The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-06-14 5:30 1) 2) 3) 4) 7:00 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) 6) 9) 12) 13a) 14) 15) FIN A L June 14, 1995 Room 241, County Office Building 7) P.M.. Ad;ourned Meetina. Call to Order. Executive Session: ~ersannel Matters~ Certify Executive Session. Adjourn. P.M.. ReQular NiQht MeetinQ. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of silence. other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. Consent Agenda (on next sheet). Public Bearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 2.1, Agricul- tural and Forestal Districts, by adding a parcel to section 2.1.4(1), Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District. Proposed addition cpnsists of 42.4 .ac located on W sd of Rt 743 (Earlysville. Rd) in Clover Hill & Ardwood Subd. SP-95-09. Darton Griest, III. Public Hearing on a request for stream crossing in flood plain on approx 36.3 ac zoned. RA located on E sd of Rt 722 approx 1.25 mi S of Rt 723. TM133,P3(part of). Scott- sville Dist. (This site is not located in a designated growth area.) ZMA-95-05. Woodbriar Associates. Public Hearing on a request for relief of Proffer 12 of ZMA-91-13, Woodbriar Associates, in order to allow relief of phasing requirement. and clarification of phase completion, zoned PRD. Property on W side of Rt 29N approx 1 mi N of North Fork Rivanna River. TM32,Pl&TM32G,S3,PsA&83. Rivanna District. (This property is located in the Village of Piney Mountain and recommended for medium density residential [5-10 dujac). Public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending and reordaining. Chapter 8, Finance· and Taxation, Article VIII, Special Assessments for Agricultural,Horticultural, Forest or Open Space Real Estate of the Code of Albemarle. This amendment would repeal the special classifi- cation for opert space real estate for purposes of use value assess- ment and taxation. Public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending and reordaining Chapter 2, Administration, Article I, In General, of the Code of Albemarle, in Section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors. This amendment ·will increase ·the Board's compensation from $9,095.00,·per year to $9,368.00 per year. .. Aàs]?"E Hesel\i'kisa efI&'keFl-E 'ksamenà Ses'kisa 22. 9 ,Cs.HI£flereial, G 1,' aaà aeef:.isr~21~ 0 ,UiªRUB:} Csmmereial, IIG,ef -Ehe&eRìRª9ràiRaRee~ -te ]?s£mit. farmers' mar]r:ef:.s sy 1:i~-'E, anel 1::8 amenel ~e.e1::ie:n 19.9, Raral AE'eas Ðiet.rie"t, BA, 1:.a, _]?eE:'Ri1:. ·fanners' maJ:"he-es E'}" speeialase pcaai1>. (Moved to Item 5.4a on Consent Agenda.) Approval of Minutes. April 7, 1993; April 19 and May 10, 1995. Cancel June ~l, 1995 Board meeting. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Adjourn to June 28, 1995. 8) 10) 11) CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Appropriation Requests: a) Community Resources Coordinator ~ $30,125, (Form 940064). b) Courthouse Maintenance Funds - $10,986, (Form #940065). c) Rescue Squads - $2,433, (Form #940066). d) Health Screening - $5,237, (Form #940067).. e) Emergency Operations Center - $6,000, (Form #940068). f) FY 1993-94 Section 8 Housing Fund Balance - $4,044.73, (Form #940069). 5.2 Revised proffer for ZMA-94-09 - Jayel Industries, Inc., and John E. Campbell. 5.3 Adopt revised resolution and proposed appointment of Albemarle's repre- sentative to the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board (CCJB). 5.4 Statements of Expenses for the Department of Financer Sheriff, Common- wealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk, Circuit court I for the month of May, 1995. 5.4a Adopt Resolution of Intent to amend Section 22.0, Commercial, C-l,and Section 24.0, Highway Commercial, HC, of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by right, and to amend Section 10.0, Rural Areas District, RA", to permit farmers' markets by special use permit. FOR INFORMATION: 5.5 Copies of Planning Commission minutes for May 16 and May 30, 1995. 5.6 Copy of letter dated June 13, 1995M from Robert E. Martinez, Secretary of Transportation,' to Robert w. ~cker, Jr., County Executi.vè, re: Meadow Creek Parkway. '" David P. BöWennan O1arlottesviUe COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Riwnna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins W¡"it~HaIl FOrrest R. MarshaU, Jr. Scottsville saUy H. Thomas &!muelMiller M E .M 0 RAN DUM TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning & Community Dèvelopment FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk ~ DATE: June 15, 1995 SUBJECT: Board Actions of June 14, 1994 The fOllowing is a list of actions taken by the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on June 14, 1995: Agenda Item No.1. Call to Order. Called to order at 7:12 p.m. Agenda Item No.2. Executive Session: Personnèl Mattèrs. At 5:30 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, secondad by Mrs. Humphris, for an execu- tive session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(a) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding a legal matter , involving an agreement and probable litigation and a legal matter involving pending litigation regarding tax issues. Agenda Item No.3. Certify Executive Session. CERTIFIED. Agenda Item No.7. PUBLIC. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the ADOPTED motion granting Mr. Tom Muncaster's request that the Board hear as soon as possible,SP 93-13, United Land Corporation, to extend the time of the permit of the Airport Mobile Home Park, which will be heard on J~ly 11, 1995, by the Planning Commission and July 12, 1995, by the Board of Supervi- sors; Agenda Item No. 8.la. Community Resources Coordinator - $30,125, (Fo~ 940064). Approved as presented. Orig~nal forwarded to Finance. Copy at- tached. Agènda Item No. 8.1b. Courthouse Maintenance Funds - $10,986, (Form 11940065). Approved as presented. Original forwarde<i to Finane.... COpy at. tached. Agenda Item No. 8,lc. Rescue Squads. $2,433, (Form 11940066). Approve<i as presented. Original forwarded to Finance. Copy attached. * Printed on recycled paper , To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg June 15, 1995 2 DATE: PAGE: Agenda Item No. 8.ld. Health Screening - $5,237, (Form #940067). Ap- proved as presented. Original forwarded to Finance. Copy attached. Agenda Item No. 8 .1e. Emergency Operations Center - $6, .000, #940068). Approved as presented. Original forwarded to Finance. tached. (Form Copy at- Agenda Item No. 8.lf. $4,044.73, (Form #940069) . Finance. Copy attached. FY 1993-94 Section 8 Housing Fund Balance - Approved as presented. Original forwarded to Agenda Item No. 8.2. Revised proffer for ZMA-94-09 - Jayel Industries, Inc., and John E. Campbell. APPROVED REVISED PROFFER FOR ZMA-94-09 as set out in a letter dated June 9, 1995, addressed to wayneCilimberg, and signed by Mark N. Farmer, re: Lake Reynovia - Mill Creek Emergency Access Road (3 pages) . Agenda Item No. 8.3. AdOpt revised resolution and proposed appointment of Albemarle's representative to the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board (CCJB). ADOPTED THE ATTACHED RESOLUTION adding Madison and Goochland Counties to the regional Community Criminal Justice Board. Approved the appointment of Mr. J. Michael McMahan as Albemarle County's representative to the regional board. Agenda Item No. 8.4a. Adopt Resolution of Intent to amend Section 22.0, Commercial, C-l, and Section 24.0, Highway Commercial, HC, of the zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by right, and to amend Section 10.0, Rural Areas District, RA, to permit farmers' markets by special use permit. ADOPTED Resolution of Intent. Copy attached. Agenda Item No.9. Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, by adding a parcel to Sec- tion 2.1.4(1), Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District. Proposed addition consists of 42.4 ac located on W sd of Rt 743 (Earlysville Rd) in Clover Hill & Ardwood Subd. ADOPTED ordinance as advertised. Copy attached. Agenda Item No. 10. Darton Greist, III. Public Hearing on a requeSt for stream crossing in flood plain on approx 36.3 ac zoned RA located on Esd of Rt 722 approx 1.25 mi S of Rt 723. TM133,P3(part of). Scottsville Dist. (This site is not located in a designated growth area.) APPROVED as recom- mended by the Planning .CommisSion subject to five conditions as follows: 1. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assess- ment; 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construc- tion one hundred year flood evaluations and boundaries; 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and state agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and water courses. The applicant is encouraged to contact the Federal and State agencies in the early stages of the designprocess¡ , To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg June 16, 1995 3 Date: Page: 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. The computation$ must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement. Agenda Item No. 11. ZMA-95-05. Woodbriar Associates. Public Hearing on a request for relief of Proffer 12 of ZMA-9lc13, Woodbriar Associates, in order to allow relief of phasing requirement and clarification of phase completion, zoned PRD. Property on W side of Rt 29N approx 1 mi N of North Fork Rivanna River. TM32,Pl&TM32G,S3,PsA&83. Rivanna District. (This property is located in the Village of Piney Mountain and recommended for medium density residential [5-10 du/ac). APPROVED as recommended by the Planning Commission subject to amendments to agreements #12 and #8, respec- tively, as follows: Agreement #12: No more than two phases with signed site plans or subdivision plats shall be under simultaneous development. This phasing limitation shall not be interpreted as limiting the construction of infrastructure (roads utilities, drainage, etc.). The development shall proceed in the following order: Phase 3A, 3B, 3C, tile completion of Phase 7, lA, 6, 5 and 4. Phase 1B may be developed following completion of Phase lA. Phase 8 shall not be subject to the phasing order. A phase shall be considered complete for purposes of satisfying phasing requirements when the follow- ing is complete: 1. All public roads shown in the phase have been given final inspection by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Charlottesville Residency. A complete assembly package has been submitted to the residency. The maintenance fee has been paid artd the one-year VDOT performance bond has been posted; 2. All private roads shown in the phase have been completed to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and all road bonds have been re- leased; 3. All necessary water and sewer lines shall have been installed and dedicated with the exception of individual connections. Agreement 118: Staff approval of recreational facilities to include: one tot lot with Phase 3C and one tot lot with Phase 1B; the dedication of open space with the approval of Phases 4 and 5 for the passive recreational area which shall include construction of walking/jogging trails; and, the primary recreation area south of Camelot shall be built or bonded for its construction prior to. final plat approval of Phase 4. This recreational area shall be built prior to completion of Phase 4 and shall consist of a baseball/multi-purpose field, two basketball courts, playgroup equipment and picnic facilities. All recreation facilities shall be installed by the developer. Agenda Item No. ~2. Public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending and reordaining Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation1 Article VIrI, Special Assessments , To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. V. Wayne Cilimberg June 16, 1995 4 Date: Page: for Agricultural, Horticultural, Forest or Open Space Real Estate of of Albemarle. This amendment would repeal the special classification space real estate for purposes of use value assessment and taxation. NANCE WAS NOT ADOPTED, IN EFFECT BEING DENIED. the Code for open ORDI- Agenda Item No. 13. public Hearing to consider an ordinance amending and reordaining Chapter 2, Administration, Article I, In General, of the Code of Albemarle, in Section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors. This amendment will increase the Board's compensation from $9,095.00 per year to $9,368.00 per year. ADOPTED Ordinance. Copy Enclosed. Mr. Marshall does not wish an increase. Agenda Item No. 15a. Cancel June 21, 1995 Board meeting. canceled. Will need to be canceled next week before the Board the June 28, 1995, meeting. Meeting not can adjourn to Agenda Item No. 16. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. APPROVED A RESOLU'1'ION OF INTENT. to amend Section 10.0 Rural Areas District, RA,of the zoning ordinance, to permit commercial stables by right. Copy attached. Mr. Bowerman requested free use of the County Office Building for a conference being set up by Pinkie Gohanner and AlVin Edwards with MACAA. Six rooms and the auditorium will be needed. He will call regarding a specific date. APPROVED retaining Richard Cranwell as legal counsel to represent Albemarle County in a discussion with the City of Charlottesville regarding the City's alleged wish to revert to town status. Agenda Item No. 17. Adjourn to June 28, 1995. Meeting adjourned to June 21, 1995, at 5:00 p.m. in the County Office Building. EWC/tpf Attachments (10) cc: Richard E. Huff Roxanne White Amelia McCulley Bruce. Woodzell Jo Higgins Larry Davis File 'C·,·,:,~, -..(,,-,,,.,, ., ,,,,,, ...,,~---'-- -"-" ,~-~,",~"" >.~ .._.-" . .._-~ -.....-...-.-.....-.-.. , - , APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940064 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: TRANSFER OF FUND FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCE COORDINATOR. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100012013110000 SALARIES-REGULAR $25,520.00 1100012013210000 FICA 1,800.00 1100012013221000 VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM 2,050.00 1100012013241000 VRS LIFE INSURANcE 50.00 1100012013520300 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 200.00 1100.012013600100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 100.00 1100012013800701 DP EQUIP-REPLACEMENT 255.00 1100012013800710 DP-SOFTWARE 150.00 1100031012110000 1100031012210000 1100031012221000 1100031012-241000 1100031012520300 1100031012600100 1100031012800701 1100031012800710 SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM VRS LIFE INSURANCE TELECOMMUNICATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES DP EQUIP-REPLACEMENT DP-SOFTWARE (25,520.00) (1,800..00) (2,050.00) (50.00) (200.00) (100.00) (255.00) (150.00) TOTAL $0.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ $0.00 TOTAL $0.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: COUNTY EXECUTIVE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE (. --- 6..-.7..:> G -(~-7'-S- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940065 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR COURT HOUSE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100043002331200 STAFF SERVICES-REPAIRS & MAINT. $10,986.00 TOTAL $10,986.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2100051000510107 COURT HOUSE MAINT. RESERVE $10,986.00 TOTAL $10,986.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: FINANCE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 6" -ç:;;-9~ ¿-/t-'i',j- DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ,,"-.~.^'--------- APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940{)66 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FuND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL TWO-FOR-LIFE FUNDS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100032030565002 CH'VILLE/ALB RESCUE SQUAD-EMS $814.33 1100032030565102 WESTERN ALB. RESCUE SQUAD~EMS 814.33 1100032030565202 SCOTTSVILLE RESCUE SQUAD-EMS 814.34 TOTAL $2,443.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2100024000240415 EMS FUNDS $2,443.00 TOTAL $2,443.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: APPROVALS: FINANCE SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE fj!,~;) c:::- .:: -~-?¿ ¿-It -7'-s- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940067 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM HEALTH INSURANCE FUND TO SCHOOL FUND TO COVER COST OF HEALTH SCREENINGS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1242062140311000 HEALTH SCREENINGS $5,237.00 1102093010930002 TRANSFER TO SCHOOL FUND-PERSONNEL 5,237.00 TOTAL $10,474.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2200051000512013 TRANSFER FROM HEALTH FUND $5,237.00 2102018000189914 TRIGON REFUND 5,237.00 TOTAL $10,474.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: APPROVALS: HUMAN RESOURCES SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~~g-'}'¿;- t. -/? -j'...s- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940068 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND EMERGENCY OPR. CENTER PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING OF ONE-TIME PURCHASES FROM FUND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ** * * **-**** * * * ** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * * * ** * * * * * * * * * ** * *** * * ** ** * ** * ** ** * 1410031040310000 PROF. SERVICES/FEES $6,000.00 $6,000.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2410051000510100 EOC FUND BALANCE $6,000.00 TOTAL TOTAL $6,000.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: APPROVALS: EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER SIGNATURE DATE ¿' - $'-"ZS- ?-/6-/,j- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS t::-ý&;¿~ DIRECTOR OF FINANCE APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940069 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND HUD GRANTS PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING OF ONE-TIME PURCHASES FROM FUND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1122781900800100 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENTS $4,044.73 TOTAL $4,044.73 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2122751000510100 FUND BALANCE $4,044.73 TOTAL $4,044.73 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: HOUSING APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~~#~ Zj7¡;¿ tJ~_ ¿ - r-?S- . c.-/¡'-YS- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS JlJ)'1-œ-1995 09' 49 FROM NICHOLS BCCOIJI1'îANCY CORP r TO 18042968316 P.01 r ., Ø~iginal Proffer ~nùed Proffer x Date~ June 8, 1995 'tax Map it: 90 FIlO!!'FBR z~ ,&: 5S-1l. 94-09 PaL"t.:el i 36 fiub8ti~ut~Qn of condi~on. 201~tin9 ~Q Re=o~~~ of 100 Acte& frcmRA to ~-4 Purauant tc $ect~on 33.3 o£ thu A1b.mari. CQUnty¡o~in9 O;:dinanc",, Jl1yal Ind.\u,t1:i6Ii, Inc., ~ co;rpoution organbed and ..",i..t!n'i '111><1...", U... ¡.._ of t~e State of CaHfnTni.. .mà Jnhn ;¡. C~ll (JAysl :twill.tries, .10(10 anc! .ToM E. c~l1 being h~~~inøf.ter colleotively tèferred ~o ~G the ·ÐCVel~~B·). ~y the4- d11ly-eultho;rbßd agent, hereby volu..t~ily proffèr the conditione liøt84þolow '~be "conditions') which shall be applied to the ?roperty, as substituted conditions. to ZMA . 8S-U Itae ·Origin.¡ ~eaoninq·) in li!Sl.t. of proffer it.etII number 3, ~eecribed in~t oe¡;tûn leUø~ d!r.t.,a Oc:toþer 10, 1~88, from John T.P. Horne of the Depa:;t!aent of Planni.n~ & Co~nlt.y Davelcpwtent of the County of AIþe¡r¡ar1e to Heavenly Bolàing Corporation,. whi.ah 1øtte:r: isattillchEld herato .61'1! ud.e a.. part be:r:eof as I!:xhibit A. The conditions are proffered '\;0. amentt toM O:r:1ginalRezoninq. and it i$ agreed that; (1) the Øriginal Rezoning itself gives ~iøe 'to. 'tM neeli for 'the çonQJ.t~oJ'l'/l; IUJd {21 the Cond.itions have a x-eAllotut.ble relation to the OJ:"igi1:ul.l I<ezoning p.z;evio_ly~est.ed a.nd g;t"an.ted. (..¡ The elWi:rgenay <n:>hic:le cr.çço"t:> ~",Q,(t.~ "ÃG..e.... ItøQcJ") shan be built in .accorda.nce with the specifications _t. out. in 1:hà.t certain HCJr::ee/CU'son design of '\;he Ace... 8.Q.n, da.1;eà. Mé.r<::oh n, 1995, wbiQh d&.~ i.. &tt&<:!blllQ: b<a"",,,f;o a:nð. """'¡o . 1'..:.:t ot<lla£ ..... Exhibit 9. (bi 't'It,," Developé~s <u1d the:l.T "'tIC"''''''I;IOT'' ",nd ...... i gnR _h..ll lI\a:i,ntain the Aceese. Road, in a manner teasonahly satisfactory to. the County of Albemarle (tbe ~Maintenanc~·)f such that the Access Road is accessible to eme:rgenay vehicles at all t1l11e8. ':I'be Developers sMll post a cash bond in the aDOUnt of F.1ve 'l'houaGC1 and 00/100 Dellars {$5,OOO.OO¡ (the ~Bon4·) t.oinsure tbat the MlUntenance continues f in accQ1:d..a.nce with the terlllS ancl oonditi.onø of' that ce~tu ~O&d/sUbdivisioD ~erforaanoe Bond for Me.i11.~. by R¡¡Q tie tween the DEiveloperlf ø.1'Id. t.he Countl.of Albemarle (the RBondAgr~I1.~"). .nigh Bond Alp:ile!IIeD.'t. 1ø att_heð ben:t:o and _cSø .,. part Q",¡;..,,:f .. S:xh.tbit C. 'rbe Bond shaH bè secured by a cortificatQ (e) JU4!-'Ø8-1995 09: 50 FROH NICHOLS ACCOUhITANC:Y èORP ,~ . TO 18042968315 P.Ø2 r ,. \ of deposit with a ban~ of the Developers' choosinq. Thê npvpl~rM shaLL assi9n the certificate of deposit ,"0 tb.e County qf :¡"lbe1;tarle, in .cçordance with the tBrJ118 and eonditilons 6£ th..t ce",tði.n cQl1l!lter~Ù Assi~~ of Ce:r;tif;lcate of De~sít by a.nd betW?"'¡¡ the Developera al>d7bc Cottnty of Ali;lemade (the "AeU<Jmnent Agr_ntU}, Wh:l.ón AØsignlllE>pt ~reement i8 atte:øhM hereto and macØE1part bereof a. bMbit D. Th~ i.ntere..!owM.cb aocrues on t:n.. ~nà ea¢h year shAu' .be paid to the O",1elo~:;a 0:: the 3~!lt œy of ~e..">;.>Ar of that year, be91.nninq 1n the yeaI: 1'95. The security for the Bond'-y bQ, l111bstit\1t.ed with equal security different. trOll! 1:,\1a1;: get out "bave if such sUb"tit.ut.i.on is ðppxoved by the County of Albemarle's attorney. IN WImRSS WBBR50J!', the Dewlcpers have caused this Proffer to be executed tbu. t:!&dø.y of June, 1995i. by thoir u~der...t~ne>d attorney~in-faQt.. JAYIIL ¡:IIDlJßft:IBS. JIIC., a CaUfonia Clo:tpQJ:at.i.oa By: .!In hony M. Ricb.ola, attornev-in- fact for Jaye1 Industriea, Inc. ùQIUC .. CAJC~ h <é. e...7~, 6, 15YI N~4 "o.t. _,. M. Niçbo~8, hie attorney-in fact 2 JUN-08-1995 09:50 FROM NICHOLS ACCÒUNTÂNCY CORP TO 18042968316 P.03 .. ~ .. t .t- SWl>'J)E OF OM. I:J;'{)1Ut:[A C01lJl'1'Y OF V u/c, CZ ~.. . 'Phs f:nre9o~n q a...:z:a.anw:...· nt _~ acknuwledged. before me this . day of Jnne, ~$95, by Antbony M. iJliobnls, o\I.tt.orJ>ey-in- aot for Jayel :rndus~ielh l¡¡'c. My commission expires; 7.2--?;:C¡;;- ·~t~~· I 10 f > MARKp.CAU. (/) STATE OJ!'QALXFOKlua Q:J'~iI;;'-' Not""Y ~ - ¢<III/omic ] (¡) T' . "" COUNIVOI' '(USA (/¡ f./ I. ~ ";',.. My Cc>mrnissIoo bpir9.$ - COUNTY OF T t.1tð <:::{ ~ :....., .Mt~. I~ _ J ~ 'l'b.e foregoing ..g>::cCJDCnt wac ..cknC'W1.edgød bc£crc .... thia ... day of J)lne, U95, by Anthony M. Nichols, at.torney-in-faøt Or John B. ~b..ll. ..,. ._..i~ -,_. ],2~ --~~. ~~ .~ Not.ary Pubh.c ~ 0FflCIALSEAI. ~ "J w..RKD. c.ou. CII Net...,. F\d:oIic. ¢<dtQm., ;u ...~OFVU8'" ( m,~Exoìt... .. JW2!.l~ ~~j - 3 TOTRL P.03 · RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Community Diversion Incentive Act of 1980 to est~blish community correc- tions programs for nonviolent offenders in an effort to reduce prison and jail overcrowding, and WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Resources Board was formed under the authority of the Code of Virqinia Section 53.l-l83 to establish community corrections programs for nonviolent offenders in the localities of Albemarle, Charlottes- ville, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Nelson, and Orange, and WHEREAS, the Virginia Assembly revised the Community Diver- sion Incentive Act on September 30, 1994 and enacted the Compre- hensive Community Corrections Resources Boards with the. new Community Criminal Justice Boards, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned communities continue to believe that working together on community corrections is in the best interest of the citizens of their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has offered to continue the role of fiscal agent, and WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is agreèable to staffing the Community Criminal Justice Board, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle agrees to: l. Join in creating the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, 2. appoint members to serve on Jefferson Area Community criminal Justice Board, 3. participate in appointing the remaining members as required under the law, 4. request the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to provide staff assistance, and 5. continue the role of fiscal agent. * * * * * I Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June l4, 1995. 6fb- W Clerk, Board of County rvisors · RESOLUTION OF INTENT BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 22.0 Commercial, C-1, and Section 24.0 Highway Commercial, HC, of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' market by right, and to amend Section 10.0 Rural Areas District, RA, of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by special use permit. FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible date. * * * * * I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. ~¿U ~ Clerk, Board of County isors ORDINANCE NO. 95-2.1(5) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2.1, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS SECTION 2.1.4, DISTRICTS DESCRIBED OF THE CODE OF THE COUNT'i OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Section 2.1.4(1), Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District, as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (1) The district known as the "Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 31, parcel 23A¡ tax map 44, par- cels 9A, 9C, 12, 12Q¡ tax map 45, parcel 1¡ tax map 45A, parcel 27, section 1. * * * * * I, Ella W. carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. JJkriJd County' ...., \'!o ORDINANCE NO. 95-2{1} AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 1, IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2, Administration, Article l, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors, as follows: Sec. 2-2.1. Compensation of board of supervisors. The salary of the board of supervisors is hereby set as follows: Nine thousand three hundred sixty-eight dollars and no cents for each board member; provided that in addition to his/her regular salary, the vice-chairman shall receive a stipend of thirty-five dollars ($35.00) for each and every meeting chaired; provided, further, that in addition to his/her regular salary, the chairman shall receive a stipend of one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800). This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1995. * * * * * I Ella W. . Carey , do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. C~~d ~o=,y , "i', ',' .. RESOLUTION OF INTENT BE IT RESOLVED for purposes of public necessity, conve- nience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section lO.O Rural Areas District, RA of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit commercial stables by right, and to include all necessary supplementary regulations related thereto. FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible date. * * * * * / I Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true copy of a resolution of intent adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June l4, 1995. JJj~d 0/ Oo='y Sup ~i"oro ¡ .JII - &ei101 d t.lA.e.Á'f,~ 0UNE 14, 1995 EXECUTIVE SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2. I -344(A) OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF REGARDING A LEGAL MATTER INVOLVING AN AGREEMENT AND PROBABLE LITIGATION AND A LEGAL MATTER INVOLVING PENDING LITIGATION REGARDING TAX ISSUES. 061 495.WPD .... ". , . ""ì i I ,-. ~'J -+.' (ðl'l, f' "'-', J". 7 ..J, J/ ~ <~-,./<-.....".-. ,.' <f'~"'" .., ¡ ,', \ \ 'I , ! j ; \ Lj \ ~ :- . j David P. Bowennan Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte y, Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller MEMORANDUM TO: Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance Ella W. Carey, Clerk túJ¿..... FROM: DATE: June 16, 1995 SUBJECT: Board Actions of June 14, 1995 At its meeting on June 14, 1995, the Board of Supervisors approved the following appropriations: Agenda Item No. a.1a. Community Resource Coordinator _ $30,125, (For.m #940064). Approved the attached appropriation. Agenda Item No. a.1b. $10, 9a6, (For.m #940065). Courthouse Maintenance Funds - Approved the attached appropriation. Agenda Item No. a.1c. Rescue Squads - $2,433, (For.m #940066). Approved the attached appropriation. Agenda Item No. a.1d. Health Screenings - $5,237, (For.m #940067). Approved the attached appropriation. Agenda Item No. a.1e. Emergency Operations Center - $6,000, (For.m #940068). Approved the attached appropriation. * Printed on recycled paper ,.. ,.. To: Date: Page: Melvin Breeden June 16, 1995 2 Agenda Item No. a.1f. FY 1993-94 Section a Housing Fund Balance - $4,044.73, (For.m #940069). Approved the attached appropriation. EWC/tpf Attachments (6) cc: Roxanne White Juliet Jennings Wayne Campagna Virginia McDonald ( ¿ ~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY D!:;·";'"n}n!:~.._ - ~'I·,O ~.~ 0'-1 I·' 1,_' Cn"'D '. ___'0 -LIU .~~...." 111i::/'\Bt.:þ.~ "'*--- ~.-. '- .~~ -- --- GENDA TITLE: Appropriation Community Resources Coordinator AGENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: a¡S dp/cj. (gIll) INFORMATION: ACTION: SUBJECTIPROPOSALIRE UEST: equest approval of Appropriation #940064 transferring $30,125 trom the Police Department to the County xecutive's Office. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT: Tucker, White REVIEWED BY: Yes (1) J ATTACHMENTS: DISCUSSION: As you know, the Community Resources Coordinator position was transferred in October from the Police Department to the County Executive's Office and since that time payroll expenditures and other miscellaneous overhead expenses have been charged to the Community Resources cost center within the County Executive's Office. In order to cover these expenses and not exceed our original appropriation, it is necessary to transfer funds in the amount of $30, 125 to the County Executive's Office. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation # 940064 which transfers $30,125 from the Police Department to the County Executive's Office. LEEAPPR.SAM 95.094 í' Ö r " ~ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940064 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: TRANSFER OF FUND FOR COMMUNITY RESOURCE COORDINATOR. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100012013110000 SALARIES-REGULAR $25,520.00 1100012013210000 FICA 1,800.00 1100012013221000 VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM 2,050.00 1100012013241000 VRS LIFE INSURANCE 50.00 1100012013520300 TELECOMMUNICATIONS 200.00 1100012013600100 OFFICE SUPPLIES 100.00 1100012013800701 DP EQUIP-REPLACEMENT 255.00 1100012013800710 DP-SOFTWARE 150.00 1100031012110000 1100031012210000 1100031012221000 1100031012241000 1100031012520300 1100031012600100 1100031012800701 1100031012800710 SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM VRS LIFE INSURANCE TELECOMMUNICATIONS OFFICE SUPPLIES DP EQUIP-REPLACEMENT DP-SOFTWARE (25,520.00) (1,800.00) (2,050.00) (50.00) (200.00) (100.00) (255.00) (150.00) TOTAL $0.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ $0.00 TOTAL $0.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: COUNTY EXECUTIVE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ,- 6-?..s- ~ -(c:'-7.j- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , , "\ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY D'~T"·"·' ...~ ~'r~ _~~:~.::¡0¡¿~¡<~S~8ERS AGRNnA TITLR: Appropriation - Courthouse Maintenance Funds AGRNnA DATF.: June 14, 1995 qç~Um~:/h) ACTION: INFORMATION: SIffi,JF.CTIPROPOSA I JRRQJTF:ST: Request approval of appropriation #940065 for funding of court house maintenance projects. CONSRNT AGRNnA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMF.NTS: STAFF rONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, White, Breeden RRVTRWF.D BY: BACKGROITNn: Several years ago court fees were increased by the State with the additional fees to be reserved for improvement and maintenance to the Court House. mscnSSTON: Since the increased fees were effective, the County of Albemarle has collected $108,275 in additional fees willch are currently reserved as required. During FY 1994/95 expenses have been incurred at the Court House willch are eligible expenses from these funds. In addition, there is a current request from the Commonwealth Attorney for the construction of additional office space within ills operation and the installation of new carpet in ills office. The total eligible expenses are as follows: 1. 2. 3. Replacement of doors and handles - Sheriff's Department and corridors Installation of heating coils in holding cells Construction of office space and carpeting - Commonwealth Attorney $ 4,586.00 3,311.00 3,OR9 00 Total $10 9R6 00 The expenses for items 1 and 2 above have been paid from the County's Staff Services budget and the current request would also be paid through Staff Services. The attached appropriation request will replace the Staff Services I funds expended and authorize the use of the Court House Maintenance Funds to replace the General Funds expended. RRCOMMRNnATION: Staff recommends approval of the Appropriation #940065 in the amount of $10,986 as detailed on the attached fonn. I) ¡qq::- APP9465.WPD 95.093 , ~ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940065 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR COURT HOUSE MAINTENANCE PROJECTS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100043002331200 STAFF SERVICES-REPAIRS & MAINT. $10,986.00 TOTAL $10,986.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2100051000510107 COURT HOUSE MAINT. RESERVE $10,986.00 TOTAL $10,986.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: FINANCE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ø' ~-:?~ ¿-/0-r~- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ~ " COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Vsi 6-/~f) EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Ag~n:J. ¡ ~i ..._._ AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Rescue Squads AGRNDA DATE: June 14, 1995 9ç?M7!i:/ c-J AC.TION: INFORMATION: STffi¡EC.TIPROPOSA I JRRQIJRST: Request approval of Appropriation #940066 in the amount of $2,443for additional Two-For-Life funds for the three rescue squads . C.ONSENT AGENDA: AC.TION: X INFORMATION: ATTAC.HMRNTS: Yes (1) STAFF C.ONTAC.T(S): Messrs. Tucker, White, Breeden REVIEWED RY: r-- RAC.KGROIJND: The County of Albemarle receives funds each year from the State Office of Emergency Medical Services. The amount is based on $2.00 per passenger vehicle, pickup and panel truck registered and is a portion of the annual State vehicle registration fee. State law requires that 25 % of the fees collected be returned to the locality in which the vehicle is registered. The use of these funds is restricted for emergency medical services. DTSc.JJSSION: The County received $2,443 more in FY 1994/95 than was appropriated to the three rescue squads. The County has traditionally appropriated the total received to the three rescue squads. This request is to adjust the FY 1994/95 appropriation to pass the additional funds on to the rescue squads. RRC.OMMRNDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Appropriation #940066 in the amount of $2,443 as detailed on the attached form. APP9466. WPD 95.092 oJ ~ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940066 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION OF ADDITIONAL TWO-FOR-LIFE FUNDS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1100032030565002 CH'VILLE/ALB RESCUE SQUAD-EMS $814.33 1100032030565102 WESTERN ALB. RESCUE SQUAD-EMS 814.33 1100032030565202 SCOTTSVILLE RESCUE SQUAD-EMS 814.34 TOTAL $2,443.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2100024000240415 EMS FUNDS $2,443.00 TOTAL $2,443.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: FINANCE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~~&:;~ ~-~-7¿ ¿ -/~ ~ 7'j- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ,~ , COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ..... '. -- ::.\ ..... -. ' -'. .: ;-'. - ". '-, . - ~ .. ", ~:Ti':'i~¡k~J ¡{-9_'¡:~ AGF.NnA TITI.F.: Appropriation - Health Screenings AGF.NnA DATF.: June 14, 1995 ITF.M NTJMRF.R: C¡ç 6fo¡c.f (g: lei) AC.TION: INFORMATION: STJRjF.C.T/PROPOSA I JRF.QIJF.ST: Request approval of Appropriation #940067 in the amount of $5,237 to transfer funds from the Health Insurance Fund to the School Fund to cover cost of health screenings. C.ONSF.NT AGF.NnA: AC.TION: X INFORMATION: ATTA C.HMF.NTS: STAFF rONTAc.T(S): Tucker, White, Breeden RF.VTF.WF.D BY: BArKGROTJND: Health screenings were initially approved by both Boards for FY 1994/95 as part of the approval of the health and dental programs last August. In March the Boards decided not to implement the mandatory health screenings. mSc.nSSION: Initially, the health screenings were budgeted at $70.00 per screening for members in the health plan and the funds were being generated by applying a $6.00 per month increase to the health insurance premium. Transfer of the funds to the Human Resources health services line item would be done after the screenings were completed and the fInal bill received from Martha Jefferson Healthworks. Even though the Boards elected not to implement the mandatory health screenings, Martha Jefferson HeaIthworks did incur expenses in preparation for the screenings in the amount of $5,237.00. Funds need to be transferred from the Health Fund to the Human Resources health services line item in order for this bill to be paid. RF.C.OMMF.NnATION: Staff reconunends approval of Appropriation #940067 in the amount of $5,237.00 as detailed on the attached form. APP9467. WPD 95.095 n r.. u '. ,---..,.., IN .., ~r ,,~ \'.. .. """ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940067 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x X ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: TRANSFER OF FUNDS FROM HEALTH INSURANCE FUND TO SCHOOL FUND TO COVER COST OF HEALTH SCREENINGS. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1242062140311000 HEALTH SCREENINGS $5,237.00 1102093010930002 TRANSFER TO SCHOOL FUND-PERSONNEL 5,237.00 TOTAL $10,474.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2200051000512013 TRANSFER FROM HEALTH FUND $5,237.00 2102018000189914 TRIGON REFUND 5,237.00 TOTAL $10,474.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: HUMAN RESOURCES APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE b-8-7'5"" ~ -/~ -7'..5- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ) '\ c· . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY D:S·:·".... .. I . ON ---k-L'i.~:¡:Ç ~._ AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation for the Emergency Operations Center AGENDA nATR: June 14, 1995 Af:TION: ITRM NTJMRER: O¡~ C/o / f{- &. Ie.) INFORMATION: SIJRJRf:TIPROPOSA I JREQIJRST: Request approval of Appropriation #940068 in the amount of $6,000 from the EOC fund balance for costs associated with the acquisition of additional radio frequencies. f:ONSRNT AGRNDA: Af:TION: X INFORMATION: ATTAf:HMRNTS: Yes (1) STAFF f:ONTAf:T(S): Messrs. Tucker and Breeden, Ms. White REVTRWRn RY: RAf:KGROIJNn: On May 16, 1995, the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Management Board approved the use of $6,000 from their fund balance for costs incurred in the acquisition of additional radio frequencies. nISf:nSSION: The $6,000 will be used from the current EOC fund balance to pay costs associated with the preparation, application, coordination, and payment of fees for twenty 800 MHZ frequencies through the Federal Communications Commission. These frequencies will be licensed to the Emergency Operations Center. REf:OMMRNDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #940068 in the amount of $6,000 as detailed in the attached form. APP9468.WPD 95.096 ~~~}~\~ '\ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940068 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND EMERGENCY OPR. CENTER PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING OF ONE-TIME PURCHASES FROM FUND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1410031040310000 PROF. SERVICES/FEES $6,000.00 $6,000.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2410051000510100 EOC FUND BALANCE $6,000.00 TOTAL TOTAL $6,000.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: EMERGENCY OPERATIONS CENTER APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE t:Ó-:f~¿- ¡(' ~ 9' --"Y S- t-/6-?J- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS · \ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ",.'...'..'~. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ~~¡;::~~%~)_1:9J---- AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation FY 93-94 Section 8 Housing Fund Balance AGENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: ) C( <; Uo lef[ r¡. I-P ACTION: INFORMATION: SUBJECTIPROPOSAUREOUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #940069 in the amount of $4,044.73 for the Housing Assistance Program. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Ms. McDonald REVIEWED BY: ATTACHMENTS: BACKGROUND: The Section 8 Housing Program is an ongoing rental assistance program offered by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (BUD) through three separate programs that are tracked in a separate fund, The Section 8-00 I program provides housing assistance with 178 subsidies and is funded through June 2002, The Section 8-002 program provides 34 housing vouchers. The Section 8-003 program provides housing assistance for 35 units. DISCUSSION: A $4,044 fund balance exists fÌ"om Plior year administrative startup funds received from BUD and not expended by the County of Albemarle. The Housing Office wishes to appropriate the FY 93-94 fund balance to complete the computerization of the Section 8 Rental Assistance program by purchasing software, a computer, and a printer. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #940069 in the amount of$4,044.73 as detailed on attached fonn. 11h. ,:::;;:w MODFUNDB.WPD 95.097 .. ~ .. APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 94/95 NUMBER 940069 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND HUD GRANTS PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING OF ONE-TIME PURCHASES FROM FUND BALANCE. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1122781900800100 MACHINERY & EQUIPMENTS $4,044.73 $4,044.73 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ TOTAL 2122751000510100 FUND BALANCE $4,044.73 TOTAL $4,044.73 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: HOUSING APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE f;~ifC:; ¿-r-?s- . c,-/þ -7 ,j - BOARD OF SUPERVISORS , COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY C.'.....-r·)1>'. i;-~' 'r'1 !:::(',f'»D 1~i'1r:!l.S C'>~' t".u.",~ /;j~'6 \_. .' }¡, ........_,._, ....._J_'-I_:~__,?..::J~=--- . AGENDA TITI_E: ZMA 94-09 Jayel Industries. and John E. Campbell AC~ENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 ITEM NTTMRER: 1~~/c¡(~, i-) ACTION: INFORMATION: STJRJRCTIPROPOSA I ./REQlTEST: Proffer amendment CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: Yes INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONTAC.T(S): Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg REVIEWED RY: RACKGROTJND: The applicant originally proposed to amend the proffers of ZMA 88-11 to delete the requirement of two points of access and to have no connection between the Mill Creek and Lake Reynovia developments. This request was heard by the Board on February 15, 1995 and March 1, 1995. The Board deferred action to allow the applicant to submit a revised proffer for Board approval which would provide for emergency access between Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek with surety of constmction and maintenance. A proffer providing for such has been submitted and is attached. DIscnSSION: The proffer has been reviewed by Planning and Engineering staff and the County Attorney, all of whom fmd the proffer acceptable in meeting the Board's intent. RECOMMRNDA TION: Staff recommends approval of ZMA 94-09 with acceptance of the applicant's proffer dated June 9, 1995 and attached. (1 JAYELZMA.WP2 95.100 '" LEWIS A. MARTIN, III STEVEN L. RAYNOR C. LAMAR GARREN· ANN C. BERGER MARK N. FARMERt MARSHALL M. SLAYTON MARTIN & RAYNOR, P.C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 415 FOURTH STREET, N.E. CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 TELEPHONE: (804) 296-4151 FACSIMILE: (804) 296-8316 LEWIS A. MARTIN, JR. OF COUNSEL .. . admitted in Maryland taho admi1led in Di.1ric1 of Columbia June 9, 1995 VIA HAND DELIVERY Mr. Wayne Cilimberg Albemarle County Engineering Department Albemarle County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 RE: Lake Revnovia - Mill Creek Emerqencv Access Road Dear Mr. Cilimberg: In connection with our telephone conversation of yesterday morning, please find enclosed an executed proffer document (the "Proffer") drafted and signed in connection with the above- referenced matter. This Proffer has been transmitted to me by facsimile. As we discussed, I will immediately submit the originally-executed Proffer to you when I receive it from Mr. Nichols on Monday morning. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Very tru~~ yours, - ?¡:;¡;-ðf¡¡U//' Mark N. Farmer MNF/bld Enclosure C:\wpdocs\94-628.mnf\letter\albco.4 REceiVED JUN .9 1995 P!2nning [)ept. !UN-08-199S 09:49 FROM NICHOLS RCCOUNTANCY CORP ... ... TO 18042968316 P.Ol O:rig.~a.l PX"offer AlMtooed Proffer 1t PROnBR Date. June 8, 1995 Tax Map': 90 ZMA 'a: 88-11, 94-09 PiU·t..-e1. .. 36 lSt1bøtitution of COlldit.ion. Re1,¡atiD9 1:Q Re:¡;onJ.:a.g of 100 Acre. from RA to R-4 ~rouant to Seg~ion 33.3 oX thv Alb.~zi. county ZOD~n9 Ordißanc~, Jayel Induø~rie., Inc., a corporation orqani~ed and .;J\;iøtin9 und.:r: i:he làW'a of the Stah~ of Cal:i.fn:rnb ..nd .Jnhn R. Campbell (Jay.l IDdustri.., Ing. end ~ohA E. C..pbcll being JU1!:r:"ildnllf·t.er aallectively 1:èferrod to I.. t.he "DCYeloperlJ"), by their dalY-Aatho~izod ~gent, hereby voluntarily prøffer ~he conditione liøted bolow (the "Condition.-) which shall be applied to the properly, as 8uhs~itut.d conditions to ZItA . 88-11 (the ~Original ReaoninqM) in lieu of proffex i~.. number 3, deecribed in that o.~tai~ letter dated October lOt 1988, fram 30hn ~.P. Horne of the Depar;tment of Plannin9 & C~J1.1t:r Dav.lopumt of the COUftty of Albemarle to Heavenly Bolding Corporation, whiah letter i. attached hereto and ..de.. part bereof 8S Exhibit A. The conditions are proffered to amend tbe Or191na1 Rezoninv# and it is agreed that: (1) the Original Rezoning itself gives ~L.e to tne need for ~he co~t¡oU.i and (2) the Conditione have a ~ea8oDable relation to the ~i9iD&1 Rezonin9 previouely requested a.nd g~.nt8d.. (a) The emerqency vehicle Aççe_. ~o.d (the "AGo... ROO~R) shall be built in accordance with the specifications aQt Dut in tha.t gert.ain McKee/Carson d..ign of 'the Ace... Røad, datød Much 2', 11'5, which ".i.qn i. A~t.aobQd. be.r;-Qto and. mad. " part. _~.o£ ... Exhibit sa. (b~ It'f¡I!!! l.":\@velopers. and thei.r aUCCf.'