HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-09-15 ACTIONS
Board of Supervisors Meeting of September 15, 1999
September 20, 1999
AGENDA ITEM/ACTION
ASSIGNMENT
1. Call to order.
4. Others Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public.
· Mr. John Martin said there was a lot of ambiguity
surrounding tomorrow's meeting between the Board, City
Council, and the RWSA. He asked the Board to indicate
their level of interest in the meeting.
5.1 Adopt Resolution of Intent, ZTA-99-04 Farmers Market, to
amend the RA Distdct of the County Zoning Ordinance to
permit farmers market. ADOPTED.
5.2 Proclamation recognizing Constitution Week. ADOPTED.
5.3 Stormwater Agreement Modification for Airport Industrial Park.
AUTHORIZED County Executive to execute agreement.
6. CPA-97-05. Brass, Inc. (Willoughby). WITHDRAWN.
7. SP-99-36. Foxfield-CV202 (Sign #95). DEFERED until 10/20.
8. Appeal: ARB-F(SDP)-99-47. Colonial Auto Showroom.
GRANTED appeal by vote of 4:2.
9. SP-99-47. 3D Studio Expansion (Sign #36). APPROVED w/5
conditions (see attachment B).
10. SP-99-48. Emmanuel Episcopal Church (Sign #35).
APPROVED w/6 conditions (see attachment B).
11. SP-99-49. Winndom Farm Bridge (Sign #34). APPROVED w/8
conditions (see attachment B).
12. Public hearing on an ordinance to amend and reenact Chapter 3,
Agricultural and Forestal Districts, of The Code of The County of
Albemade, Virginia:
· Addition to Buck Mountain Agdcultural/Forestal District
· Review of Chalk Mountain Agdcultural/Forestal District
· Lanark Agdcultural/Forestal Distdct
· Review of Sugar Hollow Agdcultu ral/Foresta l Distdot
· Creation of the Nortonsville Local Agricultural/Forestal District.
· Creation of the South Garden Agdcultural/Forestal District.
DEFERRED to 10/6 consent agenda to allow Planning staff
time to list another parcel to be deleted from the ordinance.
13. Presentation: Route 250 West Corddor Study.
PRESENTATION accepted.
15. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD.
· Mr. Tucker said Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, and he attended a
recent Fratemal Order of Police dinner and accepted an award
presented to the Board for its support of law enforcement in the
community.
· Mr.. Tucker said the East Rivanna Fire Dept. opened a
hurricane shelter at 7:00 p.m. Two potential shelters at Crozet
and Scottsville will be certified tomorrow by the Red Cross in
case needed. Additional shelters can be opened as needed.
· Mr. Perkins asked about Mr. John Martin's comments on the
water supply meeting which was to have been held tomorrow,
Meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., by the
Chairman. All BOS members present.
Clerk: Acknowledge his comments.
Clerk: Attach copy of resolution (see attachment
A) to action letter. FonNard signed copies of
resolution to Planning and Building Codes &
Zoning Services.
None. (Proclamation given to DAR
representative.)
County Attoroev staff: Obtain signatures, fortNard
copy to Clerk's office.
None.
.Clerk: Place on 10/20 agenda.
None.
Clerk: List conditions.
Clerk: List conditions.
Clerk: List conditions.
Clerk: Place on 10/6 consent agenda.
Plannin.a Staff: List additional parcel to be deleted
from the ordinance.
Plannina staff: Present final consultants' plan to
Board.
None.
None.
None.
but was cancelled due to anticipated bad weather. Mr. Tucker
said the School Board's policy is that, if school is closed, all
activities scheduled at schools are also cancelled.
· Mr. Marshall asked if the COB will be closed tomorrow due to None.
bad weather. Mr. Tucker said that will be determined
tomorrow. Mr. Martin recommended operating under caution
when considering closing the COB. He added that the City has
already dosed its offices.
· Ms. Thomas noted that the Board has not reached a resolution
about a state funding source for PDR's. Mr. Tucker said staff
will prepare a letter to the state under Mr. Martin's signature
stating the Boari:l's concerns over the state's funding of PDR's.
· Ms. Thomas said the Scenic Virginia newsletter pdnted a None.
recent article on how well the County is working with cell phone
providers.
· Mr. Martin said he sent an email to the Board regarding
information letter from Mr. Schoner of the Federal Highway
Administration, regarding what the MPO can and cannot do
regarding transportation funding. Asked for staff summary of
Mr. Shoner's letter that could be placed on consent agenda.
· Mr. Bowerman said he will discuss the urban draining basin at None.
a meeting to be held at 5:30 p.m. tomorrow at the Senior
Center.
16. Adjourn to October 6, 1999 day meeting (not to 9/16/99 for joint None;
meeting with City Council at Monticello High School.
County Executive staff: Draft letter for Mr. Martin's
signature.
Plannine staff: Prepare summary of Mr. Shoner's
letter to be placed on consent agenda.
Attachment A
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Albemade County Comprehensive Plan recommends that support be
provided for agriculture and related industries; and
WHEREAS, "farmers' market" is currently allowed only within the C-1 Commercial and
HC Highway Commerdal zoning district; and
WHEREAS, the definition of "farmers' market" contained in the zoning ordinance is
deemed as unnecessarily restrictive to allow the Board of County Supervisors to consider the
appropriateness of individual proposals; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Board of County Supervisors to liberalize existing
zoning restrictions to allow agricultural efforts in the County to flourish;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the purposed of public necessity,
convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice, the Board of County Supervisors hereby
adopted a resolution of intent to amend the definition of and supplementary regulations for
"farmers' market" and to provide for "farmers' market" within all commerdal zoning districts and
within the RA Rural Areas distdd; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemade County Planning Commission is
requested to hold a public headng on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations
to this Board of County Supervisors at the eadiest possible date.
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing wdting is a true, correct copy of a
resolution of intent adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemade County, Virginia, at
a regular meeting held on September 15, 1999.
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
Attachment B
CONDITIONS
SP-99-47. 3D Studio Expansion (Sien #36).
Not more than two employees except for family members who reside on site;
The home occupation shall be limited to the proposed 2,242 square feet studio area;
Improve existing driveway site distance to the east and improve the entrance to meet
pdvate standards;
No signs for the business shall be posted on the property; and
Use shall comply with the following provisions of section 4.14 of the Albemade County
Zoning Ordinance.
4.14.1 NOISE
All sources of noise (e~cept those not under direct control of occupant of use, such as
vehicles), must not create sound or impact noise levels in excess of the values specif'~d
below when measured at the points indicated. In addition, before 7:00 a.m. and a~er
7:00 p.m., the permissible sound levels at an agricultural or residential district boundary
where adjoining industrial districts shall be reduced by five (5) decibels in each octave
band and in the overall band for impact noises.
4.14.1.1 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Noise shall be measured by means of a sound level meter and octave band analyzer,
calibrated in decibels (re 0.0002 microbar) and shall be measured at the nearest lot line
from which the noise level radiates.
4.14.1.2 MEANING OF TERMS
Decibel means a prescribed interval of sound frequencies which classifies sound
according to its pitch.
Impact noises shall be measured by means of an impact noise analyzer. Impact noises
are those whose peak values fluctuate more than six (6) decibels from the steady values
indicated on the sound level meter set at fast response.
Octave band means a prescribed interval of sound frequencies which classifies sound
according to its pitch.
Preferred frequency octave bands means a standardized series of octave bands
prescribed by the Amedcan Standards Association in SI.6-1960 Preferred Frequencies
for Acoustical Measurements.
Sound level meter means an electronic instrument which includes a microphone, an
amplifier and an output meter which measures a noise and sound pressure levels in a
specified manner· It may be used with the octave band analyzer that permits measuring
the sound pressure level in discrete octave bands.
Maximum Permitted Sound Levels (decibels)
Preferred Frequency Octave Bands
Location of Measurement
Octave band, At residential At otherlotlines
cycles/second district boundaries within district
31.5 64 72
63 64 72
125 60 70
250 54 65
500 48 59
1000 42 55
2000 38 51
4000 34 47
8000 30 44
Overallfor
impact noise 80 90
4.14.2 VIBRATION
The produce of displacement in inches times the frequency in cycles per second of
earthborne vibrations from any activity shall not exceed the values specified below when
measured at the points indicated.
4.t4.2.t METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Earthborne vibrations shall be measured by means of a three component recording
system, capable of measuring vibration in three mutually perpendicular directions. The
displacement shall be the maximum instantaneous vector sum of the amplitude in the
three directions.
4.14.2.2 MEANING OF TERMS
Vibrations means the periodic displacement of oscillation of the earth.
Area of Measurement
Type of vibration
Continuous
Impulsive (100 per
minute or less)
Less than 8 pulses
per 24 hours
At residential At other lot lines
district boundaries within district
.00 .015
.006 .030
.015 .075
4.14.3 GLARE
No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from flood lights or from high temperature
processes such as combustion, welding or otherwise, so as to be visible beyond the lot
line, shall be permitted except for signs, parking lot lighting and other lighting permitted
by this ordinance or required by any other applicable regulation, ordinance or law.
However, in the case of any operation which would affect adversely the navigation or
control of aircra/~, the current regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
apply.
4.14.4 AIR POLLUTION
Rules of the State Air Pollution Control Board shall apply within Albemade County. Such
rules and regulations include coverage of: emission of smoke and other emissions from
stationary sources; particulate matter; odor; particulate emission from indirect heating
furnaces; open burning; incinerators; and gaseous pollutants.
4.t4.5 WATER POLLUTION
Rules of the State Water Control Board shall apply within Albemade County.
4.14.6 RADIOACTIVITY
There shall be no radioactivity emission which would be dangerous to the health and
safety of persons on or beyond the premises where such radioactive material is used.
Determination of existence of such danger and the handling of radioactive materials, the
discharge of such materials into the atmosphere and streams and other water, and the
disposal of radioactive wastes shall be by reference to and in accordance with applicable
current regulations of the Department of Energy, and in the case of items which would
affect aircraft navigation or the control thereof, by applicable current regulations of the
Federal Aviation Administration, and any applicable laws enacted by the General
Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the requirements of the Virginia Air
Pollution Act, whichever is greater.
4.'14.7 ELECTRICAL INTERFERENCE
There shall be no electrical disturbance emanating from any lot which would adversely
affect the operation of any equipment on any other lot or premises and in the case of any
operation which would affect adversely the navigation or control of aircraft, the current
regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration shall apply.
SP-99-48. Emmanuel Episcopal Church (Sian #35).
3.
4.
5.
6.
There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate special use
permit;
VDOT's approval of the entrance width and entrance radii;
Approval from the Health Department;
Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100-year flood plain;
No expansion of the mausoleum structure (tombs inside may be added);and
Any future expansion of the church structures or use shall require amendment to this
special use permit.
SP-99-49. Winndom Farm BridGe (Sign ~34).
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Engineering Depadment approval of computations and plans verifying structural
adequacy of the bridge;
Engineering Department approval of computations and plans documenting changes to
the floodplain;
Engineering Department receipt of copies of federal and state permits for disturbance of
the stream channel and any associated wetlands;
The applicant shall obtain a map revision from FEMA for changes to the floodplain of
Jumping Branch;
Engineering Department approval of a mitigation plan for repair and enhancement of the
stream buffer;
Water quality measures and mitigation methods shall be provided subject to the approval
of the Water Resources Manager;
The gate located on the southem side of the stream, near the stables, shall be closed at
all times. The bridge shall not serve as access for residential development to Rt. 676 or
for Winndom Farm to Rt. 658.
The applicant must receive the necessary approvals from the appropriate State and
Federal agencies within six (6) months of the SP approval; provided, however, that if the
permits are being prosecuted in good faith, the Zoning Administrator, in consultation with
the Chief of Engineering, may extend the time of such expiration for not more than three
(3) successive periods of one (1) month each.
RESOLUTION OFINTENT
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan recommends that support be
provided for agriculture and related industries; and
WHEREAS, "farmers' market" is currently allowed only within the C-1 Commercial and
HC Highway Commercial zoning districtS; and
WHEREAS, the definition of "farmers' market" contained in the Zoning Ordinance is
deemed as unnecessarily restrictive to allow the Board of County Supervisors to consider the
appropriateness of individual proposals; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Board of County Supervisors to liberalize existing
zoning restrictions to allow agricultural efforts in the County to flourish;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the purposes of public necessity,
convenience, general welfare and good zoning practices, the Board of County Supervisors
hereby adopts a resolution of intent to amend the definition of and supplementary regulations for
"farmers' market" and to provide for "farmers' market" within all commercial zoning districts and
within the RA Rural Areas district; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Commission is
requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to return its recommendations
to this Board of County Supervisors at the earliest possible date.
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a 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 September 15, 1999.
Clerk, Bo'ard of CountY' S~
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
ZTA~99-04 Resolution of Intent to Amend the County
Zoning Ordinance
AGENDA DATE:
September 15, 1999
ACTION:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
To allow farmers' market as a permitted use by special
permit in the Rural Areas zoning district. This would
require an amendment to the Albemarle County Zoning
Ordinance, Sections 3.1 (Definitions), 5.1.35
(Supplementary Regulations), and 10.2.2 (Rural Areas
District). These current Ordinance sections are
provided as Attachment A.
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Cilimberg, Benish, Ms. Sc,ala
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: x
I N FORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY: /
BACKGROUND:
On October 11, 1995, the Board of Supervisors adopted an amendment to the County Zoning Ordinance to
permit farmers' markets in the C-1, Commercial and HC, Highway Commercial zoning districts. Pdor to that
action, farmers' markets were not a permitted in the Zoning Ordinance. Although originally recommended by
staff to be permitted in RA District by special use permit, the ultimate amendment did not include farmers'
markets as a permitted use in the RA. The reasoning was that a farmers' market should be located near the
population (customers) it serves and that if a market is desirable in the RA District, it would be most
appropriately located on a school property where there are existing supporting facilities (paved parking,
restrooms, etc.). Furthermore, if sponsored by the County, the market would be considered a public use, and
would not require a special use permit. In summary, with the opportunity to provide for farmers' markets at
schools as a publicly sponsored use, there was not a significant need envisioned to provide it as a defined use
in the RA District.
In recent years direct marketing approaches such as farmers markets have gained in popularity and the
County has received more frequent interest in establishing farmers markets. This past year, one group
attempted to establish a new farmers market at Albemarle High School with the assistance of the Virginia
Cooperative Extension Office and the County. However, it is not possible under current circumstances to
utilize schools in the Rural Areas for a farmers' market, the one option thought to be available for establishing a
farmers' market in the Rural Area.
DISCUSSION:
Although a Development Area location may generally be the most appropriate location for farmers' markets,
there may be certain Rural Area locations where they may be appropriate. A farmers market is not unlike four
general categories of commercial/service uses allowed either by right or by special permit in the Rural Area.
These are: 1 ) country stores, 2) gift, craft, and antique stores; 3) wayside stands; and, 4) farm sales.
Furthermore, The Comprehensive Plan gives highest priority to the preservation of agricultural and forestall
activities in the Rural Areas. It stated, "For agricultural and forestall resources to be successfully preserved
from a land use standpoint, they must be successful as a business/industry." A Board appointed Agricultural
AGENDA TITLE: ZTA-99-04 Resolution of Intent to Amend the County Zoning Ordinance
AGENDA DATE: September 15, 1999
Page 2 of 2
and Forestall Industries Support Committee reported on ways to provide support for agriculture and forestry.
One of the committee's recommendations stated "Develop marketing strategies for all agricultural/forestall
products" and a strategy to "Support farmers' markets as a direct marketing strategy and a way to educate
people about agriculture."
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommend to Board of Supervisors adoption of the attached resolution of intent to amend the Zoning
Ordinance (Attachment B). The Planning Commission reviewed this proposal at its August 17th meeting, and
recommended adoption of the resolution.
99.151
ATTACHMENT A
~ , ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
PAGE 1
Dwelling Unit: A single unit providing complete, independent living facilkies for one ( 1 ) or more
persons, including permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation.
Easement: A right possessed by the owner of one parcel of land by reason of ownership of such
parcel to use the land of another for a special purpose not inconsistent with the general propert>.'
rights of that owner. (Added 7-20-88)
Eating Establishment: Any restaurant, coffee shop, cafeteria. short-order cafe, lunchroom.
tuncheonette, hotel dining room, dinner theatre, tavern. soda fountain. eating place or any other
establishment maintained and operated where there is furnished for compensation. food or drink of
any kind for oonsumption primarily therein; provided, however, that a fast food restaurant shall
not be included within the meaning of this definition, and that a snack bar or refreshment stand at
a public or nonprofit recreation facility, operated solely by the agency or group operating the
recreational facility, and for the convenience of patrons of the facility, shall not be deemed to be
an eating establishment. Entertainment which is provided for the enjoyment of the patrons shall be
considered accessory to an eating establishment
Dancing by patrons shall be considered as entertainment accessory to an eating establishment.
provided the space made available for such dancing shall not be more than one-eighth (1/8) of that
pan of the floor area available for dining. Provisions for dancing made available under this
definition shall be subject to the permit requirements of Chapter 3 of the Code of Albemarle.
Eave: The lower portion of a roof that overhangs the wall.
I. An individual; or
2. Two (2) or more persons related by blood, marriage, adoption, or guardianship. and/or
not more than two (2) unrelated persons living together as a single housekeeping unit in a
dwelling or dwelling unit; or:
3. For the purposes of this ordinance the following shall not apply to the R- 1 ~ R-2 and R-4
residential districts: a group of not more than six (6) persons not related by blood,
marriage. adoption or guardianship living together as a single housekeeping unit in a
dwelling or dwelling unit.
Farm Sales: The sale of agricultural or horticultural produce or merchandise produced on the
farm, with subordinate sales of produce or merchandise not produced on the premises.
Merchandise not produced on the premises shall be companion items intended to be used with (for
planting, caring for, displaying, combining with, canning, or preserving) the agricultural or
horticultural produce which is produced on the farm, but shall not include farm machinery and
equipment (except hand tools), building materials, furniture, or other like items. Examples:
Canning jars, pumpkin carving kits, wreath making supplies, floral arranging supplies, potting
soil,. pots, packaged fertilizer, mulch, peat moss, pruning shears, gardening gloves, Christmas tree
decorations. (Added 10-11-95)
Farm Winery:' An establishment located on a farm with a producing vineyard, orchard or similar
growing area and with facilities for fermenting and bottling wine on the premises where the owner
or lessee manufactures wine from fresh fruits or other agricultural products predominantly grown
or produced on such farm or from fruits, fruit juices or other agricultural products grown or
produced elsewhere. (Added 12-16- 8 1 )
Farmers' Market: An existing parking area used periodically by two (2) or more farmers only for
the seasonal sale of agricultural or horticultural produce or merchandise produced on their farms.
18-3-5
ALBEMARLE COUNTY CODE
ATTACHMENT A
PAGE 2
5.1.35 FARM SALES
a,
One (1) farm sales structure may be established per farra. In addition to displays and sales of
agricultural or horticultural produce or merchandise which is produced on the farm, it may
include companion items not produced on the premises, but intended to be used with
agricultural or horticultural produce which is produced on the farm. The farm sales structure
shall not be established until the agricultural or horticultural produce growing area has been
established and is in production. Such growing area shalI be reestablished on an annual basis.
The total retail sales area in the farm sales structure shall not exceed fifteen hundred (1,500)
square feet. Greenhouses shall not be counted as part of the total retail sales area, unless one
is designated as the farm sales swuctttre. At all times, at least fifty (50) percent of the retail
sales area inside the farm sales structure shall be agricultural or horticultural produce or
merohandise produced on the premises. The remaining fifty (50) percent area may be
companion items. Displays outside the farm sales structure shall be limited to agricultural and
horticultural produce only.
A preliminary schematic plan in accordance with section 32.4.1 shall be submitted along with.
and b~ome a part of, the special use permit application. The plan shall include the area of
the farm sales structure, parking and entrance. The plan shall address, in particular.
provisions for safe and convenient access from and to the public road. adequacy of delineation
of parking, and-general information regarding the exterior appearance of the proposed site.
Based on the submitted information, the board of supervisors may then waive the requirement
for a site development plan in a particular case, upon a finding that the requirement of a site
development plan would not forward the purposes of this ordinance or otherwise serve the
public interest. No such use shall be established without Virginia Department of
Transportation appwval of commercial access to the site.
The farm sales structure and parking area shall not be located closer than fifty (50) feet to any
adjoining property not under the same ownership. The farm sales structure shall meet front
yard setbacks for a primary structure. The parking area shall not be located closer than ten
(10) feet to any public or private street right-of-way.
e. Farm machine~ and equipment (except hand tools), building materials, furniture or other like
items, shall not be offered for sale.
f. All farm sales structures shall meet all applicable requirements of the Virginia Uniform
Statewide Building Code. (Added I0-I 1-95)
5.1.36 FARMERS' MARKET
a. A site development plan shall be required, unless waived in accordance with section 32.2.2.
Farmers' markets shall be limited to a maximum of two (2) days per week, during daylight
hours, between May I and November 30 only. Days and hours of operation shall be only
those specified on the site development plan.
c. The parking area for all farmers' and customers' vehicles shall not be located closer than ten
(I0) feet to any public street right-of-way.
d,
The applicant shall make adequate arrangements for the removal of trash and debris and
general restoration of the site following an event. The zoning administrator may establish and
require the posting of a bond in an amount deemed sufficient for such purpose.
18-5-18
ATTACHMENT B
RESOLUTION OF INTENT
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan recommends that support be
provided for agriculture and related industries; and '
WHEREAS, '.'farmers' market" is currently allowed only within the C-1 Commercial
and HC Highway Commercial zoning districts; and
WHEREAS, the definition of "farmers' market" contained in the zoning ordinance is
deemed as unnecessarily restrictive to allow the Board of County Supervisors to consider the
appropriateness of individual proposals; and
WHEREAS, it is the intent of the Board of County Supervisors to liberalize existing
zoning restrictions to allow agricultural efforts in the County to flourish;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that for the purposes of public necessity,
convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice, the Board of County Supervisors hereby
adopts a resolution of intent to amend the definition of and supplementary regulations for
"farmers' market" and to provide for "farmers' market" within all commercial zoning districts
and within the RA Rural Areas district; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarte County Planning Commission is
requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution of intent, and to remm its recommendations
to this Board of County Supervisors at the earliest possible date.
I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a 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 .
Clerk, Board of County Supervisors
David P. Bowerman
Charlotte Y. Humphris
Forrest R. MaBhall, Jr.
COUNTY OF AI_BEMAI~I F
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, ~n~jinia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800
Charles S. Martin
Walter E Perkin~
Whit~ Hall
Sall~ H. Thomas
September 20, 1999
Mr. John C. Martin
5115 Catterton Road
Free union, VA 22946
Dear Mr. Martin:
Thank you for your recent comments to the Board of Supervisors on September 15, 1999,
concerning the cancelled joint meeting of the Board, City Council, and the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority. A decision has not yet been as to when the meeting will be rescheduled. The Board
appreciates you taking the time to appear and make your views known.
CSM/Ibh
Again, thank you for your comments.
Sincerely,
Charles S. Martin
Chairman
Printed on recycled paper
CONSTITUTION WEEK
September 17- 23, 1999
our Fotmding Fathers, in order to secure the blessings of liberty for themselves and their
posterity, did ordain and establish a Constitution for the United States of America; and
WHEREAS,
it is of the greatest importance that all citizens fully understand the provisions and
principles contained in the Constitution in order to effectively support, preserve and
defend it against all enemies; and
the two hundred twelfth anniversary of the Signing of the Constitution provides an
historic opportunity for all Americans to remember the achievements of the Framers of
the Constitution and the rights, privileges, and responsibilities they afforded us in this
unique document; and
the independence guaranteed to American citizens, whether by birth or naturalization,
should be celebrated by appropriate ceremonies and activities during Constitution Week,
September 17 through 23, as designated by proclamation of the President of the United
States of America in accordance with Public Law 915;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that I, Charles S. Martin, Chairman, on behalf of the Board
of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim the week of September
17 through September 23, 1999, as
CONSTITUTION WEEK
in the County of Albemarle, Virginia, and urge all citizens to reflect during that week on
the many benefits of our Federal Constitution and the privileges and responsibilities of
American citizenship.
Signed and sealed this 15th day of September, 1999.
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
Stormwater Agreement Modification
AGENDA DATE:
September 15, 1999
ITEM NUMBER:
ACTION:
INFORMATION:
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Approval of Stormwater Agreement for Airport
Industrial Park
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. TuckedDavis
ATTACHMENTS: Agreement; Sept.3 letter
.~questing approval
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
The Airport Industrial Park is subject to a Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement
(hereafter, Stormwater Agreement) executed in Decemberof 1997. It is a standard agreement setting forth the
responsibilities of the landowners for maintaining on-site stormwater management facilities. Included in the terms
is a provision which requires the landowner to hold the County harmless from any liability in the event the facilities
fail to operate properly.
DISCUSSION:
The Virginia Department of Transportation wishes to purchase an 8.09 acre parcel in the Airport Industrial Park
for VDOT facilities. 'VDOT has requested that the Stormwater Agreement be modified because the
Commonwealth cannot legally bind itself to a hold harmless provision and to address other sovereign immunity
issues. A proposed Conditional Release of Indemnity and Lien Provision in Stormwater Management/BMP
Facilities Maintenance Agreement has been drafted to'address the VDOT issues. The County Attorney's Office
has reviewed the proposed Agreement and finds that it accommodates VDOT and still maintains the necessary
assurance from the remaining property owners that the stormwater facilities will be maintained.
RECOMMENDATION:I,' " .:. :
Staff recommends that the Board authorize the County Executive to execute the proposed Conditional Release
of Indemnity and Lien Provisions in Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement for the
Airport Industrial Park.
BOARD 01~ SUPERVISORS
99.173
RALPH L. FEIL
DAVID H. PETTIT
J. PAGE WILLIAMS
CATHERINE ]. WOMACK
RICHARD HOWARD-SMITH
FRED O. WOOD.
DAVID B. FRANZLeN '
JENNIFER C. SLAUGHTER
FEIL, PETTIT 8' VqlLLIAlVlS, P.L.C.
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
530 EAST MAIN STREET
P- O. BOX 2057
CHARLOLUe,,~Wn-L'~ VIRGINIA 22902-2057
March 31, 2000
TELEPHONE
(804) 979-1400
TELLCOPIER
(804) 977-5109
FIRM E-MAIL
FPW~FPWLAW. COM
INTERNET
WWW. FPWLAW. COM
Larry W. Davis, Esquire
Albemarie County Attorney
County Office Building
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
In re: Wachovia Bank, N.A. - Sale of Residue, Airport Industrial Park 'to'Commonwealth
of Virginia, Department of Transportation
The sale by Wachovia Bank of the residue property in Airport Industrial 'Park to VDOT
closed on March 30, 2000. Enclosed for your records are copies of the fully executed Conditional
Release of Indemnity and Lien Provisions in Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance
Agreement and First Amendment to Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance
Agreement, and clerk's receipts evidencing recordation f both documents on March 30.
ly yours, .
liams
J'PW/nng
enclosures
· ,JUNTY OF ALBEMARL
Conditional Release of Indemnity and Lien Provisions in
Stormwater Manaeement/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement
THIS CONDITIONAL RELEASE OF INDEMNITY AND LIEN PROVISIONS is
made this 1st day of July, 1999 by and among the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, (herein the ',County"); WACHOVIA BANK, N.A.
CWachovia"), a national banlc!ng association,. ~ successor by merger to JEFFERSON
NATIONAL BANK, the Declarant, sometimes referred to herein as the "Declarant"; MARK
W. HUTCHISON and GINA R. HUTCHISON (collectively "Hutchison"), owners of
Revised Lot 7A, Airport Industrial Park, also 'shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as
parcel 19B-8; MARSHALL GOLDMAN 'CGoldman"), owner of Revised Lot 8A, Airport
Industrial Park, also shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19B-9, all of the
foregoing parties herein to be indexed as Grantors; and COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA, DEPARTM'F~NT OF TRANSPORTATION CVI)OT") contract purchaser of the
Residue, to be indexed as a Grantee
RECITALS
R-1. By Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement (the
"Agreement") dated December 11, 1997, recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court
of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1663, page 201, the Declarant subjected certain
property in Airport Industrial Park to the Agreement with the County;
R-2. Wachovia has contracted to sell to VDOT all that certain parcel of land in the
County of Albemarle, Virginia, containing approximately 8.09 acres and being more
particularly described as Residue Tax Map 32, parcel 19B (herein the "Residue") as shown on
[This document prepared by Fell, Pettit & Williams, PLC of Charlottesville, VA]
the plat dated October 8, 1998 entitled "Subdivision Plat Showing Lots 7A and 8A; a
Redivision of Lots 7 and 8 Shown on Plat at DB 1644, pp 328-329 Airport Industrial Park
near Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, Rivarma Magisteri~,. District, Albemarle County,
Virginia", prepared by Roudabush, Gale and Associates, which subdivision plat is of record in
the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 1762, page 550-551;
R-3. VDOT has represented to Wachovia and the County that as a state agency,
VDOT cannot agree to hold any entity harmless, as it would constitute a waiver of its
sovereign immunity; and
R-4. The County has agreed to release VDOT and any other State agency from the
indemnification provisions of the Agreement and from the imposition of any liens against the
Residue for any maintenance charges, conditioned upon VDOT's acquisition of the Residue
and its agreement to reimpose those provisions upon a subsequent conveyance.
NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable
consideration, the parties agree as follows:
(1) VDOT Payment: No Lien: VDOT agrees that it shall pay an apportioned sum
equal to the stormwater facility maintenance charges (the "Maintenance Charges"), ff any, for
the Residue as such charges are imposed by the Agreement. VDOT shall not be a member of
the Association, ff ever established. It is expressly understood and agreed by all parties,
however, that so long as the Residue is owned by VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or
any department, agency or institution thereof, the Maintenance Charges shall not be a charge
or lien on the Residue land and any improvements thereon. Furthermore, so long as the
Residue is owned by VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or
2
institution thereof, the Residue shall not be subject to any lien for such Maintenance Charges
and no action to collect such Maintenance Charges in the event of nonpayment shall result in.
the imposition of interest, costs or attomey's fees against VDOT, the Commonwealth of
Virginia or any depaXtment, agency or institution thereof, unless such costs or fees are
otherwise recoverable under Virginia law.
