Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1996-08-14 FINAL 7:00 P.M. August 14, 1996 Room 241, County Office Building 1) 2 3 4 5 6 7) 8) 9) 10) 11) 12) 13) Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. Other Matters Not Lis~ted on the Agenda~from the PUBLIC. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). ZMA-96-03. Worrell Land & Cattle Co. Public Hearing on a request to amend existing agreements & proffers of ZMA-92-12. Property in NW comer o£inters of Rt 250/I-64. Area recommended for office regional use in Neighborhood 3 by Comprehensive Plan. TM78,P20B,20C,20K,20M,31,32,71,71A. Rivanna Dist. (Deferred from luly I0, 1996.) SP-96-19. John Hocutt. Public Hearing on a request for hotel on approx 2.6 ac zoned PUD located; S of & adj to Applebee's Restaurant in Branchlands. TM61Z.P11, Sec3. Rio Dist. (This property is not located in a designated growth area.) SP-96-25. Tandem School. Public Hearing on a request ro amend SP-96-06 to increase allowance of total school enrollment & on-site staffing from 177 persons to 200 persons. Tandem School is accessed from Rt 20 S approx 1 mi S of 1-64. TM91,P2A&2B. Scottsville Dist. Approval of Minutes: May 1, 1996. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from Board members. Executive Session: Legal Matters. Certify Executive Session. Adjourn. CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Resolution to mice Ashwood Boulevard in For~t Lakes, South, Sttb~viS:?n i,nt0 the State Secondary System of Highways. 5.2 Resolution to take and abandon Green Mountain Road (Star, C Rggte ~27) i~n Ennis- comhy into the State Secondary System of Highways. 5.3 Resolution to accept deed for Scotts.ville Volu~nteerRescue Squa&site. 5 3a Authorize County Executive to sign Service Agreement: Addendum for Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad. FOR INFORMATION: Jy, .... ~. 5.4 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for July 9 ~and, ul 23, 19~6,7 5.5 Notice of application filed with the Department of Motor Vehides by Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, for transfer of certificate of publ3c convenience and necessity. 5.6 Memorandum dated August 5, 1996, from David B. Benish, Chief of Commu- nity Development, to Bill Brent, Executive Dxrector, Al[emaXte County Service Authority, re: Installation Mills. ' mm mm mm mm The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: (1) Ashwood Boulevard from Station 0+ 10, right edge of pavement of north- bound U.S. Route 29, 5800 lineal feet to Station 58 + 10, back of curb of Ashwood Boulevard as shown on plat recorded 5/11/93 in Deed Book 1307, pages 43-58, in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County showing a right-of-way width of 120 feet for a total centerline length of 1.1 mile. Additional plats recorded 7/22/93 in Deed Book 1327, pages 509-518; 5/14/96 in Deed Book 15346, pages 472-473; 6/17/96 in Deed Book 1544, pages 359-366. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-584.3 FAX ~804) 296-8800 MEMORANDUM Charles S. Martin Waiter F. Perkins Sall~ H. Thomas TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Dh-ector. Plann/ng & Commmxity Development FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC DATE: August 16, 1996 SUBJECT: Board Actions of August 14, 1996 The following is a list of actions taken by the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on August 14, 1996. Agenda ltem No. 1. CalltoOrder. Called to order at 7:02 p.m. Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. There were none. Agenda Item No. 5.1. Resolution to take Ashwood Boulevard in Forest Lakes South Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. Adopted the attached Resolution. Original forwarded to Engineering. Agenda Item No. 5.2. Resolution to take and abandon Green Mountain Road (State Route 627) in Ermiscorthy into the State Secondary System of Highways. Adopted the attached Resolution. Original for~varded to Engineering. Agenda Item No. 5.3. Resolution to accept deed for Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad site. Adopted attached Resolution. County Attorney's Office to forward to Clerk's Office a Printed on recycled paper To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: August 16, 1996 Page: 2 fully-executed copy of Deed and f'fling receipt. Agenda Item No. 5.3a. Authorize County Executive to sign Service Agreement Addendum for Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad. Original forwarded to Brenda Smith for additional signatures and return to Clerk's Office. .Agenda Item No. 6. ZMA-96-03. Worrell Land & Cattle Co. Public Hearing on a request to amend existing agreements & proffers of ZMA-92~12. Property in NW comer of interS of Rt 250/I-64. Area recommended for office regional use in Neighborhood 3 by Comprehensive Plan. TM78,P20B,20C,20K,20M,31, 32,71,71A. RivarmaDist. (Deferred from July 10, 1996.) Approved ZMA-96-03 subject to the following proffers: PROFFER FOPJq Date: Ju//e 7, 1996 ZMA$ 96-03 Tax Map Parcel(s) ~78-20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be :applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. (1) See list on sheet attached Signature of Ail Owners (Signed) T. Eugene Worrell, Manager WORRELL IdLND AND CATTLE COMPAA!Y, L.C. Dated: 6/7/96 The Land Use Plan dated February 26, 1996, is the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. To: Date: Page: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg August 16, 1996 3 The supporting commerclal uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. The residential uses are not requ/ired to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Private roads within the development may be designed to meet Virginia Department of Transportation mountainous terrain standards. Public roads shall be permitted subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company, its successors and assig/ls (the developer) agrees to pay for the necessary turn lanes as determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation at the development,s entrances along Route 250 East and State Farm Blvd. The developer also agrees to Route 250 East at the primary entrance (Entrance $ 6 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy of which is attached). The developer also agrees to provide a traffic signal at the secondary entrance (Entrance $ 4 as showll on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). All improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated March 22, 1996, (copy attached), or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The developer shall contribute to Virginia Department of Transportation a pro-rata share of the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of Route 250 and State Farm Blvd. The pro-rata share shall be the fraction of the cost of installation of the signal equal to the percentage of traffic generated by this site using the intersection divided by the total traffic using the intersection. Such contribution shall be made at the time of installation of the signal. The developer its successors and assign will utilize detailed design ~D~idelines consistent with the outline included as Design Criteria and Guidelines contained in a letter dated April 2, 1996, signed by Andrew Dracopoli, a TO: Date: Page: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg August 16, 1996 4 copy of which is attached. Development occurring within those areas obtained from Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71~ and 7lA, as these parcels existed on April 22, 1996 a copy of the tax map is attached hereto, and any successor parcel or parcels, shall not require review by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, because these parcels do not lie within the entrance corridor overlay district as it exists on June 12, 1996. Development occurring within other areas shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses: Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of way. Adjacent to internal streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. b. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: Front twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. Variations from the approved application plan shall be permitted in accord with the provisions of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: August 16, 1996 Page: 5 Agenda Item Non 7. SP-96-19. John Hocutt. Public Hearing on a request for hotel on approx 2.6 ac zoned PUD located S of& adj to Applebee's Restaurant in Branchlands. TM61Z,pI1,Sec3. Rio Dist. Approved SP-96-19, as recommended by the Pla~ing Commission, with deletion of condition #2. and subject to the following condition: 1. Use is limited to a 121 room hotel. Agenda Item No. 8. SP-96-25. Tandem School. Public Hearing on a request to amend SP-96-06 to increase allowance of total school enrollment & on-site staffing from 177 persons to 200 persmxs. Tandem School is accessed from Rt 20 S approx 1 mi S ofi-64. TM91,P2A&2B. Scottsville. Approved SP-96-25, as recommended by the Planning Commission, subject to the following conditions: total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to 200 persons; Additional buildings or increase in total eurollment/staffing must be authorized by a new special use permit. Agenda Item No. 10. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from Board members. Scheduled a joint meeting of the Board of Supervisors and the School Board for Monday, September 16, 1996, from 5:00 p.m. - 6:30 p.m. (This meeting was originally scheduled for September 4, 1996.) APPOINTED Mr. George A. Spry to the Equalization Board as the Rivauna District representative, for the calendar year 1996. Mrs. Thomas said she went out to visit Route 682. It happened to be the day after a heavy rain and the scene was appalling. There were flimsy erosion control fences and the creek that runs through the area showed significant silting. Apparently the County carmot force VDOT To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Date: August 16, 1996 Page: 6 to have ma erosion control plan or police themselves. Mr. David Hirschman has talked to Mr. Charlie Williams of VDOT who promised to go out and see if he can improve matters. She is concerned because VDOT is not meeting standards the County requires private enterprises to meet. She believes VDOT does have very good environmental experts on staff but not in local residency offices, or at least not in this residency. In her opinion, if there are going to be major projects in the County, an environmental expert should be on call or more readily available to this residency. Mr. Tucker said he would talk with Angela Tucker, VDOT, about making some improvements. Mrs. Hnmphris gave a brief overview of LGOC. Agenda Item No. 11. Executive Session: Legal Matters. At 8:10 p.m., Mr. Bowerman moved that the Board go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(a) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters relating to a lease of real property, reversion, and a citizen complaint. Seconded by Mrs. Thomas. Agenda Item No. 12. Certify Executive Session. CERTIFIED at 8:55 p.m. Agenda Item No. 13. Adjourn. The meeting was then immediately adjourned. EWC/aw Attachments (5) cc: Richard E. Huff Roxarme White Jo H/ggins Bruce Woodzell Pdchard Wood Amelia McCulley Jan Sprinkle Larry Dav~s Kevin Castner File COPY Da ad P. Bowerman Charlotte Y, Humphris Forrest iR. Marshall. dr COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902~4596 (8041 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-.5800 MEMORANDUM Charles S. Martin Walte~ F. Perkins S~9 H. Thomns TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: Jo Higgins, Director of Engineering Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC August 16, 1996 Road Resolutions Attached are the original resolutions (plus four copies) adopted by the Board on August 14. 1996, as follows: · Resolution to take Ashwood Boulevard in Forest Lakes South Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. · Resolution to take and abandon Green Mountain road (section of State Route 627) in Enniscorthy into the State Secondary System of Highways. EWC/aw Attachments Printed on recycled pa~er RESOLUTION TO ABANDON SECTION OF STATE ROUTE 627 Whereas, a new section of a road has been constructed and approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner to serve the same citizens previously served by a section of State Route 627; and Whereas, the Board of Supervisors finds that it is appropriate to abandon that section of State Route 627 pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add to the secondary system of state highways the portion of road identified as New State Route 627 on the plat entitled "Plat Showing Metes and Bounds Description of Abandonment Of Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way and The Dedication Of New 50' Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 637" (a copy of which is attached). Be It Further Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors declares that the section of State Route 627 being 2,226.53 feet in length and more particularly shown an.d described as a portion of the "Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" beginning at a line identified as "S 43° 23' 30" E 50.00'" and ending at a point labeled "End of Abandonment" as shown on the plat referenced above is abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supermsors of Albemarle County by vote of five to zero onAugusr 14, 1996. C~erk. Board of County~pervisors ENNISCOR. WPD The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, 'n regular meeting on the 14th day of August, 1996, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUT ON WHEREAS~ the street in Forest Lakes South Subdivision [SUB-92-087) described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated August 14, 1996, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albe- marle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has ' advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Reouirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervi- sors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road in Forest Lakes South Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated August 14, 1996, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33, 1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right- of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation, Recorded vote: Moved by: Mr, Martin. Seconded by: Mr. Bowerman. Yeas: Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mrs. Thomas and Mr. Bowerman. Nays: None. Absent: Mr. Perkins. A Copy Teste: · Carey, Clerk,~__/~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ® MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors J Mark B. Henry, Senior Engineer ~ August 6, 1996 Forest Lakes South Subdivision, Ashwood Boulevard (SUB-92-087) The road serving the referenced subdivision is substantially complete and ready for VDOT acceptance. At the next opportunity, I request the Board of Supervisors to adopt a resolution for the road specified in the attached VDOT SR-5(A) form. After the resolution has been adopted, please date and sign the SR-5(A) and provide me with the original and four copies. Thanks for your assistance. P/ease contact me if you have any questions. MBH/ctj Attachment RESOLUTION TO ABANDON SECTION OF STATE ROUTE 62 7 Whereas, a ne~v section of a road has been constructed and approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner to serve the same citizens previously served by a section of State Route 627: and Whereas. the Board of Supervisors finds that it is appropriate to abandon that section of State Route 627 pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supermsors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add to the secondary system of state highways the portion of road identified as New State Route 627 on the plat entitled "Plat Showing Metes and Bounds Description of Abandonment Of Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way and The Dedication Of New 50' Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 627" ta copy of ~vhich is attached). Be It Further Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors declares that the section of State Route 627 being 2,226.53 feet in length and more particularly shown and described as a portion of the "Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" beginning at a line identified as "S 43 ° 23' 30" E 50.00'" and ending at a point labeled "End of Abandonment" as shown on the plat referenced above is abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. I. Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true. correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of five to zero onAugust 14, 1996. C~c<.ff~ ~ ~¢/~ ors ~oard of County~upervis RESOLUTION TO ABANDON SECTION OF STATE ROUTE 62 7 Whereas, a new section of a road has been constructed and approved by the Commonwealth Transportation Commissioner to serve the same citizens previously served by a section of State Route 627; and Whereas, the Board of Supervisors finds that it is appropriate to abandon that section of State Route 627 pursuant ro Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Super~sors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add to the secondary system of state highways the portion of road identified as New State Route 627 on the plat entitled "Plat Showing Metes and Bounds Description of Abandonment Of Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way and The Dedication Of New 50' Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 637" (a copy of which is attached). Be It Further Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supennsors &dares that the section of State Route 627 being 2,226.53 feet in length and more particularly shown and described as a portion of the "Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" beginning at a line identified as "S 43 o 23' 30" E 50.00'' and ending at a point labeled "End of Abandonment" as shown on the plat referenced above is abandoned pursuant to Section 33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of to on August 14, 1996. Clerk, Board of County Supervisors ENNiSCOR.WPD ,., i 'LC 155 t ? f133fi Prepared by Richmond and Fishburne, LLP T~{IS DEOLARATIOI~ OF OO~rE/~AI~T, made this 22nd day of May, by ENlqISCORT~{Y L. L. C., a Delaware authorized to do business in Virginia, 007[ 53 1996 limited liability company herein the "Declarant" W I T lq E S S E T /t : Recitals. The Declarant owns real property known as "Enniscorthy" which is located near Keene in Albemarle County, Virginia, by deed dated December 28, 1994 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia in Deed Book 1448, page 579, herein referred to as the "Property". State Route 627, a gravel road maintained by the Virginia Department of T~ansportation, is located on the Property~ Pursuant to the request of Declarant and Virginia Code §33.1- 155, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has agreed to abandon and relocate a portion of State Route 627 as shown and described on a plat of Gloeckner, Smith & Coleman, Inc., dated July 25, 1995 revised September 25, 1995, November 28, 1995 and further revised on March 18, 1996, titled "Plat Showing Metes And Bounds Description Of Abandonment Of 01d 30 Foot Prescriptive Right-Of-Way And The Dedication Of New 50 Foot Fee Simple Right-of-Way For State Route 627" (the "Plat") recorded in said Clerk's Office with a deed dated May 22, 1996 immediately following this document, provided that a covenant running with the land is established by the Declarant requiring the preservation of that roadbed of the abandoned portion of State Route 627. NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby DECLARES and COVENA/~TS that the roadbed as now existing in that portion of State Route 627 designated and shown as "Old 30'-Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" on the Plat shall remain on the Property undisturbed except that the Declarant, its successors and assigns, may cover the roadbed with soil, may seed the roadbed, may plant vegetation on the roadbed for screening and other purposes, end may otherwise allow the roadbed to be overgrown with natural vegetation. Nothing in this Declaration shall be construed to require the Declarant, its successors and assigns, to maintain for public use any portion of State Route 627. This covenant shall expire on May Albemarle County Board of Supervisors does of State Route ~27 as described herein prior to that This covenant shall run with the land and De¢larant~s successors and assigns. 1, 1997 provided the not abandon the portion date. shall bind WITNESS the following signature and seal: 5h'n O.' Pickett,~r., (SEAL) Manager -2- ool P6 0 3 i..:. 0 STATE OF VIRGINIA· At Large c TY/oouNTY oF The foregoing instrument was 7/C~day of May, 1996 by John O. Pickett, of Enniscorthy L.L.C. My commission expires: ~oTA~Y -PUBL~h · to-wit: acknowledged before me this Jr., the Manager 95/enniscor .dec VIRGINIA: IN TIlE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE: THIS DEED WAS PRESENTED, AND WITH CERTIFICATE ANNEXED, IS ADMrrrED TOImCORDON ~1,.1 [q ,,gRto ,AT II:030'CLOCK ~1, M. STATE TAX $ (039) LOCAL TAX $ (213) TRANSFER FEE $ (212) I.T.T.F. $ 3.00 (106) VSLF $ 1.00 (145) CLERK'S FEE $ It::~. t:bo 001) PLAT $ SECT.58.1-802: STATE TAX LOCAL TAX LOCAL TAX $ (038) SHE..~ J. MARSHALL,CLEILK $ (220) $ (223) BY:_. ,~--~w~_ DEPUTY CLERK $ I/o. oo TOTAL -3- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Mark B. Henry, Senior Enginee~(l~j~ August 5, 1996 Enniscorthy (VDO T-O07) The relocation of State Route 627 on the Enniscorthy property is substantially complete and ready for VDO T acceptance. At the next opportunity, I request the Board of Supervisors to adopt a resolution for the road specified in the attached VDO T SR-5(A) form. To comply with the requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation, the resolution must include the Boards agreement on the abandonment of the previous roadway and the acceptance of the new roadway. Please include the following statements in the resolution: BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board hereby abandons the portion of SR 627 bounded within the marked prescriptive right-of-way limits labeled "OLD 30' PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT-OF-WA Y TO BE ABANDONED" from the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia, and WHEREAS, the new road serves the same citizens as served by the portion of the road identified in the project sketch to be abandoned, which portions no longer serve a public need, and After the resolution has been adopted, please date and sign the SR-5(A) and provide me with the original and four copies. Thanks for your assistance, Please contact me if you have any questions. MBH/ctj Attachment Di~rib~ed ~ ~: The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 14th day of August, 1996, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street in Enniscorthy (VDOT-007) described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated August 14, 1996, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW~ THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervi- sors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the road in Enniscorthy as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated August 14, 1996, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Reouirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right- of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and WHEREAS, the new road serves the same citizens as served by those portions of old road identified in the project sketch to be abandoned, which portions no longer serve a public need; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board hereby abandons the portion of State Route 627 bounded within the marked prescriptive right-of-way limits labeled "OLD 30' PRESCRIPTIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE ABANDONED" from the Secondary System of State Highways pursuant to §33.1-155 of the Code of Virginia; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded vote: Moved by: Seconded by: Yeas: Nays: A Copy Teste: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC I1 The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: (1) Green Mountain Road {State Route 627} from Station 9 + 50, project beginning on State Route 627 alignment, 3216.63 lineal feet to Station 41 +66.63, project end on Old State Route 627 alignment as shown on plat recorded 7/19/96 in Deed Book 1551, page 341, in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County showing a 50 foot right-of-way for a total length of O.61 mile. AND FISHBURNE. L.L.P. July 25, 1996 MS. Ella Carey, Clerk Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road, 4th Floor Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 Re: Abandonment of a portion of St. Rt. 627-Enniscorthy Property Dear Ms. Carey: We represent Enniscorthy, L.L.Co, a Virginia limited liability company which is the owner of property known as "Ennisoorthy" located in Albemarle County near Keene, Virginia. St. Rt. 627 is located on Enniscorthy and our client wishes to have a portion of St. Rt. 627 abandoned and relocated. To that end, we hereby make application to the Board of Supervisors on behalf of Enniscorthy, L.L.C. to abandon and relocate that portion of St. Rt. 627 more particularly described as follows: Ail that certain section of State Route 627 being 2,226.53 feet in length more particularly shown and described as a portion of "Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" beginning at a line identified as "S 43° 23' 30" E 50.00'" and ending at a point labeled "End of Abandonment" on a plat of Gloeckner, Smith & Coleman, Inc. dated July 25, 1995 last revised March 18, 1996 and entitled "Plat Showing Metes And Bounds Description OfAbandonment Of Old 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way And The Dedication Of New 50' Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 627" a copy of which is attached to this letter as Exhibit 1. Also enclosed are copies of a recorded deed conveying the property for the new road, a recorded covenant regarding preservation of the abandoned road bed, and a recorded deed of easement for the Cole's cemetery. A check in the amount of $135.00 for the application fee is enclosed. Please have this request placed on the Board's agenda for the Board's consideration as soon as is convenient. I{ICHI~OND AND FISPIBURNE. L.L,P Ms. Ella Carey, July 25, 1996 Page 2 Clerk Should you have any questions regarding this request please feel free to call myself or my colleague Joe Cochran. R,Jr/jLh 94-0440.[t5 cc: John O. Pickett, Jr. (with enclosure) Mark B. Henry, Department of Engineering (with enclosure) I%e,eared Richmond and Fis Surne, lip Exempted from recordation taxes under Sections 58.1-811(A) (3), 58.1-811(C) (4), 58.1-3315 and 25-249. THIS DEED, made this 22nd day of May, 1996, by and between ENNISOORTHY L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company authorized to do business in Virginia, hereinafter designated as Grantor, and the COMMOBwsALTH OF VIRGINIA, Grantee, WI TNE S S E TH: In consideration of the benefits accruing to or to accrue to the said Grantor, by reason of the relocation and construction, or other improvement of part of Route No. 627 (herein "Route 627"), between Route 712 and Route 710, along, through, or over the lands of the Grantor, and for further consideration paid to the Grantor, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the said Grantor does hereby GRANT and CONVEY unto the said Grantee in fee simple, with GENERAL WARRANTY, a strip or parcel of land needed for the relocation and construction or other improvement of Route 627 containing 3.690 acres, shown and described on a plat by Gloeokner, Smith & Coleman, Inc., dated July 25, 1995, revised September 25, 1995, November 28, 1995 and further revised on March 18, 1996 and titled "Plat Showing Metes And Bounds Description Of Abandonment Of Old 30 Foot Prescriptive Right-Of- Way And The Dedication Of New 50 Foot Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 627", (the "Plat") attached hereto and recorded herewith, together with the temporary right and easement to use .such additional areas as located and staked on the ground for cut and/or fill slopes as being required for the proper execution of the work. Said temporary easement ~ill terminate at such time as % the construction or improvemen%of Route 627 is completed. locations and stakes having been shown Grantor at or before the execution and presents, all the said strip or parcel Said to and approved by the delivery of these of land being in Scottsville Magisterial District of Albemarle County, Virginia. Together with the right and easement to construct, improve and maintain any drain ditches or other drainage facilities that may be needed for the proper and adequate drainage of Route 627, said easements are shown on the Plat. AND FURTHER WITNESSETH: The said Grantor covenants that it has the right to convey the said land to the Grantee, that it has done no act to encumber the said land, that the Grantee shall have quiet possession of the land, free from all encumbrances, and that it will execute such further assurances of the said land as may be requisite. The said Grantor covenants and agrees for i~s assigns and successors, that it has been made aware of its right to receive just compensation for the land herein conveyed, and that the considerations hereinabove mentioned and paid to it shall be in lieu of any and all claims to compensation and damages by reason of the location, construction and maintenances of said road, including such drainage facilities as may be necessary. The Grantor, by execution of this instrument, acknowledges that the plans for the aforesaid route as they affect its property have been fully explained to it or its authorized representative. WITNESS the following signature and seal: By: ~ (SEAL) Manager STATE OF VIRGINIA, At Large cou~TY/~T~ oF ~/~~ to wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me day of May, 1996 by John o. Pickett, Jr, the Manager of Enniscorthy L.L.C. My com~aission expires ~otary Public / this ~/~ 95\0440.ded / ~ . ,, ~n -. ~ 0 !55 ] VIRGINIA: IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE: THIS DEED WAS PRESENTED. &ND WITH CERTIFICATE ANNEXED, 1S ADMITTED TORECORD ON ~'-'~l~ ,/'~ ,19q(t~ ,AT ~/t/:~ O'CLOCK i~31'. M, STATE TAX $ (039) LOCAL TAX $ (213) TRANSFER FEE $ /. d>(3 (212) LT.T.F. $ ~ (106) VSLF $ 1.00 11145) CLERK'S FEE $ ~-a,~. 