air Photo E - Letter from Adjacent Property Owner A:\SP9652.RPT 0 __ NORTHSIDE DAY ~E CENTER SP 96-52 __ NORTHSIDE DAYCARE CENTER SP 96~52 ALBEMARLE COUNTY IATTACHMENT BI ~.~,.,~T WHITE H~LL ~ · °-' _ _ ° ..... I" RIVANNA DISTRICTS SECTION [~ATTACHIflENT~C DESCRIPTION OF REQUEST: Special Use Permit Northside Daycare Comer of Worth Crossing & Proffit Road December 18, 1996 The applicant is requesting a special use permit to operate a 6,000 square foot day care fac~ty. The daycare center would have an enrollment capacity of a maxlnntm of 90 children with a support staff of 10. The age group ofthe children is expected to be infant to four year old. As shown on the attached site plan the project would be located on the comer of Worth Crossing and Proffit Road with a commercial entrance offWorth Crossing. The site currently consists of 1.735 acres after a highway take when Worth Crossing was constructed. The site plan reflects a total acreage of 1.526 acres because as you can see on the originalplat the lot line went to the center o£Proffit Road. This parcel of land consisting of 0.183 acres will be dedicated to public use. A fenced play area of 2,500 sq. ft. will be located on the east side of the building with double staggered row of pine trees screening off the adjacent Apostolic Lighthouse church to the south and a private residence to the east. Public water and sewer is available to serve the project. JUSTIFICA~ON Spec'mi Use Pexmit Northside Dayoare Comer of Wotth Crossing & Proffit Road December 18, 1996 With continuing growth to the north of Charlottesville the site at the comer of Proffit Road and Worth Crossing in OUr opinion would be a good location for a daycare center~ The site is zoned R- 1 but is included in the Comprehensive Plan to be a potential commercial site. As shown on the attached site plan the entrance is a safe distance fromthe intersection with adequate parking and a circle drop offpo'mt for the children. The site plan shows heavy screening to the east and south of the building which adjoins a private residence and a churcl~~ We have met with Pastor Ralph Adams of the Apostolic Lighthouse church next door who is very excited about the prospect of a daycare center being located on lhis laud. Northside has extended an Offer for the chUrch to use their parking lot if needed for weekend church services since the daycare only operates five days a week. Also shown on the site plan is a nine (9) foot bike easement along Proffit Road to coincide with the future plans of the County. Public water and sewer is available to the site. I have included with this application a letter from William Templeton ofNoxthside Mini.qtries in which he describes their operation. NORTHSIDE MINIST1L, ES Aror~r/d~ ~ Xc2oo~ ln~, P.O. Box 6839 Charlottesville, ~nia ~ M~n Nm~ ~) ~3~1 Toll ~ ~777~ ~urch F~ ~) ~4~799 ~o~ Fax: (~) ~1~7~ December 16, 1996 TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Northside Baptist Church was founded in Albemarle County in 19%. A small congregation under the direction of Dr. C. Spurgeon PaschalI started in northern Albemarle by meeting in a school. Soon they were able to rent another church building, and they rem,i,~ed there until they. built their present church at 1325 Fast Rio Road. The church experienced unusual growth between 1982 and 1987. Part of the vis/on of the congregation was to touch as many people in our area as possible and to do so in areas of the/r lives where they needed the most help. In ~Iune of 1987 the pastor, Rev. Will/am M. Templeton, was approached by a.group of people from several churches to start a Christian school As a result, Northside Christian School, Inc, a non- profi~ organization, was founded. From that beg/nning with jus~ over 30 students, NCS has ~own and today serves over 300 families. We offer infant care (6 weeks through 12 months), day care (12 months through 36 months), preschool (3 & 4 yesrs old), elementary (K-5 through 6th grade), and high school (7th through 12th grade). In 1988, NCS began to rent facilities located at 1414 Westwood Road in the '~izy. Since then, Northside Baptist Church has purchased those facilities, and both the day care/preschool and the academic school is running out of room. Our plan is to re-locate our elementary school to a new fadlity at 615 Woodbrook Drive. This should occur in :~anuary of 1997. Our h/gh school students are meeting at the church faci]/ty now. That leaves only in/ant care, daycare, and preschool at the Westwood Road ]ocar/on. But there is still a tremendous need for more day care in our region. Therefore, we would Hke to buiM a new daycare/prc~chool facility at the corner of Profltt Road and Worth Crossing Drive. We expect to house around 90 students in the new bulling with 10 staff members. Our approx/amate hours of operation will be from 7:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. NCS does not dis~minate in race, color, creed, sex, or culture. Pag~ Two Special Use Permit Due to the f..a~t that daycare/preschool is a.xnlnlstry for u~, we arc making every effort to keep the tuition rates Iow. Our expectation is to charge $75 per week per child for preschool and daycare, $85 per week for toddler care, and $105 per week/or infant care. If we can furnish any other information that would be helpful, please call Sincerely, Will/am Mt Templeton Rt ~1 Box 63B, l'roffit Rd Charlottesville, VA' 22901 Ii peter l!l~.:. ,,A Light mt Shineth In'A Dark COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 February 28, 1997 University of Virginia Real Estate Foundation ATTN: Jim Wilson P O Box 9023 Charlottesville, VA 22906 RE: SP-96-53 UREF Tax Map 75, Parcel 63 Dear Mr. Wilson: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 25, 1997, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted request m the Board of Supervisors. Please note that the Commission recommended approval subject to the following conditions: o Approval is for the existing golf course facility (including buildings, parking, and all site improvements) and the building enclosure/addition only. Any new construction, other than minor changes (such as additional practice tees, modifications of greens and other changes that do not require a site plan) to the existing buildings and site, and any expansion outside of the current boundaries of the existing golf course would require an amended special use permit. A field verified plan of the golf course be provided by the applicant showing the location of buildings, drives, parking lots and other constructed improyements. This field verified plan or "as-builf' plan should be provided in conjunction with the Birdwood/Faulconer Neighborhood Plan which is part of the Area B Study. Continued implementation of an Integrated Pest ManagemenffNutrient Management Plan to reduce adverse water quality impacts. Page 2 February 28, 1997 Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on March 19, 199'7. Any new or additional information regard'mg 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 regard'rog the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Elaine K. Echols, AICP Senior Planner EKFJjcf cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFFPERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: ELAINE K. ECHOLS. AICP FEBRUARY 25, 1997 MARCH 19, 1997 SP 96-53 UREF Applicant's Proposal: The applicant's proposal is to obtain a special use permit for the existing 18 hole golf course, known as Bi~dwood, which is used by faculty, staff, and students at thc University of Virginia, their guests, and guests of the Boars Head Inn. In addition, the applicant would like to improve an existing structure to house electric golf carts that will be purchased to replace the existing gas operated golf carts. The existing golf cart storage area is partially covered at present. It would be enclosed, enlarged from around 2200 square feet to about 3000 square feet (an additional 800 square feet) and attached to an existing building. [The original application indicated that there would be an additional 1236 square feet; subsequent drawings show the area to be only about 800 square feet larger.] The location~ofthe golf cart storage area is adjacent to the clubhouse on the west side of the building. No additional driveways, road connections, buildings, or construction other than the golf cart enclosure are proposed. A drawing showing the location of the build'rog addition/enclosure is included in this staff report A reduced plan of the golf course is also attached as is a copy of a survey of the entire Birdwood property owned by the University Real Estate Foundation. Petition: The petition is for approval of a special use permit for the existing golf course which is located on 172 acres of the 530 acre tract B, known as Birdwood Farms and for the building additinn/enclosure described above. The site is located on the south side of Ivy Road (Route 250 West) between the Ednam Forest Subdivision and the Bellair Subdivision. Described asTax Map 75, Parcel 63, the property is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. It is situated within the designated Development Area - Urban Neighborhood 6. Character of the Area: The site is located west of the City of Charlottesville, south of Ivy Road, near the Boars Head Inn and the entrance to Farmington. It is situated between the two residential neighborhoods of Bellaire and Ednam. Nearby and surrounding land uses consist of tow density single family homes, aparmaents, institutions, offices, and open space. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed the proposal for conformity with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval of the special use permit for the existing golf course and the building enclosure/addition with conditions. Planning and Zoning History: The Birdwood Farms property was willed to the University in 1967. In 1984, the golf course was constructed and has been in continuous operation since that time. The property was zoned R-1 Residential and, as a state institution, the University was not required to have a special use permit for a golf course. In 1989, the University trangferred the property to the Real Estate Foundation. With that transfer, no special use permit was obtained. At present, the University Real Estate Foundation would like to obtain the special use permit for the golf course and, with it, permission to enclose the shed for the golf carts. Comprehensive Plan: In 1986, the City of Charlottesville, Albemarle County, and the University of Virginia established the Planning and Coordination Council to coordinate the development of neighborhood plans in "Area B'~, a zone adjacent to the University established by a joint memorandum of understanding adopted by the three jurisdictions. In conformity with that agreemem, the University Real Estate Foundation established that it would abide by ail City and County land use laws and regulations regarding any property it holds. At present, the Birdwood/Faulconer neighborhood planning process is on-hold pending the completion of the University Master Plan for university and university foundation properties. The Birdwood/Faulconer area is not included in the current university "Facilities Master Plan." Within the 1989 Comprehensive Plan, the Water Resources goal was established as follows: Protect surface water for specific current and potential uses. Strategies include making technical assistance to implement Best Management Practice projects more readily available to the public through appropriate departments and agencies. (The Water Resources section is under review by the Planning Commission as part of the Comprehensive Plan revision) The Birdwood Golf Course is in Urban Neighborhood Number 6. Runoff from the golf course does not flow into the South Fork Rivauna Reservoir. The golf course drains into Morey Creek which then flo~ws into Moore's Creek. The 1996 Land Use Plan established as its growth managemem goai: Protect and efficiently utilize County resources by designating Development Areas where a variety of land uses, facilities, and services are planned to support the County's future growth, with emphasis placed on infill development. Additionaily, the Land Use Plan established as a goal for Neighborhood 6, "Coordinate with the University on the development of its parcels". On Map E of the Urban Neighborhoods Plan, the area is shown as "Institutional". STAFF COMMENT: Staffwill address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue ail speciai use permits permitted hereunder. S~ecial use hermits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued u_pon a finding by the Board of Sunervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property. 2 Special use permits presuppose approval prior to the establishment of a use. In this situation, the use is established and the golf course and its use is not considered to be detrimental to adjacent property. Staff has not received any comments from adjacent property owners opposing the special use permit. Concerns have been expressed by residents~about drainage from the golf course onto adjoining properties, visibility of the enclosure and addition from the adjoining neighborhoods, intensification of the golf course use and the future use of the remaining 358 acres. The drainage ~ssue is in the process of being resolved. The enclosure/addition is not visible from adjoining properties due to the existence of heavy vegetation on the perimeter of the golf course property and an evergreen screen around the existing golf cart storage area. No intensification of the golf course is expected as a result of the special use permit. No future use of the remaining 358 acres has been decided by the University Real Estate Foundation. Because this special use permit is to cover the existing facilities, inclusive of the new golf cart enclosure, there should be no additional impact on adjacent property.' that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, The district is primarily residential, low intensity institutional, and open space. The special use permit will not change the character of the district, nor should the enclosing ora storage area for the golf carts change the character of the district. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intern of this ordinance, This request has been compared to the purpose and intent of the zoning ordinance and'no conflict has been found between this request and the provisions of the ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The golf course and enclosed building are not anticipated to conflict with the residential uses permitted by right or any other uses permitted by right in the R-1 zone. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Additional regulations relating m golf courses are located in Section 5.1.16 of the ordinance. Essentially, this section allows the Board to require any additional conditions it deems necessary for the protection of the community, including, but not limited to, additional fencing and/or planting or other landscaping, additional, setback from property lines, additional parking space, location and arrangement of Iighting, and other reasonable requirements. The relationship of the existing golf course to the two adjoining neighborhoods seems to be both compatible and harmonious. The building enclosure/addition is not located near either of the established neighborhoods, nor should it be visible from any residence. For this reason, no additional regulations relating m appearance or functionality are proposed. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The continuation of the use of an existing golf course and a small enclosure/addition should not affect nor adversely impact the public health, safety, and general welfare of residents in the County. There are no known health and safety problems with the golf course. The general welfare of the community would be maintained with the issuance of the special use permit. Water quality does not appear to be a problem with runoff from the golf course. As previously stated, runoff from the golf course does not flow into the drinking water supply. The County's Water Resource Manager has visited the site and found that the applicant employs an integrated pest management strategy as well as utilizing weather forecasts in planning for fertilizer application. The Water Resource Manager found that the golf course seems to be well managed in terms of using vegetation to protect streamside areas and chemical use. Safety does not appear to be a major issue, although, the separate but closely located driveway entrances to the pavilion and golf course may be confusing to drivers who do not know which entrance belongs to each facility. The Virginia Department of Transportation has suggested that a would be beneficial if the entrance to the pavilion could be served from the golf course entrance which has left and right tam lanes. Staff suggests that better signage to each facility could also help to alleviate some of the confusion. The staffdoes not recommend any changes to the entrance at this time because the use of Birdwood will not change with the granting of this special use permit, the University Real Estate Foundation does not have ownership of the pavilion, and the steep topography between the two properties makes changing the entrances difficult. Staffdoes recommend that, during the engineering and design phase for the four laning of U.S. 250, consolidation of the entrances be considered. Site Plan Issues: A site plan entitled, "Preliminary Plan, Birdwood Golf. Course" dated April 21, 1980, has been submitted with the application. At a small scale, it shows the layout of the golf course, arrangement of holes, buildings, and drives. This site plan was the original plan for the golf course when it was constructed in 1984. R has never been field verified, but the golf course is generally as shown on the plan. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. The level of change proposed to the golf course and the golf cart facility is so minimal as to have no effect on nearby and adjoining properties. 3. The request is in keeping with the Zoning Ordinance. Staff has identified no factors which are unfavorable tO this request: RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this request with the following conditions: Approval~ is for the existing golf course facilit3- (including buildings, parking, and all site improvements) and the building enclosure/addition only. Any newconstmction, other than minor changes (such as additional practice tees, modifications of greens and other changes that do not require a site plan) to the existing buildings and site, and any expansion outside of the current boundaries of the existing golf course would require an amended special use permit. A field verified plan of the golf course be provided by the applicant showing the location of buildings, drives, park'mg lots and other constructed improvements. This field verified plan or"as-built" plan should be provided in conjunction with theBirdwood/Faulconer Neighborhood Plan which is part of the Area B Study. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Site Plan of Golf Course Site D - Plot Plan of Building Addition E - Survey of Property A:\SP9653.RPT S E MTN c 0 -- BIRDWOOD SP 96-53 tATTACHMENT A~ 0 4~4 CHAhLOT'i'ES: · : VILLE -- B IRDWOOD SP 96-53 SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT · ' SECTION SAMUEL MILLER, S(;OTTSVlLLE -<0~ ®1 NOTE- Tract A. D.B. 382. pages  554ond5551 see details on Plat recorded herewith. (~) WATER LINE EASEMENT AND POND WATER RIGHTS. ~(~) ~*PPROX. WATER LINE o~ EASEMENT \ "-%~ 550.'469 Acres ~" / I ~.~5'~'~ : ~ BIRDWO0O FARMS ~,~s.~ ~50.469 ACRE TRACT ALBEMARLE CO., VIRGINIA SCALE I"~ 6~' DECEMBER 1965 ~-., .~ ~ ~ ~ ""'~'~' , ..06~, ~00 ~<~ AMOS r=~..c.c~ R.~..=vc~ REVISED JULY ...6. SWEET February27,1997 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804~ 296-5823 Robert C. Colley 3000 Copper Knoll Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 RE: SP 96-55 Robert Colley Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2 Dear Mr. Colley: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on February 25, 1997, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Use shall be limited to indoor activities only. 2. No sale of alcohol shall be permitted. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on MARCH 19, 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 WDF/jcf Ella Carey Jack Kelsey Amelia McCulley Harold P & Frances Harrison STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ FEBRUARY 25, 1997 MARCH 19, 1997 SP 96-55 ROBERT COLLEY Applicant's Proposal: The apphcant is proposing to establish an indoor commercial recreation activity in the former Holiday Health Club on Westfield Road facing Route 29. The intended activity is Laser Tag. A description of the request is included as Attachment C Petition: Proposal to establish a commercial recreation establishment tm 0.4 acres zoned C-1, Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District [22.2.2(1)]. Property, described as Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2 is located on the south side of Westfield Road just west of Runic 29 in the Rio Magisterial District. [This is the former location of Holiday Health Club.] This site is located in Neighborhood 1 and is recommended for Regional Service. Character of the Area: This area is a developed commercial area with mostly small scale businesses. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning and Zoning History: None available. Comprehensive Plan: This site is located in an area recommended for Regional Service. This designation provides for a wide variety of uses. The typical primary uses of Regional Service areas includes those uses contained in the Community Service Areas The Community Service Areas include recreational facility. Therefore, staff opinion is that this request is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staffhas reviewed all commercial recreation activities involving a special use permit submitted since 1970. These facilities have been for a broad range of uses including, but not limited to, skating rinks, dance halls, arcade, billiard center, indoor tennis, miniature golf courses, driving ranges and indoor ennunercial recreation (such as soft play areas) and driving ranges. From the analysis of comments made in past reviews, the major issues iavolved for these recreational activities have been impact on residential areas and impact on schools (site suitability has been an issue in some cases, but is addressed by the requirements ora site plan). Staff has also reviewed h'affic impact and security. Impact on Residential Areas Thins use is proposed completely within an existing building which is retnoved from all residential development. No impact on residential areas ~s anticipated due to this use. Impact on Schools The nearest school to this site is Albemarle High School which is located more than a mile distant. No impact on this or other schools is anticipated due to this use. Traffic Impact This site has been previously developed as a Health Club. The Depam~ent of Transportation provided no comments regarding the entrance to this site. It is thus presumed that the existing aecess and street network can adequately handle the traffic associsted with this use. Securiv~- Staff has reviewed police department records and not determined any pattern of higher calls for service associated with recreation activities (Attachment D). Irt order to further reduce the potential security concerns staff has included a condition prohibiting the sale of alcohol on-site. Staff also reviews special use permits for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the f<ght to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued u_pon a find'rog by the Board of Supervisors that aneh use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, This site is located in an area of commercial development. All activity will occur indoors. Staff opinion ~s that the proposed use will have no greater impact than any by-right use of the site. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, The use will be limited to indoor activity and will not result in any change in the character of the C-1 district. The use involves no exterior alterations that would change the character of the EC district. This includes no needed changes to the parking area and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this orffmance~ This use provides for additional recreational facilities which is consistent with the intent of the orcYmanee as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5. As stated earlier this use is also consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. with the uses permitted by right in the district, Approval of this use will have no affect on permitted uses o£other properties in the area. with additional regulatinns provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.0 contains no additional regulations. and with the public health, safety and ~eneral welfare, Staff is unable to identify any negative impact this use vdll have on the public health, safety and welfare, 2 Staffhas not identified any negative factors to th-is request. Staff opinion is that this request is consistent with the provisions of the ordinance and Comprehensive Plan. .R~. COMMENDED ACT/ON: Staff recommends approval of this request subject to the following condition Use shall be limited to indoor activities only. 2. No sale of alcohol shall be permitted. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B- Tax Map C - Applicant's Information D - Police Department Information ROh~T COLLEY SP 96-55 C o MTN. II-- ALBEMARLE COUNTY [~,TTACH M ENT BI 6C -----__ ROBERT COLLEY SP 96-55 JACK JOUETT, RIVANNA AND - - - _ SECTION ALBEMARLE _ ROBERT COLLEY sp 96-55 CHARLOTTESVILLE COUNTY [ATTA~H~I~I I~ N T B~ DISTRICT SECTION 6~-W ATTACHHENT C I I request a special use permit be granted so I can operate a commercial recreation facility in the form of a laser tag arena at the old Holiday Health Club on Westfield Rd. There are over 500 of these facilities throughout the country and 18 in Vkginia. They can be found in shopping malls, strip malls, family entertainmem centers and as stand alone buildings. Our fac'tlity will have an arena area, staging room, briefing room, video arcade area, a birthday party room and a non-vented food counter. We intend to purchase top of the line equipment and the VCI Group, a well respected company in the industry, will do the theming. Theming incorporates many elements such as lighting, sound effects, three dimensional props and facades, wall murals and graphics, signage and flooring, VCI has produced Hollywood quality themes as: Jungle-A rain forest with thick plants, towering trees, twisting vines andthe ruins cfa lost city. Egyptian- A place of the past where furore technology is mixed with early architecture and the ancient beliefs of the pyramid builders. Industrial- A distressed, post industrial futuristic fac'flity with a mechanized environmem. Cosmic Rock- A desolate planet surface with rock formations, caves and space scenes graphics. All aspects of theming will be on the interior of the building. We will market to all age groups, 8-80 and intend to attract families. We will also market to corporations and others entities as a team building exercise. Safety will be stressed with Marshals present in the arena area strictly enforcing safety rules. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM I ATTAC~Mi:'I~IT O i TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Bill Fritz, Planning and Community Develo~me~nt Lee P.Catlin, Community Resources Coordinator~,~-/,~- February 3, 1997 Suspicious/Criminal Activity Levels at Family-Oriented Facilities As requested by your office, we have reviewed police department records for calls for service and crime data in the areas contammg and immediately adjacent to several family-oriented facilitie~ in Albemarle County, including Leisure Land and Adventure Laud. We have not detected any pattern of higher calls for service or crime in those areas, nor have we received complaints about increased noise or traffic beyond those normally received about traffic on Route 29 North and Proffitt Road According to our current data, it would be difficult to find any correlation between these facilities and increased crime or disorder in their immediate locations. David P. Bo~erman Charlotte Y. Humphris COUNTY OF ALBEMA~! .E Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclnfire Road Gharloffesvil]e, V~ginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-584,3 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Matin Walter E Pet'kins Sally H. Thomas March 21, 1997 Ms. Nancy lC O'Brien Executive Director Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission PO Box 1505 Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 Dear Ms. O'Brien: At its meeting on March 19, 1997, the Board of Supervisors adopted the attached Resolution ro Support the Formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. Sincerely, · Carey, CMC, Clerk / rEWC Attachment cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Printed on recycled paper 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19I 20 21 22 23 2~ 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION TO SuPpORT THE FORMATION OF A REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP IN THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors (hereafter "Board") acknowledges that, although Albemarle County enjoys economic strength, other ittrisdictions in the region may have greater economic challenges and needs; and WHEREAS, the economic development policy in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan does not support the stimulation of population growth by economic development but does recognize the County's role and place in a regional economy; and WHEREAS, the Board favors a cooperative effort by the member jurisdictions of the Thmnas Jefferson Planning District to develop a regional strategic plan to assess the region's strengths and weaknesses and to explore the possibility of obtaining funding pursuant to the Regional Competitiveness Progran~, as defined in the Regional CompetitivenessAct, to address any such weaknesses and to implement plans to enhance the region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors states its support for the formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to address the strengths and weaknesses of the region, including issues such as education, housing, transportation and the environment, as fotlo~vs: i. The Regional Partnership should consist of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (hereafter "TJPDC") as the core members plus members appointed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 li 12 13 14 I5 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 by TJPDC to provide additional represerifation from each member jurisdiction and its educational entities, businesses, and other groups such as historic preservation, environmental, rural conservation, and housing organizations; 2. Before the Regional Partnership begins work, each member iurisdiction shall by resolution approve the members which come from its jurisdiction; 3. As its first endeavor, the Regional Partnership shalt write bylaws for the conduct of its business, as stipulated in the Virginia Department of Housing and Colmnunity Development Guidelines. Prior to the formal commencement of strategic planning, Albemarle County shall by resolution approve the bylaws; 4. The TJPDC should provide the support staff for the strategic planning process to avoid the creation of a duplicate regionally funded staff; 5. The Regional Strategic Economic Development Plan (hereafter "Strategic Plan") devised by the Regional Partnership must: (a) recognize and support each member jurisdiction's comprehensive plan, including the scale and character of the region, the preservation of its historic places, its rural land and its natural resources. (b) consider agricultural, forestry, and tourism opportunities and opportunities of protected landscapes in addition to commercial and industrial opportunities. (c) be developed in a public process which includes local public hearings and other opportunities for public participation; (d) identify specific programs to be supported by any incentive funds obtained by the Regional Partnership and a method to assess the success of such programs; and, as far as practicable, consider the consequences of the programs to the regional economy, natural and fiscal resources, and population. 2 1 2 8 9 i0 11 12. 