(2) Release of Indemnity Provision in Favor of VDOT: The County agrees that
VDOT, upon its acquisition of the Residue, and so long as the Residue is owned by VDOT,
the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or institution thereof, is hereby
released from and shall not be bound by the provisions'of paragraph 8 of the Agreement
relating to indemnification of the County of Albemarle. The aforesaid indemnity provisions
shall not be a charge on the Residue land and any improvements thereon and shall not be
applicable to VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or institution
thereof.
(3) Condition of Release of VDOT: VDOT covenants and agrees that in the. event it
acquires the Residue and subsequen~y conveys the Residue (or any portion thereof) to any
entity other than the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or institution
thereof, it shall subject the Residue or the applicable portion thereof that is being conveyed to
the provisions of paragraph 8 of the Agreement relating to indemnification of the County by
express covenants and restrictions contained in the deed or other document of conveyance that
will be effective upon such conveyance.
(4) Concurrence: Wachovia, I-htchison and Goldman, the only other parties to the
Agreement, join herein to concur with the above action by the County.
3
(5) Effect: In all other respects, except as modified conditioned upon the acquisition of
the Residue by VDOT, the Agreement remains in full force and effect.
(6) Counterparts: This conditional release agreement may be signed in counterparts, but
will only be effective when signed by all parries.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
Al:lpmved as'to form:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF .ALREMARLE
COUNTY VIRGINIA .
By
WACHOVIA BANK,
JEFFERSON NATIONAL BANK
By
Ron W. Paull, Assistant Vice President
Mark W. Hutchison
Gina R. Hutchison
Marshall Goldman
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By
Authorized Agent
4
STATE OF VIRGINIA
e/~r/COUNTY OF
The foregoin in trument was acknowledged before me this 6]7 ~day of
, ~ by Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County ExecutiVe and Agent for the
~ervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia.
My commission expires:
d. oo !
tary Pubnc '
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CITY/COUNTY OF
, m-wit: '
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of
,1999 by Ron W. PauH as Assistant Vice President of Wachovia Bank,
N.A.. (successor to Jefferson National Bank) on behalf of the bank.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF , m-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __
,1999 by Mark W. Hutchison and Gina R. Hutchison.
My commission expires:
day of
Notary Public
5
· (5) Effect: In all other respects, except as modified conditioned upon the acquisition of
the Residue by VDOT, the Agreement remains in full force and effect.
(6) Counterparts: This conditional release agreement may be signed in counterparts, but
will only be effective when signed by all paxties.
WITNESS the following signatures and seals:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALB~ .
COUNTY, VIRGINIA
By
Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive
Agent for the Board of Supervisors
WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., successor to
JEFFERSON NATIONAL BANK
':~ (SEAL)
chra L.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By ~th~%~r~ed
4
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF
, to-wit:
.The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this __ day of
~.1999 by Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive and Agent for the
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia.
My commission expires:
Notary Public
, to-wit:
The foregoing ins?mment was acknowledged before me this \~"' day of
~,'--'~?'~. ,,"~-,-¢, 1999 by Ron W. Paull as Assistant Vice President of Wachovia Bank,
-N.A.. (successor to Jefferson National Bank) on behalf of the bank.
My commission expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF ~A}~r/6' , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~/j'day of
~'~'h9 ~,Y' , 1999 by Mark W. Hutchison and Gina R. Hutcliison.
My commission expires: %'~4 ~'~' '
~Pu~lic"
5
STATE OF ~
CITY/COUNTY OF /14r~d'[/l'eL~i''' V , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/1/~12~ ~,,~,-~- , 1999 'by Ri~h,ud L. Benes./'llCt~3}')cp/I Go/dmor~
My commission expires:
__ day of
C
STATE OF VIRGINIA
· CITY/COUNTY OF ?,tT,,lt..l,~l,t,~v'tll~.. , to-wit:
The foregoin ' trument was acknowledged before me this ~ day of
,~t.r.v, tZ~ ~,, ~ of the Commonwealth of V~ginia, Department of TranspOrtation..
My commission expires:
Notary~blic ~
C:\Doos\Waohovia\Storm-waiver$.agt. wpdSI24199 me 6
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINI_4.
OFFICI~IL RE~IPT
tILB~/~RLE CIRCUIT COURT
~ED RE~IFT
D~TE: '03/30/00 TIME: 12:08:52/1CCOUNT:. O0~CLRO00~07! RECEIPT: 00000~5~t5
C~SHt~R: TJ~ RE~: ~BO1TY~: ~GREE P~Y~T: FU~ P~Y~ENT
tNSTRUNENT : 000~71 BOOK: P~E: RECORDED: 03130!00
~TOR N~E: BO~O OF SU~RVISORS OF ~L~EHA El: ~ LOC~/TY= CO
6R~NT~ N~E: CO~ON~GLTH OF VIRG~NI~ OEP~ EX: N PERC~T:
'~CEIVED OF: SOUTHE~ TITLE INSURANCE DATE OF DEED: 07/01/9~
$20, O0
~S~IPTION I: COND1TIO]IAL RELF..qSE OF INDF.,~NITY ~IP, t) LIEN
2: PROVISIONS
CONSIDERATION: .00
CODE DESCRIPTION
301 DEUS
t04 TECHNOLOGY F~{) FE
ASSU~fi'-'IV/tL: , O0 nAP:
PAID HOE DE~IPT!ON PAID
16,00 lt}5 V~ 1,00
3.00
TENDERED : 20,00
AJIOUNT PAID: ~0.00
C,,~NBE AHT: ,00
CLERK OF COURT: SHELBY J. ~ztRSNALL
(7/99)
FIRST AMENDMENT TO
Stormwater Mana~,ement/B1Vlt' Facilities Maintenance A~,reement
THIS AMENDMENT is made this 1"t day of July, 1999 by and among WACHOVIA
BANK, N.A. CWachovia"), a-national banking association, successor by merger to
JEFFERSON NATIONAL BANK, the Declaxant, sometimes referred to herein as the
,..~
"Declarant"; UNIVERS)j_, TEST EQUIPMF~NT,'INC. CUniversal"), a Virginia
corporation, owner of property shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19B-2;
QUAH. RUN CONDOMINIUM OWNERS.ASSOCIATION, an unincorporated association
made up of the Unit Owners, to-wit: JAMES 'G. WEVIMER, JR. and PAMELA A.
WIMM'F~R, husband and wife (collectively "Wimmer"), the owners of Units 1 and 4 of Quail
Run Condominium as shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as parcels 19B-3 and 19B-6;
DAVID L. PURCELL and SUSAN A. PURCELL, husband and wife, and EDWARD W.
PURCELL and ALICE L. PURCELL, husband and wife (coLlectively "Purcell"), the
owners of Unit 2 of Quail Run Condominium as shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as
pared 19B-4; and THE CLEAN MACHINE, INC., a Virginia corporation ("Clean
Machine"), owner of Unit 3 of Quail Run Condominium as shown on Albemarle County Tax
Map 32, as parcel 19B-5; DAVID A. FREF_2VIAN and ANDREA L. FREEMAN
(collectively "Freeman"), owners of Lot 1, Airport Industrial Park, also shown on Albemarle
County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19B-7; EXPRESS REALTY, LLC ("Express"), a Virginia
limited liability company, owner of Lot 2, Airport Industrial Park, also shown on Albemarle
County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19C-3; MARK W. HUTCHISON and GINA R.
HUTCHISON (collectively "Hutchison"), owners of Revised Lot 7A, Airport InduStrial Park,
This document prepared by Fell, Pettit & Williams, PLC of Charlottesville, VA
also shown on Albemarle County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19B-8; MARSHALL GOLDMAN
("Goldman"), owner of Revised Lot 8A, Airport Industrial Park, also shown on Aibemarle
County Tax Map 32, as parcel 19B-9, (all of the foregoing parties herein sometimes
collectively called the "Owners',), to be'indexed as Grantors; and COMMONWEALTH OF
VIRGINIA, DEPARTMF~NT OF TRANSPORTATION CVDOT") contract purchaser of the
Residue, to be indexed as a Grantee and a Grantor.
RECITALS
R-I. By Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement (the
"Agreement") dated December 11, 1997, recorded in the Clerk'.s Office of the Circuit Court
of Aibemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1663, page 201,.the Declarant subjected certain
property in Airport Industrial Park to the Agreement with the Board of Supervisors of said
Coumy;
R-2. The Agreement was intended to cover all properties in the Airport Industrial
Park, but erroneously referred only to the properties in Airport Industrial Park then owned by
the Declarant;
R-3 The purpose of this Amendment is to clarify that all properties in the Airport
Industrial Park may utilize the drainage Facilities (as described in the Agreement) and that
each of the Owners of the said properties is bound by the Agreement, except as provided
herein;
R-4. Wachovia has contracted to sell to VDOT all that certain parcel of land in the
County of Aibemarle, Virginia, containing approximately 8.09 acres and being more
particularly described as Residue Tax Map 32, parcel 19B (herein the "Residue") as shown on
2
the plat dated October 8, 1998 entitled "Subdivision Plat Showing Lots 7A and 8A; a
Redivision of Lots 7 and 8 Shown on Plat at DB 1644, pp 328-329 Airport Industrial Park
near Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, Rivanna Magisterial District, Albemarle County,
Virginia'!, prepared by Roudabush, Gale and Associates, which subdivision plat is of record in
the aforesaid Clerk' s Office in Deed Book 1762, page 550-551;
R-5. VDOT has represented to the Owners that as a state agency, VDOT cannot agree
to hold any entity harmless, as it would constitute a waiver of its sovereign immunity; and
R-6 The County of Albemarle has agreed to release VDOT from all indemnity and
lien provisions in the Agreement by a Conditional Release instrument dated July 1, I999 and
recorded immediately prior to this document.
NOW TI-I~I~F, FORE, in consideration of the premises and other good and valuable
consideration, the parties agree as follows:
(I) Use of Drainage Facilities: The Owners, being all of the owners 'of properties in
the Airport Industrial Pa~k, hereby agree that each Owner, and its successors and assigns as
owners of properties in the Airport Industrial' Park, including VDOT, upon its purchase of the
Residue, may utilize the stormwater drainage Facilities (as described in the Agreement), which
Facilities have been constructed by the Declarant and maintained by the Declarant to date;
(2) Bound by Agreement: The Owners, being all of the owners of the properties in
the Airport Industrial Park, hereby agree that each Owner, and its successors and assigns as
owners of properties in the Airport Industrial Park, is bound by the Agreement as a ·
Landowner, except as provided herein.
(3) Cost Sharing: The Owners agree that any cost incurred in maintaining the
stormwater drainage Facilities (and any other costs described in the Agreement) shall be borne
by the Owners, their successors and assigns as owners of properties in the Airport Industrial
Park, on a proportionate basis calculated by the ratio of the size of Owner' s lot area to the
total lot area in Airport Industrial Park.
(4) VDOT Payment: No Lien: VDOT agrees that it shall pay an apportioned sum
equal to the stormwater facility maintenance charges (the "Maintenance Charges"), if any, for
the Residue as such charges are imposed by the Agreement. VDOT shall not be a member of
the owner's~Association, if ever' one is established. It is expressly understood and agreed by
all parties, however, that so long as the ResidUe is owned by VDOT, the Commonwealth of
Virginia or any department, agency or institution thereof, the Maintenance Charges shall not
be a charge or lien on the Residue .land and any improvements thereon. Furthermore, so long
as the Residue is owned by VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency
or institution thereof, the Residue shall not'be subject to any lien for such Maintenance
Charges and no action to collect such Maintenance Charges in the event of nonpayment shall
result in the imposition of interest, costs or attorney' s fees against VDOT,. the Commonwealth
of Virginia or any department, agency or institution thereof, unless such costs or fees are
otherwise recoverable under Virginia law.
(5) VDOT Payment: No Indemnity: In consideration of the VDOT payment of its
proportionate share of the costs set forth in paragraph'4 above, the parties agree that so long as
the Residue is owned by VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or
institution thereof, the provisions of paragraph 8 of the Agreement relating to indemnification
4
of the County of Albemarle shall not be a charge on the Residue land and any improvements
thereon and shall not be applicable to VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia or any
department, agency or institution thereof. The County of Albemarle, by separate agreement
recorded just prior to this Amendment, has agreed to conditionally release 'the Residue, if
acquired by VDOT, from the indemnity provisions in paragraph 8 of the Agreement.
(6) VDOT Conveyance: VDOT covenants and agrees that in the event it acquires the
Residue and subsequently conveys the Residue (or any portion thereof) to any entity other than
the Commonwealth of Virginia or any department, agency or institution thereof, it shall
subject the. Residue or the applicable'portion thereof that is being conveyed to the provisions of
paragraph 8 of the Agreement relating to indemnification of the County of Albemarle by
express covenants and restrictions contained in the deed or other document of conveyance that
will be effective upon such conveyance:
(7) Counterparts: This Amendment may be signed in counterparts, but will only be
effective when signed by all parties.
WITNF_3S the following signatures and seals:
WACHOVIA BANK, N.A., successor to
JEFFERSON NATIONAL BANK
By
Ron W. Paull, Assistant Vice President
UNIVERSAL TEST EQUIPMENT, INC.
A
QUAIL RUN CONDOMINIUA~ OWNERS
ASSOCIATION
[The association ba_s never organized
but all owners have signed below. ]
By
Auth ~zed Agent y
David L. Purcell
(SFAL)
(SEA~)
(SEAL)
· Sus~A/~.hrce~H.
Edward W. Purcell
Alice L. Purcell
(SFAL)
(SFAL)
(SEAL)
THE CLEAN MACHINE, INC.
By /-'~-/: "" - ~
William C Jr res ·
David A. Freeman
Andrea L. Freeman
(SEAL)
6
7/~S R,,~ , LLC
~ 'i~d Of~e '
· Gina R. ~utchjson
(SEAL)
(SEAL)
~,~,,~,~c/,~-__ (SEAL)
Ri~hnxd L. Sonon/g~r,5~ C~/elmQn
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA,
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
By Aathg~z~d Agent ' ('~
STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
C~TY/COUNTY OF ~-'. ~-~,\~
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this day of
X ~-~'~.~"'~ ~.~ , 1999 by Ron W. Paull as Assistant Vice President of Wachovia Bank,
N.A:. (successor to Jefferson National Bank) on behalf of the bank.
My commission expires:
7
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF ~//loly'll/"/e~ , to-wit:
- Uaiversal Test Equipment, Inc. on behalf o~he corporation. as 't)lbe. f~re,'~/t:t, Zr~tc of
My commission expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~t. day of
_, .']?X~Ce~b~ , 1999 by James G. Wimmer, Jr. and Pamela A. Wimmer.
My commission expires: ~,~
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF rO,/~rr'D(/e:' , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ptfl. day of
~flF)qb~? lr , 1999 by David L. Purcell and Susan A. Purcell. '
My commission expires:
8
STATE OF VIRGINIA
C~TY/COUNTY OF
, to-wit:
· The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~ f}4'day of -
,-%~Dd JD~f , 1999 by Fxtward W, Purcell and 'Alice L. Purcell.
My commission expires:
S~Ar~ oF vma~A
cz~/couvrY OF
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this ~day of
7~Jl?( ,1999 by William C. Bascom, Jr. as President of The Clean Machine, Inc..
N
STATE OF VIRGINIA
c~Ty/coum-f oF
, to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 8~t~' day of
<7)t~FY~J~, 1999 by David A. Freeman and Andrea L. 'Freeman.
My commission expires: %'~4 oQt"jg~/ ~J. Zt
]Q/~]T')O. K',~ , to-wit:
· ~% 7°', % ~%' ~ %~ ?F~ .' W~ ~2'~' ~ ~'~'~ o,
~ t~ of E~ress ReMty, LLC.
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUNTY OF
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this f-~ ]~itay of
c'~f)~.Dg~,gF , 1999 by Mark W. Hutchison and Gina R. Hutchison.
My commission expires:
STATE
CITY/COUNTY OF ~,ul ~ t~L~5 ~' )X , to-wit:
The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this
/}/~j/e.~-~" , 1999 by tlichard L. Dcnoo.
My commission expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY/COUN'I'Y OF
__ da~ of
-PubliC.
, m-wit:
The foregoin ' strument was acknowledged before me this ~-~ day of
~v~ ~~~ of the Commonwe~th o~kgi~a, Depment of Tinspotation..
My commission .~xpires: Lr-,?~) 31 t ,ila~
C:\Doos\Wachovla\Storm-am~nd2.agt.wpdS/25/99 ma 10
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIj~
aFFICtaL RECEIPT
aLBEtt~RLE CIRCUIT CDURT
DEED RECEIPT
DATE: 03/30/00 TI~E: la~lo:/a ~CCOU~T~ ~3CLR000407E RECEIPT: 000000~5616
C~SHIER: r~ REE: ABOI TYPE: ~END PAYMENT: FULL
INSTRUI~,ENT : 000407~ 9OOK: P~E: RECORDED: 03t30t00 AT l~:lO
ERANTDR ,k/AE: IIACHOVt~t BANK, N A Eh N L~CALITY: CO
GRANTEE NA~E: COHt~NMF..,qLTH~F VIR6INIA DEPAR E~: N PERCENT:
~D ADDRES~: NIA
RECEZVE~ OF: SOUTHERN TITLE INSURANCE ~aTE OF DEED: 07!O1R~
DESCRIPTION 1: FIRST AfiEND~EHT TO STOR.~ATER MANaEEHEHT
CONSIDERttTION= .00 .qSEUI~E/VaL: .00
. CODE DESCR.IPTION PAID' CODE DESCRIPTION P~ID
301 DEEDS ~5,00 I~ .VSLF 1,00
IO6 TECHNOLOOY FUND FEE 3,00
TENDERED :
- ~DUNT P~IB: Eg,~O
CHANGE ANT: .00
CLERK OF COURT: SHELBY 3, MARSHALL
DC-18 (7/99)
-- f
RALPH L FElL
DAVID I-L P~'FLr.t-
3- PAOE WILLIAMS
CATI-I]ERINE J. WOMACK
RICHARD HOWARD-SMITH
FRED O. WOOD, JR.
DAVID B.
JBNNIFBR J. CIOCCA
FEIL, PETTIT 6' Vv'[LLIAMS, P.L.C.
ATTOKNEYS AT' LAW
530 BA~r MAIN STREET
P- O. BOX 2057
CHARLO.t-A'.w~Vn'-~. VIRGINIA 22902-Z057
September 3, 1999
TELEPHONE
(804) 979-1400
TELBCOPIBK
(804) 977-5109
FIRM E-MAIL
FPWeFPWLAW. COM
WViW. FPWLAW. CO M
Larry W. Davis, Esquire
County Attorney for the County of Albemarle
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
In re: Wachovia Bank, N.A. - Sale of 8.09 acre residue in Airport Industrial Park
to Commonwealth of Virginia, Department of Transportation (VDOT)
Thank you for taking the time over the past couple of months to review various drafts
of agreements to facilitate the sale by my client, Wachovia Bank, N.A. of the 8.09 acre
residue parcel in Airport Industrial Park. The parcel which is under contract to' VDOT is the
residue of Tax Map 32, parcel IgB and is shown on the October 8, 1998 subdivision plat by
Roudabush, Gale and Associates, a copy of which is attached. hereto as Exhibit 1:
As you know, the property under consideration for sale to VDOT is subject to a
Stormwater ManagementfBMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement dated December 11, 1997
and recorded in Deed Book 1663, page 201. A copy of that agreement is attached hereto as
Exhibit 2.
We have been in negotiations for several months with the Attorney General's Office to
try to draft documents to accommodate their legal needs with respect to this site. As you
know, one of the issues is the agreement referenced in Exhibit 2. The issue is probably best
summarized by quoting from the May 20, 1999 letter to me from J. Steven Sheppard, llI,
Senior Assistant Attorney General and Chief Real Estate and Construction Section:
"As we also discussed, the December 1997 Stormwater Management/BMP.
Facilities Maintenance Agreement between Jefferson National Bank and the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors (Deed Book 1663, page 201) is most
problematic. Specifically, that document contains a hold harmless provision in
¶8 (page 4) which is binding on successors in interest .under ¶9. As we
discussed in the process of fmaliTing the contract between Wachovia and
VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia cannot agree to hold any entity
harmless, as it would constitute a waiver of sovereign immunity. The
Larry W. Davis, Esquire
September 3, 1999
Page two
Agreement also only imposes the sharing of expenses on 4 parcels, thus
conflicting with the initial Declaration of Restrictive Covenants and Conditions.
We need to discuss the modification of this agreement (as well as its impact on
the initial Declaration of Restrictive Covenants and Conditions)."
In order to deal with the sovereign immunity: issues raised by AAG Sheppard, we have
drafted a document called "Conditional Release of Indemnity and Lien Provisions in
Stormwater Management/BMP Facilities Maintenance Agreement". The original of this
document is enclosed as Exhibit 3.' I understand that you have approved the form of this
agreement and have asked us to send this letter along with the supporting information so that
the issue of obtaining the approval of Albemarle County might be placed as an item on the
Board of Supervisors' consent agenda.
Essentially, Exhibit 3 calls for VDOT to pay its proportionate share of the stormwater
facility maintenance charges. The payment of those charges is by agreement as opposed to
being enforced by a possible lien on the VDOT tract. Also,' VDOT is being relieved of the
standard provisions relating to indemnification of Albemarte County with respect to the
stormwater maintenance facility. The agreement provides that the release being given by the
County of Albemarle runs only to "VDOT, the Commonwealth of Virginia, or any
department, agency or institution thereof.'."
I trust that this letter is sufficient, but if I can amply the information in any way, please
don't hesitate to contact me.
Ill yOUY-~
mS
J'PW/rmg
enclosures
cc: 3. Steven Sheppard, Iff, Senior Assistant Attorney General
Ron W. hull, Waehovia Bank, N.A.
William L. Howard, Real Estate m
Jm~ s. oi~o~, m
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Office of the Governor
August 23, 1999
John Patti Woodley, Jr.
Secretary of Natural Resources
The Honorable Charles S. Martin
Chairman, County of Albemarle Board of Supervisors
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
Dear Mr. Martin:
Governor Gilmore asked me to respond to your letter and the resolution from the County
of Albemarle Board of Supervisors.
Govemor Gilmore's "Plan for Stewardship of Virginia's Environment in the Twenty-First
Century'! states that the Commonwealth should promote the use of conservation easements to
preserve natural and historic resources, and should create funding opportunities for the
acquisition and operation of new natural areas and state parks.
As you know the Virginia Land Conservation Foundation has been revitalized and
renamed from the former Virginia Conservation and Recreation Foundation by Chapters 900 and
906 of the 1999 Virginia Acts of Assembly. The Virginia Land Conservation Foundation has
received $1.75 million in funding this year, the first time the Foundation has ever had any
monies to expend. I am delighted that the 1999 General Assembly recognized the worthwhile
' goals of the Foundation and has enabled it to enrich and protect Virginia's rich natural heritage.
Thank you for notifying the Governor of the Board of Supervisor's Resolution and recent
decision to earmark $1.0 million to the County's Purchase of Development Rights program for
FY 2000. I will keep your efforts and resolution in mind as we move forward with budget
preparations.
Thank you for writing the Governor on this very important matter.
Very truly yours,
Jo~~Paul Woodley, Jr. ·
JPW/rb
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS'
P.O. Box 1475 · Richmond, Virginia 23218 · (804) 786-0044 · TDD (804) 786-7765
James S. Gilmore, III
Governor
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Office of the Governor
September 1, 1999
The Honorable Daniel Glickman
Secretary of Agriculture
United States Department of Agriculture .
Second Floor
14m Street and Independence Avenue, S.W.
Washington, D.C. 20250
Dear Secretary Glickman:
On behalf of Virginia's poultry producers I thank you for agreeing to my request to
have the Emergency Conservation Program eligibility guidelines changed to 'include poultry
producers. This important change will of great benefit and assistance.
Previously, I wrote you requesting drought designation for a total of twenty three
Virginia counties. I am now also requesting that that you designate the Virginia counties of
Albemarle, Appomattox, Culpeper, Fauquier, Nelson, Nottoway, Rappahannock, Russell,
Spotsylvania and Westmoreland as primary disaster areas to ensure farmers in these counties
are eligible for any available emergency assistance.
Attached are the official damage assessment reports that were prepared by the United
States Department of Agriculture for each Of these localities which show alfalfa, apple, corn,
hay, soybean, tobacco, wheat and pasture damages from the drought. Based on the damage
assessment reports, we estimate that the farmers in the ten counties covered by this request
have experienced losses in agricultural crops totaling more than $31 million. For all the 33
damage assessment reports that I have submitted thus far, total crop losses exceed $124
million.
I appreciate your attention to this request and look forward to your response in the near
future.
JSGIII/cas
Attachments
Very truly yours,
James S. Gilmore, III
Governor of Virginia
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
State Capitol · Richmond, Virginia 23219 · (804) 786-2211 * TDD (804) 371-8015
The Honorable Daniel Glickman
September 1, 1999
Page Two
C.'
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The. Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
The Honorable
Charles S. Robb, Member, U. S. Senate
John W. Warner, Member, U.S. Senate
Herbert H. Bateman, Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Thomas J. Bliley, Jr., Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Frederick Bouther, Member, U. S: House of Representatives
Thomas M. Davis, Ill., Member, U. S. House of Representatives
Virgil H. Goode, Jr., Member, U. S. House of Representatives
Robert W. Goodlatte, Member, U. S. House of Representatives
James P. Moran, Jr., Member, U. S. House of Representatives
Owen B. Pickett, Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Robert C. Scott, Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Norman Sisisky, Member, U.S. House of Representatives
Frank R. Wolf, Member, U. S. House of Representatives
Barry E. DuVal, Secretary of Commerce and Trade
The Honorable Gary K. Aronhalt, Secretary of Public Safety
J. Carlton Courter, III, Commissioner, Virg.'.mi.'a Depa.rtm~t of Agriculture .and
'..L ' ' ' Services ' '.
L/~h~leu~s~ Martin, Chairman, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Aileen T. Ferguson, County Administrator, Appomattox County
Bradley C. Rosenberger, Chairman, Culpeper County Board of
Supervisors
Larry Weeks, Chairman, Fauquier County Board of Supervisors
· Stephen A. Carter, County AdminiStrator, Nelson County
Ronald .E. Roark, County Administrator, Nottoway County
John W. McCarthy, County Administrator, County of Rappahannock
James E. Gillespie, County Administrator, Russell County
L. Kimball Payne, Ill, County Administrator, County of Spotsylvania
Norm Risavi, County Administrator, County of Westmoreland
Steven W. Blaine
swblaine~ntwbb.com
M WOODS
BATILE&B ,,Lp
Court Square Building
310 Fourth Street, N.E., Suite 300
Post Office Box 1288
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-1288
Telephone/TDD (804) 977-2500 * Fax (804) 980-2222
September 15, 1999
Direct Dial: (804)977-2588
Direct Fax: (804)980-2251
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Mr. Charles S. Martin
Chairman, Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Chairman Martin:
Re: CPA-97-05; Brass. Inc.
On behalf of the Applicant in the referenced matter, we respectfully withdraw our
application for a Comprehensive Plan Amendment, CPA-97-05. This request is being delivered
prior to the Board's consideration of the application at its meeting tonight. Upon your receipt of
this request, the Applicant expects that processing of the ap 'cation will cease without further
action by the Board.
Very t ~/~S'
SWB:hll
Mr. James B. Murray, Jr.
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Larry W. Davis, Esq.
co:
\\CHAX:2536~2588\Willoughby Project\Martin, C.S. 091599.do~
www. mwbb.com
AtMATY · AXLAt¢~ · BMXtMORE · BRVSSEtS ·CHAP, tOTIE · CFAntCYrrVgnm~. CmCAGO · JACKSOSVnI.E · MOSCOW · NORFOLK · RICHMOND · TrSONS CORNER · WAShq~qrOS · Zt3mca (O~ COUr4SEt)
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA TITLE:
CPA 97-05 Brass, Inc. [Willoughby Tract]
S U BJ ECT/PROPOSAL/REQU EST:
Work Session to discuss CPA 97-05 Brass, Inc., a request to
amend the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan to change
the designation of property consisting of 53.89 acres from
Industrial Service to Regional Service, for development of a
shopping center.
AGENDA DATE:
September 15, 1999
ITEM NUMBER:
ACTION: X INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
I N FORMATION:
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs~ Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
At the work session of September 1, 1999~ the Board of Supervisors directed staff to make several revisions to the Planning
Commission's recommended "Alternative Community Service Designation [Rooker-Rieley]," including but not limited to the
following issues: mandatory inclusion of residential use; minimization of impervious cover; environmental protection; design
options; and, transportation alternatives. Staff has included as attachments the revised (new) language (Attachment I),
revised language with bold (Attachment II), and the original Planning Commission's recommendation (Attachment Ill). Staff
also received via e-mail from the applicant suggested language for this amendment (Attachment IV). Staff considered these
suggestions during its development of the revised language provided in Attachments I and II.
Staff has also identified two adjacent parcels not included in the Brass, Inc. proposal: the Grand Piano Warehouse property
(Tax Map 76(M)1 ) Parcel 4A) and the parcel adjacent to the Holiday Inn, extending east across Biscuit Run (Tax Map 76
Parcel 55A) to the Brass property. The land use designations on these parcels may be reasonably expected to be affected
by the eventual Brass, Inc. site designation. No change to the Grand Piano Industrial Service designation is recommended.