!AIIOTA "nit AAAignR Rh"ll maintaiR. the Acoess Road, in a manner Eeasonably .atisfactory ~o the County of Alb~rle (the "Maintenance-), auch tha.t the Aaoess Road is accessible to e.-e:t:gt"'.l1cy vehiclEt. at all tia.s. (c) The Developers shall post a cash bond in the amount of rive Thousand and 00/100 Dollars ($5,QOO.00) (the "Bond It) t.o insure tbat the MainteIUmCe continaeø, iD accordance with the ter,as and oonditions of that ce~t&iD Road/SubdivisioD ~erfo~e Bond for MJ.nteDa1'.K;le by and b.w.en 'the Developer. &bci the County of Albemarle (the -Bond Agreem.ht~), wbiøh BQna Aqr..-en~ 1s attached hereto And made a part hereof .. S:kh.iÞi't. c. ~be Bond ahall be secured by . cørtificat4 :UN-08-199S 09:50 FRm1 NICHOLS ACCOUNTANCY CORP TO 18042968315 P.02 .. of deposit with a bank of the Developers' choosinq. ~h~ DpvRlopp-Tø .hall assign the certificate of deposit to the County of Albemarle, in .açordanc. with ~b6 tø~mø and QonditioDS of th.t çertein Collaterãl A&øigr~t of Certificate of Deposit by and between the 'Developers abd the Count:y of Albemarle (the "A..i9um.ent Agreeaent. It), which Aeøignaent ~reeDl.ent ia at.tache4 hereto and :m.acle a ~rt h.~.of ... bhibit D. The ~ntereBt whích AOorue8 on the Bond .aOh year shAll Þe paid to th= Dcvelope== en the 319t day of Dece~r of that year, beg~nninq in tbe year 1"5. ~be security for the Bond ...)" be subst.itut.ed with equal security different trOR that set out .bov. if such 8ubBtituti~n is approved by the County of Albe.IParle's attorney.. 15 WI!RBSS WBBRBOr, the negelopers have caused this Proffer to be exocuted tbi. l.!a.dllJ' of June, 1995, by th.oir undersigned attorney-tn-fact. JAYBL r.DUS7.RZBS, IRe., . Ca11fon.1.. oo~,;'a1:.l.oa By: An hony II. Nichol., attornev-in- faat for Jaye1 Industries, Inc. JOKII S. CUlJIa1ILX. f7 ~. e...7~r 6, tlra .,Aj~4 ARt ~~ N. RiçhG18, his attorney-in faot 2 ~"U1-08-1995 09: 50 FRŒ N] CHOLS ACCOUNTA~iCY CORP TO 18042968316 P.03 , . SWAm: OF CAL'IPORlUA C01J'N'I'Y OJil' V u /D cz.. ~ The fn~e90inq a9~Ø8D8nt was 4cknu.led9~d before me this day of June, 1995, by Antbony M~ IIlohDl., a:t.torney-ln- aot for Jayel IDdustxi.., Ißc. My conmi&sion expires: 7,? '6: c¡.ç- _~$ft~ .~.1.C r~~ ~~ --,-",~ _._~~ . ~)~~;.~~ œJ::IALSEAL I ÚJ l' . ~ MAAK~. <:AU. (tJ STATE 01" CAL1:FOKIIIA Q: ~~~6' -:: Notary ÞubIic - Ccìllfomia ]) q¡ q.., It; COUNT\' OF YUBA (J) COUNTY OF ~t1-6~ t~~ +~ My~~~:J ~ ~he fore9cin9 ~9~cc~ul WaD &gkn~lcd9Qd before ~ thi. day af June, 1995, by Anthony M. Nichols, attorney-ia-fagt or Jobn B~ a~mpbel~. My cOmllli..ian expire. = 7. .2?.. 9:;- ------7~ ~ /? - (}/J Rotary Publ.1c J:9 ~ 3 TOTAL P.03 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .., ~ 1·.. . ~ ,- ...~'-, .- AGENDA TITLE: ZMA 94-09 Jayel Industries, Inc. and John E. Campbell SUBJECTIPROPOSALIREOUEST: Proffer amendment AGENDA DATE: March 1, 1995 ACTION: Yes ...1- ~f',,"",'-' (.. f5:P'-ð"" 5/ INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: o BACKGROUND: The applicant proposes to amend the proffers of ZMA 88-11 to delete the requirement of two points of access and to have no connection between the Mill Creek and Lake Reynovia developments. This request was heard by the Board on February 15, 1995. The Board deferred action until March 12 to allow the applicant to discuss with the developer whether he would be willing to submit a revised proffer for Board consideration to state that "a connection between Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek shall be provided for emergency access". A proffer along those lines has been submitted and is attached. DISCUSSION: The applicant proffers a "one lane gated emergency access road". Staff feels this proffer meets the intent of the Boards' deferral with the understanding that the design of this access road is subject to the approval of the Site Review Committee. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval ofZMA 94-09 with acceptance of the applicant's proffer dated February 23, 1995 and attached. I:\GENERAL\SHARE\CILIMB\JA YELZMA.WP 9361 \7 l tW ,..,"'..,'""'......~'""-;'-..~ ;":-, t';' ~\ fi~ Ù ~ w ~; FEB-23-1995 14: 52 FRllt'1 tncHULS 8CCClUNTHNCY CORP 10 1804'3'724035 1-'. Ul LAKE REYNOVIA 1500 Reynovia Drive Charlottesville, VA 22902 February 23, 1995 Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg County of Albemarle Department of Planning & Community Development 401 MCIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Re: Lake Reynovia, Reynovia\Gristmill Connection Dear Hr. Cilimberg: The applicant is hereby requesting additional language to the proffer number 3 as follows. "The second access at the end of Reynovia Drive will be constructed as a one lane gated emergency acçess road". . .. ;.." '." Thank you very much for your kind consideration regarding this matter. Sincerely yours, I::~~f:l-. Attorney in Fact, Lake Reynovia cc Steven L. Driver, PE, LS f'~ rA.¡c- (f/t) ?y:>-- _J"'~I 7"-I",06""Y¥ no ï...) 1~9~) ~ ¡; .. .L·/O·9~ ,..."'........."""".,."..--- 9S'/)//ð'.077 n.,_..~<_~...., COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Depl. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902·4596 (804) 296·5823 ,c "_~~r=~ .'c:-_-) January 27, 1995 fEB i 0 \9'Ji L--··-- - . RO OF ç McKee/Carson 256 East High St Queen Charlotte Square Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ZMA-94-09 Jayel Industries Dear Sir: The Albemarle County Planning t ~ommission, at its meeting on January 24, 1995, by a vote of 6:0: 1, recommended denial of the above-noted request to the Board of Superivosrs. Please be advised that the Albem¡¡rle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their llIeeting on February 15. 1995. Any new or additional information regarding your appli< ation must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days pi ¡or to your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, w'¿//;::Ž William D. Fritz Senior Planner cc: Ella Carey Jayel Industries 91 I , f ~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE D.:pt. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (804) 2%-5823 January 23, 1995 McKee/Carson 256 East High St Queen Charlotte Square Charlottesville, V A 22902 RE: ZMA-94-09 Jayel IndustrÎ,;s Dear Sir: The Albemarle County Board (¡t' Supervisors, at its meeting on January 18, 1995, deferred the above-noted petition to its meelll1g on February 15, 1995. If you have any questions or co, nments, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ) ~ . . ¡();1 Ú.U~CLI~î V. WaYI~e¿imberg ///------- . J Director of Planning ~.~~~!PlIilïty Development VWC/jcw cc: Ella Carey - :\ ! " \ ~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE D¿pt. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 2965823 January 9, 1995 McKee/Carson 256 East High St Queen Charlotte Square Charlottesville, VA 22902 RE: ZMA-94-09 Jayel Industric:s Dear Sir: The Albemarle County PlanniJlg Commission, at its January 3, 1995 meeting, per your request, deferred the above-noted petition to its January 24, 1995 meeting. Please note that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this request at their February IS, 1995 meeting. I r you have any qucstions, pka~.(; do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, { . . " . William D. Fritz Senior Planner WDF/jcw cc: Ella Carey · '" COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Otepl. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire ROdd Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 MEMORANDUM TO: Albemarle COUJlty Planning Commission FROM: William D. FritL, Senior Planner DATE: December 27, 1994 RE: ZMA 94-09 - 1.Jyel Industries, Incorporated Attached please find informatio'l submitted after the preparation of the staff report and the original staff report. This request was heard by the Planning Commission on October 11, 1994 and was deferred at the request of the applicant. The applicant requested deferral to allow the applicant to determine more specifically the grading on the two properties and to see what impact a couple of options such as a náITOWer road would have. The Engineering Department hús reviewed the information submitted by the applicant and has provided additional comment. ~)taff opinion remains that this request should be denied for those reasons outlined in the initial st"ff report. J - ... McKEE/CARSON _.__.~--~~-_....._---_._-_..-.-_- _.~._- CONSULTING ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 3 October 1994 Mr. William D. Fritz Department of Planning an.1 Community DI~Vl'lopllll'nt County of Albemarle 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, V A 22l)()2 RE: Reynovia, ZMA 94-09, layel Industries, InL'. Dear Bill: In reference to the request L) eliminate the Reynovid Drive road connection between Reynovia and Mill Creek Ndrth we ,He providing ,Hlditional information as follows: Upon further review the approved p,lVement sl'L'liollS for Reynovia Drive increase, decrease and stay the same From Avon Stred to BLlckthorn Lane, the pavement remains the same (Categor\ IV). From Blackthorn I.dnl' to the first future road tie the pavement incredsesfrom d \',1tegory III to Category IV. However, the actual pavement thickness constructed excel ds the minimum reqllired; thus very little increase in pavement section would bl required. From the first future road to the second future road the pavement remain~. the same (Cllegory III). From the second future road to the Larkspur /Reynovia Drivl' inlersection the pavenH'llt section decreases from Category II to a Category I. No increds,' in pavement or ~;hollld\'r width would be required. From a construction st<lI1dpoint, ,11\\, increase in p<wl'nwnt sl'ction can be easily accomplished. Pursuant to a phone conVl'1 :-idtion with the residl'ntl~nginl'er, VDOl' is neutral on closing this conneclion. A,~ Idr ,1S irnp,1C1 to IIH' inlt' SI'\'lion with Avon Stred, the small innl'dSe in IrdHie will nol \\ dlTdnt dddilioll.d [¡III\ I.IIH'S ()r ollH'rvvisl' dffeclthe existing intersection. Constructing Reynovia Dril~ through Mill Creek NL!rth will require grading within rela ti vel y sma II lots. To Olll know ledge, no lL'mH )LI ry construction easements are shown on the final plat for ¡dill Creek, Ph,lse I. TI)(',.e lots subsequently have been sold upon which houses h,we bl'l'n constrllctl'll. To l'onsl rlld this section of road as currently designed and clpll'Oved by VDOT ¡Jnd ('l>lmly Engineering would require grading on lots Oil both sid,·s of the roeld. It is l'slil11clled thM () to ló feet outsicle the right-oE-way would be reqlJired to provide 2:1l'l1l slopes. We would not recommencl the use of retaining walls i1~. ,1n alternative, since Ihis will present a safety concern for neighborhood children. QUEEN CIIAI<IlJlTL SQUAIŒ 256 EAST IIICII STlŒET CIIAIUOITESVIIIF, VJl{CINIA 22902 80·1-979-7522 FAX, BO~-977-1J9'¡ ~ \I .. Mr. William D. Fritz 30cloberllJlJ4 1'c1gl' 2 It is our understanding thdl the majority of the residents in Mill Creek North and Reynovia do not want the Iliaci connection. It is our opinion that eliminating this connection will not ddverstly affect the traffic distrilJlltion as its relates to either subdivision. The adjacent Mill Creek South has bel:l1 approved by the COlmty and VDOT with only one road l'l>l1nection to ,1 public street, i.e. the one at Avon Street. This subdivision contains significcllltly more lots than Rcynovia. Mill Creek North will still have two public road cOI1l11'dions, i.e. Avol1 Street ,11HI Southern Parkway. ßased on the above infonn,tlion and on behalf of ollr client, we respectfully request that this connection not be reqlllred. Sincerely youh, I I r f i i (~IJv~n I "..Òriv~r, FE,! IS . McKee/( '<lrson I H70h \ xc; Jeff Lockwood ~ ,I \. .....,; ... ~ DECLM(AT lOtI L/';d " 1', J'-'~ .,~') . .11; {i\f. , '¡f;~'¡ [/~ '¡... J..;':. 'Fi ",'~ ij¡¡¡ '.:; ~. ,-j _ ~1J4 CAS'};MÏiW:hS . . 'Hj' ¡~' . '.. <)nl..; "'I"'-'¡ " OF COVENANfS, CONDITIONS, 1a:~;THICTIONS AND MILL CIŒI:K TillS DECLARATION, IIIIHlu on t.he dato horuin"fter set forth by CRAIG nUILDi:HS OF ALlIEMAHU:, ¡ II C ., a V i t· gin i a s laC k co l'- porlltlon, horeil,aftor rofo['['od to ¿¡~¡ "Declarant," WIT N E S ~; 1: T II : WIIEHEA~;, Doclarant is the owner of cel'til in pn>[1crty in tho County of Jdbomarlo, Statu of ViL'yinia, which is lIIore [1ilr- ticularly d09cribod an: Lots 1 - )'9, Phase I, Mill Creek PUD, ilS shown on tho attachod subdivision Plat thereof ilia de by R. 0 . Snow, I n c., d a to d Fe b l' U a l' y 1 7, 1 9 ¡¡ 7 . AND WIIEHEAS, DacLH'Mlt will convey the said properties, subject to cortðin protoctivu COnVel\ants, conditions, rcstric- tIano, reoervlItion!!, lien!! ilnd cl,anc:¡ ¡¡:¡ hereinaftcr.:¡et forlh; NOW, TIIEREFOIŒ, Doclal-iHìt her·cby dcclilres th..t ..II of tho proportleo doocribod ilbovo sh..ll I)(! hold, sold and convoyed subjoct to',tho following eilSCIIHlnU¡, l-csLl'ictiolìs, convenants and conditions, all of which aro fOl' the puq10se of enhi1l)cinq ilnd p['otocting tho valuo, dosirability, and aLtt'ilctiveness of the r041 proporty. The90 oasemonts, covenants, restrictions and con~ ditionø shall run with tho [,uill property and shall be binding on All partios having 0[' acquit'in() any t'ifJht, title or interest in tho doscribod propertios or any p<ll·t thet'eo(, ilnù shall inure to tho bonofit of oach owno~ thereof. AnTICLE DEfINITIONS Soction 1. "Association" shall mean ilnd refer to The Hill C['ook lIomo Ownor3 AS~lOciaLion, Inc., its successol'~¡ ilnd a89igna. Soction 2. " P t- 0 P e 1- tie ~; .. ~; I... 1 1 me iI n iI n d I' e ( e I' L 0 L h a L ----- cortAin roal property hel'oinbufo¡'e describeò, and such additions thot'oto ao may hot-oilftol' be ¡'I-mil/hI. within the. jlJ¡-i~¡dictiolì of tho ~88oclation. " .' / .. addLOSO) of sucl, violation, anù in tho cvcnt such violation i9 not stoppoù, hal tod o¡:- COl-l-octed (a~; set COL"th in such wL"itten notificat.ion) alld continll09, thon, without (lIL"thcL" noticc, the ^BBociðtlon may COllUO ouch violation to be stopped, haltcd OL" cO['Loctod, without liability (OL" no doing, and may cause 3ny and All costs iocueLod (including attornoys' feos) in connection \ tho['owith to b., cha['god AU an a[j5C~;5I1\ent to such OWIICL". Such assOß9monta ma~ bo colloctod in allY of.the manllcrs specificd in ^['t1clo VI hOIIlOf, Incllldin~ nlllt at law oc in equity oc by fillnç a notl.;o of a3!1033mont lien as heroin pL"ovided. The romody hO·L"oln pL"ovldod shall bo in addition to any othcL" L"emedy provldod or allowod by law or in cquity and shall not be deemed An oxcluBlvo ['dmedy. I::ioction of onc L"ellledy (whotheL" heL"ein spe- clflod or alluwed 0[' otho['wiso) shall not act as a bar to the Bubaoquont 0[' concll["ront uoo of othel- available cemedies. ^Hl'ICI.E IX GENER^L PHOVISIONS ahall havo thù rlç¡ht to onforce, l)y any proceeding at law or in ~~~. I::nforcolI\onL. Tho ^s50ciation, or any Owner, oquity, øll l-ootL1ctlonu, conditionH, covonantH, rll!l'~L"lIatron5, Ilona and ch..n]oo now OL horeaftor imposed by the provision:! of thia Docl/lL/l1 ion. l'a1lul-1I I,y thl) ^""ociation Ol- by allY OwneL" to enfol:co any covonant OL Loutrlctlon herein contained shall in no ovont bo doon.od ø wll1vo[" of tho I:"ight to do gO theL-oaftee. thODO covonAlltu OL LootLictlono by judIJlI1cnt OL" couct oL"der shall Soclion 2. --- soveL"11bl11ty. Invalidation of ilny one of in no way affoct any othoc pL"oviuionu which shall celllilin in [lIll lOLCO And offoct. ~ ìitllølf, 1ts UUCCOOOOL"U And øouiç¡no, (a) a ton foot (10') Oilsomont ------ ølooç¡ ollcll 111do of ovory p["OPOL-ty 1ino of Ollocy Lot, such nase- -------- mont fOL oloctrlc, cAbin tolovl:Jion, telephone, waL<~L" and otheL" ~tion 3. ~~~~~ . Doclarant heL"l~by L"eseL"ves for utilitioo /lncl (b) tho l-i<Jht to (jL"ant eascments fOL" any lawful .--- ~ pULpoao ovoc and AcrooU oach and uvecy Lot, so long as the COllL"SO ~ =---../~'-~~ ~ of Buch oO:lomont clOOD not CI:"OUO any \)lI i lei i ngs on any such Lot, ------- -1]- " /'ø .,Ã- such grant('Q) to be in writing and ~aco~dod in tha Cle~k's Office of the Circuil. Cout:t of Albemat:le County, vit:ginia. Sect!on 4. /\mondment. Tho covenants and l'estt:ictiono of this Declðl-ation ahall run with and bind tho land, and shall inure to tho l,onofit of and be on[orcoable by tho Association, at: the Ownor of any Lot ßubjact to this Declal-ation, theit: renpeo- tive legal re~resentativos, heirs, successot:s, and assigns, for a tot:m of twonty-fivo (25) yoa~u [rom the data this Declaration is recorded, aftor which timo said covcnants shall be automatically extended fo~ uucc8aaivo po~lodß o[ ton (10) yeara. Tho covonants and restrictions of this Doclal'ation may be amonded dUl'lng the firot twenty-five (25) yoal- period by an inst~ur¡lent signed by not leso than tw,,-thirds (2/3) of the Lot OwneL:s, and thereaftet: by an instrument: 8ignod by not less than two-thir-ds (2/3) of tho Lot Owners. Any amendment m\lat: 1>0 pn)pul-ly n~con)cd. IN ~liTNESS \~IICREOF, tho lJndnl-~¡ignl~cI, baing the Ooclal-ant heroin, hl>9 hot:ounto oat hlu hnnd nnd uoal thin ~ d,)y of March , 1907. C H^ I C; ntH LDE R~i OF M.1I EM/\ HLE -;,' I NC . , /1 / ~;. lIy =-¡>I~~<' --:~'7 ì-- COMMONHEALTII OF VIHGINIA C IT'f /COUNT Y (It' r)3l'A.,.-...,jlc to-wit: The foregoing wan ackno"l1.odç¡(Jd be[or:o me this ~~ day of ~Û-1'-t-_\) , 1907, by ___Ð~j~~\. C'5\O"~~ President of Craig ßuildD~5 of Albcma~I~, Inc. My ,:ommlsaion oxpii'Ds: _u_____.....J:}_~..._'6'_L____· --.-SliLlìß..~_Q__ll9 (.-J . ~otary Public -) '1- ~ L;.- '" , , ¡ .. r ~/.),j;Zh.. ) Þ ð)Ù;;;t~ April, 1986, ;;';~ .,' TillS AGIŒEMENT madc as of Lhe 1st day of by and between GeGcge Ilarrison (;jllj.am, Trustee for Reynovia Land Trust ula daLed March 15, 1985 ("'j'rust"), ßAHßARA R. WHITE, widow . ("White"), and ~he COUN'rY OF ALIŒHAHLE, VIRGINIA (I'County"), \.¡ I '1' N E SSE 'r II; 1. Factual ßackgronnd. 1.1. By Deed of Partition dated December 1, 1981, bet- ween Cl if ton J. Reynolds, e tal. (" Reynolds") and Whi te, which deed is of record in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 733, page 719 (a copy of which deed is attached hereto as Exhibit A and is sometimes referred La herein as the "Partition Deed"), the parties, among other things; (a) Pactitioned a tract of land fronting on Avon Street in Albemarle County, soutl1 of the CiLy of Charlottesville, con taining approxima te ly 490 acres in to two parce Is, One ,;on- .~ ''''''/<: I taining 100.20 acres (Tract A); the other containing the residue M, I \ ~ ,-, ,Ie. __________ (Tract B). As a JesuIt of said Partition Deed, Reynolds, et al. ---------, became owners of 'react B and While became owner of 'rract A. (b) ACj lead, upon the Le nlls and condi tions thc LC in sta Led, to grant ,:ross-easemen ts ,,1 t a. "reasonable location n for water and sewer. (c) Agl eed, upon the terms and condi tions se t for th therein, to certain road ea.sements along the centerline of the dividing line between the two tracts. 1. 2. 'I'he easemen ts above re [erred to were reci ted to be II in tended to pf:rmi t fu 11 deve Lopmen t, opera. tion and enj oymen t of [the two tracts] and the improvement of the Parcels benefited by such appurtenances and to be adequil te to sat is fy zoning, ~,i te · ~ , ~ ~- rí s¡~ . 4 ?" '¡ Z, 14 .4~, 1..': ~ " ç , I~ .¡ . ~i \~ \ ¡ / HÓE '--------- í~,,-_ -.- " -4,'-4.£.1 24---_--.___ ......- ~ '- - ''\.. '-, '~ -- '/"1" " ~:..:....:.: I 25 "- ~' '\' 17'\,I:J ., wV .1/.1,,% 2 Il~IL ·;;;T !~E INc' v1¡4/ r u I//V . (; Fe! 157 E é 7/ "" N . 1''11 I- L , I () - / " the Plat) shall bt~ permitted. Future (as yet unplanned) development of both l,roperties will result in the conunon use of roads on Tract D soutll of Tract A and the parties agree that the same principals f of c,)ntribution and cost sharing outlined here for Trust's P.U.D. shdll apply to such future development. 3.4. The parties understand that Trust does not ~ assume any obligation to build any roads on Tract 8, and that, if - ---- - . '- any roads are built, the location thereof and des~gn may vary ---- from tha t shown on E;~hibi t 8. However, it is the in tention of the parties that if roads are built on Tract il, the approximate -------------------- location of such road:; will be as shO\ýn on Exhibi t D and Tract A ------------------.. will have the right 10 intersect said roads at the approximate ~points designated. ~ for Tract A at such intersections ~h~ll be of sufficient width (including any required cuts or fills) to comply wi th VDII'I' S Landards. 3.5. Parat.Jl.-aphs numbered 5 and 6 in the Parti tion Deed provide for a COldmon road be !:\ýcen Pain ts 14 and 15 and for cul-de-sacs at Point~; 15, 17 and 2S, which were intended to provide vehicular acc,~s s to the "Wes tern R id<je II (clescr ibed in 2.5) and to a ridge fWJ:th of that. '1'he parties acknowledge tha t it would be unlikely or impractical for future development of their respective proP2rties ton 11", -" h 1 ~ ._~ _ _.__ STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSI( )N: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ AUGUST 9) 1994 SEPTEMBER 14,1994 ZMA-94-09 JA YEL IND USTRIES AND JOHN E. CAMPBELL Petition: Jayel Construction hnd Development petitions the Board of Supervisors to amend the proffers of ZMA-88-11 to delete the requirement of two points of access and to have no connection between the Mill Cl eek and Lake Reynovia developments. Property, described as Tax Map 90D, Parcel A, is the 10ca\Ìon of the Lake Reynovia Development. This site is zoned R-4 (proffered) and is located in tht: Scottsville Magisterial District. This site is recommended for medium density residential (4. 01-10 dwelling units per acre) in Neighborhood 4. Character of the Area: The area is developed with single family homes in the Mill Creek and Lake Reynovia developments. Applicant's Proposal: The prvffers made with ZMA-88-11 would require a connection between Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek. Attachment C is the action letter for ZMA-88-11, item number 3 contains the language under review. The applicant has submitted a justification for this request (Attachment D). In addition still"has included a portion of the proposed road plans for Reynovia Drive which would provide cOllnection to Gristmill Drive in the Mill Creek development. These plans have been modified by st"ff to identify the features shown on the plans. RECOMMENDA TION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the intent to ZMA-88-11 and provisions of the Zoning and Subdivision Ordinances and recommends denial. Plannin!!: and Zonin!!: Historv: The Board of Supervisors appr,wed ZMA-88-11 which established the current zoning on the site on October 5, 1988. Numerous subdivision plats have been reviewed and approved. Comprehensive Plan: This site is located in Neighborhood 4 and is recommended for medium density residential use. The Comprehensive Plan contains no comments directly addressing the proposal. 1 SUMMARY AND RECOMl\ŒNDATION: Staff has requested Engineering Department review in order to detennine if ~ngineering obstacles to the construction of a connection between Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek ~xist. Their comments are included as Attachment E. While grading will be required to comtruct a connection the volume is not such that the construction of the roadway would be inconsist ent with sound engineering and design practices. The Engineering comments note increased traffic; on Reynovia Drive and at the intersection with Avon Street and the need to upgrade Reynovia I >rive due to increased traffic. (This can be accomplished during the approval process of other plats in the development. No roads have been accepted into the state system.) Staff has also reviewed this reqllest for compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance, Sections 18··37e and 32.7.2.4 (Attachment F). These provisions call for the provision of access to adjacent properties and for the provision of two public street connections for developments of fifty or moce residential units. (Lake Reynovia is approved for 198 units maximum. Mill Creek currently has two points of access.) StatThas reviewed the file for ZMA-88-11 and is of the opinion that the provision was intended to address the Sections referenced above. Staff opinion is that their has been no change in circumstance which would indicate that the provision and acceptance of the proffer is no longer necessary. The provision of ac\;ess between the two developments is not intended to increase traffic volumes in one or the other development. However, the provision of alternate access is useful for emergency services, ~chool busses, mail delivery and other services provided in the area. The elimination of the requirement of a connection between the two developments will require that all traffic serving the two developments to travel on Route 742 for that purpose. StatT is unable to identify any engineering reasons for removal of the proffer requiring connection to Mill Creek. The elimination of the access would be contrary to provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinances and gond planning practices. For these reasons statTrecommends denial ofZMA-94-09. Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve this request the action should be to eliminate proffer tllfee ofZMA-88-11 which states "Access to Reynovia shall be provided in two locations as delineated on the application plan". ---------------- A TfACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Proffers of ZMA-88-11 D -Applicant Information E -Engineering Comments F -Provisions of Ordinance 2 HAT MTN ; I~,r; ,--- ~'O ì .-...~.. ,,~ _. - - UCK MOUN1AIN ~: --Q"..(;,,,, 100'] ë ... .' , r.P ¡¡ru I' -:- , I , GIBSON MOUNTAIN , ~ U(,. J --- o ¡ATTACHMENT AI v ..........., M¿"14 I I I I ~. . ~ '''~~~ /- ~:'" f>'?-t' '\ ? J ~'---~.... /.' .~ ~_.... (t: ¡'''II '/.~ I,í (J) r<1 o :j o Z l!I o o (J) fTl n -I o Z <D o o ) (f) rot c; ::i o z <D o o ~ I"¡ t; ~ I . i' I : r - : ~ . . ~ ! ! ~ G o ií . . ~ '; ~ r· n ; i! ¡¡¡I¡i¡ - Ii , , ~ p ~j i ; ~ -. , ~ /J) C") o -f -f /J) ~ r r IT! o ¡¡¡ -f :!! C") -f '"'' ~ -- \\ \ ~ I-' ~~ (J) I çtt 1-'-0 Œ~ ~ H R :t> r- OJ fTl <co j;: ::n r- fTl (') o C 2 -I -< IATTACHlU:NT C / \ -- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. ,)f Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5823 October 10, 1988 Errol Cowan or Jack Campbell Heavenly Holding Corporation P. o. Box 2457 Santa Barbara, California 93102 RE: ZMA-88-11 Heavenly Holding Corporation Dear Mr. Cowan or Mr. Campbell: At their meeting on October 5, 1988, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors approved the above-noted petition described as a request to rezone 100 acres from RA to R-4. Property located on the west side of Route 742, approximately one-half mile west of its intersection with State Route 20, is known as Lake Reynovia. Tax Map 90, Parcel 36. Scottsville Magisterial District subject to the following proffers, in letters of September 16 and September 26, 1988, and further verbally amended by the applicant at this meeting. Proffers read: 1. If the rezoning a~plication is approved, development will be undertaken in general conformance with the application plan (preliminary plat) with the exception of future amendments as may later be provided for during the preliminary plat approval process. Such modifications to the plan may include, but not Le limited to, (a) entrance relocation at Avon Street, (b) additional dwelling units planned for "the ridge" located west of the lake and adjacent to Mill Creek Phase 2 (see item number 2 below), (c) realignment of roadways as dictated by Virginia Department of Transportation review, (d) reconfiguration of townhouse layout, and (e) other revisions as proposed by County staff and Planning Commjssion and agreed to by the applicant. f ATTACHMENT C J ~age ~ Heavenly Holding Corporation Page 2 October 10, 1988 2. Gross density of the total tract will not exceed 198 dwelling units or 1.98 dwelling units/acre. The area west of the lake on ".the ridge" shown on the Application Plan (preliminary plat) shall be developed only with single-family, detached dwelling units on lots of roughly equivalent size to those in the adjacent areas of the Mill Creek PRD. Any reJnaining allowable dwelling units, up to 198 total dwelling units, which are intended as townhouse units, may be placed only within the area shown for townhouse units on the Application Plan. Additional single-family dwelling units may be place~ within the other areas shown on the Application Plan. 3. Access to Reynovia shall be provided In two locations as delineated on the application plan. 4. Each single-family, detached lot shall contain a 5,000 square foot building site with a length to width ratio not to exceed 2.5:1. Ño driveway shall encroach more than 50 lineal feet on slopes of 25 percent or greater. 5. Lot reconfiguration necessitated by this condition of approval and other necessary modifications to the preliminary plan will be undertaken after review of the plan by the Commission, and the changes will be subject to administrative approval by staff. If the above proffers accurately state your intent, as verbally expressed at the Board of Supervisors' meeting, please resubmit the proffers on your letterhead over your signature. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. s· erely, .J I e~· g.t,<>-rPCLt¿1'f~L, o . T. P. Horne . ector of Planning and Community Development JTPH/pcr cc: Barbara ~lite Rober t HcKee œ ~- tOTES \)~ "f\\\..\.. ' ~\tö~' ' G, .I' ,j ~t~ " , . ,~ , Cf;HTiAUHIE HOAllOHIAL CUR ':. \It: DAU ~1 - I ) ''''':..:~- I CX:~~~},,~Ü~~i'JI""" 0.. .,0)0 ,.. »1" "".. ,. 2~J·:;/,~ ~~ 9'1 ~~.." ;¡ ..... " ~- "."1'._ - ~ t:~~!,~la[) ,~.,.,.,,, ./ t r·~ "" / - - ) /..,;..-- -.-'.. ¡r _ 'J~'~- ~~"l -- , ,,:/ ,.>" J ''''''''Y>' -' '/' '(. ,ft" ),// \::=".~ "JI~'>,I~ "'---.... I ---'-- ----'-- < " " ,- '- ! ., ,1.. , d - . i , ~...',,--'... ...: \ ~- \ ,I PR .-' P ELIMINARY LAT LAND USE :::~~ ~."ChH SUMMARY r~~i::~,f~~ ." """.... i?:~~t':~':: ~;.;~~:~:~,l;URt. 'Ùª~:~1;': ~~1E;;,!::;:~n fUI~A~~~ ~~:ti~rf'r DtYtlÐr\"~fI \ ~~OT1!>W'llf " :f~~ :~:: ~ t..I.., , ~¡ .CAf ..or..( ~I,.:IM_fll ~ ·'·CHl OúeoCH( C;'tIoCllf ;~;:;~3~ ,'\'~~~tt ;,~ I"" JoQ-. 4......1 ;~g~::~::: "~~I ~:~~~17~~~~·· '0):':.'::':':"'" C.'JIOl U ~~;~'':~':T(nI .".7U ~~:.'Hf ",.,;:'~O / ,/ F/ ..> :' " , .. ./' REYl\fOVIA Reslduuial C Albemark ~mmunit y oum)', \l1f!lnUI JavelC( . mstrucuun &. Dcveio ~~4 I.. ~_.kr~¿}:.:~ Rot~~ B. McK~c ' ,:;; r'::::~' ",,~'::~~'al""- rC' ',rC, ChMlnI:U~~...A~(~;~~ 97Y 1P~ Rc...ød: A n July 19ai1 IIPi' 29. I'ln ~ ~~~k ¡·-.It(T \1) ru c~,_, In'm.'. , . il..Jl.Fl '00 '" I ATTACHMENT D , McKEE/CARSON CONSULTING ENGINEERS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 24 May 1994 Amelia McCauley Zoning Administrator Department of Zoning County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 RE: Lake Reynovia, m~nor ZMA, Construction of Reyno\,j;, Drive Dear Amelia: At time of rezoning of the above referenced subdivision, a;econd road connection was proffered. The subject connection is Reynovia Drive to Gri:;tmill Drive in Mill Creek at the rear of the property. As a minor zoning map amendment, the applicant request that the Board waive this proffer and eliminate this road connection. From a design standpoint, McKee/Carson has determined that the pavement design for Reynovia Drive is sufficient to handle the additional traffic that would be exiting to Avon Street. Currently, Reynovia Drive is built früm Avon Street to a prtÌnt just beyond the Recreation Center. The remaining road is rough graded 1o the rear of the property. No road work has commenced within the Mill Creek subdivisi'Jl1. Eliminating this connection would not affect the existing wads in Mill Creek, in fact it will reduce the amount of traffic expected on Gristmill Dri·re. . To follow, additional supporting information may be submitted to accompany this application. If you have further questions, please feel free to call upon, 'Ie. erely, Jeff Lockwood Joe Cochran QUEEN CHARLOTTE SQUARE 256 EAST HIGH STREET CHARLOrTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 804-979-7522 FAX: 804-977-1194 , .YNOVl^ DRfVE SUPERELEVAT10NS (LS-2001 C.L 51 A. C.L ELEV. S 38+61.03 478.67 0.4000 38+79.31 479.76 0.3440 38+97.58 480.78 0.2890 39+15.86 481.72 0.2330 39+34.13 482.59 0.1780 39+52.41 483.38 0.1224 39+70.68 484.11 0.0667 39+88.96 484.76 0.0110 40+07.23 485.34 -0.0440 40+25.51 485.84 -0.1000 I... 40+43.78 486.27 -0.1560 \ C:I \ \ I ~ I \ I , I E 0.0400 0.0344 0.0289 0.0233 0.0178 0.0122 0.0067 0.0011 -0.0044 -0.0100 -0.0156 \ I \ \ ............... '-- 'I --- ; ----- ! flEYNOVIA DRIVE SUPERELEV A TrONS (LS-200 t ... . I C. L. STA. C. L. ELEV. 5 E 40+43.78 486.27 -0.1560 -0.0156 ,., 40+62.06· 486.63 -0.1000 -0.0100 40+80.33 486.91 -0.0«0 -0.0044 40+98.61 487.12 0.0110 0.0011 ... 41+16.88 487.26 0.0670 0.0067 .. ... ..........- '" '4 """'n 1"\ "4.......... I ATTACHMENT D It Page 2] .", --." "- Nòrl ~"'~ ~ T.he ¡x;vemen't on Gristmill Dr. TrOiT] 5tatlon /7+50 io ..station "--. '--. 2..3 ·~.50 .5hë:J/ I be- upqraded ~", Fro¡1/ ð Cafe90ry J1J. . ¿¡I 'emenT TO a ¿afe.9ory.IJ? . /emenT before Or of- \.7ìrr¡,3,. 0/ COn.5 truc.flon or The.- 'Re.. 'no.i¿ia Driv~ ç..onnec.:hofì. -=- ~' I ..... .. . . '. .......... ! : '." t.i..J -" 0ì ~ :.'6: (.,...... ..... .'.:":: ¡~~,;'.:~ :. '::. . . \ \ \ / - 8 "TAPPING St..ëEVE ¡ VALVE J '.-.:, .. . '. I I I \ \ \ \ \ ..... '. ....... 8"G/?ADEDAGGREGA7ë BAse MAT. I-COMPACTEO SlJSGRAOE 1r.J\ ....J ; +-JJ);-(d~ -è ---. \ \I: 1\..1 ¡ =~~~ 'J_n .ì' " L:-.- I --.---..--'--.- -_'I 1- ,I -----_._--_.._>--~- , , " ~ ~. ..+' L 1T 'V \\ IV" ~ ~ ~ -{ - - ~t~ ,-- "- rr ....... ~ ~ ~ ~~''''' - , 5/0 ~ ~ "J "" ì '- ~I .~ '-"1 ~ ~ '\.-,. ~ ~ ! I-- - I r ATTACHMENT D II Page 3\ , - . T .... - II 7.P. - .;;- 7."'7 500 ·k'A ^I !'; I If ^' J ^-'" ~ of JI I I .C;;; I j /1 ~ ':;:0/... - I '1/ I I :1 490 1 01.0 ¡ '1' -r-r 1;:-- -. 1\ ~lj I .~ -..IJ ....... 1./ ....... \'\1 ...-/ ........ IjJ ~ /- --- - ...... " .... ------- - - - - - I- _ A/I 1;::- F I I~ YI, "1- 'OJ "7" - ;;;¡M N. - -- -....... ....... / 480 m ''1. -------:.--- -- ./ - - ' -- ¡.;, \IF- ^/I r,¡;;;^, ..; .--- -- / - c.--- ~ --- ...-/ ~ - .... I / .- -::.... -/ - 1.1 1--- :; ;Ž Z . (",/1' .v '''' J "" - -:.;.;;. /0 ........ -- - - ./ ..-' ~ '---- -- -- -- ··.R , F-' - ~ - 470 .-/ ~ ...., -- ...-/ ~ I ~ . ...... þ¥ 7'-JTTl, ..."........ T - ~ . .....,.... :- ~ ,. ~'"" ..... ,,",~I . .."", 'Vy I '" ...... T - .... i4Í1 - 1 -~ rL..... ~II I. I ~ /1 T/ .""1 ~ -, I" I IV' - ,.......a E-Gh- -- - -- ..., .... . II ..... ...., . ,",' If' 4<óO ~ _. 1 ,. IY' .,,' II ~ ..... { ,~ f t- r~T K "7 VV, ...... ~ '\I , l' Jq ~ .- r-- 4-50 - ........ ..... c'"- III -< II.... ~I k I ) ~ - '- " , ~ . [\ IU ~ ./ n. - f.... ~ I.... I L.o6 . ". .\ ;..... .. '. ....... r-.. "IJ , . . .< - ..... U' ., r.... .,. ,. f· \ f'-. .C' " ..' ,.' -- - "- , '. .' , ::- .... -~ ~ .." r'.. .- ;::J ~ ." /. ;. ~.~ r :J A ~~. ..... --.-- -r.;:: ~ ~ '\J' \.:. oõ} '71 A .- '.. ' "!" ,..... .. ,. -. '" . . ~ '.. - - ..- .IlL -,. .., .o, - ...,. ;J P1'Þ-" .. .. " .A ;' . -.I ..J -~ -. - 870(ò :>. L. D. ;3. e£.R.F . .. . REVISIONS: -- b-2Z c... OMl,. i WA- : ... __ ~~.,~_" <"~. i C SHEET 7 of 18 '- I ATTACHMENT E .._-.. CUUNTY OF ALBEMAJlLE MEMORANDUM DATE: July 27, 1994 (~ TQ: Bill Fritz - Senior Planner FROM: Jack M. Kelsey, PE - Civil Engineer II RE: ZMA 94-09 Jayel Industries The Engineering Department has reviewed the requested withdrawal of the proffer to connect Reynovia Drive, in Lakeland at Reynovia, to Gristmill Drive in Mill Creek. The request did not state specific reasons for the request, other than that it was the desire of the developer to eliminate this connection. This connection was designed to pass between two lots in the Mill Creek subdivision. A 50' right-of-way Was dedicated between these two lots to serve the connection. Construction of the road, between these lots, will require an excavation that varies from 12' to 9' deep. The width of the road section is 34' from center of ditch to ditch and 2: 1 slopes are required on each embankment. The resulting width of the top of the excavation will vary (at a minimum) from 82' to 70' adjacent to these lots. Temporary construction easements, outside of the 50' right-of-way and varying in width from 15' to 10', must be obtained from the adjacent property owners in order to grade the road to the appropriate cross section. These easements were not retained by the applicant during the development of Mill Creek. Subsequently these two lots have been sold and dwellings have been constructed. The plats of these lots provide for a 25' building setback from the .right-of-way lines and provide an area possible for the temporary construction easements. However, construction will alter the present character of these lots and any site improvements or landscaping within the temporary easemenf areas. As an alternative to grading within these adjacent lots, the developer could construct retaining walls. There are varieties of wall designs (ie. precast or tie-back) that minimize the amount of back-excavation and may be utilized under these conditions. The County has on file a traffic study of Lake Reynovia prepared by McKee/Carson August 29, 1988 with corrections as noted by the Virginia Department of Transportation. This study shows 307 vehicle trips per day (vtd) entering Mill Creek through the connection to Gristmill Drive. If thi~ connection was deleted, Reynovia Drive would need to carry the additional traffic. This would increase the traffic at the S1. Rte. 742 entrance to approximately 1169 vtd. The increase will impact the design of Reynovia Drive between Blackthorn Lane and the future road intersection, just below the recreation facility (ie. sta. 15 to sta. 28). This section was constructed to a Category III pavement design and 'Would have to be upgraded to a Category IV design. To check this calculation we counted a minimum of 112 proposed and future lots that will be served by this section of road, according to the most current plans. When this PUD was approved a traffic generation rate of 7 vtd per lot was the standard. Multiplying 112 lots by 7 vtd/lot results in 784 vtd within this section. Since this exceeds 750 vtd, a Category IV pavement design is required. Therefore, this checks with our previolls calculation. · .. I ATTACHMENT Ell Page 2\ Mr. Fritz July 27, 1994 Page 2 As a potential alternative, we considered extension of Larkspur Court to the Mill Creek intersection of Mill Creek Drive and Quail Crossing. Due to the short distance and vertical separation between these road systems, the intersection of Reynovia Drive and Larkspur Court woulçl have to graded at least 15' below the existing grade to meet public road design criteria. Present plans call for only as' cut at this intersection. Although such a large cut is possible, extensive grading of the adjacent lots would be necessary to make them accessible. Therefore, we have determined that this alternative connection is unfeasible. It is the opinion of this Department that this proffered and approved connection' provides a public benefit. Personal and professional relationships will develop between these two adjacent communities and there will be a need for safe and convenient internal circulation of traffic. To enable fire, rescue and police personnel to more effectively serve these adjacent communities, provision of an internal connection is necessary. Lastly, internal circulation is needed to provide more efficient maintenance and snow removal services, and to make available optional foul weather/snow routes for motorists. This connection, as envisioned when the PUD was approved, provides a necessary link between these communities. In conclusion, we find no public benefit, nor do we find any sound engineering reasons or construction limitations that can justify elimination of this connection to Mill Creek. Therefore, we recommend denial of this ZMA request. Please call me should you or the applicant have any questions regarding this matter. jmk\ cc: Jo Higgins l.... J.. . IATTACHMEN~ section 18-37. General standards of Desi (e) street access. The street arrangement shall provide adequate access to adjoining parcels where necessary to provide for the orderly development of the County. 32.7.2.4 For a development of fifty (50) 0" H\Ore r'2,-,i(1cnLial units, reasonably direct vehicular access shall be provided from all residential uniU~ to tv~-: (2) public street connections. 'rhe foregoing ilot,'.A1j tt\~ t.ancl ing I the commission for any scale of resident.iaJ d~~1'~1 r·p\\lent \\lay require two (2) points of access t.o a pl1blic street where such access is deemed \<Tarranted due t.n t.he character of the residents of sneh develo~'¡;1'"nt insllld" ing but not limited to the eldérly, handicupp~d, and developmentally disabled. (Added 5,·1-87) .. 1?~H:b 2./¡sj1~ 1 5()!:) F:e!dnO\li a [)ri \le C~r-iar1 ot t 83\.'111 e.f \li r-q i ni ô 22ª;&()2 F etiruôry 1 1.. 1995 A ì bernarl e COutÜid Board of ~;uper....'i scw~=;: '.,.'·/e nle urlljersi qned. "/'lfKI are resi dents of Lake F.~e!-J¡Ki'./i a Ôn¡j r"li 11 Creek - . - North ~;utldj'·..'ision:=;.. ot¡Ject to tt-Ie con:=;tructjon of ij connector rO¡j:j t! ÇJ t '..'." û û '-I r"1j' 1'1 ,-. I-û û I:· .j- '-I d ! d- I:' û P û 1 ¡ f'-I U- I..' ; i-j f '-, t- t ¡-. û t-e. ;-j c· ,-. r-' ':. !. it ¡:.:1 ·L-' p'1 ¡-j .....,'. .---~ IJ 1.--wl. ¡ 1 ~ II-·wf.. I j L t..I..- ....I;....:j . i- ,1__. .1.....1.-·· ,,-'Uli__' w. "'__'.- 1_,._, II. 1. de~=:it-e to rninirnize traffic (tJott~¡ \:':/¡j~d~;) tf-~rou:~t-; our re~:,p8ctive '-I p. i 0 k¡ h '-I t-~-¡ .-, U-, .-i.:. ',..... t-I j 1¡ û t '-d- j- j- i ,-. r·-I ·L-¡ '.I.! 'r-'·=t I; t-..-¡ t h p. .:.! J ¡-,.: td- r'-, t i ,j- 1 n û '-I ¡1 ; r-' C' ,-. h d-- n i"' ÇJ ':- ) -" ,_. ¡ 1...' U I ~I U ,-' . I J. . ~, L I J ,,-' . ¡ . I I'-:j . i L... ..... _' __" _ w....1 _ f __ .' ¡ " ;-.....} J 1 . I.~ ~. I . Y ___ ....1 ··/·...i HI Hie 5th ~;treet connector. F.~t. 2() connector. ôrllJ HIe po:=::=; it 1 e ¡-·-n 11 ,-. ,-û .::,1_.. ',...,' û ':. t '......1· 1 1 -t:!- 1 1 tj t-1· '." a .j- .j 1-1 1· t i ,-, '-I ij- ',' t l-¡ t- '-11 . ¡i h t ,-;=- f f i ,-. ~. T-, ¡-·I' t- ·0-' ,-p' ,ij- .j- ':. ..., p. n '11 p. L· I ,-. ç: t·" i J I.-. __, _ J I I fl· . f.-:. I i -oJ '. f ,_, I ... I _ _~ ~ f '.! Wi. ,,_, J j ¡ -J '.; . ¡ _. i "_I ~I _' ,_. r ' _' seek :=:rìortcut:=;_ ) ;-. ,-, t-I 1_· P r-t-I ': H-I i'" +L L-¡ r' p. n i t-',',I 1;;' p. I 1"-'1''--'' '..' i ij- ¡-.¡ ,-i '..' û ·,,1,.... ~,' _I :,' :"_: ,,-F._: ij- t_ !-'_-; ¡:=¡ I'-r-J' ,::, -'I' n ,,- :::; r. ¡ F._: f=-_: ¡i ',' _.;-',1.1_ ~. -...t',J .,-"_. ,_. '.J i..J t-1_"II.;:i i"_'~ I J. ,-.j.. ,_, w u _ ~~ ..... .., r-, '-u-' U""l Ü '-¡-I rl ~=t t-f ; l-'lJ ' d·- t-11 ¡ U-I·:=¡ t-, q û '-l-'ll C t ,-, t t-¡ .t'-' r·-,-· .j- to. ¡, i-- ~-. i 1 U-I t-e. t-¡ 'J- 1-- '-'ll'- '-jl--'- i ., ~-! tl I-I ,-k, l-I l-· IJ .:' i-t Ç.1 ~UI i_'. . j:j J...JIJ._¡;::f t 4....· '.u ..... - 111.1::1 __ill I ,-. ¡ 1_1'¡1 1.__1:::11 _I i i ....1. Tf-Ie road is '........i de and t'e9s for t-li !~h :;peed trMfi c (] i ke '·...·...e :=:ee on ~;outf-lerT F' - t-I . . I - ¡ . 'I :, U - t- - tW ... - - ,-1. + - - _. I - - -., - - - - .; , . - - ¡:: - - ~ i r- ., ij t~_'''\ ijd'" !j ij ij¡!!.i:!t:!!..J I_U L:dl4::;1:! I=.;'·:.Li:!'::;::;¡""1:! '=; 1i:!t:!U, Ilj. 3 the de'=;ire to pre:=;er"le rigr"Jt-of-··¡··...'f:!!d in it:=: current '...'ei~etated state. The '-j ·-û '=t i ':: '-I ,-. '...... ',1..' Î l-I d û ¡1 ,:=¡ t-Ilj .q i 1'1' t µ .j- tt '-d- r' t i '..' û ',1,1 P. .=. t'.-. ÇJ ,-, r' '-I p. P 1-1 f n d p ': t t-'-I' ¡ ¡ J c-·_ 1·_" I 1-' II 11"_ \..-.... U J "-~ ...- f _,-1 __"'1. ~._ JI _" "_, "_" It_i '_"_.-1 t_ 1..;__....1..... L:j another tleautiful natut-aì a~=;'=;et to create an un\\;;jnte¡j rO¡j¡J. ',/.,.'hy r-ep1ace + t- ¡:. µ ':. '..'..' ; t .-¡ d- ¡'-I PI i P. c· U- t-ÇJ ,:=¡ t-! Ui ; ,-, '..' ,j- Ui p. t t-I û 11 ,-; '..' .::, ,-. i' l-! f H-1 pi:¡ ,-1 i ;=t ,-. P to, t t· _I ,-. i J ':. û ':. '? l. '1-"...... "-' I J j _1. --::t -" .... -_ u i j . . _. c. ~. t- j J . !..J \-- :j . l I _, U U J '.... L· _. ,_ u . ,-I c;.~ "_, . 4 - - - - d - - t ,- -' k b - ,-' - t--; . l' 1-· ,- - - ,. ,-. - . . t c- - - ,- .:.- ; ,- -- I .... - t - - r- i - 1 ,,, ." - -- ". pt t:!ct:! I:!ti _ - ¡t:!1~}1 u¡ 1tig ,'¡], i LI I:!t:!t'.. ,::,UUdl L:U¡i.(jili':; ::;._W::;;,_ijt¡ _¡íj H:i filLIt i:! U t-'1' t ':. d- to, d 1· .:. c û '-'..' û Ui i--¡ L U- t-I 1 i! 'U- '-I 0 '=t :-. .-, ü ':. c· J '......' I "_, ·__\.:..·1 . '-- L '_ I~:f t ,-- .....·_·c·C"__.-'. ¡::; ':-d-fût¡¡ - tho r·¡L-,liL-·û '---id-'1ü':=¡ nt-ü,:·ût-,t'j-t;l-·'-i tl-¡ '-1/·'1- '-·-·¡:'f·-'-¡!-'·-··-': ,i:¡t-'U"¡ ,:·ti:¡t-·'j th,=o+ _I. --' J C. '- tt I. J I..... t- I I I . r,;;,. í J U ,-. W t-' ~. ....'~. J '-' ,_ j I i L _i ; J I....· J U e I __, '..... I w.' 'w W '- e . ._ J i '....I t - .-.,' j - -..- - ; - _.- - - f t ~- - .... - - t d - ~ - - - - .- t - - f - ,-' - - - ~ ,- - - - '- ,. ... - -,- - _...i l' ¡ . - ij L.¡j¡-I t:!-::.ijC ,::; Ufll=. U, ._I¡t:! Ui:!~=; t:!ll:!tti:!fl ~:; U, L:,ltrli:! ¡,! ij 1It::!¡~fILiUrfIUUU liKi:! ¡q J t-C T h P!' d '-,=0 '...,.. ;=- t t û '-I t i L-, ,-, t n ':: 1 ¡ .:. r¡ 1· .-. i ·L-I'I I':' L...·¡ û ~-!.:=¡ '.i i ¡-I ,- ;i:¡ ,-. ,j r¡ '-c. '.i µ n t .. :-.;=- ':: i '-j ¡'"!" I¡ f -' . '-' . I. J -"::f J U J J .....J.. '.~' J _. . I _ _ -.' ..... ,_, ~ J_, i ..,..... 1..-. t J U . . _ J ...... . : I t- :... . ..... I . '. '__ ...J ,-. if. ::j ....._ . nie nei ght!orhoclìJ t¡y crj rm n¡j ì:=; dt-j ",ij n Id through unnot! celJ. ¡::l t }-, - ,-,t-1 t 1- r-ü - - t- tit i - .-. .- f¡- - -·f ad !.- ~"',-. ¡;:,.-,¡ 1--"-¡£;~'=' ;-"1; 11 ¡-·!--oCJL··· .- ..-\ J 'hü L· . ._. I i:! U.! 1 Id _ f I, ,--. t:: i:!, I '- 1 ._ , t:: -:' ij, I:! L ,_ ._. '...i.. L. 'j f'·. Co "._ t 'd I I '-, 'I I 1...J.. ' ,¡ ,¡ ,_, ._. ,--. I·.... ,j I ,I 1. i ¡ ,--. ·jû'..',::, 'I,-,r.üt- .ij- t-û ;"'11 ij- q'i:¡i ¡-¡c· + i + ¡ '.-., Ç.I_'t-'C:. .' I::;: u.. ._t.....I..._.!_ .t. 7 l-¡ U ,- t-ü L-· .-û ·u=t t 'I' U-· t-',',=t 1 _I:=¡ t-¡:. ,:=¡ 1· ':. 1 ·U-'I-· d·- t ü -I ,-, ,-, ¡;, û i I r-j ,-,' ,i '-j r-j '-1 '.1 Û. ,:=¡ r'-, U-i -¡'-r-' OJ- t-, U ,-, f ,-, ¡ ¡ ,- .. I C:.J IJ - .....:-1 ...-u '_' J _. _C:,J ,-'il 1·....-·0 ~.,. I! l...·1 '."'__, w 1 ¡, 1._. '-11 LI:.,¡i '-'~-li l'--\'-wt-¡ '..·..·ij-11,.. a1.-·nq f f-'û ·u-l·r-1· '..'Û t U-, "ût t hü'-û Thüt-.::, d- .-.::. t-'I-' .:·i1'::".I..':=O 1 ;...,:. .:.,- t h;:.¡ i L·i . ¡'-oIi ç; 11 .t.. iUJo._ l.J\';"· . f,J.... :::r~."'" f",Jic.-;j 1,..'_ I ,Ie: ç; 1,__ J.J ,_IJL..,__ I) f",.Jito",_,} .....ILI f",J~__'~ gener¡j1ïid ·.......'¡jlk in the roalj. If the connector i~=; til.Ji1t, U-¡ere undout¡te'J1y uJ , " i -¡ 1 1-.- .- t-· i t- -. .-.- .- ,-. ,-, ; '-, + .-.::. t t ; .-. .- -..... t k. . ,. ",; i 1 _. - -. -- -. - f - +. i- - ~ - - -I ~ - - .- 'i'i, ¡ Llt!.j ¡ , IL.l t!d.::,e: ,il Li w" 'L dt,'j 1..1.1.::, 'i'i,j pU:::,;::! d :::'d,t'lY !ìdLdtlJ LU UUt c¡-li l¡jren. Ei. "..'ole ar-e una"/'/are of any cc,rnpellirjl~ rea~;on, :::;afetid Dr othe¡-"i't"i:::;e.. H¡at sU¡~!Jest~; the neelj for tt-Ie roa¡j for ei tr-Jer of our ¡j8\.'e 1 oprnents. ',....ie understarnj Hldt rnore acces:::; g;"'.'e::; rnore opt ions in an ernen~ency.. and it rnil~ht ¡(jake ;j school tlUS dri'·/er'3 route 3]i9¡-:t!id rnore ¡jirect, t¡ut ...,'....e kno'/'/ of no data to :::;ug~~e:::;t an unacceptatde le',/el of ri':;k if the rOflj ''!\.'ere ne\.'et- con :::; t ru c t e d. T h;=< "-I !.., i I U-,¡ j t,- ,-; f·- ¡, U- U t- ,-. '-I 1'-. ':. ". U...¡ Ct ,-.=< t 1· '-'.. n .-, f t hi ,-. '-r-' d- + t Ct ,- o .'u t''';:r '-4 ....... tt ...·u ,._1 1;.,.-1 U'" "-Ji L.t, ....:tJ~ ¡ i' ~""c:.:. I~ ~ -+I~~ ð~ i+Q..