13 14, 15i 16i 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 6. Prior to the submittal to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development of any application for the creation of the Regional Partnership and the submittal of the Strategic Plan, Albemarle County shall by resolution approve: (a) the Strategic Plan and the specific application for incentive funding; and (b) the formulas for the distribution of incentive funds within the region. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supereisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on March 19, 1997. Clerk, Board of County SupgSvisors tLEGPAR2.WPD 3 I 2 3 zi 5 6 7 8 9 10 i1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESOLUTION TO SUPPORT THE FORMATION OF A REGIONAL PARTNERSHIP IN THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors .hereafter "Board") acknowledges that, although Albemarle County enjoys economic strength, other jurisdictions in the region may have greater economic challenges and needs; and WHEREAS. the economic development policy in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan does not support the stimulation of population growth by economic development but does recognize the County's role and place in a regional economy; and WHEREAS, the Board favors a cooperative effort by the member }urisdictions of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to develop a regional strategic plan to assess the region's strengths and wealmesses and to explore the possibility of obtaining funding pursuant to the Regional Competitiveness Program, as defined in the Regional Competitiveness Act, to address any such weaknesses and to implement plans to enhance the region. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors states its support for the formation of a Regional Partnership in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to address the strengths and wealcaesses of the region, including issues such as education, housing, transportation and the environment, as follows: 1. The Regional Partnership should consist of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (hereafter "TJPDC") as the core members plus members appointed by TJPDC to provide additional representation from each member jurisdiction and its educational entities, businesses, and other groups such as historic preservation. environmental, rural conservation, and housing organizations; 2. Before the Regional Partnership begins work, each member jttrisdiction shall by resolution approve the members which come from its jurisdiction; I 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 t9 2O 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. As its first endeavor, the Regional Partnership shall write bylaws for the conduct of its business, as stipulated in the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development Guidelines. Prior to the formal commencement of strategic planning, Albemarle County shall by resolution approve the bylaws; 4. The TJPDC should provide the support staff for the strategic planning process to avoid the creation of a duplicate regionally funded staff: 5. The Regional Strategic Economic Development Plan [hereafter "Strategic Plan") devised by the Regional Partnership must: (a) recognize and support each member jutisdiction's comprehensive plan, including the scale and character of the region, the preservation of its histotic places, its rural land and its natural resources. (b) identify agricultural, forestry, and toutism opportunities in addition to commercial and industrial opportunities. (c) be developed in a public process which includes local public heatings and other opportunities for public participation; (d) identify specific programs to be supported by any incentive ftmds obtained by the Regional Partnership and a method to assess the success of such programs. 6. Prior to the submittal to the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development of any application for the creation of the Regional Partnership and the submittal of the Strategic Plan. each member jurisdiction shall by resolution approve: (a) (b) the Strategic Plan and the specific application for incentive funding; and the formulas for the distribution of incentive funds within the region. REGPAR2.W]~D DRAFT RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF P~EGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS PROGRA_M IN THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Regional Competitiveness Act, passed by the Virginia General Assembly in 1996, establishes an incentive fund to encourage activities that address regional economic competitiveness needs; and WHEREAS, this incentive fund is guided by the Regional Competitiveness Program administered by the Virglnma Department of Housing and Community Development; and W~EREAS, planning and acting regionally supports not only the health and well being of the region but of each locality within the region; and WHEREAS, a policy of managed growth consistent with an overall vision for the future of the region will enhance the quality of life for citizens throughout the region~ and WHEREAS, there exists in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District regional organizations, such as the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic Development and the Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council, dedicated to the overall health of the region consistent with the Regional Competitiveness Act; and WHEREAS, a regional vision that identifies key local and regional issues and prioritizes potential activitzes will enhance the quality of life and the economic viability of the region and each locality within the region; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Albemarle County does support participation in the Regional Competitiveness Program provided a. strateqiC plan for the reqion is developed following ~ public hearing which would address such issues as educatzoq, housing~ and environmental sustainability and authorizes ~h~ Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission to act as the lead agency for the purposes of participating in the Regional Competitiveness Program. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County~ Virginia at a regular meeting held on ~l~ounty Board Of S~ervisors Regional Competitiveness Program Commonwealth o£ Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development 501 North Second Street A Richmond, Virginia 28219 ~ (804) 371-7030 Preamble The reality of a global market offers an array of opportunities for Virginia's com~cnunlties. At the same time it increases the competition for investment and j ob creation. Virginia must now compete with the Pacific Rim, Europe and elsewhere, in addition m neighboring stares, for new jobs and investment. In this environment Virginia and its communities must enhance all aspects ofeconomm competitiveness if the Commonwealth is to remain a vibrant place to live, work and do business. The Regional Competitiveness Act was passed to help communities strengthen their economic competitiveness through regional cooperation. The Act provides an incentive for communities to undertake new levels of regional aetivky to address obstacles to economic competitiveness. Meaningful changes are needed in order for regions to capitalize on new economic oppornmities and to remove barriers to economic competitiveness. Governor Alien appointed a twelve-member Advisory Committee to provide guidance in designing a program to implement the Regional CompetitivenessAct. The Committee recognized that a high standard of new behavior in regional cooperation is needed to effect positive change in Virginia's economic competitiveness. While recognizing that many regions have made progress on regional cooperation, this initiative is not about business as usual. It is about stimulating new, meaningful responses that take regions to higher levels of cooperation to specifically respond to the concerns and issues that impact economic competitiveness. The attached guidelines for the Regional Competitiveness Program (RCP) provide flexibility for regions to identify opportunities to enhance economic competitiveness and develop strategies to resolve them. The Advisory Committee spent considerable time discussing the kinds of projects and initiatives which should be eligible for considerationunder the RCP. While it is expected that every locality and region could enumerate specific problems which affect their ability m be competitive, and therefore require attention and funding, the Advisory Committee believes that communities and regions will be better served if projects which RCP funds are used for have the potential for generating more immediate economic return to the region. For example, collective efforts to develop regional industrial parks, including land acquisition, infmstrncture improvements, rragsportation access and shell buildings, will hopefully yield private sector investment and new jobs, and will broaden and enlarge the revenue base for the localities which are part of a regional compact. Other examples of projects which can have the effect of generating new revenues and jobs to the region may be the development of regional tourism atrractions or facilities, or regional j ob ~raining centers specifically tailored to meet the needs of the area's industry base. The Committee appreciates that there are problems which are more endemic or deeply rooted, but it will take far more than the new resources available under the RCP to resolve these issues, and addressing them through th/s initiative may not be the best and wisest investmem for the region as a whole. In the final analysis, the Advisory Committee decided to leave the criteria open, so that a full range of projects and initiatives can be considered. Nevertheless, the Committee urges regions to subm/t projects which demonstrate the principles of regional cooperation, leverage available and new resources, and which will result in shared benefits for all participating localities in the near versus the long-tenn. The flexibility for regions to determine solutions to meet their individual challenges and the need for a high standard of new regional behavior set the context for implementing the Regional Competitiveness Act. The Advisory Committee encourages each region of the Commonwealth to view the Regional Competitiveness Act as an oppommi .ty to substantively improve their ability m meet both economic challenges and oppommities. By addressing the critical needs regions face, as outlined above, we can move Virginia forward and ensure its continuing prosperity. v~sory omm~ ee on eg~onal ompet~ ~veness Ac Regional Competitiveness Pro,ram Table of Contents Program Purpose .............................................................. 1 Program Guidelines ............................................................ 3 Funding ..................................................................... 3 Requirements for Submission .................................................... 4 Regional Configurations ........................................................ 4 Guidelines for Regional Partnerships .............................................. 6 Guidelines for Regional Strategic Economic Development Plans ......................... 7 Application ................................................................... 9 Scoring System .............................................................. 10 Performance Accountability .................................................... 11 Appendix A - Advisory Committee Members .................................... 13 Appendix B - Application and Fund Distribution Schedule ......................... 15 Appendix C - Issue Areas and Point Weights ..................................... 17 Regional Competitiveness Program 1 Program Purpose The Regional Competitiveness Act was passed in 1996 in order m enhance economic competitiveness for all regions of the Commonwealth. To do this, the Act establishes an incentive fund to encourage joint activities designed to address regional economic competitiveness needs. Nationalresearchhas demonstrated that in areas around the counuy where localities work together coopemtiv ely, economic competitiveness is enhanced. Quality of life indicators such as income disparity between localities, area median income and job creation are more positive in areas that imerac~ on a regional level. The Regional Competitiveness Program (RCP) is intended to support a more economically competitive Commonwealth and a better quality of life for Virginia's citizens. The Regional Competitiveness Program is designed to both reward existing regional behavior and stimulate new behavior-planning and acting regionally. Even areas of the state where regional activity has already been initiated are intended to increase their efforts and reach new levels of cooperation in order to qualify for incentives. It should be carefully noted that 'the Regional Competitiveness Program is not a mandate. The incentive funds are available to localities wtfich choose to carry out new levels of regional cooperation. Regions which do not demonstrate a significant increase in regional activity will not qualify for incentive funding. In order for substantive change to take place in the way communities interact, it is necessary to involve all sectors &the community. The Act calls on government, business, education and civic leaders to join in partnership to chart a course for improved regional economic competitiveness. The new ways of working together that the Act calls for will necessitate forming effective collaborative partnerships to successfully address economic competitiveness issues. THERE IS NO PAGE 2 (Per DHCD) Re~onal Competitiveness Pro,ram 3 Program Guidelines Introduction In the fall of 1996 Governor Allen appointed an Advisory Committee, as authorized in the Act, to provide policy guidance in the development of the Program. (Please see Appendix A for a listing of Committee members.) The VirginiaDepartment of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) was charged with developing procedures for incentive fund distribution and administering the fund. After its appointment, the Advisory Committee held an initial meeting on October 15, 1996 and approved a process for public participation. In accordance with this process, DHCD conducted a series of five information and input sessions around the state. Based on comments received during these sessions and issues that were identified, the Advisory Committee provided policy guidance to DHCD which is reflected in these Program Guidelines. The Program Guidelines are intended to serve as a framework for the Regional Competitiveness Program. Details on applicationprocedures for incentive funds will be contained in the application package. FUnding The 1996-1998 biennium budget allocated $3 million fo[ the Regional Competitiveness Incentive Fund. These funds are available on July 1, 1997. Additional funding may be considered during the 1997 session of the General Assembly. The Program Guidelines outline the fund distributionprocess that will be used regardless of the amount of funding available. Fund Allocation System Intent In order to be eligible for incentive funds, regions must meet several criteria (please see Requirements for Submission). Once these criteria have been met, the following allocation guidelines will be used to distribute funds. General Guidelines A region's funding eligibility will be based on meeting the guidelines on regional configuration, partnership and strategic plan, and on receiving at least 20 points in the scoring system. 2. Once eligibility for funding has been determined, the population of all eligible regions will be totaled. Each eligible region will receive a proportion of funding equal to its proportion of that Re~donal Compeli~iveness Pro,ram populationtotal. The most recent final population estimates from the Weldon Cooper Center for Public Service wilt be used. In the event that a locality is a member of more than one region and partnership, the funding applications from both regions must specify the portion of that locality's population that is to be associated with each one (please see Regional Configurations). This will ensure that no segment of a locality's populationis double-countedin fund distribution. Please note that any regional configuration other than a planning district requires prior approval from DHCD. Eligible regions will receive annual incentive fund payments for a five-year period as long as the regional partnership continues to exist and function effectively. Effective functioning is based on the satisfactory implementation of the joint activities outlined in the funding application (please see Performance Accountability). 