The western parcel (adjacent to Holiday Inn) currently is designated Regional Service along Fifth Street Extended and
Industrial Service east of Biscuit Run. The portion designated Regional Service should remain unchanged. The eastern
portion of the parcel, that portion adjacent to Brass, Inc., is recommended for Community Service, to remain consistent with
Brass. Staff recommends the Board authorize this change be considered as a separate Comp Plan amendment
subsequent to its action on CPA 97-05 Brass, Inc.
Attachments:
Revised Community Service amendment language (final draft, no bold)
Revised Community Service amendment language (bold draft, deletions/additions indicated)
Rooker-Rieley Alternative Community Service Designation
Applicant amendment language recommendation
99.175
] ATTACHMENT I
Language to be added to Neighborhood Four Profile [Brass, Inc.],
page 59, Land Use Plan:
The area located south of the Willoughby residential development and north of 1-64
between Fifth Street Extended and Avon Street Extended, accessed via Bent Creek
Road, is designated for Community Service/Mixed Use development, as a retail,
office/light industrial, and residential center within Neighborhood Four. Development of
the site shall seek to continue the scale of and remain compatible with existing uses
within the adjacent and nearby City and County neighborhoods.
Fifth Street functions as a gateway to the Charlottesville-Albemarle community because
of, in part, the access opportunity provided by the 1-64 interchange. The land uses
along this road establish the first image and impression of both the larger urban area
and this particular neighborhood to those who pass by or visit from other areas in the
region. Because of its location at the corner of two Entrance Corridors, and at the
confiuence of Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek, this site is of high aesthetic and
environmental sensitivity and importance.
Land Use:
The site shall be developed as component areas that are distinct in function but
connected by pedestrian, vehicular, and architectural features, and designed to
provide a range of opportunities and services for residents, employees, shoppers,
and the general public. A mixed use plan of development is required, incorporating
retail and/or office/light industrial, and residential uses.
Preservation Tract: approximately five acres of elevated land at the western edge of
Parcel 2B, immediately east of the bridge and the "T" formed by the existing
intersection of Bent Creek Road and the access roads leading north and south from
it. This area shall be left undisturbed, and is intended to serve as a visual buffer
between the commercial development on the site and Fifth Street Extended, a
designated Entrance Corridor. Existing vegetation, especially exemplary specimen
or old growth trees, 24" or larger DBH (Diameter Breast Height), shall be preserved
on this tract, as well as the existing land contours and rock formations.
Floodplain: a greenway shall be dedicated along Moore's Creek and Biscuit Run,
and constructed as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan Greenway Plan.
Pedestrian connections across Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek may also be
constructed as appropriate. The large area of floodplain northeast of the confiuence
of Moore's Creek and Biscuit Run shall be dedicated as public open space, and may
be appropriate for a recreational use such as a public park or multi-purpose field.
Residential: approximately ten acres lying on the south side of and above the
existing access road to the Grand Piano warehouse, facing Moore's Creek and
Willoughby to the north. This area is designated for Urban Density residential
Revised 9~7~99 1
ATTACHMENT I
development (6 - 34 dwelling units per acre), with a minimum density of R-10 (10
dwelling units per acre).
Town Center: the central, lower portion of the site, designated for Community
Service scale commercial, office, and light industrial uses (single use not to exceed
65,000 square feet). This area shall serve as a transitional buffer between
residential and the large discount anchor uses on the site, and shall incorporate
usable public open space and pedestrian access between the two other uses in its
development plan.
Regional Service Uses: one anchor store is considered an appropriate Regional
Service use for this site, generally located in the area adjacent to 1-64 and oriented
to the public open space in the Town Center.
Site Design:
Site design shall maintain a positive relationship with the surrounding community,
acknowledging the proximity of the Willoughby residential neighborhood and historic
districts within the City of Charlottesville through the use of appropriate materials,
architectural features, color, internal and external lighting, and other design
elements.
· All facades of commercial buildings visible from a public road shall continue design
elements found on the front of the buildings.
· Loading docks, trash collection facilities, outdoor storage and related facilities shall
be incorporated into the design of building(s) so that they are not visible.
· Areas of open space/recreation shall be provided for users on-site (residents,
employees, shoppers, etc.)
Buildings should not appear monolithic; articulation (massing, architectural features,
component structures) should be used to reduce the size, footprint, and
presentation of large buildings; uninterrupted facades shall be avoided in the design
of the principal structures by incorporating windows, recessed areas, projections,
awnings, arcades and other features which vary the visual impact of the buildings;
additional stories are preferred over single-floor expansion.
Roof design shall mitigate the visual impacts of the large scale structures and
associated buildings, with special attention directed to visibility from areas of higher
elevation.
Parking shall be internalized to the greatest extent possible, with parking areas
distributed throughout the site in front of and behind the commercial structures, and
trees and other landscaping material used to minimize visual impact (parking
orchard concept). Use of parking structures is encouraged.
Revised 9/7/99 2
[ ATTACHMENT I I
· Principles of environmentally responsible and energy efficient design will be
incorporated to a significant extent in site development, for example:
Minimize impervious pavement: to minimize impervious pavement, any paved
parking areas in excess of those spaces required by code, are to be
composed of pervious surfaces, such as grass pavers or stabilized tuff.
· Energy efficient building: insulation, provision for day-lighting, and other
energy conscious elements should be incorporated into the design.
Minimize roof and foundations: to minimize roof and foundation areas, a
minimum of 1/3 of the roof and foundation areas of the non-residential
buildings are to be occupied by two-story (two floor), or greater, buildings.
Other measures may also be considered to reduce overall disturbance and
alteration of the site.
Master Plan: prior to re-zoning, a master plan for the entire property showing
the layout, grading, character and scale of the project will be developed and
submitted. This master plan shall 'include road design for all property on this
site accessed by Bent Creek Road, and may provide separate access to the
residential and non-residential portions of the site. If development of the site
is phased, a minimum of 50 residential units will be developed in the first
phase.
· Space will be made available for a recycling center, not to be counted against
square foot limits.
Building Limitations:
Because of the size of the site and its specific topographic and demographic conditions,
the limits on allowable building square footage for the site will be altered from the
normal Community Service designation as follows:
· Maximum total square footage of buildings for mixed retail (including outside display,
sales and storage areas), office and research uses: 250,000 square feet.
· There is no maximum limit on residential use in the designated residential and town
center areas.
· A single user may not occupy more than 160,000 square feet of building, including
outside display, sales and storage area.
To reduce the amount of site disturbance and impervious surface, the ground floor
("footprint") of the 160,000 square foot single user may not exceed 65,000 square
feet. The building intended for the 160,000 square foot single user shall be
designed so that each floor can function as an individual business, to be reusable by
separate users in the future.
Revised 9~7~99 3
i ATTACHMENT I I
Appropriate Uses:
· Service stations are not considered to be a compatible Community Service use for
portions of this site east of Moore's Creek and Biscuit Run.
Environmental Protection:
· A publicly accessible greenway shall be constructed along Moore's Creek and
Biscuit Run as recommended in the Land use Plan, Neighborhood Four.
Exemplary specimen or old growth trees, 24" or larger DBH, will be preserved
throughout the site to the extent practicable during site development; particular care
will be given to protection of existing stands of trees that provide screening from
adjacent streets and highways, or screen one use from another on-site. (Trees in
the Preservation Tract shall be preserved as described above.)
· To preserve and protect water quality, a vegetative buffer shall be maintained along
Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek undisturbed by site development.
Because of the proximity of Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek, and the potential
impacts resulting from a large amount of impervious cover, an on-site mitigation plan
that exceeds standard BMP's, detention standards, and water quality standards
shall be incorporated into the site design.
The ~plan of development shall include features to minimize impacts from impervious
surfaces on water quality; parking areas, roads and other impervious areas shall
meet only the reasonable needs of the proposed uses (see General Land Use
Standards, p. 21 ). Construction of parking facilities within the floodplain is not
considered appropriate due to water quality concerns; therefore, users of the
greenway and other public recreation areas on the site shall utilize existing parking
areas on site that have been appropriately designed and located for this dual use.
· Complementary use of parking facilities shall be incorporated in site design;
placement and configuration of parking lots shall promote sharing of parking.
Transportation:
An alignment for the Alternative 'D' road (identified in the Southern Cities report)
shall be reserved at the time of site design. The alignment must be acceptable to
VDOT for use as a connector road, for eventual extension to Avon Street Extended.
Site development shall include access for pedestrian, bicycle, and transit users. A
continuous walkway and travelway must be provided from Fifth Street to and
throughout the site.
· Rezoning of the property will be timed with any required road improvements, which
may include, but are not necessarily limited to, one or all of the following:
Revised 9~7~99 4
I ATTACHMENT I I
· necessary improvements to Bent Creek Road;
· Fifth Street northbound (a continuous right turn lane northbound on Fifth
Street from 1-64 to Bent Creek Road);
· improvements to the 1-64 eastbound off ramp and intersection with Fifth
Street (signalization and double laning);
· improvements to Fifth Street southbound, including extension of the left turn
lane into Bent Creek Road.
Revised 9/7/99 5
MONTICELLO LOOP
PREPARED BY DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
AND' COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
URBAN
MAP C
NEIGHBORHOODS
4 &5
FEET
1450
1"=2900~
...\COMPLAN\land-use_map-d.dgn Sep. 10, 1999 11:29:27
2900
DATE; 11/12/96
I ATTACHM,ENT II I
[Deleted text indicated by overstrike; added text in bold font.]
Language to be added to Neighborhood Four Profile [Brass, Inc.],
page 59, Land Use Plan:
The Community Scrvicc area located south of the Willoughby residential
development and north of 1-64 between Fifth Street Extended and Avon Street
Extended, accessed via Bent Creek Road, is designated for Community
Service/Mixed Use development, and is intcndod to scrvc as a retail, office/light
industrial, rcc, carch and residential center within Neighborhood Four. Bocauc~ of
its location at thc corncr of two Entrancc Corridors, this sitc is of high acsthctic and
cnvironmontal c~3nsitivity and importancc. Development of the site shall seek to
continue the scale of and remain bc compatible with existing uses within the
adjacent and nearby City and County neighborhoods.
Fifth Street functions as a gateway to the Charlottesville-Albemarle community
because of, in part, the access opportunity provided by the 1-64 interchange. The
land uses along this road establish the first image and impression of both the larger
urban area and this particular neighborhood to those who pass by or visit from other
areas in the region. Because of its location at the corner of two Entrance Corridors,
and at the confluence of Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek, this site is of high
aesthetic and environmental sensitivity and importance.
Land Use:
· The site shall be developed as component areas that are distinct in
function but connected by pedestrian, vehicular, and architectural features,
and designed to provide a range of opportunities and services for
residents, employees, shoppers, and the general public. A mixed use plan
of development is required, incorporating retail and/or office/light
industrial, and residential uses.
Preservation Tract: approximately five acres of elevated land. at the
western edge of Parcel 2B, immediately east of the bridge and the "T"
formed by the existing intersection of Bent Creek Road and the access
roads leading north and south from it. This area shall be left undisturbed,
and is intended to serve as a visual buffer between the commercial
development on the site and Fifth Street Extended, a designated Entrance
Corridor. Existing vegetation, especially exemplary specimen or old
growth trees, 24" or larger DBH (Diameter Breast Height), shall be
preserved on this tract, as well as the existing land contours and rock
formations.
Floodplain: a greenway shall be dedicated along Moore's Creek and Biscuit
Run, and constructed as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan
Greenway Plan. Pedestrian connections across Biscuit Run and Moore's
Creek may also be constructed as appropriate. The large area of floodplain
Revised 9/7/99 1
'l ATTACHMENT III
northeast of the con~uence of Moore's Creek and Biscuit Run shall be
dedicated as public open space, and may be appropriate for a recreational
use such as a public park or multi-purpose field.
Residential: approximately ten acres lying on the south side of and above
the existing access road to the Grand Piano warehouse, facing Moore's
Creek and Willoughby to the north. This area is designated for residential
development, with a minimum density of R-'I0 (10 dwelling units per acre).
Town Center: the central, lower portion of the site, designated for
Community Service scale commercial, office, and light industrial uses
(single use not to exceed 65,000 square feet). This area shall serve as a
transitional buffer between residential and the large discount anchor uses
on the site, and shall incorporate usable public open space and pedestrian
access between the two other uses in its development plan.
Regional Service Uses: one anchor store is considered an appropriate
Regional Service use for this site, generally located in the area adjacent to
1-64 and oriented to the public open space in the Town Center.
Site Design:
· Site design shall maintain a positive relationship with the surrounding
community, acknowledging the proximity of the Willoughby residential
neighborhood and historic districts within the City of Charlottesville through the
use of appropriate materials, architectural features, color, internal and external
lighting, and other design elements.
· A mixed usc plan of dcvolopmcnt is encouraged.
· All facades of commercial buildings visible from a public road shall continue
design elements found on the front of the buildings.
· Loading docks, trash collection facilities., outdoor storage and related facilities
shall be incorporated into the design of building(s) so that they are not visible.
· Areas of open space/recreation shall be provided for shoppcm and
Ncighborhood rcsidcnts users on-site (residents, employees, shoppers, etc.)
· Buildings should not appear monolithic; articulation (massing, architectural
features, component structures) should be used to reduce the size, footprint, and
presentation of large buildings; uninterrupted facades shall be avoided in the
design of the principal structures by incorporating windows, recessed areas,
projections, awnings, arcades and other features which vary the visual impact of
the buildings; additional stories are preferred over single-floor expansion.
Revised 9/7/99 2
I ATTACHMENT II I
· Roof design shall mitigate the visual impacts of the large scale structures and
associated buildings, with special attention directed to visibility from areas of
higher elevation.
· Parking shall be internalized to the greatest extent possible, with parking
areas distributed throughout the site in front of and behind the commercial
structures, and trees and other landscaping material used to minimize visual
impact (parking orchard concept). Use of parking structures is encouraged.
Principals Principles of environmentally responsible and energy efficient design
will be incorporated to a significant extent in site development, for example:
· Minimize impervious pavement: to minimize impervious pavement, any
paved parking areas in excess of those spaces required by code, are to be
composed of pervious surfaces, such as grass pavers or stabilized tuff.
· Energy efficient building: insulation, provision for day-lighting, and other
energy conscious elements should be incorporated into the design.
· Minimize roof and foundations: to minimize roof and foundation areas, a
minimum of 1/3 of the roof and foundation areas of the non-residential
buildings are to be occupied by two-story (two floor), or greater, buildings.
Other measures, including flexibility in use of topography, may also be
considered to reduce overall disturbance and alteration of the site.
· Master Plan: prior to re-zoning, a master plan for the entire property
showing the layout, grading, character and scale of the project will be
developed and submitted. This master plan shall include road design for
all property on this site accessed by Bent Creek Road, and may provide
separate access to the residential and non-residential portions of the
site. If development of the site is phased, a minimum of 50 residential
units will be developed in the first phase.
· Space will be made available for a recycling center, not to be counted
against square foot limits.
Building Limitations:
Because of the size of the site and its specific topographic and demographic
conditions, the limits on allowable building square footage for the site will be
altered from the normal Community Service designation as follows:
· Maximum total squarc footagc of buildings: 310,00 s.f.
· Maximum total square footage of buildings for mixed retail (including outside
display, sales and storage areas), office and light industrial/research uses:
250,000 square feet.
Revised 9/7/99 3
I ATTACHMENT II
· There is no maximum limit on residential use in the designated
residential and town center areas.
· Whilc mixod usc in cncouragod within thc 250,000 c.f., thcrc arc no spocific
Icvcls of uscs roquirod.
· All buildingc in cxcccs of 250,000 c.f. muct bc rccidcntial.
· To rnakc thc buildings as rcusablc as possiblc by futurc uscrs, thc cizc of
any individual building will bc limitod to no morc than 65,000 s.f. Individual
buildings arc dcfinod as bcing sub dividablc at a futurc datc with minimal
physical changcc, so that thcy may function ac individual bucinccscc. Individual
buildings may bc attachod and intcrconnoctod. A single user may not occupy
more than 160,000 square feet of building, including outside display, sales and
storage area.
· To reduce the amount of site disturbance and impervious surface, the
ground floor ("footprint") of the 160,000 square foot single user may not
exceed 65,000 square feet. The building intended for the 160,000 square
foot single user shall be designed so that each floor can function as an
individual business, to be reusable by separate users in the future.
Appropriate Uses:
· Service stations are not considered to be a compatible Community Service
use for portions of this site east of Moore's Creek and Biscuit Run.
Environmental Protection:
· A publicly accessible greenway shall be constructed along Moore's Creek
and Biscuit Run as recommended in the Land use Plan, Neighborhood Four.
· Exemplary specimen or old growth trees, 24" or larger DBH, will be preserved
throughout the site to the extent practicable during site development; particular
care will be given to protection of existing stands of trees that provide screening
from adjacent streets and highways, or screen one use from another on-site.
(Trees in the Preservation Tract shall be preserved as described above.)
· To preserve and protect water quality, a vegetative buffer shall be
maintained along Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek undisturbed by site
development.
· Because of the proximity of Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek, and the potential
impacts resulting from a large amount of impervious cover, an on-site mitigation
plan that exceeds standard BMP's, detention standards, and water quality
standards shall be incorporated into the site design.
· The plan of development shall include features to minimize impacts from
impervious surfaces on water quality; parking areas, roads and other impervious
Revised 9~7~99 4
I ATTACHMENT II I
areas shall meet only the reasonable needs of the proposed uses (see General
Land Use Standards, p. 21 ). Construction of parking facilities within the
floodplain is not considered appropriate due to water quality concerns;
therefore, users of the greenway and other public recreation areas on the
site shall utilize existing parking areas on site that have been appropriately
designed and located for this dual use.
· Complementary use of parking facilities shall be incorporated in site
design; placement and configuration of parking lots shall promote sharing
of parking.
Transportation:
· An alignment for the Alternative 'D' road (identified in the Southern
Cities report) shall be reserved at the time of site design. The alignment
must be acceptable to VDOT for use as a connector road, for eventual
extension to Avon Street Extended.
· Site development shall include access for pedestrian "'-~ bicycle facilitics,
and transit users. A continuous walkway and travelway must be provided from
Fifth Street to and throughout the site.
· Rezoning of the property will be timed with any required road improvements,
which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, one or all of the following:
· necessary improvements to Bent Creek Road;
· Fifth Street northbound (a continuous right turn lane northbound on Fifth
Street from thc I-6/I wcstbound off ramp Moore's Creek to Bent Creek
Road);
· improvements to the 1-64 eastbound off ramp and intersection with Fifth
Street (signalization and double laning).
· improvements to Fifth Street southbound (installation of a continuous right
turn lanc extension of the southbound left turn lane into Bent Creek
Road.
Revised 9/7/99 5
I ATTACHMENT III .I
ALTERNATE COMMUNITY SERVICE DESIGNATION PROPOSAL
Community Service Designation:
The Community Service area located south of the Willoughby residential
development and north of 1-64 between Fifth Street Extended and Avon
Street Extended, accessed via Bent Creak Road, is intended to serve as a
retail, office, research and residential center within Neighborhood Four.
Because of its location at the corner of two Entrance Corridors, this site is
of high aesthetic and environmental sensitivity and importance.
Development of the site shall seek to continue the scale and existing
character of the proposed Community Service (mixed retail, office, research
and residential,) use and surrounding uses.
Fifth Street functions as one of the gateways to the Charlottesville-
Albemarle community because of, in part, the access opportunity provided
by the 1-64 interchange. The land uses along this road establish the first
image and impression of both the larger urban area and this particular
neighborhood to those who pass by or visit from other areas in the region.
Building Limitations:
Because of the large size of the site and because of the specific
topographic and demographic conditions of the site, the limits on allowable
building square footage for the site will be altered from the normal
Community Service designation as follows:
· Maximum total square footage of buildings: 310,000 s.f.
· There is no maximum limit on residential use subject to the overall
maximum s.f. limit of 310,000.
· Maximum total square footage of buildings for mixed retail (including
outside display, sales and storage areas), office and research uses:
250,000 s.f.
· While mixed use is encouraged within the 250,000 s.f., there are no
specific levels of uses required.
· All buildings in excess of 250,000 s.f. must be residential.
· To make the buildings as reusable as possible by future users, the size
of any individual building will be limited to no more than 65,000 s.f.
Individual buildings are defined as being sub-dividable at a future date
with minimal physical changes, so that they may function as individual
ATTACHMENT III [
businesses. Individual buildings may be attached and interconnected.
A single user may not occupy more than 160,000 s.f. of buildings,
outside displays, sales and storage areas.
Expectations for this area include development under a master plan which
incorporates the following general principles:
Site Design:
Site design shall maintain a positive relationship with the surrounding
community, acknowledging the proximity of the Willoughby residential
neighborhood and historic districts within the City of Charlottesville
through the use of appropriate materials, architectural features, color,
internal and external lighting, and other design elements;
· A mixed use plan of development is encouraged;
· All facades of commercial buildings visible from a public road shall
continue design elements found on the front of the buildings;
Loading docks, trash collection facilities, outdoor storage and related
facilities shall be incorporated into the design of building(s) so that they
are not visible;
· Areas of open space/recreation shall be provided for shoppers and
Neighborhood residents;
Buildings should not appear monolithic; articulation (massing,
architectural features) should be used to reduce the overall size of large
buildings; uninterrupted facades shall be avoided in the design of the
principal structures by incorporating windows, recessed areas,
projections, awnings, arcades and other features which vary the visual
impact of the buildings;
Roof design shall mitigate the visual impacts of the large scale
structures and associated buildings, with special attention directed to
visibility from areas of higher elevation.
Parking shall be internalized to the greatest extent possible, with parking
areas distributed throughout the site in front of and behind the
commercial structures, and trees and other landscaping material used to
minimize visual impact (parking orchard concept).
Rev. 5/11/99 -2-
] ATTACHMENT III[
· Principals of environmentally responsible and energy efficient design will
be incorporated to a significant extent in site development, for example:
Minimize impervious pavement: To minimize impervious
pavement, any paved parking areas in excess of those spaces
required by code, are to be composed of pervious surfaces, such
as grass pavers or stabilized tuff.
Energy efficient building: Insulation, provision for day-lighting, and
other energy conscious elements should be incorporated into the
design.
Minimize roof and foundations: To minimize roof and foundation
areas, a minimum of 1/3 of the roof and foundation areas are to be
occupied by two-story (two floor), or greater, buildings.
Master Plan: Prior to re-zoning a master plan for the entire
property showing the layout, grading, character and scale of the
project will be developed and submitted.
· Space will be made available for a recycling center (not counted
against square foot limits).
Appropriate Uses:
· Service stations are not considered to be a compatible Community
Service use for this site.
Environmental Protection:
A publicly accessible greenway shall be constructed along Moore's
Creek and Biscuit Run as recommended in the Land use Plan,
Neighborhood Four;
Exemplary specimen or old growth trees, 24" or larger DBH, will be
preserved to the extent practicable during site development; particular
care will be given to protection of existing stands of trees that provide
screening from adjacent streets and highways;
· A vegetative buffer shall be maintained along Biscuit Run and Moore's
Creek undisturbed by site development.
Rev. 5/11/99 -3-
ATTACHMENT III!
Because of the proximity of Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek, and the
potential impacts resulting from a large amount of impervious cover, an
on-site mitigation plan that exceeds standard BMPs, detention
standards, and water quality standards shall be incorporated into the site
design.
The plan of development shall include features to minimize impacts from
impervious surfaces on water quality; parking areas, roads and other
impervious areas shall meet only the reasonable needs of the proposed
uses (see General Land Use Standards, p.21 ).
Transportation:
Site development must include pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and a
continuous walkway and travelway must be provided from Fifth Street to
and throughout the site.
Rezoning of the property will be timed with any required road
improvements, which may include, but are not necessarily limited to, one
or all of the following:
· improvements to Bent Creek Road,
Fifth Street northbound (a continuous right turn lane northbound
on Fifth Street from the 1-64 westbound off ramp to Bent Creek
Road),
· improvements to the 1-64 eastbound off ramp and intersection with
Fifth Street (signalization and double laning), and
· improvements to Fifth Street southbound (installation of a
continuous right turn lane).
Rev. 5/11/99
-4-
Susan Thomas
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Blaine, Steven W. [swblaine@mwbb.com]
Tuesday, September 07, 1999 4:02 PM
'Susan Thomas'
Brass, Inc.
i ATTACHMENT IV I
COMMUNITY
SERVICE COMPARISON A... Susan-- Attached are some approaches to the Comp Plan Amendment for your
consideration. Please also pass these along to David and Wayne. Thanks,
Steve
<<COMMUNITY SERVICE COMPARISON APPLICANT'S TO ROOKER -REILEY 9-7-99.DOC>>
ATTACHMENT IV |
This redlined draft, generated by CompareRite (TM) - The Instant Redliner, shows the
differences between -
original document: V:X2588XBRASSXDOC99XALTERNATE COMMUNITY SERVICE
DESIGNATION PROPOSAL (ROOKER-REILEY).DOC
and revised document: V:X2588XBRASSXDOC99XALTERNATE COMMUNITY SERVICE
DESIGNATION COUNTER PROPOSAL (APPLICANT- FROM WORK SESSION)9-7~
99 .DOC
CompareRite found 30 change(s) in the text
Deletions appear as Overstrike text surrounded by {}
Additions appear as Bold text surrounded by []
ATTACHMENT IVJ
{ALTERNATE} COMMUNITY {SERVICE DESIGNATION}
[SERVICE/INTERSTATE INTERCHANGE] PROPOSAL
Community [Scrvice} [Service/Interstate Interchange] Designation:
The Community Service area located south of the Willoughby residential development and north
of 1-64 between Fifth Street Extended and Avon SWeet Extended, accessed via Bent Creek Road,
is intended to serve as a retail-~)-)-[,] office, [research} and residential center within
Neighborhood Four. Because of its location at the comer of two Entrance Corridors, this site is
of high aesthetic and environmental sensitivity and importance. Development of the site shall
{seek to continual [remain compatible with] the scale and existing character of the proposed
Community Sendee (mixed retail, office, {research and rcsidcntial,) use and surrounding} [and
residential)] uses.
Fifth Street functions as one of the gateways to the Charlottesville-Albemarle community
because of, in part, the access opportunity provided by the 1-64 interchange. The land uses along
this road establish the first image and impression of both the larger urban area and this particular
neighborhood to those who pass by or visit from other areas in the region.
Building Limitations:
Because of the large size of the site and because of the specific topographic and demographic
conditions of the site, the limits on allowable building square footage for the site will be altered
from the normal Community Service designation as follows:
Maximum total square footage of [non-residential] buildings: 310,000 s.f. [[This is an
increase from the Rooker-Reiley proposal]]
Maximum total square footage of buildings for mixed retail (including outside display,
sales and storage areas) {, office, research and residential} uses: 250,000 s.f.
While mixed use is encouraged within the [250,000} [310,000] s.f., there are no specific
levels of uses required.
· All buildings in excess of {250,000} [310,000] s.f. must be residential. [A ratio of 6:1
shall apply to non-residential to residential acreage allocations for the site.]
To make the buildings as reusable as possible by future users, {thc sizc of any individual
building will bc limited to no more than 65,000 s.f. Individual buildings are dcfined as
being sub dividable at a future date } [any individual commercial building in excess of
65,000 s.f. should be designed such that at a future date such building may be
ATTACHMENT IV
subdivided] with minimal physical changes, so that -{~aey-}- [each sub-divided portion]
may function as [an] individual {businc~,3cs) [business, occupying up to 65,000 s.f].
Individual buildings may be attached and interconnected. A single user may not occupy
more than 160,000 s.f. of {buildings} [building area].
Expectations for this area include development under a master plan which incorporates the
following general principles:
Site Design:
Site design shall maintain a positive relationship with the surrounding community,
acknowledging the proximity of the Willoughby residential neighborhood and historic
districts within the City of Charlottesville through the use of appropriate materials,
architectural features, color, intemal and extemal lighting, and other design elements.
A mixed use plan of development {is encouraged} [(residential/non-residential) is
required].
All facades of commercial buildings visible from a public road -eaha4t-}- [should] continue
design elements found on the front of the buildings.
Loading docks, trash collection facilities, outdoor storage and related facilities shall be
incorporated into the design of building(s) so that they are not visible.
Areas of open space/recreation shall be provided for shoppers and Neighborhood
residents.
Buildings should not appear monolithic; articulation (massing, architectural features)
should be used to reduce the overall size of large buildings; uninterrupted facades shall be
avoided in the design of the principal structures by incorporating windows, recessed
areas, projections, awnings, arcades and other features which vary the visual impact of
the buildings.
Roof design shall mitigate the visual impacts of the large scale structures and associated
buildings, with special attention directed to visibility from areas of higher elevation.
Parking shall be internalized to the greatest extent possible, with parking areas distributed
throughout the site in front of and behind the commercial structures, and trees and other
landscaping material used to minimize visual impact (parking orchard concept).
{Principals} [Principles] of environmentally responsible and energy efficient design will
be incorporated to a significant extent in site development, for example:
3
ATTACHMENT IV ]
Minimize impervious pavement: To minimize impervious pavement, any paved
parking areas in excess of those spaces required by code, are to be composed of
pervious surfaces, such as grass pavers or stabilized turf.
Energy efficient building: Insulation, provision for day-lighting, and other energy
conscious elements should be incorporated into the design.
Minimize roof and foundations: To minimize roof and foundation areas, -{-a
minimum of 1/3 of the roof and foundation areas arc to bc occupied byl two-story
(two floor), or greater, buildings [should be encouraged, particularly for mixed
uses, inehding residential. Flexibility in use of topography, inehding
potential waivers of critical slope requirements may be necessary to promote
mixed nse options[.
· Master Plan: Prior to re-zoning a master plan for the entire property showing the
layout, grading, character and scale of the project will be developed and submitted.
· Recycling Center: Space will be made available for a recycling center (not counted
against square foot limits).
Appropriate Uses:
Service stations are not considered to be a compatible Community Service use for this
site.