~D-7'L J y ~ ßA fD..h tt,. })~~ 1?-@6 G~~"("Ml L-L- ~ u~ tL-.. ;2 ¡} :¡ //475 7!¡J¿~. . t~ ~ ~ ~ "S.JvpWTh. \ 'd-l C1 ~ ~6eY'h ~ 0:r ~ ll~ f\j(L þ ~~i 2-- . J~~s G ..Na~~ þ...~~ ~J[j~ ~ . ~CÃNi~ ~~\("\ rQ. \ètt1\~ \'\Q\y\'\'--\ (~\ ~~ ~1Lr exy I~/J- 9,(~ ?J; -_. cy~ ~ t¿j-/.. t 3 t '5 G;1<J'STitILL f!Þ . ~1~~ i~c>lo qsß.·~·'1 Þv, 1~.(Y1 t't/;:/v1b f2.'g'J Gns+t'V1l'¡! D~ ~hr-t /Z8'ç- ¿;,'s~'11 It: dJDhfttLt ~I &whM~ Il ~ ~ th1s1rYùll ])ì. vf~ t is- ~ . v+ f!!J 1ft' ~ ~c:~ /7 () 17~//ÞV..t<J 1Y1~ J~QM.µJ ) 1 ~ ß¡<-cv., J. ÌV1.t:L-~.~~ I ; (p '13cJa.--- ct1. .5 . ""-'" ).) v":f f,A- J.f ~1iPe ~?Êf d.J DÆ: 1~é!J 1 G~ ~o,¡: rn. \!~Ett' . f\, 0 ~ "II ~llIE- J309 lDeìs-cm, . . ) . ~ . . 1500 Reynovi a Dri ve CharI ottesvi 11 e, Vi rgi ni a 22902 February 1 1.. 1995 A 1 bemar1 e County Board of Supervi sors: We the undersi gned, who are resi dents of Lake Reynovi a and Mi 11 Creek North Subdi vi si ons, object to the construction of a connector road between Mill Creek and Lake Reynovia for the reasons cited below: 1. desire to minimize traffic (both ways) through our respective nei ghborhoods. Whil e traffi c now may not be substanti a 1, pendi ng chEmges with the 5th Street connector, Rt. 20 connector, and the possible Mill Creek West will all drive additional through traffic in our area as people seek shortcuts. 2. concerns that opening Reynovia Drive will create a major speeding problem, parti cuI arly dangerous to the many children of our nei ghborhoods. The road is wi de and begs for hi gh speed traffi c (l i ke we see on Southern Parkway) guaranteed to cause excessi ve speed; ng. 3. the desire to preserve right-of-\'vay in its current vegetated state. The area is now wooded and quite attractive. v1e see no need to destroy another beautiful natural asset to create an unwanted road. \^lhy replace trees with an eyesore and invade the pri vacy of the ad j acent houses? 4. precedent - nei ghbori ng Mill Creek SOUUI contai ns sub stant i all hi more units and is served by only one access. 5. safety - the police made a presentation to our members and stated that a cul-de-sac is one of the best deterrents of cri me in a nei ghborhood 1 i ke ours. They draw attention to suspicious behavior and prevent "casing" of the nei ghborhood by cri mi ne 1 s dri vi ng througt-¡ unnoti ced. 6. the only three entities affected, Lake Reynovia.. ~1ill Creek, and the deve 1 oper. are all agai nst it. 7. our recreat i ona j area is located on Reyno'v'l a Dri ve, and many of our chil dren walk a j ong tt-Ie dri "v'e to get there. There are no si dev·¡a 1 ks.. so they generally walk in tt"le road. If the connector is built.. there undoubtedly ) ... ,., will be an increase in traffic and this will pose a safety hazard to our chil dren. 8. we are unaware of any compelling reason, safety or oHlen-vise, that suggests the need for the road for either of our developments. V-Ie understand that more access gi ves more opt ions in an emergency, and it might make a school bus driver's route slightly more direct, but we know of no data to suggest an unacceptable level of risk if the road v.¡ere never constructed. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. (JJ ,Cð~pe~"t 0 ,M,i II Cfer¿K / L A/(e, ß.e'J.t1(J111' ð.. TI1rðu~l~ eoóìd :1 ./J.I.CK S/(r¡'/v£t l3?d- Gf'I'stYl1/l( OJ(). CJtou-lÐt-tL5vi1{e. vÆ2-2.-crOl. (EJOëY1 S k.rí/o££ l311.. Gr,'stMill Dl:o ( I I 1\ I L @ (r;1~ f!¡¿ou~ IJ~4 Gf~)srrf\\tL A.\\!~ !)} \ \\ '\ © ~lÌri> Ò~ 1:,(N Gn-"15\rr). \\ :\)1'... ..,," , ' @ S;1:::pf'kp.¡ le~t",e.- I ~&-\ GR'S.-1:..o1! .U_ t ~ "" I( Ii © p c.rb~ , ci (À ~ ' L.e !110 ,,", ~ I :':k) G J~..S t ¡rj\ Ll t'i' ,\ l < '0 I( (j) GeoT,:)<" L",~j,,+'" 1~69 C;:"';s",,,,[\l Dr. ,. '- '. " ~. é /6b1 6~sfrnl II ìòr, ¿¿O!j 0J¡vMv C-f· - Jv'f ~ J- 1339 Gr{$1-m,'lI Dr"\Ve- ( J Y L {¡--,ì J7"I--.'1 ( f}q'L-'(. I I .../7 ~ I ~ .,-'! ~~~ Æ7~ If ( ( ( , ~ '1M 8JJvr¡' ) D 1-, YÞt c @ 7(1M~ if ~ @ tj..J F, ~ @).~~~ 9 ¡IA:JJ tIf;lib ({ l( I( I( LL ~l L( ~lD~ÇU\'\\"t 1J1t- ;).~();}. I ( ( LL /1 , C/~VIJ ;;;.:2? ('?;..L 1387 t,¡f(>fMtJl :]v- It rl (\ HÐv5el~ \c0\ 1500 Reynoviô Drive Chôrl ot tesvi11 e, Vi rgi ni ô 22902 F ebruôry 1 1, 1995 Albemôrle County Boôrd of Supervisors: We the undersi gned, who are resi dents of Lake Reynovi a ônd Mill Creek North Subdivisions, object to the construction of ô connector road between Mill Creek ônd Lôke Reynoviô for Ule reôsons cited below: 1. desire to minimize traffic (both wôys) through our respective nei ghborhoods. V'¡hil e traffi c now may not be substanti a 1, pendi ng changes with the 5th Street connector, Rt. 20 connector, and the possibl e Mill Creek West 'Hill all drive additional through traffic in our area as people seek shortcuts. 2. concerns that openi ng Reynovi a Dri ve wi 11 create a major speedi ng problem, particularly dangerous to the mtmy children of our neighborhoods. The road is wide and begs for high speed traffic (like we see on Southern Parkway) guôranteed to cause excessi ve speedi ng. 3. the desire to preserve right-of-way in its current vegetated state. The area is now wooded and quite attractive. 'v-le see no need to destroy another beautiful natural asset to create an unv.¡anted road. 'w'hy replace trees with em eyesore and invade the privacy of the adjôcent houses? 4. precedent - neigr¡boring Mill Creek SouH! contains substantially more units and is served by only one access. 5. safety - the pol i ce made a presentation to our members and stated thôt a cul-de-sac is one of the best deterrents of crime in a neighborhood like ours. They draw attention to suspicious beha.....ior and prevent "casing" of the nei ghborhood by cri mi na 1 s dri vi ng througt-¡ unnot iced. 6. the only three ent it i es aff ected, Lake Reyno·....i a, ~1i 11 Creek, and the deve 1 oper.. are all agai nst it. 7. our recreational area is located on Reynoviô Drive. ônd many of our children walk along the drive to get there. There are no side\·valks. so Hley generally walk in tt-Ie road. If the connector is built, there undoubtedly will be en increese in treffic end this will pose a sefety hezerd to our chi 1 dren. ô. we ere unewere of any compelling reeson, safety or otherwise, thet suggests the need f or the road f or either of our deve 1 opments. Vie understand thet more eccess gi ves more options in en emergency, and it might meke e school bus driver's route slightly more direct, but we know of no data to suggest an unecceptable level of risk if the road v.¡ere never constructed. Thenk you for your consideretion of this metter. f:W\:)Ù', S. \ZQ.:,~ l?)'~",& ·\"~i\A...~\of~I::-\'\ C:\, I C\r,G.....¡~l>+\QSV;'\~Q. ./ ..~. S6~ ""a.()~ ~.~~~II· 131(P 'lirnberbrtL(\cÝ} 6t-.) CÞ\/lY'lo+k.sVille.. ~f~ BILL t....IV~ ß2LJ ~ %~l7 Defs,y A. O. '¡'rl;~N ~Aß,~ ~~J~ffS~~; tP1À ~ .~~ j~('T~C+, Ci~ f. ~ v it VI. 0ve ?-' . 1::>-4> 0 Ti W1. !,.pý ~ VA (..(.¿; C d1 t 1/; (Ie . l\.u\~ ..L I?,l{ 1{Vy\Uo~ (} Cklv';I~ ry0.~ctru (;rqq ú{ h M\W~\t\si{( \~{SI~~~~ Ck. cA'J/fte^ f1\U)~. f . ¡ I. "-/--1 r C/v1 ¡q f)¡r t'1 -.'7 Í-. L·I , . 4 . 1.Ç- t,...J-'L'/' ¿" .-- '\. - t/ /) . .) / G' ! J- ! /;)., ./ . I I Y'-), < 7 ' . . ".¡.l ~J cj-. {- !"<L I ¡ ¡J J J j I T .. IJt~ (3ù ...¡ Cr \ C 't/~ T ( I'f ~~^'(...II- .1-.. '\ ct 1;'Mß ~ßQ~C-{ C-~ c.. - ..¡ I ~L-L (1r~ " i ': ! ,.4 i\ji~.k.~'1 Iv;¡"~'cl~) I :SCí, /L~l.h.~ 1r~'- C( Ci I UIL~ 1,,-/"1 /,.. . ( I\.' í ~ c v~ 'ff¿ LouV'le Ayler ¡:1.rl ~~¡rbrcu\ch C.f C»¡ 1I--L J~\U CL~rG venY)¡fir Whit /273 ~6eA-hraJ1cÞu C:f [;A-I/I'//-e S}~_Å:ßÀJ?Ytih / ( ./ - '-'-7-- 5~.Qfl~et\ (2 C~V1r-(l '.:ihf'L. æCk~ ~d(),- ~e/ G If n d ~ ß ( H-n ~f /d.. v, ì 7,,M. Lr & /0. L t AI"/- á I ~C' u Or VI ((, c:J a C¡oð- I ~~ / ~¡Y'r\ber bíOr.f1rÄ ~urt- éh.0vJ. ott'e <::. u/ tt ~ i/ ~ 2 '29 ð ~ 1/6y d A T",-còb5 laS'S- Ti'iYlber hr"-hC.f,., c..+ ~4 Aft~ ¿h~l-l(rt+-esville, u: ;Z~C¡Od- !E:~ ~- ~'9Jt ¡~+J ~~~ ~96J- ~ Ü. '(riff- w~Li.fdJ;þOJiA. (jJ "";"7 .--r- 1 e,...tJ... y I (j:(LN~ ( '"/) r-- / 2'-1'-1 Tì'~~h '-¿:~_f)(!-4 clj ~'~<'(~J ~.~ ~t..Ir/, V,f 2-7-'702- ~<;y \I " ({... .J +fvi'" If IX, ¡, Tï w.4--.;t-1' ~ Gf- ~ Ck~1 Vf\ -¿z9¡O 2- .~~ lþ~~d<Y/21>7; T~. o/~~.6{- ~ \ . _ I V t4- 2-VW2- . y'u../s 'Z.¡mmJ:;1<fi1111Û /;).tþ 8 ]7ml3E=ll-ß/Z.-.A+JLtf c:!-':¡- ~~ ~' < 1 1//9- ~ðÀ ¡(J-/#..i.1 L. 2t~",un<'~IItAl ¡ 1-&[/ 7t'M ~r~b/(H-l.Ið h. co Ìi ~¿ ~~.~~ C h/f /lIe; lí2S(/"¡{~ I/-L, :2.;;J.. 9 ~ ~ ftov se.J 0 Ids / ;C~~ o/tsj~s~ 1500 Reynovi a Dri ve Charl ottesvil 1 e, Vi rgi ni a 22902 February 1 1, 1 995 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors: We the undersigned, who are residents of Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek North Subdi vi si ons, object to the construction of a connector road between Mill Creek and Lake Reynovia for the reasons cited below: 1. desire to minimize tr8ffic (both ways) through our respective neighborhoods. While traffic now may not be substantial, pending changes with the 5th Street connector, Rt. 20 connector, and the possi b 1 e Mil 1 Creek West will all drive additional through traffic in our area as people seek shortcuts. 2. concerns that opening Reynovi8 Drive will create 8 major speeding problem, particularly dangerous to the m8ny children of our neighborhoods. The road is wi de and begs for hi gh speed tr8ffi c (1i ke we see on Southern Parkway) gU8r8nteed to cause excessive speeding. 3. the desi re to preserve ri ght -of -way in its current vegetated st8te. The area is now wooded and Quite 8ttractive. "'-Ie see no need to destroy another be8utiful natural asset to create an un'vvanted road. Why replace trees with an eyesore and invade the pri '.lacy of the adj acent houses? 4. precedent - neigrlboring Mill Creek SouU! contains substantially more uni ts and is served by only one access. 5. safety - the pOlice made a presentation to our members and stated that a cul-de-sac is one of the best deterrents of cri me in a nei ghborhood 1 i ke ours. They draw attention to suspicious behavior and prevent "casing" of the nei ghborhood by cri mi nal s dri vi ng through unnoticed. 6. the only three entities affected, Lake Reynovia} ~1ill Creek) and the deve 1 oper. are all aqai nst it. . - 7. our recreational area is located on Reyno'v'ia Drive. and many of our children \^¡alk along Hie drive to get there. There are no side\^¡alks} so trley generally walk in the road. If the connector is built, there undoubtedly will be an increase in traffic and this will pose a safety hazard to our chil dren. 8. we are unaware of any compell i ng reason, safety or otherwi se, that suggests the need for the road for either of our developments. We understand that more access gi ves more options in an emergency, and it might make a school bus driver's route slightly more direct, but we know of no data to suggest an unacceptable level of risk if the road were never constructed. Thank you for your consi derat i on of thi s matter. )~ .. '~ / I. A~ . / vl./v-L(ihß ~ //í~ - L·· . · · 1.'-1 .. J J. .. ÎÓ/ 71'/-)/ ~ ,¡". m /)1 Î !lrk MWu ...i- ," . (M ¡;:^.f' ' /J · I. r '. I :), ý5 (~wLø-Z<ë AJ.¿, 1ír¿¿ , d Ìftw. /1UdZr J0 1M¿£~,;b --/-/ ßJf{ fTlß ~ l [it:tm. 1 c¡ !1Hk CRf¿K C'r, t~"LR (L/~r^(·,.tl s i //.!! ¿;.:j D Q)\...S"'IvC--- rf\D~Ø~ <;:")3 ¡ìll \ I C r8! t Ct. _xkV4''-'1-.J 0, lJuJ../J__/ c; 1 1-11/ I Crt e t C ou v- 4- /7,;-:~ <./ c..u/ '11 /~,II C""jc rf- 11(/'-;. ~(// /- , /-') /('.. I/'.I. I L(, . .." ,1/.(.. C-e/EÆ c.r--- /j ¿L ~Lil L,,:J 6lJ:¿~¿t~ 9c; }77JJ ¿2i¿l" (7- ftcklJ, a~~" o.~.+~ö ~. 0) \¥-~¡ Dc ?ír16}1 t --..... 1\: ..... \ ~ (. \ ._~)('-\. \ I. \ cJt lltWc~ " # rY}f I -- -.. þ\...~ d~/'1 ~~^þ~ .~ ., .' <~~~ ~OSILù (~:~í '\ C\~JctJ qc¡ 14t#Il,d êf-. \ 0\-\ \'-\ \ \) ~t~ lù~ / ð 5/ It-r/t¿ (./l--<-""[ <..J- /ÓD 1Î1íll {rU/: Cf \2~ [--I (. J-Ç0< '~-,1r)f\c~'D\_ ¡'J l /"/ ~ / ,J' I ,I./- 'l-, ( C)!) fJi/" f?n I { ( /- / .J- :Y';' ¿''If žLs /t.¡'l2/!;'? IB<) ~.~. . \?rL, () G~o/~5Y)~~ r:: (lei? ~) (ì ~\é'ï\_C ''-í V \ ; ) } ~-t \ cvf2. ðn Il;¿,:, CIs' '7f¡,1---'-- }A/I( ( -{ £~,t.-~~-L' )//;~YV-- / I Iß- Y11: v ¡j '~T ~h'-L- ¡J / F- er- /lJf¿ Ík;r ,(/)fU,¿t{¡¿L SE 8m> t(/Ij ("f: ,Qt~V'~-f > tJa~ &~ 5701'"'- /Jê d ~JL.~ þ.-. ~<>~ ~'r ~ ~~ clt--, änlJct ï!cu.'-£J1.Y If, ~ ýj,v¿ ~újé' C;(7 lki1;.' dWL£:4- c { ~£ /Þ¿y/ ~/:- 11\. .Yl~LJ\/) C' (/~ nA ¡J -I í~_'" i Ii v \. f l 'lLl0 c~ ( Cl- v( (j?' J ..JT é J1~ I ~Ý<..LÃ.rL· ~ {Il;)-I ¡ìLw ~l'¡¿~ Ek~,vi S 3 ){.-ue J vi ; (( C{ -JJ~~ ~~ ~ II/YD "-G W\J.Q ~ ~ !2eeV.¡¡u(. z/~1r¡S' 1500 Reynovi a Dri ve Charlottesvi 11 e, Virginia 22902 F ebruarl1 1 1.. 1995 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors: V\/e the undersigned, who are residents of Lake Reynovia and Mill Creek North Subdivisions, obJect to the construction of a connector road tletween t·l111 Creek and Lake Reynovia for the reasons cited below: . 1. des1re to m1n1mize traffic (both ways) through our respective ne1ghborhoods. V.lliile traffic now may not be sutlstantial, pending changes with the 5th street connector, Rt. 20 connector, and the possible Mill Cree~( West v.till all drive additional through traffic in our area as people seek shortcuts. 2. concerns that opening Reynovia Drive will create a major speeding problem, particularly dangerous to the many children of our neighborhoods. The road is wide and begs for high speed traffic (like we see on Southern Parkway) guaranteed to cause excessive speeding. 3. the desi re to preserve right -of -way in its current vegetated state. The area is now wooded and Quite attractive. \¡1e see no need to destroy another beautiful natural asset to create an unwanted road. Why replace trees v.¡ith an eyesore and invade the privacy of the adJacent houses? 4. precedent - neighboring nill Creek South contains substantially more units and is served by only one access. 5. safety - the police made a presentation to our rnembers and stated that a cul-de-sac is one of the best deterrents of crime in a neighborhood like ours. They draw attention to suspicious behavior and prevent "casing" of the neighborhood by criminals driving through unnoticed. 6. the only tl"lree entities affected, Lake Reynovia, Mill Creek, and the developer, are all against H. 7. our recreational area is located on Reynovia Dr1ve, and many of our chlldren walk along the dr1ve to get there. There are no sidewalks, so they generally ·........alk 1n the road. If the connector is bunt, there undoubtedly wlll be an lncrease in trafflc and thls will pose a safety hazard to our chi 1 dren. 8. v.¡e are una\^/sre of any compelling reason, safety or otherwise, that suggests the need for the road for either of our developments. We understand that more access gives more opHons in an emergency, and it rnlght make a school bus driver's route slightly more direct, but we know of no data to suggest an unacceptable level of ri:=;k if the road were never constructed. 'Thank Yo;;~nSidera:&~Læ.c/ 1td4;; / . ~v~IIJœWt ~ ~ ct() ~ ~ 'I ~ ðùUz 'ß u>- )J~/ lJ-y-/ 94M 0 a"ktt I! ¿ (¡,LA-" .' - ' /, " ¡Ut-~~ 4--õð rr-. ~~ -:l?, lÙ1~ ~~j)~ J~ /?~~ ____%~ß~~ ~;(~ V ; , 'W¡f:¡ (#¡tL ~ t ~ /'WV ¡Jdlolk/d. J:4JS Pi ,4, ~/ /J ~~ ?.õ.". A/t! t{ ).:1.)0. IJJ '..ÚJ·<~ ~~ ?(/ / ~ ., . (~/ lj'J ~l,. \.. V7 1)""" ~ <"tv\f'r- ''\? \;~') .. \~.. ....... Il~' '" --i~. IV" ,) (YV~G(- ~ rw~ ~', J ~~ ~~/lì~' ,~ {~, C C:c~, ~ d;ß cI~ Ca-~- . cB~C~ ,~µ~1· ~~~ 0( ~~ -, . I ¡} I, . (J 1'-..;...<:....U7_ ~ ;". . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE DlS.Tm[i;'~\D l'~ ?l::!t~t·~:~ or; _._.~ ....-"'.-.-... EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Community Criminal Justice Board (CCill) AGENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: '? '\ qr o(p/1 {<¡. ~ ACTION: INFORMATION: X SUBJECTIPROPOSAURE UEST: equest revised resolution and proposed appointment of Albemarle's representative to the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONTACT: Tucker, White REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: At the March 1 meeting, the Board of Supervisors approved a resolution to establish and join the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board (CCJB), which was enacted by the Legislature in 1994. Under the Act, the role of the CCJB will be to purchase, develop and operate community programs, services and facilities for use by the courts in diverting offenders from local jails, evaluate and monitor the programs, and develop and amend the community corrections plan. The March resolution approved a regional CCJB consisting of Albemarle, Greene, Louisa, Nelson and Orange and the City of Charlottesville, agreed that Albemarle County would be the fiscal agent, and agreed that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission would staff the newly formed CCJB. Because the representative categories for the Board had not been determined by the State at that time, staff was to come back to the Board for the County appointment to the CCJB. DISCUSSION: Attached for your approval is a revised resolution for the formation of the regional Community Criminal Justice Board. The only change is the addition of Goochland and Madison Counties, both of which counties are in the 16th Judicial District and expressed an interested in being part of the larger regional group. The second item that needs Board approval is the appointment of the County's representative to the CCJB. The regional CCJB will ultimately consist of nineteen (19) members (the maximum is 20), one (1) appointed representative from each of the nine (9) localities and one (1) representative from each of the mandated groups that must by state legislation serve on the Board. The Board must include a representative of the following groups: a judge of the general district court, a judge of the circuit court, a judge of the juvenile and domestic relations court, a chief magistrate, a chief of police or a sheriff, a jail administrator or sheriff, a public defender or local attorney specializing in criminal cases, a commonwealth attorney, a representative of local education and a representative of the community services board. Each of the ten mandated groups are nominating one representative. The proposed nominee suggested by the Commonwealth Attorney's Office and the Criminal Justice Advisory Board (see attached letter) to represent Albemarle County is Michael McMahon, who is a resident of Albemarle County and the former Superintendent of the Joint Security Complex. Although Mr. McMahon no longer works in the criminal justice system, he not only has a high degree of knowledge and expertise in corrections, and has served as a criminal justice consultant since leaving the jail. RECOMMENDA TION: Staff recommends approval of the revised resolution that adds Madison and Goochland counties to the regional Community Criminal Justice Board and the appointment of Mr. Michael McMahon to serve as Albemarle County's representative to the regional board. After all members have been appointed by the individual jurisdictions and the mandated participants selected, each jurisdiction will need to approve the full slate of CCJB members. COMCORR.SAM 95.084 c: Nancy K. O'Brien 9 RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Community Diversion Incentive Act of 1980 to establish community correc- tions programs for nonviolent offenders in an effort to reduce prison and jail overcrowding, and WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Resources Board was formed under the authority of the Code of Virqinia Section 53.1-183 to establish community corrections programs for nonviolent offenders in the localities of Albemarle, Charlottes- ville, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Nelson, and Orange, and WHEREAS, the Virginia Assembly revised the Community Diver- sion Incentive Act on September 30, 1994 and enacted the Compre- hensive Community Corrections Resources Boards with the new Community Criminal Justice Boards, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned communities continue to believe that working together on community corrections is in the best interest of the citizens of their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has offered to continue the role of fiscal agent, and WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is agreeable to staffing the Community Criminal Justice Board, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle agrees to: 1. Join in creating the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, 2. appoint members to serve on Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, 3. participate in appointing the remaining members as required under the law, 4. request the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to provide staff assistance, and 5. continue the role of fiscal agent. * * * * * I Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held O~J~4'~5. Clerk, Board of County 00-00-0Ø Ø0:Ø0 0Bi P02 RESOLUTION TO ESTABLISH A REGIONAL COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS BOARD WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Community Diversion Incentive Act of 1980 to establish community corrections pruqr~m~ for nonviolent offenders in an effort to reduce prison and jail overcrowding, and WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Resources Board was formed under the authority of the Code of Virginia Section 53.1-183 to estab¡ ish community (.:UJ: L ectiuJl~ ¡.JL'UY'r.tl\lö rUL nonviolent offenders in the localities of Albemarle, Charlnttp~villA, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene. Louisa, Madison, Nelson, and Orange, and WHEREAS, the virginia General Assembly revised the community Diversion Incentive Act on September 30, 1994 and enacted the Comprehensive Community r.nrrAc:t:iOM!1> Act which rAplé'lcp. tha former Community Correction~ Resources Boards with the new Community Criminal Justice Boards, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned communities continue to believe that working together on community corrections is in the best interest of the citizens of their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has offered to continue the role of fiscal agent, and WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is agreeable to staffin~ thp. community Criminal Justice Board, 3. IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle agrees to: join in creating tl1~ J~rfe¡-son Area Community Criminal Justice Board, ~ppoint members to Aerve on Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, participate in appointing the remaining members as required ~nder the law, req~est the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to provlù~ 5taff Q~oictan~e, and continue the role of f~scal agent. NOW THEREFORE BE 1. 2. 4. 5. -, p 3 OFFICE OF THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY for the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE JAMES L. CAMBLOS, III COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY June 9, 1995 CHERYL V. HIGGINS DARBY E. GIBBS ASSIST ANTS DEPUTY PHONE: (804) 972-4072 FAX: (804) 972-4093 J. FORD CHILDRESS Mr. Walter Perkins, Chairman Board of Supervisors County of Albemarle VIA FAX: 296-5800 401 Ridge-McIntire Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Re: Community Criminal Justice Board Dear Walter: This letter is to recommend J. Michael MaMahan for appointment to the Community criminal Justice Board, as the Albemarle County representative. I have spoken with Mike personally and he is excited about the opportunity of serving on the Board. As you know, I am a member of the local Criminal Justice Advisory Board. Several of us on the Board have discussed Mike as a potential member of the Board and we believe he will be a valuable addition to the Board. He will bring to the Board many years of experience in the criminal justice area and give a perspective to the Board that will be invaluable in this, the formative year of the new Board. I urge you to give Mr. McMahan favorable consideration for appointment as the Albemarle County representative to the Board. If you have any questions of me, please feel free to contact me. , t~ul~ursf I , \--{~M B<I L. Camblos, III 410 EAST HIGH STREET, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 cc: Nancy O'Brien Pat smith Dave Pastors J. Michael McMahan 255 Chestnut Oak Lane Charlottesville, Va 22903 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE: fõ)JÇJE2I~1ñ\ ~s~~~;;,¿~ EXECUTIVE OFFICE OFFICE OF THE COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY for the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE JAMES L. CAMBLOS, III COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY April 24, 1995 CHERYL V. HIGGINS DARBY E, GIBBS ASSIST ANTS DEPUTY PHONE: (804) 972-4072 FAX: (804) 972-4093 J, FORD CHILDRESS Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. County Executive County of Albemarle 401 Ridge-McIntire Charlottesville, Va 22901 re: Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board Dear Bob: The multi-jurisdictional community criminal justice board is in the final planning stage for Albemarle County and the surrounding localities. It looks like there will be nine localities participating; our original seven plus Orange and Madison. I am requesting that I be appointed the representative from Albemarle County. Because of my involvement with the Community Diversion Incentive Program, I have been very active with the planning of the new board. There will be much to be done in setting up the new board in the first few months, which will be critical to the future success of the board in this very important area of criminal justice. If you have any questions or concerns, please contact me. If appointed, I will resign from the Community Diversion Incentive Board, because that would be a conflict of interest. Very tty ~:~urs, James L. amblos, III '-¡ " '( 395 ._, 410 EAST HIGH STREET, CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22902 ( r" \ David P. BoVJennan Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 2%-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall. Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller June 16, 1995 Ms. Nancy O'Brien, Executive Director Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission 413 East Market Street, Suite 102 Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Ms. O'Brien: At its meeting on June 14, 1995, the Board of County Super- visors adopted the enclosed Resolution to establish a regional community corrections board. The Board also appointed Mr. J. Michael McMahan to the Community Criminal Justice Board, as the Albemarle County representative. If there are any questions, please call me for assistance. Sincerely, E~j:JCMC EWC/tpf cc: Donald Pastors Roxanne White * Printed on recycled paper ). ,.... RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the Virginia General Assembly enacted the Community Diversion Incentive Act of 1980 to establish community correc- tions programs for nonviolent offenders in an effort to reduce prison and jail overcrowding, and WHEREAS, the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Resources Board was formed under the authority of the Code of Virqinia Section 53.1-183 to establish community corrections programs for nonviolent offenders in the localities of Albemarle, Charlottes- ville, Fluvanna, Goochland, Greene, Louisa, Madison, Nelson, and Orange, and WHEREAS, the Virginia Assembly revised the Community Diver- sion Incentive Act on September 30, 1994 and enacted the Compre- hensive Community Corrections Resources Boards with the new Community Criminal Justice Boards, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned communities continue to believe that working together on community corrections is in the best interest of the citizens of their jurisdiction, and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle has offered to continue the role of fiscal agent, and WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is agreeable to staffing the Community Criminal Justice Board, NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the County of Albemarle agrees to: 1. Join in creating the Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, 2. appoint members to serve on Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, 3. participate in appointing the remaining members as required under the law, 4. request the Thomas Jefferson Planning District to provide staff assistance, and 5. continue the role of fiscal agent. * * * * * I Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. ~fb- W Clerk, Board of County ~.._- ~.."'7 ; '"\ \'¥ \ f'ì ". ' ! \) ¡ \ " ~ l .~.~ Î r· " 1 ~ ¡ ~ U u David P. Bowerman Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902A596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller June 15, 1995 Mr. J. Michael McMahan 255 Chestnut Oak Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 Dear Mr. McMahan: At the Board of Supervisors meeting held on June 14, 1995, you were appointed to the Community Criminal Justice Board, as the Albemarle County representative. On behalf of the Board, I would like to take this opportuni- ty to express the Board's appreciation for your willingness to serve the County in this capacity. Sincerely, W~ -JlZ~~ Walter F. Perkins Chairman WFP/tpf cc: David Pastors, Executive Director The Honorable James L. Camblos, III * Printed on recycled paper FOR: MONTH OF MAY, 1995 DistriJU!èi' .J~__/<f- 9~- Menr!» 1"',,_ ., /1,r:66 ';;;7d I' " ~" ",," ii), -Z~~_~f...IL' '/-,; TO: STATE COMPENSATION BOARD DEPARTMENT COUNTY STATE TOTAL SHARE SHARE Department of Finance -0- -0- -0- Sheriff -0- -0- -0- Commonwealth's Attorney -0- 350.78 350.78 Regional Jail -0- -0- -0- Clerk, Circuit Court -0- 1,863.31 1,863.31 NOTE: Expenses listed above are only those office which the State Compensation Board has participate, and are not the total office these departments. expenses in agreed to expenses of -¡ (' ¡ ¡ .,._i' :!;/..~.. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE f \""1 , ' ,_,_'., Î :" ,<" ,:'; }fì _~, .IV.:.;'.... DIS:,¿.~U\""'" - -. cfL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 0>1_ 1~~~~_ /r AGENDA TITLE: Farmers'Market Zoning Text Amendment AGENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 IT~ . ·7119 INFORMATION: ACfION: X SUBJECfIPROPOSALIREOUEST: To amend the Zoning Ordinance to permit farmers' markets. CONSENT AGENDA: ACfION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONT ACf(S): Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg, Benish REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Farmers'markets are not currently permitted in the Zoning Ordinance, In recent years this type of direct marketing has gained popularity in urban areas, Staffhas received a specific request for a fanners' market to locate in Crozet The Board of Supervisors at its meeting on June 7, 1995, directed staff to proceed with a zoning text amendment for this use, DISCUSSION: The Comprehensive Plan gives highest priority to the preservation of agricultural and forestal activities in the Rural Area, It states, "F or agricultural and forestal resources to be successfully preserved rrom a land use standpoint, they must be successful as a business/industry," In 1993, the Agricultural and Forestal Industries Support Committee was appointed by the Board to report on ways to support and promote agriculture and forestry, One of the committee's recommendations,"Develop marketing strategies for all agriculturaIl forestal products" (Attachment # 1), includes a pertinent strategy to "Support farmers' markets as a direct marketing strategy and a way to educate people about agriculture. " RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the following resolution of intent: For purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 22.0 Commercial, C-l, and Section 24.0 Highway Commercial, HC, of the zoning ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by right, and to amend Section 10.0 Rural Areas District, RA, of the zoning ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by special use permit June14.sum 95.099 2. The use value taxation program is fair and should be continued. Land use tax is not a "tax break." (A farmer's home, other dwellings and farm buildings are taxed at the regular rate; in addition, the land is taxed at its production value.) A long- term commitment to land use tax by the County is desirable. The lánd use value of agricultural/forestal land should be based on the production capability of the land to produce. 3. Pursue an exemption for all agricultural/forestal operations from business tax. 4. Agricultural product storage buildings (silos, cold storage) should be taxed at a lower value. 5. Lower appraisals on orchard and vineyard land due to their limited use potential, and the initial capital investment required. IV. Develop Marketin2 Strate2ies For All A2ricultural/Forestal Products. 1. The County should take action to foster the development of niche agriculture such as garlic, cut flowers, etc. and direct marketing, such as "pick your own" operations and community supported agriculture (subscription farming). 2. Support farmers markets as a direct marketing strategy and a way to educate people about agriculture. There is a potential for a farmers market at the County Office Building parking lot or at a location on Route 29 North or Route 29 at 1-64. Several smaller markets operating on different days would serve the public better than one large market. Good management, location, access and parking are essential. Shelter and cold storage are desirable. A joint or coordinated effort with the City Market is desirable. " 3. Develop Albemarle County brochures listing products available for dir~ct sales, farms retailing to the public, and farms open for tourists to visit. 4. Encourage tourist attractions to promote buying from farms. 5. Agricultural tourism should be recognized and enc~uraged. Opportunities include bed and breakfast operations in historic ¡ landmarks, tourist lodging, farm tours, livestock shows, vineyards, "pick-your-own" operations, herb and flower producers, etc. 6. Encourage stores to promote local products. 7. Develop a hotline for county agricultural products (Extension Service). 8. Create a sticker, "Produced or grown in Albemarle County" to promote County products. - 7 75 RESOLUTION OF INTENT BE IT RESOLVED THAT for purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 22.0 Commercial, C-1, and Section 24.0 Highway Commercial, HC, of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' market by right, and to amend Section 10.0 Rural Areas District, RA, of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit farmers' markets by special use permit. FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible date. * * * * * I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is true, correct copy of a resolution of intent adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. ~vJ ' Clerk, Board of County isors JUN. -14' 95IWED) 09:54 p, 001 > - ..... .c ï" ~- t r ¡. ~-.. ". J \J N 1 4 '995 :) 1 r.,~: <,[- p·J\i [)Ef-'T 'i " COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA Office of the Governor Robert E. Martinez Secn:~al"J of Transportation George Allen Govemor June 13, 1995 Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Albemarle County Executive 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Tucker: Thank you for your letter of June 9 in which you requested that a representative of Albemarle County be allowed to address the Commonwealth Transportation Board regarding the Meadowcreek Parkway at its June 22 meeting. As you know, the meetings of the Commonwealth Transportation Board are open for public attendance, but they should not be confused with public hearings. The issue of the Meadowcreek Parkway is not scheduled to be on the Board's agenda at this time, and I am unable to grant your request. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~~ J~ r- Robert E. Martinez ~ REM/cmg cc: Mr. David R. Gehr P.O. BDX 1475 . Richmond. Virginia 232.12. . (604) 786·8032 . TDD (804) 786-??/il5 / ,c ~ David P. Bowennan O,arlotteSVl11e COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902A596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S.Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins WhiteHall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Mnler TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN tfI f)V Clerk, CMC If- Ella W. Carey, DATE: July 14, 1995 FROM: SUBJECT: Ordinance adopted June 14, 1995 Attached is a copy of an ordinancè adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 14, 1995: An ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts Section 2.1.4, Districts described of the Code of the County of Albemarle.. Virginia. EWC/tpf Attachments (1) cc: Honorablè James Camblos Larry Davis, Esq. Municipal Code Corporation Bruce Woodzell V. Wayne Cilimberg Richard E. Huff, II File * Printed on recycled paper y ( f " j ORDINANCE NO. ~ Dimibuted ro &ar9t;~ Agenda Item No. if AN O!U)INANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2.1, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS SECTION 2.1. 4, DISTRICTS DESCRIBED OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, is héreby amended and reordained by amending Section 2.1. 4 (1), Panorama A.gricultural and Forestal District, as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (1) The district known as the "Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 31, parcel 23A; tax map 44, parcels 9A, 9C, 12, 12Q; tax map 45, parcel 1; tax man 45A, narcel 27. section 1. ORDINANCE NO. 95-2.1(5) 1 I ~ ~ AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2.1, AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICTS SECTION 2.1.4, DISTRICTS DESCRIBED OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of County Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2.1, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 2.1.4(1), Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District, as follows: Sec. 2.1-4. Districts described. (1) The district known as the "Panorama Agricultural and Forestal District" consists of the following described properties: Tax map 31, parcel 23A¡ tax map 44, par- cels 9A, 9C, 12, 12Q¡ tax map 45, parcel 1¡ tax map 45A, parcel 27, section 1. * * * * * ~ I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an ordinance unanimously adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. ~w Clerk, Board of County S '^ '4- o~ A~~. .. k...ti§...~ €J,,-., '?- "1' OJ ,!,1.. tþ, ,., .... 'L<""J rt ' ',,.' '-. vlRGH;ï\i'- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 2%-5823 r;:::~-- .11 ~ í? r;:. --~""""",,""""~ --,'!" I 'ê .'r~.-'Œ "._.~y b .:::::"~ ,,-.,' b (í;¡ "if I" '~', ,,~ H) ';"==':'=-=,;;, _ ,11 . ;r" i; ,. 'if ;tL;:Tll,;:~~;~;?:",:~~-:..~:t7,JHf¡ "1'1' JUN ¡_"i ('~L~ ",;~~/! ;~n'b".A."· ,~J ¡ ~',"","'¿'l"'nÙ0F-C:UP";'-' ,',,' .-',' :) b.~ ", ,_vE~1\f'IQ;,AC';--Ä' --.. ,-- " ' ~_,f""'~:J~_~ MEMORANDUM TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner r;¿ß> FROM: DATE: June 1, 1995 RE: Addition to Panorama Agricultural/Forestal District The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 30, 1995, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted addition. Attached is a staff report which outlines this proposal. Please note that this addition is scheduled for your review on June 14, 1995. f i j ¡ If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. MJS/jcw ATTACHMENT , ' MARY JOY SCALA MAY 8, 1995 MAY 30,1995 JUNE 14. 1995(Amended) MEET!NG: ÇOMMl,SS!ONfP:QI..JC HEARING: SPl'ERVJSORS fPBLIC JIEARING, ADDITION to PANORAMA AGRICUL TURALI FOREST AI.. DISTRICT ,.... ···L.·.··' Note:. Tb" A~v~ory Ç91l).1l).itte" reviewe~ p~rcels owned by bi)th Cllplin Iµl~ Rosenblum. Tbe Ri)sel1;lIull). pan~els wIJrIJ lMer witbllrawn Prior to tbe flaµµiµg Comll).ission public h¢~riJ!.~. TpIJ rl~µµiJ!.g Comll).issioJ!. WIIS ª~vised of tlte witbdn!wal, .~nll comedy took IIctiolll)µly 011 thIJ C¡¡pliJ!. pllrcel. Tbis staff report bas nOW been ameµ~ell to incl!llle only Capliµ's rIJq!lIJst. . . Pllrpose: The :pµrpose of ¡ul ¡¡.griçultur¡¡/ forestal district is "to conserv~ M4 prgtect Md to encpmage!he development ¡uld iP1prove¡r¡ent of the C01µmonwealth's a~ricultur¡¡/ forestaJ.lands for the prodµçno¡¡ gffoodS ¡uld gtheragricultural and forestal produçts..," 1IIlC\. "to conserve and protect ¡"griÇultural Md forestallMds as valµ~d natmal Md ecological resomCes whicllprovide esseIlnal g:pen SPace for CleM air sheds, watershed protection, wildlife habitat, as well ¡¡.s for . a~sthetic pUJ:pg$es,!' f!J~tor~.t9Consider¡ Th~ fOllgwÍng factors must be considered by the Pl¡uming Commission ¡mdthe .AQvisgry cçuwnittee ¡uld at MY :public hearing when a proposed district is beìµg considered: l, . The agricultural Md forestal signifiçMce OflMd within the district ¡md in areas adjaçent tJ:¡~retO; 2, The presence of MY sigIlificant agriçµlturai lands or sigr1ificant forest¡Ù IMdswithìµ the district and in ¡¡reaS adjacent thereto that are not now in active agriçultmal Of forestaJ. prqduction; 3. The pa,tme ¡uld ~¡qePt gfl¡md µses pther than active farming or forestry within the district !µId in areas adjacent thereto; 4, Local deyelgpmental Patterns and needs; 5. Tlle CowpreJ:¡e¡¡sive PIM Md, if applicable, the zoning regulations; p, TJ:¡e "nYiroI1¡Il~ntaJ.1:Jenefits of retaining the lands in the district for agricultural Md for"staJ. µses; ¡uld 7. Any other matter which l11ay be relevant. Effects of II District¡ . I. The propose4district provides a connnunity benefit by conserving and protecting farmlands Md forest; enYirOI1¡IlentaJ. resources sucJ:¡ as watersheds,. air quality, open spaçe,¡uld wildlife habitat; and sçenic and historic resources.' 2. TJ:¡e State Code stipulates that the landowner receive certain tax benefits* , and restrictions '. onpµbli9 µtiJities Md govIJr¡nnIJnt action (such as land IIcqµisition Md 10calnuisMcIJ IIIWs) to pmte9t 14IJ agriculturall forestal use of14e land. In exch!l1ge,14e lMdowner !\greIJs not to dIJvelop 14IJ property to a "more intensivIJ use" during the sPIJciµIJd nµn¡.ber of years the district is in effIJct. "'SingeMbemarle C01.l)1tycurrently permits all four categories of use value assIJssmen1,A district designation may not provide anY additional real estate tax dedl¡ctions. LMd in II dis4Ï9t is protlJÇWd fr()111 special µtilityAssessments or taxes. 3. The State Code stipµlates 14at, "LoclIl ordinances, comprehensive plans, lMd use phµn¡.iµg decisions,¡µ:jrµiuistrlltivlJ dIJcisions Md procedures affectingparcIJlsofland ¥ljacep,t to any district shall t¡¡kIJinto acc01.l)1t the existence of sµch district and 14e P11fPos.es qftlÍis chllpter." The district may have no effect on adjacent developmlJnt by right,. but cquld rIJstrict proposed rezonings or uses by special USIJ peIIUit wWçh are dIJterninIJq tCl be in conflict with 14e IIdjllçlJnt agricµlturall forest;tl uses.· Pigtriçt,s l11µst n()W 1:!IJ shoW\} OIj. 14e official COl11pre4ensive Plan map each time it is µP4ate4. 4. Þ1 g!ID¡:rlll, II qistrictmllY ha,vIJ II stabi1i~g eff¡:ct ()nlMd use. The propertyowners in the dfsµict arIJ ¡naIqIj.g a statel11ent that they do not inteIj.dt9 develop 14IJir proPlJrty iIj. 14ø p'IJIµ' fµt¡µ:e, anc:l 14at tþ,IJY would like tþ,e area to remain in the IIgriculturlll Md forestal uses. ¡\djacIJnt prop~ owners l11ay be encouraged to continue IIgricult¡µ:al µscs if they do Rot anticiPlltlJ dèY~lopl11ent of IIdjllclJnt lMds. fMOr¡¡m1l District WIIS crelltec:l on Aprjl20, 1988 for !\ time period of ten YIJars. Clover PMorama District is located on the north and south sides of14e South Fork Rivanna This ¡¡ddhion isloc!\ted on the west sidIJ of State Route 743 (Earlysville Road), in and Ardwood sµbdiyisions. A~rea~e: Panorama District contains IIpproximlltlJly 1,06<5 acres. This addition contllÍns appr()J>imately 43 acres in One parcIJl.· . Ti~~Period: The proposlJçI til11e period for 14e aqdition is the same as for 14e district when it WIIS crelltlJd,or tIJn YIJIµ'S fr()m 1\priI20, 1988. A~ricµlturall forestal Significance: Land in the proposlJd addition is being used for timber, frµit trees, Md wildlife. Siçnificant Lands Not in A~ricultural or Forestal Production: LMd in the proposed ~diti()11 is nOt currently ewolled in the use value program. It has been placed under II conse!'Ylltioµ IJllslimlJntwiili the Virginia Outdoors Foundation since May, 1994. LandUs\1s Other Than At:riculture and Forestry: There is onlJ dwelling in the proposed l14dition. . . . ! ' La\jd Devdopwent Patterns. and N~eds: This are¡¡. consists ofresidential øev~lopment on. targe · P!!1"cel~. . MØWPQØ ¡p),4 ÇIQv~r ¡!\II are !lot devetoped ¡¡s they are ptatted; there are f~w~r hoW¡~~ ih'llllots.Th~\: is a targe p¡q-cel with agric¡¡ltural µse 9n the east side of ArdWooØr panor¡µn¡¡. f¡µ'ffi aøjoins tJ.¡e proposeø ad.dition to the west. CompTcbcnsin Plan and Zonin~ Rc¡:ulations: Panor¡µna District is designate" Rur¡li Mea in the ÇpI11J1rdlcnsi.\·c I'lal1, ami is :toncd R:\, Rum] Areas. The nearest Growth Area is the lJrban M¡i, a 4i~tance pf ¡¡.þoµt one mil\: to the e¡¡st. ...'.> !\ Compn:twJlsiy\: plan ob~ective is, "All decisions concerning the RWal Are¡¡s sh¡lil b\: ma4e in the interest ¡>ft4\: fow m¡¡.jor \:Ie¡µents of the Rµral Areas, witJ.¡ highest priority given to preserving agricµ}tural and for\:st¡l agtivities rather than encoumging residential dmlopment." (p2q3)· A ~trf!tI:W is,."Acµyety Promote ¡II4 SllPPOrt yollUltary techniques suc4 as agric¡¡lturall fqrest¡14i~trigts..·." (p, 53)· . Th.ii: 9peµ Sp¡Cii: plan show~ thi~ area located within the South Fork R,iYaIU1aReservoir W!ltii:~IW4· ~nvirollmelltal nenefit~: J::nviromnental benefits jnclude protection of ground anØ ~urface w¡¡tii:r,wildlife jlabit¡t, and open space· ~taff çOJ1lment: Tl1e Captin parcel, rID¡: Map 45A, Jiarcel27 A, cont¡ining 42AOOacres, is the f\:suJ.t pf çq¡µþ~ 31 lots from ClOVer Hill anø Ardwood subdivisions. Staff recommends · ¡tpprOYal oftþi~ ~øitipn, M"is()ryqoll1ß1i~eeRecoD1mendation: The AgricuJ.tural/Forest¡¡l Pistrigts A4vi~ory ç¡>mmitte\:,¡¡t ¡t~ me\:tingOµ May 8,1995, µnanimously reconunendeø that the ad.øition be · appmv¡::ø, with ¡ gon4ition p¡::rt¡¡ining to the withdrawn parcels Which i¡¡ no longer relevant, (M:illlltes ¡¡ttacheø.) . 1:\Gene¡;Ù\S4¡u-e\Ascam\P¡morama.ihn ;~ .. ~..þ APPJTWNT() PJ\N()RAMA AGIUÇ!)LTURALIFORE$TALPI$TIUÇ'f . TAX:MAPIfARCpL ACREAGE QWNER PWELLINGS ... . - . 4~þ"-Pl-27 42,4 Jeremy O. Caplin 1 . C ·'0· ------------~----------------- .. .... . .. ....... ..... ....... A:\fANORAMA·CHT J. <..1:. t <I; ~ ~. ~ o bJ · \; ã! .... '" ïi j ~ '3 ~ q Q · · · .. ~ :: · ~ · · .. o· · · " ." . j · · · > rl · · · · ¿ · ::¡: ... g ~ t ~ 00Ø :. , , , ~ iO <t z o ~ II) <", z.... z" ~æ æt; W"i5 _;jt: "'>w gJS: f::7 . g:::.::: "," «~ :¡; " : .. I , ct MV¡~!lry çQmmi«¡:ç MççHJl!: M¡¡Y ª, ¡99S The meeting w¡¡& c¡¡lleQ to pr4er by the Ch¡ÚWM, Stephen MUIr¡¡y, at 7:35 p.m. Otl;erm~mbers pr~&ent w¢re: Joseph Jones, vice-chairman, Bruce Hogue, Jacquelyµe Huckle, Pan- M¡¡upin, Rosemary pent, ¡¡nQ Bruce W oodzelL Mary Joy Scala, 'Senior Planner, was also pres~µt. AdditiQjl to f¡¡nQram¡¡ Agoçµltur¡¡l/Fomtal District · ph¡¡ir¡n¡¡n ¡¡S!>:~Q &Wf to preseµt thestaffrepoq. Mrs. Jlµckle ¡¡ske4 if the subQiyi&ion oµ the Caplin pmperty i& now gone. Staff replied that the lot~ hav¡: beeµ combjned.. HuckleaskeQ if the other pmperty still \1as individual lots. . Staff repli¡:Q YeS, on~ !