5. Regions may reapply for continued funding after the end of the five-year funding period. Prior to submission of a region' s application for incentive funds, a formula for distribution of the funds within the region shall be agreed uponby the Partnership. This distribution formula must be endorsed by resolution of the governing bodies of the participating jurisdictions (please see Guidelines for Regional Partnerships). Funds are incentive payments to increase economic competitiveness through regional efforts. Regions have wide flexibility in both how they distribute the funds and how the funds will be used. 8. Communities will be monitored on progress in implementing strategic plan activities (please see Performance Accountability). 9. There is no requiremem for matching funds from the regional parmerships or from localities within the regions. Requirements for Submission Regional Configurations Intent The intent of the RCP is To provide an incentive to form regignat partnerships which will address economic competitiveness issues affecting that region and to encourage and support effective cooperative working relationships among localities. The following guidelines and requirements are intended ro encourage regional configurations of localities that are of sufficient scale m address regional competitiveness issues while also reducing or eliminating regional fragmentation. Regional Competitiveness Program Minimum Requirements A region comprises the cities, towns of greater than 3,500 population, and counties within a planning district boundary which indicate their commitment to forming a regional partnership through a resolution of their governing body. DHCD assumes that participating localities are making a good faith effort to commit to participating for at least a five-year time period. DHCD will not recognize any regional configurationthat contains a combination of fewer than three contiguous cities, counties or towns. In addition, all three of these localities cannot be part of a single jurisdiction. For example, a region comprising a county and two towns within that county would not qualify. Regional Configurations That Do Not Require DHCD Approval A region comprising all cities, towns of greater than 3,500 population, and counties within an existing planning district boundary does not require DHCD approval to be recognized as a region for the purposes of this program. Any other configurationdoes require prior approval as outlined in the next section. Regional Configurations Requiring DHCD Approval A regional configurationthat is different from the planning district boundaries can be formed with the permission of DHCD. In making its determination, DHCD will consider the following: All cities, towns with a population greater than 3,500, and counties within a planning district boundary must be given an oppommity to participate. No regional configuration will be approved that excludes a locality that passes a resolution indicating that it wishes to be a parr of the regional partnership. The RCP is intended to promote regional cooperative efforts of a scale that will positively influence regional competitiveness. All requests for recognition of regions that contain a subset of localities within a planning district are required to provide a rationale that explains why and how the smaller region is more appropriate in addressing competitiveness issues. 3. DHCD will not approve a configurationoflocalitiesthat might result in a fragmentationofthe region. A locality that is outside the planning district, but contiguous to k, may be added to the region ar the request of the local governing body and with the concurrence of all participating localities within the planning district it petitions to join, provided that this inclusion does not lead to fragmentation of the remaining planning district. It is possible that a locality may wish to participate in two different regional partnerships. This may be approved provided that a clear method of dividing the population of that locality is agreed upon between the two partnerships for the purposes of fund distribution. 6 Re$ional Competitiveness Prosram It is recognized that some regional partnerships may include localities from outside the Commonwealth. These non~Virginia localities will not be counted toward meeting the requirements for the minimum number of localities. It is recognized that over time, regional configurations may undergo changes. Such changes may be approved provided that minimum requirements are met. Changes to regional configurations and the resulting parmership membership may require the region to undertake a revision of their plans and activities in order to meet other requirements of this program. Guidelines for Regional Partnerships Intent The RCP is intended to bring together key decision-makers in a region which represent local government, the private sector, secondary and higher education and civic organizations. Representatives of these sector groups should be individuals in a top-level management position who can influence the allocation of resources needed to address issues of regional competitiveness and intergovernmental cooperation. The following guidelines and requirements are intended to help ensure that these key people are brought together in an organized manner to effect positive change in their region. General Guidelines 1. Must have approval, by resolution, from the local governing bodies of the region to carry out the provisions of the Act. 2. May be an existing or newly-formed regional planning or economic developmem organization serving the region. 3. May be an existing non-incorporated regional coalition that has a demonstrated track record of working together to address issues of regional competitiveness. Membership Requirements 1. To the greatest extent practical, the following sector group representatives shall serve as members of the partnership: The mayor or board chairman and chief administrative officer of each member locality Corporate leaders within the region President of each institution of higher education in the region One or more chairmenoflocal school boards or superintendents representingprimary and secondary- education Regional Competitiveness Program CEOs or board chairs of local civic associations whose missions and programs are relevant to addressing issues affecting regional competitiveness. 2. Partnerships are encouraged to add other members as appropriate to ensure adequate representation of economic competitiveness issues for that region. Each partnership shall prepare and adopt a charter or bylaws which will outline sector group representation, how members will be selected and how decisions will be made and implemented by the organization. Guidelines for Regional Strategic Economic Development Plans Intent The RCP is intended to encourage regional efforts ro identify key issues affecting economic competitiveness and to support regional, coopemtiveinitiatives designed to address those issues. The method for identifyingthose key issues and building consensus for action is the regional economic competitiveness strategic plan. It is not the intent of the RCP to ignore or duplicate recently completed or ongoing strategic planning efforts. Participation by the partnership in the process of conducting a critical analysis of regional issues and prioritizing potential actions is essential to forging mutual understanding and building commitment to implementation of plan recommendations. The strategic plan is intended to be a coltaborativeprocess among the various sector groups which focuses attention on critical issues of regional economic competitiveness and identifies and prioritizes actions which should be taken. The following guidelines and regulations are intended to provide guidance on the strategic planning process and plan contem. General Guidelines 1. Existing local and regional strategic plans should be reviewed by the Regional Partnership in the beginning of its deliberations to provide baseline information. Members of the Regional Partnership shall play an active role in reviewing and analyzing regional information; shall participate ~n completing a critical analysis of the region; shall participate in identifying and prioritizing issues affecting regional competitiveness; and shall identify key actions necessary to address competitiveness issues. 3. The Regional Partnership shall solicit public participation and input to help identify regional competitiveness needs and opportunities for cooperation. 4. The Regional Partnership shall officially adopt the strategic plan. 5. The regional strategic planning process is intended to help the partnership identify strategies and formulate a plan of action for a five year period. The plan should be revisited on a yearly 8 Regional CompeiiC~veness Program basis to determine if adjustments are required to better meet regional competitiveness needs or take advantage of new opportunities. Specific Requirements 1. The plan shall define economic competitiveness for the region and outline a vision for the fUtLlre. The plan shall include an analysis of key demographic and economic trends which shall include, at a minimum, a comparison of the following measures between the region and identified competitor regions Outside the Commonwealth: Median family income changes during the last decade Job creation and loss during the last decade Regional income disparity trends during the last five years as measured by the differences in median family income levels among the region's localities Private sector investment trends during the last decade Competitor regions should, as much as possible, have similar demographic and economic characteristics to those of the Partnership region. 3. The plan shall identify current impediments or barriers to regional cooperation as well as current strengths and perceived opportunities for change. The plan shall identify and describe current joint activities relevant m regional competitiveness. A joint activity is a governmental function which is carried out by, performed on behalf of, or contracted for two or more localities within the region. 5. The plan shall identify gaps in regional cooperation, relative to regional competitiveness, and prioritize them in order of importance. The plan shall outline a prioritized plan of action coveting a period of at least five years and shall include proposed joint activities as well as other activities required to address critical gaps and improve the competitive situation of the regmn. 7. The plan shall identify organizations or individuals that have the lead responsibility for implementing plan activities. Clearly-identified, measurable outcomes shall be established which will be used ro assess progress toward addressing regional competitiveness issues and delivery of proposed joint activities. A description should be provided of a progress reporting and monitoring system Regional Competitiveness Program 9 which will be used to measure progress annually reward implementing strategic plan recommendations. 9. The role, if any, of the Regional Parmership in implementing plan recommendations should be clearly outlined. Application Intent In order to be eligible for incentive funds, a geographic region must be delineated, a regional partnership formed and a regional strategic economic development plan developed. A formula for distribution of ftmds within the region must be agreed upon by the parmership. This distribution formula must be endorsed by resolution of the governing body of each participating jurisdiction. Once these kems have been accomplished, a region is ready to submit its application for incentive funding. General Guidelines 1. Any regional configuration other than a planning district boundmy requires prior approval from DHCD (please see Regional Configurations). Information on regional partnership structure and membership and strategic plan developmem may be submitted for review prior to the application submission. DHCD will review the regional parmership and the strategic plan to ensure that they meet the guidelines. If these items do not meet the guidelines,DHCD will provide technical assistance and suggest remedial action. This advance review is optional. 3. DHCD will provide technical assistance to regions upon request as they are in the process of delineating geographic parameters, creating partnerships and crafting strategic plans. Applications will include information on joint activities, both existing and new, and how they relate to the regions' strategic plans. Information on activity implementation milestones will also be needed. 5. Initial applications for incentive funding will be due to DHCD on July 1, 1997. Incentive funds will be distributed to eligible regions in September 1997. Regions that intend to submit applications for funding in the next funding round will need to submit letters of intent to apply in September 1997. This will help the Department in gauging the demand for incentive funds prior to fmal budget preparations. 7. tn the next ~ozading round, applications will be due on December 1 1997 and funds will be distributed in July 1998. ] 0 Re~onal Competitiveness Program In future funding rounds applicationswill be due on July 1 with fund distributionin July of the following year. This will ensure that regions that qualify for funding in the calendar year receive fimding in the state's following fiscal year as required in the Regional Competitiveness Act. Scoring System Intent The RCP is intended to support actions which address regional competitiveness issues and foster increased cooperative efforts among local governmentswithin the region. The evahiationand scoring system used by DHCD to determine if a region qualifies for Regional Competitiveness Program funding is intended to recognize and reward activities that directly address key economic competi~ fiveness issues identified in the regional strategic plan. General Guidelines Regional Partnerships shall make application to DHCD to be scored under the fourteen issue areas outlined in the Regional Competitiveness Act (please see Appendix C). A total score of at least twenty points is required to qualify for Regional Competitiveness Program funding. 2. No more than ten points shall be awarded for j0int activities which were in existence prior to July 1, 1996. 3. A minimum of ten points is required from expanded or new joint activities to qualify for Regional Competitiveness Program funding. 