0 c~ (301) PLAT $ SECT.58.1-802: TESTE: STATE TAX $' (038) SItF~Y J. MARSHALLLCLERK LOCALLOCAL TAXTAX $ (220) ~/' ~--~/~'"~' $ _(223) BY:~ / DEPIY~Y CLERi~ TOTAL i551 ?60338 Prepared by Richmond and Fishburne, LL? THIS DECLARATION OF COVENANT, made this 22nd day of May, by ENNISCORTHY L.L.C., a Delaware authorized to do business in Virginia, 007L 53 1996 limited liability company herein the "Declarant" WI TNE S SETH : Recitals. The Declarant owns real property known as "Enniscorthy" which is located near Keene in Albemarle County, Virginia, by deed dated December 28, 1994 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia in Deed Book 1448, page 579, herein referred to as the "Property". State Route 627, a gravel road maintained by the Virginia Department of Tgansportation, is located on the Property. Pursuant to the request of Declarant and Virginia Code §33.1- 155, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has agreed to abandon and relocate a portion of State Route 627 as shown and described on a plat of Gloeckner, Smith & Coleman, Inc., dated July 25, 1995 revised September 25, 1995, November 28, 1995 and further revised on March 18, 1996, titled "Plat Showing Metes And Bounds Description Of Abandonment Of Old 30 Foot Prescriptive Right-Of-Way And The Dedication Of New 50 Foot Fee Simple Right-Of-Way For State Route 627" (the "Plat") recorded in said Clerk's Office with a deed dated May 22, 1996 immediately following this document, provided that a covenant running with the land is established by the Declarant requiring the preservation of that roadbed of the abandoned portion of State Route 627. NOW THEREFORE, Declarant hereby DECLARES and COVENANTS that the roadbed as now existing in that portion of State Route 627 designated and shown as "01d 30' Prescriptive Right-Of-Way To Be Abandoned" on the Plat shall remain on the Property undisturbed except that the Declarant, its successors and assigns, may cover the roadbed with soil, may seed the roadbed, may plant vegetation on the roadbed for screening and other purposes, and may otherwise allow the roadbed to be overgrown with natural vegetation. Nothing in this Declaration shall be construed to require the Declarant, its successors and assigns, to maintain for public use any portion of State Route 627. This covenant shall expire on May 1, 1997 provided the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors does not abandon the por~lon of State Route ~27 as described herein prior to that date. This covenant shall run with the land and shall bind Declarant's successors and assigns. WITNESS the following signature and seal: TY~... L C ~h~n 0.' Pickett,~r. , (SEAL) Manager -2- 3, ! 55 [ P~PO3[~u STATE OF VIRGINIA, At Large CITY/COUNTY OF /)~D~ , to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~l~day of May, 1996 by John O. Pickett, Jr., the Manager of Ennis¢orthy L.L.C. My commission expires: ~oTA~f -PUBLfC (/ ' 95/enn~scor .dec IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE: THIS DEED WAS PRESENTED. AND WITH CERTIFICATE ANNEXED. IS ADMITrED TO RECORD ON STATE TAX (039/ LOCAL TAX $ _(213) TRANSFER FEE $ (212) I.T.T;F. $ 3.00 {106) VSLF $ 1.00 (145) CLERK'S FEE $ l~5;[. ~o O01) PLAT $ SECT.Sg.I-802: STATE TAX $ i038) LOCAL TAX $ (220) LOCAL TAX $ (223) TOTAL '~-~k/ {q ,19R~ ,AT I/:03 O'CLOCK ¢1, M, $ S~Y J. MARSHALL, CLERK DEPUTY CLERK -3- sK 1557603b6. 007655 Prepare ,,,c,,menu Ffsfl urne, THIS EASEMENT AND ROAD MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT, made this 21st day of April, 1995 by and between ENNISCORTHY L.L.C., a Delaware limited liability company authorized to do business in Virginia, party of the first part, and GEORGE M. COLES, JR. and ROBERTS COLES, Trustees u/w/o L. S. Bennett dated January 22, 1917, parties of the second part WIT~ESSETH : Recitals. The party of the first part holds title to real property known as "Enniscorthy" which is located near Keene in Albemarle County, Virginia, by deed dated December 28, 1994 and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia in Deed Book t448, page 579, herein referred to as the "Property". Adjacent to the Property is a cemetery known as the Coles- Carter Cemetery (herein "Cemetery") and under the will of L. S. Bennett, spread in said Clerk's Office in Will Book 33, page 456, the parties of the second part are charged with maintaining the Cemetery. L. S. Bennett, by her will, also appointed Robert Carter as trustee. Robert Carter died on April 26, 1995 leaving George M. Coles, Jr. and Roberts Coles s rv~v~ng trustees. State Route 627, a gravel road maintained by the Virginia Department of Transportation, is located partially on the Cemetery and partially on the Property and provides access to the Cemetery. Pursuant to request of the party of the first part the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors intends to abandon and relocate that portion of State Route 627 that provides access to the Cemetery as shown and described in Exhibit A attached. The parties the Cemetery maintenance agreement. NOW THEREFORE, to this agreement wish to provide for access to from the relocated State Route 627 and provide for of the access, and to this end enter into this in consideration of the premises, and other good and valuable consideration and in further consideration of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties, the parties DECLARE and A~RE~ that a portion of State Route 627 to be abandoned, shall serve as access to the Cemetery and the parties hereby create and establish as an appurtenance to the Cemetery an access easement over and across the abandoned portion of State Route 627 as it crosses the Property and Cemetery between points A & B shown on Exhibit A (herein "Access Easement") together with an easement for a parking area to serve the Cemetery (herein "Parking Easement") also shown and described on Exhibit A. It shall be the sole responsibility of the party of the first part, at its expense, to maintain the Access Easement at its present width. Maintenance of the Access Easement shall not include snow removal but shall include the provision and maintenance of a state secondary road gravel surface with proper drainage and periodio grading. It shall be the sole responsibility of the party of the first part, at its expense, to establish and maintain a gravel parking area in the Parking Easement to serve the Cemetery. Maintenance of the parking area shall not include snow removal but shall include the provision of proper drainage and periodic grading. -2- ! 55 ! 803k8 The parties of the second part may install a chain or gate across the Access Easement at Point A shown on Exhibit A to prevent trespassing and unauthorized use of the Access Easement and they shall provide the party of the first part with a key to said chain or gate. The party of the first part shall install and maintain a farm gate immediately adjacent to the Parking Easement and shall provide the parties of the second part access to their field through such gate, on reasonable notice, for the purpose of accommodating additional parking occasioned by the holding of funeral or memorial services at the cemetery. This agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of theparties hereto and their successors in interest, and the use of the Access and Parking Easements shall inure to the benefit of the heirs of John Coles II, their guests and invitees. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: ~ENALISCO~TH~.L.C. ~/o~.h~ O. ~ickett, ~.(, Manager (SEAL)G~ORGE ~. COLES, JR., Trustee ROBERTS COLES, Trustee -3- ~ i551Pc-O3L: ~ c~Tw~ 0F ~_~?/z~ , to-wit: The foregoing instr~ent was acknowledged before ~day of ~[ , 1995 by John O. Pickett, Manager of Enniscor~y L.L.C. My co~ission expires: ~J~ ~/~ No~Y P~C me this Jr. as the STATE OF VIRGINIA, At Large ~C~TM/COUNT~ oF~/~~ , to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of ~/~, , 1995 by George M. Coles, Jr., TrUstee. u expires:~ _ ~/~ /g ~$ N~T~ PUBLIC ~/ , to'wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of . ~.~ , 1995 by Roberts Coles, Trustee. My commission expires:' ~/~ ~. ~/~ / ~ ~kTARY PUBLIC re/enniscorthy, rma -4- .._._.?K 155] pc.O:JUu",,; % 72'03'18" E 'N 7Z05'18" W 150.00' "2' VIRGINIA: IN THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF ALBEMARLE: THIS DEED WAS PRESENTED, AN-D WITH CERTIFICATE ANNEXED, IS ADMITTED TO RECORDON -~-ok( /'~ ,19% ,AT I/:07 O'CLOCK STATE TAX $ (039) LOCAL TAX $ (213) TRANSFER FEE $- (212) I.T.T.F, $ 3.00 (106) VSLF $ 1.00 (14~ CLERK'S FEE $ I.B. ~ (3or) PLAT $ SECT.58.1-802: STATE TAX $ (038) LOCAL TAX $ (220) LOCAL TAX $ (223) TOTAL TESTE: SHELBY J. MARSHALL, CLERK BY..,~~ ~7~. · -- t DEPIfI~ i~LERK COUNTY OF ALBEMAR ,il!l EXECUTIVE SUMMARY BOARD OF SUPER¥~80~$ AGENDA TITLE: Resolution to Accept Deed for Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad Site SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Authorization to Accept Ownership of Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad Site STAFF CONTACT(Si: Messrs. Tucker and Davis AGENDA DATE: August 14, 1996 ACTION: CONSENTAGENDA: ACTION:X ITEM NUMBER://` INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Res~ · R_EVJ_E_W_ED_B _Y: BACKGROUND: On May 15, '1996, the Board of Supervisors approved a Service Agreement w'~h the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. (Hereafter 'Rescue Squad") providing that the County would contribute $250,000 from the County's Fire Fund to be used for the purchase of land and construction of a rescue squad building. A term of that Agreement provided that the land and improvemer~s would be owned and titled jointly by the County and the Rescue Squad. DISCUSSION: The Rescue Squad is now prepared to close on the property on which it proposes to build the Rescue Squad building. It is 9.738 acres of property located at the southern corner of the intersection of State Route 6 and State Route 737 and currently owned by Edith and Stephan Hawranke. The deed has been reviewed by the County Attorney and is in acceptable form and mee~s the requirements of the Service Agreement. The attached Resolution would authorize the County Attorney to accept the Deed on behalf of the County. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Board adopt the attached Resolution authorizing the acceptance of the property [o be used for the constrbction of the Rescue Squad building. HAWRANKE.WPD 96.155 RESOLUTION TO ACCEPT OWNERSHIP OF 9.738 ACRES OF PROPERTY Whereas, the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad. Inc. and the County of Albemarle in a Service Agreement dated May 15, 1996, agreed that they would jointiy own property upon which a new rescue squad building would be constructed; and Whereas, the property identified in the Deed made by and between Edith Hawranke and Stephen Hawranke and the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. and the County of Albemarle, attached hereto, is the agreed building site for the Rescue Squad building. Now, Therefore, Be It Resolved that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby authorizes the County Attorney to act on behalf of the County of Albemarle to accept the property as described in the Deed conveying 9.738 acres of property fi:om Edith and Stephen Hawranke to the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. and the County of Albemarle that Deed being attached, hereto, and incorporated by reference. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that this is a tree, correct copy ora Resolution unanimously adopted by the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors at a regular meeting held on August 14, 1996. THIS DEED OF BARGAIN AND SALE made and entered into this 5th day of February, 1996, by and between EDITH HAWRANKE and STEPHAN HAWRANKE, Grantors and THE SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD, INC. and the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, a political subdivision, Grantees, whose mailing addresses are P. O. Box 33, Scottsville, Virginia 24590 and 401 Mclntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22902, respectively WITNESSETH: That for and in consideration of the sum of $19,476.00, cash in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Edith Hawranke and Stephan Hawranke, hereby GRANT, BARGAIN, SELL and CONVEY with GENERAL WARRANTY AND ENGLISH COVENANTS OF TITLE unto The Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. and the County of Albemarle, Virginia, a political subdivision, as tenants in common, all that certain lot or parcel of land in the Scottsville Magisterial District of Albemarle County, Virginia, located at the southwest coruer of the intersection of State Route 6 and State Route 737, containing 9.738 acres, and more particularly described as Lot B on a plat of robert L. Lum, C.L.S., dated November 7, !995, attached hereto and made a part hereof, be'rog a portion of the property conveyed to Guenther Hawranke and Stephan Hawranke by deed of Waldemar G. Dahl and Alice G. Dahl, his wife, dated October 18, 1982, of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of said County in Deed Book 750. page 177. By deed dated April 11, 1991 of record in said Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1148, page 37 Stephan Hawranke conveyed his on-half interest in said property to Guenther Hawranke. Guenther Hawranke died on May 20, 1995, testate, and by his will dated March 24, 1992, probated on , 1996 and spread in said Clerk's Office in Will Book , page h.e devised the above property to Edith Hawranke for life with the remainder devised to Stephan Hawranke. In the event the Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. shall be dissolved as a non-profit organization, then, in that event the entire fee simple interest conveyed herein shall automatically vest by operation of law to the County of Albemarle. Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. covenants thatJ, t shall not transfer its interest in the property described above, including all appurtenances thereto and improvements thereon, without the prior written consent of the County of Albemarle. Further, at such time as Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. no longer provides voluntary rescue squad services in Albemarle County, while operating under the jurisdiction of Albemarle County, Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. covenants that it will convey all of its interest in the property described above, including all appurtenances thereto and ~mprovements thereon, to the County of Albemarle, Virginia at no cost to the County of Albemarle, Virginia. Scottsville Volunteer Rescue Squad, Inc. joins in this instrument to acknowledge its responsibilities under this covenant. In compliance with the provision of Section 15.1-286 of the Code of Virginia, this deed is in the form approved by the County Attorney for the County of Albemarle, Virginia, and is accepted by him on behalf of the County of Albemarle, he having been authorized to so act on behalf of said County by a resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors, which approval and acceptance is evidenced by the execution of this conveyance by the said County Attorney. This conveyance is subject to all easements, reservation, restrictions and conditions contained in duly recorded deeds, plats and other instruments constituting constructive notice in the chain of title to the above-described property which have not expired by a time limitation contained there'm or otherwise have become ineffective. Reference is made to the aforesaid deed and plat for a more particular description of the property conveyed herein and for matters affecting same. WITNESS the following signatures and seals: · (SEAL) Edith Hawranke S teplYan'}Iawranke COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA By: Larry W. Davis STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this [ ,ccs~ day of , 1996 by Stephan Hawranke. My commission expires:. ~(31J ~:~(, ttC~ ~ ota y ublic % The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before ~ne this 3d_ day of t. vt , 1996 by Fxtith Hawranke. STATE OF VIRGINIA cOLrNTY OF ALBEMARLE, to-wit: July The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this lsd: day of Acting Chairman of , 1996 by Kaye M. Harden , Pr¢~idc~for the Board The Scottsville 5 oluntee~ Rescue Squad, Inc. My commission expires: ]L~ ~t, tC/~ 8 Nota~ Public STATE OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, to-wit: The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ , 1996 by Larry V~.Davis for the County of Albemarle, Virginia. My commission expires: Notary ~ublic' " day of SERVICE AGREEMENT ADDENDUM # 1 THIS ADDENDUM, made this 14 day of August, 1996, by and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE. VIRGINIA. a political subdivision, (the "County"), and the SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD, INC. a Virginia Corporation, (the "Rescue Squad") is an addendum to the Service Agreement dated May I5, 1996 and is to be attached thereto and made a part thereof. WHEREAS, the purchase of land and construction of the rescue squad building by the Rescue Squad has been temporarily delayed; and WHEREAS, the Rescue Squad desires to amend the Service Agreement to adjust the withholding of the County's annual appropriation to reflect the delay in the use of the County's contribution to the rescue squad building project; and WHEREAS, the County finds the proposed adjustment is reasonable. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the above stated premises the County and Rescue Squad agree, as follo~vs: 1. The Rescue Squad agrees that the County will withhold Sixteen Thousand Six Hundred Sixty SLx Dollars and Sixty Seven Cents ($16.666.67~ from the County's annual appropriation to the Rescue Squad's operating budget for t~ifteen (15) years beginning July 1, 1997, rather than July 1, 1996. and ending after a final withholding on July 1. 2011, rather than July 1. 2010. Such withholding may be used by the County to replenish the Fmtd for so long as the County, at its discretion. continues such Fund. This withholding shall be in addition to the withholding pursuant to the preexisting February 3, 1995 Service Agreement. 2. All other terms and conditions of the Service Agreement dated May 15, 1996, not in conflict with this Addendum shall remain in full force and effect. Witness the following signatu als: ?. _ August 14, 1996 ~R( B~R~T W.~~?¢' Date ' 32 ,EMARLE COUNTY EXECI~Ti(~51~ Date Approved as to Form: D. L. BONNER SCOTTSVILLE VOLUNTEER RESCUE SQUAD. INC, County Attorney COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE: The foregoing Service Agreement Addendum #I was signed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this /9'~ day of August, 1996 by Robert W. Tucker, Jr. NonpUblic My Commission Expires: COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE: The foregoing Service Agreement Addendum #I was signed, sworn to and acknowledged before me this day of August, [996 by D. L. Bonner. Mv Commission Expires: Notary Public 94-0}I.004 2 LEW~S A. M3.RTnw, STEVEN L. RAYNOR O. LAMAR GARREN* G. RAYE JONES i~ARSHALL M. SLAYTON MARTIn & I~YNOg P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 415 FOURTH STREET, N.E. CF~5OTTESWLLE, Vm~n~A 22902 TELEP~O~: (804) 296-4151 FACSrm-~E: (804) 296-8316 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ~30Af~D OF SUPERVISORS LEVaS A. ~IARTIN, Jg. JACK N. KEGLEY OF COUNSEL August 7, 1996 Ms. Charlotte Humphries Chairman, Board of Supervisors for the County of Albemarle 401 Mclntyre Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Re: Yellow Cab Co. of Charlottesville's Application for Transfer of Certificates of Public Convenience and Necessity Case No. MC-9608807AB Dear Ms. Humphries: Enclosed please find a Notice of Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity for Yellow Cab Co. of Charlottesville. The Department of Motor Vehicles has requested that we send a copy of this notice to you for your information. While the dates on the notice have passed, the DMV has extended the time for filing protests. If you wish to file a protest in this matter, please do so to the Department of Motor Vehicles, Motor Carrier Services. MMS/mdm Enclosure cc: Mr. James r. Graves (w/end.) Lewis A. Martin, III, Esq. (w/encl.) Sincerely, Mr. Thomas Adams (w/encl.) (via facsimile and mail) C:I#gtMMSlYELLOW~GENERALI960806.MCH RICHARD D. HOLCOMB COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA De£artment o/Motor Ve/gic/ s 2300 West Broad Ctreet NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY MAIL ADDRESS POST OFFICE BOX 27412 RICHMOND. VIRGINIA 23269-0001 Notice is hereby given that Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, transferor, 1515 6th Street, S.E. Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 and James T. Graves, 1515 6th Street, S.E. Charlottesville, Virginia 22901, have applied for transfer of the certificate ofpubtic convenience and necessity, numbered P-2599, as a common carrier, transporting passengers over irregular routes within the City of Charlottesville, Virginia and the Counties of Albemarle and Nelson, Virginia, pursuant to Chapters 20 and 21 of Titte 46.2 of the Code of Virginia. Case Number MC-9608807AB. An informal administrative proceeding to be conducted pursuant to Va. Code § 9-6.14:11 of the Virginia Administrative Process Act ("APA") has been scheduled for 2:00 p.m., June 5, 1996, and a formal evidentiary hearing to be conducted pursuant to Va. Code § 9-6.14:12 of the APA has been scheduled for 2:00 p.m., June 26, 1996, both proceedings to determine whether the public convenience and necessity would be served by granting the application of Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, transferor, and James T. Graves, transferee, pursuant m Chapter 20 and 21 of Title 462 of the Code of Virginia. Both proceedings will be held at the DMV Headquarters Building, Conference Room 128, 2300 West Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia. Any person who desires to make an oral or written statement, either support'mg or opposing the application, but not otherwise particqpate in either proceeding, must notify DMV Motor Carrier Services, Case Management Unit, Room 610B, P. O. Box 27412, Richmond, Virginia 23269-0001, telephone (804) 367-0503, by 5:00 p.m., May 29, 1996, and must indicate if the statement will be presented orally at the proceeding. Any person who wishes to participate fully in these proceedings as a party (i.e., to submit evidence or cross-examine wimesses) must file a written protest, which must actually be received in the Case Management Unit of DMV Motor Carrier Services, Room 61 OB of the DMV Headquarters Building, 2300 West Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia 23220, on or before 5:00 p.m., May 29, 1996. The mailing address is P. O. Box 27412, Richmond, Virginia 23269-0001, but mailed protests will be considered timely only if actually received by the Case Management Unit on or before the May 29, 1996, deadline. Partnership With the Public Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, transferor James T. Graves, transferee MC-9608807AB Any protest must set forth (i) a precise statement of the person's interest and how the person could be aggrieved if this application were granted; (ii) a full and clear statement of the facts which the person is prepared to provide by competent evidence; (iii) a statement of the specific relief sought; (iv) the Case Number assigned m this application (noted above); and (v) a certification that a copy has been sent to the applicant. The applicant and any person who can demonstrate that they could be aggrieved if the application were granted will be considered to have standing as a party in this case. The DMV Commissioner will determine who, other than the applicant, has demonstrated standing, based on a recommendation from the Chief Hearing Officer. As the named party in the case, the applicant may choose to waive the informal administrative proceeding and proceed to the formal hearing, with the consent of DMV. Ifa protest is filed, DMV encourages the applicant to waive the informal proceeding so that the matter can be resolved in one proceeding. In addition, the formal hearing may be waived if there are no protests and all matters are resolved in the informal proceeding. In such a case, the informal proceeding may be conducted by telephone conference call so that the applicant will not be required to appear in Richmond personally. DMV will attempt to accommodate requests for continuances; however, the applicant and protestants must be aware that DMV is committed to resolving cases expeditiously. A request for a cont'muance for either proceeding must be made in writing to the Case Management Unit in the same manner and by the same deadline as for filing a protest, and must state the reasons for the request. On or before May 16, 1996, the applicant must send by first class or receipted certified marl a copy of this entire NOTICE OF APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY to each entity listed on the attached two-page list of carders and to the mayor or principal officer of any city or town and on the chairman of the board of supervisors of every county into or through which the applicant seeks to provide service. In addition, on or before May 16, 1996, the applicant must publish the following PUBLIC NOTICE in a newspaper or newspapers having general circulation in the area to be served: Page 2 Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, transferor, James T. Graves, transferee MC-9608807AB PUBLIC NOTICE Application for Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessi _ty Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville. transferor, and James T. Graves. transferee Department of Motor Vehicles Case Number MC-9608807AB Notice is hereby given of an informal administrative proceeding at 2:00 p. tm, June 5, 1996, and a formal hearing at 2:00 p. tm, June 26, 1996, if necessary, at the Department of Motor Vehicles Headquarters Building, Conference Room 128, 2300 Y~est Broad Street, Richmond, Virginia, to consider the application pursuant to Chapter 20 and 21, of Title 46.2 of the Code of Virginia of Yellow Cab Company of Charlottesville, transferor, and James T. Graves, transferee, for the transfer of the certificate of public convenience and necessity, numbered P-2599, as a common carrier of passengers, lf you wish to participate in any manner, you must contact the Case Management Unit, DMI/Motor Carrier Services, P. O. Box 27412, Richmond, Firgiuin 23269-0001, telephone at (804) 367-0503 prior to May 16, 1996, to obtain necessary forms and information. Absolute deadline forJ~dbtg a protest is May 29, 1996. The applicant must file, in the same manner and by the same deadline as for filing a protest in this case, an affidavit of compliance with the notice requirements stated above, indicating the date of the mailing m carders and public officials and the date and the name of the newspapers in which the public notice was published. BY AUTHORITY OF THE COMMISSIONER: WITNESS MY HAND THIS 16th day of April, 1996. RiCHAP,.D D. HOLCOMB Thomas S. Adams Hearing Officer RDH:tsa Enclosure Page 3 TO: FROM: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept, of Planning & Community Developmem 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Bill Brent, Albemarle County Service Authority David B. Benish', Cl~C~ef of Community Development DATE: August 5, 1996 Installation of a Sanitary Sewer Line to Serve Homes in Woolen Mills Staffhas reviewed your request of July 31, 1996 to install a sanitary sewer collection line to serve several homes and the Old Woolen Mill, located at the end of East Market Street in the Woolen Mills area. It is our understanding that this line will replace a privme line which discharges untreated sewage into Moores Creek. Section 15.1-456 of the Code of Virginia requires that extension, enlargement or construction of water and/or sewer lines in the County be reviewed for compliance with Comprehensive Plan. In the past, all such requests for review have been 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 staffadministrative approval for 15.1-456 reviews of water and/or sewer projects which meet the following criteria: 1) The proposed water and/or sewer project is located solely within a designated Growth Area; and, 2) The proposed utility servme is within the appropriate jurisdictional area for the type of service requested; and, 3) The proposed utility service is for water distribution and sewage collection, pumping stations and appurtenances, not to include water and sewer transmission, main or trunk lines, treatment facilities and the like. Staff has determined that this sanitary sewer collection line meets the criteria for administrative review and is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Also, you should be aware that the State considers certain properties (Old Woolen Mill and the Woolen Mills Worker Houses) in this area to be of historic significance. Efforts should be made to limit disturbance of these properties as much as possible during the installation of the sanitary sewer collection line. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact me. KMB/mem Planning Commission Board of Supervisors Arthur Petrini, RWSA File Aui-nor m¥ ALBEMAIRLE C OUNTY ,--.SERVICE P.O. BOX 1OO9 168 SPOTNAP RD OHA~LOlq'ESVILLE VA 22902 · (804) 977-4511 FAX 8C4) 97%0698 Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Director of Planning & Community Developmem County Office Building 401 McInfire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 July. 31, 1996 dt t $ 1996 Dear Wayne: The Service Authority is currently developing plans to install a sanitary sewer line to serve several homes and the old Woolen Mill which are connected to a private sewer line which discharges untreated sewage into Moores Creek. The Woolen Mill building JS at the extreme end of East Market Street and the houses fac~ the railroad tracks between the Woolen Mill and the city limits. Although I do not have plans to presem at this time I ask for a determination from you that this project would be in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. A prompt reply will be greatly appreciated. If you need additional information please give me a call. Ve/~5~ru? yours, J. W. Brent Executive Director JWB:dmg cc: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. PROFFER FORM Date: June 7, 1996 ZMA# 96-03 Tax Map ParCel(s)# 78-20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which ehallbeapplied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a par~ of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. (1) See list on sheet attached Signature of Ail Owners (Signed) T. Eugene Worrell, Manager WORRELL LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY, L.C. Dated: 6/7/96 4o 5# The Land Use Plan dated February 26, 1996 is the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. The residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-ra=a basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Private roads within the development may be designed to meet Virginia Department of Transportation mountainous terrain standards. Public roads shall be permitted subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company, its successors and assigns (the developer) agrees to pay for the necessary turn lanes as determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation at the development's entrances along Route 250 East and State Farm Blvd. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left turn lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary entrance (Entrance # 6 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy of which is attached). The developer also agrees to provide a traffic signal at the secondary entrance (Entrance # 4 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). All improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virginia Depar~men= of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated March 22, 1996, (copy attached), or earlier a= the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The developer shall contribute to Virginia Department of Transportation a pro-rata share of the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection oi Route 250 and State Farm Blvd. The pro-rata share shall be the fraction of the cos= of installation of the signal equal to the percen=age of traffic generated by this site using the intersection divided by the total traffic using the intersection. Such contribution shall be made at the time of installation of the signal. The developer its successors and assign will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Design Criteria and Guidelines contained in a letter dated April 2, 1996, signed by Andrew Dracopoli, a copy of which is attached. Development occurring within those areas obtained from Ta~ Map 78 Parcels 2OK, 71, and 71 A, as these parcels existed on April 22, 1996 a copy of the tax map £e attached hereto, and any successor parcel or parcels, shall not require review by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, because these parcels do not lie within the entrance corridor overlay district as it exists on June 12, 1996. Development occurring within other areas shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses: bo Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty {30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of way. Adjacent to internal streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: Front twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to no= less than ~en (10) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. Variations from the approved application plan shall be permitted in accord with the provisions of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. s qa s AA/W3H3Ng/ W3H3Ng/ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 96-03 Worretl Land and Cattle Company SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:. Proposal to amend the existing ag~eemants and plan of the Peter Jefferson Place Developmem AGENDA DATE: August 14, 1996 ACTION: Yes ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Ye~ ~ STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Huff, Cilimberg, Fritz . REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: This proposal was reviewed by the Planning Commission on May 7, 1996 and was unanimously recommended for approval. The Board of Supervisors consideration has been deferred to allow comments received from the Virginia Departmen~ of Trausportetion (VDOT)to be addressed (Attachment A). Those comments were received after the Plam~ng Commission meeting. The applicant has provided a response to these comments ia Attachment B. DISCUSSION: In the opinion of the Dcparlmant of Planning and Community Development, this proposal is a minor amendment to the previously approved application plan of 1992. The total amount of davelopment square footage has been shghtly reduced. The primary change to the plan is the modification of the internal transportation network and redistribution of the various permitted uses within the development. No change in the number or location of entrances onto public roads is proposed. However, the location of a traffic signal has been moved from one entrance to another due to modifications to the internal development pattern, VDOT has indicated the potential need for substantial improvements, some of which involve property beyond the control ofthedeveloper. ThesewerenotnotediaVDOT's comments duringthe 1992 review and were not noted by VDOT in this review until after the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission~ VDOT iadicates that the traffic impact study submitted to them included updated traffic from this proposed development only and did not take into censiderafion other traffc studies prepared for development on nearby sites. VDOT has requested that the traffic study be amended to reflect development on other sites. An updated traffic study has not been submitted or proffered An updated traffic study can be required by both the County and VDOT during the review of site plans for the development of the site. During this review, the County and VDOT can also address the design of the entrances (nmnber and design of mm lanes, as well as the design of the entrances themselves), although the County cannot require off-site transportation improvements. It should be noted that the applicant has proffered in proffer #5 several access improvements to address prior VDOT comments. (Attachment C.) The comments of VDOT contain requirements/recommendations which are appropriate to rezoning of land involving s~gnificant upzoning. This property was initially rezoned by the County during the 1980 comprehensive rezeniag. The most recent zoning action of 1992 established a plan of developmen[ but did not intensi~ the permitted uses on the property based on the underlying zoning. Staffopinien is that the current plan results ia an improved internal development with no increase ia scale or intensity of development over that approved in 1992. Further, the applicant's proffers address the impact caused by this development to an equal or ~eater extent than that approved in 1992. Therefore, it is the opinion of staff that the most recent recommendations of VDOT should not be required as a part of tl~is application. VDOT's comments regarding an updated traffic study should be addressed during the site plan review process and/or the entrance permit approval process. Staff does note that some issues identified by VDOT address the general transportation concerns of Route 250 and these issues may be appropriate for additional discussion. A suggested starting po/hr for that consideration will be with the study of Route 250 East to Fluvanna. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA 96-03 subject to the proffers submitted by the applicant. Worrel2.rpt 96.154 DAVID R. GEHR COMMISSIONER ATTACHMENT COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRQ [NIA-'' DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 701 VDOT WAY CHARLO"C]-ESVILLE. 22911 A.G. TUCKER RESIDENT ENGINEER June 5, 1996 Peter Jefferson Place Route 250 East Albemarle County Mr. Bill Fritz Depm. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA. 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: In our letter of March 22, 1996 we mmplied that the 1992 traffic impacn study should be revised to reflect all new activity in the Pantops area This is supported by a recent review of the Peter Jefferson Traffic Study update by our Central Office Planning Division. There appears mo be very little coordination between the two studies of South Pantops and Peter Jefferson Place, although they area both prepared by Wilbur Smith ~ A~sociates. Both developmenns should be included in the traffic impacm study mo Peter Jefferson Place. It appears that when these two developments approach build-out, Route 250 from Route 20 to 1-64 will need to be widened to a mmnmmum of (6) six lanes. The impact these developments will have on 1-64/Route 250 interchange has not been addressed. Motorists are already experiencing delays during peak periods am the interchange. The need for right of way to accommodate improvements to the 1-64.'Route 250 interchange mn the Southwest quadrant needs to be addressed. The primary entrances (~6) should be further West to reduce the traffic conflicts with the interchange. Vehicles uurnlng left out of entrances ~4 and ~5 along with lefts out of Pantops Mountain Drive and Hansens Mountain Road will experience long delays, causing drivers to seek alternative access or unusual driving maneuvers. Such delays will create a demand for signals an these enmrances which will reduce the level of service along the Route 250 Corridor. TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY Page 2 J%Lne 5, 1996 Mr. Bill Fritz Peter Jefferson Place Entrances #4 and #5 should be restricted to right turns only. Left turn traffic needs to be redistributed to other side en=rances and be included in the analysis of those entrances. There may be a need for Pantops Mountain Road and Hansens Mountain Road to have service roads to the proposed lights at Glenorchy Drive and State Farm Boulevard, to function properly with the increased traffic along Route 250. This may be a very difficult process, since this would require right of way no= controlled by the Peter Jefferson Place. If you have any questions, please advise before these commen=s are shared with the developer. Vuly, Assistant Resident Engineer HWM/ldw cc: Irma vonKutzleben POST OF?ICE BOX 5386 · CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINI3, 32905 i'ELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMILE 80~ 977 6~75 July 31, 1996 Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Depmtment of Planning and Community Development Albemarle County Office Building 401 Mointire Road Charlottesv'flle, Virginia 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Cilimberg: Since thc unanimous approval of our emended Application Plan by thc Planning Commission on May 7, the Virginia Dcpartment of Transportation has brought to your attention their concern that, at full buildout of the entire Puntops area in fifteen to twenty years time, the new four-lane Route 250 East and the interchange with Interstate 64 may not be adequate for the projected traffic. We have participated in two meetings with VDOT and County oW~cials in the course of which VDOT otTaeials suggested that we make additional contributions to cover the possible widan'mg o£ Route 250 East to six lanes. The genesis for our emended Application Plan has been our relationship with a major regional developer, Childress Klein, whom we have h'med to help us market and develop Peter Jefferson Place. Childress Klein is a major real estate developer with offices in Charlotte, Atlanta and Richmond who has developed successful high quality corporate office parks in Richmond and Charlotte. In particular an office park in Charlotte called Lake Pointe, developed with the help of the land planner, Bob Hughes, eonvinoed us that this was a team who could develop Peter Jefferson Place as the high quality office park that we have always wanted. Their review of our approved plan brought out the concerns that were set out in my letter to you dated February 26, 1996 and our amended plan was designed by them to address those concerns. Our emended plan was unanimously approved by the Planning Commission on May 7. Not only de we think that the emended plan is an improvement for us as owners and developers, it is also an improvement for the County. The advantages to the County are twofold: 1. The new plan de-emphasizes tho retail portion of the plan. Going back to the discussions concerning the Comprehensive Plan in 1989, the County has wanted Mr, Wayne Cilimberg July 30, 1996 Page two to downgrade the retail potential on this site. In fact the Comprehensive Plan represents a hugh reduction in the retail potential on this site from about 60% (based on the area of underlying PD-MC zoning) to about 15% of the total. The amended plan moves and reconfigares the 100,000 square feet of retail use and shifts the emphasis from a major retail center anchored by a grocery store to commercial uses more directly supportive of the office parle 2. The revised traffic study shows a reduction in the traffic impact of our amended plan compared to the original plan and places more emphasis on State Farm Boulevard, Thus the new plan will actually alleviate in a small way the problem that VDOT is eeneerned abonL We are also now offering to contribute a pro-rata portion of the cost of the State Farm Boulevard traffic signal when it is installed, an offer not included in our original plan. In addition the shifting of the retail site across from the Westminster Canterbury median entrance makes it more likely that a traffic signal will be required there; in our amended plan we are offering to pay for the installation of that light, if traffic warrants, and such a light would be a significant benefit to the residents of Westminster Canterbury and the residentially zoned property immediately to its east. Thus the traffic changes arising from the new plan are all beneficial to the County compared to the original approved plan. As developers of Peter Jefferson Place, we have as much an interest in proper traffic flow along Route 250 East as the County and VDOT. However Route 250 East and the Interstate interchange are major arterial roads which need to be studied in their entirety, not just thc section in front of our property. For instance, given the inherent restrictions imposed by Long Street, the new Free bridge and all thc existing development from the Free bridge to State Farm Boulevard, what benefit is derived by six-laning a short section of Route 250 East from State Farm Boulevard to the interchange? The tmpaet of all the contributors to traffic on Route 250 East need to be considered in order to come to a reasonable solution. This will be a lengthy process and our project should not be delayed pending the outcome of such a study, particularly when our amended plan actually reduces the impact of our contribution compared to our already approved plan. We of course would cooperate in any such full scale study and, depending on the design chosen by VDOT, an additional lane could be built on our portion of Route 250 East without any further land take being needed. Mr. Wayne Cilimberg July 30, 1996 Page thr~e We are now designing and preparing marketing broohures for Peter Jefferson Plaoe so that we can go forward with our marketing program as soon as possible. We do not feel that any further delays in the approval of this amendment are warranted and we urge the Board of Supervisors to approve the amended plan with the proffers already extended as the Planning Commission did unanimously. The County has long wanted this prop~'y developed so that sites are available in the urban growth area for new businesses as well as relo~ating looal ones. We are working to aocompliah this goal by creating a high quality park of which everyone oan be proud. Obviously if our amended plan is denied.~ we will be forced to go back to our already approved plan, something we feel is not in the best interests of ouraelves or the County. Sincerely, Andrew J. Draoopoli Vice President A/ID:dtb 1996 [ATTACHH EN'~' C1 POST OFFICE BOX 5'~86 - CHARLQTFESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMILE 804 977 6578 June 7, I99~ Mr. William Fritz Albemarle County Planning Office 401 Mclntir~ Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Peter Jefferson Place ZMA #96-03 'Dear Mr. Fritz: Enolosed please fmd tho signed amended proffer form in oounoction with the amended Land Use Plan for Peter Jefferson Place. This proffer replaces the proffer previously submitted dated April 23, 1996. Should you have any questions or comments on this form, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Andrew I. Draoopoli ¥ic~ President Enclosures as stated. Date: June PROFFER FORM Original Proffer Amended Proffer (Amendment # 1996 ZMA # 96-03 Tax Map Parcel(s) # 78-20B, 20C, 2OK, 32, 71 and 7iA Acres to be rezoned from tO 20H, 31, Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1] the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. (1) See list on sheet attached Signature{ o[ All 'bwners T. Eugene Worrell, Manager WORRELL LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY_, L.C. 6/7/96 Printed Names of All Owners Date OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) The Land Use Plan dated February 26, 1996 is the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. The residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Private roads within the development may be designed to meet Virginia Deparanent of Transportation mountainous terrain standards. Public roads shall be permitted subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Wort'ell Land and Cattle Company, its successors and assigns (the developer) agrees to pay for the necessary tum lanes as determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation at the development's entrances along Route 250 East and State Farm Blvd. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left mm lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary entrance (Entrance # 6 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy of which is attached). The developer also ' agrees to provide a traffic signal at the secondary entrance (Entrance # 4 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). All improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated March 22, 1996, (copy attached), or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary, or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The developer shall contribute to Virginia Department of Transportation a pro-rata share of the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of Route 250 and State Farm Blvd. The pro-rata share shall be the fraction of the cost of installation of the signal equal to the percentage of traffic generated by this site using the intersection divided by the total traffic using the intersection. Such contribution shall be made at the time of installation of the signal. The developer its successors and assign will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Design Criteria and Guidelines contained in a letter dated April 2, 1996, signed by Andrew Dracopoli, a copy of which is attached. Development occurring within those areas obtained from Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71, and 7lA, as these parcels existed on April 22, 1996 a copy of the tax map is attached hereto, and any successor parcel or parcels, shall not require review by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, because these parcels do not lie within the entrance corridor overlay district as it exists on June 12, 1996. Development occurring within other areas shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. 8. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses: Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of way. Adjacent to internal streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. b. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: From twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not tess than ten (10) feet in accordance with Section 4,11.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto· Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. Variations froTM the approved application plan shall be permitted in accord with the provisions of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. 9.4 9.4.1 9.4.2. 9.4.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF SECONDARY USES Secondary uses are intended to be complementary of and subordinate to primary uses. To this end, secondary uses shall be established on a pro rata basis for phased develop- ment to the f~oor area of primary uses unless otherwise specifically permitted by the board in a particular case. In addition, the following guidelines are intended to govern secondary uses'unless otherWise specifically modified by the board in a particular case: Secondary residential uses shall not occupy more than twenty (20) percent of the total site area. Other secondary uses shall comply with the following limita- tions: Total floor area devoted to warehousing shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total floor area devoted to primary uses; be Total floor area devoted to supporting commercial uses shall not exceed five (5) percent of the total floor area devoted to primary uses; Ce Total floor area devoted to related office uses shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total floor area devoted to primary uses; As to motel/hotel/conference use, the applicant shall demonstrate that such use is intended to be complemen- tary of and subordinate to primary uses in terms of scale, contractual agreements with primary uses, or otherwise. Supporting commercial uses may consist of primary uses recommended for village and neighborhood service areas to provide convenience uses to employees within service areas. Such supporting commercial uses as may be provided by an individual occupant for the exclusive use of the employees of such occupant shall not be included in floor area limita- tions of section 9.4.2. Supporting commercial uses may also consist of dependent or parasite uses as may be demonstrated to be sustainable by and related to the. specific character and service require- ments of primary uses. (Added 6-19-91) -87.4- (Supp. #62, 6-19-91) ~ Secondon~ I ENTRANCE ~4 PANTOPS MOUNTAIN DR Secondary Access ENTRANCE #5 t Primary Access E~TRANCE LEGEND: .~-- EXIS[ING LANE DESIGNATION ~ RECOMMENDED LANE DESIGNATION ~RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC SIGNAL tlL -Itl GLENORCHY DR HANSEN'S MTN RD RECOMMENDED ROADWAY ©EOMETRICS- 2005 FIGURE 8 Page ~ March 22, 1996 April Rezonings Our preliminary review of the traffic impact study update {dated 2/23/96} indicates that signals may be warranted at entrance #6 end State Farm Boulevard. We have concern that a signal may be warranted at entrance #4 due to high left turns and its intersection with the Canterbury Retirement Village. shall be at developer's expense along with coordination of other signals on Route 250 Corridor. The signs! cost at entrance #6 shall also be borne by the de,eloper. We recommend that the developer also participate in the cost of the signal for State Farm Boulevard and Route 250. Signal plane and analysis. will be required for signal locations. We recommend the construction or allowing in design of roadway geometries to accommodate the dual left turns for entrance #6, both from Route 250 WBL and NBL on the entrance road. The crossover locations on State Farm Boulevard that do not have existing right or left turn lanes shall be installed at developer's cost, including the adding of a dual left for State Farm onto Route 250 WBL. We recommend the updating of the 1992 Traffic Impact Study with fresh data that reflects all new activity in this area. This may or may not result in recommendation changes ZMA-96-04 Encore Investments LTD. Partnership, Route 631 The PD-MC would probably increase traffic, however it is difficult to determine since the existing CO is also included in the PD-MC. A traffic impact study should be submitted for review. These parcels should be served with one entrance. A right turn lane would at a minimum be recommended and may be required. The traffic study would reflect if a traffic signal is warranted. There is already a signal proposed, when warranted, approximately 500' to the west on Route 631. ~r. Ron Kseler April Razonings Page 4 March 22, 1996 The distribution of site traffic shows no increase in left turns for eastbound Route 743 at its intersection with Route 29. This is not a reasonable assumption. This intersection does not operate at an acceptable level of service under future conditions for the P.M. peak and Saturday peak hours. Any increase in left turns could significantly impact the level of service further. Additional traffic generated by this rezoning will increase traffic volumes substantially on Ilydrsulie Road. That the meed for a five (5) lane cross section is exacerbated between Routm 29 and Lambs Road. The intersection, with Cedar tlill Road is maintained by the City of Charlottesville, therefore comments regarding traffic impacts should be solicited from the City. There are adjustments that need to be made to the traffic impact study such as for truck traffic. The numbers used in Route 29 traffic appear to be a little low and the change if only one main entrance was used on Hydraulic Road. This may result in slight changes to the study. There was a HETSIM demonstration presented to VDOT on February 26, 1996. This should be formally submitted in a written summary so that it may be officially considered. ZMA-96-02 Edqecombr Route 742 ZMA-96-03 Worrell Land and Cattle Company, L.C., Route 1117 Several comments from a letter written by Robert Hofrichter to Rich Tarbell, dated February 8, 1993, do no appear to have been addressed. These comments may or may not be significant now since access patterns and shifts of usage have chan~d. POST OFFICE BOX 5386 · CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMILE 804 977 6578 April 2, 1996 Mr. William D. Fritz Senior Planner County of Albemarle Departmen! of Planning and Community Development 401 MeIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 RE: Peter Jefferson Place ZMA 96-03 Dear Mr. Fritz: Enclosed please find the amended Design Criteria and Guidolinos for Pctcr Jcffcrson Place. Those guidelines replace thc ones filed with our original Master Plan. Thc amended guid6tines arc in thc same format as thc original ones and reflect tho changcs in thc Master Plan, particularly in rcfercnoc to thc park and mall areas. Should you have any questions after reviewing these guidelines pleaso do not hesitate to contact me, AJD:dtb Enclosures as stated. Andrew J. Draoopoli Vice President tl 2 B96 Peter Jefferson Place Design Criteria and Gaidelines The master plan and design guidelines proposed for Peter Jefferson Place are constructed to support the unique cultural and natural resources attributable to this property. The plan envisions a mixture of commercial and residential uses organized wilh respect to the natural features of the land and about a linear mall or park which establishes a direct dialogue between the '" ~" historic cultural resources of the site and national cultural resource of Monticello to the Southwest of the property. The location and orientation of themall is sympalhetic to both the existing buildings on site and the direct view shed of Monticello. Tbe mall establishes the built landscape in conjunction with the natural landscape as the primary image and organizational elements of Peter Jefferson Place. Within this context, the Master Plan and Design Guidelines propose simple architectural structures sited to lay parallel or perpendicular to the mall within an overall environment which creates a high quality of people. oriented spaces. Building area are sited to create spaces and define corridors which are sensitive to the total environment and · human scale. By establishing the environment of Peter Jefferson Place as the most important element, buildings will be less visible and prominent, allowing a succession of visually distinguished natural and manmade spaces to be the major theme of development. In order to ensure successful implementation of thc master plan, design criteria and gnidelines have been formulated. Following is an outline of these guidelines wbich briefly details some of the primary design concepts for development of 'the property. The outline corresponds to the five primary development componentswhich include: Foundation Campus; Residential Neighborhood; Mixed-Use and Corporate Core; Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites; and, Local Office Sites. In addition; criteria relating to parking, landscaping, ligbting and a comprehensive sign system have been included. · To ensure conformance ,to the design criteria and guidelines a Design Review Committee will be established by the owner. The Design Review Committe~ wilt be charged with the review of all design elements of Peter Jefferson Plac~ and ~o interpret the design intent of the master plan, covenants and guidelines documents as adopted. The Committee will have the power to approve acceptable designs or disapprove any designs which are judged inappropriate to the successful implementation of Peter Jefferson Place. .. I ATTACI':iMEN'T GJ A. Development Zones I. Foundation Campus Parcel D The existing buildings on parcel D speak not only to the history and character of the site but create a strong dialogue between the property and Monticello. The Foundation Campus will expand upon this dialogue by anchoring the northern end of the park and through site planning, scale and architectoral quality. The prominence of the Foundation Campus and its genius for the composition of the overall master plan will ensure its importance in ' :' establishing the identity of the property. Site planning will emphasize large lawns, campus-like settiogs, creation of courtyards and connection to the park. Architecture will reflect traditions of classical Virginia architecture wilb predominant building color to be white; gray pitched roofs will be defined by dormers and gables. A strong pedestrian circulation system will emphasize a hierarchy of pathways and linkag6s between buildings. Landscape elements will compliment architecture through tile use of such elements as "white board" fence and white brick walls. Landscaping will reflect traditional Virginia plant materials, with emphasis On price'alien of ..... existing large trees. 