¡rrger parcel ¡¡nd three subdiyisioµ lots. ;SWf npteQ that tl;¢re i& nO miniml\ill parcel size for enmllment in agricultural/forestal districts. HQwever,iµ tl;e P¡¡st, subQivisioµ lots have been excluded. The BOard excljlded two subdivision IpiS, iµ the Wyµg~t~subdivision from the Ivy Creek Qistrict because they thoµght they were clearly ÏI1tenQeQ forresiQenti¡¡l pµrposes, ¡¡nd to inclµdethem woulQ be inconsi~tent witl; the iµteJltofthe Qisttict~! Nine Iyy Farm& lot& Were excluded from the Moowan's River district iµ 1989, Wheµ the byP!!s& wa& proposed. There were two Ivy Farms lots owned by!! property PWJ1er Who ¡¡Isp OWJ1~Q M a4j!!cent larger Parcel, similar to the Rosenblum pmperty. They · ¡410weQ the two lots to join the cJistrict, bµt o!1ly if they were combine¡l with the larger ParceL ')'h¡¡t is !! pr¡:ceQeµt for thi& c¡u¡e. To ma.ke this application consistent with previous açtioµ, the Rpsenbll\illlPt& would þ¡¡ve to be combined in some way. · Mrs. fb¡Cde ¡¡s!>:¡:Q if the three lot& cpulQbe combined with the larger parceL St¡¡ff s!\ÍQ tl;eycoulq, but wa,sn't sweifthe !!pplicant was agreeable. She noted that MI. Ro&enblum W¡¡& present. The Çh!\Írrµa¡¡said he is familiar with the land, wbich is wooded anQ open, ¡¡nd discussed the soils, prpb!!bly Plass 11, III Md IV. He noteQ that MI. Yager, the soils expert, was not present, but tl;!!t the ¡¡PpljC¡¡µt, Mr,Caplin, wits pre&ent. TheCh¡Úrm¡¡nppeneQ the meeting to the pubjic. MI. Caplin &!\Íd bis pareµts acqµiredthe lots in the 1950's. He said it "belongs" to PMOramå - the same wooq& MQthe same streams. MI. Roseµbll\ill s¡Úq it wo!1ld b¡: reasoµable to join lot 42 with the larger ¡¡¡;reage because the ro¡¡d ~sthr0\1g4 there. The Ch¡ÚWM!!sked staff¡¡bput the recommend¡¡tioµ to join lots. Staff thought the applicant w¡¡nteQtp combine tl1e lots iµto twq parcels, but the preyiou& ¡¡ction might r¡:qujre that they be cOffibÏI1ed intp pne par\.:et. The Ch¡¡Íw¡¡n said to be consistent with preyiqus :aoarQ ¡¡ctions, the !!pplic¡¡nt woulQ AAV~ tp ÇQmbine ¡¡lIthe sm¡¡ll parcels with the larger tract, ;Staff s¡¡iQ ¡m !!ltem¡¡tive would be to just put the larger Parcel in the district. P<m M¡¡upÏI1 &¡¡iQ tl;eY a1re!!QY s¡Úd th¡¡t they wanted to combine lot 42 with the larger parcel, Mr. Rosenblum saidhe thought his wife would agree to putting all the lots together. MI·M¡¡jlpm s¡tid that wo~d be the best way to ensure that the Board would appmve it. Mrs. Huck:le s¡¡ÍQ they would AAVe to lose their status as subQivision lots. 1 'oÄ J The C~!jI). saÌ¡! he ha$ kµQW the applic!jI).t for 30 years, and has r¡o problem ¡tpprovingjtas it is, b~t tJ.e Pfecedeµt It¡¡¡¡beer¡ set and the ~oard may turn it dow ifit is not eombined. He &¡¡jd ¢at the ¡tpplieantdoe$n't þ¡¡ye to maI,:e the 4ecisior¡ tonight. Mr, R.ø&enblum &¡ti4lte WOl.!l4 ¡¡gree tent¡¡tively to combine the lots. Th.eQþ.¡¡j¡:man ¡t&ke4jftÞ.e con;unittee woµld want to approve fuÏ& only with that recommendation or con;unittee eþ'oose to recømmen4 this iµ its existin. g &tate? ., ". ....>, <.".;.."....,." :' ....", ;' , ',,' . ." .. ..... '. .... . &ai4 i& wil1iµg tg s¡ty he wants it iµ or¡e parcel, he would stilll1ave lús Planning COIIlj.1li&sior¡ meetillg. reeoIIlj.1lend that it all be combine4 iµtQ one, b\lt then leave it deeisioll betweell now and tþ.e Supervisors' meeting, the a4dition& with the aforementioned Mr. &eçQr¡de4 the motiøn. p¡¡¡¡sed ummimou&ly. E.eqµe~t forM!!fll Jltter¡siVe Use in Totier Cree~ District The CÞ.airman called for the &taff report. Staff Mte4th¡¡t the. coµnnittee, ¡tt it& Mareh 6, 1995 meeting, talke4 about a rescue. squad use in general, ¡¡µ4 decide4 that it di4 not recomt)1en4 the location of a rescue squa4 ill an agricµltur¡tl/forestal di&1rict because it would convert the farmlan4 µse. . Staff Pfe&er¡ted Ii&ts of allpreyiQUS requests for withdrawals and mO:r;e interu;iye uses. Staff Iloted tbat ¢ere w¡¡& Some crj)S&-ovefof requests. Staff thought the eommittee m¡¡y also want to çor¡si4ef tþ.e possible with(jraw¡¡1 of this property, that the use may r¡ot be appropri¡¡te in an ¡¡gricult].µ'alIforest¡¡14istriet. ~taff&aj4 fue eoµnnittee r¡ee4stg 4eter¡njne if the proposed u&e meet& the intent of¢e ¡¡grieµlturallfore$t¡¡1 distriet ¡¡et ir¡ general, an4 how fui& Partic\llar site an4 proposed use affects fue qjstriçt. staff ljste4 factPr& ill f¡¡yor and ¡¡gamst the proposal, and stated ¢e staff reeoIIlj.1lell4ation against ¢e prqposed use in the ¡tgricµltur¡¡l/forestal çlistrict. StaffnQtegt1W Mr. ~Qlmenv¡¡spre&ent, alor¡g wifu other member& of the squa4, St¡¡ff~sjcegif¢e 8 ¡¡cre& i& 10C¡¡teq ea&t of the wet area ontream. The ¡¡ppljcant$ replie4 itwas. Staff said ¢at ea&t pftIle Wet ¡¡re~ tIle soH& are very gopd. Mr. !3pt¡µer &ajd the pµrpQse 9f fue application was to replace the resCUe squa4 bui14ing; loc¡¡te4 oµ the eomer ofV¡¡lleY an4 J¡¡ek&on Street& ill dowtow Scottsville. They cpru;idered bµi14ing ¡¡ µewstrµçtµre 011 fue e~istmg site, b\lt it i& in the flood plain, there is abµi14ing ¡¡tt¡¡ched, and the IIxisµng; &trµcture j& tpo &m¡¡lI. Jµ mpnthly meetillg;s, they eanµot get 80 members in the building. They h¡¡ye trie4 for Seven years tp [md a Ilew loc¡¡tior¡. Resaid, we are trying to provide ÌJ11p~oveg mediçal&ervjees tQ o].µ' part of the Cmmty. TÞ.e CI:¡¡¡ir¡µ!jI). &l\i4 he thou~l:¡t everyone on the cOmmittee was sympathetic, but they had to 4eci4e wl:¡ether this p¡¡rcel p[\lm4 can be 4eveloped to ¡¡ more illtensive USe withill the di&trict. TÞ¡¡tp'¡¡$nptIlillg; t9 40 witIlour sympathy to yo].µ' cause. He questione4 &t¡¡ff¡¡bp\lt the statement fu¡¡t ):hey cQuI4 ¡tpply for removal pfthe property ftom the district. St¡¡f'f &¡ti4 fuey hllVe r¡ot applied for that, b\lt it would be an optioll. 2 . The a&keq aboµt t4e review date. 2001. didJ),Qt j;þ~ t4at t4e colIlll1Ìitee c!l11 allow this more intepsive use but t4at feel VeP' favorable (this is personal opinion now) tow¡¡rq t4e. removal of qistrict for this more iptensive µse. Bµt to come anq ask us to allow this to is pot c9mpatible wit4 the district act. jfbe woµlq remove t4e wbole 339 acres? The s¡¡id 1].0, jµst tJ¡.e 8 acreS. Ip t4e last discµssiop, I brought up sOl:);lething about t4e public gOQd. This is obvio1.!sly ip the public good, bµt under the restrictive laws we have to work wit4, f qon't tb~ wbether it is pµblic goOq or not, t4e applicatiop needs to be ¡nade throµgh qifferept channe~s. §iaff 1l9teq t4ere ¡¡re foµr criteria the applic!l11t woµ!d bave to meet tQ apply for withdrawal. It may be possible to skip this step in the pfocedure (the Advisory Conunittee ¡neeting) and go right to the PlaI1);lipg CQ¡nmission!l11d Board" they woµld ¡¡lready have your recorrunendaµop. Staff reaq iRe. fo¡¡r criteria. Mr. !'I(jgµe s¡¡i4 it S01);llqe~ like t4ey coulqmeet mQst oft4e conditions. Mr, WOQqzell¡¡ske4 aboµt compli!l11ce witht4e Comprehensive Plan. Mr. JQness¡¡i4 t4e Comprehe¡¡sive PI!l11 is supposed to be a gWdeline. §taff s¡¡i4 t1J¡¡twas a hard Qne, becaµse it is qesigpated Rural Area. Mrs.l1ucl4e qµestioped whether they needed so much room· Then: was qiscussiop aboµt the site. Mr, Bonner said he walked it to be sµre it WI\S satisfactory, . ¡pldwQµJq satisfy ot4er req1.!irements sµcb as EP A stand¡¡r<ls for a wet well for when they wash j;þeir rehicles. St¡¡ffw¡¡SJ.µlsµre QftÞ.emi¡¡jUll1);ll acreage, perhaps 5 acres fOr therescµe sq1.J!!d ¡¡lone. Staff qµestione4 tJ¡.eapplic¡plt wbetb~ tbat aCfeage woµld þe adequate for bo1:4 buildings, Mr. Bpl11wr s¡¡i<l he thought it W9µ!dÞe· TheY alsp W!l11ted to bave tr¡¡ipÏ¡1g ¡¡re¡¡s for extrication, ím<l rescµe sqµa<l meeµPgslike t4ey have Ï¡1 other parts of the state. They W!l11t j;Q bave a course to ieaçJ¡ e¡nergency vehicle operaµon forcertific¡¡iiop. The Cb¡¡inµfU\ s¡¡id .there maY 9nly be 6 aCres of usable l!l11d. The applicants¡¡id 1\ combineq fa~ility is conjecture; the fire department has pot shown much iµteresi. We cOµ!d acc9mmo<late them, but we woµ!q have to crowd t4e parkÏ¡1g ¡md ir¡¡ilÙ);lg area more. The appjicants¡¡i4 tbey <10 nOt have bingo games. Sf¡¡ff sf\Ì<I, in ¡tr¡&Wef to Mr. W oO<lzeU's question, whether it is in compli!l11ce wit4 the ç9J;npreþensiVe plan, we try to locate pµblic facilities within Growtþ. Areas. This is not in a Qrowtþ. Area. ft<loes ¡neet a saiety need for t4e County. The çJ¡¡¡inµansai4 that isfue Bo¡¡rd ofSuperyisors' problem. The cOInµlittee neeqS to act OP t4e illiti¡¡l feqµest. Then We can ¡n¡¡lœ a fecommendation to approve or disapprove the remov¡¡l of the 8 acrep¡¡rcel. Mr. WQ()$euaskeq if We ¡¡re sµre the l!l11downer W!l11ts to do t4is (remove the parcel from t4e 4istricO? The Ch¡¡inµ!l11 said nO, but I do t4ink we need to aCt on the recommendation before µs before we can go ont9 anYthing .else. !'Ie c¡¡lled for comments from the corrunitfee concerning the change in µse Qf part of t4e existing parcel wit4in t4e district for the rescue sqµaq. 3 Mr~.Hµct<l\' s¡ùd yo~ .st<ited it in the beginning that this is not something that shpuld take plaçe m an agriç1.JJtm'al district mai1.JJy beç<iUSe it wotÙd set a precedent for something not as viW as this. Mr. Maupm s¡ùd e<ich thing would stand 01]. its own· TIl\, Cþa4rµan s<iid this appljcatiol]. is very tµÙque. Mr. M<iupin agree4 and not\,d its loc¡¡tiol]. right beside a growth area. Mr. Hogµe S<ii4 its Ipc<itioµ h;ls merit. Mr· M<iupm s¡ù4 \\s4ifficult <is it is to cpme by property in AlbemarleCp1l11ty, it would go a¡¡;ajµst I,rls will tl:) 4eny the ¡µ;e pf it. It's not enhancing the ag district, but its enhancil].g the he<ilth and seçl1rity of the Scottsville District, TIw Cþa4rµan agreed, but sai4we h<ive to live within g\lidelines. Mr· W()04zell sai4 it's I].ot that we are not in favor of the rescue squad, it's that it's not an ¡¡gricultpr¡ûlfQrestaluse. TIW Cþ¡ùrman s¡ùd it's <i gre"ft lQc<itioµ, qmck reSPQnse, everything is right except for the f<içt.... Mr. Maupin ¡lSked if the landowµer could withdraw just th<it 8 <icres. ' ~t!\ff sai4 he ç;1:)1.JJ4 <ipply to 40 that. TheChmrman s¡ù4 h.é çle!U'ly meets three of the four criteria. Mr, M<iµpiµ s;li4hetb.l:)µght it was vital to th\,whole area to get this project. Mr. Jqnes s¡ùd he didn't thjnl¡: the lJ'ie is cOlnp<itible with. the agrictÙtm'\\lIforestal distriçt, bµt h.e would r\,çom¡nend th<it tb.e 1¡¡µ4 be withdr<iwn. Mrs. I)\'nt s¡rid if it is withdr¡¡wn then w\, 40µ't have to do anything. . ¡;;t!\ff QOt\'4 th"ft Mr· Perkins an4 Mr.~loçh. were both. symp<ithetic tQ this use m thjs loç;ltion. Tþe CW*man IlSked fQr furtb.er comment and\\ motion. Mr, JQneS "fsl<.e4 the rescue squad personnel if they wotÙd ask the landowner tQ hav\, the land witb.cll'!'fWµ· Tþeys"fid they Wl:)tÙd do that. Mr. Jq!1.eS reco¡¡µn.eµded tb."ftthe µse is nQt appropri"fte for an agrictÙturalan4 for¡:stal4istrict, pl:)wever? iftb.¡: l¡¡µdOWller \\pp1ies for an 8 "fcré withdr<iwal, th<it this çommittej: pas ¡¡lready aJ;?proV\'4 its re!+loval for th¡: Pl1fPQse of the Scottsville Rescue Squad buil4ing. Mr. Maµpin seç;()J1<led tb.e motil:)n· The cÞ¡Ùrman rest<ited tb."ft ithas beep moved and seconded th¡¡t the existing applicatioµ be <lenied, put th¡¡t tb.e commHtee formally would apprl:)ve the removal pf the 8 acre p!U'cel from the e4isting district fOr this purpQse. The mOti91]. passe4 uµanim01lsly. ~!1qn,1st f9f M9r,1 Jlltepsive Use ip the yellQW MQuptain District Staff presented the st¡úf report. The applicant is requesting ª full service garden center and greenhouse facility. The ZPl1ing Administrator has ruled that a zoning text amendment is necessary for this use, most likely by speci¡¡l use permit. A larger wayside stand could be approved by the Planning Commissiòn and would not require a ZTA, however, by definition, a wayside stand does not ¡¡llow sale of items not grown on the property. Staff nQted th¡it ip. 1994, the AgrictÙtural and Forestal Industries Support Committee (of which 1«>" BIad> "" Pooi. ""'" - m_) '"""'4 """"""",'""OM 01 how "" Comdy "'old I ! I i I J- suppm1 !i114 prof11:ott: agricult\µ'al ¡md fort:~tal actiyitit:s !i11d tht: intt:nt wa~ clt:!lfly to promoæ 4iryct f11:arkt:tiµ~ !i11d pick-ypur-ow¡¡ ppt:rations. Tht: qœstion is how, ¡md to what t:xrent, should Wt: rt:~trictthy sa}¡:: pfprmlµcts not product:d on tilt: pæmist:s. Sµµf rt:cpmm<:nd<:dtill\t thy prppqst:d USt: is not cOlµpl\tiblt: with tilt: intt:nt pf tht: I\gricµUural an4 for<:stal di~tricts, ¡md that tl¡~ I\pplicant should rt:vist: his I\pplicl\tipn ¡md m<:t:t with planning !i11d Z9niµ~tq find an qcœptl\blt: sqlution, &t~ Spqk;y with Rob .I3loch todl\Y, who ft:U thl\t wt: nt:t:dt:d to qpptow somt: typt: of rt:WI ust: wµ¡'ch w¡¡~ tjt:d to fa.r¡µ$,so tl¡t:y could cpntinut: to b<: yil\blt: opt:rations. He said tl¡t:y should 1\ot st:!1 tractpr$, forjµ~t!i11œ, bUt ~mall tqols would bt: ok. tht: difficulty is trying to find out wh¡¡tis appropriate, ¡md tht:n, hPW do you t:nfo¡ct: it? .. zoning insPt:ctOr$MYe difficultyt:nfprcing .tht:st: èonditions. fIµcjqt: þãd no problem iftl¡<:yw¡mt to makt: tht: waysidt: staµd l!lfgt:t, tht: problt:m comt:sif tht:y W¡¡µt to ~e!! ~ømt:tl¡in~ not PrPduœd on tl¡t: fann. 'Tht: prøblt:m is opt:ning tl¡e door, so tl¡at otht:r pyoply cøul4 comt: in whp!lf<: µot ~p consci<:ntious. Th~ app!icant, ScOtt Pt:yton" ~pokt:. H<: said ht: has opt:ratt:d for t\yt:nty ye!lfS ¡¡reWll¡mdscape µur$t:ry frpJl'). thy farm· A retail oµtlt:1, i.y., a g!lfdt:n ct:ntt:r, is not t:xisting. Wt:!lft: ¡¡.t ¡¡ point wþ¡:r<: !I ~µSta,int:d cash flqw i$ critical. I dOn't h¡¡v<: it in SU111!llt:r Or wintt:r, I nt:t:d tq ~tablish ¡¡ ~tr¡¡.tt:gy tq $tretcþ out wh¡¡H!Illl doil1~. What I amproposin~is tOt:xpand On Wh¡¡t I MVt: pt:t:n dqiIl~ pYqfft:ring I\cc¡::~~o*s to crops We ¡If<: prqdµcing. In my opinion, for pt:oplt: to ¡¡ppæcil\tt: ~PmethiIlg,tÞ<:Ynt:yd to undt:rst¡md it. Tq undt:r~tand it, tl¡t:y h¡¡vt: to t:xpt:rit:nce it, Our entirt: farm OPera,tioµh¡¡& be<:Il pryqicatt:d on diæct m!lf,lœting. Wt: bring tht: public onto our fann ¡md tl¡<:y t:xpt:riYIlœ it. We brin~ tl¡ous¡mds of schpol kids that comt: tp our farm for ¡m t:ducatipnal t9% fIoP<:fu1lytheY willlt:¡µ-n tl¡t: valU? pf agricultuæ to tht:m, to our CO\lJlty, State and OO\lJltry."fþt:ynet:d tø unqt:rst¡md that tht:re i~ alinkage theæ. Wt:Would like tP pe able to Providt: tø tl¡e publiçqçcçssory Products tq tl¡t: crøpswt: !lfe growing. W t: have beeIlgrpwing flqwer~ .COmmerçially førten ye¡lfs. My wife manages tl¡e grt:enhouse· Sooner Or later ~pmeone \vi!! ¡¡* ifypµ ~t:!1 pots,t()p~oil, mWch. These!lfe the types pftl¡ings I ¡un talking ¡¡pout, not ~eneral ¡nerch!i11dis<:, This f.arm þ¡¡S pt:¡::n in f11:y family fOr close to one hundæd yt:ars. . 'There i~ a 4çmpn*"able çommimWnt to preserve this laµd in ¡¡µ agricultural conte¡ct. . The Cþ<!irm¡m ¡¡skt:d the ¡j;jffurence between what tl¡t: peytøns ¡lfe <!pplying for, ¡md building a ¡nPll~tr()P~ Þµild.iIlg fqr ¡¡ winery. Mr~. Huckle ~ai4 the winy i~ produced On the place, that's tht: wholt: chPç. 'Tht: problem i~ tl¡t: tl¡ingshew¡!!1t~ to ¡¡dd tøhi~ Sale~ ¡1ft: tl¡ings not prøduc¡::d On his fann, tl¡at's tht: difference. Mr,Wøpd;l¡:\l ~ai4 mØSt qftl¡t: wiµt:rit:s t04ay sell cOrkscrt:ws, t-shirt~, not just tlw win<:. I l1ave a littl<: bit qf problem with s4ovel~, but shovels !lfe related to this m¡m's business. I døn't think we are~ettin~ a. precec1.t:nt. MI, M"aupiIl agre<:d. Mr, P\?ytqll ~ai4hi~ wift: ~t:I1~ dried fløwer arr¡mgements. Acct:ssorit:s like floral wire and silica gel¡¡rething~ We would lj](e to sell. The CIµ¡irni1lIl said f;cott has proUght up q pøint, you opt:nt:d this up tp a much brøader senst:, yqµ asJ>:¢4 ns tøcoIlsider in ~pmeWaY designating specifications not only fOr what Seven Oaks is ~sking f% Þut før tilt: entiæ I\griculturally relatt:d rt:t¡¡il business. Mr. P~)1QIlsaidzpning asked u~ to gt:t ~Omt: ft:eling for wht:tht:r wMt W<: art: proposÌI:¡g is yiewe4 as apprppriatt: in the NF District. What we are talking about is directly ¡md inextricably 5 ~ ',"':.,:,-'----:', "m-::";':,) , ":--':y~~ ";",.c.'; '.:' ",~.; ;,.-.<,,>.,'" >..<:....;. , ~. liµl<:ed tp wh!\t we !Ire prodllcin¡¡ on the fann. I a¡n sensitive to the precedent. isslle, I want to be hpnest abpllt wlult I a¡n doipg, ¡¡µd address the isslle up ftont. Wh!\t ¡ a¡n talking aboutis linked to the ProdUl.;tion c!\pability of ¡¡µ existing fann that has been demonstrated to be in production, ~s opposed to spmeone jllst comin¡¡ ip ¡md wantin¡¡ to open, liP some kind of retail olltlet. .Mrs. i:¡:µckle ¡¡sked wh!\t action they !!1"e able to take, what is 01.11" role in this. ~µ¡ff said, tell me if ¡¡ simil!\f lIse to tþis woµ14 be appropriate iQ. any agricllltl.lral district. ¡f yOU S!\y it is appropriate, tþell we will 4evise some cate¡¡ory that he would be pennitted to oPerate µn4er in the ~onin,¡¡ or4inance· My suggestioP was an enlarged kind of wayside st¡md so it wouj4 still be tie4 to the a¡¡ricultµr¡¡lµse of tþe Property, similar to the wineries, ¡ thiµl<: retai.l pursery 8.1}d greephpµse is too broad. ... . The Çhainnan s.aid t4at's what he is doing now, To me, yoµ are coming in and applYing for sp¡petþÏ!1g tþat is jµst abqµt almost a retai.l prpcess· Mr, peytp!) s¡¡i4 what Wt; !!1"t;40in¡¡ is comrÍ1erci¡¡l, creating pr04ucts for s¡¡le. Mrs. peQ.t¡¡sk~ci jfhe h!\4togoqefore tþePI¡µµling COlI1lI)issipn to epl!!1"ge the greenhouse, ~W'f sai4¡¡reeµhp¡¡ses W01jlq þt; Per¡pitted ~s an agriculturalllse. Mr. Pe)1op said· st!lff tol4 him 11e coul4 put the eQ.tire hUI].dred aCres Ul1der glass, but brin,ging tþe public on,to the fann is 4ifferent· . . The ÇhairmllIl ¡¡sked, why js it \eg¡¡l for me to come to YOll ¡md buy be4ding p\¡mts? Mr, Pe)1op saiq,tl¡.e iSsµe iswantil1g to offer expanded accessories. Mr. M!\lIPÍI) said what he is prpppsin¡¡ to sell works in with what he is already selling. Mrs. Ruckle s!\i4 what typespfthings he is ¡¡oing to be able to sell willlulve to be stipµlated . he c<µ1't seU Weeq eaters or lawn mowers or something like that. There's gOt to be st¡¡µdar4s set, Mrs, Pent said ¡ c¡¡n't sell saddles orri4ing things. She aske4 Mr, Maµpin if People !\sked him to sell clUIJ.1ing jars, Mr, MaµpÍI) saici they neyerasked for them. ~. HµClde saiq he is missil1g tþeboat. Mr, Maµpin said, there's been ~ change Ï!1tþe world, ¡md he needs to change along with it. Mrs· Hµclde s~j4 posie made ¡i ¡¡ood point, people come to her fann to bllY a horse, an4 then they saY, 40 YPll h¡¡ve ~ sa44leor bri4\e Or saddle blankets? That's the sort of thing tþat c¡m be fUlcillary to this. Mr, Jones said, rye so\4 a hors¡:: with a bri41e on it before, ¡fhe jµst app)ied, for ¡m e¡¡:p¡mded Iitan4, selling Prodllct.& tþat cijr¡::ctlY r¡::late to his production.,.. Mr·Wpg4zell said tþat is stilltpo weak, t4at is open-en4ed. Mr· JOQ.es saici no, he is s¡::lli!1g pr04l1cts ¡¡ t4at !!1"e relate4 to what he produces. He won't be sellÏ!1g l¡iWPmqWers bec¡¡use he is not produci!)g turf grass, Ifhe was pro4ucing sod, he could seU l~wrunower~ at his ex,pap.ded stffild. Mrs. P¡::j1tsaid,there!!1"e roadsid,estar¡ds all. ¡¡long where he lives. Other committee members noted tþat the st¡mds are not in an aglforestal district; and they !!1"e gr8.1}df¡¡tþered, ~t!\ff said, tþ¡¡t jswhat I ¡un most concerned about - I have less of a problem in the Rl.I1"al Area in geQ.er¡¡l. . po yoµ see that a, retail µse like this is approprÏa,te in an ag/forest¡¡l district? Mr· M¡¡µpip s!IÍd, the a,pplic!\D.t ¡¡lready has a retai.l use. St¡¡ff said, he has ¡¡ waysi4e stand. The cþ¡¡jrm¡m sai4, he has a, greenhouse and it's drawing the public in to a retail business. He 6 "'- ~'. , ~" , .~-_._~~.~,.'--""-"-"' .' ~ 1 " ¡¡Jrç¡¡qy ña~tIWtr¡iffip ¡:onIÎng - what'S the qifference? I agree with Sco~ " somç criteria sho!1ld bç \Îrawn !1p to P¡¡t i.qtQ tile or\Îina1We tlrat womq allow this type of ¡¡se. St¡¡ff~aiq, What tf tI1i~ lrappençq in IÇe~wiç!ç Agric¡¡lmral District, wo¡¡lq a rçtail ¡¡se bç apprgpriate tIlere, Qf i~ itomy iµ çertain locations? Á çOJJl!1littee member ~aid" if they ¡µ:ç growing strawberries, they pomd sel! the s¡¡me thing&.. St¡¡ff ~aiq, s() you thiI1!c1 iµ ¡u¡. ag/forestal distriPt1 a~ long as it is tied to the prod¡¡ctionofthe farrp,..,. PQYoµ, thi'* it's Î!11portant like Scott saiq, that we shomq establish that the farm has qÇWOµstratçq ~()I11e prgd¡¡ptiQn P!\pability before we allow the st¡u¡.q? Mr, l()ne~ ~aidthere shQmq be eno¡¡gh acreage to S¡¡Pport it. I don't l>now that they sho¡¡ld have qeI11o!1strated a past history. . Mr~. H\lcJqe as~e4 if ~taff çxpeçte4 ¡u¡.y aptipn from the committee, or Was it jjlSt a brainstonning sessioµ? Mr,. Pçyt()µ sai4 the Zoning A4minjstrator wante4¡u¡. opinion from tI1is pOJJl!1littee as to whether tlrey thQ¡¡ght what I aw reQ\l9sting is çonsidereq to be appropriate in an AfF district, There wiU be otller i~sues tIlat I will h!\vç to ¡¡dQress from planning and zoning. S,taffsaiqWç cI0n't Mve a n¡¡me fqr it yet, beça¡¡se he will have to apply for a l-TA, If you want tq put iq thç f()nn ()f¡¡ m()ti()!l that what he has described here is appropriate, and if it requires a ~pecial ¡¡Se pçnni1¡it would be pojlSidered a more intensive use. I tI1ink you. should say that yO¡¡ feçl what hç has proposeq is appropriate in an agricmtural district, and sPecifically, where he i~ 10P!\ted. Mr~, Iiuçkle sai4, ¡u:r4 we do need stanqards, we n.ee4 criteria. TIre Chairm¡u¡. said, þ¡¡t that C()µld ÇOn1(: tÞrough the reCOI)1lIIendations of the committee, and not necçssi!{ily thl'0ugh tlre motion. Mrs, Hj,!cJqe said, I'm not sayin;¡ tIlat we lrave to list the criteria, I'm saying it nee4s to have criteri¡¡ ¡¡tt€!clre4to it, not ju.St be an ppen-çnded, do wlratever you want. Mr· J()neS said,the njlJ11ber one Priteria womd be that the products be directly relate4 to the ¡u:r.eagç ¡u¡.4 tl}ç agriÇ¡¡ltwal products prodµced. Mr. Wo04;¡:çU ¡¡ske4 if anY other grpup O¡¡t there now would come under these regs for eµfop.:emeIlt? As honorable as tI1is .man is, the next gentleman or lady comes in and does not live ¡¡P totll~jr oþljg¡¡tions, who is going tp be the enforcer? Mrs· Ii¡¡çJqe saiq, Amelia, I guess, she gets aU the dirty work. WO()dz;eU said, what if Scott wants to start seUing motorcycles and cilllin saws, where does go? Mrs. Pent sai4we 40n't have a prpcedure. Mrs. H¡¡clde said, that's Wlrere yow çriteria is so important. Mr. Jones ¡¡sked who enforces that? Staffsaid, ifhe applies for a special use Permit, and ponditions are plaped pn it, then zoning womq enforce those c()nditipns. TheChair¡nansaid, if! ¡¡m reading the consensus here, then the request for a more intensive use witlrin tI1is distri¡:t shoJ.!ld be aUowed with certain criteria added to it? Mrs. lijlcl):le sai4, tilllt it be qirectly relateq to the products that he is growing on the place? Tire Chairman said We nee4 to f)1.¡t that in the fOnn of a motion. I qon't have any problem with thi~ request, b4t I qo tI1ink the cOI)1lIIittee should recoI)1lIIend that, if this 'reqnest is a¡:cepted, that criteria be ~et µp to set gniqelines for subseqnent aPpliçations. ':" 7 - A_f' Mrs- f!:¡~*ft: sa!d, J 40n't tbÜ1k we can approve something tonight without knowin~ wbat those S;pµditipns !!):t:, 40 you? §taff s!\Ì4 j:þey b¡¡ve to 40 th¡;: ZTA, then apply for a speciall.jse permit. Mr. M¡¡l.jpiµ move4 tQat thisçon;¡mittee approve it as applicable in tlûs agricu!tl.jrallfQrest¡ù 4isw.ct, lffiqC);' the çon4itioµs be as~ed fQr, which is all related products. Mr. JQIWS seconde4 the motion. Mrs.. Rµcl4¡;: said she is].lIlCQmfortable with tQis, until it gets a little more for¡naliz¡;:4. Not that I bave anY qµesj:Ïoµs about Ü1is particular applicant, but it makes me ].IIlcomfortable whel} we 40n't ¡'µow wh¡¡t criteria is going to be. I think we are jlllllpipg aheaq of ourselves. Mrs. Deµt Sµggested anotber worksession on this particular case. Staff sl.j~gesteci th¡¡t they cQu!ci bring the Z1' A back to the COffiIllittee. Mrs.. Hticlde ¡¡grreci. The Çb!lir¡nan asked if it is. critical that this r¡;:qµest be approved tonight. Mr. !,¡;:yton saidQpe thing h¡;: had discussed with Amelia and Bill was the PQssibility ofa speci¡Ù µse pefD;lit for aÇO].lIltry store. 10 were to apply for a country store with specifis; çrit¡;:ria, woulci tbat beanpther Way to ~o? S¥Iff sai4 that inber ciisctissions wiÜ1 Bill and Amelia, that was nQt the ¡¡ppropriate way to go. I 4p!1't tbinlc a CO].lIltry stor¡;: is apprQpri¡¡te in an aglforestaI district. Mrs. P¡;:nt suggest¡;:(¡. that tbey coµlq recoffiIllend that the land be taken out of the ¡¡glforestaI ciistriçt. Mr. P¡;:yton saicibe dici not want to tak¡;: it out of the distriçt. 'j'þe CfuIirn;¡an s!lici tber¡;: is a motiQp on the floor. Th¡;: vote Was taken, with Sin favor and 2 abstaining (Huckle and Dent). Qther nUsbH~Ss Mr. JOlleSsaid the Albem!!):le Fam;¡ Bureau took a VQte on the questioll ohlIowing riding lessons (cpn;¡mercial stabl¡;:) byright. The çOffiIllittee had discussed this qµestiQn at its last meeting. He saici the ram;¡ Bl.jreau voted in favor of allQwing them by right. Mrs. Hµckle asked ifth¡;: proposed change in the use value taxation law (to eliminate use v¡Ùue t!)JI:aj:Ïol} for QPe~ space) wou!ci have any effect on ag/forestal districts. There WaS qiscussion rel¡¡teci to the golf courses that Qave applied for use value taxation. Mr· Jon¡;:s asked wbere ):ìd Shearer got the nlllllber of 60,000 existing building lots whell he heard him talk 01} a. radio show. The meeting was adjourned at 9:20 p.m. 8 ___________________ __________T____ K-ecólf€d Jï»re. ltf¡ ms- ~- -~~þ STATEMENT TO THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (Concerning the proposed Caplin Agricultural District) June 14, 1995 My name is Frances Martin. As a resident of Ardwood Subdivision, in which part of the property under discussion is located, I would like to state briefly the homeowners' view of the proposed designation. It is our understanding that the 3.76 acre section of the Caplin property composed of Lot #14 will remain subject to the provisions of the deed covenant of the Ardwood Subdivision, as revised April 21, 1982. The other Ardwood residents have no objection to this designation as long as the restrictions in the deed are respected by the owners. Thank you very much. >. ~ . ',\ Distributed io &ard: .6-1 sI-l:('.... '\ Agendl Item No. 0/) Ob/tf('fIS) COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 May 19, 1995 Robert E. Knight Clamar Corporation T/Z Southeastern Land & Timber 6 i 8 Kenmore Avenue, Suite lA Fredericksburg, VA 22401 RE: SP-95~09 Darton Greist, III Dear Mr. Knight: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 16, 1995, by a vote of 6:0:1 recommended approval of the above-noted petition to theBoard of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment; 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction one hundred (100) year flood elevations and boundaries. 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. The applicant is encouraged to contact the Federal and . State agencies in the early stages of the desigu process; 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. The computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the ZoningOrdinance; 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a ~ingle family erosion control agreement. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on June 14. 1995. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~~ Ronald S, Keeler Chief of Planning RSK/jcw vcc: Ella Carèy Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley 'to , , " . 'c STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: YOLANDA HIPSKI MAY 16, 1995 JUNE 14, 1995 (SP 95-09) DARTON GREIST III Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing work in the floodplain to establish a stream crossing. Conceptual schemes indicate there shall be two culverts located at the crossing (see Attachment A). Petition: Darton Greist III petitions the Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a floodplain crossing (30.3.5.2.1) on 36.3 acres zoned RA, Rural Area. Property, described as Tax Map 133 Parcel 31, is located on Route 722 approximately 1.25 miles south of the Route 723/722 intersection in the Scottsville Magisterial District (see Attachment B). This .site is not located in a designated growth area (RA 4). Character of Area: The landscape is generally hilly with a mixture of open and wooded areas. The stream is approximately three to five feet wide with fields on both sides. The elevation rise on the western bank is approximately 15 to 20 percent while the elevation rise on the eastern bank is approximately 10 percent. There is a staggered row of eastern red cedars and scotch pine about 10 feet ITom the eastern bank. Planning and Zoning History: (SUB 94-136) Ruth B. and J. H. Wheeler Estate Exempt Plat- On December 12, 1994, the Planning Department approved a plat which created eleven lots. (See Attachment A-2. Parcel 31 is identified as lot 10). The property in question was sold to Mr. Greist on March 2,1995. On December 22, 1994, the Planning Department administratively approved a plat which divided lot 7 into two parcels (Attachment A-5). Staff Comment: There is an existing stream crossing serving lot 7A and B located approximately 2100 feet northeast of this property. The applicant is proposing to locate a second stream crossing to serve lot 10. Lot 10 is adjacent to lot 7B. Given the shape of the portion of this parcel between Hog Creek and Rte. 722, it is questionable that the applicant would be able to construct a dwelling unit in this area with adequate drainfield locations. Historically, the Board of Supervisors has reviewed stream crossing for potential alternative access. In this case, there is no stream crossing located on property to the south (Tax Map 133 Parcel 5). The stream crossing located on Lot 7 could be utilized, however, that would require at least 2100 feet of driveway length and a stream crossing (Note: Driveway length as proposed ~ ~ would be at least 1500 feet). Such a driveway to the Lot 7 crossing would be located in the floodplain and/or require grading into the hillside. Lot 7 is not owned by the applicant or the seller. The Engineering Department has reviewed this request and recommends approval subject to conditions (see Attachment C). Recommended Action: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with section 31.2.4.1. Staff opinion is approval of stream crossing will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties nor change the district, if approved. Given the additional review by the Engineering Department and that the stream crossing allows for a house site without the need for a variance, staff opinion is that this use shall in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Ordinance. Therefore, staff recommends approval subject to: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. Water Resources Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment; 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction one hundred (100) year flood elevations and boundaries. 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. The applicant is encouraged to contact the Federal and State agencies in the early stages of the design process; 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. The computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement. -------------------------- ATTACHMENTS: A - Applicant's proposal B - Location Map C - Engineering Department Comment . "-I:: ..ðg.. gi? "y, N 'n-aEl"W "'''''''''''''''' "'\'1"'0\'1'" "'''''''.......... N"'O<ðQ~". ":"!~3~": i,:<t.:,; ~~~a~~ .~:;:~~~.. 03J'0' ~"'"' ei.· '2 '@Ii .~., '8 ;:~~~~g ~~ð!g¡~¡¡¡ ::f.:g~~~~ ~:¡:~:8"¡~ <q' . . *~~~E~ð~~ !~~5~jðê~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~i~~~~g~~ ~~~doo~ø" ~~~OÓ~~~~~ ~'.' -0"''''' ''''~iJ,.¡''',,, ....,.¡ -í"'¡\ ..~M~~~Nm~~ ~~,.¡~ M0 ~~~~~~~~~ ~~.i5.:::;~ø~_~ t;:¡;~~~;'~2:;¡ ~~-~ ~¿~ ~.....~ gr::i,.¡ 3¡f¡:~ ð,j,jf~,5~~ ~J,,:~~ ":":<:¡¡a:o~"1' :~g"i~ ~~~-:.::~,:;¡~ ò ',lÓ"¡"" - UO·" ¡Ö,J't.;;j'" imN"!~;::à4~"'o-..J-;,,¡i~'\ '" "j,,¡,,;{j.r>M"'¡"¡·",,¡' "':J) ""' ~~~ .............. .......................'" "'!'I"'o,," ......."'''',.,,'''....... ~~~g¡-~- ~?4~~~~'S~ t/r:¡¡.' ,.Iì"'":'C."·' ....,.'q ."f . . IT '< -~-' ,,- ifi.l!@f::!'\ .. "t::'. .,Ia"" ~1 'r~ in: _ - 1:, ¡'.~~""i f-¿, 24 1995 AI!.,,· .fI\:.!.." Jji-fi;,'i:..:-, ......_' -.. ¡¡"",d¡¡~i..... Z{'r'I"I~¡¡'" "( \ .~'i.' 1 T.M. ~3¡'tÂ~ & PAPER co. WE:.~1,V:o~~: 120, L24 PLAT t &i j:õ i~ "4 "4f"W J' i. . ¡~98.46· c" if' 649,~$' ~ œ,.. ." .", £= M ~ " .IOSI~,53' !118$J' ". ~ ~ . > ~~~~ ,ðn:" ~7~t: . 0' ';i~~~ > 0 " . I' -,.. ·0 ..., £'" M ~ 14.1':)5"::12"£11$.94' /43'44061:"565 H~3"6'4rE 69.60' H24;J276"e: 56.'6' &':;6'02"£ 48.3¡1 HZS':lO'32""£iIU'J N30'04·Zð"'[jQ'l.70' 1130"11'08"( 34.83' NJO"lrOon£ 2$.:19" 1134'08"08"" 41.23' "I37'Z012"[ "-30' N4r01:44"E &0,311' 1142'29"2'''[704.43 4J'06·~~£flSI.:a N.4T./'OJ"E 91.2.5' 1H":!Sl14,,"£ n27' H47'42'20"" 72.'/'0' N46·S6·zr£:5I.7J" N39'41'34""£18.7:)" t.l3I':;6'2I"E <IUS" 11126'02'26"(56.8]' NiSl'OO'O:;"!: 107.60 ;r: 23'00'4:1"£5929" 1125"7"05""[ 133.30' 1121"241'1""[ 50,60' NI,e·lo·...S·EJ860· Nl3·Zf39nE:l9.3r 1,111'1(56""£,8080' ~"·40·~.rE 53 &r "''''',,> n"'l>oò!12~ o:i...;..;..;......;..;..;-.ij!i1f ..:;~~~~~~~1Þ_~~:;: £;;: ØI_ ð,;-i'" oJ.-~'" i-, PI.. I:\:: -. ........... Ji'!!:i~~I:".!"2~i'l\ ~¡¡:8I~z:t:~~Z-i~ ;:...~~¡;;~i:...~~~c ~~~~a~~f..~;i! Ili:ÄM;¡¡~gm"i~!:¡c: !~g;q!pi~~~~~ ~~¡¡I~~"~;:d~ "'aa"'3Ä~~ ~ r E!~:"~i~ !¡ "ooól:l!J ¡ Ä:¡:f Ñ.5! ;Q ~i §¡;~~~~ ~~' !"o5~oå ";1)- fi.:r-",'" ~~ got'l"'2 "",...0 n...' ~y>~~ ~~~ "<0 I', O· )oJ ~ ¡-= ~~ ~.... eÞ "" '0 >" o· 1Y t~ ~. ~ ~. (i!\ ~ v, " <;:¡ ~ t ~ ;.. ~ \J .--... - --- Z 1 , 1J n l\\ ~ " . C; 0< ~ -Iñ Q :r ~ S-, t\ (Q -tªª I I ,(1) :I I ~ 0-1 I' "- ~~ ~ U)'-( ',~ ..... m \) ~ 0;:: [ll'. Z I III ~ »» i-)~ ~ ~'1J '-1 "- .¡;:, !';)~ » .,¡) ~ \Y " o " ~ I::) , ~ ~ ~ }~ lA \. <... <; Iì' ~ , t . ,< p ~::I~~'::: ~~g~~~ jj'dj~J .;~~~~~ ~~~~d2 â~~~1£; W~·~;i~.~€ro~~~ ~:E@ g:~;:~~g ~:g~~~.~ . . ··lJ!o_ 1;':~~~'i'g ~:J:"!~~o: "! _ . . ~ZZz~~%z.z ~~~~~~~~~ ~g~;~~q~~ ~~~~j~¿~~ ~~~g~~ôB~ 5~~dÓ~~~g. ¡Jii""óoo~a¡~~", '¡"!U! '''!'<Î¡'¡@ m ,"¡'':;¡;¡;:¡;;¡''¡I<i,.¡0,.,¡roi' <'Î.,,:¡IYI,..¡ ~:gJ~~~~~p "i~~It¡"!"!"!~~ ~~g~::~~~~ ~"i~::¡~::;~Qi ~~55~tii~ ~~g~t~~~ ~~~~~~~'~~ ~4;~~5~~, ødl~ q3 01"'''/ D<<.I!¡;::""! "1 ~ q ,,¡ "11',,,;0 @'i..!......,.¡..... ,.¡ ,,,,.¡tv" '" ,,, ", N. u....V'...."'.....'" .........."'!"!",."":-I ~~~~~~~~ ~!!!~~~~t1t_~ ~qt-J~~~~~~ , ~ " ;: or " '0 X g ". ~ V Z c- " ~ H " ~ d u "" , "0 V 0 ·m Z r> > On v ~ "" n C C , "" r ~~ u .c ~ "> 0 ~~ ~ 5 z< p ~f "0 ., u 0 Ò 0 0 " , ,-1- " m HI' ;~ ~~;:~?i :,,~ l'c?:. 0('\ ....þ '''''''''¡ 0:u :..~ 3~~ g::-.;'J~ ß~ ~~~ ~ig~ no ~E~ ""~-u'~ ~: ~z~ ~"'~þ ~~ Zþ'- ~':3R: "'Q ~gg ¡;rþ~..."VI OQ oo~ ~~ ~¡g~ ~~.~ þ~ ~~~ "'2Z ª. ~ ~~~ ô,~~ ~,~ ;~~ ~ci~ ;¡¡ J: ;Q g i'~:: ~~g '~~g g ~ ::;,--c Y' po -(g~ ov on þ " a ~þ r~~ ~ I'lr Q. ~ Þ "(D ();:E 0 . -:ft1(J)þrZ ~:1 ":t: n-if'lo3: Ç:f,t~ ~,:Þ~º{,grn'TfG'Î"lJ Þ::U r 01::0"'1 r CJ 0 r ~ 'r or--'OiTI-Þ-þ b;:e t:;p oP1~z:Ur:<>;:r.n- :t~~"i> "(') Ftnmfl1 UI_(¡¡, ~-< ~Eè: gr-;~ê3:-I <",:O:tJ zmÞþ.-m:r:o f"þ Jon -t -, :rþ;:O::Ë ~~ eg --(2m¡;1 oCz - 0 '00 UI::o (IO~CJ <p". þ- -iO-U" ,::1::- þo ~ -I<:2C::O:€{f :!~ m:ijo-0::r P~ '.Ø-T~~ " i\)~ ¡j::Or p ÑÞ t\)~~ . '" .. ~ ð u 5 N~9' ~'08'·W I/t_G", o 0 :9~-I ~!»~k '~fI~ O>-ÞV' ;;"5' UCN "U,-":o", CO~ þ 0 , z N þ. NO -'" 'l;J. ~''tI '" ~~ ~g , C "U 9~ w· ·u (T>./'J 'w ¡;'! t:þ Ö , . r "(I- "1 -c ~ ~ ~ ,-I , ~ , o r _[I~r WO" œ~á~ , ~.Þ"" ~''''<; ·-....0'" ,1!~~a> ". N23·3~·~2:~£ 1I~.94· N23·"4·06 £ 9~ 6~ N23'~ó'4r'£ fi9.ó!)' 1'12<4'32"26·"£ ~6.~6" N2ó°1:l6"02"·( 4f1.39 NZ9·:;tr32··E 66,:;3 N~O'04'2a"£ /02;70' 30·U'OS·'£ 34.S3' N300J"OS"£ 21:1,::'9' 1'134°08'08"£41,23' N37·2012·'E.~1.30' 1'141'07'44"( GO.3S' N42°29·2~'·E 14.43 N43°06'~G"£ a9,~3 N44°2'03'·E9J.Z~' 1'141:1'::'9"14"'£ 7/.2r N41°42'ZS"£ 72.70' N4G°1:l6'27"£ :11,1)" N39'47·34"£·¡8.7~' N3056·2r·E.41.J~' Nõ?6°0õ?·2G'"£ :;6:S3' ""9·0S·0::'''£ 107.GO N"'2~':;2·'E·94.J4' N27°4a'26"£ 44.3G' 1'123°40'22.'£ 6::'.80' ~ N22·3::."OO""£ 10:ÜI3' .._ N27°3'¡S"£ :l4.7Z' 1'133°48'41"'£ 29.1:;" N39·/~·41"'E ~3J~' N44°õ?G'OO·'£ 14.~2' ;./"..... T .1.1" 13~~ ¡ PAPER CO, WEST V!RGINIA'20 124 PLAT J 0.8, 406 ~. ,..I "~ D. ~C 0" (1 ., ,;L998.4';> O' . . o 649.55' '" "',.. "0 ..-I 0_ ~- ~ '" 1124.31 1096,::'3" 11/8,,53' ~51;' og 3~ "1 ã~ '" "',.. "'0 ~-I £õ ~ '" N 'ã;ï "0 Þ-I £'" ~ '" . .. , o. " '. " S-.J;~(f" ¡:. s-./"!"fOj6~l.;i¡() J,.o.;~o, %-"-.:: '.5.".""6"4- " $vs.o,v<f'1'> /(JfJ.?O:J I(~ 9_ .6'0$.6""4- .f4A;4óV,.~ f" 0-3"'- ~ . "w "0 ~" "'. ~"! . "~ Co 'z !;: /IJ.i. Ow VlO .0 . ~" w "',.. "0 ~-I £~ ~ '" o o . , . z ,. S )'QG'03~W h 26Q';'o , S/g·09·I7·W 89.GS· .. 54036',rw 4'1.00' -to ,., S;¡I'52'50"W17.,78' !.3'. SJr,52·:lO"W aó.tI~. ~., . W-FE'NCJNG ESM(1 ,.... S22°3/'OS"WIOS.50· L POLE,' V. S39·Z3'34"WUl.5S· V. '" S:lO'3'j9':W 80,90" )I $<3'°''''··7 ".73· ~ . S43'06'13"jI2S.62' . S49'2ô'04"W 144.~1 POWER: I , lINE-...:.¡ JI. $52'29'2¡>-·"", . .. 32.42' S5:;.08J¡O"W ~ I. ' - S66°09'3a"w ~3.6~" "0.9/, $49°.50·54"W d .<.>5'FENCWG £S1\- 6.9.5' S6s000'07'W 106,42' $53°32.24"" ~ "-/24.66" '" ¡;.... "~ .MArç'::!! MATEHI ,- .'; .... o , .... "'''' o. '" 'I\J !»~ '" .~~ .~~ fi;iIJ ~~ ;¿ _00:>' ,~ ¡¡ c . S3S'S4'¡J'"W 2· ~62.81' '~E's SJ0030'3rw 121,95'-:0 542°59:52""'" 1- 0' ¡40.?}". S44·2.h2,w 6 S600J!;I~9"W ~.98 $52'3/'/7''''''' ~6,4r___ S46°29·00"·:~~~4" FENe N "'r 00 0-1 .. ON ~ '" " , Nr9·oa'O~·'E 1::'6.n' Nõ?)'OO'4:.-¡, ~9.29· N2S0¡ros"¡;: 133.30' N2,024'14'·f" ~O.60" Nl8°¡O'49 'f 38.60' _Nl3°2f39'·£ 59.)1" NU"II'~6··E 80.80' ·Nl3·4Cr:lrE 53,~ Nl7'Zf59"£ 62.~O' N¡>2°3(03""£ 41.2a' tI26'¡4'2a""£6Õ?,:)4' ""I N32'2G'34'·E 1:':1,11 N)9'):!"2~Nf 61.07' N4¡>0~217"'£ 37.00' N:>4·53·0)'·E 63.S)' N60·:\Q·oa'"£ 39.:\9. N4~·42'22·"£ 1!:I3.a4 42"~"'3~"£ 54.60.' N37'41"~4··E" !:I2,32 N)f02:1'33··£' 43.:;9 N29'49·11'"£ 96.~4' N20019"29'"¡:: n36' N2'·/1"03··¡;- 69,40' 2'2iI"32"En02" };2;:"24'J<i"c fiS.Jr N2~'02"47"E 4o,~ N2:~"02"47"'£ 21.91 N26·~9":¡r"E 100. N20'2419'"£n: 1'120'20'37""£ a N29'40'OO'"£ ....'1 n -/~Ä 11 JO 99.... S4~·2I"O~5'·¿ 10.49_95' '" 100709' S3oo"Q C o o . ~~~~ ro· . ~~i8 ....¡;;¡. g!!!¡¡;¡;¡ " . r > . . , z ~ 'co "~.laN ~~G~~2tGb{; ~.~ "~-i"''''g'''ë:ë: "M £-f~;i5"'''''Nrm'''P1 ~~~~~-:!1~~uo~2~i :¡-< -<¡P¡1,II........2~ ~m~mz~(IIo...~,. "l"l i~l:lØ"n :;~i~ao~~....§ i~~~;~~~!~~ "'ºc t;~~-I,.A... ~~~~F~gfflr:!~ :;;saa.~.¡¡¡ :;!~ þZZ2;;:....~2? ¡iii ~d~ë:g~~~ æ ~~a~;~ ~i~' ~g5P1°å ...~ J>.J>~J>. $:r PÇa", PI-I~ "1'1."'10 g¡, <,III>;QO '::¿1 t.' ~p ~þ~ ~~.. i~~ n cN ~ ~~ ;-\ ~,... '0 "" o· . UNI l~ o o. 1"1,.... n· ,. o v. o. " -0:' r· . z ~ .~o o. ~ ; ~~- w' , t~4"' H"~" ~ CQ CD \) ~ ~ o J: J: m Z -i » · L- ;u < M '-< Ž Ii1 ~ .-- ~, ..,;!! M(') M-I -I ... -.;:- - { L-j; III rl rl r ./-. I :--::-.:t ~~A.""'Ð:Þ~.~~ èi ~ ~ &:.~. ~ !II.~, ~~.....~ ~ ~ ~. ~~~o¡,: ~~!"I ~!:!: \~~lo~Ìò:::S: ~ ()-~Õ 40'8oo~ Ot:) ~,~ Õ1. it::;. a.::::.tJt.~ k:. ~ ' ~~'~~:b1.~~~~:'::,~ ' , ~.",'",.",,,,,,,a,:,;,,,,,,,,,~ ~'¡::> '. U~· - ~ ( b.. '4 " I.. ~,'" '~ ~ ~ ~- (') J: ::I m Z -I :Þ " ·. I'- 0 t -\ 1,:, \t 1--\ --- Ç" ~\ --- ..'t\' l¡, ~ ,,< UN It 0 - \-\ '" z .~ ::: r Òf f\ ~.~ ~ -\ . 'ti, ... ~' . i "'. '1 () 'I ~ ~ j. '\ :t : ~ ... - &\j 'f'~;· ~ ~ "- ~. 'Q ""j -1> \) ~j ~ ~ ~ " 0 \.: ~ =- ~. -'¿¡ t, ~ "- VI ~ . (\ """, ~ ~ ',:> ... 1t'\ "'<i' ~. \1 '\ '" I¡ ~ @ '" . (;, " \ 1-\ t ' \) j', '\ tI!- Ä IJ) ~ '" <J ~. Q t "'\ '" D -..0 , j ------~---- --,--.~ _.~~.~~ _..~_._- ~' ÿ,& "·fl , /t.' ;\J." ,t. \'¡ /;j\¥~:II\\ I j ¡if I \\ ¡;j..,;!J¡. ~ \' I' '\ .J,.\ ¡~ \1 '- - -...~ N 't "- "\ ~ B d \,.. "- " . ~ "- f- {, I f' \!\ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ï ~.~ ~ ~ f ~ , (\ l. ~ . \) ¡;- þ'1 '- "- ~, " ~ " ~ >- ~ i '" '" ~ ~~\ J~~........ "" - '" - ... ~. \..;; ;1\ " i\ , , \. \;- ~ ~ -C 0 g J: () :I ,þ m Z -I :Þ '<t .,.... ~ <- (J) 0 '" ~ I -"- ¡¡¡ J '" ';\ º øU ~ '" N~ _ ~ T .rt:0::~:R 0 £oJ "--,. "'-- t0ù..~w<;" <- J !:2C1:2~O ~ z :;i~~a:i~ <- W N ~.~ cia:¡ 1:]['\ I- ~ IO <! 0 W 0 UI 0 N _ U. <- 3..S0.2.ÞÞS N¡<j' 0 W W 96'62:01 N 00 0 I m '" - ø z ~~ W --' ÎOWU) <! N~W :r u F~ en <-~ ø_ m " -~ « I- Z UI I: ::t U ~ ~ i f[1 lfj Nw~2~~ ~g~~~ ~g~~~$t0~~ ~:¡remdgJ: 1J)_1O<'i<;J'" .oN.ou.irdtÕ~ciN__ N~N~QN iJ)Wm=({) mWI{I{I{¡<jWr<')<;t T ~ ~~Q ~W ~ ~~~ W ~W~ : OþJ~~~i:olð~îo: ~!;>JffiwmQ)i.o!;>J: i<1:.~ N ,-Jf'JîoÓ99P-NY~f---~-- ;'[')Ka~:;::~~~~ 1- ~?~~~~ ~p~~~ ~f1?~~~~?1 3 W.t()WNr<')t'- 0 WO " . Of'-<;t<tlDO . roD:! to(\1r<')<;"r<')(\ mo~!:2~ 1{<;"<;"r<')N~!:2N<;" zzzzzz ZZZZZ U)U)U)U)U)U)U)U)U) w<;¡- wwmm~ ~.~~~~.~.~.~ðo.~. J'-"1NmtOl'--f'-~ci ~ . ~~~~~~~<;"<;t ~~g~~~~~~ ~~3~~~33~ ~~3~~3~33n 8~ ~ ~ 8 g:gþio~;g ~ ~~2 ~ ~ io~t2J : ~£~g~~~g~~~~~~~:gg~ .0" 0·0·0"." .··..·0""" 0·.. NffiN<;f"r<')J'-OWIO WNffilOffir<')r<')r<')ID mI{I{I'--OWV(\1O mI{Wf'-J'-J'-~ml'-- ZU)U)U)ZZU)U)U) wzU)U)U)U)U)U)z ~~§~s~~~ ~~~3â 1Of'-I'-Q<Dm~N f'1mNNf'1 ~3?= ·~;::f=·3 3~3~ , : r<'): lJ)~oi<10:D: <;t= w~~ !-'-::róf'lN9!09¡::¡lEJ~!<"J~9~ltI - *Q~~~Rl¡gfQ- ~~~~N Ð . . Ð . Ð O. .".. N t'-~())[fJ<tNO')lO ~<>tt'-t'-. r<)IOWlOQJaJt'-t'- ~101Ot'-~ UJ((){f.IUJ.UJtI)ZZ U)tI)CfUJUJ ~ <- o ...J (52 <- Ii;! .<- /0 .", ~-'¡Q ~ i ~ ~! 8 ...J ~ :r: ---~¡-.: - " ~m NW '" z " z W . "-<- - " õmæ ¡o. &1 <-. &1 Q. I~~I ,,c) Õ' . m /w. '" W OIO~w()) . f'1\o()) :~~~~~::i~~~~~ 1O<;tt'-<t~t'-r<1I'0NNI'0<O g¿g~!!2~ ~~~r;;~ ~ ~~~ ~~ [Q ~~~~IH : = ~~~: : ?"3:·~:?~W~: : : :- P~8~~~~g~~~~~: 5~~~~' ;J;~~Q:g~~~~~~~ iD[::n::::g¡;; Ð. . Ð Ð . . r<1. 0 .. o. Ð 0 . Nt'-NWaJt'-<tLa:J.f<1t'-m LaJN<ow t'-t'-<;tW<tOO.lOaJt'-f<1t'-t'- ([)1O<;t1O([) ZZZCfCfUJUJZUJUJ(fZ UJ(/)UJUJU) ~ <- o J ~ N ó¡tJ~~i!([)g~;o.~~ wm<;t<tIO~dt'-<;tI'0r<i Noo<t!£2=CO!£:!Nm ",NWr-- t'-co <;t<t qO'!~,-,!~~f':O')~O')t'- O.WCO<;tN.;..:°,owa:i<i <tr2Q~'££:!:'tW([)101O Q~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~w~~ ~~~~oro~mP99Þ~~~9N~~~~m~9~ iDm~~~~~~~~~ ~gg~~g~~~~~ ~~~rÑmå~mÑ~ wmw~&òÑ~ÒÑW N_<tI'0Nr<1IO<t<tIO.1O W~WIOI'0'<)<;t<tWIO¢ zzzzzzzzzzz ZZZ2ZZZZZZZ ~*O~¡;;g=glO <;tri!ÓN~ÓW~ <t<tWr<)<;tNJ")Nm ~ b 90 00 o . . 0 "'ø ø- m ~~g~~~;;¡:!f;~ <t...;1'-r--<tr--f<10¢ ())WlOr<1r<}Nr<1¡<J¡<J ~q~~:'1;~{;;f{g l'-oomlO<tt'-.;..:r<)N "t t'-<t 'O<t <tr<1<t1O D~~LtJ~~·~.}'l~wDLtJt~~~~t:~~íD~~~k~~~·~t:1Ð ~~o~~~~~~~~~~~89g~~2~9f'1~99~~~~® ~~~2m~~ooG ~g.~~~~~~.~ ~~~.~~~~~:g Ñ&~~M~å~~ ~Ñ~~Ñm~rw qWW~w~~~ro ~N~Nr<)r<)r<1m!!2 tNNr<)wmlO<01'1 NNNNNr<}IO~lO '(f(f)Cf(f)UJU)(f)(f (f(f)(/)UJ(f)ZZZZ zzzzzzzzz --- --_.._,..._._-,----~~. ø <- o J m <- o J LtJß~ __ ,_ u(f)<:,( -=-'-""-.. ~o3 oa::il..w -11-°> !!,!zD:::ã:: I.1.w!bo '" <!w r--!] 1-'" 02 --'oj '" '" ~. W ~, 0· ~ '" Z " ~ o '" w ro", r--U '" I-r-- Or-- --,. ~ '" -~~--- \ o o 2 ~ ,,", ~~ ~o ~. ~N ~ m WO zz o=> 3-:~f? "' wo ø- .~ ~o N. ~N ~ m WO Zz o=> <-0 m~ wi' ø~ ;;?:; .f' N ~ ~ ~ <- W « ID...J°...J Nm(J)Q.· o~_ '(!I,N r<). 10 r<}<:,(¢' - 0 .O=¡j5 :2¡bair1 I-jcir4 o ~ z <- o '" m J NIrOa.. N~~!D ~~~':1 ~u3' ~¡:j-:~ ¡-':Zß:!lO ;30O:¡ o 3 wiD ~N "';io ~~ \JIJ'>.\'\"'¿ ;)Ç ,,?f>.\¡:\'í'¿\) 9 .:'6"~ SA'ó°?-°'ò \'ò'ò.'ò\,\\-'¿ 'íO~'¿ ,o;:.6"'-N /S 6.'].0 . S"\?"3.'6A ¡" , )1/ \ "m 103:<oro~ I':cri::;<!it'- !;Jf<1<tlOQ _ ~"'p.' ~w_ fP<t<t~iDiog D~~·Ç;:i~9l§j :t,.~?g::; 0>0.. !DO ¡<')r1i<iNill ZZZZZ º <- o ~ giõffi3!2:gþ¡~g N.¢NW¡-":,o,..;WO IC)IO\Ot'-<tr<1!D<tr<) ww. LtJwwLtJ r:Jkb~~k~wo~O W~~~·~·:~~~~1tI lOQ!DI'1<t¡<')O<tN o . ~No . . ° N :ß~8;~:ri~r::r::fu 'ZZZZZZZZV) ALBEMARLE COUW. 127 ~. r- <f/\ J 1- "---T-~- , " ""'- " 139 .,. ~tJ;.1.-':' !Ii.RET - .- - "f'" SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT ¡ATTACHMENT 81 134 SECTION 133 / / ,,~ ~, 00 , /. \ I~' \ 11 / ) \ '. ( \ ". , ,; ~ Jl_(p~ " )l..;'j,,, I ( / I ~},~;, >to r~-. . """'...., {ill] ~liw if] \" ~. $' "" "" " ,," ~" ~" " . '< , ) -' " " ~ ~-9.tv,., '" ~"/OA¡ "I""'W \. ... - c:.--:; c N G " þ. f'-' ù c K " ,. · COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ¡ f ..i Ir~C ~.. '"'.. pl". [' ~ D~ ~ ,~.~':~ ;"'J ~""" j. r ..~ , ,,~""!~ 'ü ...'..~ _0' M;\( j 1,';/) MEMORANDUM Pìanning Depi. TO: Yolanda Hipski - Planner FROM: DATE: RE: Glenn E. Brooks - Civil Engineer II G>[li 3 May 1995 Darton E. Greist Special Use Permit The special use permit application received on 3 April 1995 has been reviewed. The applicant is proposing a low water culvert crossing in Hog Creek off of Route 722 in the Southern part of the County. Hog Creek is shown as a perennial stream on the USGS maps. On a visit to the site, the stream was observed to be about 3-5' wide and 1-2' deep. There are no noticeable banks. Hog Creek, as shown on the FEMA maps, has associated floodplain as detennined by approximate methods. In the field, the grassy floodplain begins with grassy wetland vegetation directly alongside the stream. The floodplains to either side rise at about 15-20%, becoming steeper with distance from the stream. This limits the potential spread of floodwaters. These sloping plains are grassy with a fence line and a row of cedars running alongside the creek on the far side (from Rt. 722). The near side plain slopes up about 20-25' to the treeline which is approximately 150' from the stream. The far side rises only about 6-8' to the treeline, which is about 100' from the stream. Due to the topography of the floodplain, large amounts of backwater will not be generated by an adequately designed low water crossing. The characteristics of the stream should not be adversely affected if the culverts are designed to allow for the continuation of the natural stream morphology. The effects to the environment from clearing and grading should be minimal if this drive is built as a typical private driveway. Based upon the observations noted above, Albemarle County Engineering recommends approval of the special use pennit subject to the following conditions. a. Water Resource Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment. b. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the fmal culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction lOOyr flood elevations and boundaries. !: "'.~ MEMORANDUM Yolanda Hipski May 3, 1995 Page Two c. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. The applicant is encouraged to contaCt the Federal and State agencies in the early stages of the design process. d. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.30fthe Zoning Ordinance. e. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions regarding these comments or require additional infonnation. GEB/ctj Copy: SP 95-09 David Hirschman, Water Resources Manager i:\general\sbare\eng\glennb\greist 1 ,- ~ ¡ Distributed ro Büard: (p ~/{Jf-;- Agendm Item No. 9(})f;/ch Wif, COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of PJanning & Community Deve10pment 401 McIntir~ Road Char¡ott~svill~, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 ¡;11U& ~ u wm ¡jl ¡J U.¿ r ~"-'=-~='=""'-'j I,'; f,¡;'"l j[j¡ JUN ...6/995 , 1 June 5, 1995 Wendell Wood W oodbriar Associates, P. O. Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Ii !¡: I 'il ;'1 !i " 'I RE: ZMA-95-05 Woodbriar Associates Dear Mr. Wood: , The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 30, 1995, by a vote of 5-0 (with 1 abstention) recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to changes in agreements #12 and #8 as proposed by staff . Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive pubHc cOIrurient at their meeting on June 14. 1995.. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted tQ the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. , I If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. , !~ l i Ii \1 'I ,~ ,i· 'li .u .i '1 j I '1 Sincerely, g ~ / .--' ~-'. - ,. -'-.. - -...