4. No more than ten total points shall be awarded for activities within a single issue area. 5. Existing joint activities which are expanded in scope or number of localities may be considered a new joint activity but shall not receive the full value of points. Evaluation Criteria and Scoring System DHCD wilt evaluate each existing and proposed joint activity using the following five criteria. These five criteria shall each have a weight assigned to them that will determine how points are awarded under each activity. The criteria and their weights are: Regional Competitiveness Program 1] Criteria Weight The significance of the activity as measured by its impact on regional 50 % economic competitiveness The significance of the activity on improving or strengthening 35 % cooperative working relationships among local governments The complexity or difficulty in carrying out the activity 5 % The amount of fiscal resources committed to implementing the activity 5 % The number of localities participating in the activity 5 % The application shoul~l discuss the relationship of each existing and proposed joint activity to each o£the criteria identified above. DHCD will place heavy emphasis on strategies and actions which impact the regional competitiveness needs identified in the regional strategic plan in making its determination of allocating poims. Adjusting the Issue Area Point Totals Each of the fourteen issue areas identified in the Regional Competitiveness Act is assigned a total number of points (ranging from a high of ten to a low of two), which can be earned for activities with_in that category. A region can petition DHCD to adjust the weight of a category upward to reflect the relative importance of that issue on the region's economic competitiveness, in considering its decision to adjust a category point total, DHCD will determine whether or not the issue area has a clearly-defined,vital link to economic competitiveness as identified by the regional strategic plan. Bonus Points A region can petition for up m five bonus points by documenting actions taken to reduce the property tax burden throughout the region or actions taken to improve the efficiency of delivery of governmental services. DHCD wilt use the five criteria outlined above in evaluating these actions to determine the amount of bonus poims that may be awarded. Performance Accountability Intent In order for eligible regions to receive continued incentive funding the partnership must continue to exist and function effectively. Effective functioning is based on the satisfactory implementation of the joint activities outlined in the funding application and on the continued existence of the partnership. DHCD will assess implementation of the joint activities outlined in the funding allocation. Progress in achieving identified outcomes and benchmarks is the basis of continued funding~ 12 l~e~ional Compegitiveness Pro,Tam General Guidelines 1. Eligible regions must submit an annual report. The annual report shall identify progress in reaching implementation milestones described in the funding application, 2. Eligible regions that show satisfactory implementation will automatically receive the next year's funding allocation. DHCD recognizes that delays occur in the implementation of complex projects and activities. A region's efforts to resolve and mitigate such delays will be taken into consideration when the annual report is reviewed. 4. Eligible regions that have not been able to implement the joint activities that were the basis of their funding eligibility will not automatically receive the next year's funding allocation. 5. Eligible regions that have experienced implementationproblems will have a six-month period in which to "catch up" and take remedial action in implementing its activities. DHCD will provide technical assistance and work with the region to modify its implementation plan, if needed, as long as changes do not affect the joint activitiesthat formed the basis of the region's funding eligibility. Eligible regions that have not been able to resolve implementation problems or make satisfactory revisions to its implementation plan within the six-month "catch up" period will not receive their funding allocation. Funds that are not allocated to regions because of implementation problems will be redistributed to eligible regions in accordance with the funding formula outlined in the Funding Allocation section of the guidelines. A region that has been unable to receive its annual incentive payments for a year or more because of implementation problems may request that payments be resumed in a subsequent fund distribution cycle once satisfactory performance on its existing strategic plan and joint activities has been demonstrated. If the request to reinstate funding is based on a new strategic plan and joint activities, the region will be required to reapply for funding eligibility in a future application round. Changes to a region's configuration and partnership structure may impact implementation of its joint activities. DHCD will review such changes with the partnership to determine the impact on implementation and the region's funding eligibility. 10. Annual repons will be due to the Department in May prior to July funding distribution. l~e~onal Competitiveness Pro,Tam ! 3 Appendix A Advisory Committee Members The Honorable Barry E. DuVal (Chair) President and CEO Hampton Roads Partnership 430 World Trade Center Norfolk, Virginia 23510 Mr. Jack Broaddus/Vice Chair) Executive Vice President Wampler Foods, Inc. Post Office Box 7275 Broadway, Virginia 22815 Mr. Gene Bailey 49 Woodlawn Terrace Fredericksburg, Virginia 22405 The Honorable Lee B. Eddy 2211 Pommel Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Mr. Rodger W. Fauber 1208 Blackstone Place Lynchburg, Virginia 24503 Mr. Robert F. Hill 9 Lower Tuckahoe Road, West Richmond, Virginia 23233 The Honorable Elaine McCounell Springfield District Supervisor 6140 Rolling Road Springfield, Virginia 22152 Mr. Lane B. Ramsey County Administrator Chesterfield County Post Office Box 40 Chesterfield, Virginia 23832 Ms. Terrie G. Spiro President and CEO Tysons National Bank 8200 Greensboro Drive McLean, Virginia 22102 Mr. Hugh R. Stallard President and CEO Bell-Atlantic-Virginia, Inc. 600 East Main Street, 24th Floor Richmond, Virginia 23219 Ms. June M. Wilmot Executive Director Winchester-Frederick County EDC 45 East Boscawen Street Winchester, Virginia 22601 The Honorable Kenneth G. Mathews 161 Hillside Drive Abingdon, Virginia 24210 ,~ar. ~997 '2 ;ssM !sEAM:3 ~o.8086 ~P,,_ . !997 ~z:15PM iD~AMED No.~086 ~P, 2~ 300 E~,~ Main S~, PO Box 1505, Ch~lo~,~;ll~ VA 22902-1505 {804~ 97%PD10 {73~0~ + F~ {804~ 979-1597 + E~M~fl: fipdc~mon.ficello.avem~e.gen.~,~.us February 18, 1997 The Honorable Charlotte Humphris Chair, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 109 Falcon Drive Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mrs. Humphris: I appreciate the Board's taking time to consider the possibilities for Albemarle County and the region using the Urban Partnership Program. Given appropriate elected official direction, this could be an opportunity to build on some of the common strengths within the region. Since the presentation, the final regulations have come into the office and I thought you and the Board might find them useful in your deliberations. After reading them, the need for a slightly different approach may be clearer to Albemarle staff and the Board. It may not be as easy as I had hope to bring the existing regional entities together, but I hope some way can be found to keep duplication of effort under control. The suggestions the Board made at the meeting will strengthen any strategic plan developed. It was curious to me that the legislation did not call for defined public hearings. I hope to attend the public hearing and would be willing to give any background the Board wishes. Otherwise, it is my intent to be there to listen. Please cai1 me if you need any additional information (979-7310 or voice mail 984-9103). Sincerely, Nancy K. O'Brien Executive Director ~ ~.A. ,D OF SUPERVISO ~ cc: Board Members, R. Tucker, L. Dav/s enc:regulataions file:\dd\tjpd\ch2-18.vq~d COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Count~ Executive 401 Mclnfire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4696 (804) 296-584t FAX ,804) 972-4060 February 19, 1997 Mr. William C. Shelton Deputy Director - Community Development VA Dept. Of Housing & Community Development The Jackson Center 50t N. Second Street Richmond, Virginia 23219 RE: Regional Competitiveness Act Dear Bill: Thank you for agreeing to meet with the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to make a brief presentation regarding the Regional Competitiveness Program. The Board has set Wednesday, March 5th, to take public comment regarding this matter and your comments would be very beneficial to the Board in their ultimate decision. The meeting will be held in the Albemarle County Office Building, Room 241, at 10:00 a.m. Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. County Executive RWT,Jr/dbm 97.027 pc: Ms. Nancy K. O'Brien ~f~. Ella W. Carey COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Albemarle County Board Of Supervisors Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive /~l February 10, 1997 Regional Competitiveness Program Resolution-Revision Attached is a revised draft of the resolution regarding the Regional Competitiveness Program in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. The last paragraph has peen amended to re~lect those suggested changes offered by the Board at your meeting on February 55 Basically the revision provides for a public hearing of the Strategic Plan for the region under this program as well as emphasising those issues such education, housing, and environmental sustainability~ I have added this 5o your consent agenda for approval, however, should you have any suggested changes to this draft pri6r to our meeting on February 12, please do no~ hesitate RWTjr/bat Attachment COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE IAGENDA TITLE: AGENDA~ATE: ~t ITEM NUMBER: Regional Competitiveness Program Febr~n7 5, 1997 ~ ~--. ~-~_~ iNFORMATION: SUBJECT/PROPOSAUREQUEST:. Endorsement of Regional Proposal STAFF CONTACTISI: Messrs. Tucker, Citimberg ~CTION: X CONSENT AGENDA.: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: The Regional Competitiveness Act wes passed in the lg96 General Assembly in response to needs for greater regional cooperation. (See Attachment A, Background) The purpose of the Act is to encourage counties, cities and towns to exercise options p~ovided by law to work together for their mntual benefit and benefit of the state. The Act received $3 million ta provide monetary incentives for localities to enter into regional agreements for strategic planning and cooperation. These funds will be available on July 1, 1997 and will be available for a five-year period to eligible regions that continue to function according to the Act's requirements. Regional partnerships intending to apply for funding must be approved by resolution by the local governments of that region. The centerpiece of ongoing regional initiatives under this program ,,viii be a regional economic competifiven~ss strategic plan that identifies critical competitiveness issues and actions to build consensus to address these~issues. DISCUSSION: The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission proposes to have the Sustainability Council, the Thomas Jefferson Economic Development Partnership and the Planning District Comm'~sion join together as a qualifying regional partnership and submit a proposal. In discussions with the Department of Housing and Community Development it appears that while the program is Intended to better enable areas to be economically competitive, how regions approach this IS fairly open to regional discretJon and prio~es. Theoretically. the strategic plan could include elements like regional sustainability and quality of'life improvements that enable the region to better position itself as an attractive, livable and economically viable place. It appears that this first year would be an opportune time for the region to make a proposal that can fit the area's needs and priorh~es. The Planning District Commission is requesting the County's support of this regional partnership. RECOMMENDATION: Consider adopting draft resolution attached. 97.023 DRAFT RESOLUTION IN SUPPORT OF REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS PROGRAM IN THE THOMAS JEFFERSON PLANNING DISTRICT WHEREAS, the Regional CompaaJvensss Act, passed bythe Virginia General Assembly in 1996, establishes an incentive fund to encourage activities that address regional economic competitiveness needs; and WHEREAS, this incentive fund is guided by the Regional Competitiveness Program administered by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development; and WHEREAS, planning and acting regionally supports not only the health and well being of the region but of each Iocal~ within the region; and WHEREAS, a policy of managed growth consistent with an overall vision for the future of the region will enhance the quality of life for citizens throughout the region; and WHEREAS, there exists in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District regional organizations, such as the Thomas Jefferson Parlnership for Economic Development and the Thomas Jefferson Sustainability Council, dedicated to the overall health of the region consistent with the Regional Competitiveness Act; and WHEREAS, a regional vision that identifies key local and regional issues and prioritizes potential activities will enhance the quality of life and the economic viability of the region and each locality within the region; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that AJbemarle County does support participation in the Regional Competitiveness Program, including development of a strategic plan for the region, and authorizes the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission to act as the lead agency for the purposes of participating in the Regional Competitiveness Program. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certity that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held on Clerk, County Board of Supervisors 300 E~t M~ 8~¢~, 1~ Fl. M~H Exxk~ce P.O. Bo~ 1505 Ch~do~, VA 22902A505 (804)979-PD10 (73101 - F~ (804) 979-1597 .MEMO TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Chair and Members of the Commission Nancy K. O'Brien, Executive Directpr Urban Partnership May 2, 1996 Attached please find a comparison of two Acts of the General .Assembly, both w/th the initials "RCA". One, the Regional Cooperation Act governs planning d/strict; the other, Regional Competitiveness Act provides for a re~'onal parmership focused on economic development. There could be such a parmership formed in this reg/on, if localities were interested. While there are many of the criteria for which a reg/on is assigned points in place here, there are several remaining on which the area could work I've listed below how it appears we fit into the criteria. Cooperative pro,am Points available Full Partial None Potential Economic 10 x 6 Development 6 Regional Revenue 10 x Sharing Regional Education 10 x [ 2 Human Services 8 · x 3 Local Land Use 8 x 0 HOusing 8 x 4 Transportation 5 x 2 Solid Waste, Water 4 x 2 and sewer Corrections 3 x 2 Fire services/EMS 3 x 1 Libraries 2 x t Parks and recreation 2 } x t 1 If we did meet the state cnteria and were named eligible, the most funding from the Comparison of Regional Cooperation Act and Regional Competitiveness Act Requirement Regional Cooperation Act Regional Competitiveness Act Purpose el~ Act provide framework and forum for encourage counties, cities and towns to cooperation, articulation of community exercise options provided by law to work needs, encourage cooperation and together for their mutual benefit and benefit of coordination, deter fragmentation of the Commonwealth governmental units and services. Definition of appointed by local member governing government, business,education and civic governing bodies to include at least 51% local elected leaders approved by local governments to organization '6fficlals; no requirements for remaining carry out provisions of Act; partnership 49% should include local government, elementary and secondary education, higher education, the business community, and civic groups; to extent practical the mayor or chair, chief administrative officer, president(s) of higher education institutions, corperate leaders, and leaders of local civic associations Geographic Area planning district boundaries as defined by planning district boundaries for guidance; may and reviewed by the V!rginia Department of include more or less with approval of DHCD; ' Housing and Community Development must contain core city unless city ehoo~es not (DHCD); localities may join more than one to participate ! PDC Funding per capita from state, with base for smaller Incentive fund for regional strate~c planning PDCs like TJPDC; formula for local, in our and cooperation; must qualify for with case per capita; additional funds from strategy and be approved by DHCD; amount grants and contracts may be secured; state of funding, after eligibility approved depends funding determined annually in state on cooperative agreements exist ng and budget; no application process necessary; developed after partnership formed; funding incentive fund not funded guaranteed for five years Required regional strategic plan to include all regional strategic economic development plan planning eleraents which are important to more than I identifying critical issues of economic one jurisdiction