2. Residential Neighborhood Parcel ! The residential component of the development will cansist of moderate dehsity attached homes located adjacen~t6 the River corridor. The residential neighborhood will be closely integrated with the open space system proposed for the entire property. Site planning will reinforce residential scale and circulation. Architecture will incorporate traditional detailing with pitched roofs, dormers and window treatments... Building forms will be sensitive to sloped development and predominant colors will be neutral shades. Landscaping will incorporate elements that lend a human scale: use of plants wilh seasonal interesi, special' paving details, walls, and site fnmiture, such as benches. The design of these site features will be of traditional style. 3. Mixed-Use and Corporate Core Parcel B,H, K Tim Mixed Use Corporate Office area oftbe plan will be organized around strong pedestrian scale and orientalion. Tile mixed use area will support a mixture of office, hotel and retail components nod will feature a strong connection lo the park. Site planning will creal¢ a stroag organized relationship among cmnmons, specialty retail and hotel oses emphasizing creation of spaces sad pedcslriml circalation. Architecture will incorporate clean simple detailing with buildings utilized to form spaces for people. Buildi~g~s will be constructed of neutral earth tone colored tnaterials witll non-reflective glass, I ATTACH MEbiT G Because of its prominent location, there will be equal design consideration o fall building Facades. Landscaping will empimsize a variety of I~ardscape featnras (special paving, planters, tree grates, benches, sculpture, furniture, etc.) and a high level of detailing. 4. Peripheral Corporate and Retail Silos Parcels E, F, N The Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites will define the edge of Peter Jefferson Place and will be located adjacent Io highway frontages, stream valleys and wooded slopes. - ..... Site planning will maximize benefits of views and adjacent amenities emphasizing the grouping of buildings' to respect landforms. Architectura will incorporate clean simple strnctaras which are secondary to the total environment. Buildings will be constructed of neutral earth tone colored materials with non-raflective glass. Landscaping will be used to create an overall sense of quality and space. 5. Local Office Sites Pared O The local office silo are Ihose sites along Stale Farm Bonlevard Ihat are appropriate for more typical local office development. Architecture will include both traditional and compatible contemporary styles. Buildings will bo constructed of nenlral earth tone colored materials with non-reflective glass. Landscaping will be used lo inlegrale buildings into dm over-ali streetscape. B. Treatment of Parldng Parking is a necessary element of any development, but if integrated properly into a site, it can be visually tm-obtrusive. Parking design will be appropriate to the user it serves and to adjacent development and will be part ora clear hierarchy of the vehicular circulation system. I. Sorface Parking Parking will be broken into small areas relating to topography and oriented away from roadway views. Parking areas will be sited so as not to impede or discourage pedestrian circulation between buildings. Berms, hedges and landscaping will be nsed to buffer and rednce impact of parking form adjacent roadways ' and from adjaceut properties. C. Landscaping, Lighting ami Sign System A master laedscaping, lighting, and sign syslem program will be developed, incorporating trees, shrubs, lighting and other landscape elements, existing trees, and a comprebensive sign system inlo an integraled wl~ole. General landscape character and qaatity of public spaces is to be the key componem. !. Landscaping j~TTACHMENT G~ Landscaping along roadways and corridors will help define circulation system as well as relate tbe proper~y to the surrounding communily. Trees and shrubs will be used to integrate individual buildings into the over-alt landscape. A plant material list will be developed compatible to tile cmmty's "Generic Landscape Plan Recbmmended Species List". Each site developed will be required to snbmit a landscape plan which incorporates tile design principles outlined in the Landscape Master Plan. 2. Lighting Lighting fixtures will bo coordinaled tl~rongbout the property and be ora lraditional design style. Specific fixture types will be selected witl] consideration toward control of stray light and glare. 3. Sign System Thematic form of tile sign program will reflect the tradilional architectural themes and designs eslablisbed for tile property. Colors will be rich, yet respectfnl of their traditional design theme. Tile sign system will incorporale a hierarchy of sign lypes including Entrance Identity Signs, Parcel Entrance Signs, Directional Signs, Bnildiug identity Signs, Informational Signs, Service Signs and Pedestrian Signs. Signs will be located only where needed witb the nnmber of signs being kept tn a mmimnm to avoid unnecessary clutter. 77 ALBEMARLE COUNTY SGOTTSVILLE AND RIvANNA DISTRIGTS SECTION 78 4.11 4.11.1 USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED IN REQUIRED YARDS The following uses and structures shall be permitted in required yards, subject to the limitations established. CO,RED PORCHES, BALCONIES, CHIMNEYS ARD LIRE FEATURES Covered porches, balconies, chimneys, eaves and like architectural features may project not more than four (4) feet into any required yard; provided that no such feature shall be located closer than six (B) feet to any lot line. (Amended 9-9- 92) 4.11.2 STRUCTURES IN REQUIRED YARDS No portion of any accessory structure shall be permitted in any required yard; except as herein expressly provided. (Amended 3-18-81) 4.11.2.1 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES If no utility or drainage easements or other easements are adversely affected, accessory structures or portions thereof may be erected no closer than six (6) feet to adjacent lot lines in the case of detached structures, or to a common wall in the case of attached structures; provided further that no such structure shall be located within any yard required by section 4.6.3. (Addition 3-18-81) (Amended 1-1-83) 4.11.2.2 PUBLIC TELEPHONE BOOTHS Public telephone booths may be located within required yards, but no closer to any street than the existing rlghtof-way line or right-of-way reservation line, provided that: ~_ Such booths shall be equipped for emergency service =o the public without prior paymen=; The location of every booth shall be determined by the zoning adminia- trator to ensure that the same will not adversely affect the safety of the adjacent highway; Every such booth shall be subject to relocation at the expense of the owner, whenever such relocation shall be determined by the zoning administrator to be reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare or whenever the same shall be necessary =o accommodate the widening of the adjacent highway. (Addition 3-18-81) 4.11.2.3 FENCES, MAILBOXES, AND SIMILAR STRUCTURES 4.11.3 Fences, free-standing mail and/or newspaper boxes, signs advertising sale or rent of the property, and shelters for school children traveling to and from school shall be permitted in all districts and shall be exempt from all setback and yard requirements except as otherwise provided in section 4.4. For the purposes of this section, the term "fence" shall be deemed to include free-standing walls enclosing yards and other.uncovered areas. (Addition 3-18-81) REDUCTION OF BUILDING SEPARATION AND SIDE YARDS (Added 1-1-83) 4.11.3.1 Minimum building separation and side yards for main structures shall be reduced in accordance with applicable district regulations in a particular case under the following c~rcumstances: ~_ a. 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 Service offices standards to permit such reduction; or b. Ail such structures for which separation and/or side yards are reduced shall be constructed in accordance with Table 401 Fire Resistance Ratings of Structure Elements of the BOCA Basic Building Code 1984 Edition; or its equivalent in the current edition of BOCA Basic Building Code; or (Amended 10-15-86) -32- (Supp. #82, 1-3-96) 4.11.3.2 4.11.3.3 4.12 4~12.1 4.12.2 Co In the case of yard reduction, the Albemarle County fire official may require~-such guarantee as deemed ne6essary 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 ~n the office of the clerk of th~'circuit court of the county. (Added 1-1- 83) 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 six (6) feet to any lot line; No such structure shall encroach on any utility, drainage or other easement, nor on any feature required by this ordinance or other applicable law. (Added 1-1-83) Development approved prior to the effective date of this section shall be exempt from 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 purposes 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 sec=ion 32.0 of this ordinance or comparable provision of prior zoning ordinance; or any planned development district established pursuant to the provisions of this ordinance or prior zoning ordinance. (Added 1-1-83) OFF-STREET PARKING AND LOADING REQUIREMENTS PURPOSE The purpose of these regulations is to set forth off-street parking and loading requirements for permitted uses: (1) in accordance with the intensity of such use; (2) to provide adequate parking for the travelling public; and (3) to reduce traffic hazards and conflicts. To these ends, parking and loading area designs shall comply with minimum standards as set forth in sections 4.12 and 32.7 of this ordinance. It is intended that the purposes of this ordinance be served through physical design measures as opposed to directional or policing measures such as signage, one-way circulation, and other such devices which rely on vehicle operator compliance for effectiveness. Development proposals which seek to maximize building area or otherwise intensify development to the extent that these minimum regulations are not satisfied shall be deemed to be contrary =o the purpose of this ordinance. (Amended 6-14-89) APPLICATION Off-street parking and loading requirements shall apply ~o all uses and s=ructures established prior to or after the effective date of this ordinance except as otherwise provided herein. Off-street parking and loading spaces shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of this section at the time of erection, alteration, enlargement or change in use of any structure. Any use for which parking and/or loading space was approved and provided prior to the effective date of this ordinanc~hall be considered in conformance to this ordinance provided the intensity of such use remains unchanged. Where, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, a change in such use and/or structure occasions the need for additional parking and/or loading space, or such change would physically alter parking and/or loading space available, such use shall comply with these provisions. -33- (Supp. #82, 1-3-96) 8.5.6 8.5.6.1 8.5.6.2 8.5.6.3 8.5.6.4 FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND SUBDIVISION PLATS CONTENTS OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS: SUBDIVISION PLATS Unless modification is permitted by board of supervisors' action pursuant to sections. 8.5.4 and 8.5.5, all site development plans shall comply with sectioJ ~.0 of this ordinance and all subdivision plats shall comply with Chapter 18 of the Code of Albom~rle. (Amended 9-9-92) APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS: SUBDIVISION PLATS Approval of site development plans and subdivision plats shall be based on: compliance with site development plan or subdivision regulations applying at the time the land was designated as a PD district; or at the option of the applicant, compliance with such regulations currently in effect. (Amended 9-9-92) VARIATIONS FROM APPROVED APPLICATION PLANS Variations in site development plans and subdivision plats from approved application plans may be permitted by the director of plan- ning and comm~inity development upon a finding that such variations are: generally in keeping with the spirit and concept of the approved application plans; in accordance with the comprehensive plan; and in accordance with regulations currently in effect. Changes other than permitted herein shall be made only by rezoning application. (Amended 9-9-92) BUILDING PERMITS, GRADING PERMITS After PD designation, no building permit including special footings and foundation permits shall be issued in such district prior to approval of site development plans or subdivision plats for the development of the area in which such permits would apply. In the case of a subdivision plat, the director of planning and community development may authorize issuance of a grading permit for road construction upon approval of road plans by the director of engineer- ing or the Virginia Department of Transportation as the case may be. (Amended 9-9-92) -86- (Supp. #68, 9-9-92) COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community' Development 40t Mclnfire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4,596 (8O4) 296-5823 1996 Worrell Land & Cattle Company, LC ATTN: Andrew Dracopoli P O Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 ZMA-96-03 Wort'ell Land & Cattle Company LC (Peter Jefferson Place) Tax Map 78, Parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Dear Mr. Dracopoli: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on July 10, 1996, per your request, deferred the above-noted request to amend existing agreements and proffers of ZMA-92-12. This request has been rescheduled for review by the Board of Supervisors at their August 14, 1995 meeting. If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, V. Wayne/Eilimberg ~ ~3 ] Director of Planning ~ty VWC/jcf Development cc: ~,:~]la Carey Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins ~ · t - 977 68(t3-FACS?llL&.8,r)4 977 6578 POST OFFICE BOX 538( - CHARLO'I"TESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22905 FELL[.I ()NE 804 ~:.,,~ ~:.. ,, July 10, 1996 Mr. Wayne Cilimbcrg Dcpartmont of Planning and Community Development Albemarle County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Peter Jefferson Plaoe ZMA 9603 D~ar Mr. Cilimburg: Worrell Land and Cattle Company, L.C. hereby agrees to the deferral of tho publio hearing before the Board of Supervisors on the above refemnoed matter until Wednesday August 14, 1996. Sincerely, Andrew J. Draoopoli Vi~e President AJD:dtb COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (80~) 2%-5823 July 1, 1996 Worrell Land & Cattle Company, LC Attn: Andrew Dracopoli P. O. Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: ZMA-96-03 Worrell Land & Cattle Company, LC (Peter Jefferson Place) Tax Map 78, Parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Dear Mr. Dracopoli: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on June 19, 1996, unanimously deferred the above-noted petition to its JULY 10, 1996 meeting. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior m your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sin~cerely, - , VWCIjcf Development CC; - ~u~ OF SUPErVISOrS p .... , ~_~_, r~ON~- 804 977 680! FACSIMILE 804 e77 ~ 578 ~ QS~ O~r!CE SCX 5386 · CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22905 ~'i c~- ~- ~ YUne 18, 1996 Mr. William Fritz Department of Planning and Community Development Albemarle County Offioe Building 401 Molntiro Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Peter Jefferson Plaoe ZMA 9603 Dear Mr. Fritz: Worrell Land and Cattle Company, L.C. hereby agrees to the d©ferral of thc public hearing before the Board of Supervisors on the above referenoed matter for one week to June 26 in ord,r to enable oertain transportation matters to be resolvcd. Sinocr¢ly, Andrew J. Dracopoli Vioc Prosifl~at AJD:dtb May 9, 1996 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Worrell Land & Cattle Company, LC Attn: Andrew Dracopoli P. O. Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: . ZMA-96-03 Worrell Land & Cattle Company, LC (Peter Jefferson Place) Tax Map 78, Parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Dear Mr. Dracopoli: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 7, 1996, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffers. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June 12, 1996. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled heating date. Il'you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Williana D. Fritz Senior Planner WDF/jcf COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 96-03 Worrell Land and Cattle Company SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REOUEST:. Proposal to amend the existing proffers of ZMA 92-12. Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71, and 7lA is located in the northwest comer of the intersection of Rt. 250 and 1-64 in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This area is recommended for Office/Regional use in Neighborhood 3. STAFF CONTACT(SL' Mr~ Fritz AGENDA DATE: Planning Commission - May 7, 1996 Board of Supervisors - June 12, 1996 ITEM NUMBER: ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: No ACTION: Yes INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND'.. This project was originally approved on March 17, 1993. The proffers of the 1993 action are included as Attachment C. The current proposal (described in Attachment B) amends the location of various uses within the project resulting in the need to ammend the existing proffers. The new proffers are provided as Attachment D. Staff has included a copy of the previous layout as attachment E and the proposed layout is attachment F~ DISCUSSION: The proposed amendment to the previous plan results in a modified layout ofthe development and opens the opportunity for some of the internal roads in the development to be public. Private roads were previously approved within the development. The changes to the development have resulted in modifications to the design guidelines for the project (Attachment G) to reflect the new area identification numbers. (The previous guidelines are included as Attachment H.) Staffhas meet with the Department of Transportation to address issues of traffic. As the proposed level of activity is slightly less than the previous approval, minor revisions to the proffers addressing traffic concerns are proposed. The proffers contained in item 5 of Attachment D substantially address the concerns of the Department of Transportation. The only issue outstanding at this time is specific language regarding the allocation of responsibility for traffic signals. The applicant has agreed in principal to such a proffer, ~however, as the Department of Transportation will be a party to the proffer stalTha~q requested appropriate language. ,, this language has not been received as of the preparation of this report. In s~mmary, those items proposed for change by this proposal are: 1. Relocation of uses within the development including internal road layout; 2. Allowance for the use of public roads within the development. The following items remain substantially unchanged: 1. Location of access to Route 250 and State Farm Blvd.; Total square footage and mixture of the various uses; 3. Location of open space; 4. Provision of pedestrian walkways; 5. Design Guidelines for the development. The Architectural Review Board will review the modified development plan in a preliminary conference on May ~,,~6, 1996. Comments from that meeting will be forwarded. Staff has also included in this package the prior staffreport, not including Attachment I (Application Plan book), as background information for your reference. The original Application Plan book has many pages and is here at the Department for your rewew should you so desire. RECOMMENDATION: Staff views the proposal as a non-substanmtive change from the previous approval, which is consistent with the previous approval, Based on this analysis staff is able to recommend approval subject to the acceptance of the applicant's proffers. A:~ZMA9603.RPT ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZM~-96-U3 WORRELL LAND ~D CATTLE CO, LC MONTICELLO ........... SCOTTSVILLE AND -- ' RIVANNA DISTR (~TS .~,~. D SECTION 78 POST OFFICE BOX 5386 CHARLOTTESVILLE VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMi~E 804 9,, 6; f8 Febnm~ 26, 1996 ]ATTACHMENT Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Director of Planning and Community Development Albemarle County Office Building 401 MacIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 RE: Peter Jefferson Place ZMA-92-12 ALBEMARLE COUNTY 20NiNG DEPART,M~NT I Dear Mr. Cilimberg: We are hereby requesting an amendment to the approved Application Plan for Peter ~¢fferson Place to reflect the results of more r~search and our sales efforts since the original plan was approved in 1993. The original Application Plan, ZMA-92-12, covers the 241 aares owned by Worrell Land and Cattle Company L.C. along Route 250 East, Interstate 64 and State Farm Boulevard. The property eousists of parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 71A, all on Tax Map 78. Since the plan was approved, we have prepared detailed drawings for the implementation of Phase 1 and have met with developers with a view to commencing construction of the project. As this work has progressed, we have concluded that certain aspects of the original plan are not compatible with a successful project. The problems lay with three aspects of the plan: 1. The primary entrance to the park was also the entrance to a major shopping center which was to have been anchored by a grocery store. This was viewed as a major obstacle to attracting office users from outside Charlottesville who would be used to the more traditional style of corporate park entrance. 2. Similarly the placement of residential uses in the heart of a park that was primarily an office park was also thought to be aa obstacle to office users from outside the area. Major national and regional office users consider the approach to and arrival at their buildings to be very important, and the placement of retail and residential uses beside those approaches would not create the image for their businesses that they wish. 3. The use of two entrance roads from Route 250 East to the heart of the property was unduly expensive. Mr. Wayne Cilimb~rg Page 2 IATTACHNENT B ! ]Page 21 The revised plan 'eliminates these problems by making the entrance opposite Glenorehy the primary entrance, by moving the retail center to the Westminster Canterbury crossover and changing its character to a supporting commercial center rather than a freestanding shopping center, and by moving the residential portion of the property to the ridge framing down to the Rivanna River, which is an option in the original plan. The new primary entrance road provides excellent access to four major office sites while the entrance from State Farm Boulevard provides excellent access to smaller office sites on the west side of the property and to the residential portion of the property. The revised plan also enlarges and reorients the public park at the heart of the property. None of these changes alters the intent of the approved plan. We still intend to develop Peter Jefferson Place as a high quality mixed-use development comprising office (including research and development), retail, hotel and residential uses. The amendment does not change the potential size of thc development apart from a small reduction in the number of residential units. This amendment does not change the character of the developed property with its substantial amount of dedicated open space, its public park (substantially increased in size) and its emphasis on architectural coherence through design guidelines. Furthermore, the amendment does not change the plan's compliance with the County's Comprehensive Plan. In support of this amendment request, we are attaching six copies of the revised land use plan and a revised illustrative plan that shows how the site might be developed and the possible locations of parking areas and sidewalks. Also enclosed is a narrative description of the changes in the plan prepared by the land planner. Five copies of the revised traffic study are enclosed showing slightly reduced traffic impact compared to the approved plan and the elimination of one set of traffic lights on Route 250 East. We will be submitting revised design guidelines, private road justification and, although it may not be legally required at this juncture, an outline storm water management program. We are not resubmitt'mg the detailed site analysis, wetlands information or the property plats as all this information was included in the original submittal in 1993 and none of this information has changed since then. After you have had an opportunity to review the materials submitted, we will make any amendments necessa~ and provide you with sufficient copies to satisfy your public hearing requirements. While this amendment is being processed, we will also be submitting detailed grading and engineering plans for Phase 1 of the project_ Phase 1 includes the grading Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Page 3 on the State Farm Boulevard side of the property and ooustruotion of the park and allows us to create four building sites ready for development We have two local companies that are interested in locating in the park and who wish to build buildings of 60,000 and 40,000 square feet. The approval of this amendment will therefore allow us to go forward with these two local companies and have sites immediately available for other local or out-of-town office users. This amendment has no impact on the special use permits approved in 1993. Those permits will still be required for the amended plan and we ask that they stay in place. Prior to the public hearings, we w'fll again meet with our neighbors, including Monticello, to review with them the changes in the plan. Given that the amendment does not significantly change the original approved plan but does enhance its viability, we do not expect any adverse comments from our neighbors and we strongly urge the approval of the amendment as submitte& Sincerely, Andrew J~ Dracopoli Vioe President AJD/ps PETER JEFFERSON PLACE J ATTACHPIENT B I LPage 4] The comprehensive master plan for Peter Jefferson Place has been prepared to ensure capful guidelines in development of this unique piece of property. The dramatic terrain of the site, its prominence in the Monticello view shed and its proximity to 1-64 and the Rivanna River combine to present a tremendous resource base of cultural and natural features. The master plan proposes to respond to each of these resources in a sympathetic manner. Previous master planning efforts established an edmiml list of development goals for the property. Their goals were: The plan, must retain and enhance the inherent beauty of the property; must be economically viable: should incorporate a mixture of complementary uses; should have a strong concept or focal point for the design; should help achieve the County's desire to prevent further strip development along 250 East: must be sensitive to views form Monticello and adjacent properties; should be built in phases over an extended period of time following a carefully and thoughtfully conceived master plan; should maintain certain flexibility of uses to adapt to changing market demands; should promote pedestrian activity and provide alternatives to automobile trips; and should incorporate design criteria and guidelines adopted to help insure quality developmenL The present master Plan supports and enhances these goals. The modifications inherent in the proposed master plan are primarily driven by an alternative perspective of market driven forces whick dictate certain physical relations for economic viability. While economic viability is but one component or goal of the project, it is the ability to be successful in the market place which will endure to the creation of the total environment proposed for Peter Jefferson Place The master plan calls for a corporate office environment with support retail. local office, foundation campus and residential uses located to promote a mixed use pedestrian oriented environment. Specific land uses respond to natural site features as well as market driven elements such as views, access and image. A major compositional element of the plan is an expanded park and mall area within the main focus of the Monticello view shed. The park/mall is expanded in size from the previous plan and takes on au orientation which creates a visual and cultural dialogue between Monticello and the historic and cultural significance of the foundation campus to the northeast of the site. The geometric form and conceptualization of the proposed park and mall area reminiscent of classical design philosophies and are inspired by spaces such as the Jefferson designed UVA Campus. The significance oftbe mall as the heart of Peter Jefferson Place is supported by a plan requirement which results in all proposed buildings being sited as parallel or perpendicular orientation to the mall. This requirement will define a degree ofvisuul order and emphasis on the mall as seen from Monticello. Other modifications to the plan include modification of the proposed 250 retail, creation of a single main entrance from 250 and relocation of the residentiai component to the West aiong the Rivamm River. The modification of the retail concept is from a grocery anchored center to an office support retail. Groeery purchasing is more directly related to residentiai transportation patterns and is felt to have liffie economic viability at Peter Jefferson Place As equally impo~ant was the large footprint size wl:dch could be required for a grocery. The proposed retail site would impact the view beth to and from the foundation campus. The present retail concept calls for small shops and upscaie restaurants which would draw from and support quaiity office development. The smaller footprints associated with these uses would be more in scale with the existing building and foundation campus. The third modification is the creation of a single major road entry form 250. The single road was found to be sufficient for traffic flow and eliminating the requirement for a cosily second road. The single entry can create a strong corporate office image and reduce site impacts. The master plan retains a smail automobile and enlarged pedestrian connection from the internai site to the supporl retail, The finai major modification in the plan calls for potential residential uses to be shifted to the Western Edge of the property. This location presents two major improvements. First the location adjacent to the river allow residents access for recreational purposes and counectiveness to future green way systems. The second is the residential component is located such that commuter traffic is not directed through this use as shown in the previous plan. The proposed plan, however, does not alter the vision of Peter Jefferson Place. The proposed plan establishes strong design principles with inherent flexibility to ensure that market success is a driving force behind its implementation. J ATTACHHENT B J [Page S1 March 23, 1993 COUN/Y OF ALBEb4ARLE Dept. of P~annln9 & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902.4596 (804) 296-5823 Andrew Dracopoli Worrell Investments Inc. P. O. Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: ZMA-92-12 and SP-92-66 Worrell Land and Cattle Company Dear Mr. Dracopoli: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on March 17, 1993, took the following actions: ZMA-92-12 - Approved with the followin~ a[reements: Establishment of the Land Use Plan dated November 11, 1992 and revised January 20, 1993 as the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Provision of private roads within the development designed to meet mountainous terrain standards. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company agrees to pay for the necessary right turn and taper lanes at the development's entrances along Route 250 East. The right turn lanes shall be constructed as each entrance is established. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left turn lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary and secondary entrance to the site. These improvements Andrew Dracopoli Page 2 March 23, 1993 ATTACHMENT C] [Pag'e 21 shall be constructed upon demand of the'Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated February 8, 1993, or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Gontrol Devices. The applicant will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Appendlx I of the Peter Jefferson Place Application Plan book. Except those sites shown as Parcels A-2, B-i, and B-2 on the Land Use Map (Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71, and 7lA), all future site plans shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Archttectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses; Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right-of-way. off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of- way. Adjacent to internal private streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. b. Residential. Uses; Minimum yards: Front twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side.yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Setbacks for the townhouses adjacent to the park may be reduced to five feet surrounding the loop road. Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. In the spirit of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Director of Planning and Gommunit~ Development shall be authorized discretion over reasonable variations from the approved zoning application plan. Future requests for parking decks or a helistop will require additional Planning Gommission and Board of Supervisors reviews. Andrew Dracopoli Page 3 March 23, 1993 SP-92-66 - Approved - No conditions.. If you should have any questions or commen~s regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, V. Wayne fCi_limberg '/ Director of Pl~ommunity Development V~C/j cw cc: Amelia Patterson Jo Higgins Marcia Joseph Pete Gorham Jay Schlothauer Angela Tucker Robert Hofrichter POST OFFICE BOX 5386 · CHARLOTTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMILE 804 977 6578 April 25, 1996 Mr. William Fritz Albemarle County Plann'mg Ofl~me 401 MeIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Peter Jefferson Place ZMA #96-03 Dear Mr. Fritz: Enclosed please fred the signed proffer form in connection with the amended Land Use plan for Peter Jefferson Place. Should you have any questions or comments on this form, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~_ Andrew J. Dracopoli Vice President AJD:dtb Enelosuras as stated. 1996 Date: 4/23/96 Original Proffer. Amended Proffer (Amendment # ) PROFFER FORM ZMA# 96-03 TaxMapParcet(s)#78-20B, 20C, 20K, 20M, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Acres to be rezoned from to Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezontng requesied. (1) See list on sheet attached SignaturEs of All Owners T. Eugene Worrell, M~nager Signature of ARorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) WORRBLL LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY_ L.C. Printed Names of All Owners 4/23/96 Date OR' Printed Name of Attorney-in-Facl PROFFORM.WPD Rev. December 1994 ZMA-96-03 1. [.ATTACHMENT OI Establishment of the Land Use Pian dated February 26, 1996 as the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Provision of private roads within the development designed to meet mountainous terrain standards. The use of public roads shall be permitted subject to approval by the Virgima Department of Transportation. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company its successors and assigns agrees to pay for the necessary mm lanes at the development's entrances along Route 250 East and State Farm Blvd. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left turn lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary entrance (Entrance # 6 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). The developer also agrees to provide a traffic signal at the secondary entrance (Entrance # 4 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). All improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virg'mia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated March 22, 1996, or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Un'fform Traffic Control Devices. The applicant its successors and assigns will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Design Criteria and Guidelines contained in a letter dated April 2, 1996, signed by Andrew Dracopoli, a copy attached. Development occurring within those areas obtained from Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71, and 7lA, as these parcels existed on April 22 a copy of the tax map is attached hereto, and any successors parcel or parcels, shall not require review by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, all development occurring within other areas shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses: Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of way. Adjacent to imemal streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. b. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: Front twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10.) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 af the Zoning Ordinance. Administrative approval of all furore site plans and subdivision plats. In the spirit of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Director of Planning and Community, Development shall be authorized discretion over reasonable variations from the approved zoning application plan. It is understood that an additional proffer allowing for reasonable pro-rata contribution for improvements to the §tate Farm Blvd./Route 250 intersection will be submitted. This proffer is not provided at this time as verification of the appropriate method for providing such a proffer is not yet available from the Department of Transportation. JATTACHMENT E J 'L- O~_z ,%" I'.': · .' I/,',' ,, POST OFFICE BOX 5386 * CHARL©TTESVILLE. VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 97? 6803 FACSIMILE 804 977 6578 April 2, 1996 Mr. William D. Fritz Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 Molntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 RE- Peter Jefferson Place ZMA 96-03 Dear Mr. Fritz: Enclosed please find the amended Design Criteria and Guidelines for Peter Jefferson Place. These guidelines replaoe the ones filed with our original Master Plan. The amended guidelines are in the same format as the original ones and refleot the ohanges in the Master Plan, partioularly in reference to the park and mall areas. Should you have any questions after reviewing these guidelines please do not hesitate to oontaot me. AJD:dtb Enclosures as stated. Andrew J. Draoopoli Vice President JPage 2[ Peter Jefferson Place Design Criteria and Guidelines The master plan and design guidelines proposed for Peter Jefferson Place are constructed to support the unique cultural and natural resources attributable to this property. The plan envisions a mixture of commercial and residential uses organized with respect to the natural features of the land and about a linear mall or park which establishes a direct dialogue between the" historic cultural resources of the site and national cultural resource of Monticallo to the Southwest of ibc property. The location and orientation of the mall is sympathetic to both the existing buildings on site and the direct view shed of Monticello. The malt establishes the built landscape in conjunction with the natural landscape as the primary image and organizational elements of Peter Jefferson Place. Within this context, the Master Plan and Design Guidelines propose simple architectural structures sited to lay parallel or perpendicular to the mall within an overall environment which cremes a high quality of people. oriented spaces. Building area are sited to create spaces and define corridors which are sensitive to the total environment and human scale. By establishing the environment of Peter Jefferson Place as the most important element, buildings will be less visible and prominent, allowing a succession of visually distinguished natural and manmade spaces to be the major theme of development. In order to ensure successful implementation of the master plan, design criteria and guidelines have been formulated. Following is an outline of these guidelines which briefly details some of the primary design concepts for development of the property. The outline corresponds to the five primary development components which include: Foundation Campus; Residential Neighborhood; Mixed-Use and Corporate Core; Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites; and, Local Office Sites. In addition; criteria relating to parking, landscaping, lighting and a comprehensive sign system have been included. To ensure conformance m the design criteria and guidelines a Design Review Committee will be established by the owner. The Design Review Committee will be charged with the review of all design elements of Peter Jefferson Place and to interpret the design intent of the master plan, covenants and guidelines documents as adopted. The Committee will have the power to approve acceptable designs or disapprove any designs which are judged inappropriate to the successful implementation of Peter Jefferson Place. '; t-ATTACHMENT GI A. Development Zones 1. Foundation Campus Parcel D The existing buildings on parcel D speak not only to the history and character of the site but create a strong dialogue between the property and Monticello. The Foundation Campus will expand upon this dialogue by anchoring the northern end of the park and through site planning, scale and architectural quality. The prominence of the Foundation Campus and its genius for the composition of the overall master plan will ensure its importance in establishing the identity of the property. Site planning will emphasize large lawns, campus-like settings, creation of courtyards and connection to the park. Architecture will reflect traditions of classical Virginia architecture with predominant building color to be white; gray pitched roofs will be defined by dormers and gables. A strong pedestrian circulation system will emphasize a hierarchy of pathways and linkages between buildings. Landscape elements will compliment architecture through the use of such elements as"white board" fence and white brick walls. Landscaping will reflect traditional Virginia plant materials, with emphasis on preservation of existing large trees. 2. Residential Neighborhood Parcel I The residential component of the development will consist of moderate density attached homes located adjacent to the River corridor. The residential neighborhood will be closely integrated with the open space system proposed for the entire property. Site planning will reinforce residential scale and circulation. Architecture will incorporate traditional detailing with pitched roofs, dormers and window treatments. Building forms will be sensitive to sloped development and predominant colors will be neutral shades. Landscaping will incorporate elements that lend a human scale: use of ptants with seasonal interest, special paving details, walls, and site furniture, such as benches. The design of these site features will be of traditional style. 3. Mixed-Use and Corporate Core Parcel B,H, K The Mixed Use Corporate Office area of the plan will be organized around strong pedestrian scale and orientation. The mixed use area will support a mixture of office, hotel and retail components and will feature a strong connection to the park. Site planning will create a strong organized relationship among commons, specialty retail and hotel uses emphasizing creation of spaces and pedestrian circulation. Architecture will incorporate clean simple detailing with buildings utilized to form spaces for people. Buildings will be constructed of neutral earth tone colored materials with non-reflective glass. I ATTACHMENT G tPage 4~ , Because of its prominent location, there will be equal design consideration of all building facades. Landscaping will emphasize a variety of hardscape features (special paving, planters, tree grates, benches, sculpture, furniture, etc.) and a high level of detailing. 4. Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites Parcels E, F, N Tho Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites will define tile edge of Pater Jefferson Place and will be located adjacent to highway frontages, stream valleys and wooded slopes. Site planning will maximize benefits of views and adjacent amenities emphasizing the grouping of buildings to respect landfurms. Architecture will incorporate clean simple structures which are secondary to the total environment. Buildings will be constructed of neutral earth tone colored materials with non-reflective glass. Landscaping will be used to create an overall sense of quality and space. 5. Local Office Sites Parcel O The local office site are those sites along State Farm Boulevard that are appropriate for more typical local office development. Architecture will include both traditional and compatible contemporary styles. Buildings will be constructed of neutral earth tons colored materials with non-reflective glass. Landscaping will be used to integrate buildings into the over-all streatscape. B. Treatment of Parking Parking is a necessary element of any development, but if integrated properly into a site, it can be visually un-obtrusive. Parking design will be appropriate to the user it serves and to adjacent development and will be part ora clear hierarchy of the vehicular circulation system. 1. Surface Parking Parking will be broken into small areas relating to topography and oriented away from roadway views. Parking areas will be sited so as not to impede or discourage pedestrian circulation between buildings. Berms, hedges and landscaping will be used to buffer and reduce impact of parking form adjacent roadways and from adjacent properties, C. Landscaping, Lighting and Sign System A master landscaping, lighting, and sign system program will be developed, incorporating trees, shrubs, lighting and other landscape elements, existing trees, and a comprehensive sign system into an integrated whole. General landscape character ancJ quality of public spaces is to be the key component, -I. Landscaping IATTACHPIENT G I Landscaping along roadways and corridors will help define circulation system as well as relate the property to the surrounding community. Trees and shrubs will be used to integrate individual buildings into the over-all landscape. A plant material list will be developed compatible to the county's "Generic Landscape Plan Recbmmended Species List". Each site developed wilt be required to submit a landscape plan which incorporates the design principles outlined in the Landscape Master Plan. 2. Lighting Lighting fixtures will be coordinated throughout the property and be ora traditional design style. Specific fixture types will be selected with consideration toward control of stray light and glare. 3. Sign System Thematic form of the sign program will reflect the traditional amhitectursl themes and designs established for the property. Colors will be rich, yet respectful of their traditional design theme. The sign system will incorporate a hierarchy of sign types including Entrance Identity Signs, Parcel Entrance Signs, Directional Signs, Building Identity Signs, Informational Signs, Service Signs and Pedestrian Signs. Signs will be located only where needed with the number of signs being kept to a minimum to avoid unnecessary clutter. I ATTACHHENT H I Peter Jefferson Place Design Criteria and.Guidelines LDR International, Inc. December 4, 1992 Considering the natural and historic beauty of the Worrell property, Peter Jefferson Place, a unified master plan is critical for its development. The plan envisioned for the property incorporates commercial and residential uses in an over-all master plan that respects and accentuates the sites unique natural features. Individual land parcels are defined by ridgetops and stream valleys and are linked by an internal road system. Central to the plan is an organized core which includes a mixture of uses adjacent to an open "commons" or park that will become known as Peter Jefferson Park. This core will serve as the center of pedestrian activity from which linkages will radiate to other areas within the site as well as to off-site areas. In addition, buildings will be sited to define spaces and corridors with architectural forms that are sensitive to the human scale. Through the use of building form, color, and landscaping, prominent buildings and spaces will be visually distinguished within the development areas. In order to ensure successful implementation of the master plan, design criteria and guidelines,have been formulated. Following is an outline of these guidelines which briefly details some of the primary design concepts for development of the property. The outline corresponds to the five primary development components which include: Foundation Campus; Residential Neighborhood; Mixed-Use and Corporate Core; Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites; and, Local Office Sites. In addition, criteria relating to parking, landscaping, lighting and a comprehensive sign system have been included. To ensure conformance to the design criteria and guidelines a Design Review Committee will be established by the owner. The Design Review Committee will be charged with the review of all design elements of Peter Jefferson Place and to interpret the design intent of the master plan, covenants and guideline documents as adopted. The Committee will have the power to approve acceptable designs or disapprove any designs which are judged inappropriate to the successful implementation of Peter Jefferson Place. IATTACHMENT H I ,4. Development Zones 1. Foundation Campus (Parcels A-1,A-2,A-3,A-4,A-5) Currently, the existing buildings on parcels A-1 and A-2 convey a strong image of Peter Jefferson Place, particularly as it is perceived from State Farm Boulevard and Route 250. The Foundation Campus component of the development will expand on this established image in site planning, scale, and architectural quality. Located on a highly visible corner, it will continue to establish an identity for the property. Site planning will emphasize large lawns, campus-like settings and creation of courtyards. Architecture will reflect traditions o[ classical Virginia architecture with predominant building color to be white; gray pitched roofs will be defined by dormers and gables. A strong pedestrian circulation system will emphasize a hierarchy of pathways and linkages between buildings. Landscape elements will compliment architecture through the use of such elements as "white board" fence and white brick walls. Landscaping will reflect traditional Virginia plant materials, with emphasis on preservation of existing large trees. 2. Residential Neighborhood (Parcels D,F) The residential component of the development will consist of moderate density single-family attached homes clustered around an open "commons" or park. The residential neighborhood will be closely integrated with the mixed use core and open space system. Site planning will reinforce definition of the commons and maximize distant views while being sensitive to existing [andforms. Architecture will incorporate traditional detailing with pitched roofs, dormers and window treatments. Building forms will be sensitive to sloped development and predominant colors will be neutral shades of reds and browns. I ATTACHPIENT H I /Page 31 Landscaping will incorporate elements that lend a human scale: use of plants with seasonal interest, special paving details, walls, and site furniture, such as benches. The design of these site features will be of a traditional style. 3. Mixed-Use and Corporate Core (Parcels C-1,C-2,C-3) The mixed-use and corporate core will become the central focus of the property, however, it is also the most difficult to define at this time. A mixture of specialty shops, local offices, and corporate offices integrated with an inn and defined by a framework of pedestrian walks, courtyards and spaces is envisioned. Site planning will create a strong organized relationship among commons, specialty retail, inn. and residential uses emphasizing creation of spaces and pedestrian circulation. Architecture will incorporate traditional detailing with focal point buildings being white with gray roofs. Remain'ag buildings will be neutral shades of reds and browns. Becaus~ of it's prominent location, there will be equal design consid.~ration of all building facades. Landscaping wi emphasize a variety of hardscape features (special paving, planters, tree grates, I~enches, sculpture, furniture, etc.] and a high level of detailing. 4. F'eriph~ral Corporate and Retail Sites (Parcels E,G,H,I) The Periphelal/Corporate and Retail Sites will define the edge of Peter Jefferson Pla~e and will be located adjacent to highway frontages, stream valle~, s and wooded slopes. Because these sites are separated from the fo~l hal framework of the core area there is more flexibility in their site pla ~mng. · Site pla~ ~ning will maximize benefits of views and adjacent ameniti~:s emphasizing the grouping of buildings while respecting landforms. ATTACHMENT Architecture will incorporate traditional and compatible contemporary styles utilizing varied roof lines and maintaining neutral shades of reds and browns. Landscaping will be used to create buffers and to minimize impact of parking areas. 5. Local Office Sites (Parcel B-2f B-3) The local office sites are those sites along State Farm Boulevard and Road B that are appropriate for more typical local office development. Parcel B-2 site planning will utilize the linear parcel by orienting buildings toward the road. Parcel B-3 will utilize site planning and buildings that are more residential in scale. Architecture will include traditional and compatible contemporary styles with pitched roofs, while maintaining neutral shades of reds and browns. Landscaping will be used to create appropriate buffers adjacent to residential uses and to integrate buildings into the over-all streetscape. B.- Treatment of Parking Parking is a necessary element of any development, but if integrated properly into a site, it can be visually unobtrusive. Parking design will be appropriate to the user it serves and to adjacent development and will be part of a clear hierarchy of the vehicular circulation system. 1. Surface Parking · Parking will be broken into small areas relating to topography and oriented away form residential uses. [ATTACHHI=NT.1 Parking areas will be sited so as not to impede or discourage pedestrian circulation between buildings. Walls, hedges and landscaping will be used to buffer and reduce impact of parking from adjacent roadways and from adjacent properties. Strudured Parking Structured parking is encouraged to utilize slopes and to minimize surface area designated to parking. Rooftop planting and Iow glare material will be used on top decks to reduce visual im pact from above. C. Landscaping, Lighting and Sign System A master landscaping, lighting, and sign system program will be developed, incorporating trees, shrubs, lighting and other landscape elements, existing trees, and a comprehensive sign system into an integrated whole. 1. Landscaping Landscaping along roadways and corridors will help define circulation system as well as relate the property to the surrounding community. Trees and shrubs will be used to integrate individual buildings into the over-all landscape. A plant material list will be developed compatible to the county's "Generic Landscape Plan Recommended Species List". Each site developed will be required to submit a landscape plan which incorporates the design principles outlined in the Landscape Master Plan. 2. Lighting Lighting fixtures will be coordinated throughout the property and of a traditional design style. Specific fixture types will be selected with consideration toward control of stray light and §late. Careful location and placement of light fixtures will be considered so as not to interfere with the residential units or the surrounding residential communities. Sign System Thematic form of the sign program will reflect the traditional architectural themes and designs established for the property. Colors will be rich, yet respectful of their traditional design theme. The sign system will incorporate a hierarchy of sign types including Entrance Identity Signs, Parcel Entrance Signs, Directional Signs, Building Identity Signs, Informational Signs, Service Signs and Pedestrian Signs. Signs will b'e located only where needed with the number of signs being kept to a minimum to avoid unnecessary clutter. 6 STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: RICHARD E. TARBELL FEBRUARY 23, 1993 MARCH 17, 1993 ZMA-92-12 - WORRELL LAND AND CATTLE COMPANX SP-92-66 - WORRELL LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY Petition: Worrell Land and Cattle Company petitions the Board of Supervisors to approve an application plan for 241 acres zoned PD-MC, Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and CO, Commercial Office and to approve a special use permit to allow residential use [Section 23.2.2(9)] and supporting commercial uses [Section 23.2.2.(11)] in the portion of the property zoned CO, Commercial Office. Included in this petition is a request ~o rezone 1.7 acres from CO, Co~ercial Office to PD-MC, Planned Development-Mixed Commercial. Property, described as Tax Map 78, Parcels 20B, 20C, 20K, 2OM, 31, 32, 71 and 7lA is bounded by Richmond Road (Route 250 East) to the north, Interstate 64 to the south and east and State Farm Boulevard to the west. This site is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District. Character of the Area: The site is predominately open pasture with a rolling terrain. In addition to the existing farm complex the site features office buildings utilized by the Worrell Investment Company and the Thomas Jefferson Center for First Amendment Rights. APPLIOANT'S PROPOSAL: The application plan generally proposes 977,550 square feet of office development, 145,000 square feet of retail (regional service) development, 296 residential units, and 85 acres of open space to be served by private roads. The applicant's proposal is outlined in detail in the book titled "Peter Jefferson Place Application Plan December, 1992" included as Attachment I. S,,mmary of the land use follows: ACREAGE PERCENTAGE DEVELOPMENT PARCELS 144.9 60% OPEN SPACE 84.9 35% ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY 11.7 5% The open space includes sufficient area ro accommodate the future greenway project along the Rivanna River. The applicant has expressed a willingness to cooperate with the County in the development of this project. SUM/(ARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Most of the uses proposed are by-right within the existing zoning districts. Staff opinion is: The proposed development and application plan are consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Plan. The establishment of this application plan will allow for orderly development of this large-scale, lonE-term project while comprehensively protecting the most environmentally sensitive areas of the property. The provision of supporting commercial uses would not only be a convenience to employers but would also reduce off-site traffic consistent with traffic reduction efforts. The residential units would allow for a complete mixed use planned development providing potential foron- site houstnE for employees while also reducing off- site traffic. The provision of private roads allows for a more environmentally and aesthetically sensitive design for this project. Staff recommends approval of ZMA-92-12 and SP-92-66 subject to the agreements set out in Section VI of this staff report. PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY: The Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoning boundaries wore established by the County with the 1980 original zoning designation (see Attachment C for map). A plan for development has never previously been submitted for this 241 acre property. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN: This property is located in a designated area and recommended for Office/Regional Service land uses in Urban Neighborhood 3. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: The Architectural Review Board reviewed this proposal on January 19, 1993. The Architectural Review Board recommended approval of the application plan with the applicant's proposed design guidelines and private road request (see Attachment D). STAFF COMMENT: As noted earlier, the zoning on this property is the original designation by the County. This petition is ~ request for the Board of Supervisors to, in accordance with Section 8.5.5 of the Zoning Ordinance, approve an overall application plan and, in the spirit of Section 8.5.6.3, the Director of Planning and Community Development should be authorized discretion over reasonable variations from the zoning application plan in application of the plan to site development. In the case of a Planned Development district established as the original zoning designation of a property, Section 8.5.6.5 requires all transportation analysis plans and other maps, studies and reports to be approved under Section 8.5.5 prior to review of site plans and subdivision plats. The applicant has provided a complete and thorough submittal of these items. This section of the staff report will be presented in six sections: Rezoning of 1.7 Acres to Planned Development-Mixed Commercial II. Review Under Section 8.0 Planned Districts III. Uses by Special Use Permit IV. Private Roads V, S,mmary VI. Agreements I_=. RezontnR of 1.7 Acres to Planned Development-Mixed Commercial Included in this petition is a request to rezone a 1.7 acre portion of Parcels G~l and C-2 on the Land Use Plan (see shaded area on Attachment G) from Commercial Office to Planned Development-Mixed Commercial. The proposed mixed-use core (hotel/conference center) on these parcels is allowed by special permit in the existing Commercial Office zoning or allowed by-right in the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial district. Most of these two parcels and nearly all of the buildings and parking for the mixed-use core are located within the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial zoning. For clarity, staff recommended the applicant rezone the 1.7 acres from Commercial Office to Planned Development-Mixed Commercial to permit this use by-right and allow the zoning boundary to match the proposed road alignment. Staff opinion is this is a minor "housekeeping" matter to simplify reference to the property's zoning boundaries and, therefore, staff recommends approval of the 1.7 acre rezoning. II. Review Under Section 8.0 Planned Districts Although the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoning already exists on this property, staff has reviewed this proposal for consistency with Section 8.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT DISTRICTS - GENERALLY. Section 8.5.3 requires an applicant "to meet with the planning staff and other qualified officials to review the Application Plan and original proposal prior to submittal" in order to "assist in bringing the application" into conformity with various planning and zoning regulations and policies. This process, formally and informally, has involved multiple meetings to discuss the project with the Planning Department and other members of the Site Review Committee since 1988. The applicant has endeavored to address all issues raised by this department as well as adjusting plans to accommodate regulatory measures adopted during this time period. At this time, under Section 8.5.4 of the Zoning Ordinance, this petition is forwarded to the Planning Commission which "shall proceed to prepare its recommendations to the Board of Supervisors," and "specifically, recommendations of the Commission shall include findings as to: The suitability of the tract for the general type of Planned Development district proposed in the terms of: relations to the comprehensive plan; physical characteristics of the land; and its relation to surrounding area; bo Relation to major roads, utilities, public facilities and services; Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, deed restrictions, sureties, dedications, contributions, guarantees, or other instruments, or the need for such instruments or for amendments in those proposed; and Specific modification in Planned Development or general regulations as applied to the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are necessary or justified by demonstration that the public purpose of Planned Development or general regulations as applied would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by such modifications. Based on such findings, the commission shall recommend approval of the Planned Development amendments as proposed, approval conditioned upon stipulated modifications, or disapproval." Staff will address each item of Section 8.5.4 individually. The suitability of the tract for the Keneral type of Planned Development district proposed in terms of: relations to the comprehensive plan: ohysical characteristics of the land; and its relation to surroundinK area; This property is recommended for Office/Regional Service in the Comprehensive Plan. Adjacent uses include Office/Regional Service to the west and southwest (State Farm Offices) and Low, Medium and High Density Residential uses on the north side of Route 250E (Westminster Canterbury, Glenorchy). The property is bounded by Interstate 64 to the south and east. The proposed plan of development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation and with the designations and existing land uses on properties adjacent to this site. The proposed development is sensitive to the physical characteristics of the property's rolling terrain. The open space of this development has been designed to include the areas of: Wetlands Floodplain Resource Protection Areas Critical Slopes. b. Relation to maior roads, utilities, nublic facilities and service: This site is located at the intersection of Route 250 East and Interstate 64. The plans for the- Route 250 East widening project currently under construction provide for left turn lanes and crossovers for the secondary entrance (located across from Glenorchy Drive), the primary entrance (located 800 feet west of the secondary entrance), and an entrance to Parcel "A-5" (located across from Westminster Canterbury). The proposed road system connects to State Farm Boulevard at two existing crossovers located 600 feet and 1700 feet south of Route 250 East and at the intersection of State Farm Boulevard and South Pantops Boulevard. In accordance with Section 25A.6 of the Zoning Ordinance the applicant has prepared a traffic study. The Virginia Department of Transportation has determined that in addition to the planned Route 250 East improvements, this development will occasion the need for right turn lanes at each entrance and an additional left turn lane and traffic signal at both the primary and secondary entrance. As per the proposed agreements with the applicant, the right turn lanes will be provided upon establishment of each entrance on Route 250 East. The left turn lanes and signals will be provided upon demand of the Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter of February 8, 1993 (see Attachment E). The development will be served by public water and sewer. A 16" water line is being installed along the property frontage during the Route 250 East project. A 15" sewer line exists on-site. At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning staff reviews rezoning requests for their fiscal impact on public facilities. This analysis is limited to those rezonings that have some effect on facilities that are identified in the CIP and have a cost associated with them. The total cost of the effected facilities is $3,951,144 with this development's proportionate share being approximately $349,336 or $1,180 per dwelling unit. The complete analysis is included as Attachment F. Because of the very general nature of this analysis, staff is not recommending any action based on these estimates. They are presented for the Commission's and Board's information concerning the fair share determination of a particular development's impact on facilities based on cost of proposed improvements and without regard to revenue sources and proportionate share of revenues generated by the development. 5 Consideration of the fiscal impact of the development needs to be balanced against considerations of the County's growth management policy and other County policies. Excessive development exactions could have the effect of discouraging utilization of the holding capacity of Urban Area, and thus~ lead to accelerated development in the Rural Areas. Adequacy of evidence of unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, deed restrictions, sureties. dedications, contributions. ~uarantees. or other instruments, or the need for such instruments or for amendments in those DrODosed: and This property is under single ownership. Specific modifications in Planned Development or ~eneral regulations as aDDlied to the particular case. based on determination that such modifications are necessary or ~ustified by demonstration that the public DurDoses of Planned Development or ~eneral regulations as aPPlied would be satisfied to at least an eouivalent degree hv such modifications. The applicant has requested that the residential development, proposed as a secondary use, not he limited on a pro-rata basis with the primary use of office development. Section 9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance states: "Secondary uses are intended to be complementary of and subordinate to primary uses To this end, secondary uses shall be established on a pro-rata basis for phased development to the floor area of primary uses unless otherwise specifically permitted by the Board of Supervisors in a particular case." The applicant has requested a modification of this regulation stating: "We obviously cannot now determine the relative pace of development of residential and office uses but clearly the major character of the development will always be an office park In order however to maintain flexibility to meet market demands, we do not wish to be restricted in the relative pace of development of residential and office uses." Staff opinion is the main intent of this regulation was to control the most intensive (i.e. commercial) uses within an office development and that strict application of this regulation to the proposed residential development does not serve an identifiable public purpose. In accordance with Section 9.4.1, the area for the residential use shall not exceed 20% of the total site area. The land use plan proposes 20.9 acres of residential use (8.6%) with an alternate area of 23.1 acres (18.2% total potential residential area). Based on such findinms, the commission shall recommend approval of the Planned Development amendments as DrODosed. approval conditioned upon stipulated modifications, or disapproval. III. Uses bY Special Use Permit The applicant has requested two categories of uses by special uae permit within the Commercial Office zoning districts: Section 23.2.2.(11) Supporting Commercial Uses: Available to Parcels B and E and alternately to Parcels D and F also. The uses permitted as supporting commercial uses would include uses permitted by-right under the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. In accordance with Section 9.4.2.6 the total floor area devoted to supporting commercial uses shall not exceed 5% of the total floor area devoted to the primary use. Section 23.2.2.(9) Residential Uses Permitted in Section 18.0: Available to Parcels D and F and alternately to Parcel E also. Staff opinion is these uses are consistent with the intent of service areas and with the secondary uses listed i~ the non-residential land use guidelines for the office/regional service area designation. The provision of supporting commercial uses would not only be a convenience to employees but would also reduce off-site traffic consistent with traffic reduction efforts. The residential units would allow for a complete mixed use planned development providing potential for on-site housing for employees while also reducing off-site traffic. It should also be noted that special use permits normally have an expiration date of eighteen months if construction has not commenced. However, because the uses proposed by special permit are a part of the application plan, staff interpretation is there would be no expiration on this approval and the special permit uses would be governed by the application plan and proposed agreements. IV. Private Roads As a part of the application plan the applicant is requesting the use of private roads throughout the development stating: "The proposed plan is based on the use of private roads within the entire property. The property has steep slopes and major changes in elevation so that building roads to meet the rolling terrain standards would require considerable cuts and fills. These would destroy the beauty of the site and do considerable environmental damage. Although the mountainous terrain category allows for steeper grades for roads, the main benefit from the use of this standard comes from the reduced radii allowed for horizontal curvature. This allows much better fitting of the road alignment to the topography and significantly reduces the amounts of cuts and fills. The use of private roads is a critical element of the plan as the Virginia Department of Transportation has indicated that in this case it will not accept into the public system roads designed to mountainous terrain standards. The use of private roads will also allow more flexibility in the design of the roads and a more creative use of landscaping along them." In addition, the applicant has provided a detailed justification, included as Appendix II of the Application Plan book (see Attachment I), which indicates a 71% reduction in earth moving by utilizing private road standards rather than public road standards. The Engineering Department has stated their support for the private road request (see memo also included in Appendix II of Attachment I). It should be noted that Section 18-36(d)(4) of the Subdivision Ordinance states: "Except where required by the commission to serve a specific public purpose, such private road shall not be designed to serve through traffic nor to intersect the state highway system in more than one location." Staff's interpretation is this requirement does not apply to the proposed layout because no private road directly connects two state roads and, therefore, would not effectively serve through traffic. In addition, this is not an exclusively residential development. Staff concurs with the applicant's justification and, therefore, recommends approval of the private road request. V-- S~lmmar¥ Staff opinion is the proposed development and application plan are consistent with the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan and the Comprehensive Plan Land Use Map designation. Staff recommends approval of ZMA-92-12 as the establishment of the proposed application plan will allow for orderly development of this large-scale, long-term project while comprehensively protecting the most environmentally sensitive area of the property through the designation of open space and the utilization of private roads. Staff also recommends approval of SP-92-66 for the supporting commercial uses and residential areas which are consistent with the non-residential land use guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance. VI. Amreements While the Commercial Office and Planned Development-Mixed Commercial zoning already exists for this property, staff has reviewed this petition in accordance with Section 8.0 PLANNED DEVELOPMENT - GENERALLY. In that respect, staff has worked with the applicant to propose a set of agreements as specified by Section 8.5.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. The agreements are compiled from the applicant's proposal as well as recommendations by the staff to allow for administrative reviews of future site plans. No conditions of approval are recommended for the special use permit requests. The applicant has agreed to the following: Establishment of the Land Use Plan dated November 11, 1992 and revised January 20, 1993 as the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. The residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Zoning Ordinance. Provision of private roads within the development designed to meet mountainous terrain standards. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company agrees to pay for the necessary right turn and taper lanes at the development's entrances along Route 250 East. The right turn lanes shall be constructed as each entrance is established. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left turn lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary and secondary entrance to the site. These improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated February 8, 1993, or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The applicant will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Appendix I of the Peter Jefferson Place Application Plan book. Except those sites shown as Parcels A-2, B-I, and B-2 on the Land Use Map (Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71, and 7lA), all future site plans shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a._ Commercial and Office Uses: Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty (30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of-way. Adjacent to internal private streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (10) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. 10. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: Front twenty-five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, Rear twenty (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (10) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Setbacks for the townhouses adjacent to the park may be reduced to five feet surrounding the loop road. Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. In the spirit of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Zoning Ordinance, the Director of Planning and Community Development shall be authorized discretion over reasonable variations from the approved zoning application plan. Future requests for parking decks or a helistop will require additional Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors reviews. ATTACHMENTS: A - Tax Map B - Location Map C - Zoning Map D - Architectural Review Board Action Letter E - Virginia Department of Transportation Comments F - Fiscal Impact Study G - Land Use Plan H - Illustrative Plan I - Application Book 10 I ATTACHHENT A I ./ > ~-92-12 & Worrel! Land and Cattle Cc~Danv ,=~, ~,-, SGOTTSVILLE AND "-' - -' ............ RIVANNA ' DISTRICTS SECTION 78 , / Z~A-92-12 & SP-92-66 ~brrelt Land and iI \ \ MONTICELLO COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoniag 40] M¢Intire Road CharIottesvi]te. Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296~5875 January 21, 1993 Andrew Dracopoli P.O. Box 5386 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Re' ARB-P(SDP)-93-01 Peter Jefferson Place Tax Map 78 Parcels 20B, 20C, 20M, 31, and 32. Dear Mr. Dracopoli: The above noted item was reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board at its meeting on January 19, 1993. The Board (5:0) ruled to recommend approval to the Board of Supervisors of the application plan as presented with the following suggestions: The grading plan approval (site preparation) is based on the plan shown to the ARB labeled Phase I Grading (dated Nov. 30, 1992), any additional grading will require review and approval by the ARB. Approval o1' the design guidelines (Appendix I/Attachment A) as proposed by the applicant, supplemented by existing Interim Design Guidelines. The applicant's design guidelines (including the photograph indicating the Design Character) are compatible and consistent with the existing County Interim Guidelines. Prior to final approval, the site plans for any proposed development must be reviewed and receive a Certificate of Appropriateness from the ARB. Support of the applicant's request to build the roads to mountainous standards, thereby lessening the impact on the environment by reducing the grading necessary. If you have questions please call me. Sincerely, Marcia Joseph Design Planner RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINJ[A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 671 CULPEPER, 22701 8 February 1993 ECEIVED Dept. THOMAS F. FARLEY DISTRICT ADMiNiSTRATOR Richard E. Tarbell Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Peter Jefferson Place Route 250 Albemarle County Dear Mr. Tarbell: I have reviewed the traffic impact study and its revisions along with the application plan. In addition, these have been reviewed byTransportation Planning Division in Richmond. I offer the following comments regarding this proposed development: 1. In their revisions to the traffic study, the developer's consultant did not adequately address my concerns regarding trip allocation by entrance. I still believe that a significant portion of trips bound for or heading from Area 8 will use the secondary entrance. Because of this, the enzrance should be configured as shown in Figure 10a (January 27, 1993 Revision), whether or not Parcels H and I are switched. 2. The concept of delaying the installation of traffic signals and dual left turn lanes was brought up in the January 27, 1993 Revision to the traffic study. From an operational standpoint, this would be the preferred approach. On the other hand, the Department does no~ have the manpower to regularly study the entrances ~o determine when a traffic signal and additional left turn lane would be installed at each. Instead, it is more practical to set a level of development that will trigger the required improvements. I recommend that a signal and additional turn lane be added to an entrance when the expected trips per day for that entrance exceed 2500. The trip generation would be as specified in ITE, and the distribution would be as follows: for the Primary Entrance- 1/2 of the traffic from areas C-2, E, F, I and all traffic from areas-A-l, A-5, B-3, C-l, D; for the Secondary Entrance- 1/2 from areas C-2, E, F, I, plus all from areas C-3, G, ~. Using this approach, the need TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY I ATTACHMENT E I IPage 2I for a signal would become apparent during the approval process for specific site plans. The number 2500 was chosen because it should give an hourly volume that would meet at least the Peak Hour Volume Warrant for signalization in the MUTCD. Attached for your information and records are the final comments from Transportation Planning Division regarding the submitted traffic study and its addenda. If you have any questions or concerns regarding this proposed development and its attendant traffic impact study, please call me at (703) 829-7555. cc: R. C. Lockwood A. G. Tucker ely, orta~ htPr Engineer ATTACHMENT F FISCAl.[ IMPACT ANALYSIS This analysis is based on a fair share determination of a particular development's impact to affected facilities. It must be pointed out that this analysis is cursory, due to the lack of information on revenues and the amount attributable to this development. The cost outlined by staff only indicates the proportionate share of construction costs from the additional development generated by the rezoning over by-right development. This development proposes by special use permit 296 more units than could be achieved by-right (in this case with Commercial Office zoning, no units arc achievable by-right). The following are those facilities which will be affected by the rezoning request and have a cost associated with them A. Schools Schools affected by this proposal which have a cost as identified in the CIP are: BURLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL $1,264,000 ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL $2,300,000 Based on the additional students as estimated by multipliers currently used by the County, 198 additional elementary school students. 114 additional middle school students and 82 additional high school students are anticipated. Costs attributable to this development based on the proportion of students is $344,200 or $1164.86 per dwelling uni~. B. Libraries This Froposal is considered to be in the service area of [he Jefferson/Madison Regional Library. Based on the proportionate impact to library capacity, the proportionate share cost of this project is $509 or $1~72 per dwelling unit. C. Recreational Facilities Recreational Facilities affected by this proposal which have a cost identified in the CIP are: RIVANNA RESERVOIR BOAT LAUNCH $150,000 ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL TENNIS LIGHTING $75,000 RIVANNA PARK IMPROVEMENTS $143,144 Based on the additional population generated by this request, the proportional share cost of this project is $19,424 or $65.62 per dwelling unit. I ATTACHMENT F I Page SUMM..',P,5' Ol: FISCAL IMP:',(;';7 PRO.;ECTS I '.' 'r.,.T I ""'""":':;':'~'" .0..;.. COST . COST/DU l I{ ,,O ..... $ SHARE (296 DU'S) $ $ ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL 2,300,000.00 92,000.00 310.81 BURLEY MIDDLE SCHOOL 1,264,000.00 252,800.00 854.05 RIVANNA RESOURCE 150,000.00 7.50 0.03 BOAT LAUNCH ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL 75,000.00 4,020. O0 13.58 TENNIS LIGHTING RIVANNA PARK 143,144.00 0.14 -- IMPROVEMENTS JEFFERSON MADISON 19,000.00 509 . 00 1.72 REGIONAL LIBRARY TOTALS $3,951,144.00 $349,336.64 I $1,180.19 :L PROGRAM LAND AREA FOUNDATION CAMPUS 25.87 AC 11% RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD l 6,65 AC 7% MLXED-USE AND CORPORATE CORE 63.02 AC 26% PERIPHEtLAL CORPORATE AND RETAIL 38.35 AC 16% LOCAL OFFICE 5.16 AC 2% ROAD R.O.W. 13.54 AC 6% OPEN SPACE 78,9 l AC 32% TOTAL LAND AREA 241.5 AC 100% % OFTOTAL PROPOSED OFFICE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED RETAIL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL U-NITS NOTE: 977,550 SF 145,000 SF 250 AREA SHOWN ON PLAN AS OPEN SPACE MAY BE ADJUSTED PROVIDED THE FINAL DEVELOPED PLAN MAINTAINS 30% MINIMUM OPEN SPACE. PARCEL LAND AREA PROGRAM FAR PROVIDED BUILDING AREA A .81AC OPEN SPACE B 22.94 AC OFFICE .23 229,800 SF C 3.08 A OPEN SPACE D 25.87 AC FOUNDATION A 1 128,050 SF (18,250 SF EXISTING) CAMPUS E 10.32 AC RETAIL .22 I00,000 SF F 8.29 AC OFFICE .23 83,100 SF G [0.13 AC OPEN SPACE H 16.13 AC OFFICE 23 161.600 SF [ 16.65 AC RESIDENTIAL 250 HOMES J 41.91 AC OPEN SPACE K 23.95 AC HOTEL/ 200 ROOMS RETAIL/ ~.5,000 SF OFFICE 125.500 SF i~_!~.~l ~ ~lr~'¢ ~;~ iL", Original Proffer/-"-/ ~ ~ ~ , Amended Proffer iBOARg QF_ SU~E~V~'.~.'~j (Amendment Cf ) PROFFER FORM 1996 ZMA Cf 96-03 Tax Map Parcel(s)# 78-20B, 20C, 2OK, 20?], 31, 32, 71 and 7lA Acres to be rezoned from to Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. (1) See list on sheet attached Signature¢ of All ~wners T. Eugene Worrell, Manager WORRELI LAND AND CATTLE COMPANY_, L.C. 6/7/96 Printed Names of All Owners Date OR Signature of Attorney-in-Facl (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) Printed Name of Attorney4n-Fact PROFFORM WPD Rev. December 1994 The Land Use Plan dated February 26, 1996 is the approved application plan for the Planned Development-Mixed Commercial and Commercial Office zoned property. The supporting commercial uses shall be in accordance with those uses permitted by-right in the C-1 zone as modified by Section 9.4.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. l'he residential uses are not required to be developed on a pro-rata basis with the office development in accordance with Section 9.4 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, t996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Private roads within the development may be designed to meet Virginia Department of Transportation mountainous terrain standards. Public roads shall be permitted subject to approval by the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Worrell Land and Cattle Company, its successors and assigns (the developer) agrees to pay for the necessary turn lanes as determined by the Virginia Department of Transportation at the development's entrances along Route 250 East and State Farm Blvd. The developer also agrees to provide an additional left turn lane and traffic signal on Route 250 East at the primary entrance (Entrance # 6 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy of which is attached). The developer also agrees to provide a traffic signal at the secondary entrance (Entrance # 4 as shown on Figure 8 of the February 23, 1996 Traffic Impact study, a copy attached). All improvements shall be constructed upon demand of the Virginia Department of Transportation in accordance with their letter dated March 22, 1996, (copy attached), or earlier at the developer's option provided the primary or secondary entrance meets the signalization warrants as given in the latest edition of the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The developer shall contribute to Virginia Department of Transportation a pro-rata share of the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of Route 250 and State Farm Blvd. The pro-rata share shall be the fraction of the cost of installation of the signal equal to the percentage of traffic generated by this site using the intersection divided by the total traffic using the intersection. Such contribution shall be made at the time of installation of the signal. The developer its successors and assign will utilize detailed design guidelines consistent with the outline included as Design Criteria and Guidelines contained in a letter dated April 2, 1996, signed by Andrew Dracopoli, a copy of which is attached. Development occurring within those areas obtained from Tax Map 78 Parcels 20K, 71, and 7 lA, as these parcels existed on April 22, 1996 a copy of the tax map is attached hereto, and any successor parcel or parcels, shall not require review by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, because these parcels do not lie within the entrance corridor overlay district as it exists on June 12, 1996. Development occurring within other areas shall be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board if it is determined the site will be visible from Interstate 64 or Route 250 East. Setbacks shall be as follows: a. Commercial and Office Uses: Adjacent to public streets: No portion of any structures, except signs, shall be erected closer than thirty 1,30) feet to any public street right-of-way. No off-street parking or loading space shall be located closer than ten (10) feet to any public street right-of way. Adjacent to internal streets: The setbacks for buildings and parking may be reduced to ten (t 0) feet provided adequate sight distance is maintained and minimum landscaping requirements are met. b. Residential Uses: Minimum yards: Front twenty~five (25) feet, side fifteen (15) feet, rear wventy (20) feet. Minimum side yards shall be reduced to not less than ten (I0) feet in accordance with Section 4.11.