--- þ/~.?P ß~., - , William D. Fritz Senior Plannér cc: Ell~eY Î COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (804) 296-5823 MEMORANDUM TO: Albemarle County Planning Commission William D. Fritz, Senior Planner ,)Pr FROM: DATE: May 23,1995 RE: ZMA 95-05 Woodbriar Associates This item was heard by the Planning Commission of May 9, 1995. The applicant has requested relief as to the order of phasing and the limits on the number of phases under development at a single time. This item was deferred to allow staff and the applicant to investigate possible methods of rearranging the phases and allow for the construction of inftastructure improvements in advance of phases where active residential development was occurring. The current agreements for this project (agreement 12) states "No more than two phases shall be under simultaneous development the development shall proceed in the following order: Phase 3A, 3B, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lA, lB,A, 5, 6 and 8." The applicant has stated that the limitation on the number of phases under development disrupts the flow of the development by not allowing for construction of iniTastructure improvements which ate necessary to allow for the residential development to proceed. In addition, the order of the completion of the phases does not allow for response to the market place by allowing for the various products available in Briarwood to be developed according to market demand. (Briarwood has attached (phases lA, 4, 5 and 6), townhouse (phases 3C and lB) and single family detached (phase 8) units in the various phases.) In response to the comments of the applicant and the Planning Commission, staff and the applicant have developed the following proposed amendments to agreement 12: II I ¡ ~ :1 ~ Ii '! No more than two phases with signed site plans or subdivision plats shall be under simultaneous develonment. This phasing limitation shall not be inteqJreted as limitin~ the construction of iniTastructure (roads. utilities. drainag-e. etc.). Nt) 1îJ:ðre ilittn tW6 l"ft!l3ÐS 3htt!1 he tH'lder simttltflfl:eß1:1ß dß, dôl"m<01'lt. The development shall proceed in the following order: Phase 3A, 38, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lA, lB 4, 5, (; 6. 5. 4 !I:fIt!-8. Phase lB may be develoned fol1owin~ ji l!i ! "I ::" "Ie !·I "i J ~i !,~ 'if ;i 11:1 I~ '1 I~ I~~ I) ij ! ¡.¡ , r Page 2 May 23, 1995 completion of Phase lA. Phase 8 shall not be subiect to the nhasing order. A phase shall be considered complete for pw;poses of satisfying phasing: requirements when the followin~ is complete: L All public roads shown in the phase have been ~ven final inspection by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Charlottesville Residency. A comDlete assemblv package has been submitted to the residencv. The maintenance fee has been paid andthe one-vear VDOT performance bond has been posted: :b. All private roads shown in the phase have been com.vleted to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and all toad bonds have been released: .1. All necessary water and sewer lines shall have been installed and dedicated with the exception of individual connections. The change to the order of the phases results in a need to amend agreement 8 as follows: Staffapproval of recreational facilities to include: one tot lot with Phase 3C and one tot lot with Phase 1B; the dedication of open space with the approval of Phases 4 and 5 for the passive recreation area which shall include construction of walking/jogging trails; and, the primary recreation area south of Camelot shall be built or bonded for its construction prior to fmal plat approval for Phase-61. TIris recreational area shall be built prior to completion of Phase 6- :land shall consist of a baseball/multi-purpose field, two basketball courts, playground equipment, and picnic facilities. All recreation facilities shall be installed by the developer. Staff opinion is that the modified agreement will allow for orderly development of the site without adversely limiting the activities which may occur. The original intent of the phasing order appears to have been to prevent uncoordinated development and insure orderly development of the site. The revised agreement is consistent with that intent. Staff is able to recommend approval of this amendment request subject to the modified language of agreement 12. ------------------------------------ A:\ZMA95S-2.RPT II , \. ~ STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ MAY 9, 1995 JUNE 14, 1995 ~MA 95-05 WOO:PBRIAR ASSOCIATES Applicant's Proposal: The applicant has submitted a request to amend the limjt on the number of phases under development at anyone time in the Briarwood.development. The applicant's request and the existing agreements for Briarwood are included as. Atìachment C. . Petition: Woodbriar Associates petitions the Board of Supervisors to amend Proffer 12 of ZMA 91-13, Woodbriar P.R.D., Planned Residential Development in order to allow relief of the phasing requirements and provide clarification of phase completion. Property, described as Tax Map 320, par6ell, and Tax Map 320 Section 3 p¡µ-cels A and 83 is located on the west side of Route 29 North approximately one mile north of the North Fork River in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is located in the Village of Piney Mountain and is recommended for medium density residential (4.01-10 dwelling units per acre). Character of the Area: This is the location of the Briarwood development. The Camelot development is located adjacent to the south of this development. . RECOMMENDATION: . Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with. the prc:vious agreements and reconunends denial of the request to eliminate restrictions on the number of phases under development at any one time. Staff recommends approval of modifications of agreement 12 to provide clarification. Planning and Zoning History: Tþis area was originally rezoned with ZMA 79-32 which was approved on January 23, 1980. At that time a condition of the approval was "No more than two phases shall be under simultaneous development "Plan B" phasing". (Two plans were referenced in the approval. Plan B indicates Phasing.) The current agreements were approved on March 18, 1992 with ZMA 91-13. Various subdivision and site plans have been approved. Comprehensive Plan: This area is recommended for medium density residential in the Village of Piney Mountain. The Comprehensive Plan contains no conunents which are applicable to this request. I í STAFF COMMRNT: Attachment D contains information prepared by the Zoning and Engineering Departments in response to this request. The minutes :trom th.e Bo¡µ-d of Supervisors meeting at which ZMA 91-13 was approved are included as Attachment E. Staff has reviewed the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors minutes for both rezonings as well as all files available. The limitation on phasing appears to have bec:n intended to limit the volume of activity occurring at anyone time. Further, the intent ofthe conditions of both rezonings (ZMA-79-32 and ZMA-9l-13) appear to be to insure that grading and in:trastructure improvements are completed in a timely manner. It also appears that the intent oflimiting the number of phases under. . 1 development was to minimize the number and length of roadways which were constructed, bl.lt not yet in the state system. Allowing multiple phases to be under development at the same time subjects homeowners to additional inconveniences of road construction and houses served by roads not yet completed. Roads which are bt:ing built for acceptance into the state system, but not yet in the state system, must continue to be maintained at the expense of the develoPer or property owners. As this development was approved in part to provide affordable housing, incomplete roads Which remain out of public maintenance would appear to be inconsistent with this intent. Staff has taken into consideration the expectations of the homeowners in Briarwood. These homeowners purchased their homes with the opportunity to have knowledge of and rely on the existing agreements. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDED ACTIONS: , Staff is unable to identify any change in circumstance since the original rezoning of this site or the subsequent amendment in 1992 which would warrant amendment of the existing agreements. The comments of the Zoning and Engineering Department are shared by the Planning Department. Therefore, staff does not recommend elimination of restrictions on the number of phases under development atany one time. Issues surrounding the determination of 'phase completion' should be addressed. From the review of the available infonnation, it does not appear that 'phase completion' \Va8.intended to apply to the completion of all units in the phase, but rather referred to the completion of inrrastl,"Ucture. Staff recommends that agreement 12 be modified to read: . No more than two phases shall be under simultaneous development. The development shan proceed in the following order: Phase 3A, 3B, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lA, lB, 4, 5, 6 and 8. A phase shall be considered complete for pUI:Poses of satisfving phasing requirements when the following is complete: 1 All public roads shown in the phase have been comJ>leted and accepted bv the state into the highway system: 2. All private roads shown in the phase have been comJ>leted to the satisfaction of the County Engineer and all road bonds have been released: l.. All necessarv water and sewer lines shall have been installed with the ex~eJtion of individual connections. ATTACHMENTS: A- Tax Map B - Applicant's Infonnation C - Staff Comment D - Board of Supervisors Minutes ---------- A:\ZMA9505.RPT 2 ALBEMARLE o \ ~.' ~. .,,~. ·"<:'·~<i:·· --- "\ , . I;, Ii! III , . ""':~I, , ",:: : ';;",:, "" ~ ",. o ., . ,. . IL.. ,\ " 'I, !' "I "' : I .' .. ., , .. . ,. : , ,-. '" <> ...::.. \. ;¡i i: , P, , ~,~, \ .... >"""~ ,'./. , /~~ .",,;$~;' . ,. SEe .,,;.. ..,' CM,'¡",. SEC., SEC , SEC.3 D.6.653 ~9' 79 " , .....' "'" '''" ",..:..,..-.~-'~'~' ," .~.~ ,.. SC.L[ IN H(T zoo .oa .., ",' RIVANNA t "TTACHMENT A I COUNTY . ':':':'01 "" "'. "" '....".,~" , , .' . ·SECTION 32G BRIAfMOOD PHASE I (future Oevdopm~nll o PHAse 2 DB. 114 Pq.23-45 ~PHASE 3 g~ ,bl~ ~j:i~f~08Hj41'91£ o PHASE .. (fu¡¡r~ Devtlopmen o PHASE 5 (future ~vclOP<Jl.enl) OPHASE 6 (Fulu<e Dor,relopmfnl) (ž)PHASE g~: fJ~:'i>;.a~~ OBff3'",'p~ 01.$ DB!l5'Pg.£21 . ..'...... ':~:~.,.,.._"." "' \ ...'" ". ...",.:,." "~',,, .(, .~; ;.~. , "-~:~.....:'\ ~(S~ ,\......." .;:~. .;' '::'. :,;.~,.;:; ..-J··->·l~ . ''-'¡' . .. . . r ,,, ··;i::.,,,¡;,':'. ": ,.:.::' f' : .~... \ ',". ":~.:., ",:':. "-/~~':'..', """,~ 1'Ø" ..... .".:..,...: .,:..,:~~::~'.:y,:\ :;! Eli> ":'/0.10"1" :;. ~\'ç.\:t4..>,..~4 7 . ~:. '. I ~ , I . i"~ ,'. '.... . . ~. ' . ..; ~. :.: ,. " .," I, I .", :~;. \ ...;"-' ....\. "'~ ../ 4 1" I . ~,. ,.. :""'.r.~':~~ ~._ .. .-'"": " ,~,;:" ~:,~~::,."-::::. ..~":.. _-:.~:~~. .,'.i:'\':-.... ,. "',::;:"", " DISTRICT SEGT I ON 32E6G , We hereby request relief from item 12 of Woodbriar AS$ociates ZMA-91--13 dated March 23, 1992 (copy attached). We are currently develoþihl phàse 3B. consisting of only 14 lots, hi've 6 lots remaining in phase 7. AU water, seWer and roads i're in to serve the remaining 6 lots in phase 7. In order to maintain f low of development and a mix of housing types, we need to begin development of phase IA. Being unable to begin development of ph¡¡se IA poses an undue hardship due to the limited types of housing that can be built on the small number of Jots split between phases 7 and 3B. The strict interpretation of item 12 does not even allow us to begin infrastructure in phaselA and prevents an orderly flow of lot development and delivery of homes. We believe the intent of item 12 was to prevent hodgepodge development ri'th"r than bring the project to a halt simply because there are punchlist and VDOT items to complete. Phase 7 is substaqtially complete and we believe that was th~ intent of the zoning. We further request that the planning staff be given discretion of the order of development of various phases as stated in item 12. 3-CJ9-1S ~~~. REC£'''EÐ Mfl.R 14 \995', .. i!I~ç. WUN~ t6NtNGDa>A~ . p.o. Box 5548 . Charlottesyille, Virginia 22905 . (804) 979·3334. Fax (804) 979·6268 ! :17 ~i".. .,.~'" I ATTACHMENT B I 2 of 4 '. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Depl, of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Chal~lottesville. Virginia 22901·4596 (804) 296·5823 '~~''''',.'-",~ f"";i¡E·;;O¡~~"··'¡¡~"E·n . t~1~: ':':_~{l£;' t~ ~ . ~~ '. _:'~;, ': H .t w.,.,'(~y .,.".,·tl_i ,_."'.' ,~, March 23, 1992 MM1 14 1995 ftlUJEJViiH'lc;. ....(J¡JI~TV '. 7" ·ji\-ll~'f. ' ,·\1'1',"'1 ,. Wendall Wood Woodbriar Associates P. O. :Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: ZMA-91~13 Wo04briar Associates Tax Map 32G, Parcel 1 and Tax Map 32G, Section 3, Parcels A and 83 bear Mr. Wood: , . The Albemarle county poard of suparvisors, at its meeting en March 18, ,1992, unanimously approved the above noted request to update and amend conditions of existing PRO to alloW us~ of private'roads and to revise the application plan to show areas for future townhouse development in Briarwood. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1~ Approval is for a maximum of 661 dwellings subject to conditions containe4 herein. Locations and acreages of . variouG lapd uSeS shall comply with the approved plan. In the .final site ...lan and subdivision process, open space shall be dedicated in proportion to the number of ·'lotsapproved. Primary recreation areas to be OWned and maintained through a homeowners association¡ approved by the County Attorney. Off-street par~ing and access shall be limited to the recreational area shown on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan revised February 7, 1992 and the means to limit such access shall be part of. the site plan review; } 2. NO grading permit or building permit shall ·be issued in any area until final site plan and subdivision approval for that area has .been obtained; Ÿ'tj, 3. Albemarle county service Authority verification of adequate sew~r capacity owned by Woodbriar Associates and allocateà to serve th.e ,:Briarwood development bafore approval of each. Phase; /' r 0TTACHMJ¿NTB· ~ .. ~ 3 of 4 Woodbriar Associates Page 2 March 23, 1992 ,5. 4. All road plan and entrance plan approval shall be obtained prior to any final site plan or s~bdivision approval. All roads shall be designed and constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation specifications and dedicated for acceptance into the state secondary Road system except the private roads shown on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan with a CPR) label; iNO grading or construction on slopes of 25% or greater except as ~s necessary for road construction as approved by the County Engineer. Any lot which is ~nbuildable due to slope shall be combined with a buildable lot and/or added to common open space sUbject to Planning commission approval; 6. Fire Official approval of fire protection system including but not limited to: fire flow rates, hydrant locations, and emergency access provisions. Such SYstem shall be provided prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy in the area to be served; . 7. Albemarle County service Authority approval of plans for water lines, sewer lines, pumping station, and manhòles and appurtanances which are to be constructed at the expense of the developer; Staff approval of recreational facilities to include: one tot lot with phase 3C and one tòt lot with Phase IB; the dedication of open space wJ.th the approval of Phases 4 and 5 for the passive recreation area which ~hallinclude construction of Walking/jogging trails; ~nd, the primary recreation area south of Camelot shall ve b~¡lt or bonded for its construc~ion prior to final plat apI,>roval for phase 6. This recreation area shall be built prior to completion of Phase 6 and shall ·consist of a baseball/multi-purpose field, two, basketball courts, playground equipment, and picnic facilities. All recreation facilities shall be installed by the developer; 8. 9. Sidewalks shall be provided along the southerly side of Austin Drive from Route 29 North to Briarwood Drive and along the westerly side of the entire length of Briarwood Drive; 10. County Attorney approval of amended Homeowners' Association agreements prior to final approval of Phase IB or 3C to include provision for maintenance of the private roads. Such maintenance shall be the responsibility of the homeowners in Phases IB and 3C respective1,y; ...,~~~". I ATTACHMa;NTQ I 40£4 - , WOodpriar Associates Page 3 March 23, 1992 . . 11. Only those areas where a structure, utilities, pedestrian ways, recreation areas, roads, and other improvements are to bè located shall be disturbed; all other land shall remain in its natural state; No mOre thanitwo phases shall be under simultaneous .development ~he development shall proceed in the .. I· ... .. . ... . follow~ng orqer: Phase 3A, 3B, 3C, the completlon of Pha¡;;e 7, lA, lIB, 4, 5, 6 and 8. .- .. I Lots along camelot Drive and st. Ives Road are to be dev.eloped wi~h single-family detached dwellings and ¡shall have a jf"inimu¡tl lot ~..¡idth of 65 feet. All other lots Shall.b~ developed with single-family atta. ched units includ~ng townhouses in Phases 1B and 3C; t Bfiarwood Drire shall be built or bonded for its entire length from A~stin Drive to Route 29 prior to any final plat approval for Phase 1A. Briarwood Drive shall be completed to "ts intersection with Route 29 prior to ; approval of Phase lB. The eastern portion of Briarwood Drive through[the commercial area shall be designed to ' category VI standards with a four-lane cross-section; ~ . . \. . . The ¡tllX of dWell1pg Unlt types shall be as shown on the Briarwood ~. R ¡ D. ¡mended Application and Phasing Plan; , , \ site plan approv~ls for phases four and beyond shall be contingent upón evidence that dwelling units in the earlier phase~ haV..e substantially met the county's gOals and the Idev~lopers' assurances that moqerate income housin~has been provided; . . . Landscaping s all be provided in accordance with . section 32.7.9.8 alrmg the front of townhouse units which constit te double frontage lots; 18. Adminis~rative approval of future site plans and plats .to be in accor ance with the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application an Phasing Plan provided no waivers or modifications of ordinance regulations are required. If you should have ~ny questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. Sincerely, (). ,,_. RECEIVED cc: Amelia Patt son Tom Muncaster Community Development Jo Higgins Jeff Echols MAR 141995 ALBEl\IJJi¡ii...L \JÛUIIITY ZONING DEPARTMENT \ II. .O'A~4} ff¡ ."", " fj _ r u . ["1~ t:':J ~~ ,.-"., vi)¡G\¡:"" ~iECEiVED APR 6 1995 Planning Dept. I ATTACHMENT ç I I of 22 CùUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Bill Fritz, Senior Planner Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator~ April 6 1995 ZMA 95-05 Briarwood I Woodbriar Associates This is in response to Ms. Hipski's letter of transmittal requesting comments on this zoning amendment. For background, please also refer to my March 1st letter to Wendell Wood in which I made an official determination pf the current (!992) rezoning agreements. I suggest that you include in your report, the minutes from the meeting in which these zoning agreements were accepted. Agreement #12, that which is proposed for revision, was not in the original Planned Development approval and was . added in the 1992 zoning amendment. In brief, I recommend against this request to change the zoning agreements for Briarwood Planned Development relating to the number of concurrent phases of development. I see the question of the order of development (which phase at what time), to be one for your department and the Engineering department to most appropriately address. In the review of this request, we should consider what is reasonably expected by the current residents based on the last zoning amendment on March 18, 1992. It may be useful to understand the basis for that condition #!2, and to know what circumstances have changed to warrant this zoning amendment. Mr. Wood has indicated that the outstanding items are relatively minor. Therefore, it is difficult to understand why they have been and continue tp be substantial to complete. We believe that staff has interpreted "completion" in such a way as to be reasonable and to not unnecessarily delay the development prpcess. For example in the case of erosion control, the measures should be physically complete and the slope and soil stabilized; but the final grass cover can be still growing. The Engineering Department has addressed this with regards to roads in a separate letter, such that "completion" requires that all I ATTACHMENT C I :2 of 2 Bill Fritz, Senior Planner Page Two .1\.pril 6, 1995 the necessary physical work is complete and paperwork filed fo+ acçeptance into the state road system. I support a definition such as this rather than one allowing some percentage of incomplete physical work. Staff discussed a possible solution to allow development to proceed by approving the subdivision plat or site plan and withholding building permits or certificates of occupancy. This would allow the construction of the infrastructure to begin (roads, w~ter and sewer, etc.). This is difficult tò administer. .1\.nd, most i~portantly, we are not in support of that proposal because if the lot were sold it could then impact an innocent third party. If the Board chooses to support this request, we recommend that it not be left open-ended, but that a specific number of phases be listed. For example, perhaps three instead of two, such that they could be developing one and finishing two. One phase could be under plan review, one could be under active new construction, and the third could be closing out the final approvals. The following information would be most helpful, regardless of , the recommendation on this zoning amendment: 1. .1\.mendment of the planned development application plan. It should show phase lines which better clarify what improvements are requi+ed with which phase. Details for recreation areas and the like, should be shown. 2. Define phase 3.1\., Band C, and phase 1.1\. and B in terms of whether they are individual phases or subphases within one numbered phase. 3. Clarify what is meant within agreement #12 by "development" and "complete." 4. Submit the information for the which relates to Board action. abandonment of the old and the right-of-way. ) relocation of Rt. (That is forithe dedication of the 606 new 5. Submit confirmation from the .1\..C.S..1\.. of their approvals. (See item #4 on page 3 of my letter.) 6. Provide an updated building summary. page 4 of my letter.) (See item II on Bill Fritz, senior Planner Page Three April 6, 1995 ATTACHMENT.CI 3 of 22 7. Better define where the 661 units are located on the current phase plan. The relocation of Rt. 606 seems to include land which was not included in the original Planned Development and has not been advertised for rezoning .to P.R.D. Also Tax Map 32G, Parcel 2 ~ included in the original P.R.D. but does not appear on the revised phase plan approved in 1992. Please contact me with any questions. I can provide further comments,~ if any revisions are submitted. \ cc: Working F~le Jack Kelsey Jan Sprinkle ~tw~ tJ. \ ATTAC:HME:NT C \ 4 of 22 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 Mçlntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (804) 2%-5875 FAX (804) 972-4060 TOD (804) 972-4012 Recaveo MAR ~f 1995 Planning Dept. Më\rc~ 1, 1995 \ Wendell Wood woodÞrië\r Associë\tes P.O. ßox 5548 Chë\rlottesville, VA 22905 Re: Brië\rwood - ZMA 91-13 Woodbrië\r Associë\t~s (Të\X Më\p 32G) Official Determination of Rezoning Agreements for Development Deë\r Mr. Wood, ;i This is to provide you with information as to what is nec~ssary for th~ approval of the pending proposë\ls for subdivision in phase 111. and the site plan for 3C. This consideration of the rezoning agreements arose during zoning and planning review of these it~ms pending in sit~ review. As a point of reference, I will explain the status of development approvals according to oUr records. In addition, I will go through the rezoning agreements, which are attached. As you are aware, any chë\nge to these may not þe approved administratively and requires actiQn þy the Board of Supervisors because it is a legislative act amending t~eir prior action. At the time of approval of that zoning (ZMA 91-13), it appears that phases 2 and 3 were complete and phase 7 was under construction. Compliance with that agre~ment is a critical point for approval of the pending applications. It states "No more than two phases shall be under' simultaneous development the development shall proceed in the following ord~r: Phase 311., 3B, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lA, 1B, 4, 5, 6 and 8." I will use t~e section and phase numbers interchangeably, as is consistent in our records. My records show that plats have been recorded for lots in sections 2, 3, 311., 3B and 7. You mentioned in our meeting on February 13th that you have 6 or so more houses to build, prior to build-out of these sections. jATTACHMENTC I 50f 22 Mr. Wendell Wood Page Two March 1, 1995 The status of development approvals for infrastructure includes: I. 1. Erosion Control (according to Engineering Department files) : Bonds are held on phases 3A, 3B, and 7. with the exception of phase 3B, the work remaining varies but generally includes repair and finish grading, stabilization of slopes and channels and removal of erosion control facilities. Work in phase 3B is in the ép.rly stages of construction. (I u)1derstand that p. breakdoW)1 9f the details by phase ¡;¡.nd bO)1d have been provided to you.) 2. Roads (according to Engineering Department files): Roads in the state system are as follows: Austin Drive from Rt. 29 to Briarwood Drive; Briarwood Drive from Austin Drive to the temporary cul-de-sac past Whitney Court; Whitney Court; and ' Heather Court , I)1ternal neighborhood roads which are built, paved and meeting the occupancy criteria, but not approved are: oriole Court; Finch Court; and Wren Court Austin Drive is: Built, paved and meeting the occupancy criteria, but not approVed (with the exception of the last section of about 200 feet which is not paved). Route 606 Relocation is in this condition: The road is constructed and tied into the ~x~sting road. A permit for this work is pending V. D.O. T'. approval. Fill has been placed and the stone surface applied. It needs more stone and gener¡;¡.l shaping, etc. The road work was tied to the bond for Wren Court in phase 7 (identified as Ph¡;¡.se 4 on the bond) , but the bond is insufficient. presently the bond must be increased and is in default. The existing Rt. 606 right-of-way needs to be abandoned and the new construction accepted. This requires a resolution by the county. ¡ATTACHMENT Cl 6 of 22 Mr. Wendell Wood Page Three March 1, 1995 Briarwood Drive (according to Engine",ring Department files) : Approved road plans do not show a fOllr-Iane cross- section, as reqllired by agreement #14. They will need to be redesigned to reflect a class VI road. This will increase the pavement to 40 feet face-to-face with an increased median and probably an increased~ight-of-way. The road is not currently bonded. I understand the bond amount necessary is $167,000. See Engineering Departm",nt fór details. .' Sidewalk construction is referenced in agreement #9. The asbuilt plans show sidewalk on the south side of Allstin Drive to the intersection with Briarwood Drive and on the south side of Briarwood from the intersection with Austin Drive to the limit of state acceptance. 3. Reoreation Areas Phase 7 recreation area is substantially complete. The remaining work is: Installation of a fence along the ste",p side¡ Installation of some grOllnd covering (grass, mulch, etc.)¡ Confirmation that it lies within the dedicated open space and has provisions for maintenance. The tot lot drawn within Phase 2 on the application plan is not complete. Agreement #8 allows phasing with Phase lB. The application plan should be revised to reflect this. Phase 3A/3B recreation area is in need of maintenance. For example, a bench is missing the back, etc. Phase 3C completion involves the installation of a new tot lot. The details (equipment, ground cover, acceps) will need to be identified with a plan. I 4. Water and Sewer I am not informed of the status of this. It appears that a portion of the phase 7 erosion control bond includes water and sewer. I believe that you mentioned something about the lift station in phase 3B not yet being completed. , I ATTACHMENT C\ 7 of 22 Mr. Wendell Wood Pa.ge Four Ma.rch 1, 1995 There are a. few items which do not involve within the a.greements, Plea.se respond confirmation for our files. physica.l improvements with informa.tion or II. BUilqing summary Wa.yne Cilimberg, Director of planning ilPproved the shifting of two lots into pha.se 3B .We need a. new summa.ry to reflect w!1e:i\"e these lots .,ill be deleted. ' Please include the accounting for open spa.ce dedica.ted, Agreement #1 speaks to t!1is in requiring it to be proportiona.l to the number of lots a.pproved. The rema.ining opem space for pha.se 7 needs to be ,dedica.ted. Let me begin by sta.ting tha.t for the purposes of the required chronology of development, we agree that phases 3, 3A, 3B a.nd 3C ma.y becons.i.dered a.s one pha.se. And under the sa.me a.greement (#12), the reference to development shall not be construed to include the completion of all homes for tha.t phase. Instead, "completion" is interpreted as the completion of a.ll infrastructure necessa.ry for the home construction. This includes: a.pproved construction ofwa.ter and sewer lines; installa.tion of recrea.tion fa.cilities a.nd any other common area. improvements; soil erosion is complete or tq the point of stabilization of ground cover; a.nd roa.ds ilre approved as being in their finished state a.ccording to approved plans. \ , It is my opinion that the agreement for the chronology does not require, for exa.mple, tha.t the townhomes in phase 3C be constructed prior to moving onto phase 7. However, it is my opinion that construction of the recreation area in phase 3C a.nd a.ny other actions which are necessary to serve later phases, shall be complete. Therefore, you ma.y begin either phase lA or 3C. The obvious difference in requirements for approval of 3C rela.tes to technical site pla.n requirements,such a.s construction of the par~ing spaces and the like. It is your choice, a.nd is subject to the¡ completic:m of necessa.ry items such tha.t no more than two pha.ses sha.ll be under simultaneous development. I will more pa.rticula.rly describe this. Under the zoning agreements, prelimina.ry a.pproval of pha.ses 1A a.nd 3C ma.y be granted with the following conditions included for signa.ture of the fina.l plat/plan: 1. Erosion control sha.ll be complete as discussed in the preceding. ¡ATTACHMENT C 8 of 22 Mr. Wendell Wood Page five l1arcþ 1, 1995 ø 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 2. Neighborþood roads: complete (as discussed in the preceding) the roads in either phase 7 or phase 3 with the e~ception of tþe private road in 3C. The actual work shall be complete and paperwork. filed· for the acceptance prpcess. Austin Drive shall be completed with phase 7. , Briarwood Drive shall be bonded. for the through cpnnection to Rt. 29, with an additional dollar amount to include the cost of redesign to a four-lane rpad. It shall be built as per the agr~ernent. " Route 606 work shall be done at this time, once the permit is approved. The abandonment of the right-of-way may be conditioned on approval of the first building permit for the next chosen section, 1A or 3C. Complete either the phase 3 (A,B and C) recreation areas or the phase 7 recreation. , Confirm approval from the A.C.S.A. for items relating to them. Submit a revised application showing the current building summaries (number of lots per phase, open space, etc.). The open space calculation should be included in subsequent subdivision plats. If you are aggrieved with this determinatipn under Virginia code section 15.1.496.1, yOU may appeal this decision within thirty days of the date of this letter by filing with this office a written notice of appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals. If you do not fi¡e such written appeal within thirty days, this decision will become final and unappealable. 8. We look forwar~ meeting to discuss this next week. I,krow this is complex and voluminous we will be available to assist you through thé approval process. We regret any inconvenience this may have caused you. We did not want to give you misinformation. Staff have met several times to resolve this as quickly as possiblé. , Mr. Wendell Wood Page six March 1{ 1995 Sincerely, I ATTACHMENT C I 9 of 22 'I... .11.'_ ¿!!7 e ~1fWM~cµiley, A.I.C.P. Zoning Administrator AGM/db Attachments ." cc: Working File Tom Muncaster Jo Higgins Yolanda Hipski Wayne Cilimberg Larry Davis ZMA 91-13 File . , . ..,... B' ·MARL·E ¡ATTACHMENT ClIO pf 22 COUNTYOFAL E.· . .. . ~,<OfAI~~ RECEIVED '" . . ~ § 'r '" APfH'91995 Planning Dept. MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: 13ill Fritz, Senior Planner Q. . . . J""".. 14'''Y. r¡¡, Cþi.(,f~g (J\II't-- 119 April 1995 , . ZMA 95-05 Woo¡lbriar Associates Tpe Engineering Department pas recieved a copy of the above referenced reqµest for relief frOIn ConditiQn 12, Board's approval letter dated 23 March 1993. Iµ general, this cQndition note& that nQ more than two phases shall be under simultaneous development. The Engineering pepartment consi4ers a phase complete when all roads have been inspected and apprQved, all dpcumentation required for acceptance into the state system has been submitte¡l to VDoT, and the site work has been complete4 and stabilized to the satisfaction of the coµrity engineer and . erosion control Qfficer. This Departmeµt has reviewed the request and we recommend denial based upoµ the following: R(!~idents will be servild by q public road accepted and maintained by Vtlot. YDoT maint¡¡ins all of the public roads in Albemarle County and their related drainage systems. However, this benefit is provided to only those property.owners residing on roads accepte¡l into the state system. Public roads are eligible for the state system when serving at least 3 ()cGupied dwellings. In the current phases, approxim¡¡tely 100 lots are being served by public roads that have not been accepted into the sta~ system. These roads have met the eligibility requirement ( 3 occµpied dwellings) fQr approximately two years. The sooner the road is accepte¡l by the state, the sooner residentsml,ly benefitfrom the maintenance program. Lastly, the Police Department cannot enforce speed limits on the roads until they have been accepted into the state system. ]J,esiden4 will be relieved ofthe inconvenience/nuisance of prolonged construction activities. Completion of the work and acceptance of roads into the state system Will reduce or elimnate the negative impacts to the lives and property of the residents. This includes . .. inconvience of access along the internal roads; safety concerns in and around construction sites; and/or qisruption of their lives, property, and imprQvements due to prolongeq constrµction activities necessary for incomplete and/or cQrrective work. I ATTACHMENTC III of 22 IJpnd Program Impact. We cµrrently hold }25 active road and 300 erosion bonds. A great deal of staff time is spent in manage¡nent of the program,. The County must reduce this task by making every effort to facilitate completion of construction and the release of bonds. Under the bonding policy, the County has the ability to call bonds and complete public imprqvements, when deemed neCeSSary. However, calling bonds and coq¡pleting the constructiqn of improveq¡ents has an impact on Engineering Department tasks, In cases where the roads were constructed over 4 years ago, the roads often req¡¡ire substantial maintenance and corrective work in addition to any incomplete work. In A¡¡gpst } 984, the Co¡¡nty called a road bond in the amount of $50,000.00 for Phase 2 of this development. The County usect these funds to complete tile road!> .& drainage facîlities, ¡md to get the roacts accepted into the state system. , Although the Co¡¡nty has the authority .to call bonds, the intent of this policy is to assure that improvements will be completed. It is not to be construed as a substitute for the developer's responsibility to construct and complete improvements. Factor$ influencing development and hou$ing CO$t$ will be eliminajed. The developer bears the cost of the road maintenance necessary to maintaÍI\ the level of service ¡¡ntilthe roact is accepted into tile state system. The longer the road remains · unaccepted, the greater the financial burden on the developer. Incompletç road and . erosion & sediment control work deteriorates over time and requires additional corrective wqrk and expense. In phases where most of the lots have been sold, access to private properties may be necessary in order to complete road and erosion & sediment control work. If construction access has not been preserved, the developer must obtain temporary easements from the l¡mdowners. If the landowners are \!nwiUing to cooperate, these easements are often difficult and lor expensive to obtain. AU of these factors can be eliminated by the timely completion of improvements and acceptance of public roads into the state system. For Y0\!r information I have attached copies of the latest road and erosion control ÍI\spection checklists. Please contact tills department should yO¡¡ have any questions regardiµg this matter. jmk\ attachments cc: Jo Higgins Peter Parsons Robert Shaw t ATTACHMENT C 112 of 22 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, VirginÎa 22902-4596 (804) 296·5861 March 24, 1995 United Land Corporation of America Post Office Box 5548 Chariottesville, Va 22905 Attn: Ms. Nena HalTell , , FAX: 979"6268 Re: ariarwood Subdivision, Orioie and Finch Courts (SUB-88-101) Dear MS. Harrell: . t=nclosed Is the joint pLlnShlist for the above roads. As I mentioned to HUnter over the phone, Wren Court .coulci not be inspected prior to the Austin DriveIS.R. 606 inspection since it doe$ not connect to a currently state maintained roaci, but may be inspected simultaneously with AustinIS,R. 606, As yo/{ are aware, all of the field work described on the punchlist must be completed within 45 days of the . date of this letter. In adciitiolj, all remaining paper work must be taken care of within this time frame for the road to be accepted, incluciing as-built drawings, submittal of four copies of plats (with deed book references), CE-7 permits (to VOOT), etc. I sent you a cf¡ecklist of these items for Oriole Court previously. Enc/oseci Is the checklist for pinch Court. Neither we nor VDOT have received CBR test results f(¡r Finch Court. Three copies pf thesfl must bfl submitted to my attention, with any neæssary pavflment redflsign, bflfore the road may be accepted. Feel free to contact me anytime you have questions pertaining to the road acceptance process. Sincerely, -p~~~ Peter Parsons Lµ.¡:L Civil Engineer 1/ PJPlctj Enclosures Copy: Charies Baber, VOOT Charlottesvì/le Hunter Wood, United Land Corporation of America ALB,·ryLE COUNTY ENGINEERING DE~~~~ENT SUBL_ 3ION INSPECTION REPORT ~ .LIST VuOT/COUN'l'Y..JOINTINSPECTION Proj~ct Name: Briarwood Phases 3&7 (portions of) IATTACHMJ;NT c:1· 13 óf 22 proj~ct Number: Sub-88-101 Date: March 22, 1995 Weather Conditions: Sunny and warm Participant{s): Charles Baber, Hunter Wood, Peter Parsons Erosion Control Bond In o no Inspector's Signature: Effect: 0 yes ~. 0~)" \ -I)J'\..- \!" \..,,+_ Date Corrected: Oriole Court, Station 0+00 edae of Austin Drive Pavement , o o o Finch Court o o o o o o o Sta. 1+60 - remoVe pavement and patch around leveled water valve box. Sta. 1+97 - remove rough pavement at end of cul- de-sac as mark~d with spray pa~nt in front of driveways serving 4676 and 4672 Oriole Ct. Install one 25 mph speed limit sign and one støp sign in accordance with VDOT specifications. Install one 25 mph speed limit sign and one stop sign in accordance with VDOT specifications. Remove pavement and patch around water valve box near entrance from Briarwood Drive. Replace broken non-standard handicap ramp and curb and gutter in south side of,entrance with ~tandard CG-12 and CG-6. Replaçe asphalt in front of new CG-12/CG-6 to eliminÇlte, water ponding. This may need to extend to ro~pway crqwn I'· ." (centerline) . .. I Replace broken section of CG-6 in front of 2325 Finch Court as marked. Remove all landscaping within right-of-way/clear zone (10 feet from edge of pavement) as it obstructs sight distance. Remove pavement and patch around water valve box and manhole at end of cul-de-sac as marked. Remove basketball equipment from right-of-way at end of cul-de-sac. Clean silt and dirt from gutter pan at this location (in front of 2309 Finch Court) . . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLEfÀTTACHMt;t-¡T Cl14 of 22 œI<:'O'Hl.~" '.~" .. - -,f ~, .' "P c - .. .. ".t " ... -. -. ,-. ~. ..!!.< ~~ '~'"'. pc r'7RGl~\Ì" MEMOMNDUM TO: Jack Kelsey, PE, Chief of Engineering fROfv'l: DATE: RE: peter Parsons, Civil Engineer 1/ f.:ffi) "0{' ~, April 5, 1995 i: . . Briarwood Subdivision (SUB-88-101) Provided here is EI chronqlogy of oµr activities relating to road inspection and accept¡¡nce of Finçh Court at the above project. It seems preferable to focus on one partiçular road as representative of the entire development. . As far asthe SF BOt) relocation work is conçerned, suffice it to say that this work was performed with nO permit issued by VDOT, and the sube!ivision bond for this has been in default for well over a year. As for Oriole Court, thh¡ department did receive a request for information some time last fall on what was remaining to have the ro¡¡d accepted by VtJOT. The developers representative was given verba! information, and informed of the CountylVDOT insPEiction procedurEi, and promisee! follow-up written information, Due to a heavy worklo¡¡e! this information was not SEint out until January of this year, but much of the paPEilWork could h¡¡ve proceedEid nevertheless. On the other hand, a VDOT/County joint (oad inspection could not be held between October 15 and March 15 due to weather limitations on corrective pavEiment work. None ofthe necessarypapelWOrk has been submitted to date, thoUgh thEi developers represent¡¡tive was made aware of these verbaJ/y last fal(,ane! in writing this past January. 1 do not see how providing this written information sooner çould have hastenee! the process, though I agree that it should 'have gone out sooner. . i IrrespectivEi of the foregoing, I can report that a joint inspection of both Oriole and Finch Court was performed, and punchlists transmitted on March 24, 1995. Tf¡e developer is now obligated to have the roads accepted by VDOT within 45 days of this transmitt¡¡1 d¡¡te. I am plEiased to see these projects moving again, and hope that they continue to do So regardless of the outcome of the developers relief request. , , o Rewc't,: entrances/driveways at 2""8, 2307, 2309, 2- 2313, 2315, and 2317 Fi - .':ourt tq convey dr~inage along the gUtter in ~~cordance with the CG-9D standard. Asphalt concrete may be used. o Replace broken CG-6 in front of driveway entrance to 2307 Finch Court. o Repair spall{ng curb with epoxy concrete east of driveway entrance to 2317 Finch Court. NOTE: This punchlist is valid for forty-five days from the date of transmittal. Barring significant new problems, if all described field and remaining paper work is satisfactorily completed within this time period the road(s) may be accepted by VDOT. , , I A.TTACHMENT C I 15 of 22 , i ~. ." ,ATTACHMENT C 116 of 24 MEMORANDUM Jack Kelsey Page 2 Briarwood Subdivision, Finch Court, a chrono/oqv: 12-17~QO Revised Finch Court plat approved by engineering. V 2-27-92 Progæssinspection by Engineering Inspector reveals that curb inst¿¡lIed ¿¡nd aggregate placed. The road meets the VDOT seMce requirement for acceptance of three occupied dwellings. . 2-28-92 Letter to developer with 6-30-92 deadline for completion of Finch Court. (Certified fetter is returned "unclaimed. '7 Letter to developer noting that if all field work is complete and paperwork underway, the bond period may be extended past 6-30-92. (Certified letter is returned "unclaimed.·~ \ 3-24-92 6-24-92 Letter to developer to remind of 6-30-92 deadline for Finch Court bond. 7-6-92 Finch court bond extended contingent upon comPletion schedule " submittal, which has never been provided. 7-92/ 9-92 Staff turnover in engineering department may f!xplain loss of continuity in bond deadline follow-through. ;. 8-6-92 ,. , Finch Court punchlist prepared and sent 10 developer by Engineering Inspector. . Finch Court bond is again renewed. Urged completion and acceptance of road. Requested completion schedule, neVer receivec/o 6-21-93 7-14-93 Engineering Inspector hand-delivers a new revised punchlist qf work remaining on Finch Court tD the developer. Is verbally harassed by develDper. 8-8-94 Finch Court bond reduced and renewec/. 2-2-95 Finch CDurt bDnd renewed. 1-31-95 OriDle CDurt jDint inspectiDn agreement letter sent to develDper, along with paperwDrk checklist. (This information had been requested some time in the fall of 1994). MEMORANDUM Jack Kelsey Page 3 3-10-95 3-22-95 3-24-95 PJP/ctj Copy: Jo Higgins r.-JTACHM!:f'lT Cll7 of 22 Phone discussion of joint inspection of Courts with Nena Harrell. We agreed that Austin/SR. 606 inspection should folloW others since Austin was not entirely paved, and S.R. 606 acceptance would be complicated due to right-of-way issues. Indicated that she could handwrite the additional street names on the Oriole Court letter already sent to her. Receiyed this soon after. Joint inspection of Finch/Oriole performed with VDOI', County, and United Land personnel present. Wren Court was nor incll/ded since it did not cOnnect to a state maintained (oi'ld, i.e. it would haye to be inspected along with Austin/606. Oriole/Finch punchlist transmitted to developer. . , I' fACHMENT C 18 of 22 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 (804) 296-5861 March 23, 1995 Mr, We~dell Wood Post Oßfice Box 5548 Cþarlottesville, VA 22905 Re: status of Projects in Briarwood Subdivision For COIDPletio~ of Erosion Control Plan Requirements Dear Mr. Wood: As requested, the following is the stat~s of all projects i~ Briarwood SUbdivision and any work nece:;;:;;ary to complete the erosion control requirements of projects in the final stages. #5i2 Briarwood, Phase III & IV - Bond covers State Route 606 relocation, Austi~ Drive (lots 73-82, lots 1-10), Finch Coqrt (lots 11-22), and the sanitary sewer north of Austin Drive, State Route 606 a. silt trap:;; are still needed and must remain in place at this time. b. Dressing and soil stabilization is required on both sides of the road. Previous seeding was dOne witqrye grass, c. EC-1 rip-rap must be installed at the d+scharge of the pipes located o~ the south end of State Route ~06. Backfill at the end of the pipes has eroded aWaY and ~u~t be repaired. d. The drop inlet on the east side of Route 606 must be cleaned and the D-1 grate properly installed. Fi~ch Court . . ¡ a. S il t trap below lots 40, 41 must remain in place as it is still needed for the present work. b. Repair and reshape the rip-rap downflume below the drainage pipe between lots 44 and 45, Special attention is needed at the bottom of the slope where it intercepts thé natural chan~el. c. The channel behind lots 45 and 46 has litt'1e or no vegetation on the cut slopes and must be stabilized. d. Remove a large rock in the natural channel below lots 44 and 45. , tATTACHMENT C }19 of 2~ Mr. Wendell Wood March 23, 1995 Page Two e. Remove the silt trap in the natural channel þelow lots 44 and 45. f. Slope repairs and staÞilization is needed Þehind units 42, 43, and 44. Earth dykes must Þeremoved a~d staÞilized Þelow the fill slope in this area. i g. The fill slope Þehind lots 37, 38, 39; ~hd 40 mvst Þe graded to a minimum slope of 2:1 and staÞilized. Trees which are dead and trees whiclJ, are covered over with fill must Þe re,moved. The present .slope is approximately ;¡.. 