Environmental Protection:
A publicly accessible greenway shall be [constructed} [reserved] along Moore's Creek
and Biscuit Run as recommended in the Land Use Plan, Neighborhood Four.
Exemplary specimen or old growth trees, 24" or larger DBH, will be preserved to the
extent practicable during site development; particular care will be given to protection of
existing stands of trees that provide screening from adjacent streets and highways.
A vegetative buffer shall be maintained along Biscuit Run and Moore's Creek,
undisturbed by site development.
Because of the proximity of Biscuit Run and Moore' s Creek, and the potential impacts
resulting from a large amount of impervious cover, an on-site mitigation plan that
[exceeds standardl [implements] BMPs, detention standards, and water quality
standards shall be incorporated into the site design. [Use of regional, offsite facilities is
encouraged]
4
I ATTACHMENT IV ]
The plan of development shall include features to minimize impacts from impervious
surfaces on water quality; parking areas, roads and other impervious areas shall meet only
the reasonable needs of the proposed uses (see General Land Use Standards, p.21).
Transportation:
Site development must include pedestrian and bicycle facilities, and a continuous
walkway and travelway must be provided from Fifth Street to and throughout the site.
[Site development must contemplate future plans of Alternative D (Avon Street
Connector); provided that plan for Alternative D are developed prior to submission
of a site plan.]
Rezoning of the property will be timed with any required road improvements, which may
include, but are not necessarily limited to one or all of the following:
· improvements to Bent Creek Road;
Fifth Street northbound (a continuous right turn lane northbound on Fifth Street
from the lI 6'1 westbound off ramp] [bridge at Moore's Creek] to Bent Creek
Road);
· improvements to the 1-64 eastbound off ramp and intersection with Fifth Street
(signalization and double laning); and
· improvements to Fifth Street southbound ((installation of a continuous fight turn
~[(extension of the left turn lane into Bent Creek Road)].
LEBO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, INC.
667 Berkmar Court · Berkmar Crossing · Charlottesville, VA 22901
www. leboproperties.com
· Office: 804/973-1977 · Fax: 804/974-4575
E-maih 74213.1647@compuserve.com
August 30, 1999
Mr. Charles Martin, Chairman
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Va. 22902
Re: Brass, Inc. proposal, Willoughby at 5m St. Extended
Dear Charles,
I ask that you lease consider voting in favor of the Brass Inc. p~'oposal at the
Willoughby area of 5~p St. I also ask that you consider voting for it in its original request,
the large box.
As you may know, I have managed the Rio Hill Shopping Center since it was
developed over ten years ago. I am very familiar with retail trends and I can attest to the
fact that retailers need larger spaces to compete with today's consumer needs. This store
could serve the area's needs for many years to come.
Additionally, the proposed Willoughby shopping center would provide tax
revenues similar to what Rio Hill currently provides. By my estimate these centers each
supply an amount equivalent to the meals tax.
' If you would like additional input from me I would welcome a call or even a
meeting. This letter is simply to let you know that I believe the Brass Inc. proposal would
be a positive attraction in many ways for Albemarle County.
Thank you for your consideration of this proposal.
'-~' :""'!. !;,;.;:50~ SUPERVISOR
Sincerely,
Charles T. Lebo
Member of:
BBB
Better Business Bureau
U.S. Chamber
of Commerce
ICSC
International
Council of
Shopping Centers
Charlottesville-
Albemarle
Chamber of Commerce
CO20N2A2
Lincoln · Mercury · Mitsubishi · Suzuki · Buick · Pontiac · GMC * Cadillac · Nissan
July 27, 1999
Ms. Ella Carey, Clerk
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
i3OA.RD OF SUPERVISORS
Dear Ms. Carey:
This letter is to formally appeal the July 19, 1999 decision of the Albemarle County
Architectural Review Board to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and request a review
of same.
The ARB staff advises us that written transcripts or minutes from their meetings
involving our application are not yet available. Therefore, I will attempt to outline below the
course of events and am enclosing copies of documents from my files that should more fully
evidence this issue.
We are required to obtain approval from the ARB for a major site plan amendment to
allow us to build a small (4,000 square feet) showroom between our existing showrooms and
build an addition to our service departmere (not visible from Route 29).
We filed our application for a preliminary conference with the ARB on February 8, 1999.
That conference was held on March 1, 1999.
On May 17, 1999 we made written request to the ARB to be placed on their agenda for
June 7, 1999, but that request was denied, as our request was not in the proper form.
On May 26, 1999 we submitted our Application for Certificate of Appropriateness with
Addendum and we were placed on the Agenda for Monday, June 21, 1999.
Many issues arising from our original preliminary conference on March 1, 1999 and the
subsequent meeting on June 21, 1999 have been resolved. The remaining outstanding issue is
that of landscaping along the entrance corridor (Rt. 29). A decision on that issue was deferred at
the June 21, 1999 meeting pending our submission of additional information.
To conform with the ARB's request for additional information arising from the June 21,
1999 meeting, we made inquiry, which resulted in the information outlined in our letter to Ms.
Route 29 North · P.O. Box 7823 · Charlottesville, Virginia 22906
(804) 951-1000 FAX (804) 951-1010
Affiliate of Carter Myers Automotive * An Employee Owned Co. · Est. 1924
Ms. Ella Carey, Clerk
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
July 27, 1999
Page 2
Pickart of July 15, 1999 (a copy of which is enclosed). Pursuant to that letter the ARB again
reviewed this matter on July 19, 1999 and their decision is attached.
We believe the Architectural Review Board has not comprehensively reviewed our
specific circumstances and that their decision of July 19, 1999 does not reflect our best interest
as a commercial property owner engaged in a designated business on Route 29 in Albemarle
County for over ten years.
Our assertions would be that, (1) the 24 inch hedgerow would not enhance the visual
appeal of our property from the entrance corridor but, in fact, would detract from the "park-like"
landscape we have striven to maintain on this site over the past years; (2) we are in the
automobile sales business and to place a hedgerow of minimum 24 inch height along the curb in
front of our automobile display area would be detrimental to the business we are licensed to
operate at this location and; (3) that we are one of the few businesses along Route 29 that has a
sprinkler system which waters not only our grass but the VDOT right-of-way as well. The
location of a hedgerow would impede the ability of the sprinkler system to operate properly to
reach the grass we currently maintain. We are unable to relocate the sprinkler system because of
the sewer system easement explained in our July 15th letter.
We would further assert that the planting scheme recommended by Virginia Power
Arborist Kathie McDaniel of the addition of two Amur Maples between each pair of pear trees in
front of our property and the phcing of those two maples in an irregular bed planted with Purple
Wintercreeper would satisfy all milky restrictions, not unduly obscure the product we sell and
would be more visually appealing to the motorists on Route 29 than a hedgerow.
We respectfully request a review of this matter at this time by the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors.
Please advise as to any further information you may require and/or any hearing dates,
which are scheduled.
Thank you for your consideration in this regard.
Sincerely,
H. Carter Myers, IH
President
Enclosures
A/~ U~. ~IAFL~
SCHEMATIC LANDSCAPE PLAN
COLONIAL AuTO CENTER
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
AGENDA TITLE:
Colonial Auto Showroom
S U BJ ECT/PRO POSAL/REQU EST:
Colonial Auto - appeal of ARB decision
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA DATE:
September 15, 1999
ACTION: X
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
INFORMATION:
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Benish, Ms. Pickart
ATTACHMENTS: Yes
REVIEWED BY:/,~~t"""""""
BACKGROUND:
Colonial Auto applied for ARB review of a major site plan amendment for a new showroom building and an
addition to the service building. The existing Colonial Auto site is landscaped, but the landscaping does not
meet the ARB's standards. The ARB typically requires the upgrading of landscaping to meet the standards
when existing sites expand.
The application progressed through preliminary (3/1/99) and final (6/21/99 and 7/19/99) ARB reviews, with
most issues of concern being worked out between the Board and the applicant. The final outstanding
condition of ARB approval identified at the 7/19 meeting was the addition of a row of 24" high shrubs along the
Route 29 frontage, instead of the proposed purple wintercreeper, which would grow to only about 10" tall. The
ARB indicated that the addition of 24" shrubs is intended to provide a consistent line of landscaping all along
the Entrance Corridor. The applicant indicated his desire to maintain visibility of the cars on display.
Subsequent to the applicanrs letter of appeal (8/9/99), revisions were made to the landscape proposal. The
revisions, consisting of the addition of Amur Maples, Bar Harbor Juniper (which would grow to about 10" high)
and Aaron's Beard Hypericum (which would grow to about 18" high), were presented to the ARB at its 9/7/99
meeting. The ARB did not approve the plan, because the low-growing Juniper and the Hypericum
groundcovers would not meet the intent of the ARB landscaping guidelines.
RECOMMENDATION:
The ARB has not approved either of the alternate landscape proposals because they do not meet the ARB
landscaping requirements. At its meeting on September 7, 1999, the ARB clearly stated its position that 24"
shrubs are an integral part of the Entrance Corridor streetscape. Staff recommends that 24" shrubs be a
required element of the plan.
Attachments:
A - Staff report for preliminary ARB review held on March 1, 1999
B - Action letter from ARB preliminary review of March 1, 1999
C - Staff report for final ARB review held on June 21, 1999
D - Action letter from ARB final review of June 21, 1999
E - Action letter from ARB review of July 19, 1999
F - Staff report for revised final ARB review held on September 7, 1999
G - Action letter from ARB review of revised final proposal of September 7, 1999
99.176 ' BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
ATTACHMENT A
ARCH/TEC~ REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION NAME: COLONIAL AUTO SHOWROOM ADDITION
APPLICATION TYPE: PRELIMINARY SDP
Project #
ARB-P(SDP)-99-06
Location
· Located on the west side of Rt. 29, south of Rio Hills Shopping
Center
Parcel Identification Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Zoned
Highway Commercial (HC) and Entrance Corridor (EC)
Magisterial District Rio
Proposal
Preliminary review of a plan to construct a new automobile sales
showroom between two existing showroom buildings
ARB Meeting Date March 1, 1999
Date of Staff Review Febxn_mry 23, 1999
Staff Contact
Margaret Pickart
PROJECT IllSTORY
This site is currently occupied by Colonial Auto Center, with two showroom buildings facing the
EC, and service buildings behind. A parking lot accommodating a total of 254 employee, customer,
and display parking spaces is situated between the existing showroom buildings and the EC.
(Additional parking is provided between the showroom and service buildings, and behind the service
building.) The showrooms are situated approximately 8Y apart. A grass area with a tree currently
occupies this space. The site is landscaped, but the planrings do not meet the standard ARB
requirements. The .last approved site plan shows medium shade trees along the EC at about 100" on
center. Five parking islands with Bradford Pear trees are spaced between the shade trees. Seven
street shrubs are shown surrounding each EC shade tree. Landscaping also exists in front of the
showroom buildings. The site slopes down from the north to the south.
PROJECT DETAILS
The applicant proposes 'to construct a new showroom building between the two existing buildings.
The new structure would be joined to the existing ones by shorter, connecting structures. The
connectors are open to the outdoors, and are composed of sloped roof elements on steel columns.
The overall design, materials, colors, size, and scale of the new building is intended to match the
ARB 3/1/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Preliminary, - Page I
Marell 4, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & CommuniW Development
401 Mclndre Road
Chartottes~iih, Virainia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
ATTACHMENT B
Debm Hurt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: ARB-P(SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Dear Ms. Hurt:
The A/bemarle County Architcctm'al Review Board, at its meeting on March I, 1999, reviewed a
preliminary plan to construct a new automobile sales showroom between two existing showroom
buildings. The Board offered the following comments for the benefit of the applicant's final
submission:
1. Add large shade trees at 3¼" caliper along the Route 29 frontage. Incorporate the
existing trees along this frontage so that trees Will be spaced 35' on center. The trees
located in islands in the parking lot should not be counted toward this requirement.
Ornamental trees should be interspersed among the trees along Route 29. Shrubs, 24"
high at planting should be added along the EC. The existing shrubs that encircle the
existing trees may be incorporated into this row of shrubs.
2. Show on the landscape plan the proposed landscaping in front of the new showroom.
This landscaping should be compatible With the landscaping in front of the existing
showrooms.
3. The showroom Windows should not incorporate glass down to the floor line. Solid
material should be included between the Windows and the ground.
The "voided comer" detail of the showroom is not appropriate for the EC. The
showroom building should have solid comers.
Please submit revised drawings addressing these comments at your earliest convenience. A submission
and review Schedule is inetuded for your use.
If you have any questions regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely, '-
Margaret M. M. PiclG~
Design Planner
Co: ~ CMA Properties, Inc
t
ARB:P(SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition - Preliminary review of a plan
to construct a new automobile sales showroom between two existing showroom buildings
and to construct an addition to the service building.
MS. Pickart presented the staff report noting that the site is currently occupied by
Colonial Auto Center. There is a parking lot which accommodates a total of 254
employee, customer and display parking spaces situated between the existing showroom
buildings and the Entrance Corridor. The showrooms are situated approximately 83'
apart. The site is landscaped, but the plantings do not meet the standard ARB
requirements. The applicant proposes to construct a new showroom building between the
two existing buildings. The overall design, materials, colors, size and scale of the new
building is intended to match the existing. The glass showroom windows across the
facade, the sloping metal roof, the stucco-like wall surfaces, and the canopy extension of
the roof over the sidewalk are all repeated in the new design. Staff recommendations
include: (1) clarify the configuration of the covered walkways on the site plan; (2)
incorporating the existing medium shade trees along the Entrance Corridor frontage,
upgrade the landscaping to meet the standard Entrance Corridor requirements; (3) add
landscaping along the front of the new building similar to that which is in front of the
building to the south, to soften the impact of the glass area of the new show room and to
add human scale to the development.
Deborah Hurt stated that this is a steel based construction building. The roof will be the
same color as the exiting roof and will be a standing seam metal roof. The connectors
. will have the standing seam metal roofs and will be open, with sidewalks under them.
The north connector is at the back of the two buildings. The distance between the new
building and the north buildings will be only 16'. She stated that this connector will not
be visible from Rt. 29. The other connector is about 23' wide and will be the location of
the new entrance for the new building. This building will have no front steps; it will
blend with the other two buildings. This area is exposed aggregated which is required in
DRAFT
the Code for the visually handicapped. This connector is wider and is closer to the front
of the property; therefore, it will be more visible from Rt. 29.
Mr. Michel asked if sign applications will be submitted.
Ms. Hurt stated that the signs will not be different. She noted that this building is for an
exclusive General Motors Showroom. The existing Nissan sign will be put on the new
building. Existing Pontiac, Cadillac, GMC, and Buick signs will be used. There will be
no new signs.
Mr. Michel noted on the Subam building, there appears to be a stucco material below the
windows.
Ms. Hurt stated that the stucco is visible, but once the new landscaping is in place this
will not be visible. She also noted that the windows are not going to the ground, they will
look like the existing buildings.
Ms. Joseph stated that the showroom windows should not incorporate glass down to the
floor line. The design of the windows on the proposed building should be consistent
with those of the existing buildings. She also noted that the signage will be placed on the
band.
Ms. Hurt pointed out that the signage will be on the lower part of the band.
Ms. Puopolo stated that the voided comer detail of the showroom is not appropriate for
the Entrance Corridor. She felt the showroom building should have solid comers.
Mr. Michel stated that landscaping should be compatible with the landscaping in from of
the existing showrooms and should meet Entrance Corridor standards.
Ms2 Hurt stated that there will be full landscaping against the building to match the other
two buildings. She noted that various shrubs will be used as well as some trees. It is
their intent to have this match the existing landscaping to help soften the glass. She noted
their concern regarding the addition of large trees on the Entrance Corridor. She noted
that the existing trees, which are about 100' apart, are in the grassy lane as well as
another row of trees in the parking lot. The trees are approximately 50' apart. The trees
in the grassy lane have shrubs around the base of them that encompass a larger area. She
pointed out that they are a car dealership and do not want to obscure the fact that there are
cars being displayed. She questioned the size of trees, whether shading would be an
issue, and whether they would thrive.
Ms. Joseph stated that other car dealerships in the area have been required to put in street
trees.
Mr. Michel stated that perhaps a layout could be provided.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
10
Ms. Joseph stated that she would like to see a site plan for this site.
Ms. Hurt pointed out the location of existing trees and shrubs on the site.
Ms. Pickart stated that there are 254 parking spaces. The ARB guidelines require one
tree for every ten parking spaces, which would be 25 trees for the front interior area. She
noted that this would be in addition to the Entrance Corridor trees; which would be 3¼"
caliper trees 35' on center along the Route 29 frontage.
Ms. Hurt reiterated her concern with requiring street trees because of visibility issues~
Mr. Michel stated that a landscape plan showing the location and size of the existing trees
needs to be provided. ,
Ms. Joseph stated that buffer shrubs will help soften the site and not obscure the view.
Ms. Hurt pointed out that the Brown's dealership on Rt. 29 has no street trees. She asked
if any additional information is needed on the building connectors.
The Board offered the following comments for the benefit of the applicant's final
submission:
1;
,
Add large shade trees at 3 ½" caliper along the Route 29 frontage. Incorporate the
existing trees along this frontage so that trees will be spaced 35' on center. The
trees located in islands in the parking lot should not be counted toward this
requirement. Ornamental trees should be interspersed among the trees along
Route 29. Shrubs, 24" high at planting, should be added along the EC. The
existing shrubs that encircle the existing trees may be incorporated into this row
of shrubs.
Show on the landscape plan the proposed landscaping in front of the new
showroom. This landscaping should be compatible with the landscaping in front
of the existing showrooms.
The showroom windows should not incorporate glass down to the floor line.
Solid material should be included between the windows and the ground.
The "voided comer" detail of the showroom is not appropriate for the EC. The
showroom building should have solid comers.
ATTACHMENT C I
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION NAME: COLONIAL AUTO SHOWROOM ADDITION
APPLICATION TYPE: FINAL SDP
Project #
Location
Parcel Identification
Zoned
Magisterial District
Proposal
ARB Meeting Date
Date of Staff Review
Staff Contact
ARB-F(SDP)-99-47
West side of Rt. 29, south of Rio Hills Shopping Center
Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Highway Commercial (HC) and Entrance Corridor CEC)
Rio
Final review for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a plan to
construct a new automobile sales showroom between 2 existing
showrooms, and to construct an addition to the rear service building
June 21, 1999
June 14, 1999
Margaret Pickart
PROJECT HISTORY
The ARB reviewed the preliminary application for this project on March 1, 1999 and made the
following comments:
I. Add large shade trees at 3 ½" caliper along the Route 29 frontage. Incorporate the existing
trees along this frontage so that trees will be spaced 35' on center. The trees located in
islands in the parking lot should not be counted toward this requirement Ornamental trees
should be interspersed among the trees along Route 29. Shrubs, 24" high at planting, should
be added along the EC. The existing shrubs that encircle the existing trees may be
incorporated into this row of shrubs.
2. Show on the landscape plan the proposed landscaping in front of the new showroom. This
landscaping should be compatible with the landscaping in front of the existing showrooms.
3. The showroom windows should not incorporate glass down to the floor line. Solid
material should be included between the windows and the ground.
4. The "voided comer" detail of the showroom is not appropriate for the EC. The
showroom building should have solid comers.
Staff met with the applicant on May 21, 1999 to discuss the comments and options for proceeding
with the project. The applicant has concerns about adding landscaping that will orefly obscure the
ARB 6/21/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Final - Page 1
ATTACHMENT C~
business from potential customers traveling along the Rt. 29 Entrance Corridor. The applicant has
· also indicated that overhead utility lines limit the height of trees along the EC.
Currently, the site has 5 medium shade trees (Bradford Pear) along the EC, spaced 100' on center.
Shrubs surround these trees in a circular pattern. Five parking islands with Bradford Pear trees are
spaced between the shade trees. These are considered interior parking lot trees and are typically noi
counted toward the EC frontage landscaping. Landscaping in front of the existing showroom
buildings includes juniper and assorted ornamental trees.
REVISED PROPOSAL - Details and Analysis
LANDSCAPING
Entrance Corridor: The applicant proposes to add two omamental trees between each existing
Entrance Corridor tree, for a total of 9 new trees. The new omamental trees would be surrounded
by new juniper, The species of omamental tree has not been specified. The EC trees (existing and
new) would be spaced approximately 35' apart.
Comment: The proposed circular beds &new shrubs would coordinate with the existing plantings,
and the proposal would meet the standard requirement for 35' spacing along the EC. However, the
proposed trees are ornamentals - not the standard large shade trees. While this proposal would
increase'the number of Entrance Corridor trees, the proposal effectively reduces the size and number
of trees from that which is typically required, resulting in a significant change to the character of the
landscaping intended for the Entrance Corridor. If the overhead power lines limit the potential for
landscaping, the height of the lines should be specified.
Building: The applicant proposes to add landscaping in front of the new building that matches the
landscaping in front of the existing buildings. The proposal includes juniper on the bank in front of
the showroom, and 2 small omamental evergreens flanking the sidewalk leading to the building.
Comment: Matching the existing landscaping in this area is appropriate. This landscaping is
situated at a distance from the EC and will be minimally visible.
SHOWROOM
Showroom Windows - Lower Panels: The windows of the proposed showroom will matchthose
of the existing buildings, which have solid panels at the base.
Comment: The solid panels are appropriate.
Showroom'Windows - Comers: The applicant does not wish to add solid masonry comers to the
showro6m because 1) this design would differ from the existing buildings, and 2) because the
buildings are situated a ..considerable distance from the EC, and therefore the detail would be
minimally visible.
Comment: Due to the distance from the EC and the compatibility with the existing buildings, the
addition of masonry at the comers of the new showroom would have .minimal impact.
ARB 6/21/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition F/nal - Page 2
ATTACHMENT C2
SERVICE ADDITION
There have been no changes to the proposed addition to thereat service building.
expected to be minimally visible from the EC.
The addition is
OTHER AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIPS
The applicant has provided photographs of other automobile dealerships that exist on Entrance
Corridors in the County, indicating that he does not want to be held to stricter landscaping standards
than everyone else. The photographs are meant to show sites that do not meet the requirements for
spacing, size, etc. the following is a brief overview of the ARB status on these sites.
Brown Honda, west side of Route 29 North: Original site predates EC regulations. EC landscaping
required, but not yet planted, as part of recent renovations. Smaller trees permitted to coordinate
with overhead power lines.
Price Chevrolet, west side of Route 29 N, south of WalMart: Original site predates EC regulations.
(BP)-97-04 Special Finance Building: 3 evergreens and 2 Dogwoods required at new building.
Brown Toyota, south side of Route 250 East: F(SDP)-94-06. EC landscaping limited by VDOT
sight distance requirements.
Dennis Enterprises, south side of Route 250 East: Original site predates EC regulations. Additional
landscaping required with proposed enclosure of display area and expansion of display parking.
Right-of-way/sight-line limitations exist. Construction not complete.
Pegasus Motorcars, north side of 250 East at Route 20: Site predates EC regulations. No recent
site plan or building permit applications on f~e.
Brady/Bushey Ford, north side of Route 250 East: F(SDP)-95-04. Street trees approved at 35-40'
on center.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed landscaping at the building, and the' showroom window issues have been satisfactorily
addressed. The proposed EC landscaping does not meet the standard ARB requirements. Staff
recommends that the proposal be approved with the following conditions:
1. Specify the height of the overhead power lines.
2. Add medium shade trees along the EC frontage so that trees (existing and new) are spaced
approximately 35' on center.
3. Intersperse 8 ornamental trees with 'the trees required in #1. Specify species and size.
4. Add shrubs at the new shade trees to match the existing shrubs. Specify species and size.
5. All landscaping must be added to the site plan prior to approval.
The revised proposal does significantly increase the number of trees along the EC frontage. If the
ARB finds the proposed layout acceptable, the following conditions are recommended:
I. Specify the height of the overhead power lines.
2. Specify the species' and size of the ornamental trees.
3. Add one tree to the south of the southernmost existing EC tree.
4. Specify the size of the proposed juniper.
5. All landscaping must be added to the site plan prior to approval.
ARB 6/21/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Final - Page 3'
June 23, 1999
Dept.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
of Planning & CommunitS/Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
ATTACHMENT D
Debra ] Hurt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE:' ARB-F(SDP)-99-47 Colonial Auto-Showroom
Tax Map 45, Parcel 45B
Dear Ms. Hurt:
At its meeting on Monday, June 21, 1999, the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board
unanimously voted to defer the above-noted application to allow the Applicant time to submit
additional information necessary for review, including the height of overhead power lines and a
landscaping plan in keeping with the standard ARB requirements. The Board noted the
following concerns and comments:
l. The size of the ornamental evergreens has not been specified.
2. The ARB ~ouidelines outline the requirements for Entrance Corridor landscaping. The
requirement for large shade trees, interspersed ornamentals, and a row of shrubs is intended
to create a coordinated, ordered appearance along the County' s Entrance Corridors. Trees
and shrubs should be added to bring the landscaping of this site up to the standard ARB
requirements. Shrubs should be added in a row format, not in a circular pattern around the
trees.
3. If it is believed that the overhead power lines will interfere with landscaping, the height of
the lines should be indicated so that an appropriate species can be identified.
4. Show all landscaping on the site plan.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
: Cc: File
~rack Beamon
,,,z/., 1,99¢
ARB-F (SDP)-99-47: Colonial Auto Showroom - Final review for a Certificate of
Appropriateness for a plan to construct a new automobile sales showroom between 2 existing
showrooms, and to construct an addition to the rear service building
Ms. Pickart presented the staff report, pointing out that the Board reviewed the preliminary
application for this project on March 1, 1999. Currently, the site has 5 medium shade trees along
the Entrance Corridor, spaced 100'on center. The applicant proposes to add two ornamental trees
between each existing Entrance Corridor tree, for a total of 9 new trees. The new ornamental
trees would be surrounded by new juniper. Landscaping in front of the new building will match
landscaping in front of the existing buildings. She also noted that due to the distance from the
Entrance Corridor, the addition of masonry at the comers of the new showroom would have
minimal impact.
Mr. Beverly ascertained that the size of the ornamental tree shown on the plan has not been
specified.
Debra Hurt stated that the trees along the Entrance Corridor and throughout the parking lot are
larger than others in the area. She stated that they could add omamental trees between existing
trees on the Entrance Corridor, but they do not want to shield the cars from view. Their
landscape architect made the following suggestions:
· Forest Pansy which is 1.75 to 2" caliper. It has a handsome purple leaf and emerges with a
red purple and changes to a more Subdued color as the season progresses.
· Suggestion for another pattern along the road frontage includes putting the ornamentals
closer to the pear trees and incorporates them into huge beds.
Mr. Kessler stated that adding the ornamentals to the existing street trees is sufficient.
He stated that he has no problem with redoing the voided comer of the showroom as it ties in
with the existing building.
Ms. Joseph asked if staff felt the omamental trees would be planted the same as the existing
trees.
Ms. Pickart stated this was discussed at the preliminary review, pointing out this could be
incorporated with the standard spacing with the circular pattem that they have. She noted that
the applicant wants something that is different, noting that staff has worked with the applicant to
address this. She also indicated that information on the size and species has not been provided.
Mr. Beverly stated that he respects the fact that this is a car lot and the need to advertise the
business. However, he felt more information needs to be provided before he could support a
final Certificate of Appropriateness.
Ms. Puopolo asked why is there even a question about fulfilling the landscape requirements.
DRAFT
Ms. Pickart stated that there is an existing site plan showing Entrance Corridor landscaping. The
recommendation is to have the street trees 35' on center, which is a standard Entrance Corridor
requirement.
Ms. Puopolo ascertained that staff felt they could enforce the need to have street trees 35' on
center.
Ms. Joseph noted her concern with trees and small shrubs. She felt that shrubs should be
continued in front of the parking area and street trees should be required in a row. Continuity is
an important issue. Given the elevation of the building, the cars as well as the building will be
visible.
Mr. Kessler pointed out, for the benefit of the applicant, that one of the goals of this Board is to
have a streetscape that is consistent as well as allowing the individual more freedom on their
building.
Ms. Pickart noted that the applicant indicated that there are overhead power lines in the area
which may interfere with landscaping. The height of the power lines should be identified so that
an appropriate species may be identified.
Ms. Hurt stated that she has been unable to find anyone that could identify the height of the
power lines. She added that there is a problem with the hedgerow pointing out that the front lot
is a display lot, not a parking lot, headlights won't be pointing towards Rt. 29 and they don't want
to hide the display.
Ms. Joseph pointed out that other car dealerships in the area have a hedgerow in front of the
display area.
Mr. Kessler moved for deferral in order to allow the applicant time to submit additional
information necessary for review, including the height of overhead power lines and a
landscaping plan in keeping with the standard ARB requirements. The Board noted the
following concems and comments:
1. The size of the ornamental evergreens has not been specified.
2. The ARB guidelines outline the requirements for Entrance Corridor landscaping. The
requirement for large shade trees, interspersed ornamentals, and a row of shrubs is intended
to create a coordinated, ordered appearance along the County's Entrance Corridors. Trees
and shrubs should be added to bring the landscaping of this site up to the standard ARB
requirements. Shrubs should be added in a row format, not in a circular pattem around the
trees.
3. If it is believed that the overhead power lines will interfere with landscaping, the height of
the lines should be indicated so that an appropriate species can be identified.
4. Show all landscaping on the site plan.
Mr. Beverly seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
ATTACHMENT E
July 21, I999
COUNTY OF ALBExMARLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
40 [ Mclntire Road, Room 213
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(304) 296 - 5323
Fax (304) 972 - 4035
Debbie Hurt
Colonial Auto
PO Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
Re: .~B-F(SDP)-9947:
Colonial Auto Showroom; Tax Map 45, Parcel 4fib
Dear Ms. Hurt,
The Albemarte County..~rckitecraral Review Board reviewed your revised ladscape proposal rbr
above noted project (which is part of a plan to add a showroom building to the existing Colonial Auto
development on Route 29 North) at its meeting on July 19, 1999. The .~B voted unanimously to approve
the addition of shrubs along the curb of the parking lot that is closest to Route 29. The shrubs should be of
a variety, that is compatible with the existing shrubs, and the new shrubs should be 24" high at plating. The
addition of these shrubs is intended to provide a consistent line of shrubs along the Entrance Corridor
frontage.