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. Administrative approval of all future site plans and subdivision plats. Variations from the approved application plan shall be permitted in accord with the provisions of Section 8.5.6.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, as in effect on June 12, 1996, a copy of which is attached hereto. 9.4 9.4.1 9.4.2. 9.4.3 ESTABLISHMENT OF SECONDARY USES Secondary uses are intended to be complementary of and subordinate to primary uses. To this end, secondary uses shall be established on a pro rata basis for phased develop- ment to the fZoor area of primary uses unless otherwise specifically permitted by the board in a particular case. tn addition, the following guidelines are intended to govern secondary uses'unless otherwise specifically modified by the board in a particular case: Secondary residential uses shall not occupy more than twenty (20) percent of the total site area. Other secondary uses shall comply with the following limita- tions: Total floor area devoted to warehousing shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total floor area devoted to primary uses; Total floor area devoted to supporting commercial uses shall not exceed five (5) percent of the total area devoted to primary uses; Total floor area devoted to related office uses shall not exceed ten (10) percent of the total floor area devoted to primary uses; As to motel/hotel/conference use, the applicant shall demonstrate that such use is intended to be complemen- tary of and subordinate to primary uses in terms of scale, contractual agreements with primary uses, or otherwise. Supporting commercial uses may consist of primary uses recommended for village and neighborhood service areas to provide convenience uses to employees within service areas. Such supporting commercial uses as may be provided by an individual occupant for the exclusive use of the employees of such occupant shall not be included in floor area limita- tions of section 9.4.2. Supporting commercial uses may also consist of dependent or parasite uses as may be demonstrated to be sustainable by and related to the. specific character and service require- ments of primary uses. (Added 6-19-91) -87,4- (Supp. 962, 6-19-91) SOUTH PANTOPS DEVELOPMENT ~ STALE FARM F-- BLVD Secondary Access ENTRANCE #4 Secondary Access ENTRANCE #5 Primary Access ENTRANCE #6 LEGEND: -i-- EXISJlNG LANE DESIGNATION ~ RECOMMENDED LANE DESIGNA11ON _~RECOMMENDED TRAFFIC SIGNAL O alt PANTOPS MOUNTAIN DR GLENORCH¥ DR HANSEN'S MTN RD 1-64 RECOMMENDED ROADWAY GEOMETRICS- 2005 FIGURE 8 Page 4 March 22, 1996 Mr. Rcn Keeler April Rezonings The distribution of site traffic shows no increase in left turns for eastbound Route 743 at its intersection with Route 29. This ia not a reasonable assumption. This intersection does not opsrate at an acceptable level of service under future conditions for the P.M. peak and Saturday peak hours. Any increase in left turns could significantly impact the level of service further Additional traffic ~enerated by this rezonin~ will increase traffic volumes Substantially on llydraulic Road. That the need for a five (5) lane cross section is exacerbated between Rout~ 29 and Lambs Road. The intersection, with Cedar Hill Road is maintained by the City of Charlottesville, therefore comments regarding traffic impacts should be solicited from the City. There are adjustments that need to be made to the traffic impact study such as for truck traffic. The numbers used in Route 29 traffic appear to be a little low and the change if only one main entrance was used on Hydraulic Road. This may result in alight changes to the study. There was a NETSIM demonstration presented to VDOT on February 26, 1996. This should be formally submitted in a written summary so that it may be officially considered. ZMA-96-02 Ed~ecomb~ Route 742 ZMA-96-03 Worrell Land and Cattle Companyr L.C.t Route 1117 Several comments from a letter written by Robert Hofrichter to Rich Tarbell, dated February 8, 1993, do no appear to have been addressed. These comments may or may not be significant now since access patterns and shifts of usage have chan~d. Page 5 March 22, 1996 Hr. Ron Keeler April Rezonings Our preliminary review of the traffic impact study update (dated 2/23/96) indicates that signals may be warranted at entrance #6 and State Farm Boulevard. We have concern that a signal may be warranted at entrance ~4 due to high left turns and its intersection with the Canterbury Retirement Village. In the event of a needed signal at entrance ~4, when analys~s warrants, it shall be at developer's expense along wlth coordination of other signals on Route 250 Corridor. The signal cost at entrance ~6 shall also be borne by the developer. We reco~end that the developer also participate in the cost of the signal for State Farm Boulevard and Route 250. Signal plans and analysis will be required for signal locations Ws recommend the construction or allowing in design of roadway geometrios to acoommodate the dual left turns for entrance ~6, both from Route 250 WBL and NBL on the entrance road. The crossover locations on State Farm Eoulevard that do not have existing right or left turn lanes shall be installed at developer's cost, includin~ the addin~ of a dual left for State Farm onto Route 250 WBL. We recommend the updating of the 1992 Traffic Impact Study with fresh data that reflects all new activity in this area. This may or may not result in recommendation changes ZMA-96-04 Encore Investments LTD. Partnershipf Route 631 The PD-MC would probably increase traffic, however it is difficult to determine since the existing CO ls also included in the PD-MC. A traffic impact study should be submitted for review_ These parcels should be served with one entrance. A right turn lane would at a minimum be recommended and may be required. The traffic study would reflect if a traffic signal is warranted. There is already a signal proposed, when warranted, approximately 500' to the west on Route 631. POS3' OFFICE BOX 5386 · CHARI,OTFESVILLF. VIRGINIA 22905 TELEPHONE 804 977 6803 FACSIMILE 804 977 6578 April 2, 1996 Mr. William D. Fritz Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 MeIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 RE: Peter Jefferson Place ZMA 96-03 Dear Mr. Fritz: Enclosed please find the amended Design Criteria and Guidelines for Peter Jefferson Place. These guidelines replace the ones filed with our original Master Plan. The amended guidelines are in the same format as the original ones and reflect the changes in the Master Plan, particularly in reference to the park and mall areas. Should you have any qnestions after reviewing these guidelines please do not hesitate to contact mc. AJD:dtb Enclosures as stated. Andrew J. Dracopoli Vice President Peter Jefferson Place Design Criteria and Guidelines The master plan and design guidelines proposed for Peter Jefferson Place are constructed to support tim unique cultural and natural resources attributable to this property, The plan envisions a mixture of commercial and residential uses organized witl~ respect to the natural features of the land and about a linear mall or park which establishes a direct dialogue between the ' historic cultural resources of the site and national cultural resource of Monticello to the Southwest of the property. Tho location and orientation of tho mall is sympathetic to both the existing buildings on site and the direct view shed of Monticello. The mall establishes the built landscape ia conjunction with the natural landscape as the primary imago and organizational elements of Peter Jefferson Place. Within this context, the Master Plan and Design Guidelines propose simple architectural structures sited to lay parallel or perpendicular to the malt witbin an overall environment which creates a high quality of people. oriented spaces, Building area are sited to create spaces and define corridors which are sensitive to the total environment and human scale. By establishing the environmenl of Peter Jefferson Place as the most important element, buildings will be leas visible and prominent, allowing a succession of visually distinguished natural and manmade spaces to be the major theme of development. In order to ensure successful implementation of the master plan, design criteria and guidelines have been formulated. Following is an outline of these guidelines which briefly details some of the primary design concepts for development of properly. The outline corresponds to the five primary development components wbich include: Foundation Campus; Residential Neighborhood; Mixed-Use and Corporate Core; Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites; and, Local Office Sites. In addition; criteria relating to parking, landscaping, lighting and a comprehensive sign system have been included. To ensure conformance [o tho design criteria and guidelines a Design Review Committee will be established by the owner. The Design Review Committee will be charged with the review of all design elements of Peter Jefferson Place and to interpret the design intent of the master plan, covenants and guidelines documents as adopted. The Committee wilt have the power to approve acceptable designs or disapprove any designs which are judged inappropriate to the successful implementation of Peter Jefferson Place. 1. Foundation Campus Parcel D The existing buildings on parcel D speak not only to the hisio.ry and character of the site but create a strong dialogue between the properly and Monticello. The Fnundation Campus will expand upon this dialogue by anchoring the: northern end of the park and through site planning, scale and architectural quality. The prominence of the Foundation Campus and its genius for the composition of tho overall master plan will ensura its importance in ' establishing the identity of the property. Site planning will emphasize large lawns, campusqike settiugs, creation of courtyards and connection to tbe park. Architectura will reflect traditions of classical Virginia architecture wgh predominant building color to be white; gray pitched roofs will be defined by dormers and gables. A strong pedestrian circulation system will emphasize a hierarchy of pathways and linkages between buildings. Landscape elements will compliment architecture through the use of such elements as "white board" fence and white brick walls. Landscaping will reflect traditional Virginia plant materials, with emphasis On prd~e~ation of .... ' existing large trees. 2. Residential Neighborhood Parcel I Thc residential component of the development will consist of moderate density attached homes located adjaeen(to the River corridor. Tho residential neighborhood will be closely integrated with the open space system proposed for the entire property. Site planning will reinforce residential scale and circulation. Architecture will incorporate traditional detailing with pitched roofs, dormers and window treatments ..... : . Building forms will be sensitive to sloped development and predominant colors will be !~eutral shades. Landscaping will incorporate elements that lend a human scale: use of plants with seasonal interest, special paving details, walls, and site rum turc, suc ~ as benches The design of these site features will bo of traditional style. 3. Mixed-Use and Corporate Core Parcel B,ti, K Thc Mixed Uso Corporate Office area of the plau will be organized around strong pedestrian ~cale and orientation. The ]nixed use area will support a mixture of office, hotel and retail components and will feature a strong connection to the park. Site planning will create a stroug organized relationship among commons, specialty retail and hotel uses emphasizing creatiou of spaces aud pedestriau circolation Architecture will incorporate clean simple detailing with buildings utilized to form spaces for people. Bnildingls will be constructed of neutral earth tone colored materials with non-reflective glass. Landscaping will emphasize a variely of hardscape £eatures (special paving, planters, tree grates, benches, scnlpmre, fumitare, etc.) and a high level of delailing. 4. Peripheral Corporate and Retail Sites Parcels E F, N The Peripheral Corporate aad Retail Sites will define the edge of Peter Jefferson Place and will be located adjacent to highway frontages, stream valleys and wooded slopes. Site planning will maximize benefits of views and adjacent amenities emphasizing the grouping of buildings to respect landforms. Architecture will incorporate clean simple smlcmres which are secondary to the total environment. Buildings will be constructed of nentral eartb tone colored materials with non-reflective glass. Landscaping will be used to create an overall sense of quality and space. 5. Local Office Sties Parcel O The local office site are those sites along State Farm Bonlevard that are appropriate for more typical local office development. Architecture will include both traditional and compatible contemporary styles. Buildings will be constructed of heatrol earth tone colored materials witb non-reflective glass. Landscaping will be ased to integrate boildings into the over-all streetscape. B. Treatment of Parking Parking is a necessary element of any development, but if integrated properly into a site, it can be visually an-obtrusive. Parking design will be appropriate to the user it serves and to adjacent development and will be part of a clear hierarchy of the vehicular circulation system. I. Snrface Parking Parking will be broken into small areas relating to topography and oriented away from roadway views. Parking areas will be sited so as not to impede or discourage pedestrian circulation between buildings. Benns, hedges and landscaping will be used to buffer and reduce impact of parking form adjacent roadways and from adjacent properties. C. Landscaping, Lighting ami Sign System A master landscaping, lighting, and sign system program will be developed, incorport¢ing trees, shn bs, g~t ng and other landscape elements, existing trees= and a comprehensive sign system into an integrated whole. General landscape character and quality of poblic spaces is to be the key component. Landscaping along roadways and corridors will help define circulation system as well as relate the property to tile surrounding commnnity. Trees and shrubs wilt be used to integrate individual buildings into the over-all landscape. A plant material list will he developed compatible to the county's "Generic Landscape Plan Recommended Species List". Each site developed will be required to submit a landscape plan wllich incorporates lhe design principles outlined in tile Landscape Master Plan. 2. Lighting Lighting fixtures will be coordinated throughout Ihe property and be ufa tradilional design style. Specific fixture types will be selected with consideralion toward control of stray light and glare. 3. Sign System Thematic form of the sign program will reflect tbe traditional architectural themes and designs established for the property. Colors will be rich, yet respectful of their tradilional design theme. The sign system will incorporate a hierarchy of sigu types including Entrance Identity Signs, Parcel Entrance Signs, Directional Signs, Building identity Signs, Informational Signs, Service Signs and Pedestrian Signs. Signs will be located only where needed with the mm~ber of signs being kept to a minimum to avoid unnecessary clulter. ?$4 SGOTTSVILL£ AND RIVAHNA DISTRIGTS SECTION 78 4~11.2.1 4.11.2.2 4.11.2.3 4.11.3 4.11.3.1 ACCESSORY STRUCTURES If no utility or drainage easements or other easements are adversely affected, accessory structures or portions thereof may be erected no closer than six (6) feet to adjacent lot lines in the case .of detached structures, or to a common wall kn the case of attached structures; provided further that no such structure shall be located within any yard re.quired by section 4.6.3. (Addition 3-18-81) (Amended 1-1-83) PUBLIC TELEPHONE BOOTHS Public telephone booths may bs located within required yards, but no closer any street than the existing rightof-way kine or right-of-way reservation line, provided that= Such booths shall be equipped for emergency service =o the public without prior payment; bo The location of every booth shall be determined by the zoning adminis- trator to ensure that the same will not adversely affect the safety of the adjacent highway; Every such booth shall be subject to relocation at the expense of the owner, whenever such relocation shall be determined by the zoning administrator to be reasonably necessary to protect the public health, safety and welfare or whenever the same shall be necessary to accommodate the widening of the adjacent highway. (Addition 3-18-81) FENCES, MAILBOXES, AND SIMILAR STRUCTURES Fences, free-standing mail and/or newspaper boxes, signs advertising sale or rent of the property, and shelters for school children traveling to and from school shall be permitted in ail districts and shall be exempt from all setback and yard requirements except as otherwise provided in section 4.4. For the purposes of this section, the term "fence" shall be deemed to include free-standing walls enclosing yards and other uncovered areas. (Addition 3-18-81) REDUCTION OF BUILDING SEPARATION AND SIDE YARDS (Added 1-1-83) Minimum building separation and side yards for main structures shall be reduced in accordance with applicable district regulations in a particular case under the following circumstances= Such structures are located within a four (4) mile radius of a respondinq fire station and in an area where available fire flows are adequate b~ Insurance Service Offices standards ro permit such reduction; or All such structures for which separation and/or side yards ars reduce( shall be cons=rutted in accordance with Table ~01 Fire Resistance Rating~ of Structure Elements of the BOCA Basic Building Code 1984 Edition; or it equivalent in the current edition of BOCA Basic Building Code; or (Amends 10-15-86) -32- (SuDp. #82, 1-3-96 4~11.3.3 4.12 4.12.1 4.12.2 DeveLopment approved prior ~ ~, ...... from section 4.11.3.1 and shall comply with the side yaru regulations of the zoning ordinance in effect at the time of such approval. For the purposes of this section, "development approved" shall mean: any final subdivision plat approved pursuant To Chap=er 18 of the Code of Albemarle; any site development plan approved pursuan= to section 32.0 of this ordinance or comparable provision of prior zoning ordinance; or any planned development district established pursuan~ to the provisions of this ordinance or prior zoning ordinance. (Added 1-1-83) OFF-STREET P~RKING kND LOADING REQUIREMENTS PURPOSE The purpose of these regulations ks rd se= forth off~street parking and loading requirements for permitted uses: (1) in accordance with the intensity of such use; (2) =o provide adequane parking for the travelling public; and (3) ~o reduce traffic hazards and conflicts. To these ends, parking and loading area designs shall comply with minimum ~tandards as set forth in sections 4.12 and ~2.7 of this ordinance. It is intended that the purposes of this ordinance be served as through physical design measures opposed to directional or policing measures such ae signage, one-way circulation, and other such devices which rely on vehicle opera=or compliance for effectiveness. Developmen= proposals which~seek to maximize building area er otherwise intensify development to the extent that these minimum regulations are no= satisfied shall be deemed to be con=rary to the purpose of this ordinance. (Amended 6-14-89) APPLICATION Off-stree= parking and loading requirements shall, apply ~o all uses and structures established prior to or after the effective date of this ordinance except as otherwise provided herein. Off-street parking and loading spaces shall be provided in accordance with the provisions of this section at the tim~ of erection, alteration, enlargemen= or change in use of any s=ruc=ure. Any use for which parking and/or loading space was approved and provided prior to the effective date of this ordinance shall be considered ~n conformance ~o this ordinance provided the intensity of such use remains unchanged. Where, in the opinion of the zoning administrator, a change in such use and/or suruc=ure occasions the need for additional parking and/or loading space, or such change would physically alter parking and/or loading space available, such use shall comply with these provislons. -33- (Supp. ~82, 1-3-96) 8.5.6 8.5.6.1 8.5.6.2 8.5.6.3 8.5.6.4 FINAL SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND SUBDIVISION PLATS CONTENTS OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS: SUBDIVISION PLATS Unless modification is permitted by board of supervisors' action pursuant to sections.8.5.4 and 8.5.5, all site development plans shall comply with sectio~ 3~.0 of this ordinance and all subdivision plats shall comply with Chapter 18 of the Code of Albemarle. (Amended 9-9-92) APPROVAL OF SITE DEVELOPMENT PLANS ~ SUBDIVISION PLATS Approval of site development plans and subdivision plats shall be based on: compliance with site development plan or subdivision regulations applying at the time the land was designated as a PD district; or aT the option of the applicant, compliance with such regulations currently in effect. (Amended 9-9-92) VARIATIONS FROM APPROVED APPLICATION PLANS Variations in site development plans and subdivision plats from approved application plans may be permitted by the director of plan- ning and community development upon a finding that such variations are: generally in keeping with the spirit and concept of the approved application plans; in accordance with the comprehensive plan; and in accordance with regulations currently in effect. Changes other than permitted herein shall be made only by rezoning application. (Amended 9-9-92) BUILDING PERMITS, GRADING PERMITS After PD designation, no building permit including special footings and foundation permits shall be issued in such district prior to approval of site development plans or subdivision plats for the development of the area in which such permits would apply. In the case of a subdivision plat, the director of planning and community develppment may authorize issuance of a grading permit for road construction upon approval of road plans by the director of engineer- ing or the Virginia Department of Transportation as the case may be. (Amended 9-9-92) -86- (Supp. ~68, 9-9-92) .... ........... %804) 977-0205 ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. LAND SURVEYORS A August 8, 1996 Members of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Madams and Sirs: On behalf of our clients, Daly Seven Corporation, developers of the Fairfield Inn, I am writing to request that condition number 2-" submittal and approval of an intersection analysis at Branchlands Blvd.", be removed from the conditions of approval for SP96-19. I have spoken with the County Planning staff, who have informed me that this condition is at the request of VDOT. In a phone conversation with VDOT, we were told that the existing level of service at the particular entrance in question has not been determined, and that no particular complaint has been made in regard to the existing traffic flow. ZMA-88-7, Branchlands PUD specifically set out the process of designing Branchlands Blvd. and Hillsdale Dr. as the primary and secondary ingress and egress for this overall development. The PUD also anticipated development of all the land in Lot 6, south of Branchlands Blvd. to be commercial/service uses. To require this single developer to provide a $5,000 to $7,000 traffic study at an entrance already approved for the existing and proposed uses, is both unfair and unnecessary: All of the commercial sites to the north and south of Branchlands Blvd. have been developed. None of these developers - Toys 'R' Us, Old Country Buffet, Food Lion, Applebee's - were required to provide a traffic study of the entrances. The purpose of the P.U.D. designation and predetermined road and entrance locations is to deal with these issues before the individual sites are developed. Curb cuts were installed before any development occurred, and the resulting businesses have conformed to the prearranged traffic patterns. If a traffic study is needed at this location, we feel it should be VDOT traffic engineers who perform this study. They have access to the data and appropriate computer analysis programs, and know what particular concerns on which to focus. A simplistic and common sense analysis of the traffic generated by the proposed August 8, 1996 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Page 2 Fairfield Inn would indicate that without restaurant and meeting room facilities, the proposed 121 room motel will generate traffic exiting the site in the early morning hours, non-peak hours for both Food Lion and Applebee's. If VDOT's concern is the exiting left turns at the Branchlands Blvd. crossover, this particular use for the site will generate less traffic at the Food Lion and Applebee's peak hours than most other permitted uses. Your consideration of this issue is appreciated. Sincerely, David L. Collins, L.S. DLC/mg cc: Mark Dowdy, Daly Seven Enclosures: Sheets 6 & 7 of ZMA-88-7. Branchlands P.U.D. i996 Page July 6 13, 1988 the PUD have agreed to this unified drainage plan. A channel designed to accommodate 6he 100 year storm shall be approved by the Albemarle County Engineering Department. The channel will be constructed though the PUD as shown on Exhibit 1 and as shown on the specific drainage plan prepared by Gloeckner & Osborne. Riprap of the channel will be installed to a standard sufficient to provide channel stability and control effects of channel erosion. This channel will allow the development of Area C to fill to the drainage easement necessary for the channel. Construction of the channel will proceed with the development of Area ~E~Are_g_~, or the filling of Area C whichever shall "0~--first. In addition a fifth 72" pipe shall be added under Greenbrier Driv~ at the time of the construction of the drainage channel. TRANSPORTATION PLAN Primary ingress and egress for Areas A,B,E & F will derive from 29 North, north and south at Branchlands Boulevard. Secondary access will derive at Rio Road and Fashion Square Mall through Squire Hills, by way Hillsdale Drive. Branchlands Boulevard and Section 1 of Hillsdale Drive to Branchlands Boulevard are currently under construction to a standard approved by VDOT for acceptance into the state highway system. The remainder of Hillsdale Drive shall be designed for acceptance into the state system by VDOT, and constructed at time of development of any portion of Area E or F. Direct 'access to 29 North shall occur only at Branchlands Boulevard, and the developer shall provide signalization of the intersection of Rt. 29N and Branehlands Boulevard at time of any development of Area E or F. The extension of Greenbrier Drive from the end of state maintenance to Hillsdale Drive shall be designed in accordance with VDOT standards to accommodate traffic anticipated from the Hillsdale Drive and Areas C and D, and dedicated for acceptance into the state highway system at time of development of any portion of Area E or F. From Hillsdale Drive to Areas C and'D, Greenbrier Drive shall be designed in accordance with VDOT standards to accommodate traffic anticipated from Areas C and D, and dedicated for acceptance into the Page 7 July 13, 1988 state highway system. Access Road II from 29N to Hillsdale Drive and then through Area C is no longer deemed necessary and shall not be installed. With the exception of Brookmill Drive pedestrian walkways will be provided on one side of all public roads to VDOT standards. An additional pedestrian walkway will be provided across Area C to Hillsdale Drive along one side of the existing church road. Pedestrian trails should be constructed along open space corridors (stream beds) or sewer easements. Such construction shall occur with each phase of development on the open space corridors and sewer easements located withi~ or immediately adjacent to that phase of development. D. LAND, USE PLAN Locations densities Exhibit 1. and acreages of various land uses and residential shall comply with the Revised Application Plan, Staff recommends the following land use schedule: AREA ACREAGE USE A 7.04 B 12.00 C 26.63 D 14.915 E Lot 5 1.5 Lot 6 8.11 F Lot 6A 1.0 Lot 1 4.09 Lot 2 1.00 Lot 7 5.84 Lot 4 3.285 82 dwellings OR 106 low/moderate cost units Church 312 dwellings elderly housing 90 dwellings Net usable acres - office Net usable acres commercial/service Net usable acres commercial/servica OR wetlands Marriott (commercial/service) Net usable acres office Net usable acres commercial/service No development SP-96-19 John Hocutt Proposed substitute condition #2: Submittal and approval of an intersection analysis as a condition of site plan approval to insure that the traffic generated by this site accessing Branchlands Blvd. at the crossover serving Food Lion, Applebee's, Toys 'R Us and Old Country Buffet does not result in a reduction in the level of service if the existing level of service is 'C' or less. In the event that the existing level of service is greater than 'C', the level of service may be reduced to not less than 'C'. The applicant may provide improvemems to the imersection to maintain the level of service if the level of service is currently less than 'C' ar to insure the level of service does not drop below 'C' if the current level of service is greater than 'C'. Service.ltr COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. ot Planning & Community Development 40] Mclnfire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296~5823 July 10, 1996 John Hocutt Innkeepers Properties 4741 South Main Street Winston Salem, NC 27127 RE: SP96-19 - John Hocutt Dear Mr. Hocutt: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on Jill¥ 9, 1996 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 is limited to a 121 room hotel; Submittal and approval of an intersection analysis to insure that the traffic generated by this site accessing Branchlands Blvd. Food Lion/Applebee's crossover does not result in a reduction in the level of service Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on Aumlst 14, 1996. 