5;1. Austin Drive - Lots 1-10 & 73-82 - satisfactory. , , Sanitary Sewer North of Austin Drive Satisfactory, The p+esent bond held is in the amount of $24,570.00. !1157 Bri~rwoOd, phase IV - Bond covers Wren Court(lots 1-10, lots 25 and 26) Austin Drive (lots n-24). a. Wren Court - Lots 1-10 are complete, lots 25 and 26 are presently u~der construction. b. Austin Drive - Lots 11~24, vegetatipn on lots 23 and 24 and the open space adjacent to lot 24 is unsatisfactory. Remove old silt fence Þehind lot 20, c. Austin Drive (road) - The slopes and shoulders on Austin Drive are incomplete from Wren Court to State Route 606. The present bond is in the amount of $3,630.00. #~275 BriarwoOd, Phase 3A (oriole court) - Bond ,covers roads and all lots. a. The rip-rap tieing into the existing paved ditch behind lots 7 and 8 is unsatisfactory. The stones are washing away and do not cOnform to any kind of typical section. b. The drainage swale behind lots 5-7 is unstable and must be stabilized. , , c. Previous installed rip-rap tieing into the chann~l Þehind lot 6 is eroding and f~iling and must be stabilized. d. The drop inlet grate at Drainage structure J must be placed on the D-¡ properly. (Behind unit #5.) e. Erosion Control stone EC-1 at the discharge of the pipes at structures K & U is scouri~g out and must be replaced. f. The rip-rap place in the drainage channel below drainage Structures K & U is failing and must be corrected, Rip-rap in this area appears to be too small. g. Apply soil stabilization on the embankment of the sanitary sewer at the rear of units 4 and 5. :;.. .-. ¡ATTACHMENT C 20 of 22 ~, Wend~ll Wood March 23, 1995 Page Three h. Apply soil stabilization to the area behind units 1-4. The present pond held is in the amount of $6,040.00, ~1~7~ Briarwood, Pbase 3B (B1ueJay Way) - Bond covers roads and lots. The erosion control permit was issued in ~ovember of 1994, and is in the early stages of construction. Only rough grading of the road has been done, The present bond is in the amount of $11,110.00. , , ~131i Briarwood, phase VIII - Bond covers Wren court (lots 49-66), Briarwood Drive (lots 67-88). . i . . a. Wren Court (lots 49-66) - Un1ts 49-50 or. under constructlon, vegetation is not mature behind units ~1~p6, TheWQoded area behind units 61-66 must be stabilized, Erosion control facilities must be maintained and remóved at completion of work. b. Briarwood Drive (lots 67~68) - This area has been dressed and seeded, however vegetation is not satisfactory at this tjme, The present bond is in the amoUnt of $9,700.00 Notes: Pléase be reminded that vegetation in all areas is not considered established until such time that it is mature énough to withstand severe weather condition and will inhibit erosion. ~?7~ Robert A. Shaw Erosion Control Officer RAS/sms Copy: Jack Kelsey, Engineering Department Reading File , ALBEMARLE COUNTY SERVICE AUTHORITY p,o. Box 1009 168 SPOTNAP RD. CHARLOTTESVILLE. VA 22902 , (804) 977-4511 FAX (804) 979-Q998 ' IATTACHMENTC. 21 of 22 TO: I&LSf~ y ALß 'c EfJ£:::r [~)£fJ2.t ¡."E( f fµ ~:ER: '·172 - LlO ~:S FR~M: ... 12(otP\[2-b?, ~:)Hr-l'70J I /' ( J-ø¡c- DATE: . C<? ¡V¡AI2:c.<t~ J:' ~--,j {V:X: COMP1\.UY: , .. ", lWMBER OF ~AGES: ~-, ~SSAGE; '. b. ·.~O"-'- . , D;U..OtNI~J(~~ ¡Ç A I--trfB' íT+kr ~1---·St~._, 70 . ()' . ·L · " " i'í"fs .- ,,1\ T1'D ~,:...-;, f.e" . e.IA;f.'L..K...:D. f4i..Jt:ú. [Nfèf-'J'~~"· . /H0""-·' ~?.s/JI''<:'' Cf7: 111C 13 (includin~ tAts pase) -(?'P-.\t\f?\<)r~ ygj.,,>:s, 2 . "0,1 ....¡'.~... '.".. . .' , . . ..~ ..: " . . .l-.E:r- I'f.C ' r;Gow If ÿoJ H~-;¡ö--I'",'( 'QIJE;"S,\W'&' 1-~~~. ", " .;.'~-_.--.- . ( Oriqinal to follo\(' Original upon request ____ Shou14 you hav~ any problems Yith this transmission, please call 804/977-4511. FAX ~ER a04¡'19-0698 . . ~. TO'" Ç'oo-oN 80:6 S6,¿¡) _JI?I~ 8690-6l6-ÞOe:13L 'H' S' J' t! c(. J' ALBEMARLE ~OUNTY SERV: =:E AUTHORITY P.O Box IOO'-? 168 $l'ori'J¡\P r~D OIAJ<LOfTE$VllI.E. VI1, 22902 ~ (804) 977-4511 F/\X (804) 9l'ì0698 ; I ATTACHMENT C I 22 9f 22 feb~uary 7, 1995 Ms. liena HarreLl. United Land corporation P.O. Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Re: Briarwood Phases 3A, 7 - Bonds Deªr NeI'\ª' , , I hªve recommended to the County Engineering Department that the Þohd for phase 3~ of Briarwood (OrioLe court) be reduced to $1,000. This is to ensure that the valVe box in the cul-de-sac that currently sits in a depression is raised and Fhe road patched accordingLy to produce an even surface with the top of the box flush with the asphalt. Though this section has.just been dedicated, there is a One year warranty period in Which the d....veloper is obligated to correct any deficiencies ~nconstruction. Phase 7 nots 49-78) i5 a similar ßituation. I have' as~ed the County Engineering Department to. keep the bond at its Cur¡::ent ¡eyel of HO,OOD. Th,Ís is in antiqipation of the gt;"ade being )';aised in several locatio1$ Þ~tlfeen manholes 42 and. 41 along WrE!i1 Court. Tl1ese are areas \'lh.l,ch presently do n01:; ha.ve 1:;he.required minimum of j feet of' çoyer over·tne . ~ewer line, but we naVe been assured. bY the project superin- tendent that fill Will soon be a.dded to raise the grade. with this aSl>ura.nce, we cnose to process the dedibation since this work wo~ld be required, as a con$truction deficiency, to be corrected during the warranty period. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at 977-,\511 ext. 11,\. Sincerely, ~()l,W» ª~~ ,,-- Richard R. Johnson civil Engineer, I RR.1/lbt c.c: ~ike Lynn¡ AC$A Inspector _,_...,....... _p.·~·'...M__·"___....-__. ?il" ,I Ç'ilil" oN óil: ó Só,/OJ€H 869il-6/ 6-1708: TII "H"S"J"U 'i . , March 18, 1992 (Regular ~1i.9htMeeting) Page 7 M.B. Pg. 266 Mr. Bowerman asked if the applicant agrees to the insertion of the word, "land~caped," in the proffer. Mr. Roudabush answ13red, "yes." Mr. Bain seconded th~ motion. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES; Mrs. Hurophris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Bain and Bowerman. NAYS: None. (The proffers are set out below:) 1. A fifty foot (50') landscaped buffer zone along the residential portion of~orest Lakes adjoining TMP 32-42G. 2. A restriction at 430 vehicle trips per day per acre for any allowed use of the property with the C-l Zoning classification. Agenda Item No. 10. ZMA-91-13. Woodbriar Associates~ Public Hearing on a request. to update & amend conditions ofexistiog PRD to allow use o(pvt rd~ & to revise Application Plan to show areas for future townhouse develop- ment in Br.i:arwood. Property on W Elide of Rt 29N approx 1 roi N of North Fork i, RivannaRiveris zoned PRD. property located in Piney Mountain Village is recommended for medium density residential (5-10 du/ac). TM32G,Pl & TM32G,PA,Sec3. ~ Rivanna Dist. (Advertised in the Daily progress on March 3 and March lOi 1992.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized thestatf report {on file). Mr. Cilimbergsaid the applicant is proposing to amend the conditions of. approval of ZMA-79-32 to allow for the utilization of private roads to serve two proposed sections of townhouses. To date 188 lots in Briarwood have been approved and recorded. He noted that the Engineering Department cóncurs with the applicant's justification for private roads. The applicanthaa agreed to the conditions of approval recommended by staff. , These conditions and the application plan have been revised to reflect the current development status of the Briarwood PRO. Thi~ am~ndmentdoes not increase the level ot development over the 661 units originally approved with ZMA~79~32. He went on to say that staff supports the inclusion of the townhouses in the PRD andendorsés them asa greater mix of dwelling types in a residential area. Mr. cilimberg also discussed th~ issue of double frontage lots proposed in the townhouse sectio~s. The applicant is requesting a waiver of that provision. Staff supports the applicant's request in consideration of the justification and the I provis~on of landscaping to insure adequate privacy for the units from the I streets~ He said that the staff also supports the. private road request. as " necessary to serve the townhouses. The staff recommends approval of ZMA-91-13 subjec; to the following list of agreements: 1. Approval is for a maximum of 661 dwellings subject to conditions contained herein. Locations and acreages or various land uses shall comply with the approved plan. In the final site plan and subdivision process open apace shall be dedicated in proportion to the number of lots approved. Primary recreation areas to be owned and maintained through a homeowners association approved by the county Attorney. Off-street parking and access shall be limited to the recreational area shown on the Briarwood P~R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan revised February 7, 1992, and the means to limit such access shall be part of the site plan review; 2. No grading permit or buildiogpermit shall be issued in any area until final site plan and subdivision approval for that are~has beenoÞtained; 3. Albemarle county Service Authority verification of adequate sewer capacity owned by Woodbriar Associates and allocated to serve the Briarwood development before approval of each phase; 4. All road plan and entrance plan approval shall be obtained prior to any final site plan or subdivision approval. All roads ahall be designed and constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation specifications and. dedicated for acceptance into the State Secondary Road System except the private roads shown on the BriarwoodP.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan with a (PR) label; S. No 9radirig or construction on slopes of 25 percent or greater except as is necessary for road construction as approved by the County Engineer. Any lot which is unbuildable due to slope shall be combined with a buildable lot and/or added to co~on open space subject to Planning commission approval; 6. Fire Official approval of fire protection system including, but not limited to: fire flow rates, hydrant locations, and ATTACHMeNT P II 1 I I lof 5 . c , !i 1992 (Regular Night Meeting) M.B. '1 Pg. 267 Ii emergency access provisions. Such system shall be prov:ded [tTTACHMEfIIT D I prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy in the ': area to be served; 2 of 5 March 18, Page a 7. Albemarle County service Authority approval of plans for water lines, sewer lines, pumping station and manholes and appurtenances which are to be constructed at the exp~nse of the developer; 8. Staffapproyal of recreational facilities to include: One tot lot with Pha5e 3C and one tot lot with phase 18; the dedication of open space with the approval of Phases 4 and 5 for the passive recreation area which shall include construction of walking/ jogging trails; and, the primary recreation area south of Camelot shall be built or bonded f9r its construction prior to final plat approval for Phase 6. This recreation area ahall be built pri~r to completion of Phase 6 and ahall consist of a baseballj multi-purpose field, two basketball courts, playground equipmept and picnic facilities. All recreation facilities shall be installed by the developer; 9. Sidewalks shall be provided along the southerly side of Austin Drive from Route 29 North to Briarwood Drive and along the westerly side of the entire length of Briarwood Drive; 10. county Attorney approval of amended Homeowners' Association agreements prior to final approval of Phase IB or 3C to in~lude provision for maintenance of the private roads; 11. Only those ar~as where a structure, utilities, pedestrian ways, recreation areas, roads and other improvements are to be located shall be disturbed; all other land shall remain in its natural state; 12. No more than two phases shall be under simultaneous develop- ment, the development shall proceed in the following order: Phase 3Ar 3B, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lAr IB, 4, 5, 6 and 8. Lots along camelot Drive and St~ lves Road are to be deve- loped with single-family detached dwellings and shall have a minimum lot width of 65 feet. All other lots shall be deve- loped with single-family attached units including townhouses -in phases l~and 3C; 14. Briarwo6d Drive shall be built or bonded for its entire length from Austin Drive to Route 29 prior to any final plat approval for Phase 1A. Briarwood Drive shallbecomplet~d to its intersection with Route '29 prior to approval of Phase lB. The eastern portion of Briarwood Drive through the commercial area shall be designed to Category VI standards with a four-lane cross-section; 13. s 15. The mix of dwelling unit types shall be as shown on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan; 16. Site plan approvals for Phases 4 and beyond shall be contin~ gent upon evidence that dwelling units in the earlier phases have substantially ~et the County's goals and the deve- lopers' assurances that moderate income housing has been provided; 17. Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Section 32.7.9.8 along the front of·townhouse units which constitute double frontage lots; apd 1S. Administrative approval of future site plans and plats tabe in accordance with the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing plan provided no waivers or modific~tions of ordinance regulations are required. Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 3t 1992, unanimouslyr~commended approval of ZMA-91-13 subject to the list of agreernentsrecommended by staff, with an amendment to #10. He added that at the Commissionmeetingr there was 60me discussion regarding the maintenance responsib~lity of the road. The Commission amended the language to read as follows~ 10. County Attorney approval of amended Homeowners' Association agreements prior to final approval of Phase 18 or 3C to include provision for maintenance of the privaté roads, such maintenance shall be the responsiÞility of the homeowners in Phases 18 and 3C,respectivély. Mr. Bain commented that maintenance of a private road. could be expen- sive because th~re will not be many townhouse owners. He asked if this issue has been studied to get an idea of the costs and maintenance of the roads over " . ~:~~h g18, 1992 {Regular Night Meeting} M.B.;''''' Pg. 268 .![ . .. . ' , - a ten year period. Mr. Cilimberg replied that staff has not done a study of (JfrTACHMENT D I what the costs could be.. Although a site pla~ haa been submitted, he ia not L¡ .. . . .:1 sure Lf plans for the prJ.vate roads were subml.tted._ _.Hewent on to say that :.1 ' "___' . this situation does not look out of the ordinary in terms of private roads i 3 of 5 serving townhouses and compared to other projects that are served by private 'I Mr. Martin mentioned that the developer still owns many of the lots in I :::d:~bdVision and asked if that would make an .difference in the responsible : for maintenance of the road. Mr. Cilimberg said that could have some 91g01- ficanceas far as who pays for the maintenance of the road over the life of the project. Until all the lots are sold, the developer will be as respon- sible as the other homeowners for maintenance of the road. Mr. Bain expressed concern about other areas in the county where road maintenance is costing the homeowners a lot of money. He discussed a problem ~ith one particular road where it w~s approved, bonded and released, and now the homeowners are left with the burden of paying a lot for the maintenance. He would like to find a means to make sure that homeowners are not left with the burden of having to pay more than was expected for the upkeep of a road. Mr. Bówerman asked the County Engineer about the standards by which these roads will be built. Ms. Higgins said the roads would have to meet private road specifications. She added that currently staff does not have plans to review for this project. Mr. Bain asked how long the county can hold a bond. Ms. Higgins said the bond is r~leased upon final inspection of a private road. I , Mr. Martin asked if there is a time limit on when a road has to be paved if people aré occupyingdwe+lings. Ms. Higgins said the developer has tó obtain a certif~cate of occupancy. Mr. Bowerman stated that often the developer will wait to do the final paving after all the other details are complete. Mr. Martin asked about the provision of snow removal on private roads. Mr. Bowerman said until 51 percent of the homes are pwned, snow removal is the developer's responsibility. Mr. Marshall asked what is the purpose of the bond. Mr. Tucker answered that the purpose of the bond is to insure that the road is built. Mr. Marshall noted that if there is a bond and improvements are needed to the road, the developer can be forced to make them. Mr. Martin commented that it is a matter oftLmingas to when the road will be completed. He said that this makes a lot of difference to the people who are living on the road. Mr. Marshall asked if Board members are thinking that a time limit should beset as to when the road should be finished. Also, if Board memb~rs are considering using county funda tofiniah a road, if the developer does not do it by a certain time. Mr. Tucker answered that this .is already being con- sidered. Mr. St. John stated that the County is already involved in complet- ing roads when they are pot done in a timely manner. He explained that every þond has a deadline. Mr. Tucker commented that the bond could be extended. Mr. St~ John responded that the County does not have 'to extend the bond, and there is a deadline written on the face of every bond. He said the burden is on the developer to show good reason why the bond should be extended. He went on to say that if the developer wants to extend the bond, then the county usually does so, in order to remain out of building roads. He added that,on the other hand" if members' of the public are having problems with potholes, I etc., th~ bond can be called, and the money can be used to fix the road. Mr. Marshall said he does not understand why the County does not force the issue ¡'Iii because that is the reason for bonds. He knows that Board members do not want the county to get tfito the road building business. However, if homeowners are to be considered, then the county will have to get into the business, if the deve~oper is not willing. At this time, Mr. Bowerman opened the public hearing. " Mr. Tom ~uncaster, of Muncaster Engineering and computer Applications, stated that the applicant agrees with the conditions outlined by the staff. ffe pointed out that ~developer does not like a pave the road until everything is finished because, if not, construction trucks will tear up the road. He anticip tes that when the units are finished, the road will be paved within the nex two months. He said that Mr. Wendell Wood, the developer, is also present at the meeting, if there are questions. M Mr. Woo $70,000 . Bowerman asked what will be the selling price of the townhouses. responded that the selling price of the townhouses will be in the mid andS80,OOO range. M . Bowerman asked if there was anyone from the public w~owished to speak. No one came fQrward. At this time, Mr. Martin offered motion toapprova ZMA-91-13,subject to the 18 agreements (set out below) approved by th~ Planning commission. Mr. Bain sepon~ed~he mótion~ AYES: NAYS: Roll was called, and the motion carried by the followiqg recorded vote: Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin, Perkins, Bain and Bowerman. None. ., ,.."-, . ". .:,¿~~~.).:., ·~ . " II March 18, 1992 (Regular Hight Meeting) Page 10 Pg. 269 M.B. (The agree~ents ~re set out in full below:) ATT., CHMENT D Approval is for a maximum of 661 dwellings subject to conditions contained herein. Locations and acreages\of various land uses shall comply with the approved plan.' In the final site plan and subdivision process open apace shall be dedicated in proportion to the number of lots approved. Primary recreation areas to be owned and maintained through a homeowners association approved by the county Attorney. Off-street parking and access shall be limited to the recreational area shown on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Applicatiçn and Phasing Plan revised February 7, 1992, and the means to limit such access shall þe pa~t of the site plan review; 2. No grading permit or building permit shall be issued in aoy area until final site plan and subdivision approval for that area has been obtained; 1. 3. Albemarle County service Authority verification of adequate sewer capacity owned by Woódbriar AS$ociatas and allocated to serve the ßriarwood development before approval of each 'phase; 4. All road plan and entrance plan approval shall be obtained prior to any final site plan or subdivision approval. All roads shall be designed and constructed to Virginia Department of Transportation specifications and dedicated for acceptance into the State Secondary Road System except the private roads ahòwn on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan with a (PR) label; 5. No grading or construction on slopes of 25 percent or greater except as is necessary for road construction as approved by the County Engineer. Any lot which is unbuildabledue to slope shall be combined with a buildable lot and!or added to common open space subject to Planning Commission approval; 6. Fire Official approval of fire protection system including, but not limited to: tire flow rates, hydrant locations; and emergency access provisions~ Such system shall be provided prior to issuance of any certificate of opcupancy in the area to be served; 7. Albemarle county Service Authority approval of plans for water lines, sewer lines, pumping station aod manholes and appurtenances which are to þe constructed at the expense of the developer; 8. Staff approval of recreational facilities to include: one tot lot with Phase 3Cand one tot lot with Phase IB;the dedication of open spaqe with the approval of Phases 4 and 5 for the passive recreation area which shall include construction of walking/ jogging trails; and, the primary recreation area south of Camelot shall be built or bonded for its construction prior to final plat approval for Phase 6. This recreation area shall be built prior to completion of Phase 6 and shall consist of a baseball! multi-purpose field, two basketball courts, playground equipment and picnic facilities. All recreation facilities shall be installed by the developer; 9. Sidewalks shall be provided along the southerly side of Austin Drive from ROute 29 North to Briarwood Drive and along the westerly side of the entire length of Briarwood Drive; 10. county Attorney approval of amended Homeowners' Association agreements prior to final approval of phase IB or 3C to include provision for maintenance of the private roads, such maintenance shall be the responsibility of the homeowners in phases IB and 3C, respectively; l¡. only those areas where a structure, utilities, pedestrian ways, recreation areas, roads and other improvements are to be located shall þe disturbed; all other land shall remain in its natural state; 12. No more thap two phases shall be under simultaneous develop~ ment, the development shall proceed in the following order: phase 3A, 3B, 3C, the completion of Phase 7, lA, lB, 4, 5, 6 and 8. 13. Lots along camelot Drive and St. Ives Road are to be deve- loped with single-family detached dwellings and sball have a minimum lot width of 65 feet. All other lots shall be deve- loped with single-family attached units including townhouses in Phases IB and 3C; 4 of 5 11 P , '. .. ". oil> ~>.^ Page 11 14. Briarwood Drive shall be built or banded for its entire length from Austin Drive to Route 29 prior to any final plat approval for Phase lA. Briarwood Drive shall be completed to its intersection with Route 29 prior to approval of Phase lB. The eastern portion of Sriarwood Drive through the commercial area shall be designed to Category VI standards with a four-lane cross-sectiori; 15. The mix of dwelling unit types shall be as shown on the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and Phasing Plan; Site plan approvals for Phases 4 and beyond shall be continw gent upon evidence that dwelling units in the earlier phases have substantially met the county's goals and the deve~ lopers' assurances that moderate income hous~ng has been provided; 17. Landscaping shall be provided in accordance with Section 32.7.9.8 along the front of townhouse units which constitute double frontage lots; and 16. 18. Administrative approval of future site plans and plats to be in accordance with the Briarwood P.R.D. Amended Application and PhasingPlanproyided no waivers or modifications of ordinance regulations are required. Agenda Item No. 11. SP~92-04. Robert & Doris Oliphant. Public Hearing ona request, ~or a single-wide mobile home on 5.0 acs zoned RA located on E sidé of Rt6~0 approx 3/4 roi N of Rt 20: TM48,P77A. Rivanna Dist. (Adver- tised in the Daily Progress on March 3 and March 10, 1992.) Mr. Cilimbßrg summarized staff report (on file). Mr. Ciliroberg said no dwellings are, currently on the site. The location tor the proposed mobile home has been cleared and the septic system has been installed. No dwellings are visible from the location of the proposed mobile home and the mobile home will not be visible from the public ~oad. Staff has identified eight mobile homes within one mile of this property including one on property adjacent to this site. One letter of objection regarding this request was received. Mr. Ciliffiberg said ,the staff recommends approval of SP-92-04 subject to the following five conditions: 1. Albemarle County Building Official approval; 2. Conformance to all area, bulk and other applicable require~ ments for district in which it is located; Iii !: 'I I Ii ,¡ :1 I ¡ ~ :-----. ..-."."1, I.IJ - 5 of 5 3. Skirting around mobile home from ground level to base of mobile home to be completed within thirty (3D) days of the ; issuance of a certificate of occupancy; 4. Provision of potable water supply and sewerage facilities to the satisfaction of the Zoning Administrator and approval by the local office of the Virginia Department of Health -if applicable under current regulations; 5. Landscaping and/or screening to be provided to the satisfac- tion of the zoning Administrator. Required screening shall be maintained in good condition and replaced if it should die; é. Mobile home is to be located as shown on plat initialed WDF .and dated February 24, 1992; and 7. The mobile home shall be occupied only by Robert and Doris Oliphant or their family. Mr. cilimbergsaid the Planning Commission, at its meeting on March 10, 1992, unanimously recommended approval of SP-92-04 subject to the first six conditionsrecómroended by staff. At this time, Mr. Bowerman opened the public hearing. Mrs. Doris oliphant, the applicant, presented pictures said the mobile home will have a natural buffer to screen it She stated that it is her intent to occupy the mobile home. this property has been in her family for 45 years. Mr. Kevin Cox spoke next. He said that the Zoning Ordinance is the implementation for this Board's policy, and the Zoning Ordinance does not specify applicant or owner occupancy. He said that 85 percent of the single~ wide mobile homes that are approved in this County are approved without that condition. He said that when he mentioned the fact that IS percent of the special use permits were having this condition put on them, the action that this Board:,should have taken was to not use the condition again until a decision was made, rather than to continue with the inconsistency. The applicants that are forced to come before this Board and plead to live in a mobile home must do so because someone in connecticut or Maryland complaine~. of the area. She from the rOad. She noted that / , ,",,< r' . COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY , D¡ST'~¡SÛT~ ' ,. ... .. ON_ ;~:';r""""> ACTION: X rrE~ t{)'a ' 6ð'Â INFORMATIONf /,1/7 AGENDA TITLE: Ordinance to amend Chapter 8, Finance and 'j'axation, Article VITI, Special Assessments for Agricultural, Horticultural, Foresta! and Open Space Real Estate AGENDA DATE: June 14, 1995 SUBJECTæROPOSAUREOUEST: Repeal of tbe Special Classification for Open Space for Pµrposes cf Use Value Assessment and Taxation CONSENT AGENDA: ACTlON: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. TuckerlDavis REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: The County has established special classificaticns for real estate which allow for reduced rea! estate taxes for property being used for certain purposes. Currently property in agricultural, horticultural, forestal or open space use can qualifY for land use aSsessment. Pursuant to the State Code the. County can, at the Board of Supervisors' discretion, designate which of the four classifications it wishes to include in a use valne assessment',ordinance. DISCUSSION: In evaluating the open space classification, some concerns have been identified. Under open space standards, five categonesoflandqualify for special assessment. These standards identifY "open space" as I) park or recreation lands; 2) conservation lands; 3) floodways; 4)historic or scenic areas; and 5)lands identified by the County for no development to assist the implementation of the land use plan. The County Assessor has providedinfonnation that no property other than land which would otherwise qualify for use value assessment presently benefits :!Ìom the open space classification. All existing land classified as open space can either qualifY as agricultural or furestalland or would continue to receive use value assessment because the property is under a permanent open space easement under the Open Space Land Act This year, however, thr"" applications have been received for properties which would not qualifY for land use without the open space classification. One application involves 43 acres that is being hush-hogged. The other two applications are golf courses and related facilities which are seeking land use as "park Or ¡-cereation lands". If the open space classification is maintained, these applications must be reviewed for compliance with thegenera1 and specific standards for the open space classification. The park or recreation use standards specifically recognize privately owned golf clubs and countIy clubs as qualifYing park or recreation lands. If these properties can othelwise meet the open space standards, they would have to be accepted into the land use program. Attached is background infonnation tìom the County Assessor (Attachment I), the Planning Director (Attachment 2), and the standards for open space as published in the Manual of the State Land Evaluation Advisory Counsel (Attachment 3). RECOMMENDATION: The proposed ordinance would eliminate the special classification for open space for purposes of use value assessment and taxation. The effect would be that only open space land consisting of20 or more acres subject to a perntanent easement pursuant to the Open Space Land Act would continue to qua1i:iy for open space use value assessment The adoption of the proposed ordinance would preclude the necessity for consideration of those applications proposing to qualifY land for open space use value assessment for tax ye . M.~' ....., : : ,'~ct the current land use program as it applies to agricultural, horticultural or forestal lands. ' .. ..... , \ f' \ ¡ II "\ IS \!!! '" u -----,1\1: ~,\U~\-- 81995\';1\. ¡\1li\ JJN - \ "" \ I L "c~"'"", , n- ~upt:¡';¡\J"~~'i';;)' \90~RD <vI- ~ _~--"..- ..-- 'k,..~,,=-><=-- OPENSP.EXE 95.098 - 'c. . ~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Planning and Community Development Bruce W oodze1l, County Assessor FROM: Larry W. Davis, County Attorney /M June 7, 1995 DATE: RE: Open Space Land Use Attached is a draft Executive Summary for the above matter. Please review and provide any comments to me as soon as possible. If a meeting is desired to discuss tills material prior to it being submitted for the Board package, please let me know. Thank: you for your assistance. LWD:rcs Attachments 95-486.002 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE f]!~m ¡j.. ;;2. I, n(( JUN" !9951 Ihi 'II ¡ I ¡ ¡, .\~-h""'.T'~' ,. ¡¡ j I L~l~~U V=, ~ EXECUTIVE OFFICE , v --------- ATTACHMENT 1 _._-~ TO: Larry Davis, County Attorney Bruce Woodzell, County Assessor1J~ FROM: DATE: May 31, 1995 SUBJECT: Open Space Land Use / As a follow-up to our meeting on Wednesday, May 2~, 1995, the following parcels would be affected by the repeal of the open space standard as a qualifying uSe for land use assessment. Currently Under Land Use Parcel: 28-35 Location: Parcel is located on Rt 671, near Free Union and lies within the White Hall Magisterial District. Acreage: 78.603 ~ Unimproved (Please Note: This parcel contains 25.603 acres which are open and 53.0 acres which are forestry. The acreage would qualify for land use assessment without the open space standar~, as the open portion of the parcel is hayed and the remainder qualifies as forestry), Applied for Land Use - For 1995 Tax Year Parcel: 63-30F Location: Parcel is located on Rt 20 North, near Stony Point and lies within the Rivanna Magisterial District. Acreage: 21.539 - Improved Parcel (This parcel contains 21.539 acres of which 20.539 acres are open and currently being bushhogged and 1 acre is dedicated . to the house site. This parcel could not qualify for land use assessment without the open space standard) Parcel: 63-308 Location: Parcel is located on Rt 20 North, near Stony Point and lies within the Rivanna Magisterial District. Acreage: 22.717 - Unimproved (This parcel contains 22.717 acres which are open and currently being bushhogged and could not qualify for land use assessment without the open space standard). . · .,. Larry Davis May 31, 1995 Page 2 Parcel: ~5A-01-27 Location: Pðrcel located off State Route 7~3, approximately 4 1/2 miles from Charlottesville lies within the Jack Jouett Magisterial District. Acreage: ~2.~0 - Improved (This parcel èontðins ~2.~0 acres of which ~1.~ acre forestry and 1 acre is dedicated to the house site. Parcel is encumbered with easement to Virginia Outdoors Foundation and is currently seeking approval as an addition to Panorama Farm Agricultural Forestral District. Parcel is wooded and could qualify for land use without the open space standard. Due to open space easement parcel will be taxed in 1995 based on use value same as land use value). Parcel ~~-158 LOcation: Parcel located off Rt 676, approximately ~ 1/2 miles from Charlottesville and lies within the Jack Jouett Magisterial District. Acreage: ~Ü.OO~ - Improved (This parcel contains ~o.oo~ acres of which 6.295 acres are open and 31.709 acres are forestry with 2.0 acres being dedicated to the house site. Parcel is encumbered with easement to The Public Recreational Facilities Authority of Albemarle County. If open space standard is repealed the 6.295 acres would lose their land use status, however, due to open space easement parcel will be taxed in 1995 based on use value same as land use value). Pðrcel 60E2-1 Location: Rt 250 West, approximately 3 miles from Charlottesville and lies within the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. Acreage: 273.~72 - Improved (This parcel contains 273.~72 acres of which 230.0 acres are dedicated to a private golf course, 13.0 acres which are dedicated to the club house complex and the remaining 30.~72 acres of excess acreage. If land use application is approved for 1995 this parcel would not qualify for land use assessment if open space standard is repealed. · .... Larry Davis May 31, 1995 Page 3 Parcel 93A1-1 Location: Rt 250 East, approximately 5 miles f:rom Charlottesville and lies within the Rivanna Magisterial District. Acreage: 792.226 - Improved (This parcel contains 792.226 acres of which 155.0 acres are dedicated to a private golf course, 15.0 acres which are dedicated to the club house complex and the remaining 622.226 acres of excess acreage dedicated to various usage, i.e. future development, open space, equestrian center. If land use application is approved for 1995 this parcel would not qualify for land use assessment if open space standard is repealed. BW/cas . v ATTACHMENT Z COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dep!. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Larry Davis, County Attorney I ) Wayne Cilimberg, Director of Planning and Community Development UtfX-/ June 5, 1995 Update ofOctober3, 1990 Memo on Use ValueTaxation Two alternatives from the 1990 memo are discussed in this memo: Alternative A. Retain use value taxation for the open space category only, and Alternative B. Eliminate use value taxation for the open space category, but keep the other three categories of use value taxation (agriculture, forestry, and horticulture). ALTERNATIVE A. (Open space only) was recommended at the time by the Department of Planning and Community Development staff as being the most consistent-with the Comprehensive Plan. The j?eneral standards for open space use require: Consistency with the Land use plan; Minimum acreage (20 acres in Albemarle); and either 1) it be within an agricultural/forestal district, 2) it be subject to a recorded perpetual easement held by a public body; or 3) it be subject to a recorded commitment of between 4-10 years entered into by the landowner with the local governing body. The specific standards require either 1) park or recreation use, 2) conservation ofland or other natural resources, 3) floodways, 4) historic or scenic areas, or 5) assisting in the shaping of the character, direction and timing of community development, or for the public interest. Advantages: 1. Best alternative from a planning perspective: · The Plan endorses use value assessment in general as a means to preserve rura1 land ùses. · The Plan recognizes the benefit in preserving all rural properties, not just active farms. Development on adjacent properties can cause direct and indirect effects which are detrimental to the continuation of agricultural/forestal activities. · The Rural Area serves many purposes such as protection of watersheds, and the þreservation of natural, scenic, and historic resources and open space. · Preserving the Rural Area also results in less costly service delivery needs. · The Plan encourages the maintenance of open space in Growth Areas for historic/scenic resources, wetlands, etc. y 2. This alternative would require landowners to make a commitment, either through a 4-10 year agricultural/forestal district, a 4-10 year recorded commitment with the governing body, or through a perpetual easement, in order to qualifY for use value taxation. Such commitments would better protect the Rural Area and open space. 3. Interest was expressed recently by a citizens' group in utilizing the open space category as a mechanism to encourage privately owned biodiversity conservation districts to protect plant and animal populations. Dìsadvantages: 1. It had been thought that this alternative could result in a rash of new applications under the open space category. However, since the County raised the minimum acreage ITom 5 to 20 acres, that is less likely to occur. 2. This alternative would require all landowners to sign up for one of three options in order to continue to receive use value taxation. Many landowners could be opposed to making a 4-10 year commitment on their properties, which could result in a "backlash" effect of increased subdivision in the Rural Area. 3. This. alternative would create an administrative problem to either enroll current eligible properties into an aglforestal district or to develop individual contracts for Board approval. 4. This alternative could provide a disincentive for lartdowners to continue active farming. Note: When this alternative was previously discussed, it was thought that "Open space only" would provide the County with a certain amount of control over use value within Growth Areas, by eliminating use value in Growth Areas except where open space is designated by the County. The Board decided not to pursue this option due to the identified disincentives. ALTERNATIVE B. (Eliminate Open Space) was favored by the Director ofFinance because it most closely approximated ITom a fiscal standpoint the current use value situation. Although the County ordinance currently includes all four categories of use value, County residents have not used the open space category. It was thought that if the County maintained all four categories, the amount of use value deferrals could increase as the open space categQry is fully utilized. Advantages: 1. As the specific standards are written under the state law, the County has no discretion regarding which uses may qualifY for use value. Eliminating the open space category is a means to deny use value to uses which the County deems inappropriate. 2. The open space category is currently used by only a few landowners. Most land enrolled under open space could also qualifY UIlder one of the other categories. y Disadvantages: 1. This alternative is inconsistent with important Comprehensive Plan objectives which are identified in Alternative A. (Open space only) under Advantages, #1. Note: The only opportunity for use value taxation that would remain for properties that can only qualify through the open space category would be, for properties of 20 acres or more, through dedication of a perpetual conservation easement to Virginia Outdoors Foundation or to Albemarle County's Public Recreational Facilities Authority. Because properties of less than 20 acres could support Comprehensive Plan objectives through dedication to a perpetual conservation easement, if the open space use value category is eliminated, then the 20 acre minimum should be dropped ftom the County Code, and the state's 5 acre minimum would apply in lieu thereof. 2. Open space uses in Growth Areas or the Rural Area which are not under conservation easement, and which do not otherwise qualify as agricultural, forestal, or horticultural uses, will no longer be eligible for use value taxation. 3. The local and statewide agricultural/forestal districts will lose importance as a method to obtain the open space category of use value. Status of Other Actions Related to Use Value Since 1990: 1. The County has unsuccessfully attempted to obtain enabling legislation to exclude use value taxation ftöm Comprehensive Plan Growth Areas. It did receive legislation to exclude use value taxation ftom certain zoning districts: commercial, industrial, and planned development, but that applies only to land zoned prior to January, 1981. 2. The County adopted local agricultural/forestal districts which may be approved in Growth Areas, regardless of zoning, for bona-fideagricultural/forestal uses or open space areas mapped in the Open Space Plan. Therefore, use value taxation remains available in Growth Areas: on land not restricted by the above zoning, through a local aglfor district, or through the open space category. 'V ~5- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Robert Tucker, Jr., Deputy county Executive Wayne cilimberg, Director of Planning ~nd \,f}JG community Development ' October 3, 1990 Use Value Taxation Use value taxation is endorsed in the Comprehen~ive Plan as a method to help relieve pressures that might cause rural land conver~ion and to encourage preservation of land for agriculture, forestry, horticulture and open space. A major concern is whether the program is successful in preserving agricultural land use. Over the past several months, a committee has met to discuss alternatives to the current use value taxation system in an effort to address the following concerns: 1. The inconsistency of the uSe value program with the Comprehensive Plan because it allows use value taxation on properties in Growth Areas; and 2. The 1988 amendments to the use value state law which create the potential for many additional properties to qualify for use value taxation under the open space category. The committee targeted the following two alternatives for detailed discussion: . Alternative A. Retain use value taxation for only the 'open space category (use value taxation for agricultural, forestal and horticultural uses could continue onlvon properties enrolled in agricultural/forestal districts); or · \,.~ t. , Ir 1'-1 ~ I .. Robert W. Tucker, Jr Page 2 October 3, 1.990 Alternative B. Retain use value taxation for only the agricultural, forestal and horticultural categories - eliminate use value taxation for open space uses. Alternative A. (open space only) was recommended by the Department of Planning and Community Development staff as being the most consistent with the comprehensive Plan. The 1988 amendments. to the state enabling legislation for use value taxation extend the definition of "rea], estate devoted to open space use" to include real estate "for t!le public interest and consistent with t!le local land use plan..." In addition, t!le requirement was added t!lat suc!l real estate must be eit!ler: , ." \ , 1.. wit!lin an agricultural/forestal district; 2. Subject to a recorded easement !leld by a public body; or 3. subject to a recorded commitment of between 4-10 years entered into by the landowner wit!l t!le local governing body. The net effect of a use value taxation program for "open space only" would be to tie t!le program more closely to t!le County land use plan. It would encourage the preservation of all rural properties and would eliminate use value in Growth Areas except where open space is designated by the County. The committee had two major concerns with Alternative A: 1. It would require all interested property owners to sign up for one of the three options in order to continue to receive use value taxation. Many landowners would probably be opposed to making a 4-1.0 year commitment on their properties, w!lich could result in a "backlash"·effect of increased subdivisicn in the Rural Areas. property owners in Growt!l Areas would no longer qualify for use value, unless t!leir property was designated as open space in t!le Compre!lensive Plan. 2. It could result ina rash of new applications .for use value taxation under the open space category. Theoretically, all Rural Areas properties of five (5) acres of greater could easily qualify through enrollment in an agricultural/forestal district. (/ ... Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Page 3 October 3, 1990 Alternative B. (eliminate open space) was favored by the Director of Finance because it most closely approximated from a fiscal standpoint the current use value situation. Although the county ordinance currently includes all four categories of use value, county residents have not used the open space category, as amended in 1988. If the County maintains the statùs quo of all four categories, then the amount of use value tax deferrals could increase' as the open space category is fully utilized. < The Planning staff's major concern with Alternative B. was that it is contrary to Comprehensive Plan objectives: 1. The Plan endorses use value assessment in general as a means to preserve rural land uses. 2. The plan recognizes the benefit in preserving all rural properties, not just active. farms. Development on adjacent properties can cause direct and indirect effects which are detrimental to the continuation of agricultural/forestal activities. In addition, the Rural Areas serve many purposes such as protection of watersheds, and the preservation of natural, scenic, and historic r;esources and open space. Preserving the Rural Areas alsö results in less costly service delivery needs. 