As indicated previously, the locations of all the proposed landscaping should be shown on the site plan. rn
addition, the size and species of all landscaping, include the ornamental ever~eens and juniper previously
proposed for the front of the showroom building, should be identified on the plan.
Thank you for your hard work on this project. Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Margar'e/ft Pickart
Eric Morrisette
ARB-F(SDP)-99-47: Colonial Auto Showroom - Review of a revlsea tanascapmg ptul~u~at
i~sf~tof a pl~ to add a sho~oom building t0 ~e e;~sting C01~ial Auto development on Route
Ms. Pickart stated that she received a letter from Colonial Auto addressing concems raised at the
last ARB review. At the last ARB review the Board deferred action to allow the applicant time
to obtain additional information. The applicant has coordinated with Virginia Power, the
telephone company, VDOT, and the Service Authority. The result is that they have no additional
depth for planting due to VDOT and sewer easements and the overhead lines are at about 20'.
The Arborist at Virginia Power suggests planting two 8' Amur Maples (Acer Ginnalla) between
each existing pear tree as well as planting Purple Wintercreeper (Euonymous Coloratus) in the
beds with the trees.
Mr. Beverly suggested planting the same type of shrubs as the existing shrubs.
Mr. Kessler stated that he feels comfortable supporting the trees recommended by VEPCO.
Debbie Hurt stated that the Virginia Power lines are shared with the cable and phone company.
The fiber optic lines are mounted on the poles at approximately 20-25' from the ground with a
"sag" height of 18'. An engineer with the telephone company indicated that they tag on the poles
with Virginia Power, and the poles are maintained by Virginia Power. Virginia Power had an
arborists from Richmond to look at the site. She also pointed out the location of manholes,
noting that they have lost a significant amount of space to VDOT right-of-way. A
representative from the Service Authority stated that they would not allow landscape plantings in
their right-of-way except in the area between the curb and the existing line of pear trees. The
distance from the pear trees to the curb is at an angle, with the narrowest measurement being
approximately 7 ½' and the widest measurement approximately 9 ½'. The arborist from
Richmond stated that given the size of the power line and the limited width, she recommended
planting maple trees between the existing pear trees. The maple trees have a maximum height of
20' which could be trimmed and cared for in a way that will not grow into the power lines. She
pointed out that the shrubs are in a ring around the trees, noting that this is a narrow space.
Ms. Joseph stated her concern that shrubs should be planted along the line of the pavement.
Ms. Hurt stated that there are elm trees in islands in the parking lot located between each of the
pear trees.
Mr. Michel stated that he preferred a line of shrubs along the curb rather than the maple trees.
Mr. Beverly stated that he agreed with Mr. Michel.
Ms. Hurt pointed out that the arborist recommended maple trees and indicated that planting
shrubs will present a problem.
Mr. Kessler clarified that the arborist indicated that maple trees and shrubs would be too much.
He noted that the Board is recommending that shrubs be planted instead of maple trees in order
to have a consistent streetscape in this area.
ARB Minutes for July 19, 1999 - Page 5
DRAFT
Ms. Hurt stated that the new building is identical to the two existing buildings, 250' off of the
road, and there is established landscaping.
Mr. Michel pointed out that the Amur Maple is a tree with branches that tend to be low and to
droop. These would have to be "butchered" in order to maintain visibility. There would be
much more visibility with 24" shrubs along the front.
Mr. Beverly moved for approval, subject to the following condition:
1. Addition of 24" shrubs of a variety that is compatible with the existing shrubs, to be
planted along the front curb of the parking lot, to provide a consistent line of shrubs along
the Entrance Corridor frontage. The type of shrub may be approved administratively by
staff.
Ms. 'Joseph seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
ATTACHMENT F ~
: ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION NAME: COLONIAL AUTO SHOWROOM ADDITION
APPLICATION TYPE: FINAL SDP - REVISED (continued)
Project #
Location
Parcel Identification
Zoned
Magisterial District
Proposal
ARB Meeting Date
Date of Staff Review
Staff Contact
ARB-F(SDP)-99-47 (continued)
West side of Rt. 29, south of Rio Hills Shopping Center
· Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Highway Commercial CI-IC) and Entrance Corridor (EC)
Rio
Revised proposal for landscaping along the Route 29 frontage.
September 7, 1999
August 31, 1999
Margaret Pickart
PROJECT HISTORY
The ARB reviewed the preliminary application for this project on March 1, 1999 and the final on
June 21, 1999. The applicant returned to the ARB on July 19. At that meeting, the ARB approved
the proposal with the condition that 24" shrubs be added along the front curb. On July 27, 1999, the
applicant appealed the ARB's decision to the Board of Supervisors. On August 27, staff met with
the applicant to review a revised landscape proposal. Because the proposal includes information not
previously reviewed by the ARB, it was agreed that the revision should return for ARB review. The
appeal remains scheduled for hearing by the Board of Supervisors on September 15, 1999.
REVISED PROPOSAL
The applicant proposes the following additions to the Bradford Pear trees and Japanese Holly that
currently stand along the Route 29 frontage:
· Add 2 Amur Maple trees between each existing Bradford Pear tree
· Add Bar Harbor Juniper around each circle of holly, and continue the Juniper for a short distance
along the curb
· Add Aaron' s Beard Hypericum along the curb behind the trees and between the Juniper
ARB 9/7/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Final - revised landscaping - Page 1
ATTACHMENT Fz
Additional information on proposed plants:
The Amur Maple grows to a height of about 20'. It has an upright, rounded growth habit with dense
branching. It tends to take on a large, mushroom shape (with spread greater than height) and grows
about 15' per year. It has a red fall color, is hardy, a rapid grower, and tolerates poor soil.
The Bar Harbor Juniper is a creeping juniper that generally grows to 10" in height and spreads 6-8'.
In the summer it is gray-green color and it is slate-colored in winter.
The Aaron's Beard Hypericum (Hypericum japonicum) is a semi-evergreen plant that can grow to
a height of 18".
ANALYSIS
Staff has identified the following negative factors of the proposal:
n The Amur Maple is not a large shade tree, as required by the ARB guidelines.
ca The proposed Hypericum and Bar Harbor Juniper do not meet the standard
requirement for shrubs along parking areas.
24" height
Staff has identified the following positive factors of the proposal:
The addition of the Amur Maple trees will provide the required spacing of trees along the EC.
Although the Amur Maple is not a large shade tree, it meets the limitations created by utilities
on and near the site.
ca With the addition o£ Hypericum and Bar Harbor Juniper, the proposed planting scheme would
result in a continuous row of low plants along the EC.
The proposed plan would create a pattern and rhythm of plants along the parldng lot curb, which
would successfully soften this hard edge of the parking area.
[] The proposed plantings would achieve a softening of the overall appearance of the EC frontage
of this site.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff recommends approval of the proposed landscaping. The landscape plan must be included as
part of the site plan amendment documents and should include a landscape key with species, sizes,
numbers, etc.
ARB 9/7/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Final - revised landscaping - Page 2
September 8, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road, Room 7. 18
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296 - 5823
Fax (804) 972 - 4035
ATTACHMENT G
Debbie Hurt
Colonial Auto
PO Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB-F(SDP)-99-47: Colonial Auto Showroom - Revised Landscape Proposal
Tax Map 45, Parcel 451t
Dear Ms. Hurt,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed your revised landscape proposal for the
above noted project (which is part of a plan to add a showroom building to the existing Colonial Auto
development on Route 29 North) at its meeting on September 7, 1999. The proposal consisted of the
addition of Amur Maple trees, Bar Harbor Juniper, and Aaron's Beard Hypericurn along the Route 29
frontage.
The ARB voted unanimously to deny the proposal for the following reasons:
· The proposed Juniper and Hypericurn are ground covers - not shrubs.
As such,. they are too short and too
horizontal in appearance to meet the ARB guidelines.
The ARB guidelines call for 24" shrubs'along the Entrance Corridor. The small plant materials proposed will
not provide the intended effect along the Entrance Corridor.
The ARB guidelines envision a consistent streetscape of trees and shrubs along the Entrance Corridor. The 24"
shrubs are a critical component of the intended streetscape structure.
If you have any questions about this action, please do not hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
cc: File
Steve Blaine
Eric Morriscite
~ARB-F(SDP)-99-47 Colonial Auto Showroom - Revised proposal for landscaping
along the Route 29 frontage.
Ms. Pickart presented the staff report, noting the following:
ca As you recall, the applicant was last at the ARB on July 19. At that time the proposal
was to add 2 Amur Maples between each existing pear tree, and to add purple
wintercreeper (about 9" tall) in the beds with the trees
ca The Board's action was for approval with the condition that 24" shrubs be added.
DRAFT
ARB Minutes for September 7, 1999 - Page 8
[] The applicant appealed that decision to the Board of Supervisors. Since the letter of
appeal was sent, they have revised their proposal. We thought it best to bring that
proposal back to the ARB before going to the BOS next week.
ca The current proposal is to:
ca Add 2 Amur Maples between each existing pear tree,
ca Add Bar Harbor Juniper around each circle of holly, and continue the Juniper for
a short distance along the curb
n And add Aaron's Beard Hypericum along the curb behind the trees and between
the Juniper
~a A little more information on each of the proposed plants:
ca The Amur Maple grows to a height of about 20'.
ca The Bar Harbor Juniper is a creeping juniper that generally grows to 10" in height
and spreads 6-8'.
ca The Aaron's Beard Hypericum (Hypericum japonicum) is a semi-evergreen plant
that can grow to a height of 18".
ca Negative and positive factors are outlined in the staff report.
ca The recommendation in the staff report was for approval based on the positive factors
identified in the staff report.
[] Minutes from each of the meetings at which this application was discussed have been
distributed to the ARB members. There has been some discussion between the
applicant and staff about why shrubs are required along the EC frontage. Staff pointed
out early on that many parking lots are designed such that headlights would be
pointing out into the road, and the addition of shrubs would shield that light, but the
cars in this lot would not have that headlight issue. At the July 19 meeting the board
did make it clear that the 24" shrubs were intended to provide a consistent streetscape
along the EC. The ARB guidelines do clearly state that 24" high shrubs should be
provided to minimize the impact of parking areas. And this area would be considered
aparking lot whether or not the cars were for display or were being used by
customers or employees.
Ms. Joseph asked if the Board should deny this proposal, will this also be appealed to the
Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Beverly stated that the appeal before the Board of Supervisors is based on the
ARB decision of July 19; denial of this proposal would not affect that appeal.
Ms. Pickart explained that if this revised proposal for landscaping had been submitted to
the Board of Supervisors first, it would probably be referred back to the ARB for their
input.
Mr. Beverly questioned why this proposal would be submitted to the Board of
Supervisors, as the appeal was based on the July 19th ARB decision.
ARB Minutes for September 7, 1999 - Page 9
Steve Blaine stated that if there was a decision made on this plan, it would be a new
decision by ARB. He stated that they are attempting to address the concerns that have
been raised during the ARB process and illustrate this in a plan. If these concerns were
addressed in the appeal to the Board of Supervisors, it would be referred back to the ARB
for their input. Therefore, in the interest of saving time we thought it best to come back
to the ARB with the new plan. This plan attempts to address the Entrance Corridor tree
requirements on the 35' centers, not with shade trees that would encroach on the overhead
utilities, but with trees that would grow to a height within those parameters. The Juniper
and the Hypericum will provide the consistency and take away the harshness of the hard
edge of the parking lot, but will still be able to accommodate the irrigation system along
the edge of the pavement. The irrigation system provides sprinkling to the green area that
is along the edge of the pavement. The piping of the system can not be relocated because
of utility constraints and the edge of the right-of-way. The applicant intends to install,
where possible, adjacent to the existing sprinkler heads, heads that will pop up to get over
the juniper and low growing shrubs. The applicant wants to comply with the guideline
standards they can, recognizing that this is a display area and not a parking area. He
noted that the Zoning Administrator takes the position that there is a difference between a
display lot and a parking lot. There are precise designations on the site plan for this
property as to what is display area and what is parking. He noted that there is a letter
written by Amelia McCulley reminding the applicant that there is a difference in where
they parked display vehicles in the parking area. He noted that the guidelines create
expectations in landowners and applicants so they know what is expected in the Entrance
Corridor. He asked that the Board work within the guidelines and with the applicant to
arrive at a compromise.
Ms. Joseph askedif the Aaron's Beard Hypericum and the Bar Harbor Juniper were
ground cover.
Mr. Anhold stated that this would be correct.
Ms. Joseph asked Mr. Anhold if she defined ground cover as something that did not grow
more than 12-18" high, would this be correct.
Mr. Anhold stated that ground cover is something that will grow in such a way that other
things will not be able to grow up through it.
Ms. Joseph asked if ground cover grows more horizontally than vertically.
Mr. Anhold stated that he agrees that ground cover grows more horizontally than
vertically. He noted that they were trying to split the difference between the 24" plant
that would obscure the front of the cars. He noted that it would be the difference between
screening the car bumpers and the grilles. From a screening standpoint, with the utility
companies hemming us in on the tree that they want, a smaller rounder tree will create
'more screening than a taller one.
ARB Minutes for September 7, 1999 - Page 10
Ms. Joseph stated that she could not support this request. She noted that the trees are not
the issue, that she could not support such small plant materials, and that the 24" shrubs
are a critical component of the intended streetscape structure. The small plant materials
are plant materials that would be used on a bank and will grow horizontally, not
vertically. She stated that the proposed ground cover won't provide what the ARB has
been looking for. She acknowledged that the 24" shrubs are a guideline, but it is a
guideline that the ARB has consistently applied. She noted that the Board is attempting
to have a consistent streetscape along Rt. 29. She also pointed out that every display area
that has been appmved by this Board has the line of shrubs in front.
Mr. Beverly also noted that the Board is attempting to create a consistent streetscape
along Rt. 29. He pointed out that the ARB guidelines call for 24" shrubs along the
Entrance Corridor.
Ms. Puopolo stated that she liked the trees as they give more screening than a street tree,
and that the plan, overall, is considerably improved. She noted that the screening shrubs
are an important element of the streetscape. They are critical to giving the streetscape
structure. She stated that she supports the trees, but not the ground cover.
Ms. Joseph moved for denial of this proposal based on the following reasons:
· The proposed Juniper and. Hypericum are ground covers - not shrubs. As such, they
are too short and too horizontal in appearance to meet the ARB guidelines.
· The ARB guidelines call for 24" shrubs along the Entrance Corridor. The small plant
materials proposed will not provide the intended effect along the Entrance Corridor.
· The ARB guidelines envision a consistent streetscape of trees and shrubs along the
Entrance Corridor. The 24" shrubs are a critical component of the intended
streetscape structure.
Mr. Beverly seconded the motion, which carried unanimously.
Steven W. Blaine
swblaine~mwbb. com
MCGtnREWOODS
BATTLE&BOOTHELLp
Court Square Building
310 Fourth Street, N.E., Suite 300
Post Office Box 1288
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-1288
Telephone/TDD (804) 977-2500 · Fax (804) 980-2222
September 8, 1999
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Direct Dial: (804)977-2588
Direct Fax: (804)980-2251
Ella W. Carey, Clerk
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Re: Avl~eal of ARB Decision: ARB-99-06
Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Dear Ella:
I represent Colonial Auto Center in connection with the referenced Appeal. The Appeal
relates to the ARB's decision of July 19 requiring certain landscape improvements as a condition
for issuing a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Certificate is required for my client to construct
a 3,000 square foot addition to its automobile showroom on Route 29N. The basis for the
Appeal is to request the Board to reconsider the AKB's requirement that Colonial install 24" high
shrubbery along the entire length of the automobile display area in the front of the site.
In connection with the Appeal, the Applicant submits a revised landscaping plan,
incorporating additional trees to comply with the ARB's Entrance Corridor guidelines and
proposing an alternative landscape plan. The alternative plan addresses the ARB's guidelines,
but proposes a lower height of shrubbery from the 24" which the ARB seeks. The proposed
hypericum will reach up to 18" in height. The ARB did not review the enclosed plan when it
made its decision on July 19.
The enclosed proposal addresses my client's two main concerns: (1) it allows for
continued irrigation of the lawn area via irrigation lines currently installed in the area behind the
proposed shrubbery, and (2) improves Entrance Corridor landscaping and provides a softening of
the edge of the automobile display area, without obscuring the display area.
One of the stated reasons for the 24" shrubbery called for in the ARB Guidelines is to
provide screening; in particular, this design specification is intended to minimize glare from
headlights in the parking area. The display area involved in this project does not present the
need for screening from headlights as the area is used for display models only. Thus, the display
www. mwbb.cora
.A_uvtATY · Am · BAtY~ORE · BRUSSELS · CIIARLOTrE · CHARLOITESVHIZ. CHICAGO. JACI{SONVlI/,E · MOSCOW · NORFOLK · RICHMOND · T/SONS CORNER · WASHINGTON · ZCIRICH (OF COUNSEL)
Ms. Ella W. Carey
September 8, 1999
Page 2
lot is distinguishable from a normal parking lot. Therefore, the ARB guidelines should not be
strictly applied in this instance. The distinction is further supported by the client's site plan
prepared by B. Aubrey Huffman and Associates, Ltd., dated May 2, 1986, last revised June 10,
1997, a copy of which is on file with the Albemarle County Planning Office. The site plan
specifically delineates "parking" areas and "display" areas. The two uses are separate and clearly
not intended by the County to be treated as one in the same. The Zoning Administrator has
established a record that automobile display is to be distinguished from normal parking areas, as
evidenced by the attached Official Determination dated August 13, 1990 [#V-90-37/DH].
On behalf of my client, we respectfully submit the ched information for consideration
by the Board, and request a hearing by the Board at its ~ng on September 15, 1999.
Respect y sub d,
SWB :hll
Enclosures
Mr. H. Carter Myers, III
Ms. Debbie Hurt
\\CllAX2536X2588\Myers-Colonial AutoXLtrXCarey, Ella 090899.doe
OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF ZONING VIOLATION
From:
To:
No. V-90-37/DH
DATE: August 13, 1990
Amelia M. Patterson
(Zoning Administrator)
CMA Properties, Inc., H. Carter Myers, III
(Owner and Violator)
You are hereby informed that after investigation the Zoning
Administrator has determined that the following use or activity
constitutes a violation of the Zoning Ordinance of Albemarle
County:
Property: 45-94R
(Tax Map No.) (Page No.) (Parcel No.)
Owner: CMA Properties, Inc.
Violator: H. Carter Myers, III
Nature of Violation: Section 36.1 of, the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance - display, parking & storage of vehicles in
areas not approved on site development plan #SDP-89-010 entitled
Colonial of Charlottesville.
You are hereby ordered to cease and desist from the above
violation no later than August 24, 1990 . If you need
additional time for termination of this violation you may come to
the office of the Zoning Administrator at 401 McIntire Road,
Charlottesville, Virginia and extension to a later date will be
considered.
Under Virginia Code Section 15.1.496.1, if you disagree with
this determination of violation 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 file such written appeal within thirty days, this
d~cision will become final and unappealable.
Albemarle County, Virginia
CERTIFIED MAIL #P 072 262 149 & #P 072 262 150
- !
COLONIAL
Lincofiq · Mercury .. Mitsubishi * Suzuki ,. Buick * Pontiac .. GMC .. Cadillac * Nissan
July15,1999
VIA FACSIMILE: (804) 972-4035
Ms. Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
County of Albemarle
Dept. of planning and Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Re: ARB-F(SDP)-99-47 Colonial Auto Showroom
Tax Map 45, Parcel 45B
Dear Ms. Pickan:
In an effort to establish exactly how much space we had to work witit, we consulted with
Virginia Power on their power lines which run along Rt. 29 in front of our property. With their
assistance, we established that the poles are Virginia Power and they are shared with the cable
and phone company. The lowest lines on the poles are fiber optic lines belonging to the phone
company. I consulted with an engineer with the phone company who advised that they "tag"
with Virginia Power on Virginia Power poles and Virginia Power maintains the fights of way. I
was further advised that the fiber optic lines are mounted on the poles at approximately 20-25
feet from the ground with a "sag line" (the lowest point on the hanging line) of 18 feet.
We further investigated the easements in the area and established that Albemarle Sanitary
Sewer has an easement that totally encompasses the land we own between our curb and the
VDOT property and right of way. Mr. Pete Gorham came to our site and advised that they
would not allow landscape planrings in their right of way except in the area between our curb
and the existing line of pear trees. I understand that he sent you an E-mail to that effect. We
have measured the distance from the pear trees to our curb and find that line to be at a slight
angle with the narrowest measurement being approximately 7.5 feet and the widest measurement
to be approximately 9.5 feet.
Given the height restriction and width restriction for plantings, we requested the
assistance of Kathy N. McDaniel. System Arborist with Virginia Power and Dale Crotchfield,
local forester with Virginia Power. After viewing the area and the limitations imposed by the
various preexistent milky easements Ms. MeDaniel recommended the addition of two Amur
Maples (Aeer Ginnalla) at the approximate height of 8 feet to the existing line of pear trees.
Route 29 N,~rrh * PO Box '823 * ~:h.lrlottesvilk.t 'C'r~:nia 22906
, .~114 t ~ i - 1¢.)0(} FAX ¢ ,~, .~ ~ ,)~ [-101o
Ms. Margaret Pickart
July 15, 1999
Page 2
lVls. McDaniel and Mr. Crotchfield have advised that these trees have been used in many
locations in Charlottesville with success. They advised that they will top out at approximately 20
feet, but they are a tree that we can trim and somewhat control the growth so that they will not be
badly misshapen in later years by the trimming process from the power company. She further
recommended that we place these two trees in a bed with a slightly irregular outline and add
planrings ofEuonymous Coloratus or "Purple Wintercreeper" in the beds to help soften the
appearance of the line of trees and their trunks.
We believe we have made a dillgem effort to satisfy all restrictions in this area and come
as close to what the ARB is requesting as possible. Therefore, we respectfully request at thl.q
time that the above planting scheme be approved by the ARB pending a detailed and accurate
drawing of same on the site plan. Upon the ARB's approval of this planting concept we could
proceed to have the site plan amended accordingly and submit for final approval
We understand that the Board meets on Monday, July 19, 1999 and Mr. Myers would be
available at that time to answer any questions or we would be happy to answer any questions not
covered by the above information prior to that date. Ms. McDaniel, Mr. Crutchfield and Mr.
Gorham are also willing to discuss the matter with you and answer any questions you may have.
We very much appreciate your assistance with this matter and look forward to hearing
from you in the near future.
' cerely,
ebraJ. H
Administrati ' ant
Amur Maple
Acer ginnala Tree Form
Ac gi
Height:
Width:
Hardiness Zone:
Crown:
Foliage:
Flowers:
Fruit:
Description:
Advantages:
Limitations:
Site and Culture:
Cultivars:
15' to 20' (15' at age 30)
15' to 20' (15' at age 30)
3to7
globose to ovate, irregular outline. medium texture
11/2" to 3", three-lobed, long middle lobe, glossy dark green, variably yellow, orange,
or red in fall
fragrant, yellowish-white paniclos
variably red or brown in summer, abundant
A slow growing small tree or large shrub native to northern China. Though multistemmed,
it may be pruned to a single stem which is seldom straight. Closely related to Acer
tataricum.
Very cold-hardy. May be used as a street tree, specimen plant, hedge, or in large containers.
Occasionally injured by Verticillium wilt, bacterial blight, or other maple diseases and in-
sects. Abundant seed can be a litter problem.
Transplants readily, preferably B&B. Grows well in full sun or light shade. Adaptable to
a range of soils, but does not tolerate alkaline soil and prefers well drained soil. Pruning
to produce a tree form must begin in the nursery and continue on site.
'Flame' has fruits that turn bright red in summer and fiery red in fail. This somewhat
variable seed-propagated cultivar is reputed to be superior as a small tree, if trained.
'Embers', introduced in 1990, was selected for red fruit and outstanding fall color. Other
cultivars are being developed that have promise for use as street trees, e.g. 'Summer Splen-
dor' which also has bright red fruit but produces less seed.
Notes:
Z 1993 by The Pennsylvania State University.
Municipal Tree Restoration Program, School of Forest Resources. Penn State University. University Park, PA 16802
Amur Maple
Henry D. Gerhold,
Penn State Universily
Henry D. Gerhold, Penn State University
Donald R. Selinger, Bailey Nurseries
David R Bowerman
Charlotte Y, Humphr~s
ForrestFLMarshall, Jr.
COUNTY OF At REMAlqLf-
Office of Board of Supervisors
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, V*n~inia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800
Charles S. Martin
Walter E Perkins
Sally H. Thomas
,~muel MBer
August 9, 1999
Mr. H. Carter Myers, III, President
Colonial
PO Box 7823
Cha~ottesville, VA 22906
Re: ARB-F (SDP)-99-47 Colonial Auto Showroom
Dear Mr. Myers:
This is to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated July 27, 1999, appealing the decision of the
Architectural Review Board made on July 19, 1999. This appeal has been scheduled to be heard by the
Board of Supervisors on September 15, 1999 at 7:00 p.m.
The Board meets in Meeting Room #241, on the Second Floor of the County Office Building.
The applicant or his representative must be present at this meeting.
Any additional materials you wish mailed to the Board on this request should be in the hands of
the Clerk by 4:00 p.m., September 8, 1999. If you have any question, please do not hesitate to contact
me.
/ewc
cc:
V. Wayne Cilimberg
Margaret Pickart, w/attachments
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
Printed on recycled paper
July 21, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296- 5823
.Fax (804) 972 - 4035
Debbie Hun
Colonial Auto
pO l~ox 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
Re: ARB-F(SDP)-99-47: Colonial Auto Showroom; Tax Map 45, Parcel 45B
Dear Ms. Hurt,
The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board reviewed your revised landscape proposal for the
above noted project (which is part of a plan to add a showroom building to the existing Colonial Auto
development on Route 29 North) at its meeting on July 19, 1999. The ARB voted unanimously to approve
the addition of shrubs along the curb of the parking lot that is closest to Route 29. The shrubs should be of
a variety that is compatible with the existing shrubs, and the new shrubs should be 24" high at planting. The
addition of these shrubs is intended to provide a consistent line of shrubs along the Entrance Corridor
frontage.
As indicated previously, the locations of all the proposed landscaping should be shown on the site plan. In
addition, the size and species of all landscaping, include the ornamental evergreens and juniper previously
proposed for the front of the showroom building, should be identified on the plan.
Thank you for your hard work on this project. Please call me if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Design Planner
Cc: File
Eric Mortisetie
June 23, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ": ...........
Dept. of Plannin~ & Community Developme~ .....
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Debra J Hurt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB-F(SDP)-99-47 Colonial Auto Showroom
Tax Map 45, Parcel 45B
Dear Ms. Hurt:
At its meeting on Monday, June 2 l, 1999, the Albemafie County Architectural Review Board
unanimously voted to defer the above-noted application to allow the Applicant time to submit
additional information necessary for review, including the height of overhead power lines and a
landscaping plan in keeping with the standard ARB requirements. The Board noted the
following concerns and comments:
1. The size of the ornamental evergreens has not been specified.
2. The ARB guidelines outline the requirements for Entrance Corridor landscaping. The
requirement for large shade trees, interspersed ornamentals, and a row of shrubs is intended
to create a coordinated, ordered appearance along the County' s Entrance Corridors. Trees
and shrubs should be added to bring the landscaping of this site up to the standard ARB
requirements. Shrubs should be added in a row format, not in a circular pattern around the
trees.
3. If it is believed that the overhead power lines will interfere with landscaping, the height of
the lines should be indicated so that an appropriate species can be identified.
4. Show all landscaping on the site plan.
If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
MP/jcf
Cc: File
Jack Beamon
COLON'_AL
Lincoln * Mercury, · Mitsubishi * Suzuki · Buick * Pontiac · GMC * Cadillac * Nissan
June :23, 1999 Transmated Via Facsimile 6:30 p. nt 6/22/99 9724035
Original mailed 6/23/99
Ms. Margaret Pickart, Design Planner
County of Albemarle
Department of planning and Community Development
,401 McIntire Road
12harlottesville, VA 22902-4596
R=: ARB-P (SDP)-99-06 Colonhi Auto Showroom Addition
Dear Ms. Pickart:
This will reduce to writing my request by phone (your voice mail) of June 2 I, 1999.
Please advise as to what steps are necessary for us to receive a written transcript of the portions of the
ARB's March 1, 1999 and Jane 21, 1999 meetings dealing with the above project. If the requirement is simply a
written request, please accept this correspondence as such.
R was not clear to me at the meeting en June 21, 1999 what exactly "defexfhag" our request would mean. Is
the matter now set off to the Board's next me~'ing on July 6, 19997 If so, could you please clarify exagtly what you
expect fxom us at that meeting. I was somewhat chagrinned by questions from the Board relative to why we wanted
to alter the recommended landscape pattern, as the matter of not blocking visibility of our inventory and the power
lines were both matters that were addressed in detail in our submission papers. We were under the impression that
we provided 9 packets of submission documents because those were distributed to the Board members. Is that not
the case? Any procedural clarificatiats you could offer would be greatly appreciated.
Ms. Joseph made reference to photographs we provided that depicted other dealerships with the required
trees and hedgerows - I cannot identify any such photographs. Could she have been speaking about photographs
staff provided? If so, could you let me know of which properties they were?