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/blb ,~ Ella Carey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ JULY 9, 1996 AUGUST 14, 1996 SP 96-19 JOHN HOCUTT Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct 121 room hotel on this site. The hotel would not have msrauram or conference facilities. Access m the site would be from the internal road network of Food Lion and Applebee's. Petition: Proposal to establish a motel on approximately 2,6 acres zoned PUD, Planned Unit Development [20.4.2(1)]. Property, described as Tax Map 61Z, Section 3, Parcel 10 is located south of and adjacent to Applebee's Restaurant in the Branchlands development in the Rio Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Community Service in Neighborhood 2. Character of the Area: This site is located in the Branchlands developmem. The site is currently undeveloped and has been graded during past development activity in Branchlands. Immediately adjacent uses include a grocery store and restaurant. Nearby uses include the Marriott Hotel and Fashion Square Mail. RECOMMENDATION: Stuff 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_: This site has been included in severai rezoning actions have resulted in the current designation of all lands within Branchlands. The adjacem developments provided for the extension of access, utilities, and drainage structures. which Comprehensive Plan: The current Comprehensive Plan identifies this area for Community Service. Hotel/Motel is a use listed as a typical primary use in the Regional Service Area. However, the Community Service Area typical primary uses also include "compatible regional service uses". The location of this site is removed from ail residential development and is located near other developed commercial areas. This site will be visible from Route 29 and will draw users from this roadway which is an entrance corridor. This proposal compliments commercial activities in this corridor and provides supporting service to businesses in the area as well as tourists. The relationship of this site to other commercial uses and the entrance corridor are such that in the opinion of staff this hotel would be a compatible regional service use. The PUD plan (current zoning) shows this area as office. The written agreements state "Section 20.4 shall apply to areas C, E and F". This site is in area E. This provision of the Zoning Ordinance allows for uses by Special Use Pemait in the C-l, Commercial District, such as hotel, motel and inns to also be considered for Special Use Permit in the pUD. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address each provision of Section 31,2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby-reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property_, The use of adjacent property is commercial. Staff is unable to identify any potential negative impacts on the adjacent properties caused by this use. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, This site is located central to a planned development which is near a regional mall and Route 29. An existing hotel is located near this site. The Architectural Review Board has reviewed and commented on this request. These comments address the design of the facility and do not state any inconsistency of this use with other.uses in the area. This proposal is consistent with the existing level an~l character of development in the area. Staff has reviewed the potential traffic generation from the proposed hotel as compared to the traffic which could be generated from an office use. Office use (assuming 26,000 square feet of office which is 10,000 square feet per acre) of this site could be expected to generate approximately 500 vehicle trips per day (vtpd) while the proposed use could generate 880 vrpd. However, other uses would be available by right such as restaurant which could generate more traffic than the proposed use. The Departmem of Transportation has recommended the completion of an intersection analysis to determine the level of service. Staff opinion is that hotels do not generate traffic at a rate greater than other uses which could occur on site. This development is in a planned development with the intersection locations determined by prior actions and limited to those locations which would result in the least adverse impact. An intersection analysis would allow a determination of the level of service and staff has included a condition of approval which will address this content. Staffdoes not that other uses could be located on this site which generate an equal or greater volume of traffic. With the appropriate conditions staff opinion is that this proposal will not change the character of the area. 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 opinion is that approval of this request may be considered consistent with the purpose of the ordinance as stated in Section 1.4.7. This provision states "To encourage economic development activities that provide desirable employment and enlarge the tax base". This facility will be readily accessible from Route 29 which has been designated as an entrance corridor due to its role as a route of significant tourist traffic. This facility, therefore, will provide a support service to the tourism economy of the County as well as business in the northern urban area. Based on this analysis staff opinion is that this request is in compliance with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district. This use will not prohibit any permitted uses within the Branchtands development. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance. Section 5.0 contains no additional regulations for this type of use. and with the public health, safety and ~eneral welfare. Staff opinion is that the public health, safety and general welfare will be adequately protected by the review of the site plan for this site. Staff is unable to identify additional features of this proposal which cannot be adequately addressed during site review and must be addressed during the special use permit review stage. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: This use will provide a support service to the EC district; This use is consistent with other uses in the Branchlands development; This use is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance. Stuff has identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request: The potential traffic generation from this site may negatively impact the intersection with Branchlands Blvd. Staff review has found this proposal to be consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the zoning ordinance. The proposal is consistent with the character of the Planned Development in which it is proposed to be located. The one negative factor cited by staffmay be addressed by conditions. Based on these findings staff recommends approval of this request. 3 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: Use is limited to a 121 room hotel; 2, Submittal and approval of an intersection analysis to insure that the traffic generated by this site accessing Branchlands Blvd. does not result in a reduction in the level of service. ATTACItlVIENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C- ARB Comment D - VDOT Comment E - Sketch Plan A:\SP9619.RPT 3 SP-96-19 JOHN HOCUTT ALBEMARLE COUNTY J ATTACHNENT B I Id O~I"IP~ Lt lC~j T T I Gl CHAPE:L HILLS ~ GREENBRIER HEIGHTS SECTION r~ BRANCHLAND ~ SRANCHLAND RETIREMENT VILLAGE 4 D.B. 560-526 D.B, 797/272 ~ BROOKMILL CONDOMINIUMS L-I thru9 D.B.889/612~ 625 ' ~ BRANCHLANDS PHASE 4 D.B. IOig/607 ~ BRANCHLANDS CHARLOTTSVlLLE DISTRICT SECTION 61Z COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE D~partraent of Zoning, Room 223 401 Mctntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5875 FAX (804) 9?2-4035 TDD (8041 972-4012 IATTACHMENT C J May 21, 1996 Daly Seven, Inc. 4741 South Main Street Winston-Salem, NC 27127 ATTN: John Hocutt RE: Request for Architectural Review Board Review ARB~P(SDPI-96-08 Fairfietds Tax Map 061Z, Parcels 03-11 (Outparcel B) Dear Mr. Hocutt: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed the above- noted item on May 20, 1996. The Board made the following comments and suggestions: 1) Place landscaping along the edge of the right-of-way, 2) Place screening trees in the area to screen the service area of Foodlion which will become visible when the berm area is graded for parking, 3) Elevations of the existing roadway down uo the property, 4) Indicate types of landscaping and street trees~ 5) Provide a color sketch. The pediment's color was suggested to be an earthtone or grey color. 6) Address trea~men~ of windows, 7) Comply with the recommendaticns made by staff as follows: a) Use brick colors for the building that provide less contrast in color, the tan brick should be replaced with a more red brick, and the dark brick should be a darker red brick. b) The standing seam metal roof should be dark qray in color. c) Indicate the height of the retaining wall, It is not likely that this will be a feature visible from the EC street. ATTACHMENT Letter to Daly Seven, Page 2 May 21, 1996 d) Provide a grading plan. e) Landscaping should match Applebee's site. the trees used on the f) The aisle between Food Lion and the Fairfield Inn site should be planted with street trees to match the trees on the Applebee's site. ' g) Trees should be placed in the area between the building and the parking, in areas visible from the EC street. If you have any questions, please contact our office. Sincerely, arcia ~r~se~h ' Design Planner MJ/st cc: /File Innkeeper Properties, Inc. I:\generat\$hare\zoning\marcla~ fairfiel.app) JOH~-21' 96(FRll 03;57 VDOT TEL 804 979 ~759 P, COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 701 VDOT WAY A. c~ TUCKE~ June Mr. ~O~ Keeler Des:. O~ Elanning SP-96-18 Riohard AlZa~, Route 707 SP-96-~9,,John HOOU=:, Route additional tra£fi~ may result in a lower level of s~rv~¢m during peak approximately ~0 VPD. An inDarseetio~ analysis is needed uo T~ANSPOI:ITATtON FOR THE 21ST CENTURY dUN.-21'g6{?RI) 03;57 VDOT TEL=804 979 37~9 P. O02 ~,age 2 ZTA-96-03 Pavilion ac ~ver~gnd, L.L,C. Route 1156 SP-96-21 ZMA-~6-1] The cheque ~r~m C-1 co ~DMC wo~ld rsfteot similar :raffic n~bers deDendin~ upon the density of 9articular si:e plans. The outdoor will brin~ i~nse traffic in shoND pari~ ~Z time. The ~ou~h P~tops an~ River~en= ~s ~e~ly oon~r~ll~ b~ u scenario fox the ti~ f~ame of the arenas. ~y Z~ar develo~m~t euD~itte~ for ray, mw fo= special events i~ poli~e officers ara useS. s~-gs-z0 H~l=~x ~wl~y, Rou~e 250 The euxre~D entrance ali~ns with RoUte 1055 a~d =his should continue. Tk~re is adequaue sigh= dis=ante available, however Some overhar~xn~ limbs :o ~/r~e~ly controlled ~y woo¢le~n hlo=~. Thmma ~heul~ ~m repla~e~ with a Dark4n~ s~O~S on the righ= o~ way. The placement o£ curb or island will assist wi=h ~his. We will assist wiuh propex ~ronta~e improvemen:s SP-96-22 Branch&ands ~and Tru~,~; Rou=e }%~? This ms on pri~ate road and all access ~o development should be on Bral%¢hlands Drive TEL:804 979 5759 P, OO~ conse~a~ive estimate woul0 probably be 70O+/-~D. Thi~ w~ld nsc ~ a ~Jor i~aot, but w~l~ probably lower Lhm level of s~rvic= for interseo~i~ duri~ pea~ ~o~rs, It la my ~der~tan~ that a traffic ~te is bein~ done to SP-96-2g G, Eh. Fanuc Automation NA, Inc. Route The 'l'a~dem ~chool, Route co= ~rmavonKutzlaben J, H, Kesterson you have any questions, please advise before releasillg CO the developmellt [ ATT~,CHI~IENT' E I c ~ NNI cIr-I,r-4Id~IVd VA "oD ~ NNI (I~IHI~h[IVK /I II I I / I I / ll~lil~lil~ YA "oz) ~ NNI GH~[I,~[~IV~[ (ONNOSH£~ON) I VA "o:D ~ I ATTACHMENT E I ...... ~ © © 000~ ~ C), © O 0 O July 25, 1996 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Plannin9 & Communit'~ Development 401 Mclntlre Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4696 (804} 296-5823 Robert B. McKee McKee/Carson 256 East High St Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: SP-96-25 The Tandem School Tax Map 91, Parcels 2A and 2B Dear Mr. McKee: The Albemarle County Plarmifi~ Commission, at its meeting on July 23, 1996, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: Total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to 200 persons. Additional buildings or increase in total enrollmentdstaff'mg must be authorized by a new special use pem~it. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on ~ Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk o£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, Ronald A. Lilley L/ Senior Planner RAL/jcf ce', Ella Carey Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley Tandem School STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: RON LILLEY JULY 23, 1996 AUGUST 14, 1996 SP 96-25 - THE TANDEM SCHOOL Applicant's Proposal: To increase the total enrollment and on-site staffing from 177 to 200 persons, Petition: To amend the currem Special Use Permit (SP 96-06) to increase the allowance of total school enrollment and on-site staffing from 177 persons to 200 persons [Section 13.2.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance]. Property is zoned R-1. Residential, is described as Tax Map 91, Parcels 2A and 2B, comprises approximately 21.8 acres, is located on Tandem Lane. and is accessed from Route 20 South approximately 1 mile south of 1-64 in the Scottsville Magisterial District. This property is within Urban Area Neighborhood 4 and is designated for Institutional use. A location map and a general campus layout is included as Attachment A. The applicant's justification for this request is included as Attachraent B. Character of the Area: The site is largely wooded and unnoticeable from public roads. The area around this property contains a variety ofuses, including an elementary school, industrial facilities, and residential developmems including Mill Creek and Willow Lake apartments. The new County High School (Monticello High School) is planned to be constructed just north of the subject property, and the new Avon Street/Route 20 Connector Road being built to serve the new high school will provide a new entrance for subject property. RECOMMENDATION: Staffhas reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance (Special Use Permit criteria) and Section 4.1 (water and wastewater facilities) and recommends approval with conditions. The school has been in place since 1972 and an'additional facility was approved with SP 96-06 m support the present enrollment, though it was noted during that consideration that the new facility would serve an increased enrollment in the future. The present special use permit conditions (SP 96-06) are provided as Attachment C. l'he condition limiting total enrollment and on-site staffing to 177 persons is based on the capacity limitations of the present septic dralnfield and the County's policy that areas within the Albemarle County Service Authority's Jurisdictional Area/SAJA), which includes the subject property, be served by public water and sewer. Section 4. I of the Zoning Ordinance provides that public water and sewer be utilized unless, among other things, it is determined that the cost of connecting to the public system, exclusive of connection fees. exceeds the cost of installing an on-she well and/or septic system. The applicant's justification ~ Attachment B~ includes such a cost comparison and concludes that the cost of cormecting to the public system would range from three to five times that of installing an adequate drainfield on-site. Staffhas ascertained with the Health Department that an adequate area for drainfield expansion exists and with both the Health Department and Service Authority that these estimates are reasonable. Therefore, staff finds that this request meets the criteria for drainfield expansion with the SAJA. Regarding the criteria for issuance of a special use permit, staff opinion is that: The use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property; The use will remain the same as has been in place since 1972. Given the physical characteristics of the property, with substantial wooded area around the campus buildings, the addition of 23 persons should not adversely impact to adjacent properties. The school does not have outdoor activities involving righting or noise at night. the character of the district will not be changed; This school is located in a residential zoning district the use will remain the same as it has been since 1972. Given the physical characteristics of the property, the additional loading is not expected to change the character of the residential district in this area. the use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and with the uses in the area; The private school can serve the steadily devbloping residential uses in the area which are called for by the Comprehensive Plan. This use is complementary to other schools in the area, including Cale Elementary School and.Piedmont Virginia Community College, and the new high school expected to be in operation just north of the Tandem School by the fall of 1998. the use will be consistent with public health and welfare. There is nothing unusually hazardous or objectionable about the proposed use. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has indicated that the existing entrance omo Rome 20 does not meet current standards for sight distance and mm lanes, but notes that, since the new Avon Street/Route 20 Connector Road being built to serve the new high sqhool will provide a new entrance for the Tandem School property, the existing entrance does not need to be upgraded. The addition of 23 persons at the school is estimated to generate on the order of 40 additional trips to and from the property per day. Adequate parking and circulation exists to serve the proposed staffing and student enrollment. When SP 96-06 was applied for, the applicant provided an indication of the longer-term plans for the Tandem School. A brief recap of those plans is provided here to lend some context for the 2 consideration of this request for expansion. The Tandem School is in the process of developing a master plan for their facility needs and has discussed this plan with staff. The planning consultants have indicated that. upon resolution of the details in coordinating a new entrance to the school off of the new connector road, that the plan will be completed and submitted for review and a school representative has indicated that a new special use permit will be applied for at that time. As the applicant's text indicates, the school hopes m expand to approximately 280 students ultimately (present enrollment is indicated to be a maximum of 153 students, with 24 staff persons), The County is obligated to provide for a new entrance to the Tandem School from the new connector mad and the existing entrance offofRoute 20 will be closed when the new entrance is established. The connector road is expected to be operational by the fall of 1997. Additional parking would be provided for in the master plan. Issues of septic field and well adequacy for the increased level of enrollment will need to be assessed when the plan is submitted. That assessment will include an assessment of the feasibility of hooking up to the public water and sewer facilities. SUMMARY: The proposed expansion is not expected to have any delximental affect on the surrounding area; however, since there are issues related to the ultimate future expansion of the school that would need fluter review and since the applicant has expressed an understanding of this, staffbelieves that limitations' on the enrollment for the school are appropriate at this time. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this special use permk request, with the following conditions: 1. Total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to 200 persons. Additional buildings or increase in total enrollment/staffing must be authorized by a new special use permit. A - Location Map and General campus layout B - Applicant's justification for request C - SP 96-06 Conditions I:\general\share\lilley\tandem2.sp 3 SP-96-25 THE TANDEM SCHOOl. LBEMA E COUNTY ATTAC HI"! ENT AI OlSTRIGT SECTION "' S~OTTSVILLE TANDEM SCHOOL SPECIAL USE PERMIT SP 96-Q.6 AMENDMENT Description of Request On January 29, 1996, the Tandem School applied for a Special Use Permit for the construction of a 10,000 square foot Community Hall Building on its 21.77 acre property (Tax Map 91, Parcels 2A/2B) on Route 20 South. On March 12, I996, the Albemarle County Planning commission recommended approval of the Special Use Permit to the Board of supervisors with three conditions, and on March 20, 1996 the Board of Supervisors approved the Special Permit with those conditions. As per letter dated April 1, 1996, two of the conditions for approval of the Tandem School Special Use Permit SP 96-06 were: 2. Total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to 177 persons. 3. Additional buildings or increase in total enrollment/ staffing must be authorized by a new special use permit. Based on current estimates of returning students and projected new enrollees, the total Tandem School enrollment and on-site staffing is projected to be 200 persons for the 1996-97 school year. Although the exact number of students and staff will not be known until the beginning of school in September 1996, the Tandem School would like to amend its Special Use Permit to allow up to 200 persons at the school site. Justification With the addition of the new Community Hall Building, there. Will be ample space to accommodate the projected additional students and faculty. The projected student population for the fall of 1996 is 164 students in eight grades (grades 5-12), which is an average of 20.5 students per grade. It is felt that having additional students will enrich the educational experience at Tandem. The additional students will allow Tandem School to offer a more varied course selection and will allow for a more diverse student population, both of which are crucial for a school as small as Tandem. As noted in the January 29, 1996 Special Use Permit Application, the Tandem School site is an ideal one for the location of a school. The 21.77 acre property is large enough to accommodate the school population and buildings. The site is convenient to the 1-64 exit on Route 20 and adjacent both to Piedmont Virginia Community College and the new Albemarle County High School property. The issue of increased enrollment was discussed with the Albemarle County Planning Department staff at the time of the original Special Use Permit. Since the present seDtic field was adequate for the current number (177) of students and faculty, bu~ potentially too small for increased nu~ers, Planning staff suggested deferring the issue of increased student/faculty population until a projection of 1996-97 enrollment could be made. Now that an estimate of the 1996-97 student/faculty population is available, the Tandem School is submitting an amendment to SP 96-06 for consideration. 2 rAc: ENT McKEE/CARSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 35uly1996 Mr, Ronald A. Lflley, Senior Planner County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 RE: Tandem School Community Hall; Public Sewer Feasibility Dear Mr. Lilley: As you requested, I am providing information on the availability of public sewer facilities for this project. According to the project contractor's rough estimate, the cost of upgrading the existing septic system to be acceptable to the Health Department will be in the neighborhood of $10,000. Please note that there are still unanswered questions about the existing septic field conditions that must be resolved before we can determine a more precise estimate. The Service Authority indicated in their site review comments for the Tandem Community Hall preliminary site plan that the nearest public sewer connection is a 10" line located approximately 2000 feet from the site. According to Pete Gotham of the Albemarle County Service Authority, this line is located near the lake in the Willow Lake subdivision. There is also an existing 8" line accessible in Lot 16 of Willow Lake. The cost for connecting to either line may be $37,000 to $52,000, exclusive of public utility connection fees but including design costs. Additionally, any such connection at the current time would not only cross the line of imminent road construction but also involve significant easement acquisition across private property. After the connector road and high school construction is complete, a manhole is expected to be available to the west of the Tandem School site. According to the plans which you provided for me, this manhole may be accessible via approximately 1200 - 1300 feet of pipe and three or four man_holes. The cost for this construction may range from $37,000 to $45,000, again exclusive of public utility connection fees but including design costs, This costs also excludes any potential trench rock excavation as may be encountered along the connector road cut. With this utility connection, most of the sewer main would be constructed either on site or along public right of way. QUEEN CI-IARLOTTE SQUARE 256 EAST HIGH STREET CHARLt)! igSVILLE. VIRGINIA 22902 IV[r. Ronald A. Lilley 3 July 1996 Page 2 We are tn the process of securing from the Health Department a permit for expanding the septic system. We expect to be able to do so. According to Bill Craun of the FIealth Department, construction involving expansion of the existing drainfields and the addition of a new septic tank will satisfy Health Depart~tent requirements for a population of up to 250 persons on the site. The cost estimate above was based on such a system. I trust that this information will assist you in preparing the staff report for the Planning Commission's hea]ting of the Special Use Permit application. Please contact me if vou have any questions or require further information. Sincerely, Eliot R. ~;ndig, E.I.{. McKee/Carson ERF:erf xc Ethan A. MiUer, Esq. IATTACHHENT C I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. o~ P~anning & Community Developmen~ 401 Mcinure Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 (804} 296-5823 April l, 1996 Robert B. McKee McKee/Carson 256 East High St Charlottesville, VA 22902 SP-96-06 The Tandem School Tax Map 91, Parcels 2A and 2B Dear Mr. McKee: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on March 20, 1996, approved the above-noted request to allow for expansion of the private school facilities. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: The new facility will be located approximately as shown on the attached site layout (Attachment A). 2. Total school enrollment and on-site staffing shall be limited to 177 persons. Additional buildings or increase in total enrollment/staffing must be authorized by a new special use permit. In the event that the use, structure or activity for which this special use permit is issued shall not be commenced within eighteen (I 8) months after the issuance of such permit, the same shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon terminate. For purposes of this section, the term "commenced" shall be construed to include the commencement of construction of any stmctnre necessary to the use of such permit within two (2) years from the date of the issuance thereof which is thereafter completed within one (1) year. Before beginning this use, you must obtain a zoning clearance from' the Zoning Department. Before the Zoning Department will issue a clearance, you must comply with the conditions in this letter. For further information, please call Jan Sprinkle at 296-5875. Page 2 April 1, 1996 If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, VWC/jcf cc: Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins The Tandem School AT~TACUMENTd A, Location M~. Scale: 1"=2000' / / [' · / ,Ye /. {~Ol~l~lml& /. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mdntire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902-4596 ~'804) 296-58~ FAX 1804) 296-5800 MEMORANDUM Charles S. Martin Walter F. Ferklm TO: Board of Supervisors FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMCJ~~(-~ DATE: August 9, 1996 SUBJECT: Reading List for Augus~ 14, 1996 May 1, 1996 - pages 1 - 14 (~12) - Mr. Marshall pages 14 (%12) - 31 - Mrs. ~umphris pages 32 - end - Mr. Perkins /EWC Printed on recycled paper COPY COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902~4596 (804] 296-5843 FAX (804} 296-5800 September 11, 1996 Charles S. Martin Walter F. Perkins SaIly H. Thoma~ Mr. George A. Spry 2358 AUSEOn Drive CharloEtesville, VA 22911 Dear Mr. Spry: At the Board of Supervisors meeting hold on AUqUSE 14, 1996 you were appointed as a member of the Equalization Board for the calendar year 1996. Duties of this Board are see ouE in the Code of Virginia, Chapter 32, Article 14, Sections 58.1-3370 through 58.1-3389. The duties are more specifically set out in Section 58.1-3379 and read as follows: "The board shall hear and give consideration co such complaints and equalize such assessmenLs and shall, moro-over, be ch&rged with the especial duty of increasing as well as decreasing assess- ments, whether specific complaint be laid or not, if in its judgment, the same be necessary to equalize and accomplish the end that the burden of taxation shall rest equally upon all citizens of such county or city. The (Director of Finance) of such county .o. shall, when rec/~ested .... call the attention of the board to such inequalities in real estate assessments in his county or city as may be known to him. Every board of equalization may go upon and mnspect any real estate sub3ec~ co equalization by it." In order to be eligible for appointment, every prospective member of such board shall attend and participate in the basic course of instruction given by the Department of Taxation under Section 58.1-206. In the near future, you will receive notice of a meeting from Bruce Woodzetl the Real EstaEe Assessor. If you have any questions about the duties of this Board, please call Bruce Woodzell at 296-5856 Sincerely, Chairman CYH/aw cc: B~uce Woodzell James L. Cambtos, III Printed on recycled paper 08-1~-l@s~ Ia:08 P.01 County of Albemarle Puhl~. C~lvle and ~harh~l* ~fl~l~ ~d I tv, ~ AoflvMt~ m Intm~ata Tb tnform~oa ln~d~l on ~ appli~ will Albemm'le ~ C3m.lottesville, VA 22902,-4596 AUGUST I 4, 1996 EXECUTIVE SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2. I -344(A) Of THE CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO CONSULT WITH IEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF REGARDING SPECIFIC LEGAL MA~-EERS RELATING TO A LEASE OF REAL PROPERTYI ~/~$J oM i I~ ~) ~ ~ it ~¢~