3. The Plan encourages development in the Growth Areas, while Alternative B. would continue to permit use value taxation on undeveloped Growth Area properties. 4. The Plan encourages the .maintenance of open space in the Growth Areas for historic/scenic resources, wetlands, etc., which may not be eligible for use value taxation if the open space category is eliminated. .. Robert W. Tucker, Jr Page 4 October 3, 1990 After much discussion, the committee agreed upon the fbllowing compromise which would be recommended to the Board of supervisors: L The County should maintain all four categories of use value taxation, but should raise the minimum acreage requirement of the open space category from 5 to 20 acres in the Rural Areas. (;) \,Ì\\V :;if \vJ\} , .¡iI'} \V,{'"4Þ --,"'¡' 2. . IV /t Q.(Ý' "\),.~I.0 ., V \.LW' U This compromise will allow maximum opportunity for preserving the Rural Areas in a way that is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and the current zoning of the Rural Areas. (Raising the minimu~ open space acreage requirement above 20 acres would be inconsistent with the cùrrent 21 acre minimum parcel size which was originally intended to accommodate a dwelling on one acre, with 20 acres remaining to satisfy the use value requirement.) . The County should seek legislation to allow for the elimination of use value taxation in areas of the County designated for growth in the Comprehensive Plan. < MJs/vwc/jcw cc: Melvin Breeden Bruce Woodzell Roxanne White Mary Joy Scala (for file) \ §2. CONSERVATION OF lAND RESOURCES, MANAGEMENT AND PRODUCIlON, AND CERTlRCATlON. A To qualify for forest use, the owner shall certify that the real estate is being usedína planned program of timber managemem·and soil conservation practices which are imended to: 1. Enhance the gro-wth of commerciallydesîrable species through generally accepted si!viculturalpractìces. 2. Reduce or prevent soil erosÍon by Best Management Practices such as logging road layout and stabilization, streamside managememzones, water diversion prac- tices and other Best Management Practices which prevent soil erosÍon and improve water quality. B. Certificarioll of intent by the owner can be shown by: 1. A signed commitmemto maintain and prorectforest- land by documenting land-use objectives to include methods of resource management and soil and water protection or, 2. Submitting a plan prepared by a professional forester. §3. OPINIONS. Section 58.1-3240 of the Code of Virginia authorizes a local assessing officer mrequest an opinion frdmthe State Forester determining whether a particular property meets the crÎteria for forest use. The· request should be in writing describing the situation in question. Maps, photos or Other pertinem informa- tion should accompany the request TheStateForesrer may hold a hearing or arrange for an onsite inspection by a Department official, the applicant and the local assessing officer. The State Forester will is>ue his opinion as quickly as po>sib!e after aU necessary infOlmation has been received. An appeal of any opinion that does not comply with these standards may be taken as provided by§58.1-3240 ofthe Code of Virginia. Effective date: January I, 1989 James W Gamer State Forester Department of Forestry " ATTACHMENT 3 '-------'--~.._._-_._-,_.- STANDARDS FOR ClASSIFICATION OF REAL ESTATE AS DEVOTED TO OPEN-SPACE USE UNDER THE VIRGINIA lAND USE ASSESSMENT lAW. Under [he authority of §581- 3229 et seq. of the Code of Virginia. the Director ofthc Dcpartmeilt of Conservation ¡md Historic Resources adopts these Standards for Classification of Real Esrate As Devoted to Open-Space Use Under the Viroinia ö Land Use Assessmenr·ww!O: L Encourage the proper use of real estate in order to assure a readily available source ofagriculrural, horticultural and forest products, and of open space within reach of concentrations of population. 2. Conserve nau.lm! resourcCS in forms that wi!! prevent erosion_ 3. Protect adequate and safe \vater supplies. 4. Preserve scenic natural beauties Jnd open spaces. 5. Promote proper land use planning and the orderly development of real estate forthe accommodation of an expanding population. 6. Promote a balanced economy and ease pressures. whí-ch force rhe conversion of real estate to more intensive uses. According to the specific authority and responsibility conveyed by§§58.l- 3230 and 58.1-3240 of the Code of Virginia. the Director of the Departmem of Conservation and Historic Resources is directed to provide a statement of the standards which shaUbe applied uniformly throughout the Common- wealth to determine if real estate is devoted to open-:space uses After holdifl:g public hearings. the statement shall be sent to the Commissioner of the Revenue and ;J, duly appoimedassessor of each !ocaJityadopting an ordinance ¡n compliance v,rith Article 4 of Chapter 32 ofT¡t!e 58.1. of the Code of Virginia. §L GENERAL STANDARDS. To qualify as an open-space use, real estate must meet the requirements of both this section and the specific swndards conrain-edin Section 2 of these regulations. The genera! standards are as foHovvs A. Consistency with land use plan. L The open-space use of [he property rnust be consistent with the land use plan of the coumy, city, or toV.'11 which has been made and adopted officíally in accordance with Article 4. Chapter ¡ I. Title 15 ¡ of the Code of Virginia. 2. Aland use consistent with tbe land use plan means a use that is consistent with areas or land use zones depicted on a map tharis pan of the land use plan.or that directlysupporrsor its generaHy consistent with stated land uses, natural resources conservation or historic preservation objectives, goals or standards of the land use pbn. 14 , 3. A property that is subject to a recorded perpetual conservation, historic oropen-spaceeasememheld by any public body, or is part of an agricultural, a forestal or. an agricultural and.· forestal district approved by local government, shall be considered to be consistent with the land use plan. B. Minimum acreage, L Except as provided in subdivision B 2 of this section, real estate devoted to open-space use shall consist of a minimum of five acres. 2. If the governing body of any COUnty, city or town has so prescribed by ordinance, real estate devoted .to open space shall consist9f a minimum of two acres when the real estate is: 3. Adjacent to a scenic river, a scenic highv..ray,a Virginia byWay or public property listed in the approved ·State Comprehensive Outdoor Recrea- tion Plan, also known as the Virginia Outdoors Plan (the Virginia Outdoors Plan can be obtained from the Depart"mem of Conservation and Historic Resources at 203 Governor Street, Suite 302, Richmond,Virginia 23219); or b. Located in a county, city or [Own haviDg a. density of population greater than 5,000 per square mile. C. Other Requirements. Real·estare devoted to open-space use si~atl be: L Withinan agriculturaL a forestal or an agricultural and forestal district entered into pursuant to Chapter 36 of Title IS. 1 of the Code of Virginia: 2 Subject to a recorded perpetual easement that is held by a publíc body and that promotes the open-space use classification as defined in §58.1-3230 of the Code of Virginia; or 3. Subject toa recorded commitment emereclinro by the landowner With the governing body 'in accordance with Section 3 of these regulations. D. Opinions. In determining whether a property meets the genera! and specific. standards for open-space usc;lhe local assessing officer may request an opinion from the Director of the Department of ConservatÌon and Historic Resources under the provisions of Section 4 arthese regulations. §2. Specific Standards TIre specific standards·· fordetermioing whether real estate will qualify for special assessment based on open-space use are as foHows. Thererm "land" includes water, submerged land, wedands~ marshes, and similar properties. A Park Or recreation use~lands.that are provided or preserved for:: 1. Any public; semi-public or privately-owncd parl·c. playground or similar recreational area. for public {1r community use, except any use operated with intl.'HI for profit. Examples: ' -Parks, play areas, athletic fields; botanical garJen_...; fishing or skating ponds. -Golf clubs, country dubs, svvìmming dubs; lx'ach clubs, yacht clubs, scout camps. -fairgrounds. 2. Golf courses operated for profit as a public service and having the park-like characteristics normally asso- ciated with a country dub. 3. Buildings shall not cover more than lO% of the s:ire_ 4. Commercial recreational or amusement places, such as driving ranges, miniature golf courses, pony rides, trap shoots, marinas, motor speedways, drag strips, amusement parks and the like, shaU not qualify. B. Conservation· of land or other natural resources- Lands that are provided Or preserved for forest p,eserves, bird or wildlife sanctuaries, watershed preserves, nature preserves,arborerums, marshes, swamps and similar natural areas. C Floodways-Lands that are provided or preserved for 1. The passage ,or containment of waters, înduding the floodplains or valleys and side slopes of streams that are or may be subject to periodic Or occasional overflow, such as floodplains identified by engineer- ing surveys by the U.s. Corps of Engineers or others, or by soil surveys or topographic maps. Roodways also include adjacent lands that should be reserved as additional channels for future floods'due to increased runoffs. 2. Coastal lowlands. such as bays, estuaries or ocean shores, subject to inundation by Storms or high tides. 3. Tidal and Non-tidal wetlands, such as swamps, bogs and marshes. D. Historic or Scenic Areas-lands thár are provided or preserved for historic or scenic purposes are: L On the Virginia landmarks Register or the National Register of Historic Places or contributing properties in an historic distriCt Hstedin the Virginia Landmarks Register or the National Register of Historic P1a(('~. Information concerning properties on these Register"" can be obtained from the Department ofConscrvalÜln and Historic Resources. 2. Properties protected by scenic or open-space easements. 15 3. Places designated or recommended at "Scenic" by the Department of Conservation and Historic Resources, the Department of Transportation, the General A.<.;setn- bly or other State agency subject in each C35.e to a specific area description provided by the desigr'tJting agency. ;~¡ t , E. Assisting in the shaping of the character, direction and timing of community development, or for the public Înterest-Lands that are officially planned or approved by the local govemingbody to be left in a relatively natural and undeveloped state and that are provided or preserved fonhe purpose of shaping the locality into neighborhoods and communities, identifying their boundaries, insulat- ing incompatible uses from one another,directing growth, controlling the rate or timing of growth or otherwise serving the publicimerest as detennined by the local governing body Examples: -Greenbelts, parkways and trailways, -Stream valleys, -Forests and farmlands, -Hilltops or hillsides, -Mountaintops and mountainsides, -Scenic vistas. §3, STANDARDS fOR WRITTEN COMMITMENTS BY lANDOWNERS TO PRESERVE OPEN-SPACE lAND USE The written commitment entered into by landowners for the locaIgoverning body to preserve open-space land use, pursuam to subdivision 3 of §58.1-3233 of the Code of Virginia, shall conform substantially to the following form of ,agreement: OPEN-SPACE USE AGREEMENT This Agreement, made this _ day of 19_ between hereafter called the Owner, and ,he ¡County, City or Town¡ of apolitical subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, hereinafter called the ¡COUnty, City or Town¡, recites and provides as follows: RECITAlS 1. The Owner isrhe owner of cerrain real estate, described below, hereinafter caHed the Property; and 2. The ¡County, City or Townl is the local governing body having rea.l estate tax jurisdiction over the Property: and 3. The ¡County, Cuy or Town¡ has determined: A That it is in the public Îmerest that the Properryshould be provided or preserved for ¡insert one or more of the following uses: park or recreational purposes: conser- vation of land; conservation of (Insert description of other natural resource): an historic area~ a scenic area~ assisting in theshaping of the character, direction and timing of community deveJop¡nent; or other use which serves the public imerest by the preservation of open-'space land as provided !n the land-use plan_I: and B. That the Property meets the applicable criteria for real estate devoted to open-space use a5 prescribed in Article 4 (§581,3229 et seq) of Chap,er 32 ofTirle 16 58.! of the Code of Virginia, ,and the standards for classifying su.ch real estate prescribed by the Director of the Virginia Department of Conservation and Historic Resources: and C That the provisions of this agreemem meet the requirements and standards prescribed under §58.1- 3233 of the Code of Virginia for recorded commit- ments by landowners notm change an open-space use to a nonqualifying use; and 4. The Owner is willing to make a written recorded commit- ment topreserve and protect the open-space uses of the Properryduring therermohhis agreement in order forthe Propeny robe taxed on the basis of a use assessment and the Ownerhas submitted an applic:ationfor such taxation to the assessing officer of the {County, City or Town) pursuant to §58.1-3234 of the Code of Virginia and {citation of local ordinance]; and 5. The ¡County, City or Townl is willing to extend the tax for the Properryon the basis of ause assessment commencing with the next succeeding tax year and continuing for the term of this agreement, in consideration of the Owner's commitment to preserve and protect the open-space uses of the property, and on the condition that the Owner's application is satisfactory and that aU other requirements of Article 4, Chapter 32, Title 58.1 of the Code of Virginia and [citation of local ordinance] are complied with: NOW THEREfORE, in consideration of the recitals and the mutual benefits, covenants' and, terms herein contained the parties hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1. This agreement shall apply to all of the [gllowing des, cribed real estate; {Insert property description] 2 The Q\VTler agrees that during the term of this agreement: A There shall be no change in the use Or uses of the Property that exist as of the date of this agreement to any use that would not quaJify as an open-space use. B. There shall be no display of billboards, signs or orher advertisements on the property, except to (1) state solely the name of the O\.vner and the address of the Property; (ii) advertise the sale or lease of the Property, (iii) advertise: the sale of goods or services produced pursuant to the permiued use of the Property; or (iv) provide warnings. No sign shall exceed four feet by four feeL C There shall be no construction, placement or mainte- nance of any structure on the Property unless such structure is either: (I) on the Property as of the date of this agreement: or (1) related to and compatible with the open-space uses of the Propeny which this agreement is ÎT1tended to protect or provide for. D. There shall be no accumulations of trash, garbage, ashes, waste, junk, abandoned property or other unsightly or offensive materia! on the Propeny, , E. There shall be no filling, excavating, mining, drilling, removal of topsoil, sand, gravel, rock, minerals or other materials which "Iters the topography of the Property, except ás required in the construction of permissible buîlding, structures and features under this agreement F. There shall be no construction or placement of fences, screens, hedges, walls or other similar barriers which materially obstruct the public's view of scenic areas of the Property. G; There shaH be no. removal or destruction of trees, shrubs, plants and other vegetation, except that the Owner may: (1) engage in agricultural, horticultural or silvicul- rural activities, provided that there shall be no cutting of -trees, other than selective cutting and salvage of dead or dying trees, within 100 feet of a scenic river, a scenic highway, a Virginia Byway or public property listed in the approved State Comprehensive Outdoor Recreation Plan (Virginia OutdoOIS.Plan); and (2) remove vegetarian which constitutes a safety, a health Dr an ecological hazard. *H. There shall be no alteration or manipular:ion of natural water courses, shores., marshes, swamps, wetlands or other water bodies, nor any activities or uses which adversely affect water quality, level or flow. *1. On areas of the Property that are being provided or preserved for conservation of land, flood ways or other natural resources, or that are to be left ín a relatively natural or undevelòped state, there shall be no operation of dune buggies, all-terr<3.in vehicles, motorcycks, motorbikes, snowmobîles or other motor vehicles, except rothe extent necessary to inspect, protect or preserve the area. J There shall be no industrial or commercial activities conducted on the Property, except for the continua~ tion of agricultural, honicuhural or silvicultural acrivities; or activities that are conducted in a resi- dence or an associated outbuilding such as a garage, smokehouse, small shop or similar structure which is permitted on the property K There shall be no separation or split-off of lots, pieces or parcels from the Property. The Property may be sold or transferred during the term of this agreement ,only as the same entire parcel that is the subject of this agreemem; provided, however, that the Owner may grant to a public body or bodies ,open-space, conserva- tion or historic preservation easements which apply ro all or part of the Property. 3. This agreement shall be effective upon acceptance by the ¡County, Gty or Town]; provided, however, that the real estate tax for the Property shaH not be extended on the basis of its use value until the next succeeding tax year following timely application by the Owner for use assess- ment and taxation in accordance 'With {citation of applica- ble: local·ordinanceJ. Thereafter, this agreement shall remain in effect for a term of [InserT a period of not less than 4 nOT more than 101 consecutive years. 4. Nóthirig contained here in shall be construed as giving to the public a right to enter upon or to use the Property or any portion thereof, except as·the Owner may otherwise allow, consistent with the provisions of thisagreemem. 5. The [County, City or Town] shall have the right at all reasonable times to enter the Property to determine whether the Owner is complying with the provisions of this agreement. 6. Nothíng in this agreement shaH be construed to çreate in the public or any member thereof a right to·maimain a suit för any damages againstthe Owner for any violation of this agreement. 7. Nothing in the agreement shall be construed to permit the ()v.mer to conduct any activity or to build or maintain any improvement which is otherwise prohibited by law. 8. If any provision of this agreement is determined to be invalid by:a court of competent jurisdiction, the æmainder of the agreement shan not be affected thereby. 9. The provisions of this agreement shall run with the land and be binding upon the parties; their successors, assigns, personal representatives, and heirs. 10. Words of one gender used herein shall include the other gender, and words in the singular shall include words in the plural, whenever the sense requires. 1 L This :agreement m:ay be cerminated in the manner pro- vided in §I5.1-l513 of the Code of Virginia for withdrawal of land from an agricultural, a foresta.l or an agricultural and forestal district. 12. Upon termination of this agreement, the Property shall thereafter be assessed and taxed at its fair market value, regardless of its actual use, unless the ¡County, City or Town} determines otherwise in accordance with applica- ble law. 13. Upon execution orchis agreement, it shall be recorded with the record of land titles in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Virginia, at the Owner's expense. 14. NOTICE: WHEN THE OPEN-SPACE USE OR USES BY WHICH THE PROPERTY QUALIFIED FOR ASSËSS- MENT AND TAXATION ON THE BASIS OF USE CHANGES TO A NONQUALIfYING USE OR USES, OR WHEN THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY CHANGES TO A MORE INTENSIVE VSE AT THE REQUEST OF THE OWNER, THE PROPERTY, OR SUCH PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WHICH NO LONGER QUALIFIES, SHAU BE SUBJECT TO ROLL-BACK TAXES IN ACCOR- DANCE WITH §58.I-3237 OF THE CODE OF ViRGINIA THE OWNER SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ALL OF THE OBLIGATIONS AND LIABILITIES OF SAID CODE SECTION. 17 ., . , > *Paragraphs H and I must be included in agreements for properties which are to be provided or prese1Ved· for natural areas left in undeveloped stares, including floodways. These paragraphs are unnecessal)' for agreements for other types of land uses, such as for a park or a farm use. (SEAL) Owner [Name of City, Coumy, Town] by (Açknowledgmems) §4. OPINIONS Incases of uncertainty, the local.3ssessingofficer may request an opinion from the Director of the Department of Conservation and Historic Resources as to whether a particular property meets the cri.teria for open-space classification. The procedure for obtaihing such an opinion is as follows: A The local assessing officer shan address a letter to the Director, Department of Conservation and Historic Resources, 203 Governor St., Suite 302, Richmond, VA 23219, describing the particular use and situation and requesting an opinion as to whether ornot it qualifies as an open space for the purpose of use value taxation. Such letter should be accompanied by exhibits such as land use maps,· subdivision plat5,open~space deeds or easements, applicable agricultural; forestal, hisroric district or other ordinances, if any, topogt2phiC maps, and photographs, sufficient to explain the situation adequately, The director may request additional· information ·if needed. B. The director may hold a hearing at which the applicant and others may present additional information. C The director will issue an opinion as quickly as possibly after all necessary information has been received and any hearing çomp!eted. An appeal from any opinion which does not comport with the standards set forth herein may be taken as provided by §58.1-3240 of the Code of Virginia. Certìficatìon [heæby approve the final adoption ofthe.amended Standards for the ClassificaÜon of Real Estate as Devoted to Open Space Use under the Land Use Assessment Law as presented. I further certify the above standards as atme and correct çopy. Effective date: January 5, 1989 Signatuæ -- Name Tide Agency Name B. C Leynes,]r. Director Department of Conservation and Historic Resources November 16, 1988 Dare STANDARDS FOR Cl.ASSIRCATlON OF REAL ESTATE AS DEVOTED TO AGRICULTURAL USE AND TO H01l.TICULWRAL USE UNDER THE VIRGINIA LAND USE ASSESSMENT LAW Under the authority of Article 4, Chapter 32, of Title 58.!, Section 58.1- 3229, of the Code of Virginia. the Commissioner of Agriculture and Consumer Services adopts these Standards for Classification of Real Estate As Devoted to Agricultural Use and to Horticultural Use Under the Virginia Land Use Assessment Law to: A. Encourage the proper use of real estate in order to assure a readily available source of agrìcultural;horticultural,al1d forest products, and of open space within reach of concentrations of population. B. Conserve natural resources in forms that will prevent erosion. C. Protect adequate and safe water supplies. D. PreseIVe scenic natural beauties and open spaces. E. Promote proper land-use planning and the orderly developme.nt of real estate for the accommodation of an expanding population. F. Promote a balanced economy and ease pressures which force the conversion ofreaT estate to more intensive uses. _ ~. According to the specific authority and responsibility conveyed by Sections 58.1-3230 (a) and (b), 53.1-3233 and 58.1- 3240, the Commissioner of Agriculture andConsumet Services is directed to provide a statement of the standards which shall be applied uniformly throughout the stare to determine if real estate is devoted to agricultural or horticultural uses. After holding public hearings, the statement shall be sem to the Commi55ion~r of the Revenue and a duly appointed assessorof each locality adopting an ordinance in çompliance with this article. The area must be a minimum of five acres and must meet all the following standards to qualify for agricu[tut2[ or for horticultural use. §L Previqus and Current Use, and Exception. A. Previous Use. The real estate sought to be qualified must have been devoted, for at least five consecutive years previous, to the production for sale of plants or animals, or to the produc- tíon for saJe of plant or animal products useful to maR, or devoted to another qualifying use including, but not limitedm: L Aquaculture 2. Forage crops 3. Commercial sod and seed 4. Grains and feed crops 5. Tobacco, cotton, and peanuts 6. Dairy animals and dairy products 18 ~ , DltAFÏ DRAFT: May 15, 1995 ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAlN CHAPTER 8, FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE VIII, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR AGRICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL, FOREST OR OPEN SPACE REAL ESTATE, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Article VIII, Special Assessments for Agricultural, Horticultural, Forest or Open Space Real Estate, sections 8-31, Definitions; and 8-3 6, Valuation of real estate, as follows: ARTICLE VII, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR AGRICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL OR FOREST OR OPBN SPÁ^£E REAL ESTATE Sec. 8-31. DefirÜtions. gl For the purposes of use value assessment and taxation this article, the following special classifications of real estate are established and defined: Real estate devoted to agricultural use. Real estate when devoted to the bona fide production for sale of plants and animals useful to man under uniform standards ~ DRAFT prescribed by the commissioner of agriculture and consumer services or when devoted to and meeting the requirements and qualifications for payments or compensation pursuant to a soil conservation program tmder an agreement with an agency of the federal government. Real estate devoted to forest use. Land, including the standing timber and trees thereon, devoted to tree growth in such quantity and so spaced and maintained as to constitute a forest area tmder standards prescribed by the state department of forestry , pursuant to the authority set out in Section 58.1-3240 of the Code of Virgirûa. Real estate devoted tiJ horticultural use. Real estate devoted to the bona fide production for sale of fruits of all kinds, including grapes, nuts and berries, vegetables, and nursery and floral products tmder uniform standards prescribed by the state ommissioner of agriculture and consumer services; or real estate devoted to and eeting the requirements and qualifications for payments or other compensation ursuant to a soil conservation program tmder an agreement with an agency of the ederal government. RO%I.! 8state MÞYJtðd te open sJ%ICf! use. Real estate when so used as to be pro';idcd " 2 ? DRAFT prescribed by the dcparJlleI).t of conservation BIld historic resources pursuBIlt to the authority set out in section 58.1 3210, Code of Virginia, BIld ttjs article. hl Real estate devoted to open-space use. as defined in Section 58.1-3230 of the Code of Virginia. is not established as a sJ?ecial classification of real estate for use value and assessment taxation except as provided in Section 10.1-10 II of the Code of Virginia. Sec. 8-36. Valuation of real estate. (a) In val1.Úng real estate for purposes of taxation under this article. or for J?u1:poses of open sJ?ace pursuant to Section 10.1-10 II of the Code of Virginia, the director of finance or the duly appointed assessing officer shall consider only those indicia of value which such real estate has for agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, and real estate taxes for jurisdiction shall be extended, upon the value so determined. In addition to use of his personal knowledge, judgement and experience as to the value of real estate in agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, he shall, in arriving at the value of such land, consider available evidence of agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space capability, and the recommendations of value of such real estate as made by the state land evaluation advisory committee. In such determination, the local assessing officer or the director of finance, in addition to the standards supplied by the state land evaluation advisory committee, and the uniform standards f?r forest areas prescribed by the director of the depart- 3 , . I t DBAFr ment of conservation and historic resources, ætâ the commissioner of agriculture and . consumer services, and the uniform star,dards prcscribed by the state forester, may request an opinion of the director of the department of conservation and historic resources as to land which qualifies for open space ferest use or an opinion from the state forester as to land which qualifies for ft5 forest open space use. (b) In determining the total area of real estate actively devoted to agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, there shall be included the area of all real estate under bams, sheds, silos, cribs, greenhouses, public recreation facilities and like structures, lal<:es, dams, ponds, streams, irrigation ditches and like facilities; but real estate under, and such additional real estate as may be actually used in connection with, the farm house or home or any other structure not related to such special use shall be excluded in determining such total area. (c) All structures which are located on real estate in agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use and the farm house and home or any other structure not related to such special use and the real estate on which the farm house or home or such other structure is located, together with the additional real estate used in connection therewith, shall be valued, assessed and taxed by the same standards, methods and procedures as other taxable structures and other real estate in the locality. 4 t ,1 Þ, , -, Ì)~ (d) In addition, such real estate in agricultural, horticultural, or forest OT open ~ use shall be evaluated on the basis of fair market value as applied to other real estate in the taxing jurisdiction, and land book records shall be maintained to show both the use value and the fair market value of such real estate. 8·31.WPD . 5 fÞ., ,--\ Aff2.WPD . Page 1 Distributed to Bijai~ Agenda Item No.-----1..-I1 Qt.Ø5ð1¡A/1 ORDINANCE NO. DRAFT: May 15.1995 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 8, FINANCE AND TAXATION, ARTICLE VIII, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR AGRICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL, FOREST OR OPEN SPACE REAL ESTATE, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 8, Finance and Taxation, is hereby amended and reordained by anlending Article VIII, Special Assessments for Agricultural, Horticultural, Forest or Open Space Real Estate, sec:tions 8-31, Definitions; and 8-36, Valuation of real estate, as follows: ARTICLE VII, SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS FOR AGRICULTURAL, HORTICULTURAL OR FOREST OR OPEN SP.:'£E REAL ESTATE Sec:. 8-31. Definitions. ill For the purposes of use value assessment and taxation this article, the following special classifications of real estate are established and defined: Real estate devoted to agricultural use. Real estate when devoted to the bona fide production for sale of plants and animals useful to man under uniform standards prescribed by the commissioner of agriculture and consumer services or when devoted to and meeting the requirements and qualifications for payments or compensation pursuant to a soil conservation program under an agreement with an agency of the federal government. Real estate devoted to forest use. Land, including the standing timber and trees thereon, devoted to tree growth in such quantity and so spaced and maintained as to constitute a forest area under standards prescribed by the state department of forestry pursuant to the authority set out in Section 58.1-3240 of the Code of Virginia. Real estate devoted to horticultural use. Real estate devoted to the bona fide production for sale of fruits of all kinds, including grapes, nuts and berries, vegetables, and nursery and floral products ¿ ._~ A TT2.WPD Page 2 under uniform standards prescribed by the state commissioner of agriculture and consumer services; or real estate devoted to and meeting the requirements and qualifications for payments or other compensation pursuant to a soil conservation program under an agreement with an agency of the federal government. RNlI est¡;¡te ;i1J!8tM Ii8 open SptlfC use. Real estate'."."hen so u3ed as to be provided or presffved f.or park or recreatieFl:al purposes, eCH'lservation ef land or other ml:tural resources, floodways, historie or seenie purposes, or assisting in the shaping of the eharaeter, direction and timing of community development, 1:1Rder uniform. st¡mdards prescribed by the department of CORsen,'ation and historic reSOffi'ees pffi'suant to the authority set out in section 58.13210, Code efVirginia, and this articlc. Ql Real estate devoted to open-space use. as defined in Section 58.1-3230 of the Code of Virginia, is not established as a sjJecial classification of real estate for use value and assessment taxation except as provided in Section 10.1-10 11 of the Code of Virginia. Sec. 8-36. Valuation of real estate. (a) In valuing real estate for purposes of taxation under this article, or for purposes of open space pursuant to Section I 0.1-1 0 11 of the Code of Virginia, the director of finance or the duly appointed assessing officer shall consider only those indicia of value which such real estate has for agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, and real estate taxes for jurisdiction shall be extended, upon the value so determined. In addition to use of his personal knowledge, judgement and c.,'q>erience as to the value of real estate in agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, he shall, in arriving at the value of such land, consider available evidence of agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space capability, and the recommendations of value of such real estate as made by the state land evaluation advisory committee. In such determination, the local assessing officer or the director of finance, in addition to the standaIds supplied by the state land evaluation advisory committee, and the uniform standards for forest areas prescribed by the director of the department of conservation and historic resources. attd the commissioner of agriculture and consumer services, and the uniform standards prescribed by the state forester, may request an opinion of the director of the department of conservation and historic resources as to land which qualifies for open space fere;Æ use or an opinion from the state forester as to land .J A TT2.WPD ~ Page 3 which qualifies for as forest open space use. (b) In detennining the total area of real estate actively devoted to agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use, there shall be included the area of all real estate under barns, sheds, silos, cribs, greenhouses, public recreation facilities and like structures, lakes, dams, ponds, streams, irrigation ditches and like facilities; but real estate under, and such additional real estate as may be actually used in connection with, the farm house or home or any other structure not related to such special use shall be excluded in determining such total area. (c) All structures which are located on real estate in agricultural, horticultural, forest or open space use and the farm house and home or any other structure not related to such special use and the real estate on which the farm house or home or such other structure is located, together with the additional real estate used in connection therewith, shall be valued, assessed and taxed by the same standards, methods and procedures as other taxable structures and other real estate in the locality. (d) In addition, such real estate in agricultural, horticultural, or forest Of open space use shall be evaluated on the basis of fair market value as applied to other real estate in the taxing jurisdiction, and land book records shall be maintained to show both the use value and the fair market value of such real estate. 8-3I.WPD ~þ, '!to_-'I ... ., t' '-\ . . feœ¡tJed J"w-¿ t1!r YiO(~ PIEDMONT ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL Protecting The Environment Is Everybody's Business June 13, 1995 The Hon. Sally Thomas Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902c4596 Re: Elimination of the Open Space L¡¡nd Use Tax category Dear Sally: You have before you a proposal to eliminate the "Open Space" category of the local "land use tax" program. I understand that the reason for consideration of this action is to prevent several local golf coUrses from becoming eligible for reduced real estate assessment under the County's "land use tax" program. I do not believe that it is necessary for the County to eliminate the Open Space category in order to successfully prevent local golf courses from qualifYing for reduced assessments under the land use tax program. There are three separate requirements all of which a golf course must meet in order to qualify for reduced assessment under the Open Space category. 1) the actual use of the l¡¡nd as a golf course must fit the definition of open space use contained in the Code of Virginia (Code) ¡¡nd the Manual of the State LandEvaluation Advisory Council (Manual); 2) that use must be consistent with the locall¡¡nd use plan; ¡¡nd 3) the land must be determined to be within an agricultural/forestal district, or under permanent conservation easement held by a public body, or subject to a written commitment with the locality that it will not be put to uses inconsistent with its open space use. Even if the golf courSes meet the first two of these requirements (and I believe that the County has sound arguments that they do not meet these requirements), they clearly do not meet the third requirement. Furthernwre, and most importantly, I believe that the County (fan control whether or not the golf courses can comply withthe third requirement. The County controls the creation of agricultural/forestal districts; the County can signific¡¡ntly influence whether these golf courses can be placed under permanent conservation easements held by a public body; ¡¡nd the County has the discretion to refuse to enter into a written commitment with the golf courses that they will remain in open space use. 45 Homer Street, Box 460, Wárrenton, Virginia 22186/703-347-2334/Fax 349-9003 1010 Harrís Street, Suíte 1, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901/804-977-2033 ~ . , , . ~ The Hon. Sally Thomas June 13, 1995 Page 2 . I understand that there has been a focus upon the possibility that the golf&urses will seek to qualify through the means of the written commitment. I believe that the County's discretion to refuse to enter into such a commitment with the golf courses exists even if the golf courses can successfully demonstrate that they fit the definition of open space use and that they are consistent with the local land use plan. I recognize that there are different opinions pertaining to these questions. However, I think that the County has a strong case to deny reduced assessment to thes.e golf courses without eliminating the Open Space category. Because this category may serve an increasingly important public purpose in the future the County should continue to authorize it. Ifthe County is met with a legal challenge it has a strong chance of prevailing. If it does not prevail, I believe that the cost to County taxpayers will be relatively small and that at that point elimination of the Open Space category can be considered to minimize revenue losses. My reasoning that the County can preserve the Open Space category and prevent local golf courses from qualifYing for reduced assessment under that category is the following: There are two independent requirements for qualifying for a.reduced assessment under the Open Space category. First, real estate must be devoted to open space use. The Code and the Manual set forth the types of uses of land which will qualify. The relevant provisions of the Code (section 58.1-3233) require that in order to qualify for the Open Space category real estate be ". . . used as to be provided or preserved for park or recreational purposes, conservation of land or other natural resources, . historic or scenic purposes, or assisting in the shaping of the character, direction, and timing of community development or for the public interest and consistent with the local land-use plan. . ." The Manual provides specific standards for real estate claiming open space status due to recreational characteristics. The Manual (page 15, section 2 "Specific Standards") states that the land must be preserved for Any public, semi-public or privately-owned park, playground or similar recreational area, for public or community use , except any use operated with intent for profit. [Emphasis added.] The Manual gives as examples of the foregoing, golf club8 and country clubs. Based upon these standards I think that.the Board would have a strong case that golf courses which can only be used by members of 'a specific club or organization (such. as Farmington Country Club) are not available for public or community use. ~ J' , , The Hon. Sally Thomas June 13, 1995 Page 3 . I understand that some argument has been made that although Farmington is not open to the public, it does serve the "community" of Farmington. It may be that if the golf course is open to any resident of the subdivision known as "Farmington" without any further requirement that a resident must join the Farmington Country Club to use the golf course it could qualifY as serving a "community." I do not kµow what the rights of residents of the Farmington subdivision are. However, I think that if there are any substantive requirements to pIa:ying on the Farmington golf course other than residence in the subdivision it cannot be said to serve a "community." I think it is further arguable tha:t any subdivision, by itself, qualifies as a "community" as described by the Manual. Indeed, the section of the Code recited above trom which the Manual derives its authority, uses the term "community" in the sense of "locality." The question of whether these golf course uses are consistent with the local land . use plan is complicated by the vagueness of the Comprehensive. Plan, in particular with respect to Farmington, and by the very generalized definition of "consistent" contained in the Manual, although legitimate arguments that the golf courses are not consistent with the Plan in these areas can be made. However, this is only one of the three criteria which must be met for the golf courses to qualify for reduced assessment. Finally, the previously cited Code section requires a local determination that in addition to being devoted to a qualified use, the real estate fits into one of three categories of restrictions. These requirements are that the land devoted to open space use must be 1) within an agricultural or forestal district; or 2) subject to a recorded perpetual conservation easement held by a public body; or 3) subject to a "recorded commitment entered into by the landowners with the local governing body, or its authorized designee, not to change the use to a: nonqualifying use. . ." None of the courses in question fall into any of these categories. The category most likely to be chosen by a local golf course would be the "recorded commitment" with the County. I find nothing in the Code or Manual which suggests that the County does not have extensive discretion in deciding to enter into any such agreement - even for land which clearly meets all of the use standards established to for open space. The fact that the County has never entered into such an agreement mea:ns that the County is not bound by any local precedent with respect to such an agreement. The County has an over-riding responsibility in any action that it takes that the action must serve the public interest. I believe it to be consistent with that responsibility for the County to refuse to enter into a "recorded commitment" with any golf course that restricts use either through membership requirements or substantial fee requirements unrelated to the specific costs of maintaining the course itself. '.;- , , e ." The Hon. Sally Thomas June 13, 1995 Page 4 The Code and Manual list five separate categories of opén space uses. I believe that the County can select any one or moré of these categories as the appropriate subject of a written commitment. Therefore, I believe that the County has the discretion, so . long as there is no local precedent to the contrary, that it will not provide preferential taxation to any recreational facility through the mechanism of the "recorded commitment. " Because I believe that the County has the discretion to refuse to entér into "recorded commitments" I also believe that if the County chooses to enter into such a commitment it can impose conditions upon such commitments which are substa;ntially related to the purpose of the commitment. Sincerely, //4-' Tim Lindstrom Staff Attorney cc.: Larry W. Davis, Esq. , !:ec-eíve) Ju.u. IIf¡ lOftS- Date: From: To: Re: 14 June, 1995 Citizens for Albemarle, presented by Tom Olivier Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Possible repeal of Open Space classification Citizens for Albemarle urges that the Open Space category be retained in our land use taxation ordinance. The Open Space category provides a mechanism for protection of natural areas and historic sites. Such areas can contribute significantly to the common good, though their income generating potentials may be low to nonexistent. Some of you attended the presentation by Dr. Pete Myers on Saturday at the Sustainability Council Forum. In his talk, Dr. Myers noted the critical need to protect our flora and fauna, i.e. our biodiversity, and the habitats on which our plants and animals depend. This need to better protect our flora and fauna also is described in our Open Space Plan. Unfortunately, as the Open Space Plan notes ( Table 1, p. 14 L most of our techniques for protection of wildlife habitat are indirect. For example, agricultural/forestal districts are aimed primarily at protecting rural industries. However, in the section of the Manual of the State Land Advisory Council that that deals with classification standards, it is explicity stated ( Section 2.B, p. 15) that the Open Space category may be applied to lands dedicated to wildlife sanctuaries, nature preserves, swamps and similar natural areas. It is true that until now there has been little use of the Open Space designation. However, we believe that as this community seeks to better protect its biological resources, the value of this category and its utilization will increase. We believe it is unfortunate that commercial golf courses are explicitly included in the state standards. Our view is that the county attorney should thoroughly explore all legal options for retention of the Open Space ordinance without commiting the county to granting such designations to golf courses. If push comes to shove, we believe the Open Space category should be retained, even if it means the county should lose some tax revenue from golf courses that seek protection under it. To repeal the entire category in our view would amount to throwing out the baby with the bath water. , ,. Presentation to Board of Supervisors June 14. 