I apologize for not having the detailed informslien you required at the meeting But by way of explanation,
as you may recall we met with you on May 21, 1999 and our submission was made on May 26, 1999, six days
ahead of the June I, 1999 deadline. After making that submission I leR at least two voice mall messages for you
inquiring if you felt the submission was complete or if you required additional information. Although your notation
on the staff report you sent by fitx indicates 6/17/99, the fax time/date stamp indicates that report was haasmiRed to
Colonial at 8:07 on 6/18/99. I was in my office until 8:00 p.m. on 6/17/99 but was out of town on Friday, 6/18/99,
so the first time I saw you report was upon returning to work on Monday, June 21; just hours before the scheduled
review meeting. I was unable to get the answers you needed in that limeframe.
Ifl can get your clarification on the above inquiries in the near future we will have any information you
require available by the next hearing date of July 6, 1999(?).
you.
We very much appreciate any assistance you can provide in this matter. I look forward to hearing from
DebraJ. Hurt
Administrative Assistant
Route 29 North * P.O. Box 7823 · Charlottesville. Virginia 22906
(804) 951-1000 FAX (804) 9"31-1010
Mliliate of Cane .Myem Automcmve · An Employee Owned Co. * E,;t. 192q
08:07 FAX 9724012 DEPT OF PLAN~ING ~01
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOART) STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION NAME: COLONIAL AUTO SHfiWRO~M ADDITION
· APPLICATION TYPE: FINAL SDP
Project #
Location
Parcel Identification
Zonod
Magisterial District
Proposal
ARB Muting Date
Date of Staff Review
Staff Contact
ARB-F(SDP}-99-47
West side of Rt. 29, south of Rio Hills Shopping Center
Tax Map 45, Pawel 94B
Highway Com~rclal (I'IC) and Entrma~ Corridor (EC)
Rio
Final review for a Certificate of Appropriateness for a plan to
conswact a new automobile sales showroom between 2 existing
showrooms, and to construct ~m addition to the rear service building
June 21, 1999
june 14, 1999
Maq~aret Pickart
PROJECT HI~'I'ORY
The ARB reviewed the preliminary application for this pwject on March 1, 1999 and made the
following comments:
1. Add large shade tr~s at 3 W' callper atong the Route 29 frontage. Incorporate the existin~
trees along ~ frontage so thaZ trees will be spaced 35' on cen~cr. The trees locat~ in
islaud~ Lu the parking lm should not be coum~ci reward this requirement Ornamental trees
should be in~rspersed among ~he ~es along Route 29. Shrubs, 24" high at plau~i._o, should
be ad&~d aloug she EC. The exisling shrubs that encircle the existing trees may be
incorporated into this ww of shrubs.
2. Show on th~ hadscal~ plan the pwposed landscspine in fi'ont of the new showroom. This
landscapin.o. should be compatible with the landscaping in front of the existlns showrooms.
3. The shovffoom windows should aut incort~rate glass down W the floor line. Solid
rnaterial should be included between the windows and the ground.
4. The "voided comer" detail of the showroom is not appropriar~ for the EC. The
showroom bulldinS should have solid comers.
Staff met with the applicant on May 21, 1999 to discuss th~ comments and options for proceeding
with the project. The applicant has concerns about adding landscaping that ~ overly obscm'~ th=
POEt-it* Fax No~e
7671
6/2199 Coloajal Auto Showroom Addition F~al - Page ]
06X18/99
08:07 FAX 97~401~
DEPT OF PLANNING
~102
business from potential customers travclin~ alone the Rt. 29 Entrance Corridor. The applicant hss
also indicated that overhead utility lines limit the height of trees along the EC.
Currently, the ske has S medium shade ~rees (Bradford Pear) along the EC, spaced 100' on center.
Sbrubs surrouud these trees in a circular pattern. Five Varki,~.a. islands with Bradford Pear trees are
spaced between the shade trees. These arc considered interior psrici~o~ lot trees and are typically not
counted toward the EC fronta2e landscapinS. Landscaping in front of the existing showroom
buildings includes juniper and assorted orrmrnenUtl trees.
REVISED PROPOSAL - Details end Analysis
LANDSCAPINO
Entrance Corridor: The applicant proposes to add two ornamcnnd trccs between each cxistln~
Entrance Corridor tree, for a Wtal of 9 new ~ees. The new ornamental trees would be surrounded
by new juniper. The species of ornamental tree has not been specified. The EC trees (existing and
new) would be spaced approximsteiy 35' apart.
Comment: The proposed circular beds of new shrubs would coordinate with the cxis,lna_ planrings,
'aml th~ proposal would meet the standard requirement ibr 35' spacing along the EC. However, the
proposed trees are ornsmenlals - not the standard large shade lrccs. While this proposal would
innsuse tl~ umnber orEnuance Corridor lees, ale proposal effectively reduces the size and n,,mber
of trees from that which is typically required, rem~S in a si~i~c-~t chs-Ee to the character of the
landscaping intended for th~ Enlrdnce Corridor. If the overhead power lines limit the potential
landscaping, the height of the lines should be specified.
Buiidina: The applicant proposes to add landscaping in front ofthe new building rtmt marches the
landseeping in front of the existhg builditxl~. The proposal includes juniper on rite bank in front of
the showroom, and 2 small ornamental evergreens flanking the sidewalk leading to the building.
Comment: lVi2?~hing thc cxisting landscaping in tiffs ar~a is appmprian:. This lsradscapin~ is
situated at a distance from the EC and will be mlnlrnm|iy visible.
SHOWROOM
Showroom Windows -Lower Panels: The windows of the proposc~l showroom will match those
of the existing buildings, which have solid panels at the base,
Comment: The. solid panels are appropriate.
Showmere Windows - Corners: The applicant does not wish to add solid masonry corners m the
showroom because 1) this desi2n would differ from the existing build~n~Is, and 2) because the
buildings are ,~imstst ~ considerable distance from the EC, and therdorc the detail would bc
minimally visible.
Commmt: Due to the di.~ance f~ ~he EC and the compatibility with the existing builrt~,,$s, the
addition ofm~LSortry at the COrners of the new showroom would have minimal impact.
ARB ~F21~9 Colonial luW Showroom Addition Fi~,.i. Page 2
.06/18/99
08:07 PAX 9724012
DEFT OF PLA1N~ING
~P, KVIC~. ADDITION
There have been no changes. to the proposed addition to the xv~.r service buildin2.
expected to be minimally visible from the EC.
The addition is
O~-R AUTOMOBIl .E DEALERSHIPS
The applicant has provided photographs of other automobile dealerships that exist on Entrance
Corridors in the County, indicating that he does not want to be held to stricter landscaVin~ standards
than everyone else. The photographs ate meant to show sites that do not meet the requirements for
spacing, size, etc. the followinS is a brief overview of the ARB status on these sites.
Brown Honda, west side of Route 29 North: Ori2inal site preetst~..~ EC regulations. EC l~nrl~vving
required, but not yet planted, as part of recent renovations. Smaller trees permitted to coordinate
~ C~e~,,~~ofRoute 29 N, south ofWalMart: Ori~ns! site predates EC regulations.
(BP)-97-04 Special P'inauce Buildi-R: 3 evergreens and 2 Dogwoods required at new building. .~
Brown Toyota, south side of Route 250 East: F(SDP)-94-06. EC landscaping limited by VDOT
sight distance requirements.
Dennis Enterprises, south side of Route 250 Ea,~: Original site predates EC r~gulations. Additional
landscaping required with proposed enclosure of display ares and expansion of display parkintO.
Right-of-way/siSht-line limitations exist, Construction not complete.
PqJmsus Motorears, north side of 250 East at Route 20: Site predates ]~(j regulations. No recent
Site plan or building permit applications on file.
Brady/Bush~y ll'ord, north side of Route 250 Ea.~: F(SDP)..95-0~. SlEet trees approved at ~540'
on center.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The proposed landscaping at dxe b~ildix~, ~md the showroom window issues have been satisfactorily
addressed. The proposed EC landscaping does not meet the standard ARB requirements. Staff
recommends that the proposal be approvcd with the followhiS uvndilions:
l, Specify the height of the overhead power lines.
3, Add medium shy, de trees along the EC frontage so dust trccs (cxistin2 mad new) ur~ spa '~
approximately 35' on center. ., ~,
3. Intersperse ll or,,,,,qental trees with the trees required in #l . Specify species and size.
4. Add shrubs at the new shade trees ~o match the cxistin~ shrubs. Specify species and size.
5- All lsmdscapinll must be added to the site plan prior to approval.
The. revised proposal does si~dficantly increase the number of trees alonl~ thc EC front~c. If the
ARB finds the proposed layout acceptablc, the followin2 conditions are rccommended:
1. ,~pecify the bej!~t of the overhead power lines.
2. Specify the species and size of the o~smental trees.
3. Add one tree tn the south of the southernmn~t exiStinl~ EC try.
4. Specify the size of the proposcd jtmiper.
5. All landscaping mtt~t he sdfled to the site plan prior to approval.
AK8 6/21/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Final - Page 3
June 8, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Debra J. Hurt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB-F(SDP)99-47 Colonial Auto Showroom
Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Dear Ms. Hurt:
The above-noted item will be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board on
Monday, June 21, 1999. The Board will review this item in Meeting Room #241, at 1:30 p.m.
in the County Office Building, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
It will be necessary for someone to be present to speak for the application. If you have any
questions, please contact our office.
Sincerely,
Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
va,/jcf
File
Jack Beamon
County of Albemarle
Virginia
DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING
Charlottesville, Va.,
NO "21636
'County of
A!bemarle
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
Application for a
PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
OR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
for a Site Development Plan
ARB#
Corresponding File Name/#
Date Submitted
ARB Meeting Date
Action Deadline 60 days from
submittal
Fee Paid
Department of Zonin~
401 McIntire Road * Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 * 804 296-5875 * Fax 804 972-4035
Preliminary Conference
(no fee required)
Certificate of Appropriateness
($160.00 fee required)
TITLE of Development:
Tax Map/Parcel: 04500
Zoning: HC
Location: West side of Rt.
Auto Center, next to Rio Hills Shopping Center
Type Of Use: [] Commercial
[~ Public
OWNER Name: CMA Properties, Inc.,
AddressP:. o. Box 7823, Charlottesville, VA
Phone: (804) 951-100
DEVELOPER Name:~ CMA Properties, Inc.
Address: P' o. Box 7823, Charlottesville, VA 22906
Phone: (804) 951-1000
Showroom Construction and Service DeDartment addition
-- O0 -- 00 -- 094RO
Magisterial District: RIO
29, north of City of Charlottesville ? Colonial
Industrial
22906 (]777 Myers
(1777 Myers Drive - 22901)
[] Residential
Drive - 22901)
SURVEYOR/ARCHITECT/PLANNER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Name: Beamon & Associates, PC (Jack BeAmon)
Address: 2083 Dabney Road, Richmond, VA 23230
Phone: (804) 355-8366
CONTACT PERSON Name: Debra J. Hurt
Address: P. O. Box 7823, Charlottesville,
Phone: (804) 951-1000
or H. Carter Myers, III
VA 22906 (777 Myers Drive
22901~
DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION: Please describe briefly the request of the applic~ion (new building,
addkiom or other): Request is for the construction of a new sales showroom between our
existing showrooms. The new showroom will be the same design and colors as existing
showrooms. Also construction of addition to existing service building - located
behind showrooms - this too will be same design and color scheme as existing service
building.
If applying for a certificate of appropriateness, this application is not complete and WILL NOT be
forwarded to the Architectural Review Board until all of the following information has been submitted to
the Department of Zoning. Please check the materials that have been submitted.
[] Eight (8) separate packets of submittal materials listed on plan checklist.
Copy of completed plan checklist
Written description of application (on this form or an attached sheet)
Written narrative of how proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and the Entrance
Corridor design guidelines.
~ Written justification for any requested modifications (setback variance, etc.)
The foregoing information is complete and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have read and understand the
provisions of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance applicable to this application.
Signed ~ctIF Date
( purchaser, agent)
5/25/99
Received By:
Fee Paid:
Action:
(OFFICE USE)
ARB Date:
ADDENDUM TO APPLICATION FOR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
ARB-P (SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
This addendum will address the 4 comments offered by the Architectural Review Board as
a result of a March 1, 1999 Preliminary Conference.
As illustrated on Exhibit A attached hereto we would propose to add two ornamental
trees between the existing shade trees. Our existing shade trees are mature and have
large branch/leaf spans. The existing trees are approximately 100 feet apart. If you
look closely at our current plan you will note that we have a tree between each of
these large shade trees just inside the curb line, which from the street could easily
appear to he on approximately the same line as the Bradford Pear shade trees.
We feel that with the addition of two ornamental trees between the existing
trees we would meet the minimum 35 foot spacing requirements and at the same time
create an attractive landscape feature along the entrance corridor. We have a number
of reservations about adding additional "shade" trees at this time. We feel that at
maturity the trees would he growing into each other. Also, there are heavy utility
lines right over our existing trees and we don't want to compound that problem by
adding additional large trees under those utility lines. We are attaching a photograph
that clearly depicts the power lines and their placement relative to our existing trees
(Exhibit B). We currently have large shrubs in a circular pattern around the base of
our existing trees. (Some of those shrubs have died but 24 inch replacements have
been ordered and will be planted by our landscape contractor as soon as they come
in. ) We would propose to use the same circular pattern around the base of the
ornamentals but with a smaller juniper type shrub. We feel this would create an
attractive scenario and at the same time allow a reasonable visibility to our vehicle
display area. We believe that this landscape pattern will create a more aesthetically
pleasing appearance than the typical "hedge row" design that you would normally
recommend for a Wal-Mart type parking lot.
We understand and appreciate the efforts to limit headlights from "parking
lots" casting into Route 29 traffic. However the cars on our front lot are all
automobiles for sale and are rarely moved after darkness falls. Our sales department
opens at I0:00 a.m., well after daylight, and closes at 8:00 p.m. during the winter
months, and 9:00 p.m. during summer months. So there would be very little, if any,
headlights casting from our front lot into Route 29.
We are enclosing photographs of the from of our business to illustrate the
attractiveness and the abundance of landscaping that currently exists (Exhibit C).
We, too, want to use landscaping not only to beautify the entrance corridor but also to
make our business more attractive to our customers. Because our dealership
architecture and facility layout is somewhat unique to the atrto industry (i.e., more of
an auto-park-like setting (Exhibit D) as opposed to the typical dealership box design)
we would not want to overly obscure our business from our potential customers that
travel on Rome 29.
The landscaping in front of our new showroom will be like that in front of our
existing showrooms. We have indicated same on a portion of the site plan which is
attached hereto as Exhibit E. We are attaching photographs of existing landscaping
(Exhibit F).
An excerpt from the architectural drawings is attached (Exhibit G) showing that the
glass on the building does not go all the way to the ground. There is solid material
below the glass line just as on our other showrooms.
The corners of the new showroom will be solid brown metal to match the existing
showrooms. To change these to a solid of another color would not continue the
existing pattern. We are attaching photographs (Exhibit C) that illustrate that from
the entrance corridor a motorist does not clearly see the corners of our buildings.
However, someone actually on our premises would clearly note the mismatched
corners when close to the buildings.
/ /
/
44
50'
See Detoil "
I \
I /
i i ...
t
', I
Existing shade trees and shrubs
~ Proposed new oynamentals and juniper
SCALE: 1 inch = 50 feet
U. S
EXHIBIT C
EXHIBIT D
0
.... '. L"~ EXHIBIT F
CONC. RAMP
EXT. INSUL. & RNISH SYSTEM--~
SOUTH ELEVATION
1/S' = 1,-0-
fPREFIN. METAL TRIM
WITH EXIS'rlNG
ROOF--
GUT~R
EXISTING
STOREFRONT
CONSTR. --~
STANDING SEAM METAL ROOF
TO UATCH EXlSI'INO
METAL
PRERN. METAL
GUTTER
STEEL RAIL,
: PNNTED
IDa'.INSU. & INISHSYul=d
TO lATCH EXISlNG
-- PR :RN. 4ETAL
DO INSP(UT
CONC. STEPS
STEEL COL, PNNTED
STOREFRONT CONSTR.
INSUL
\RNISH SYSTEM
PREFIN. METAL
DOWNSPOUT
FAST ELEVATION
CONC. SPLASHBLOCK, Tyff.
EXHIBIT G
fED(IS'rING
STOREFRONI
CONSTR. --
PAINTED
COLONIAL
Lincoln · Mercury · Mitsubishi · Suzuki - Buick · Pontiac · GMC · Cadillac · Nissan
May 17, 1999
Ms. Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Developmere
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596
Re: ARB-P (SDP) - 99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Dear Ms. Pickart:
On Friday, May 14, we received notification of preliminary site plan approval for the
above project. We are now proceeding to meet the requirements for final site plan approval. Mr.
Myers has taken some photographs of our site and other sites in the area and would like to
present those photographs to the ARB and discuss in detail their requirements for final ARB
approval of our site plan.
I called your office earlier today but you were tinavailable and I later spoke with Mr.
Fritts to inquire what we needed to do today for Mr. Myers to get on your agenda for June 7m.
Mr. Frills advised that he did not know what would be needed.
Therefore, I would like for this letter to act as our formal request to be placed on the
ARB's agenda for June 7, 1999 for Mr. Myers to further discuss the requirements for final ARB
approval. I am also submitting a representation of photographs recently taken of our site and
other sites in the area. I am submitting eight copies of this letter and eight copies of the
representative photos in anticipation that this is all that will be required to place our matter on the
agenda.
If you require any additional information please let me know. Thank you for your
consideration in this regard.
Route 29 North * P.O. Box 7823 * Cha~ottesville. Virginia 22906
(804) 9'8-3711 FAX (80-D 978-1'11
Affiliate of Carter Myers Automotive · An Employee Owned Co. · Est. 1924
II
Ie.
.!
March 4, 1999
Dept.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Debra Hurt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
RE: ARB-P(SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Dear Ms. Hurt:
The Albemade County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on March 1, 1999, reviewed a
preliminary plan to construct a new automobile sales showroom between two existing showroom
buildings. The Board offered the following comments for the benefit of the applicant's final
submission:
1. Add large shade trees at 3¼" caliper along the Route 29 frontage. Incorporate the
existing trees along this frontage so that trees will be spaced 35' on center. The trees
located in islands in the parking lot should not be counted toward this requirement.
Ornamental trees should be interspersed among the trees along Route 29. Shrubs, 24"
high at plantink should be added along the EC. The existing shrubs that encircle the
existing trees may be incorporated into this row of shrubs.
2. Show on the landscape plan the proposed landscaping in front of the new showroom.
This landscaping should be compatible with the landscaping in front of the existing
showrooms.
V,5(. The showroom windows should not incorporate glass down to the floor line. Solid
material should be included between the windows and the ground.
4. The "voided comer" detail of the showroom is not appropriate for the EC. The
-~ showroom building should have solid comers.
Please submit revised drawings addressing these comments at your earliest convenience. A submission
and review schedule is included for your use.
If you have any questions regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
Margaret M. M. Pickart
Design Planner
Cc: File CMA Properties, Inc
ARCttITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
APPLICATION NAME: COLONIAL AUTO SHOWROOM ADDITION
APPLICATION TYPE: PRELIMINARY SDP
Project #
Location
Parcel Identification
Zoned
Magisterial DisWict
Proposal
ARB Meeting Date
Date of Staff Review
Staff Contact
ARB-P(SDP)-99-06
· Located on the west side of Rt. 29, south of Rio Hills Shopping
Center
Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Highway Commercial (HC) and Entrance Corridor (EC)
Rio
Preliminary review of a plan to construct a new automobile sales
showroom between two existing Showroom buildings
March 1, 1999
February 23, 1999
Margaret Pickart
PROJECT HISTORY
This site is currently occupied by Colonial Auto Center, with two showroom buildings facing the
EC, and service buildings behind. A parking lot accommodating a total of 254 employee, customer,
and display parking spaces is situated between the elisting showroom buildings and the EC.
(Additional parking is provided between the showroom and service buildings, and behind the service
building.) The showrooms are situated approximately 83' apart. A grass area with a tree currently
occupies this space. The site is landscaped, but the plantings do not meet the standard ARB
requirements. The last approved site plan shows medium shade trees along the EC at about 100' on
center. Five parking islands with Bradford Pear trees are spaced between the shade trees. Seven
street shrubs are shown surrounding each EC shade tree. Landscaping also exists in front of the
showroom buildings. The site slopes down from the north to the south.
PROJECT DETAILS
The applicant proposes to construct a new showroom building between the two existing buildings.
The new structure would be joined to the existing ones by shorter, connecting structures. The
connectors are open to the outdoors, and are composed of sloped roof elements on steel columns.
The overall design, materials, colors, size, and scale of the new building is intended to match the
ARB 3/1/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Preliminary - Page 1
existing. The glass showroom windows across the facade, the sloping metal roof, the stucco-like wall
surfaces, and the "canopy" extension of the roof over the sidewalk are all repeated in the new design.
The Applicant is also proposing an 80' x 50' x 23' tall addition to the south side of the service
building. The addition would match the existing service building in scale, general design, and
materials. It would be faced with metal siding and would have a metal fascia. The east elevation
would have an overhead door and a pedestrian door. The south elevation would have no window
or door openings. Due to the distance from the EC and other structures between the EC and the
service building, the addition should not be visible from the EC.
ANALYSIS
Compatibility to historic structures: The proposed showroom design has little relationship to historic
structures in Albemarle Cotmr:'; however, it is compatible with the immediate sm-roundings.
Context: The site is located in a heavily developed commercial area on Route 29 North.
Scale: The proposed showroom has few features that would convey a human scale; however, the
building would be in scale with its immediate surroundings. The building would be approximately
50' wide and 37' high. The connecting structures measure approximately 20' high. The existing
building to the north is 33' high. The building to the south is 24' high. :
Forms and Features: The 'primary features of the showroom are the glass front and the broad, sloped
roof. These features are not compatible with historic architecture of the county, but they are
compatible with the immediate surroundings. The similarity of the design to the existing buildings,
and the use of connecting devices, help create a cohesive whole. Entrance to the new showroom is
from the side elevations; these elevations will not be readily visible from the EC.
Materials and Colors: The showroom would have a standing seam metal roof painted to match the
existing roofs. The storefronts would match the existing. The wall surfaces would match the
existing "stucco" surfaces.
Blankness: Blax~ess is not a feature of the proposed design.
Connecting Devices: Connecting devices are used to unify the showroom buildings. They are
composed of sloped roof elements on steel columns and are combined with paved walhvays, stairs,
and ramps with painted steel railings to provide access between showrooms. The connectors are set
back from the face of the buildings, but the exact configuration is somewhat unclear from the
information provided.
Accessory Structures and Equipment: The site plan shows an equipment screen and concrete pad
situated to the northwest of the proposed showroom. It would not be visible from the EC.
ARB 3/1/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Preliminary - Page 2
Lighting: No new lighting is proposed.
Signs: No new signs are proposed.
Landscaping: No new landscaping is proposed. A green area will be removed from the site, and the
site will appear more developed and more crowded. Landscaping could be added to help soften the
impact of the additional development on this site. The ARB has consistently required at least the
minimum landscaping ou~ined in the ARB guidelines for similar sites.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Clarify the configuration of the covered walkways on the site plan.
2. Incorporating the existing medium shade trees along the EC frontage (not in the parking area),
upgade the landscaping to meet the standard EC requirements of: 1 ) Large shade trees at 3 V2"
caliper, 35' on center, 2) interspersed ornamental trees, and 3) shrubs 24" high along the EC.
This landscaping should be compatible with the existing landscaping on site.
3. Add landscaping along the front of the building, similar to that in front of the existing building
to the south, to soften the impact of the glass area of the new showroom and to add human scale
to the development.
ARB 3/1/99 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition Preliminary - Page 3
1:30 P.M.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY ARCH rrECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
TENTATIVE AGENDA, MONDAY, MARCH 1, 1999, .............................
ALBEMARLE COUNTY OFFICE BUILDE~G, MEETi ' 0OM #241
I. Call to Order
II. Establish a Quorum
IlL Consent Agenda
a. ARB-F(SIGN)-99-09 Penske Truck Sign
Cornact Person: Randy Smith
IV. Preliminary Reviews
a,
ARB-P(BP)-99-02 Rivanna Water Tank Antenna
Contact Person: Steve Yancey
ARB-P(BP)-99-03 Greenwood Motel Antenna
Contact Person: Steve Yancey
ARB-P(BP)-99-01 Christian Aid Mission Antenna
Contact Person: Steve Yancey
ARB-P(BP)-99-04 Fontnine Research Park Antenna
Contact Person: Steve Yancey
ARB-P(SDP)-99-05 Westminster Canterbury-Assisted Living Facility
Contact Person: Tye Campbell
ARB-P(SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Contact Person: Debra Hun
ARB-P(SDP)-99-07 Vintage Market Canopy
Contact Person: Willie Mac Perkins
V. Old Business:
VI. New Business.
VII. Adjournment.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4,596
(804) 296-5823
February 18, 1999
Debra J. Hunt
P O Box 7823
Charlottesville, VA 22906
ARB-P(SDP)-99-06 Colonial Auto Showroom Addition
Tax Map 45, Parcel 94B
Dear Ms. Hunt:
The above-noted item will be reviewed by the Albemarle County Architectural Review Board on
Monday, March 1, 1999. The Board will review this item in Meeting Room #241, at 1:30 p.m.
in the County Office Building, Second Floor, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
It will be necessary for someone to be present to speak for the application. If you have any
questions, please contact our office.' .'
Sincerely,
Margaret Pickart
Design Planner
MP/jcf
CO:
File
CMA Properties, Inc
County of
Albemarle
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD
Application for a
PRELIMINARY CONFERENCE
OR CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
for a Site Development Plan
ARD#
Corresponding File Name/#
Date Submitted
ARB Meeting Date
Action Deadline 60 days from
submittal
Fee Paid ...... '
Denartment of Zonin~
401 McIntire Road * Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 * 804 296-5875 * Fax 804 972-4035
Preliminary Conference
(no fee required)
[~] Certificate of Appropriateness
($160.00 fee required)
Zoning:
Location: LO.~,~X¢ ,-~ ,k,;
Type Of Use: _[~ Commercial
[D"'] Public
OWNER Name: CL rn c~
Address: ~. O. t'~ o~t
Phone: (~ o~"'} o~.~ ~, .~ q X I
DE~LOPER Name: ~X ~
Address: ~. ~, ~ c~ ~. % X ~.
Phone: C~ ~3~' %'1 ~1
O~q SC
Magisterial District:
['D'D Industrial ~ Residential
SURVEYOR/ARCHITECT/PLANNER/LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT
Address: ,~ ~S--% iN, ~L~,~ ~..~ (~ o~k , ~', & ~X, V ~
Phone: ('~O~ BS~ '- S' ~ bG
DESCRIPTION OF APPLICATION: Please describe briefly the request of the application (r/~ building,
Itapplyin~ for a ce~i~cate ofappropdateness, thidapplicntion is not complete an~ NOT be
fo~arded to the Architectural Review Board until all of the following information has been submiRed
the Department of Zoning. Please check the materials that have been submitted.
~'] Eight (8) separate packets of submittal materials listed on plan checklist.
Copy of gomp~eted plan ~h®cklist
Written description of application (on this form or an attached sheet)
Written narrative of how proposal is compatible with the surrounding area and the Entrance
Corridor design guidelines.
Writtcn justification for any r~q-estcd modifications (sctback va~a-r~,~. etc.)
The foregoing information is complete and correct to the best of my knowledge. I have read and understand tl'
provisions of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance applicable to this application.
Signed ~
· act
Date
purchaser, agent)
Received By:
Fee Paid:
Action:
(OFFICE USE)
ARB Date:
MEMORANDUM
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road, Room 218
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296 - 5823
Fax (804) 972 - 4035
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Juandiego Wade, Transportation PlannerS~
August17,1999
'SP-99-48 Emmanuel Episcopal Church
The Planning Commission approved the above-noted special use permit at their August 10, 1999
meeting subject to conditions. These conditions can be found in the staff report. One of the
conditions was approval from the Health Department. The Health Department has given
approval for the proposed use (see Attachment).
If you should have any questions, please feel free to contact me.
JW/jcf
ATTACHMENT
TJHD - Environmental Health Services
P. O. Box 7546, Ch&rluttesvi!le, VA 22905
AZeat's Address:
REQUEST FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION WITII EXISTING SEWAGE DISPOSAL
,F A 2U L_ F_,p c ur-cH >ate:
(Note; By xi~iliRJ ~ statement you aro requcsL~ng Uaat a~c F.n~itonrr~tal Heal~ Sl:~cialist evaluate your s~st~ and.
a_re Fdag laet',~lm psanissicm to enter ycrt~t property.)
DEPARTMENT USE ONLY
]~xi~ng sew'age disposal system should bc adequ,~te to Iradie new consmEllon and use as above,
Building permit may be Issued.
Existing sewaLOe disposal syslem Inadequate, Apl~licant must a~ly at ~e h~ ~~f~ a
Se~ge Di~s~ C~~ P~c to ~ issa~ ~fo~ B~8 r~: ~ ~ is~
Hcal~ Department Records mid/or Site Visit FindhiEs:
ron L1ALGLIESH, EICHMAN,
GIL,PtN & .e;J:lON. RC.
mental ltealtl: Specialist
Dept.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
August 12, 1999
Gloeckner Engineering & Surveying
Kurt M. Gloeckner, PEPLS
2246 Ivy Road, Suite 11
Charlottesville, VA 22903
RE: SP-99-48 Emmanuel Episcopal Church; Tax Map 70, Parcel 13
Dear Mr. Gloeckner:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on August 10, 1999, unanimously
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of SuperviSors. Please note that this
approval is subject to the following conditions:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate special use permit.
VDOT's approval of the entrance width and entrance radii.
Approval from the Health Department
Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100-year flood plain.