in the PDC and which competitiveness, identify existing and promote the orderly development of the proposed joint activities; no requirement for region; include transportation, economic public participation; no requirement for development and environmental updates; no requirement for local government management; public participation, including approval be[ore plan becomes effective in the a public hearing, in developing plan locality required to be in effect in PDC, commission most approve; to be in e[[eet in each locality the locality must approve; to be revised every five years _~ Requirement Regional Cooperation Act Regional Competitiveness Act Strategies to economic and physical infrastructure regional strategic planning and cooperation include development; solid waste, water supply and (unspecified), specifically for economic other environmental management, development planning and joint activities transportation, criminal justice, emergency management, human services, recreation Agreements revenue sharing, joint service delivery, joint the agreements in place and the manner Of suggested as government pumhasing regional data bases support are part of the formula to be potential regional plans developed by DHCD to determine eligibility; funds will be available based on an amount activities to equal to the percentage of the funds pursue appropriated for incentive payments that represents the region's percentage of the total :population of all eligiblcregions; distribution ' I within the region is per regional agreement. the weights used to determine eligibility are in I I 0 as follows: job creation or economic .I development (10); regional revenue sharing (10); regional education (t0), human services (8), local land' use (8), housing (8), transportation (5) law enforcement (5), solid waste, water and sewer services (4), corrections (3), fire services and emergency medical services (3), libraries (2), parks and recreation (2); local effort in supr)orting the above will also play into determination~ the weights may be appealed ~ Other potential may implement any plans, strategies, as implementation of programs not addressed; requested by localities; delegated more primarily focuses on economic development general governmental activity and revenue sharing RCA/RCA comparison (\fy96h'cacompss.wpd-4/30t96 j Program Guidelines Program Purpose The Regional. Competitiveness Act ~vas passed in 1996 in order to enhance economic competitiveness for all regions of the Commonwealth. To do this, the Act establishes an incentive fund to encourage j oint activities designed to address regional economic competitiveness needs. National research has demonstrated that in areas around the country vChere localities work together .... cooperatively, economic competitiveness is enhanced. Quality of life indicators such as income .: .~,~.~ . disparity between localities, area median income and job creation are more positive in areas that ..- ~.. interact on a regional level. The Regional Competitiveness Program (RCP) is intended to support · - a more economicallycompetitive Commonwealth and a better quality of life for Virginia's citizens. :~ The Regional CompetitivenessPrograms is intended to both reward existing regional behavior and :' .stimulate new behavior-planning and acting regionally. Even areas of the state where regional "- :activity has already been initiated are intended to increase their efforts and reach new levels of .cooperation. in order to qualify for incentives. It should be carefully noted that the.Regional 'Competitiveness Program is not a mandate. The incentive funds are available to localities Which 'choose to carry out new levels of regional cooperation. Regions which do not demonstrate a significant increase in regional activity will not qualify for incentive funding. In order for substantive change to take place in the way communities interact, it is necessary to involve all sectors of the community. The Act calls on government, business, education and civic ':leaders.to join-in partnershipto chart a course for improved regional economic competitiveness. The new ways of working together that the Act calls for will necessitate formifig effective collaborative · partnerships to successfully address economic competitiveness issues.. Introduction to Program Guideline~ In the fall of 1996 Governor Allen appointed an Advisory Committee, as'authorized in the Act, m provide policy guidance in the development of the Program. (Please see Appendix A for a listing of Committee members.) The VirginiaDepartment of Housing and Corranunity Development (DHCD) is charged with developing procedures for incentive fund distribution and administering the fimd. After its appointment, the Advisory Committee held an initial meeting on October 15, 1996 and approved a process for public participation. In accordance with this process, DHCD conducted a series of five information and input sessions around the state. Based on comments received during these sessions and issues that were identified, the Advisory Committee provided policy guidance to DHCD which is reflected in these Program Guidelines· The Program Guidelines are intended to serve as a framework for the Regional Competitiveness Program. Details on application procedures for incentive funds will be contained in the application package. Funds are incentive payments to increase economic competitiveness through regional efforts. Regions have wide flexibility in both how they distribute the funds and how the funds will be used. Communities ~vill be monitored on progress in implementing strategic plan activities (please see Performance Accom~tability). There is no requirement for matching funds from the regional partnerships or from localities within the regions. Requirements for Submission Regional Configurations Intent The intent of the RCP is to provide an incentive to form regional partnerships which will address .. economic competitiveness issues affecting that region and to encourage and support effective cooperative working relationships among localities. The following guidelines and requirements are intdnded to encourage regional configurations of localities that are of sufficient scale to address regional competitiveness issues while also reducing or eliminating regional fragmentation. Minimum Requirements A r~gion comprises the cities, counties and towns above 3,500 population within a planning district boundary which indicate their commitment to forming a regional partnership through a resolution of their governing body. DHCD assumes that participating localities are making a good faith effort to commit to participating for at least a five-year time period. DHCD will not recognize any regional configurafionthat contains a combination o f fewer than three contiguous cities, counties or towns. In addition, all three of these localities cannot be part ora single jurisdiction. For example, a region comprising a county and two towns within that'county would not qualify. Regional Configurations That Do Not Require DHCD Approval A region comprising all cities, counties and towns of greater than 3,500 population within an existing planning district boundary does not require DHCD approval to be recognized as a region for the purposes of this program. Any other configuration does require prior approval as outlined in the next section. Regional Configurations Requiring DHCD Approval A regional conflgurationthat is different from the planning district boundaries can be formed with the permission of DHCD. In making its determination, DHCD will consider the folloMng: 3 General Guidelines 1. Must have approval, by resolution, from the local governing bodies of the region to carry out the provisions of the Act. 2. · Maybeanexistingornewly-formedregionalplamfingor economic development organization serving the region. 3. May be an existing non-incorporatedregionalcoalition that has a demonstrated track record of working together to address issues of regional competitiveness. Membership Requirements - 1. To the greatest extent practical, the following sector group representatives shall serve as members of the partnership: The mayor or board chairman and chief administrative officer of each member locality. Corporate leaders wi/l~in the region. - ]/'resident of each institution of higher education in the region. One or more chairmen of local school boards or superintendents representing primary and secondary education. CEOs or board chairs of local civic associations Whose missions and programs are relevant to addressing issues affecting regional competitiveness. 2. Each partnership shall prepare and adopt a charter and bylaws which will outline sector group representation, how members will be selected and how decisions will be made and implemented by the 9rganization. 3. The partnership bylaws shall also specify a process for determining how regional competitiveness funds will be distributed to participating localities. Any agreed upon formula for fund distribution shall be endorsed as indicated by resolution from each governing body. Guidelines for Regional Strategic Economic'Development Plans Intent The RCP is intended to encourage regional efforts to identify key ~ssues affect'rog economic competitiveness and support regional, cooperative initiatives designed to address those issues. The method for identifyingthose key issues and building consensus for act/on is the regional economic competitiveness strategic plan. Regional income disparity trends during the last five years as measured by the differences in median family income levels among the region's localities - Private sector investment trends during the last decade. Competitor regions should, as much as possible, have similar demographic and economic characteristics to those of the Partnership region. 3. The plan shall identify current impediments or barriers to regional cooperation as well as current strengths and perceived opportunities for change. 4. The plan shall identify and describe current joint activities relevant to regional competitiveness. A joint activity is a governmental function which is carried out by, performed on behalf of, or contracted for two or more localities within the region. 5. The plan shall identify gaps in regional cooperation, relative to regional competitiveness, and prioritize them in order of importance. 6. The plan shall outline a prioritized plan of action covering a period of at least five years and shall include proposed joint activities as well as other activities required-to address critical gaps and improve the competitive situation of the regmn. 7. The plan shall identify organizations or individuals that have the lead responsibility for implementing plan activities. 8. Clearly identified, measurable outcomes shall be established which will be used to assess progress toward addressing regional competitiveness issues and delivery of proposed joint activities. A description should be provided of a progress reporting and monitoring system which will be used to measure progress annually toward implementing strategic plan recommendations. 9. The role, if any, of the Regional Partnership in implementing plan recommendations should be clearly outlined. Application Intent In order to be eligible for incentive fun~ds, a e_g_3~raphic re~ion must be delineated, a regional p_.artner_ship forme__d and_a re~ionat strategm economic dev~elopment~2~l~ dev~elop~e~ things p ' .'e~gixx~x. ~'t its a_~p_plication for incentive funding. have been accom hshed, areo ea to su _ General Guidelines Regional Partnerships shall make application to DHCD to be scored under the fo__urteen issue · a_[eas outlined in the R~al Compe_!titiveness Ac__jt (please see Appendix C). A total score Of ~at least twenty points is required to qualify for funding from the Regional Competitiveness Fund. 2. No more than ten points shall be awarded for joint activities which were in existence prior to July 1, 1996. 3. A minimum of ten points is requked from expanded or new' joint activities to qualify for Regional Competitiveness Funds. 4. No more than ten total points shall be awarded for activities within a single issue area. 5. Existing joint activities which are expanded in scope or number of localities may be considered a new joint activity but shall not receive the full value of points. Evaluation Criteria and Scoring System DHCD will evaluate each existing and proposedj oint activity using the following five criteria. These five criteria shall each have a weight assigned to them that will determine how poims are awarded under each activity. The criteria and their weights are: Criteria /~' Weight ~ The significance of the activity' as measured by its impact on regional 50% economic competitiveness The significance of the activity on improving or strengthening cooperative 35% working relationships among local goverranents The complexity or difficulty in carrying out the activity 5% The amount of fiscal resources committed to implementing the activity 5% The number of localities participating in the activity 5% The application should discuss the relationship of each existing and proposed joint activity to each of the criteria identified above. DHCD will place .heav~m.phasis on strategies and actions which impact the reo~iional competitiveness needs id~entified m the regional strategm plan ~n making ~rs determination of allocating points. 9 Eligiblc regions that have not been able to resolve implementation problems or make satisfactory revisions to its implementationplan within the six-month"catch up" period will not receive their funding allocation. Funds that are not allocated to regions because ofimplementatlonproblems will be redistributed to eligible regions in accordance with the funding formula outlined in the Funding Allocation section of the guidelines, A region that has been unable to receive its annual incentive payments for a year or more because of implementation problems may request that payments be resumed in a subsequent fund distribution cycle once satisfactory performance on its existing strategic plan and joint activities has been demonstrated. If the request to reinstate funding is based on a new strategic plan and joint activities, the region will be required to reapply for funding eligibility in a future application round. Changes to a region's configuration and partnership structure may impact implementation of its joint activities. DHCD will review such changes with the partnership to determine the impact on implementation and the region's funding eligibility. 10. Annual reports will be due to the Department in May prior to July funding distribution. 