1995 By Stephen N. Runkle The Kessler Group First, let me thank you for the opportunity to speak to you tonight about this matter and, in particular, about Glenmore Associates' application for land use. Much has been said in the media about our application, projected tax savings to us and why our application for land use for a golf course/country club has no merit. I hope I am able to give you some rationale for our application, some perspective of land taxation at Glenmore, and what we consider the pertinent facts and issues to be. During 1989, the Rivanna Growth Area was approved by the Board of Supervisors. A significant reason for the approval of the Rivanna Growth Area, and the subsequent rezoning of Glenmore in late 1990, was our argument that large, amenity based projects could move single family residential development from rural to growth areas, and thus preserve our rural areas. In fact, we demonstrated that Forest Lakes had been responsible for shifting approximately 20% of new single family detached housing from rural areas to a growth area. The master plan submitted as part of the Glenmore rezoning to PRD envisioned a very large proportion of the land to be reserved for non-residential uses including golf, equestrian and open space. In fact, the residential development was only about 50% of the total 1,150 acres in the PRD. Given the proffered maximum number of lots of 750, the average lot size would be less than two-thirds of an acre. Yet, because of the amenities and open space, we felt we could create value in the lots and could draw development from much larger lot, rural area developments. On the referenced master plan: 567 acres were estimated for roads and residential development areas (the numbered areas) including common space to be deeded to the Community Association; 176 acres were estimated for the golf course, club facilities, and golf maintenance facilities; 38 areas were designated as equestrian area; and 360 acres (the remainder) were designated as other open space. Fifty four (54) acres 'Were not included in the PRD of which six (6) acres were to be given for a fire station and twenty seven (27) acres for a school or other public use: · 2 Our application for land use, which will be discussed in more detail later, was intended for the golf course, club and equestrian areas, or 568 acres. In other words, our application was for the amenities and open space provided as part of our project that we feel creates the value in our relatively small lots, and the competitive advantage necessary to draw single family residential development from larger lot, rural areas. Let's consider what has occurred since we started Glenmore. Work began on our first phase, 314 lots, in the spring of 1992. Those 314 lots consisted of 70 of what we call cottage lots, averaging about 0.25 acres and 244 regular lots averaging about two-thirds of an acre. Since Phase I we have developed an additional 98 regular lots, but no additional cottage lots. From May of 1992 through the end of 1994 we sold 257 regular lots and 52 cottage lots, or 309 in total. Current prices average about $75,000 for a cottage lot and $115,000 for a regular lot. Table 1 is building permit data for the years 1984 - 1994 for single family detached houses. As you can see, from 1984 to 1987 only 25% to 30% of single family permits were in growth areas. Forest Lakes began in late 1998, and in the years 1989 through 1992 about 45% - 50% of single family permits were in growth areas, or an increase of about 20%. Glenmore lot sales began in 1992, and by 1994 the percent of permits for single family homes had increased to almost 60% in growth areas. In 1994, Glenmore (Rivanna) accounted for 15%. Clearly, the desired result of drawing single family homes out of rural areas is occurring, and the trend should be even more pronounced as more of the lots already sold in Glenmore are built on (through 1994, 309 lots were sold, but only 133 building permits issued). Table 2 contains information on some of the rural area, larger lot developments Glenmore competes against. While these certainly do not represent 100% of what is available, I believe they do demonstrate the primary distinction - larger lot size without open space or project amenities such as golf, tennis, swimming and equestrian. In fact, had the 309 Glenmore lots sold through 1994 averaged the lot size as shown in Table 2, the total acreage utilized would have been about 2,500 acres. For 750 lots, the total lots allowed at Glenmore, the acreage utilized would be about 6,225 acres - or over five times the size of Glenmore. Tables 3A and 3B contain land tax assessment information since we have owned Glenmore, and our estimate of projected tax savings if our application is approved. Let me emphasize that the information in Tables 3A and 3B is for land only - it does not include improvements. 3 The 1989 and 1991 assessments are shown in Tàble 3A. The 1989 assessment occurred prior to our purchase in November of 1989, and averaged about $1,100 per acre. In December of 1989, the Rivanna Growth area was approved, and in December of 1990, the rezoning of Glenmore as a PRD was approved. The 1991 assessment increased the average per acre value to about $2,500. In 1991, soon after approval of the rezoning, we paid all roll-back taxes for the years 1986 - 1990. The 1993 and 1995 assessments are shown in Table 3B. By the 1993 assessment the tax map parcels had been combined and renumbered to reflect the PRD and other parcels. Note that the original master plan acreages are included in Table 3B for comparison purposes with the 1993 and 1995 assessments. The only significant deviation in acreage was in "other open". The reason for that deviation is that about forty acres originally classified as "other open" became common area to be deeded to the Community Association, thus increasing the "residential" designation by a like amount. Those forty acres remain as open space, but are classified differently. The total assessed value for developed lots of $27 million in 1993 and $45 million iri 1995 are estimates based on the assessments of lots still owned by Glenmore Associates, but are felt to be accurate to within plus or minus ten percent. Please note that the average per acre assessment for land utilized for developed lots including roads and common areas now average more than $125,000/acre. For a two acre rural area lot this value would equate to $250,000, for five acres $625,000 and for the eight acres average in Table 2, $1,000,000. One must question, I think, what causes such high relative values in Glenmore? Also note that by 1995, the average per acre assessment for the land used for non- residential uses (golf, equestrian and open) had increased to $6,523 or 154% of the 1993 assessment. Issues we think are pertinent relative to the values assigned to the land utilized for non- residential uses as well as to our land use application are as follows: (1) We have proffered 750 lots - changing the designation of land use within the PRD does not increase the number of development rights. The $15,000 per acre assessment on golf and equestrian land is a value for residential development property. (2) At least 30% of the golf course is in flood plain, and probably at least that much of the "other open" is flood plain. (3) What distinguishes "equestrian" from "other open" other than our designation - 4 often there is little or no physical difference in the land. (4) Approximately 30 acres of the "other open" land has been reserved as a 100 foot green belt along the Rivanna River, and agreed to be given to the County at their request. (5) Should any of the "other open" or "equestrian" lands be designated common area and deeded to the Community Association it would not be taxed. (6) Improvements to the golf course land, i.e. construction of tees, sand traps, greens and fairways, have been assessed at $3,150,000. In other words, the total assessment for the golf course is $5,706,500. Table 3B also contains our estimate of projected tax savings under land use. I'm told by the assessors office that in Albemarle County a land use value of $380 to $510 is normally used for agricultural land or open space, $160 for forestry and a statewide value of $2,000 for golf courses. The lower values suggested by category was used in our estimate since the lower would estimate the highest potential savings. Also, for "other open" a blended rate was used since some of the land is open and some wooded. Obviously, the actual tax savings would be a function of the values agreed to and the acreages those values are applied to. 1 feel it is worth noting that the projected savings represent about 5.5% of the total tax on land of $388,357. Assuming no change in value from the 1995 asssessment, at completion of the 750 lot Glenmore project the estimated savings would represent about 3.5% of the total tax on the 1,144 acres in the PRD. In conclusion, we feel our application is merited and allowable under the existing code. As stated therein, "Real estate devoted to open-space use shall mean real estate used as to be provided or preserved for park or recreational purposes, conservation of land or other natural resources, fIoodways, historic or scenic purposes, or assisting in the shaping of the character, direction and timing of community development or for the public interest and consistent with the local land-use I " pan.... This is one possible incentive that is available to promote the stated land use goals of the County and should be allowed. r I 'c I ~ TABLI; 1 SINGLE FAMILY BUILDING PERMIT DATA- ALBEMARLE COUNTY ~A 1~1m1~1~~1~~1m 1~1m1~ -------------- ----- .---- ----- ----- ----- ----~ ----- -----. ----- ----- .'---- NUMBER: ,,-~ TOTAL 437 437 465 502 543 595 484 409 465 551 511 RURAL AREAS 294 326 348 360 351 296 265 222 242 240 211 GROWTH AREAS 143 111 117 142 192 299 . 219 187 223 311 300 HOLLYMEAD 16 11 20 1 22 136 91 89 75 57 95 RIVANNA 1 0 11 45 77 PERCENT: TOTAL RURAL AREAS GROWTlI AREAS HOLLYMEAD RIVANNA '~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~1~ 67% 75% 75% 72% 65% 50% 55% 54% 52% 44% 41% ~~kf~2i~~;c·25ci~:?ã~;,~5x~;~,:~~~~~~~~~=':~~.'=:'~J~7~~:r;C~~ff 4% 3% 4% 0% 4% 23% 19% 22% 16% 10% 19% 0% 0% 2% 8% ,. TABLE 2 SELECTED RURAL AREA DEVELOPMENTS DEVELOPMENT ------------------- STONEFIELD BEAUMONT WOODCREEK CLAYMONT ROSEMONT INGLECRESS GRAEMONT INGLES IDE BLUE SPRINGS FARM VIRGINIA FþRMS WEIGHTED AVERAGES '. . CURRENTLY. AVAILABLE LOTS --------- 10 10 13 13 20 3 6 5 11 6 APPROX. AVERAGE SIZE - ACRES --------- 4.0 2.5 ,10.0 5.0 6.5 8.0 11.0 9.0 12.0 25.0 8.3 APPROX. AVERAGE PRICE ----------- $60,000 $70,000 $70,000 $88,000 $120,000 $130,000 $95,000 $125,000 $155,000 $135,000 $101,588 '''-- _______________.__.__ __...._.__ _.___u_.__..___··---,,--___.____ TABLE 3A ',. GLENMORE TAX APPRAISALS ~.··LAND ONLY (EXCLUDES IMPROVEMENTS) ; / ¡ 1989~AX ASSESSMENT '1991 TAX ASSESSMENT ROllBACK ----------------------------- ----------------------------- TAXES DESCRIPTION (PURCHASE) ACRES $/ACRE VALUE ACRES $/ACRE VALUE 1991 -.-.------------------.- ----..-- -------- -.--------. .------. .------. ----------- .------- ORIGINAL TM PARCELS: TM 790-6 (11/01/89) " TM 790-7 (11/01/89) TM 93-59 (11/01/89) TM 93-60 (11/01/89) TM 94-02 (08/24/90) TM 94-11 (08/24/90) GRAVEL ROAD (11/01/89) TOTAL 0.6 1.0 925.3 124.7 14.0 131.1 0.9 1197.6 $7.500 $9.000 $1.146 S882 $1.200 $876 $4,500 $9,000 $1,060.000 $110,000 $16.800 $114.800 :.-_-~=-CT_-7;: $hØ9lt, $1.315,100 ._",!~.;-,_,~_;""'_..2:1c. 0.6 1.0 925.3 124.7 14.0 131.1 0.9 1197.6 $10.000 $10,000 $2.553 $2,506 $2.000 $1,996 $6.000 $10.000 $2,362.400 $312.500 $28,000 $261.600 $137 $255 $32.622 $3,375 5667 $4.030 ; $...·--.2_~.'...'.~,. r.91.·,':, .iz. 980, 500 ~3;,~~:~ --;:.:0.:-''''''-,-="0- ~ - - <'fJ~i':,Hk1G¡ii> · · · · .... · 0 ;:! 0 · · ... · - · CI · ~ 0 :z · ~ · - · W 0 ~ · ... 0 · ::;) · 0 · .. · · :z · 0 c( · W · .... · .. · · U · W 0 ~ 0 .. · · 0 · ... · W · 0 0- · · <0 ! 0 · · · ... · 0 - · W 0 I") 0- 0 .. 0 In ... · U 0 W · c( · 0 · '\i¡('/'" · · 0/ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 0 .. .. 0 .. .. 0 .. .. ,... · 0 .0" 0 .. .. <:) <:) 0 <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) 0 <:) <:) In · · JQ". In <:) <:) <:) <0 I") In <:) <:) .... 0- N <0 .... <0 "" In I") · · ~::b: - - - - i - -ò - - - - - - - - - ..; - 0 o· ,... 0 0 In 0 ~ '" ~ N ~ <0 .... - In :g 0 W 0 'Q-: .. <:) ~ .~ ~ '" ~ N ~ ~ .... In .... "" 0 ::;) 0 .'0;. - .. '" '" .. "" - .. N 0- "" · .... · _:~~: .. - - - .. .. " - .. .. - ... · < · '" 0 ~ "" I") 0- I") · > · ... ~ ..'" ... In · °1= :II: .. · :~ w 0 0 .. 0 .. .. g 0 0 .. X .. 0 N N <0 · w · <:) <:) <:) <:) 0 .. <:) <:) .. I"t w .. :if - 0- N 0 .. 0 In <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) c- _-~ <:) I"t I") .... 0- 0 U 0 - - - - - - - - - " - ~ - " - - - :z 0 c( · N 0 0 '" .. - In '" In - 'o) In ~ ti ~ .... W 0 ;;¡- 0 .. In N - N ~ - - - ... ~ 0- .. ;1; :II: · · .. .. .. .. .. ... .. ... · ... · 0 w · ... 0 N ... · 0- · - ... · 0 0 .... c( · .... · · ~ · · · · 0- 0 0 .. 0 .... .... 0 0 .... ~:' - .. <0 0- N <0 0- 0- 0 · . . . . . . -. · . . . . . . · · · ... · - I") N N - "" ~ 10 - - ~ 'o) 0- ,... <0 - In ~ · W · In In I"t N ,tJ" I"t 'o) <:) · .. · I"t N ~ I"t ~ N · U 0 -""'j ~ - ~ · c( 0 ,~." · · ';'''0 · 0 0 .. 0 .. .. .. .. <:) .. .. .. .. 0 .. 0 0 ~ · · 0 0 <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) <:) ~ ~ <:) <:) ~ <:) <:) · · <:) 0 0 0 <:) .... .... <:) <:) <:). - <0 In 'o) N · 0 .......,.'..:... - - " " - - - - - " - " - - - :g" - · 0 '8 In Ie PSI In .. - <:) g <:) ~ ~ ~ ;:l ~ ~ In · W 0 ~ ~ ~ ::: N N N · ::;) 0 <Q .. ... ... .. 0- ~ ... ~ "" - ~ N N · .... · ,·i..·.. - - .. .. - " - .. .. - .. · ~ · .,... ~ «I - N - 0- ~ .... · 0 -N .. N .. .. ~ ... ~ ... · .. .. :II: 0- · W .. :z · N 0 .. 0 <:) <:) <:) N <:) .. <:) In Ie X .. Qf 0 w 0 W <:) 0 <:) <:) <:) 0 N ~ <:) <:) <:) N .... W <:) N N :II: · .. <0 0 In <:) <:) <:) .... .... <:) <:) In N - ... <:) <0 0 - W 0- 0 U - - - " " " - - - - - - - .... ~ - " - - ~ :z · c( "" ~ ,... <0 In In ;:l In ~ <:) ~ ;1; ,... w ~ ~ ;1; ìS w · ;;¡- <:) ~ ~ - .. ... N N U 0- .. :II: · - .. .. .. .. .. .. ... ... 0 .. ~ :II: ... - W ... .... ... 0- - .... ... ... 0 I"t 8 w c( .... 9 :z: ~ · u .... · - 0 0 0 0 - N 0 0 .. - - N ... <:) «I 0- 'o) 0- u 0- 0 . . . . . . . · · . . . . . . . · · X ... · 0 "" N N - ìS ~ ~ «I - - 0 .... .. 'o) 0- ,... I"t ,... w & w 0 'o) .... ~ In .... I"t In 0- .., .. 0 N "" In - In ~ W - U · - ... ~ ,.. ~ c( · a .... :z 0 ....ii¡¡¡.> .... :z: 0 · C> C> <:) W 'o) 0 .. 0 · · . ~.".~....: .. · · 0 w ... · ~ <0 C> - I") In :z 0- :z w · .... .Ii". .... ... In 0- c( ... c( .. 0 - -1(\' - ~ .... ! .... u · - w - ... c( · ---~ 9 · ... .... ... · :¡ u .... .... · .... :z w c( · '" 0- X - - ... ... 0 c( ... :z w . a - 0 w w .... .... - 0 c( · .. I ... :II: c( ... ... ~ 0- :z: .. 0 ... a 2s - · ~ w ... w ... 0 c( ... :z ... .. a. · w :z: .... :z - ::;) .. - c( 0 .. ... .. w w w w ~ :II: .... ... 0 .. c( u :z 0 ... ... ~ > .. :z .. 0- .... ... ~ · .... ...- c( w a :z w - .. :z '" :z w .., w ! · c( 0 ... .... 2s c( :z: .. '" ... ... c( < w :z: U N I"t .... < 0- 0 - W 0 ... :z: :z w w .... - '" ... 0- 0 '" . . . - - 0 ... 2; '" .... w w w '" ... g .. 0 0 '" c( - ~ ~ 'o) '" W 0- · :z ...- .. w ~ 0- .... '" ::;) 0- W ... ... ,,¡ c( c( . '" ~ ... · w .... en w > - ::;) .... ...- '" '" .. .... ~ ~ ~ .... - · .. w S ::a w :z 3 '" 0- < .. '" w ~ w < .... .. 0- < .... en w .. · - > w .. ~ i ::;) 0- W ::;) 5 :z: 0- == W S c( w .... :z U · en w .... ... :z 0- ... 0 :z: .... :z: S 0 :z: :II: :II: :II: :II: 0- X '" W ... · w .. ::;) ... s u W 0- 0 ... 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0 c( == .... w · '" ... 0 0- ... CI .. · , w " c w w < ø w <.> ~ w 0 ~ ~ z z ~ Œ ¡¡ ¡¡ > < 1.1 ø ~ Œ ~ W Z " ~ Œ ... ~ ø w w z w ~ z w ~ Œ ... ... 0 " Z Z < ~ ~ ~ Z < < ~ ø ~ < w 0 < Œ ~ < ~ w ~ " w <.> ~ ... 0 ... ø Œ ... ~ ø ø " ø ø " ~ ~ w 0 z w w " Z ~ ~ ~ ~ w w ß " 0 0 0 <.> ~ ~ 0 0 Z ø " " 0 0 W W ~ ~ ~ w w EJ II .111 e> I . ";,, ,. w -;trifi' D}'" p ..J T \i .",-,- """ jlJ,,_ k~ ' 1.' j:// ." \:. \\'. ¡ ¡ ~ 11! Q. ::;¡ o a: e> a: w w ::0 ..J 1'-:;:0 (/) Oøl' ~ (I) ~~~ '" UJ )(.....~ o ~ 00() ~ w Inæ- "'x ..,{""" Ii! L- q¡x¡g .....- ~....- w o m N . < ~ " Œ > . aw u z I - . '" W m I ... w Œ N <3: " . - ... M , U <.> N 0 w ! ... < (I) ,Ï Z · "'OU(DÕ'" « !~~S~ I a: Zwœ>¡.. ),: W %Q.NÔ' <Ii <", z'" ~ 0;:: ....0)(0.,. ... D.(þO"" ~ 0 QQœ:l_ ~..J zz .x.., 0<.>0 () <C« .-co ..J-Iø.a:...... ~ <: ~ Z 0 ~ l:J ~ ~ > Z ç; <t ~~ ..J Q. a: ~~ UJ .... (J) :â <t we¡ ÇQ :t ,..J <: . ~. , .' ~ . < , , , z u > , o o · · · , · · Z:! -. '- .. ., ., o . · , ., uo " .. · . , . __,,9¡ <0, '0, ... ... · · z- .0 0' z, .. ., 0' .' ," · .. " 0' .< .' -. " 02;-- "''' I . . · ., .... . . ... " .~ .. .. -. .. .. ,. " o. 0< '0 · · · - · « · Q · · « . · · , . · · · - · · « · « · « " " · .. . · · ,". · · "s ~ ~~!iI " · · . > > ~ ~ .0. "0. @I , I , ! ¡ , i, " ,iIi,. ------- . .. . - . .' \.. ! i , " ,I· ~., -'-- \ . \.' . / / / ,. . ,nY ~~ m'L ,. / ... .m · ;¡.. · V,, · r." /f;, , .,.¿ ... ~- t·, ,. . . 'Í I IÎî , ! ! j.! ¡! ~! jJ' 1, .¡, I: ï, . ,J Ii; '¡lli', II: I ¡ !il I:! I!,!" "~I ! .- "-, ,'! ;:!i ¡ ,i,: Ii Ú' ¡ 1':1.1--<.;' ! ':¡i !i 'I ;~ ',' ¡ 'I"" -, ,·1,;,1',';:' .!... ",\ - <.> " \ f;- <5 <.> z 11 z ~ , . ~ 0 , 3. HI, w 0 w w ., w c w m w I" ~ M ... N m ." <J . <ø . . ~ " ¡¡. m z < 00 < < · w ... z < · z ø> Z <.> ~ w - Z M a "'>00 w " a · > . <0:4« "'wo '" " > ",:::10;:;: -~Œ . < ~<.>< ... ;; 0 W wwa; . <'>Œ<'> Z ~ ...IOolIJ Œ_ Z l.L.æÕC\l 0 ~ .ctO%ø % :<1:1 4%...1::11) <3: O""Q:;<I:I 04...1;:;:0 ~ x"'> 01 WW:::lU) ... ",<"1;;:0 0"'''''''' ...IW():<.I 6~~g? ..J ....01 .... WNW'" x.ow? ::;¡ <NO' ....cø....' ~~¡::....,.. I-)(ZO o:>(l-~ ~o...llli: '" iiioo~ <I:IWz....,.. wOo(Ð <woOø ...IO~~N Z <coS_ -..~ OZ~~- ~ Œ- zu..°...l""':' 0 x .1':"" 11. .<"" gõ""<tg %Õ<o>g 0000 11.0:1:0 U - .-<0 .ctciu~ z~~ o 0< IDt:l.a;~ a;wøo~ '")C]C\I....!2 " 1, ,,1; ,d ,., ,. , 'I'''' ,.- . ,_,I 1, ~ i ¡ , ¡ i I , , , , ¡ , , , ¡ , , I , , , I , I I , ¡ , ¡ ¡ I , ¿UN. -LJ.g5(WE~) 15:26 P. 002 < Virginia IIJl Tech . ... VIRGINIA PQL YTF-CliNIC INSTITUTE AND STATE UNIVERSITY '......__._~ .'" !-'!.-:p~t~~~r A;~~~~~~~_~~pJ.i~~ ~,~~nDf!tics, I , t C(lllcge of AgriculLurc and Lif~ SdC:nces Blacks-burg, ViTginia. 24061-0401 (703) 231-6301 June 14, 1995 Mr. Larry W. Da.vis Courtty AltOrney County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charloltesville, VA 22902-4596 Re; Discretion of a board of su.pervisors with respect to the malter of providillg qualifying land access to the Open-space Class of taxable subjects and thereby access to taxation in accordance with use. Dear Mr. Davis: Some levels of discretion available to a board of supervisors with respect to the Open-space Class of taxable subjects are discussed below. First, a board of supervisors IDªY act to anthorize the Open-space Class of taxable subjectS to be in effect. Tlús action may also be rescinded. Second, a board of supervisors ~ m&!~ i!&!: to enter into Open-space Use Agreements with owners of qualifYing land seeking to obtain the benefits available to land in the Open-space Cll'Ss. Thou~ judgments differ, my judg¡nem is, and ~t of other persons who deal with this matter professional1y is, that there is no reouirement that a board of supervisors ever ellter into an Open-space Agreement with any requesting owner ofland thateitherc1early qualifies or margjIlally qualifies for the Open- space Class. This view of discretion is clearly subject to being contested in court. Third, a board of supervisors II¡W<: ~ amonR: the subclasses of Open-space Class land when entering into Open-space Use Agreements with the objective and purpose of achieving locally determined land-use goals. Five subclasses ofland are within the Open-space Class. They are: A. Park or recreation use B. Cooservation ofland or other natural resources C. Floodway D. Historic or Scenic Areas E. Assisting in the shaping of the character, direction and timing of conununity development, or for tbe public interest. Again judgments differ. My judgment is, and that of other persons who deal with this matter professionally is, that a board of supervisors has discretion to limit Open-space Use Agreements by subcll'Ss. Thus, the judgment is that a board of supervisors may authorize entering into Open-space A ÜJ.n.d-o'tJlIf Uniytr~ìty-Th~ Commimwemlh Is O~r C('("'pu~ Au Eq~al Opportunity I Affirmdtive AcriollltL,fIirll.lWff .JUN. - W'95 (WE!!') 15: 27 P. 003 Mr. Larry W. Davis Page 2 JUlie 14, 1995 Use Agreements for some subclasses of Open-space Class land and not others. Here the key will be uniformity of administrati on. F Of. example, a board of supervisors mID:: auth On ze entering into Open- space Use Agreements when land meets the standards for either subclass B., C., D., or E., and !!2! aUthorize such agreements when lanci meets the standards for subclass A. This view of discretion is also clearly subj ect to being contested in court. Four, a boarci of supervisors ~ ~ the authonr;y to actat its discretion to amend ~ ~ comprehensive ¡¡.a¡¡.. so that saici plan will provicie that land being used in specifically designated 'W11ys or devoted to specifically designated uses will not quality for the Open-space Class. Examples are so abundant that identifying specific cases here is not necessary. Without question other areas of ciiscretion exist with respect to the Open-space Class of taxable sUbjects. However, my judgment is that, excepr for the potentia! of amending the enabling ordinance, this letter discusses the primary levels of discretion available to a board of supervisors confronting local issues concerning landin the Open-space Class. On a different issue, my judgment is that a board of supervisors shoulci have authority to aciopt reasonable additional policies with respect to land in any subclass of land in the Open-space Class. This matter is discussed in the attacbed letter to you. Sincerely, j. p~ ~ J. Paxton Marshall Extension Economist Public Policy JPM:kpo Attachment: One copy of the referred-to letter to Mr. Larry W. Davis. ~UN, -11' ~5!WED'¡ 15:27 P,004 Virginia II!lTech .\I1RGINIA po~ YTECHr;¡ç IJ'ISTITUTE J\ND STATE UNrVER.SITY June 14,1995 ~ '..u,.' ..,. ... ..,."P...!P~,~~~!,~r~;~!u~~(a~d.~,p.P\lì,~~,E,~o~.o~.i~. \' .._....,_.. ' Coll.::gJ:: Qr Ag(i(;lihu~and Life: Sc:ien¢e~ BlaclI:sburg. VirMinia 240(jJ-()401 (703) 23r-6301 Mr. ùury W. Davis COUnty Attorney CountyofAIbemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Re: Establishing a definitive policy-based decisionmakiDg process and forgoing the current problems in the decisiomnakingprocess on the matter of providing qualifying land lying in anjurisdiction access to the Open-space Class of taxable subject and thereby access to taxation in accordance with use. Dear Mr. Davis: Amendment of the statewidesrandards applicable to land in the Open_space Class will be required before boards of supervisors can possess the authority to adoptthe policy proposed below. The policy proposed will standardize the decisionmaJcing process with respect to the Open-space Use Agreement, and it will greatly reduce, indeed effectively eliminate, the on-going controversy related to the matter that is the subject of this letter. The proposed policy is simple, direct, and defuritive, and it provides that the Open-space Use Agreements entered inrobetween a board of supervisors and the owner or owners offering to obtain for their land access to the Open-space Class contain II. provision (correctly worded, of course) to assure this described achievement. The ()v.rner is wil1ing to act and agrees to act during the term of this agreement to convey in pezpemity an open-space easement on the described land to a qll8lifÿing public body. Completing this aclÌO¡¡ during the tenn of this agreement provides the COW1ty a publio benefit and eliminates the need for this agreement to continue beyond the date the agreed. to conveyance is publicly tecorded. This amendment would assure that the land at issue provides a public benefit to any county entering into an Open-space Use Agreement containing the proposed policy, Moreover, this policy provides the land at issue the benefit of being taxed on the basis otthe use to which it is being devoted, just as do the other two alternatives provided by Section .58,1-3233 3. of the Code of Vi rgilli a that provide access of land to the Open-space Class. The proposed policy shifts to the owner ofland seeking access to the Open-space Class the basic decísionmaking process and makes a county's on-going deci$ionmaking process ministerial. The proposed policy might appropriately be appended to the Open-space Agreement as a codicil, if so provided by the adopted and promulgatedstatewíde standards. Sincerely,,.!-_. ~ ,g. P "'71J'V'- 'f. Paxton Marshall Professor and Extension Economist--Public Policy A lAM·Gran.t Univel'sîry-Thr C~mm.{J7JwedM¡ l.s Our CampUJ AII' Equal ()ppt'Jf'llPJiryl Affirm(JJive AClioll ¡rf.Jtirutio7J "",~ ~ , R.k2tefu.ed 0UM /If¡ /ife¡s:- Þ' .. Statement on Open Space Proposal: MI. Chairman and Supervisors: My name is Eleanor Santic and I'm speaking as a private citizen resident of Albemarle County. I guess if the law on this issue were clear, none of us would be here this evening. What seemed apparent in the law apparently is not: what seemed obvious, apparently is not obvious. In attempting to avoid both passion and indignation in speaking to this issue, I find I must resort to logic of sorts: Fact 1: To compare a golf course to a farm { re: public access, as has been suggested,} seems quite silly. I know of no golf course that requires its users to play through a com field. I doubt many would. Fact 2: To consider that a golf course might take advantage of a forestal or horticultural designation is equally facetious. Trees create obstacles for the happy golfer, and flower beds would be hazards above and beyond. Fact 3: To suggest that a golf course constitutes a scenic addition to the public's view should also suggest that the public has access to the view proposed. The public may not, as far as I know picnic in these areas to enjoy the view while munching lunch; The public may not drive into these areas to park and sit and enjoy the view any time of day; The public is not invited to use these areas in any manner which gives them the rreedom to enjoy the scenery at alL ~,1he law specifically states in the Open Space agreement that quote: ''There shall be no construction or placement of fences, screens, hedges or other similar barriers which materially obstruct the public's view of scenic areas of the property. " Would logic or the law also suggest tearing down all obstructions to the public's view? Fact 4: The law does allow golf courses under the section labeled "Specific Standards." The allowance is listed under "Parks or recreation use," on page 15. BUT -and I feel this is an important BUT - the first provision specifies' for public or community use, except any use operated with intent for profit." The second provision allows golf courses operated for profit BUT adds" as a public service and having the park-like characteristics normally associated with a country club." Neither provision says ''private country clubs." Neither provision says - operated for profit where the public contributes to the profit. ~ ,-/1" ""!',.-"- .. There may be many other arguments against granting these applications without eliminating the Open Space provision of the law. Access to public utilities, for example. Preservation of watershed areas would certainly not be one of the arguments because the carefully tended greens are not preserving the watershed. They are imprlWed lands. Of course, logic might suggest that improved grounds constitute no reason for denial. Then perhaps an improved grounds in the county should have the same benefit. For example, every beautiful lawn on every lovely property should be considered as Open Space. Certainly the lovely lawns of our neighbors are far more accessible for public view than are the private entry grounds of these applicants. Logic and perhaps good sense should be able to prevail in this situation. If the public contributes to the benefits, then the public should be able to pursue those benefits. If the public is not permitted to freely enjoy the benefits, then the public should not be asked to freely contribute..Æ f'nLI"'?e. h P.r(>e.ff'f, ~¿i (Thank you for your attention. I j - r ¡¿Mf/¡~ ~Þ.. ¡i# .M dWc'j thu;!l. ð.~0Ó/U.iy¡S. 1J~ ~f~ .. 'r' :;1 - David P. Bowerman O1arlótte.sville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-45% (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 2%-5800 Charlotte Y. Humphris JaCk Jouett Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsvi"e TO WHOM :IT MAY CONCERN Blla W. Carey, Clerk, CMC ~& FROM: DATE: June 19, 1995 Ordinance adopted June 14; 1995 SUBJECT: Attached is a copy of an ordinance adopted by the Board of Supervisors on June 14, 1995: An ordinance to amend and reordain Chapter 2, Administration, Ärticle 1, In General, of the Code of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, for compensation of Board of Supervisors, effective July 1, 1995. EWC/tpf Attachments (1) cc: Honorable James Camblos Larry Davis, Esq. Municipal Code Corporation File œ Printed on recycled paper Charles S. Martin Rlvanna Walter F. Perkins WhiteHall Sally H. Thomas SamJ.lelMilIer ...."'^ v; ORDINANCE NO. 95-2(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 1, IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2, Administration, Article I, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors, as follows: Sec. 2-2.1. Compensation of board of supervisors. The salary of the board of supervisors is hereby set as follows: Nine thousand three hundred sixty-eight dollars and no cents for each board member; provided that in addition to his/her regular salary, the vice-chairman shall receive a stipend of thirty-five dollars ($35.00) for each and every meeting chaired; provided, further, that in addition to his/her regular salary, the chairman shall receive a stipend of one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800). This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1995. * * * * * I Ella W. .Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. cgf!krd ~=nty , '.,;/ " '.~ ~ /' Distributed to BoSld¿~ 8 Agímda Item No. . .. ¡j ¡ qt;, ótf I ;),;7( ORDINANCE NO. Page 1 A TTO. 1 DRAFT: May 18,1995 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE I, IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2, Administration, Article I, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors, as follows: Sec. 2-2.1. Compensation of board of supervisors. The salary of the board of supervisors is hereby set as follows: Nine thousand ninety fi-,e three hundred sixty-eight dollars and nO cents ($9,095.00) ($9,368.00) for each board member; provided, that in addition to his/her regular salary, the vice-chairman shall receive a stipend of thirty-five dollars ($35.00) for each and every meeting chaired; provided, further, that in addition to his/her regular salary, the chairman shall receive a.stipend of one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800.00). This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1995. 2·2.1 ~ ,_.... -/ .'-, ORDINANCE NO. 95-2(1) {1 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 2, ADMINISTRATION, ARTICLE 1, IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 2, Administration, Article I, In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending Section 2-2.1, Compensation of board of supervisors, as follows: Sec. 2-2.1. Compensation of board of supervisors. The salary of the board of supervisors is hereby set as follows: Nine thousand three hundred sixty-eight dollars and no cents for each board member; provided that in addition to his/her regular salary, the vice-chairman shall receive a stipend of thi.rty-five dollars ($35.00) for each and every meeting chaired;· provided, further, that in addition to his/her regular salary, the chairman shall receive a stipend of one thousand eight hundred dollars ($1,800). This ordinance shall be effective on and after July 1, 1995. * * * * * I Ella W.Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an ordinance adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on ðune 14, 1995. C~~rd ~=nty S · ....A."'"'.. "",- - David P. BOwerman Charlouesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin R¡\lanN ;,¡ Charlotte Y ~ Humphris JackJ6uett Walter F. Perkins WhiteHall Forrest R. Marshall,' Jr. Sco\tsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel MiI\er MEMORANDUM TO: Juliet C. Jennings, Director, Human Resources FROM: Ella W. Carey, Clerk tþJ & SUBJECT: Board Compensation DATE: June 21, 1995 At its meeting on June 14, 1995, the Board of Supervisors approved the following compensation plan, effective July 1, 1995: 1. David P. Bowerman $9,368.00 $9,368.00 $9,368.00 $9,368.00 2. Charles S. Martin 3. Sally Thomas 4. Charlotte Y. Humphris 5: Walter F. Perkins, Chair $9,368.00 plus a stipend of $1,800. Mr. Marshall has declined to receive a salary increase for FY 1995-1996. If there are any questions, please call me for assistance. EWC/tpf Attachments (1) * Printed on recycled paper ~ .." , . Distributed to Board: {:,- r<f-c¡Ç' Agenda Item No. cr; b(P 1/, c¿ZiJ David P. BOwerman CharJottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902·4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296·5800 Charlotte Y. Humphris JaçkJouett Forrest R. Marshal1, Jr. Sçbttsville MEMORANDUM TO: Board of Supervisors Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC.gu.,~ FROM: DATE: June 9, 1995 SPBJECT: Reading List for June 14, 1995 öL,Wf{d~ J 'April 7, 1993 - pages 1 - 19 - Mr. Bowerman p~ges 20 - 34 (#18) - Mrs. Humphris pages 34 (#18) - end - Mr. Martin April 19, 1995 - Mr. Marshall - RpP(Û~~ May 10, 1995 - Mr. Martin -()uAfi+ {-t:.~ 'C~ EWC:mms * Printed on recycled paper Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter F. Perkins WhiteHall S3lly H. Thomas SamllelMiller . II ~,. f.ÆœflJ&!~4 t .. Jl.pril 19, 1995 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 9) ,î1ows ~S.HUmphrW..said Centel Cellular· severely misjudged the character of this ne:LgllDorho00hich consists of historic properties. The Landfill will eventually be closed; however, the tower will be an,eyesore to look at for a long time. Just because the:re is one type of ugliness in the neighborÞ.ood does not mean .that aJ;:1other one should be added. r'\. Moti"n was then· made by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mrs. HUmphris, to deny SP-95-04. Mr. Marshall said he supports the Planning Commission's recommendations, the Su~rviso:rs whose district this lies, the a.djacentproperty owners 'who .feel an infringement of their rights, and he said he was born and raised in this community and'does.not have. a problem with phone reception in his car. Roll was called and the motion carried by ,. the following reco:rded vote: AYES: Mr. Perkins, M:rs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr; Martin (The Chairman called a.recess at 9.:19 p.m. The meeting reconvened at 9 :28 p.m.) \ I I I I , , I I I I ¡ I: Ii I, ("'. Agenda Item No...9 . SpC95-05. Anthony E. Champ. Public Hearing on a request to allow .morethan 600 sf for on-premise sale and/or consumption of wine. Property on WsdofRt 674 a.pprox800 ft S ofRt 673, TM26,P52. White Hall Dist. (Advertised in the Daily prog:ress on April 3 and April 10, 1995.) Mr. Cilimbe:rg su~arized the. staff report which. is on file in the Clerk's office and apart of the permanent records of the Board., Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 and 5.1.25 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Mr. Cilimberg said the P:Lanning conunission at its meeting on March 28, 1995, unanimoualyrecommended approval of SP-95-05. The Chairman opened the public hearing. Mr. Richa:rd. Carter,rep:resenting the appliçants, said Mr. ·and MrS. Champ owns over 300 acres on which the wine:ry is 'to be located. Th.eneeded space is approximately 1700 sgua:re feet. This use is clean, agricultural and p:romotes tourism. MS. Thomas asked if :Limiting it to 1750 squa:re feet wOjlld be a p:roblem. Mr. Carter had no problem with that condition. The public hea:ring was closed at 9:32 p. m.· Motion was made by Mr. Marshall,. seconded by Mrs. Humphris to approve SP-95-05, Subject to the following cOl1dition: 1. Tasting. area shall be 1imitedto 1750 square feet maximum.. Roll wascål1ed and the motion carried by i:h~ foiioWing,i"écQrdê(lir~òte£ AYES: Mr. Perkins,. Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphrisand Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Martin. --. I Agenda Item Nó. 10. CPA-95-02. Milton Airport Area B Study. public Hearing on a propo~a:L to amend. the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan to include recommendatiol1s of the Milton Airport "Area B" Study as stipulated in the Three Party Agreement between the County, City of c::harlottesville and the University of Vi:rginia. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 3 and April 10, 1995.) Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff report which is on file in the Clerk's office and a part of the permanent records of the Board. Mr. Cilimbergsaid th~¡anning Conunission at its meeting on March 21, 1995, unanimously recommended approval of C::PA-95-02. Mrs. Thomas asked what the report meant when it stated to review the site with. an eye to more recreation since the County does not own the proper- ty. She also wanted to knowhow the Board bad any impact· on what happens to the property. Mr. Cilimberg said the purpose of the study is to identify joint uses with the City and University properties that are of jointp;Lanning interest. Part of this. process is to identify the potential importance and purpose of ¡. the property and to establish public use for the property as wel:L as cost issues. He. said he was notimp:Lying the C::ountywill be purchasing the property, but the property may have some use for passive recreational uses and I . --.---------.-- "----~--_.~-- .----,-.~~c_.,......._-____,.__...._.._~_________ .-..~-.---,---.-.,-._.__~.~__..~..._. .-.________ -- _ _ ., ----~---~----,----"---,,----~.._~-_.---,..-"-_.-_---.-~----~~,._~,,------- I,ll I ,. Oi! Itlay even be worth evaluating for other potential investments for the future ¡ 'i Mr. Tom Lebach said he is the Capital Budget Manager for the University .of Virginia and represents the University on the City and County Planning Commissions. The surplus of the Milton properties is in the early stages. This past February, the Board of Visitors agreed to proceed with the surplus procedures under the State system. A letter win be sent to the State requesting to initiate the procedure. This is a rather. lengthy procedure that involves obtaining an appraisal of the property and getting it surveyed. In the conveyance to the state, neighborhóod and County interests, and historic and archaeological significance of the site will be stressed. The property also has· scenic and natural significance. The State will respond and the process will be initialized. The procedure is other State agencies will get the first opportunity to acquire the property for whatever use. If there is no interest among other State agencies, then the localities (Albemarle County and City of Charlottesville) will have a chance to acquire the property at fair market value. If there arena takers at that level,thenthepreperty will be offered for s"le ._t<:>. the public. . ¿ ",\, ~ April. ~9, ~995 ¡Regular Night Meeting) ¡Page :1.0). . II Ii ¡: I! Mr. Marshall asked what the chances were for donating the property. Mr. Lebachreplied he did not know how far the discussion had gone at the Universitylevélregardingthe property. If the County feels there is a need for either passive or active recreational use for thepropérty, the property should be evaluated. Mr. Lebach said, to the best of his knowledge, the University was not interested in making a profit on the property. However, the University has legitimate concerns regarding the firing range, which City and County police use. So, if the county did not want the property, the University would like some provision made somewhere else in the County or the City for a new firing range. Currently, the University-is using the buildings for storage. If the land is donated outright, the University would need to figure out someway of acquiring additional warehouse space or building new ;~ warehouses. He indicated that he could not speak for the University in '-.J donating property to the County. Mr. Marshall said if the property was to be abandoned, then maybe the property could be donated and a workable agreement could be reached to where the University could.still have some use of the property. Mr. Lebach said it was a possibility. Mr. Marshall said sometime in the future, the property may be used as a park. Mrs. Thomas asked if the property reverted· to the State, whether the State would require the purchaser to pay fair market value as opposed to donation. Mr. Lebach said the property does not revert to the State. The University is authorized to make every effort to sell théproperty òr dispose of it in some. manner. . Mr. Marshall asked who had the authority to negotiate with the County on an agreement for donating the property to the County. Mr. Lebach said the Board of Visitors would be involved and it would also require some legislative action in Richmond to approve. He also said the initiative was started by Governor Allen's administration with the idea of selling surplus state proper- ties so the state could get money from these properties. In this case, the University would retain the proceeds. . Once the land is sold, for example, to a private developer, he/she would need to develop the property in accordance ~c>~Cº'mty zoning and land use regulations, of which most is located within the , floodplain anâ wetlands. - - Under ëurreIit zoning, there areu J.7-residence-s-uthat . -.- ¡¡ are on or near, the property. Currently, there is not a tremendous market for ¡: the property. 'I Mr. Tucker said the University is aware of the County's needs and interC I ests in the property.· .. . . . C)! Mr. Lebach said when the study was started approximately two years ago, the Provost office was notified and a surv",y·was done. At that time, there were no identifiable research or academic needs. for the property. However, in the future, if an academic need is identified, the property maybe used. The Board of Visitors approved-the area to be studied and last August, the state asked the property be declared surplused. It is not in the UniversityJs interest and there is no initiative on the UniversityJs part to try and sell the property. The public hearing was op",ned at 9:50 p.m. Dr. William Orr criticized this area being studied. He owns property across the. road at .thE! upper part of the Airport property. The property was part of .the old Village of Milton and the part he owns was once owned by Thomas Jefferson. ... He was never told abóutthe study of the area or invited to participate in any way on a committee or to attend any meetings. He indicated this report seemed to be telling people what to do without consulting the interested parties. _ Dr. Orradde~ there were some contradictions in the report. Contradictionsincll,lde Milton Airport being located in.an area characterized by very low density residential. The village of Rivanna is located to the east of the study area and is a designated growth area which contains the Glenmore subdivision and to the west is-Milton Heights subdivi- sion. Also inaccurate is the statement that the Stone Robinson recreational facilities aré limited due to a small site. He said thê property would be a I ____..____~___----'-___________1L______' _________..._________m___ ·' /£œ¡'/J.€d cfWUt l<fí I tt9s- COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Commercial Stables Zoning Text Amendment AGF..NDA DATE: June 14, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: SUBJECTfPROPOSALIREOUEST: To amend the Zoning Ordinance tOþermit commercial stables by right. ACTION: X INFORMATION: ST AFFCONT ACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg, Benish CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: . ATTACHMF..NTS: No REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Commerciaì stables are currently þermitted by special use permit in the RlIÍ'aÌAreas, RA District. Staff has received two specific requests for commercial stables to be permitted by right. The Albemarle Farm Bureau recently discussed and endorsed allowing commercial stables by right. DISCUSSION: The Comprehensive Plan gives highest priority to the preservation of agricultural and forestal activities in the Rural Area. It states, "For agricultural and forestal resources to be successfully preserved ftoin a land use standpoint, they must be successful as a business/industry." The ì992 U.S. Census of Agricl1Ìture reþorted that Albemarle ranked first in the sta . . .. . number of horses. RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the following resolution of intent: ) For purposes of public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Aìbemarle ,,-,,&rod ,fS~"" 'ereby"'''' '=01""" of mreoí to om"," &roQ. 10.0 Rw! "- b¥,". ... RA, of the zoning ordinance, to permit commercial stables by right, and to include all neCessary supþlementary I regulations related thereto. 'I m ¡!i , Ii ~1 'H l' ¡: ! ff:~ðl~ .rI- I:\General\Share\Áscala\June 142.snm ....'" RESOLUTION OF INTENT BE IT RESOLVED for purposes of public necessity, conve- nience, general welfare, and good zoning practice, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend Section 10.0 Rural Areas District, RA of the Zoning Ordinance, to permit commercial stables by right, and to include all necessary supplementary regulations related thereto. FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission is requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations to this Board at the earliest possible date. * * * * * I Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true copy of a resolution of intent adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on June 14, 1995. c~ ~coun'Y Sup rvi"or"