No expansion of the mausoleum structure. (tombs inside may be added)
Any future expansion of the church structures or use shall require amendment to this special use
permit.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive
public comment at their meeting on September 15, 1999. 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, ~ .,~
Juandiego Wade
Transportation Planner
Cc: Ella Carey
Jack Kelsey
Amelia McCulley
Steve Allshouse
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JUANDIEGO WADE
AUGUST 10, 1999
SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
SP 99-048 Emmanuel Episcopal Church
Applicant's Proposal:
The applicant proposes to use the existing manse for church offices and Sunday School
classrooms. See Attachment A & B
Petition:
Request for special use 'permit to bring a nonconforming church and cemetery into
conformance and, thereby, allow expansion of the church use. This request is in
accordance with Section 10.2.2.35 of the Zoning OrdinanCe, which allows for church
building and adjunct cemetery. The property, described as Tax Map 70 Parcel 13,
contains 11.619 acres, and is located in the White Hall Magisterial District on Rockfish
Gap Turnpike [Route # 250 approximately 14 miles from Charlottesville, near the
intersection with Rt. 691]. The property is zoned Rural Areas (RA). The Comprehensive
Plan designates this property as rural in Rural Area 3. (Attachment C & D)
Character of the Area:
The site is set back fi'om an area along Route 250 West in an area that is not heavily
traveled. The area is rural in nature.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 3 1.2.4.1 of
the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval with conditions.
Planning and Zonin~ History:
There is no zoning history associated with this parcel.
Comprehensive Plan:
This area is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff will address each provision of Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special
use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this
ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use
will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property.
The applicant proposes to use the existing manse for office and Sunday School rooms.
The manse would be renovated to handle these changes. Staff does not believe there will
be any substantial detriment to adjacent properties. There are no major external changes
planned to the building. Although the church would welcome new members, the
renovations to the manse are to handle the existing congregation. The parish hall is
currently used for Sunday School rooms and offices.
The requirement for a special use permit for this project is based on the fact that the
church itself and cemetery are non-conforming while the manse is a conforming use-
single family dwelling. To expand the nonconforming church use into the currently
conforming dwelling without a special use permit would create a new nonconformity,
which is not allowed. In this case, although the permit is being "sought for the expansion
of the church use into the rectory building, the special use permit will cover the entire
site: the church use and all of its buildings and the cemetery.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby,
The character of the district should not be changed in any way. The church has been at
this location since the 1860's. The manse has been at this location since 1910.
and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance,
Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5,
and 1.6. Staff rinds no conflict with these provisions of the ordinance.
with the uses permitted by rimht in the district,
This use will not restrict permitted uses on any adjacent property.
with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance,
These regulations do not apply to this request.
and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
Staff has not identified any component of this proposal that is inconsistent with the public
health, safety and general welfare. VDOT. comments can be found on Attachment E.
VDOT recommends that the entrance width to be widened and the radii improved. Staff
supports VDOT's recommendations and the applicant has agreed to them as well.
The Health Department comments can be found on Attachment F. The applicant is
working with the Health Department to answer questions raised. Staff will make
approval fi:om the Health Department a condition of approval. The Health Department
may put restrictions on the size of the congregation and limit the use of the manse base
on their review of the septic system. The applicant does not anticipate any problems
addressing the issues raised by the Health Department. The manse is on a separate septic
system than the church and should be able to handle the intended use.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request:
2.
3.
4.
This request is consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance.
There will no major change to the extemal part of the manse.
If approved, the general use will not generate any additional traffic.
Oppommity to bring church and cemetery into conformity.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of this request subject to the following conditions:
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
There shall be no day care center or private school on site without a separate
special use permit.
VDOT's approval of the entrance width and entrance radii.
Approval fi'om the Health Department
Future burials in the cemetery shall be limited to areas outside the 100-year flood
plain.
No expansion of the mausoleum structure. (tombs inside may be added)
Any future expansion of the church structures or use shall require amendment to
this special use permit.
ATTACHMENTS:
A ' Application
B - Sketch Site Plan of Church
C - Tax Map
D - Location Map
E - VDOT Comments
F - Health Department Comments
OFFICE USE ONLY
Application for Special Use Permit
--., .... .y -.- .~--.,,---..~--.- * ~,~.pa-,.tuvtt,. ,.,t vua.uan$; ,.A,u,; a~ ATTACHMISXN i A
Date
PrOjeCt Name (how shouid we rerer to this app.cation?) Emmanuel Episcopal Church
.ExistingUseOld Manse with Office Proposed Use Sunday School & Office
*Zoning District RA *Zoning Ordinance Section number requested I 0.2.2.35.
(*staff will assist you with these items) ( 1 I . 482AC + 0.137 AC. )
Number of acres to be covered by Special Use PerHlit(ir aporUon|t must be delineated on p|at) 11 . 61 9 AC.
Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit?
Are you submitting a site development plan with this application?
[221 Yes]~] No
2~1 YesCI No
Contact Person (Whom should we call/write conceming this project?): Kurt M. Gloeckner, P.E. , P. L. S.
Address 2246 Ivy Road, Suite I 1 City Charlottesville State VA Zip 22903
Daytime Phone ( 804 ) 971 - 1591 Fax # 293 - 7612 E-mail
Owner of !and (As listed in the County's records): Emmanuel Epi scopa l Church
c/o Rev. C. F. Mullaly, J~.
Address P- O. Box 38 CityGreenwood
Daytime Phone ( __ ) 4 5 6 - 6 3 3 4 Fax # E-mail
State VA Zip22943
AppliCant(Whoisthecontactpersonrepresenting?Whoisrequestingthespecialuse?):KUrt M. Gloeckner, P.E. , P. L. S.
Address P- O. Box 38 City Greenwood State VA Zi 22943
P
Daytime Phone ( __ ) 971 - 1591 Fax # 293 - 761 2 ' E-mail
Taxmapandparcel TM 70 Par. 13 PhysicaiAddress(if~signed)
7500 Rockfish Gap 'Turnpike Greenwood, VA 22943 (P.O. Box 38)
LOCatiOnOfprOperty(landmarks, intersections, orother) Route 250 West - 14 miles from
Charlottesville on left just past Route 691.
Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting property? If yes, please list
thosetax map and parcel numbers Yes, TM 70 Par. I 2
·
OFFICE USE ONLY ~5,bo ~ 0 ~- I
History: D Special Use Permits: C] ZMAs and Proffers:
~ Variances:
[2]~-~tter of Authorization
Co.c.,.e.t re,,ie,,, Site De,,elo me.t P,..?NoC, l.fi
401 Mclntire Road -:. Charlottesville, VA 22902 .:- Voice: 296-5832 .:- Fax: 972-4126
Section. 3 1.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors
hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district
will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance, with the uses permitted by fight in the district, with additional regulations provided in section
5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete
this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request.
If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
WhatistheComprehensivePlandesignation~rthispropeny? R-A
Not at all.
Howwillthepropos~s~cialuseaffecta~acentprope~y?
has been church use and will remain as such.
Since this property
There will be no affect.
H~wwi~thepr~p~sedspecia~usea~ctthech~a~ter~fthedist~ctsu~undingthepr~perty?Th~e will'
no change in the character of the district.
be
The church
How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance?
the Historical Registar and has been in harmony with
is on
all since
its beginning.
Howistheuseinharmonywiththeusespermittedbyrightinthedistfict? The church is part of
the community and has always fit in with the "by right" uses.
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use? None
How will this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community? The church i s
the most powerful contributor to the health, safety and welfare
of everyone.
2
DeScribe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of persons
involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use: The manse will be
converted to Sunday School use downstairs and church offices
upstairs. The classrooms will be used for the most part on
Sunday and some durinq the week in davtime hours.
ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each:
Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and
,the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it
needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing.
Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type oflegal
entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership
or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to
the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority
to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application.
If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
~//3. Drawings or conceptual plans, if any.
~ 4. Additional Information, if any.
knowledge. ~,
Signa ,f "~
Printed Name
Date
Daytime phone number of Signatory
3
ATTACHMENT B
ATTACHMENT C
ALBEMARLE GOUNTY
54
~i ,~ "' '~\' :~ '
~ .. /',,?/ /
~ . ~. ~ . X ~ ,"~ ~ ~':'.~,.. , i .' ',
., . , ,, . . ;~ ~ ,, / ;;
- ,, , ~ ,., .~, ...-
~ I. ~ ',,,, ~,. ~,.~.~.~. ,,.,,.:.'~ --:. ...._..'..~
. ~ ...'
, ~.... .,...,,.,~.: ..,~,.:~~..
...... SAMUEL M~LLER AND SECTION 70
WHITE HALL DISTRICTS
t
MOUN I AIN
white Ibll
!
I
SP-99-48 Emmanuel Episcopal Church '\'
c-
CASTLE
HeQfdl Mfn F r
eOAZ
MOUNTAIN
/~'~/;OVINGSTON
ROCK
TOP
TOM
MOUNTAM
.-?
\ '
/ Noah Garden
Abederie
/
Arrt~whl~l
ATTACHMENT
. Weedseat
t
I
' '~'~'- - ' Cogmr,/C/ub
Pawel/
Stme
ATTACHMENT E
:)AVID R. GEHR
COMMISSIONER
COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRCfiN A
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
701 VDOT WAY
c.Ad vk _ . ,,9, a. mCKE.
R~ID~T ~GINE~
AuSust Public Berg Submi~ls
Mr. David Benish
Dept. of Planning & .
Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mr. Benish:
Please find our comments for the August public hearings listed below:
SP-99-46 St. Luke's Chapel, Route 53
Our comments reflect those expressed in a letter from VDOT to the applicant dated January 4,
1999, regarding this proposed improvement.
· We recommend that the exiidng entrance be upgraded to a minimum commercial entrance,
which is 30 foot width at ROW line and paved within ROW.
· The entrance should be shifted easterly as much as the property allows to enhance si~t
distance to the west.
· The embankment to the west of the entrance should be graded down as much as is feasible to
also enhance sight distance.
· It is our understanding that this additional building is not for the sole purpose of enlarging the
congregation, but to allow the existing membership to have better meeting facilities for
fellowship, etc.
. SP-99-47 3D Studio Expansion, Route 641
· Sight distance to the east along Route 641 does not meet commercial entrance standards.. We
recommend that sight distance from driveway to the east along Route 641 be improved by
lowering mound of dirt nearproperty line.
· We recommend that the driveway entrance be widened to private entrance standards, as it is
· about 10- t2 feet wide at the mad and about 8 feet along most of it's length.
SP-99-48 Emmanuel Episcopal Church, Route 250W
· The existing entrance width will require widening to a width of t 8' at 25' from the edge of
pavement of Route 250. The 18' should taper down. to the existing width near the rock
pillars. The radii should be improved to 25' as indicated on recently submitted site plans.
SP-99-49 Winndom Farm Brid~e, Route 676
No comment at this time with existing RA use.
RECEIVED
JIJL 2 2
PL~,i.;i':5?,:'3 AND
CO,MMUNIT'.' 2. 'i' ,' '_'LC~ ,%!E:xlT
TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY
Juandiego Wade
From: DROADCAP.VDH.STATE.VA.US
[D ROAD CAP. VD H. STATE .VA. U S @vd h. state. v a. u s]
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 1999 2:45 PM
To: D ROAD CAP. V D H. STATE .VA. U S @vd h. state. va. u s;
BCRAUN.VDH.STATE.VA. US@vdh.state.va.us; mpickart@albemarle.org;
dmahon@albemade.org; msipe@albemarle.org; emorrise@albemarle.org;
eechols@albemarle.org; bfritz@albemarle.org; sthomas2@albemarle.org;
jwade@albemarte.org
Subject: Contact person
': ATTACHMENT F
Please change Bill Craun as your primary contact person regarding Health Department
comments for Site Plan Review. I will act as Bill's back-up and assist as needed. Below are
some comments that Bill made for the Emmanuel Episcopal Church:
1. Need to apply at the local health department for a "Review of Existing System with Proposed
New Construction". This application is free:
2. Need to uncover the Septic Tank and Distribution Box, Call for an inspection from the local
health department when completed.
3. Need to supply more detailed information regarding number of persons in the sunday school,
number of employees, and anticipated use figures (hours of operation, specialty events-
weddings, funerals, revivals & number of persons attending, organizational meetings, etc.).
Is food service planned for classes that are being held during the week or weekend?
4. The sewage disposal system may be inadequate for its intended uses but no permit can be
located to identify the drain~eld's potential. In order for the local health department to
properly assess, the above actions must be completed. No reserve area has been located.
I will forward these comments to Paul Gertner (spelling?) at 977-4480 today.
Thanks for your assistance,
Dwayne
August 12, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Richard B. Drumm
Dmmm Land Trust
3140 Burnley Station Road
Barboursville, VA 22923
SP-99~47 Studio Expansion
Tax Map 21, Parcel 31
Dear Mr. Drumre:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on August 10, 1999, unanimously
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that
this approval is subject to the following conditions:
1. Not more than two employees except for family members who reside on site.
2. The hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday.
3. The home occupation shall be limited to the proposed 2,242 square feet studio area.
4. Improve existing driveway site distance to the east and improve the entrance to meet private
standards.
5. No signs for the business shall be posted on the property;
6. Use shall comply with the following provisions of section 4.14 of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance.
4.14.1 NOISE
All sources of noise (except those not under direct control of occupant of use, such as vehicles),
must not create sound or impact noise levels in excess of the values specified below when
measured at the points indicated. In addition, before 7:00 a.m. and after 7:00 p.m., the
permissible sound levels at an agricultural or residential district boundary where adjoining
industrial districts shall be reduced by five (5) decibels in each octave band and in the overall
band for impact noises.
4.14.1.1 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Noise shall be measured by means of a sound level meter and octave band analyzer, calibrated in
decibels (re 0.0002 microbar) and shall be measured at the nearest lot line from which the noise
level radiates.
BDARD OF SUPERVISORS
Page 2
August 12, 1999
4.14.1.2 MEANING OF TERMS
Decibel means a prescribed interval of sound frequencies which classi~es sound according to its
pitch.
Impact noises shall be measured by means of an impact noise analyzer. Impact noises are those
whose peak values fluctuate more than six (6) decibels from the steady values indicated on the
sound level me~er set at fast response.
Octave band means a prescribed interval of sound frequencies which classifies sound according
to its pitch.
Preferred frequency octave bands means a standardized series of octave bands prescribed by the
American Standards Association in S1.6-1960 Preferred Frequencies for Acoustical
Measurements.
Sound level meter means an electronic instrument which includes a microphone, an amplifier and
an output meter which measures a noise and sound pressure levels in a specified manner. It may
be used with the octave band analyzer that permits measuring the sound pressure level in discrete
octave bands.
Maximum Permitted Sound Levels (decibels)
Preferred Frequency Octave Bands
Location of Measurement
Octave band, At residential At other lot lines
cycles/second district boundaries within district
31.5 64 72
63 64 72
125 60 70
250 54 65
500 48 59
1000 42 55
2000 38 51
4000 34 47
8000 30 44
Overall for
impact noise 80 90
4.14.2 VIBRATION
The produce of displacement in inches times the frequency in cycles per second of earth borne
vibrations from..any activity shall not exceed the values specified below when measured at the
points indicated.
4.14.2.1 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Earthborne vibrations shall be measured by means of a three component recording system,
capable of measuring vibration in three mutually perpendicular directions. The displacement
shall be the maximum instantaneous vector sum of the amplitude in the three directions.
Page 2
August 12, 1999
4.14.2.2 MEANING OF TERMS
Vibrations means the periodic displacement of oscillation of the earth.
Area of Measurement
Type of vibration
Continuous
Impulsive ( 100 per
minute or less)
Less than 8 pulses
per 24 hours
At residential At other lot lines
district boundaries within district
.00 .015
.006 .030
.015 .075
4.14.3 GLARE
No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from flood lights or from high temperature processes
such as combustion, welding or otherwise, so as to be visible beyond the lot line, shall be
permitted except for signs, parking lot lighting and other lighting permitted by this ordinance or
required by any other applicable regulation, ordinance or law. However, in the case of any
operation which would affect adversely the navigation or control of aircraft, the current
regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration shall apply.
4.14.4 AIR POLLUTION
Rules of the State Air Pollution Control Board shall apply within Albemarle County. Such rules
and regulations include coverage of: emission of smoke and other emissions from stationary
sources; particulate matter; odor; particulate emission from indirect heating furnaces; open
burning; incinerators; and gaseous pollutants.
4.14.5 WATER POLLUTION
Rules of the State Water Control Board shall apply within Albemarle County.
4.14.6 RADIOACTIVITY
There shall be no radioactivity emission which would be dangerous to the health and safety of
persons on or beyond the premises where such radioactive material is used. Determination of
existence of such danger and' the handling of radioactive materials, the discharge of such
materials into the atmosphere and streams and other water, and the disposal of radioactive wastes
shall be by reference to and in accordance with applicable current regulations of the Department
of Energy, and in the case of items which would affect aircraft navigation or the control thereof,
by applicable current regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration, and any applicable laws
enacted by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the requirements of the
Virginia Air Pollution Act, whichever is greater.
4.14.7 ELECTRICAL iNTERFERENCE
There shall be no electrical disturbance emanating from any lot which would adversely affect the
operation of any equipment on any other lot or premises and in the case of any operation which
would affect adversely the navigation or control of aircraft, the current regulations of the Federal
Aviation Administration shall apply.
Page 4
August 12, 1999
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and
receive public comment at their meeting on September 15, 1999. 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,
Juandiego Wade
Transportation Planner
Cc: Ella Carey
Jack Kelsey
Amelia McCulley
Steve Allshouse
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
JUANDIEGO WADE
AUGUST 10, 1999
SEPTEMBER 15, 1999
SP 99-047 3D STUDIO EXPANSION
Applicant's Proposal:
The applicant is proposing to establish a television soundstage to produce educational
programs with two' employees.
Petition:
Request for special use permit to allow the construction of a sound stage studio and two
employees (Attachment A) in accordance with Section 10.2.2.31 oft he Zoning Ordinance
which allows for Class B Home Occupation. The property, described as Tax Map 21
Parcel 31, contains 23.46 acres, and is located in the Rivanna Magisterial District on
Bumley Station Road [Route 641] approximately 3/4 miles from Rt. 29. The property is
zoned Rural Areas IRA]. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural in
Rural Area 2. (Attachments B & C)
Character of the Area:
The character of the area is rural residential in nature.
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4: 1 of
the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval with conditions.
Planning and Zoning History:
There is no zoning history associated with this parcel.
Comprehensive Plan:
This area is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan.
STAFF COMMENT:
Staff will address each provision of Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance.
The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special
use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this
ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use
will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property.
Staff was unable to identify any aspects of this request that would be of a substantial
detriment to adjacent properties. The applicant proposes to make educational videos with
two employees in a studio. The studio is proposed to be located in an expanded 2,242
square foot building. It will be similar in character to a garage. The size of the existing
building is 1,042 square feet and the expansion will be 1,200 square feet. There will be
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request:
1. This request is consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1
Ordinance.
2. There will no unusual noise or light associated with this use.
3.
of the
If approved, the general use will not generate traffic significantly greater than
would normally be anticipated in a residential neighborhood.
Staff has identified' the following factor which is unfavorable to this request:
1. The size of the studio area will be larger than the home.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Staff recommends approval of this request subject to the following conditions:
1. Not more than two employees except for family members who reside on site;
2. The hours of operation shall be from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Friday;
3. The home occupation shall be limited to the proposed 2,242 square feet studio area;
4. Improve existing driveway site distance to the east and improve the entrance to meet
private standards;
5. No signs for the business shall be posted on the property;
6. Use shall comply with the following provisions of section 4.14 of the Albemarle
County Zoning Ordinance.
4.14.1 NOISE
All sources of noise (except those not under direct control of occupant of use, such as
vehicles), must not create sound or impact noise levels in excess of the values specified
below when measured at the points indicated. In addition, before 7:00 a.m. and after 7:00
p.m., the permissible sound levels at an agricultural or residential district boundary where
adjoining industrial districts shall be reduced by five (5) decibels in each octave band and
in the overall band for impact noises.
4.14.1.1 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Noise shall be measured by means of a sound level meter and octave band analyzer,
calibrated in decibels (re 0.0002 microbar) and shall be measured at the nearest lot line
from which the noise level radiates.
4.14.1.2 MEANING OF TERMS '
Decibel means a prescribed interval
according to its pitch.
of sound frequencies which
classifies sound
Impact noises shall be measured by means of an impact noise analyzer. Impact noises are
those whose peak values fluctuate more than six (6) decibels from the steady values
indicated on the sound level meter set at fast response.
Octave band means a prescribed interval of sound frequencies which classi~es sound
according to its pitch.
Preferred frequency octave bands means a standardized series of octave bands prescribed
by the American Standards Association in S1.6-1960 Preferred Frequencies for
Acoustical Measurements.
Sound level meter means an electronic instrument which includes a microphone, an
amplifier and an output meter which measures a noise and sound pressure levels in a
specified manner. It may be used with the octave band analyzer that permits measuring
the sound pressure level in discrete octave bands.
Maximum Permitted Sound Levels (decibels)
Preferred Frequency Octave Bands
Location of Measurement
Octave band, At residential At other lot lines
cycles/second district boundaries within district
31.5 64 72
63 64 72
125 60 70
250 54 65
500 48 59
1000 42 55
2000 38 51
4000 34 47
8000 30 44
Overall for
impact noise 80 90
4.14.2 VIBRATION
The produce of displacement in inches times the frequency in cycles per second of
earthborne vibrations from any activity shall not exceed the values specified below when
measured at the points indicated.
4.14.2.1 METHOD OF MEASUREMENT
Earthborne vibrations shall be measured by means of a three component recording
system, capable of measuring vibration in three mutually perpendicular directions. The
displacement shall be the maximum instantaneous vector sum of the amplitude in the
three directions.
4.14.2.2 MEANING OF TERMS
Vibrations means the periodic displacement of oscillation of the earth.
Area of Measurement
Type of vibration
Continuous
Impulsive (100 per
minute or less)
Less than 8 pulses
per 24 hours
At residential At other lot lines
district boundaries within district
.00 .015
.006 .030
.015 .075
4.14.3 GLARE
No direct or sky reflected glare, whether from flood lights or from high temperature
processes such as combustion, welding or otherwise, so as to be visible beyond the lot
line, shall be permitted except for signs, parking lot lighting and other lighting permitted
by this ordinance or required by any other applicable regulation, ordinance or law.
However, in the case of any operation which would affect adversely the navigation or
control of aircraft, the current regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration shall
apply.
4.14.4 AIR POLLUTION
Rules of the State Air Pollution Control Board shall apply within Albemarle County.
Such rules and regulations include coverage of: emission of smoke and other emissions
from stationary sources; particulate matter; odor; particulate emission from indirect
heating fumaces; open burning; incinerators; and gaseous pollutants.
4.14.5 WATER POLLUTION
Rules of the State Water Control Board shall apply within Albemarle County.
4.14.6 RADIOACTIVITY
There shall be no radioactivity emission which would be dangerous to the health and
safety of persons on or beyond the premises where such radioactive material is used.
Determination of existence of such danger and the handling of radioactive materials, the
discharge of such materials into the atmosphere and streams and other water, and the
disposal of radioactive wastes shall be by reference to and in accordance with applicable
current regulations of the Department of Energy, and in the case of items which would
affect aircraft navigation or the control thereof, by applicable current regulations of the
Federal Aviation Administration, and any applicable laws enacted by the General
Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia or the requirements of the Virginia Air
Pollution Act, whichever is greater.
4.14.7 ELECTRICAL INTERFERENCE
There shall be no electrical disturbance emanating from any lot which would adversely
affect the operation of any equipment on any other lot or premises and in the case of any
operation which would affect adversely the navigation or control of aircraft, the current
regulations of the Federal Aviation Administration shall apply.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Application
B - Tax Map
C - Location Map
D - VDOT comments
A:sp99-0473d studio.doe
· 'County of Albemarle o:- Department of Building Code an
Application for Special Use Permit
ATTACHMENT A
Project Name <nov, sn,,.~d ,,e refer to this application?)3D .STLtDIO EYP~S IO ~
*Existing Use ~6RIC~T~ g Fo~6~ Proposed Use ~a~e o~e~to~
*Zoning District ~ .... *Zoning O~dinance Section number requested
(*staff will assist you Vkt~ these items)
Number or acres ~o be covered by Special Use Permit at ~ ~r~o,, it ..... t ~e ocn.¢a,~d o. p,a,) * ] 7Z ~ oR
Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit?:
Are you submitting a site development plan with this application?
C2 YeaJel No
O Yes~ No
COntaCt PerSOn (Whom should we call/write conceming this project?): l~lC_A-~l;~.b tB. DRL~A/eV~
Address. '3lqo i?,~Rr,tt.C-y 5-rPrrtoN 6eb.
Daytime Phone ( 8'oq ) qT~-2-'73g
City tgq}Rga~R-SVttA.-6 State V/I- Zip z:z-,:tv3
Fax # q7'3 - 3o,:13 E-mail D~,.~t,~,- ¢~
C 4.tl~Rt-o'rt'~V t t4,(c , ef~n'
Owner of land (As listed in the County's records):
Address 3 1 oH 6~RN~Z
Zip zz~tzj.
Daytime Phone( 8oq ) q78-tit7 Fax#
E-mail gDl~uau~ {E} tMT~t~5 .~ET
AppliCant(Whoisthecontactpersonrepresenting?Whoisrcquestingthespecialuse?): gLI, Ct4A'R.b leg. bR.~
Address S|qo B~y 5TATIo~ ~. City 8~o~Sv,~State v~ Zip ~z~
Daytime Phone ( ~ ) q?~-ZT~g Fax ~ q?~-3o8~ E-mail o~~~m~e.~
Tax map and parcel M;tP 2. t Pt~cr~t-- 3 t Physical Address (teassigned) ~ gaRU~Z 5~e,
g~SV~, ~ ~
LOCatiOn OfprOperty(tandmarks, intersecfions, orother) 0~ ~T ~ q l ~ ~/q ~ ~. 6 AST a~ ~r Z~ ~ ~o~K ~t~ ~ ~,
Does the ownel' of this property own (or have any ownership i,~terest in) any abutting property? If yes, please list
thosetaxmapandparcelnumbers ~t6s : 'r'tcx 2.1 - ~i ~ ,.e 'rt,~
OFFICE USE ONLY -
~eeamo~.~$ 350.Crb Dat~Paid ~q3C'2'.,'4~'Ch¢ck# q 3~
History: B Special Use Permits: ~ ZMAs and Proffers:
0 Variances:
:: .>:;? 121 Letter of Authorization
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? Cil[Ycs O No
401 Mclntire Road":' Charlottesville, VA 22902 + Voice: 296-5832 + Fax: 972-4126
Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors
hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district
will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section
5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The items which follow will be reviewed by the .staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete
this form and provide additional information which will assist the COunty in its review of your request.
If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? R. h (Rv.~A t_/AC:,R ~cu. t:r~a:A ,.-)
How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property? ;}D 7~(-~r~f Plo. op~4ltrt6:~ Lvct,L. BC-/AN',0F-'r-6cTE'~ ·
H~wwi~~thepr~p~sedspecia~useaffectthecharacter~fthedistrictsurr~undingthepr~perty? trt.,,c4_ B~- ,w/ht:r6ta~,o.
How is the use in harmony with the pur~se and intent of the Zoning Ordinance?
How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district? ~
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use?
How will this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community?
Describe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of persons
involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use:
Fate ,4. C_..qtt..Dt~6~; fV e~ppei' ~Dt4C.,q.Tt~,/~/4t. FI~R,4p'I l~ttlr_.~ .I totz~
ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each:
Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and
the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it
needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing.
Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal
entity or organization including,. but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership
or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to
the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority
to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted containing the owner' s written consent to 'the application.
If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
Drawings or conceptual plans, if any.
Additional Information, if any. (eeer,,,~,,,,,,,ce
I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in
filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my
know/~~ J(,4,v~ ?-~/Iqff
Signature Date
Printed Name
Daytime phone number of Signatory
ALBEMARLE.
COUNTY
_.~n['T A-CHMENnf B
,'.l
6
. ,
$ClI,E IN FEET
o ,. .~o
. :../ . {
:~SP-9947 3D'Studio Expansion.
40
3.1' ;/ / ~
, ~-.., /_.~-~'.,~,f
WHITE 3~ALL
$TRI~
RIVANNA DI
22
.' SEE 22- t
X
/
Advance Mills
Albe,marle
ATTACHMENT C
/L ........_/.....;.:.
I TO RUCKERSVILLE
7 3D S~udio Expansion
X/
~ou,
· ~ I
I
Dist. i
I
I
//
Fannington
Country Club
/ :1
1 ~'68 1167-
Redland
//
TTE'S'
I
I
I
ProfiR
I)
!
Ii
/./
Monticello
~/'
ASh Lawn'
ATTACHMENT D
July 22, 1999
August Public Hearing Submittals
Mr. David Benish
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22902
Dear Mr. Benish:
Please find our comments for the August public hearings listed below:
SP-99-46 St. Luke's Chapel, Route 53
Our comments reflect those expressed in a letter from VDOT to the applicant dated January 4,
1999, regarding this proposed improvement.
We recommend that the existing entrance be upgraded to a minimum commercial entrance,
which is 30 foot width at ROW line and paved within ROW.
· The entrance should be shifted easterly as much as the property allows to enhance sight
distance to the west.
· The embankment to the west of the entrance should be graded down as much as is feasible to
also enhance sight distance.
· It is our understanding that this additional building is not for the sole purpose of enlarging the
congregation, but to allow the existing membership to have better meeting facilities for
fellowship, etc.
SP-99-47 3D Studio Expansion, Route 641
· Sight distance to the east along Route 641 does not meet commercial entrance standards.. We
recommend that sight distance from driveway to the east along Route 641 be improved by
lowering mound of dirt near property line.
· We recommend that the driveway entrance be widened to private entrance standards, as it is
about 10-12 feet wide at the road and about 8 feet along most ofit's length.
SP-99-48 Emmanuel Episcopal Church, Route 250W
· The existing entrance width will require widening to a width of 18' at 25' from the edge of
pavement of Route 250. The 18' should taper down to the existing width near the rock
pillars. The radii should l~e improved to 25' as indicated on recently submitted site plans.