11 '~~ Regional Competitive~:tess Program Background . In 1994, in response to growing concerns about urban problems, a consortium of urban areas joined forces to explore ways in which to ease the burden an cities. It was decided that a permanent organization was the best tool for identifying issues, researching solutions and tracking progress. The Urban Partnership was formed to carry out this mission. One serious issue that the Partnership has identified is that of"urban creep." This is where problems such as poverty, crime and declining real estate values, thought to be endemic only to cities, can spread gradually over time to the surrounding suburban areas. In other words, the problems that cities face today can be the problems that suburban counties face tomorrow. More encouraging research from the Urban Partnership suggests a solution. Localities that work together as part of a region, and treat the health of that region as integral to their own, tend to stave off the problem of urban creep. Crime, economic disparity and unemployment are all shown to be markedly less problematicin areas with regional vision and cooperati0n, Additionally, areas that have already adopted a unified approach have proven to attract and retain businesses better than areas with little or no cooperation. Ultimately, by acting in unison with neighboring cities and counties, localities can benefit themselves. While it is clear that a regional approach offers advantages to t0dallties, it is not alv,~ays easy to find a way to forge cooperation. The varying structures and policies of local governments may be stumbling blocks. The relative absence of examples of regional cooperation for localitiks to study and emulate can be another hindrance. Further, localities may also fear that collaboration may mean a loss of control over policies and revenue. .Some efforts to encourage regional approaches have already taken place. The Regional Jail Fund provided monetary incentives for localities that agreed to pool their resources for a regional jail facili .ry. The Economic Growth Sharing Agreement, passed in 1996, paved the way for localities to divide revenue generated from joint economic development projects. In response to the need for greater regional cooperation, th~ General Assembly passed the Regiohal CompetitivenessAct in 1996. This Act is intended to give regionalism more structure and to reinforce the need for planning and acting regionally. Its centerpiece is a plan of monetary incentives for localities that forge agreements and work together on a regional basis. The Act received $3 million in funding. Through encouraging localities to address issues regionally it is hoped that a pattern ofregional cooperation will be established and 0'at localities will become accustomed to exploring new metho..'Js of regional cooperation. The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), along with an advisory commntee, is responsible for implementing this promising new legislation and work has already begun. Research on regic cooperation, both within Virginia and across the United States, is being undertaken. Additionally, a series of public input meetings is proposed for this fall. From the reseamb conducted by DHCD and from the feedback at the public forums, a draft:program design will be developed to provide the program's format. Again, the public ~vill have a chance to comment on the draft: proposal. The dra~ will be revised once more, and by late fall qn:d comments on the program design ~vill be solicited. In December, a report will be made to the General Assembly on the Regional CompetitivenessAct. Once the final program design is in place. DHCD will work with governments. Planning Dis/tier Commissions and other interested parties to educate them on the R:e~ior~al Competiliveness Act and how the program will work. 300 E~ 3Li~ $~¢~, 16t Fl. MA1 Enfraame P.O. Bo:~ 1505 CMdoia~41h, VA 22902-1505 (804)979-PD10 (7310) - FAX (804) 979-1597 MEMO TO: FROM: RE: DATE: Chair and Members of the Commission Nancy' K(O~Brien, Executive Directpr Urban Partnership May 2, -t 996 Attached please find a comparison of two Acts of the General Assembly, both w/th the init/als "RCA". One, the Reg/onal Cooperation Act governs planning district; the other, Reg/onal Competitiveness Act provides for a regional parmership focused on "economicdevelopment:Therecouldbesuchaparmershipformedinthisreg~on, if localities were interested. While there are many of the criteria for which a region is assigned points in place here, there are several remaining on which the area could work. I've listed we fit into the criter/a. Cooperative program' Points available Full Partial None Potential Economic 1 0 . x 6 Development Regional Revenue 10 x 6 Sharing Reg/onal Educati°n 10. ] x i 2 Hmnan S&vices kocal Land Use 8 x 0 Housing 8 x 4 71Transportation 5 ix 2 Solid Waste, Water 4 x ? and sewer I - Corrections . 3 x [ 2 Fire services/EMS [ 3 x 1 Libraries 2 x 1 Parks and recreation 2 _ l Totals __ 78 } 1_ 30 If we did meet the state criteria and were named eligible, the most funding from the Comparison of Regional Cooperation Act and Regional .Competitiveness Act Requirement Regional Cooperation Act Regional Competitiveness Act Purpose of Act provide framework and forum for encourage c0unties, cities and towns to cooperation, articulation of community excrdise options provided by law to work needs, encourage cooperation and together for their mutual benefit and benefit of coordination, deter fragmentation of the Commonwealth governmental units and services. Definitioh of appointed by loc~al member g6~i'ning · government; business,education and civic bodies to incliideat le~gt'51~ lc, cai elected leaders approved by local governments to governing organization officials; no requirements for remaining carry oust provisions of Act; partnership 49% .. : shgul.d include local government, elementary and secondary education, higher education, the business community, and civic groups; to exten_t practical the m~.yor or chair, chief administrative officer, president(s) of higher ~ducafisy~ institutions, corporate leaders, and leadem of local civic associations Geographic Area planning district boundaries as defined by planning district boundaries for guidance; may and reviewed by the Virginia Department Of include more or less with approval of DHCD; Housing and Community Development must contain core city unless city chooses not (DHCD); localities may join more than one to participate · PDC ' ~ Funding per capita from state, with base for smaller Incentive fund for regional strategio planning PDCs like TJPDC; formula for local, in our and cooperation must qualify for with case per capita; additional funds from strategy and be approved by DHCD; amount grants and contracts may be secured; state of funding, after e igibility approved depends t funding determined annually in state on cooperative agreements existing, and budget; no application process necessary; developed after partnership formed; funding I incentive fund not funded guaranteed for five years Required regional strategic plan to include ail regional strategic economic development plan planning elements which are important to more than identifying critical issfies of economic [ one jurisdiction in the PDC and which competitiveness, identify existing and promote the orderly development of the proposed joint activities; no requirement for region; include transportation, economic public participation; no requirement for development and environmental updates; no requirement for local government management; public participatioa, including approval before plan becomes effective in the a public hearing in developing plan locality required; to be in effect in PDC. commission must approve; to be in effect in l each locality, the locality nmst approve; to be revised every five years Requirement : Regional Cooperation Act Regional Competitiveness Act Strategies to economic and physical infrastructure - regional strategic planning and cooperation include development; solid waste, water supply and (unspecified), specifically for economic ' other environmental management..~ development planning and joint activities ~ ' transportation, criminal justice, emergency "' management, human services, recreation ' "' Agreements revenue sharing, joint service delivery, joint the agreements ii~ place and the manner of suggested as government purchasing regional data bases ' support are part of the formula to be r*gional plans ' ' dove oped by DHCD to determine elig bility potential funds:will he available based on an amount activities tO equal to the Percentage of the fuhd~ pursue '.. approp~'i~ted fo? incimtive payments that represen~:s the re~i0n's pi~roentage Of the total population 0f all eligihl~ regions; distribution within the region is per regional agreement. · the weights used to d~termine eligibility are in ' 0 as fei ows: job creation or ecoflomie ' ~ ' devetopnient (10) regional revenue sharing : ' · ~ (i0); regional educati~Sh (10), human services (8} local land use (8) housing (8) ' Iransp0rtation (5), law enforcement (5), solid · ' waste, water and sewer services (4), correctioos (3), fire services and erhergency ' medical'services (3), lit/r~ies (2), p~l~s and recreation (2) local effort in supporting the -' abbve w~tl also play intodetermination; the weight~ may be appealed: Other potential may implement anyplans, strategies, as ' impleme:nthtion el'programs not addressed; requested by localities; dele~gated more primarily fOcuses on economic development general governmental activilay ~ and revenue sharing RCA/RCA comparison (\ly96~rcacompss.wpd4/30/96) Program Guidelines Program Purpose The Regional. Compe(itiveness Act was passed in 1996 in' order to, ernhance economic competitiveness for all regions of the Commonwealth. To do this, the Act establishes an incentive fund to encourage joint activitieg designed to address regional economic competitiveness needs. National research has demonstrated that in areas around the country ,,gbere localities work toge'd~ter -. .... cooper, at!vely., economic competitiveness is enhanced. Quality of life indica[ors such as income · .~ :- -' dispaniy, betweefi localities, area median income and job creation are more positive in 'areas that ..~ -:..' · interaet~ on a regional level. The Regional Competitiveness Program (RCP) is integded to Support - a more economically competitive Commonwealthand a better quality of life for Virginia's citizens. - TheRegional CompetitivenessPmgrams is intended to both reward existing regional behavior and .~ ,': ' - :'.. stimulate new behavior-planning and acting regionally. Even areas of the state where regional ,activity has aiready been initiated are intended to increase thei} efforts and reach new levels of .;~.': ..... cooperation, in order to qualify.- for incentives. It should be carefully noted that lbo. Regional -: ' -.'Competitiveness Program is not a mandate. The incentive fonds are available to localitieg Which 'choose ko carry out new levels of regional cooperation. Regions which do not demonstrate a significant increase~jn regional activity will not qualify for incentive funding. In order for substantive change to take place in the way communities interact, it is necessary to .- . involve all sectors of the community. The Act calls on government, business, education and civic · leaders.to join in partnership to chart a course for improved regional economic competitiveness. The .. - ' new ways of working together that the Act calls for will necessitate f0rmifig effective-collaborative - partnerships to successfully address economic competitiveness issues.. Introduction to Program Guidelines In the fall of 1996 Governor Allen appointed an Advisory Committee, as authorized in the Act, to provide policy guidance in the development of the Program. (Please see Appendix A for a listing of Committee members.) The Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) is charged with developing procedures for incentive fund distribution and administering the fund. After its appointment, the Advisory Committee held an initial meeting on October 15, 1996 and approved a process for public participation. In accordance with this process, DHCD conducted a series of five information and input sessions around the state. Based on comments received during these sessions and issues that were identified, the Advisory Committee provided policy guidance to DHCD which is reft :cred in these Program Guidelines. The Pro8 ram Guidelines are intended to serve as a framework for the Regional Competitiveness Program. Details on application procedures for incentive funds will be contained in the application package Funds are incentive payments to increase economic competitiveness through regional efforts. Regions have ,,vide flexibility in both how they distribute the funds and how the funds will be used. Communities~vill be momtored on progress m ~mplement~ng strateoiC plan activities (please see Performance Accountability). There is noxequirement for matching funds from the regional partnerships or from localities within the regions. Requirements for Submission Regional Configurations Intent The intent of the RCP is to provide an incentive to form regional p~ftnerihips which will address · economic competitiveness issues affecting that region and to encourage and suppor~ effective cooperative working relationships among localities. The ~'oilowin~ gtiidelineS and requirements are intended to encourage regional.configurations of localities that are of sufficient scale to address regional competitiveness issues While aiso reducing or eiiminating'~egl;nal fragrnentati0n. Minimum Requirements -': iSl:~ifig district A regmn comprises the reties, counties and towns above 3,500 poputat~onv~thin a boundary wbrich indicate their commitment to forming a regional partnership thr(~ugh a.r. esolution of their governing body. DHCD assumesthat participating localities are making a good faith effort to commit to participating for at least a five-year time period. DHCD will not recognize any regiona[configurationthat contains a combination0f fewer thanthree contiguous cities, counties or towns. In addition, all three of these localitie§'cannot be part ora single jurisdiction. For example, a region comprising a county and two towns within thaf county would not qualify. Regional Configurations That Do Not Require DIICD Approval A region comprising all cities, counties and towns of greater than 3,500 population within an existing planning district boundary does not require DHCD approval to be recognized as a region for the purposes of this program. Any other configuration does requireprior.approval as outlined in the ne:ft section. Rigional COnfigurations Requiring DHCD Approval A regional configurationthat is different from the planning district boundaries can be formed with the permission of DHCD. In making its determination, DHCD will consider the following: General Guidelines 1. Must have approval, by resolution, from the local g0veming bodies of the region to carry out the provisions of the Act. 2. May be an existing or newly-formed regional Planning or economic development organization serving the region. 3. May be an emstmo nonqncorporatedreglonal coalition that has a demonstrated track record of working together to address issues of regional competitiveness. Membership Requirements 1. To the greatest extent practical, the following sector' group representatives shall serve as members of the partnership: - The mayor or board chairman and chief administrative officer of each member locality. Corporate leade[s within~the region. President of each institution of higher education ia the region. 2. One or more chairmen of local school boards or superintendents representing primary and secondary education. - CEOs Or board chairs of local civic associations whose missions and programs are relevant to addressing issues' affe:cting regional competitiveness. Each partnership shall prepare and adopt a charter and bylaws which will outline sector group representation, how members Will be s~l~cted and how decisions will be made and implemented by the organizati6n. - o The partnership bylaws shall also specify a process for determining how regional competitiveness funds will be dish-ibuted to participating localities. Any agreed upon formula for fund distribution shalI be endorsed as indicated by resolution from each govemir~g body. Guidelines for Regional Strategic Economic Development Plans Intent The RCP is intended to encourage regional efforts to identify key issues.affecting economic competitiveness and support regional, cooperative initiatives designed to :address those issues. The method for identifyingth~ose key issues mhd building consensu~ for action is the regional economic competiuveness strategic plan. 5 - Regional income disparity trends during the last five years as measured by the differences in median family ~ncome levels among the re°ton s locahues Private sector .investment trends during the last decade. Competitor regions should, as much as possible, have similar demographic and economic characteristies to those of the partnership region. The plan shall identify current impediments or barriers to regional cooperation as Well as current strengths and perceived opportunities for change. 4. The plan shall identify and describe currentjolnt activities relevant to regional competitiveness. A joint activity isa governmental function which is carried out by, performed on b~half of, or contracted for two or more localities within the region. 