SP-99-49 Winndom Farm Bridge, Route 676
No comment at this time with existing RA use.
SP-99-52 White Gables Condominium, Route 250W
· A -full-frontage right turn lane is required along Route 250.
· In order to provide protected left turn movements into the site, and help the left turn out
movement, the applicant is required to modify pavement markings along Route 250 between
Birdwood and the nearby commercial left turn lane to the east to provide a continuous mixed
use left turn lane.
ZMA,99-02 Value America. Route 29N
August 19, 1999
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 Mclntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596
(804) 296-5823
Craig & Katharine Winn
741 Woodlands Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
SP-99-49 Winndom Farm Bridge
Tax Map 44, Parcel 19B
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Winn:
The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on August 10, 1999, unanimously
recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that
this approval is subject to the following conditions:
Engineering Department approval of computations and plans verifying structural
adequacy of the bridge;
Engineering Department approval of computations and plans documenting changes to the
floodplain;
Engineering Department receipt of copies of federal and state permits for disturbance of
the stream channel and any associated wetlands;
The applicant shall obtain a map revision from FEMA for changes to the floodplain of
Jumping Branch;
Engineering Department approval of a mitigation plan for repair and enhancement of the
stream buffer;
Water quality measures and mitigation methods shall be provided subject to the approval
of the Water Resources Manager; and,
In an effort to prevent any residential traffic from using the bridge, the gate located on the
southern side of the stream, near the stables, shall be closed at all times. The bridge shall
not serve as access for residential development to Route 676;
Page 2
August 19, 1999
The applicant must receive the necessary approvals from the appropriate State and Federal
agencies within six (6) months of the SP ~approval; provided, however, that if the permits
are being prosecuted in good faith, the Zoning Administrator in consultation with the
Chief of Engineering, may extend the time of such expiration for not more than three (3)
successive periods of one (1) month each.
Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and
receive public comment at their meeting on September 15, 1999. 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,
Eric L. Morrisette, AICP
Senior Planner
ELM/jcf
\
Cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley
Jack Kelsey Steve Allshouse
STAFF PERSON:
PLANNING COMMISSION:
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS:
Eric L. Morrisette, AICP
August 10, 1999
September 15, 1999
SP 99-49 WINNDOM FARM BRIDGE
APPLICANT'S PROPOSAL:
The applicant is seeking approval of a bridge crossing for farm/agricultural purposes on
Winndom Farm. Attachment B depicts the location of stream crossing.
PETITION:
Winndom Farm petitions the Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit to allow for
bridge construction within the floodway of Jumping Branch, which is a tributary to the Rivarma
River Reservoir [Section 30.3.5.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance] (Attachment A). The fill is
associated with raising the elevation of the road to the bridge deck. The property is located on
the southern side of Woodlands Road [State Route 676], approximately 1 and ½ miles west of
the Rivanna River Reservoir. Property, described as Tax Map 44, Parcel 19B, consists of 35
acres and is zoned RA, Rural Areas (Attachment B). This property is not located within a
designated growth area as defined by the Comprehensive Plan.
Note: The bridge, with its associated fill, has been installed without prior County approval.
The bridge was constructed approximately three years ago. The Department of Building
Codes and Zoning Services issued a violation letter on June 09, 1999 for the construction of
the bridge without the issuance of a special use permit [Section 30.3.05.2.1 of the Zoning
Ordinance]. A copy of the violation letter is attached as Attachment F.
This application seeks to remedy the violation. In an effort to ensure compliance within a
reasonable timeframe, staff has limited the timeframe to obtain all necessary State and
Federal approvals and is attached as Condition 8.
CHARACTER OF AREA:
The property is located on the southern side of Woodlands Road, approximately 1 and ½ miles
west of the Rivanna River Reservoir (Attachment B). The property has two existing houses, a
cemetery [SUB 98-289], and a recreational lodge currently under construction; all of which are
served by a substantial network of driveways. The property is accessed directly off of
Woodlands Road. All surrounding properties are zoned Rural Areas.
This site is the location of an existing farm road [gravel] that has served as an access from the
main dwelling to the stables across Jumping Branch. Prior to the bridge installation, vehicles
used to ford the stream. Jumping Branch meanders through the primarily wooded site from west
to east and converges with the Rivanna River reservoir approximately 1 and ½ miles east of the
subject area. The southem side of the stream is primarily wooded, while the northem side of the
stream (in this area) is primarily a field. This portion of Jumping Branch has a defined 100 year
flood plain as determined by the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA] flood maps.
The approximate 100-year flood level elevation is 449 feet above sea level. The bridge has
already been installed and pictures of the bridge have been attached for reference (Attachment
C).
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN:
This area is located in the Rural Areas as designated in the Comprehensive Plan. The Rural
Areas zoning district provides for three general categories of commercial/service uses: 1)
agricultural/forestal uses; 2) tourism uses; and 3) basic support uses. As previously stated, the
bridge is desired to provide access to the stables and farm across the stream. The bridge clearly
falls under the category of an agricultural use, because it is intended to provide limited support to
an agricultural population. The proposed road will not serve any residential traffic. The
proposed road, with the associated fill in the flood plain, is consistent with the Comprehensive
Plan.
OPEN SPACE AND CRITICAL RESOURCES PLAN:
The Open Space and Critical Resources Plan defines this Jumping Branch stream valley as a
Major Stream Valley. Any fill that has occurred is associated with the installation of the bridge.
Since the fill and the bridge placement are located in the alignment of an existing farm road, and
the fact that no additional trees were destroyed, the intrusions into the stream valley have not
resulted in a loss of aesthetic value. Therefore, this request is not contrary to the intent of the
Open Space and Critical Resources Plan.
PLANNING AND ZONING HISTORY:
SUB 98-298 Craig and Katherine Winn Cemetery Plat - The applicant filed a
subdivision plat for County approval of a cemetery. The Zoning Administrator
determined that no County approval was necessary for a cemetery, so long as the
cemetery met certain setbacks from residential structures. The plat was never signed, but
rather filed for future reference.
REASON FOR PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW:
Bridge construction requires special use permit approval by the Board of Supervisors [Section
30.3.5.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance].
STAFF COMMENT:
Recommendation:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 30.3 of the Zoning
Ordinance. Staff is recommending approval subject to conditions.
Staff Analysis:
The applicant is requesting approval of a recently constructed bridge to allow for a stream
crossing over Jumping Branch [A tributary to the Rivarma River Reservoir]. The bridge
construction consists of large concrete flared abutments that support a steel beam and wooden
deck span that rises out of the floodplain. The fill, located behind the concrete flared abutments,
is associated with elevating the existing farm road to the height of the bridge.
The bridge was constructed (without Cotmty approval) to provide access to the stables across
Jumping Branch. The bridge replaces a ford of the stream channel and therefore minimizes
environmental degradation. The bridge will only be used for agricultural purposes. In an effort
to prevent any residential traffic from using the bridge, Planning Staff has included a condition
that the gate located on the southern side of the stream, near the stables, be closed at all times
(Condition 7).
Sections 30. 3 and 31.2. 4. 1 oFthe Zoning Ordinance:
Staff provides the analysis of the criteria under Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance through
the review of Section 30.3 of the Zoning Ordinance [Flood Hazard Overlay District]. The intent
of the Flood Hazard Overlay District [Section 30.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance] is attached as
Attachment D. It states "These provisions are intended to restrict the unwise use... which may
result in: danger to life and property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and
relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of water resources; and general
degradation to natural and man-made environment". The Engineering Department has reviewed
this request in accordance with Section 30.3.3.2 of the Zoning Ordinance and has revealed no
substantial detriment to life, property, and public costs for flood control. The Engineering
Department has provided comments regarding the proposed fill in the flood plain (Attachment
E).
The Engineering Department notes that although similar private bridges have been approved in
the past, those bridges have been approved in areas of FEMA approximated floodplains. The
accuracy of the floodplain in FEMA approximated floodplains is within a one foot vertical
margin of error. "In this case, because Jumping Branch is in an area of detailed study, where
floodplain levels have been computed by the Army Corps of Engineers, the County Engineering
Department does not have the same margin of error to work with in review." The Engineering
Department does not expect the bridge abutments and fill for the roadway to have a significant
increase in flood levels. Any small increase in flood levels will only affect the applicant's
property. To verify this, the applicant must update FEMA's detailed study, and obtain a map
revision from FEMA for changes in the floodplain (Condition 4)
The Engineering Department also continues their analysis by fully describing the scope of the
proposed work. Because the bridge abutments and the approaches are within the stream buffer, a
mitigation plan is required by the Water Protection Ordinance (Conditions 5 & 6). The disturbed
areas are largely stabilized with grass cover. "Further planting to stabilize the stream banks is a
measure proposed by the applicant, and can be incorporated into the mitigation plan."
The Engineering Department's analysis has determined that the proposed fill will be properly
mitigated and Engineering is confident that the conditions of approval are adequate to fully
ensure that the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance are adhered to. With the conditions of
approval listed below, Planning Staff recommends approval of this request.
Summary:
Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request:
1. Consistent with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan;
2. Consistent with Sections 30.3 and 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance;
3. Vehicles no longer drive through the stream channel, and therefore minimize
environmental degradation;
4. The proposed use will not cause substantial detriment to adjacent properties;
5. The bridge will only be used for agricultural purposes. A condition has been attached to
prevent the use of residential traffic; and
6. The construction of the bridge had not resulted in a loss of aesthetic resources and,
therefore, is not contrary to the Open Space and Critical Resources Plan.
Recommendation:
Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 3 0.3 of the Zoning
Ordinance and finds no conflict with this proposal. Therefore, staff is recommending approval
subject to conditions.
(
Recommended Conditions of Approval:
1. Engineering Department approval of computations and plans verifying structural
adequacy of the bridge;
2. Engineering Department approval of computations and plans documenting changes to the
floodplain;
3. Engineering Department receipt of copies of federal and state permits for disturbance of
the stream channel and any associated wetlands;
4. The applicant shall obtain a map revision from FEMA for changes to the floodplain of
Jumping Branch;
Engineering Department approval of a mitigation plan for repair and enhancement of the
stream buffer;
Water quality measures and mitigation methods shall be provided subject to the approval
of the Water Resources Manager; and,
,
In an effort to prevent any residential traffic from using the bridge, the gate located on the
southern side of the stream, near the stables, shall be closed at all times. The bridge shall
not serve as access for residential development to Route 676;
The applicant must receive the necessary approvals from the appropriate State and
Federal agencies within six (6) months of the SP approval; provided, however, that if the
permits: are being prosecuted in good faith, the Zoning Administrator in consultation with
the Chief of Engineering, may extend the time of such expiration for not more than three
(3) successive periods of one (1) month each.
ATTACHMENTS:
A - Applicant's Special Use Permit Request and Justification
B - Tax Map and Location Map
C - Pictures taken on site
D - Sections 30.3 and 30.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
E - Engineering Memo from Glenn Brooks Dated July 29, 1999
F - Violation Letter Dated June 09, 1999
C6unty of Albemarle .:o Department of Building Code m ATTACHMENT A
OFFICE USE ONLY
s~ ~-'~ .~p .O. ~ q. O. LL-0 0 - LD 0 0 ~..~ ~ 0
Application for Special Use Permit
(*staff will ~sist you ~i~ these items) y ~ ·
Number of ac~ to be covered by Speci~ Use Per~t (lfn~lt m~t~in~t~on p~t) ,~ ·
Is this'an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit?
Are you submitting a site development plan with this application?
~ Yeg~o
~ Yesti~o
Contact Person (Whom should we call/write concerning mis project?):
Daytime .Phone ( ~D t{ ) ¢X ~ fi 5' g ;t..fi Fax #
Owner of land (AS listed in the County's records): CP'~t-~3
Daytime Phone ( gO q ) ~ ~-~qt~ Fax~
E-marl
Daytime Phone < ~'t)q ) ~] r/q. ~ f l t./ Fax # E-mail
ziFzh,/
Tax map and parcegZ///'//7/' I ~ ~ Physical Address (if assigned)
o o,l l,.,,,,e;
Locatio ofp Operty(,andma~ks, interw-tions. orother)/_--//'e,,ff ~//O/~t'.~.~.f/¢.,~ .~7.. I
Does the owLr this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting prope~y? If yes, piece list
thoset~mapandp~cclnumbe~) ~b~ ~~ Mq- 17
OFFICE USE ONLY
FeeamountS (OC}O DatePaid Io'Z¢~::;i Che_,ck#~0q~' Receipt# ~ By: ST
~story:' ~ Special Use Permits: ~ ZMAs and Proffers:
401 Mclntire Road
~ Variances: . ~t~etSerofAuthorization.[/~/ND3q. St, a~,~,
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? ~ No
Charlottesville, VA 22902 -:. Voice: 296-5832 .:- Fax: 972-4126
ATTACHMENT A
' Section 3 1.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of suFe~.ors
hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special ~e
permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors ·
that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district
will not be changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this
ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section
5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare.
The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete
this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request.
If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? ~69//.d j41~.a-/j4~
How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property? ,/~ ~
How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district surrounding the property?/~
How is the use in harmony with the purpose 'and intent of the Zoning Ordinance ?
How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use?
· , ATTACHMENT A
"D~sdibe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numoets ox persons
involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use:' 7
ATTACHMENTS 'REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each:
O 2.
Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and
the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number.
Note: If you are requestinga special use permit only for a portion of the property, it
needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing.
Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal
entity or organization including, but 'not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership
or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to
· the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority
to do so.
If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be
submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application.
If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the .County must be
submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency.
OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS:
Drawings or conceptual plans, if'any.
Additional Information, if any.
I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in
filing this application. I also certify that th information provided is true and accurate to the best of my
knowledge. ~_~~
Signature Date
Printed Name
Daytime phone number of Signatory
3
II
/ "~ 11
z, ~ ,,' ,,
/ \ ... ~~ ii
z II
/ \~ 0 II
·/
/
/
/
,'
* \
·
//// \\,,,
·\~\ ,-_~"' \X
MTN.
./ ATTACHMENT B . ..
TO RUCN~
-- , ~/ EARLYS
=ou~ ~,~
"~ ~P 4 ,V G E
6
'
Country Club
7
I Charlott~'ville -~
Albemarle
· Airpor~
\ /
SP 99-49
Winndom Farm Bridge
//
ALBEMARLE
30
COUNTY
IOA ' ~ 7
' 4F
268
~6A
27C
..TO.
\ ~e
IRt. 658
J9
SP 99-49
Winndom Farm Bridge
,*'53 /
~ 33C '
33G7
6O
WHITE HALL, JACK JOUETT
"AND RiO DISTRICTS
64'
ATTACHMENT B
/
9C
I
35A
120
SECTION 44
45
ATTACHMENT C
ATTACHMENT C
ATTACHMENT D
30.3 FLOOD HAZARD OVERLAY DISTRICT - FH
30.3.01 INTENT
It is intended that the flood hazard overlay district hereby and
hereafter created shall be for the purpose of providing safety and
protection from flooding. More specifically, these provisions are
intended to restrict the unwise use, development and occupancy of
lands subject to inundation which may result in: danger to life and
property; public costs for flood control measures and/or rescue and
relief efforts; soil erosion, sedimentation and siltation; pollution of
water resources; and general degradation of the natural and man-made
environment.
It is further intended that these provisions shall be adequate for
qualification and continuation of Albemarle County on the regular
program of the National Flood Insurance Program as administered by
the Federal Insurance Administration. To these ends, provisions have
been developed in accordance with regulations governing the regular
program.
ATTACHMENT E
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department &Engineering & Public Works
MEMORANDUM
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
Eric Morrisette, Senior Planner
Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer ac'~3
29 July 1999
Winnd0m Farm Bridge, special use permit
The application for a special use permit for fill in the floodplain associated with Winndom Farm
Bridge received on 9 July 1999 has been reviewed. This bridge has already been constructed
without a permit, and photographs are attached. It crosses Jumping Branch, which is a perennial
tributary to Ivy Creek and the Rivanna River Reservoir. It has a floodplain associated with it, as
shown on FEM FIRM panel 210, the pertinent portion of which is also attached for reference.
The floodplain on Jumping Branch is an area of detailed engineering study, showing the
floodplain to be at elevation 449' in this location. The gently sloping floodplain is about 100'
wide, and the stream channel about 5'-10' wide at the water surface. The bridge has been built
with large concrete flared abutments supporting a steel beam and wood deck span which appears
to rise above the floodplain. Fill has been placed in the floodplain behind the abutments to raise
the road to the bridge deck elevation.
According to Zoning Ordinance section 30.3.03.2, no increase in the 100yr flood levels is
permitted. Similar private bridges in the County which have been approved in the past have been
in areas of FEMA approximated floodplain, where the accuracy of floodplain levels is
acknowledged by FEMA to be within a 1' vertical margin of error. This gives the County
Engineering Department some flexibility in computations and design review. In this case,
because Jumping Branch is in an area of detailed study, where floodplain levels have been
computed by the Army Corps of Engineers, the County Engineering Department does not have
the same margin of error to work with in review. An increase in flood levels is expected from the
bridge abutments and roadway in the floodplain. It is our opinion that this increase will be small
and will only affect the applicant's property, a fact which needs to be verified by the applicant.
Therefore, the applicant must update FEMA's detailed study, and obtain a map revision from
FEMA for changes to the floodplain.
The bridge abutments and approaches are within the stream buffer. Therefore, a mitigation plan
is:required by the Water Protection Ordinance. Around the bridge, clearing and grading areas
appear to have been largely stabilized with grass cover. Further planting to stabilize the stream
banks is a measure proposed by the applicant, and can be incorporated into the mitigation plan.
The Engineering Department recommends approval of the special use permit with the following
conditions:
I. Engineering Department approval of computations and plans verifying structural adequacy
,
'of the bridge
Engineering Department approval of computations and plans documenting changes to the
floodplain.
Engineering Department receipt of copies of federal and state permits for disturbance of the
stream channel and any associated wetlands.
The applicant shall obtain a map revision from FEMA for changes to the floodplain of
jumping branch.
Engineering Department approval of a mitigation plan for re ~air and enhancement of the
stream buffer.
Please contact me if you have questions.
Copy: file (SP-99-49)
File: Winddom Farm Bridge.sp 1 .doe
ATTACHMENT E
ATTACHMENT F
FAX (804) 972-4126
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Department of Building Code and Zoning Services
401 Mclntim Road, Room 227
Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596
TELEPHONE (804) 296-5832
NOTICE OF OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF VIOLATION
TTD (804) 972-4012
Date Notice of Determination is Given: June 9, 1999
CERTIFIED MAIL # Z 397 027 023
No: V-99-83/SBW
Craig A. or Katharine B. Winn
741 Woodlands Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22091
Property: 44 19'.B
Tax Map Number Parcel Number
Craig A. or Katharine B. Winn
Owner of Record
You are hereby notified that, after an investigation of the above-described property, the Zoning Administrator has
determined that the following use or activity constitutes a violation of the following section(s) of the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance.
30.3.05.2.1: By Special Use Permit within the Floodway Fringe; Water related uses such as boat docks,
canoe liveries, bridges, ferries, culverts and river crossings of transmission Hnes of all types.
Section 36.1: Violations-Generally;
Any building erected contrary to any of the provisions of this ordinance ...any use of any building or land
which is conducted, operated or maintained contrary to any provisions of this ordinance, . .. shall be a
violation of this ordinance and the same is hereby declared to be unlawful.
The bridge located on your property crossing the Jumping Branch stream was built prior to the submittal of an
application for a Special Use Permit and Board of Supervisors approval of the same.
You are hereby ordered to cease and desist from the above described use or activity immediately.
Your failure to comply with this order may result in legal action being taken against you.
If you are aggrieved by this determination, you have a right to appeal it within thirty (30) days of the date notice
of this determination is given, in accordance with Section 15.2-2311 of the Code of Virginia. If you do not file a timely
appeal, this determination shall be final and unappealable. An appeal shall be taken only by filing with the Zoning
Administrator and the Board of Zoning Appeals a notice of appeal which specifies the grounds for the appeal. An appeal
application must be completed and filed along with the fee of $95. The date notice of this determination was given is
specified above.
County of Albemarle, Virginia
cc: Reading File V-99-83/SBW; Tax Map 44 Parcel 19B
or the Zoning Administrator at 804-296-5832.
Citizens' Advisory Committee
for the
Route 250 West Corridor Study
(from Charlottesville City/Albemarle County line-west to Yancey Mills)
June 25, 1999
The Citizens' Advisory Committee Position:
The Citizens' Advisory Committee (the "Committee") opposes the Virginia
Department of Transportation's Engineering Recommendation to widen the Route
250 West corridor to four lanes from Mechums River east to the city/county line.
The Committee is against any widening of Route 250 West to four or six lanes. The
Committee believes that widening the Route 250 West corridor is unnecessary, and
further that it is undesirable because it would destroy the current scenic and
community character of the corridor. Since the corridor is used primarily for local
traffic, the Committee believes that the wishes of the local community should prevail
in determining the future of Route 250 West.
· The Committee notes that the corridor is unique in that Interstate 64 parallels it
for most of the studied distance.
· The Committee believes that efforts should be directed towards increasing
utilization of Interstate 64, rather than mining Ronte 250 into another "interstate."
A careful review of Altematives 6 and 12 (widening altematives presented to the
public) shows that widening reduces traffic on Interstate 64 and increases traffic
on Route 250 between Flordon and the 29/250 Bypass.
The Committee believes that a combination of solutions, including a lowered
speed limit on Route 250 and improved access to Interstate 64, would help ease
future traffic congestion on the corridor*.
* Two of the 15 members of the Committee are opposed to lowering the speed limit on Route 250.
Background:
The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors appointed a Citizens' Advisory
Committee of 15 members on May 7, 1997, to meet with VDOT, and its consultant,
Whitman, Requart CVDOT" or the "Study TeamY'). Also included were Juan Wade,
Senior Planner with the Department of Planning & Community Development for the
County of Albemarle as well as our local representatives, Sally H. Thomas from the
Samuel Miller District and Walter F. Perkins from the Whim Hall District. The
Committee first met on November 20, 1997. VDOT's planning horizon for the study is
through the year 2022. 'VDOT's goals and assumptions for the study indicate that VDOT
favors a four-lane divided highway for the corridor.
A public meeting was held on February 11, 1999. The Study Team presented a
series of alternatives for the Route 250 West corridor, including two non-widening
alternatives (Altematives 8 and 8A) which are supported by the Citizens' Advisory
Committee. Written comments by the public were due by March 1, 1999.
The Committee met with the Study Team on May 20, 1999 to review the public
comments and to hear the Study Team's final recommendation for the 250 West corridor.
Engineering Recommendation Presented May 20, 1999:
VDOT recommends that Route 250 West be widened to four lanes from
Methums River (the junction of Routes 240 and 250)east to the city/county line.. VDOT
further recommends phasing in widening, with the first priority being Broomley Road to
Route 29 and the second, Route 29 to the city/counly line.
The Study Team emphasized that its recommendation is based on engineering
factors as they relate to projected traffic volume on Route 250 West~ The
recommendation does NOT take into account the public comments received.
Public Comments:
The Study Team received a total of 325 written comments, not including the
petitions referred to below. These comments were overwhelmingly against widening
Route 250 West. There was strong support for lowering the speed limit on the corridor.
The Study Team received three petitions, signed by a total of 284 people, stating strong
opposition'to widening Route 250.
Current State of Corridor:
In the course of the study of Route 250 West, the Committee was apprised of the
existing. condition of the corridor. Accident data, road geometry and traffic levels were
reviewed. An origin/destination survey performed by the Study Team showed that
approximately 95% of corridor traffic is local.
2
Development of Alternatives:
Beginning in August 1998, VDOT and the Committee discussed traffic model
projections and road improvement alternatives in depth. Growth projections for the
Crozet area, traffic management strategies such as buses, light rail, earpooling and other
alternatives were reviewed. This process resulted in the alternatives presented at the
February 11, 1999 public meeting. (The Committee asked VDOT to evalUate the
possibility of a new interchange for Interstate 64 at Miller School Road. VDOT stated
that this would be hard to justify given the cost and under usage of the nearby interchange
at Yancey Mills. Consideration of a Miller-School Road interchange was dropped by
VDOT.)
The Committee's' View on Level of Service Goals for the Corridor:
VDOT's stated 'goal for the corridor is to achieve a Level of Service (LOS) "C"
for the year 2022; LOS "C" means free flowing traffic with no delays. VDOT has stated
that the current LOS on Route 250 West ranges from a "D" to an "F" except at
"signalized" intersections where it is a "B." The Committee objected to LOS "C" as the
stated goal for the corridor since it would seem to lead to automatic widening of Route
250 to at least four lanes, thereby undermining input from the Committee. After several
requests, the Committee received a letter in June 1998 from VDOT stating that the LOS
"C" "... is only one of the components to be considered. in selecting an alternative."
Change in Public Meeting Format Rejected by VDOT:
The Committee requested that the public meeting be interactive, with a formal
presentation by VDOT and an opportunity for public comment at a microphone. This
was rejected by VDOT in favor of the one-on-one format used on February 11, 1999.
3
Thomas W. Payne, 'Jr.
415 Gillums Ridge Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
July 2, 1999
Mr. John P. Maddox
Whitman, Requardt and Associates, LLP
9201 Forest Hill Avenue, Suite 103
Richmond, VA 23235
Mr. Wayne Woodcock, Transportation Engineer
Programs Supervisor
Department of Transportation
1401 East Broad Street
Richmond, VA 23219
Re: Route 250 West Study --
Dear Messrs. Maddox and Woodcock:
As we discussed at the May 20, 1999 Citizens Advisory Committee meeting, the
Committee planned to update its position statement for inclusion in your study report. I am
attaching the updated Committee position statement. As you will see, the Committee continues
to strongly oppose any widening or four-laning of Route 250 West, including the engineering
recothmendation presented verbally at the May 20th meeting. "
Please let me know if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Thomas W. Payne, Jr.
Chair
Route 250 West Citizens Advisory Cormnittee
Enclosure
Sally Thomas
Walter Perkins
Charlotte Humphris
David F. Bowerman
Charles Martin
Forrest R. Marshail, Jr.
Juan Wade.
RT. 250 WEST CORRIDOR STUDY
CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD
NA 4ES AND ADDn SSES
Mr. Thomas W. Payne, Jr.
415 Gillurns Ridge Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
977-9458 (H) / 924-4169 (W)
twp2z@forb e s2. comm. virginia. edu
Mr. Thomas J. Goodrich
3680 Country Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22903
979-4764 (H) / 982-7150
Mr. Phillip W. Unger
5008 Rockfish Gap Turnpike
Charlottesville, VA 22903
823-7968 (H)
Mrs. Marion G. Rothman
2580 Andrew Lane
Charlottesville, VA 22901
295-7788 (H)
Mrs. Nancy Whiting Barnette
P.O. Box 492
Crozet, VA 22932
823 -2170 (H)
Mr. David W. Carr, Jr.
1071 Allendale Drive
Charlottesville, VA 22901
971-7052 (H) / 977-4090 (W)
Mr. Charles M. Toms, Jr.
5476 Brownsville Road
Charlottesville, VA 22903
823-8476 (H)/977-4242
(W)/987-9446 (mobile)
Mr. John A. Cruickshank, Principal
Brownsville Elementary School
5870 Rockfish Gap Turnpike
Crozet, VA 22932
823-4658 (W)
Mr. Samuel A. "Pete" Anderson
Architect for the University -
The Rotunda, SE Wing, U.Va.
Charlottesville, VA 22903
924-6015 (W); 924-6014 (Fax)
APPOINTED
05-07-97
05 -07-97
05-07-97
05 -07-97
05-07-97
05-07-97
05-07-97
05 -07-97
05-07-97
'TERM EXPIRES
CITY/COUNTY
LOCAL BIKING
ASSOCIATION
EMERGENCY
RESPONSE '
COMMUNITY
RURAL LANDOWNERS
AND FARM BUREAU
IVY RESIDENT AND ST.
PAUL'S CHURCH
NAACP AND YANCEY
MILLS
NEIGHBORHOOD
GLENAIRE AND
MORGANTOWN ROAD
NEIGHBORHOODS
REAL ESTATE
COMMUNITY AND
BROWNSVILLE AREA
NEIGHBORHOOD
BROWNSVILLE
SCHOOL
UNIVERSITY OF
VIRGINIA / UREF/ITT /
KAPPA SIGMA
Mr. George'W. Carter
1833 Westview Road
Charlottesville, VA' 22903
296-4725 (H) / 295-1183 (W)
Mrs. Diana H. Strickler
Six Sunset Circle
Charlottesville, VA 22901 - 1920
979-9493 (H); Fax: 979-7977
dstrick@rlc.net
Mr. Willie Smith
Albemarle County Department of
Public Schools
Department of Transportation
2045 Lambs Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
973-5716 (W)
Mr. Carroll Conley
P.O. Box 85
Crozet, VA 22932
823-5873 (H)/823-4041 (Fax)
Mr. Steve Gibson
2203 Dudley Mountain Road
North Garden, VA 22949
979-2160 (W)
Mrs. Pat Kennedy
810 Emerson Drive
Charlottesville, VA 2290'1
293-9622 (H)/296-3630 (H)
05-07-97
05-07-97
05-07-97
05-07-97
05-07-97
BUSINESSES ALONG
CORRIDOR
FARMINGTON,
BELLAIR, EDNAM, AND
EDNAM FOREST
NEIGHBORHOODS
SCHOOL
TRANSPORTATION
DEPARTMENT
TRUCKING INTERESTS
WEST LEIGH,
FLORDON,
KEARSAGE, OAK
KNOLL AND
GREENCROFT
NEIGHBORHOODS'
Members, Board of Supervisors
From: ' , ,
Date: September 9, 1999
M[MOBNOUM
March I 0 (A), 1997
April 2 I, 1999
Ms. Thomas
Ms. Thomas
/ewc