5. The plan shall identify gaps in regional cooperation, relative to regional competitiveness, and prioritize them in order of importance. The plan shall outline .a prioritized plan of action coveting a period of at least five years and shall include proposed.10int activities as well as other activitiesrequired.to address ctitichl g~ps and improve the competitive situation of the region. The. plan shall identify organizations or individuals that have the lead responsibility for implementing plan activities. Clearly identified, measurable outcomes shall be established which will be used to assess progress toward addressing regional competitiveness issues and delivery of proposed joint activities. A description should be provided of a progress reporting and monito~ng system which will be used to measure progress annually toward implementing strategic plan recommendations. The role, if any, of the Regional Partnership in implementingplan recommendations should be clearly outlined. Application Intent In order To be eligible for incentive funds, a_g_eographic re,ion must be delineated, a regional p..~nersh! p forme~ and a regional s_~_trategic economic development~t~ 1~ deve_!~~ things have been accomphshed, a .r~g20 subrn_!I its a~!2plication f_or ince~ntive fundin, g. General Guidelines Regional Partnerships shall make application to DHCD to be scored under the fourteen issue .a_zreas o_uutlined in the Re~g_ional Compe~titiveness Act (please see Appendix C). ~-~otal score~'f 'at least twenty points !s required to'qualify 'for funding frbm the Regional Competitiveness Fund. No more than ten points shall be awarded for joint activities which were in existence prior to July 1, 1996. A minimum of ten points is required from expanded or new joint activities to qualify for Regional Competitiveness Funds. No more than ten total points shall be awarded'fur activities within a single issue area. Existing joint activities which are expanded in scope or number of localities may be considered a new joint activity but shall not receive the full value of points. Evaluation Criteria and Scoring, System DHCD will evaluate each existing and proposedj0int activity using the fotlowingfive cfiterla. These five criteria shall each have a weight assigned to them that will determine how points are awarded ~.~ under each activity. The criteria and their weights are: , Criteria , Weight The significance of the activity as measured by its impact on regional 50% economic competitiveness - · ' ~ The s~=mficance of the aet~wty on ~mprov~ng or strengthening cooperative 35% working relationships among local govermnents The complexity or difficulty in carrying out the activity 5% The amount of fiscal resources committed to implementing the activity 5% The number of localities participating in the activity 5% The application should discuss the relationship of each existing and proposed joint activity to each of the criteria identified above. DHCD will place heavy emphasis on strategies and actions which impact~e reo. ional com___pet~t~veness needs ~ ent~fied .... ~n t. he regmnal strategm plan m' ~.--?r.~ ...making irs determination of allocating poims. o o Eligiblc regions that have not been able to resolve implementation problems or make saris fa~crory revisions to its implementationplan within the six-month"catch up" period will nor receive their funding allocation. Funds that are not allocated to regions because of implementationproblems will be redistributed to eligible regions in accordance with the funding formula outlined in the Funding Allocation section of the guidelines. A region that has beeri unable to receive its annual incentive payments for a year or more because of implementation problems may request that payments be resumed in a subsequent fund distribution cycle once satisfactory performance on its existing strategic plan and joint activities has been demonstrated. If the request to reinstate funding is based on a new strategic plan and joint activities, the region will be required to reapply for funding eligibility in a future application round. Changes to a region's configuration and partnership structure may impact implementation of its joint activities. DHCD will review such changes with the partnership to determine the impact on implementation and the region's funding eligibility. 10. Annual reports wilt be due to the Department in May prior to Juty funding distribution. 11 l~egional Competitiveness Program ATTACHMENT A Background tn 1994, in response to growing concerns about urban problems, a consortium of urban areas joined forces to explore ways in which to ease the burden on cities. It was decided that a permanent organization was the best tool for identifying issues, research lng solutions and tracking progress. The Urban Partnership was formed to carry ont this mission. One serious issue that the Partnership has identified is that of"urban creep." This is where problems such as poverty, crime and declining real estate values, thought to be endemic only to cities, can spread gradually over time to the surrounding suburban areas. In other words, the problems that cities face today can be the problems that suburban counties face tomorrow lVlore encouraging research from the Urban Partnershipsuggests a solution Loca tiesth~at w0rk togetheras pan of a region, and treat the health of that region as inte}rat ~) their own, tend to stave off the i5~01~1~ of urban creep. Crime, economic disparity and unemployment are all shoxvn to,be markedly less problematicin a[eas wifl~ regional vision and cooperati~dhl ~dditiorially, ai'eas that have already adopted a unifie~l~a:ppr~ach hax;~ proven to attract and retain businesses better than areas with little or no cooperhtion. Ultimately, b3 acting in unison with neighboring cities and counties, localities can benefit themselves. While it is clear that a regional apprOach offers advantages tff'lddatiti~s; it-is riot a:twaYs easy tofinda way to Forge cooperation: The varying structures and policios of local governments may be stumbling blocks. The relative absence of examp!¢s, of' regional cooperation for locaIities to study and emulate can be another hmdrance. Further, localities may also fe?./? that-collaboration maymean a loss 0£control oYer policies and revenue. .Some efforts to encoumg~'rdgional approaches have a ready taken nlace The Reo onal Jail l~hnd ~,rov deal monetary'incentives for looalities that agreed to oo their resources for a ret, ionaljail facility The Economic Growth Sharing Agreement, passed in 1996, paved the way for loca ities to divide revenue generated from joint economic development projee/~s. In response to-the need for grea!¢[~regtona[ cooperation,"the'-General Assembly pagsed the Regiffnal Comt~etitivenessAct in 1996. This AC( is intehded to give regionalismmdte structure and to reinforce the need for planning and acting regionally. Its cente~iece s a plan or. monetary incentives for localities that forge agreements and work together on a ~regional basis. The Act rece red $3 mill on in funding. Through encouraging localities to addless issues, regionally it is hoped that a pattern or.regional cooperation will ;be established and 0'at localities)viII.b69om~ accustomed to exploring new metho..qs~ of regional cooperation. The Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD), along with an advisory committee, is responsible for implementing this promising new legislation and work has already begun. Research on re~ionul cooperation, both within Virginiaand across the United States, is being undertaken. Additionally, a se~'ies public input meetings is proposed for this fall. From the research conducted by DHCD and from the feedback at the public Forums, a draft program design will be developed to provide the program's format. Again, the publ will have a chance to comment on the dral5 proposal. The draft:will be revised once more, and by [ate fall final commems on the program design will be solicited. In December, a report will be made to the General Assembly on the Regioual CompetitivenessAct. Once the final program design is in place. DHCD will works~:'*t~_.~ Ioc.~t governments. Planning Dis/rict Commissions and other interested .parties to educate them on the Regio,~:d Competitiveness Act and how the program will work. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLEBoARD OF SUPERVISORS (~ 03~'I 1-97PO_P :55 ~CVD MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive / March 11, 1997 ,/ Ivy Landf'dl Options As you know, the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority is scheduled to discuss and possibly take action regarding the GBB options presented at the public hearing on March 10th. It would be helpful for your representatives on the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority to have your recommendations or direction on the following items: · Which of the nine options best meets the overall solid waste needs of our community? · Should construction and demolition debris (CDD) continue to be landfilled at the Ivy Landfill? I will place this matter on our March 19th meeting for further discussion. RWT,Jr/dbm 97.037 pc: Ms. Ella W. Carey ~zv~ls~ f'~,lmuKz~£b~ Fax:804-295-S858 Rap 21 '97 7;56 P. 02/02 RIVANNA SOLm WASTE AUTHORITY MEMO~UM TO: FROM: ARTHUR PETR[~XECUTIVE DIRECTOR STEVE CHIDSEI~', DIRECTOR OF SOLID WASTE DATE: MARCH 20, 1997 SUBJECT: ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPEItVISOR'S ACTION t received a copy o£the Bob TuekeL CounD° Executive memorandum concerning Board of Supervisors action relative to OBB Opdon 7a, This memo is in response to the subject matter m that memo. The Landfill will continue to only accep*, waste (CDD and other as described in the option) that is generated from within its $cr~%e area consisting of the ComE/of Albemarle, CiD' of Charlottesville and the Town of Scottsville. Landfill personnel will monitor the Construction Demolition Debris (CDD) for potential hazardous ccntaminauts. Operators and sponers who direct thc traffic are responsible for inspecting the material that is discharged. In addition, as the mater/al is scavenged for recoverables, an ex'wa inspection is performed of the material. Any hazardous material spotted is isolated and properly disposed of. Haulers identified as bringing hazardous waste with thc CDD will also be properly dealt with. Staffis also very sensitive to the need to protect the service area against potential liability at the megs-landfills, A draft P, FP ha~ been prepared in response to ~ government actions associated with Option 7a. Under the draft RFP, the Authority makes the unusual stipulation of requiring weekly access to disposal sites for inspe~tiun. The Authority w/Il be inspocting the sites to determine compliance ~Sth operafiunal and environmental requirements. All inspections will be logged md kept as a permanent retard. This type of close scrutiny will make certain that Albemarle's waste is disposed of auder the highest possible envirotanental standards. As proposed in Option 7a. it i~ intended that the Rivanna Solid W~te Authori~ will continue its Household Hazardous Waste Collect/on Program m the future. This program has been well received and is very popular in the commurdt3,. 'Fne Blue Bag program remains m~changed from its current operation. The drol>offlocations in the City of CharLottesville ar Coiner's Salvage are still available for blue bags (operated by Coiner's) and paper (operated by Rivanna Solid Waste Authority). In addition, the drop-off center at the Landfill will still be operational for both rccyelable streams. I hope this serves to clarify the questions that were a-~ked by the Board of Supervisors at its Wedvcesda.v, March 19~ 1997 me~ing. Word't$hared/Board/Swla--~rsiaVl~mostSteveJCOU'NTY QUESTION8 ANSWERED 03-28-97P12:02 RC¥~ Michael and Alison Weber 1855 Westview Road Charlottesville, VA 22903 BOARD OF SUPERVISORs March 2], 1997 Ms. Sally Thomas 889 Leigh Way Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Sally, I want to commend you for the excellent presentation you made of the GBB options at last Wednesday's Board of Supervisor's meeting. Although I disagree with many of your conclusions, I can't fault you for not being capable of articulating your perspective. As I was listening to your presentation, it struck me that the divergence between us is not simply what to do at Ivy -- our divergence is also philosophical. You apparently believe that BFI and other large corporations are fundamentally bad. By contrast, I prefer to evaluate a business on the basis of its performance rather than its size. Ifa large corporation can dispose of trash with greater efficiency and less impact on the environment than RSWA, then that corporation should get the business. BFI has fought the hold that the Mafia had on garbage collection in New York'and it is chaired by William Ruckleshaus, a former head of the EPA, who has outstanding credentials as an environmentalist. By all reports; the BFI facility in Henrico County is well managed, well constructed and appropriately sited. It is in an old quarry, in an industrial area, with sub-title D cells and a leachate collection system that feeds directly into the waste treatment. By contrast, the Ivy site is improperly located and has never had a serious environmental analysis. Moreover, RSWA has failed at even the most elementary aspects of sound landfill practice, such as keeping garbage off the road, smells out of the air and carcinogens out of the water, RSWA even refused to do off-site water testing -- in contrast to what USA Waste has done in Amelia. So who is the bad guy here? Considering these issues, your concerns about liability from using the BFI landfill seem mis-placed. You may argue that BFI is driven by cost considerations rather than environmental considerations. However, isn't that true also for RSWA? Isn't that why -- as you said -- the GBB options represent a fiscal plan not a solid waste management plan? The GBB options also represem a Steve Chidseyjob protection plan. That is why no options were considered in which RSWA does what numerous municipal authorities have done -T.get out of the business oflandfilling and concentrate on management and regulation This would involve developing a strategic plan, dividing the domponents of the plan into segments and negotiating with various private concerns to handle the various segments. This is what Ralph Allen proposed at the Task Force meetings, and it is disappointing that this creative idea was not pursued. However, the only person who could effectively orchestrate such a scenario is Bob Tucker -- Steve Chidsey likes what he does, believes he does a good job and will try to make sure that he continues doing it. We live in a free market economy. You and I differ fundamentally in our view of the appropriate functions of government in such an economy. I believe that government should set up roles and incentives which can channel the creative energy of the market in socially productive ways. Government should not try both to regulate an industrial activity and perform that activity, which is what happens with municipal Solid waste authorities. Sincerely, Michael Weber David P. Bo,x, erman Rio Charlolle Y. Humphfis Fort-est R. Marshall, ~ COUNTY OF Al REMARLE Office of Board of Supetx,Ssors 401 Mclntim Road Charlottesville, V~rgin~ 2290g-45~6 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles $. Martin Walter E P*rldm Sall~ H, Thomas Samuel Mi~ March 25, 1997 Mr. Eric Stmcko 1620 Garden Court Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Mr. Strucko: At the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 19, 1997, you were appointed *.o serve as an at-large representative for the Development Area Initiatives Steering Committee On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity tO express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to, serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, ~p~i~ Chaimlan CYH:lbh cc: V. Wayne Cilimberg James Camblos, III Printed on recpcled paper Dav/d P. Bo~,nnan ~o Ch~rlo~e Y. Humphrls Formst ~. Marshall Jr. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisor~ 401 Mclntire Road Charlotteswille, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 March 25, 1997 Charles S. Martin Walter E Pexkin s Sally H. Thomas Ms. Cindy Perry 3767 PritchetlLane Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Ms. Perry: At the Board of Supervisors meeting on March 19, 1997, you were appointed to serve as an at-large representative for the Development Area Initiatives Steering Conunittee. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportunity to express the Board's appreciation for yom: willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, Charlotte Y. Humphris Chairman CYH:Ibh cc: V. Wayne Cilimberg James Camblos, III Pdnted on recycled paper