The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1995-07-19 FIN A L 7:00 P.M. July 19, 1995 Room 241, County Office Building 1) Call to Order. 2) Pledge of Allegiance. 3) Moment of Silence. 4) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. 5) Consent Agenda (on next sheet). 6) Appeal: SDP-94-067. Virginia Oil Minor Site Plan Amendment. Pro~e8al to leea~e a 11159 81! f~ ear ~Ja8h slEl!;J aR a!l~re][ 1.25 ae BRei PD HC &. BC. rre~erty eR SB serRer ef RelJtia Ceurt aREl Rt 2se 13 iRterB. TI!78,P7JA. Ri7aana DiBt. (Applicant requests deferral until August 2, 1995.) 7) ZMA-95-07. Rio Associates Limited Partnership. P~lie lIeariag ea a re~e8t te amaREl zr~ 88 9g in orEier ta meElify ~roffers limitin!;J ·.-ohiela tri~ !;JeneratioR OR ~re~erty losateEl ea W eEl af Rt 29 Botm~oR Rt 29 &. Berhæar Dr. Site reeeææeaEleà fer Re!;Jienal Ger.-ice in Uei!;Jh serheeEl 1 sy Ceæ~rehenBivc Plan. TI!15,P1e9. Rie DiBt. (Indefi- nitely deferred by the Planning Commission.) 8) SP-95-16. The Covenant School. Public Hearing on a request for a private school on 9.0 ac zoned CO located on E sd of Rt 780 S of I-64. TM76,P46F. Scottsville Dist. 9) ZMA-95-08. George W. Clark. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 7 ac from RA to VR. Property in NE corner of inters of Rt 29/Rt 779. Site is recommended for Village Residential in the Village of North Garden by the Comprehensive Plan. TM87,P35D. Samuel Miller Dist. 10) ZMA-95-09. Sam Enterprises. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 82 ac from R1 to R4 located on N sd of Rt 250 approx 0.6 mi E of Rt 250/Rt 240 inters at Brownsville. Site is recommended for low density residential in the Community of Crozet by the Comprehensive Plan. TM56,P96&108. White Hall Dist. 11) SP-95-19. Gabriele & Eugenia Rausse. Public Hearing on a request for a stream crossing in the flood plain of Slate Quarry Creek. Property of approx 76 ac is zoned RA & is located on E sd of Rt 627 approx 1.1 mi S Rt 795. TM103,P43K. Scottsville Dist. 12) SP-95-25. Wendall Wood/United Land Corp. Public Hearing on a request to establish a mobile home park on property of approx 57 acres zoned R- 15 is located on E sd of Rt 606 approx 0.6 mi S of Rt 649. TM32, P50,53,54,55&56. This site is recommended for High Density Residen- tial (10.01-34 du/ac) in the Community of Hollymead. Rivanna Dist. 13) Selection of Board members to serve on Compensation Plan study. 14) Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. 14a) Executive Session: Legal Matters. 14b) Certify Executive Session. 15) Adjourn. CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Appropriations: a) A. T. Williams Service Road (Route 29 North) - $29,268, (Form #95005) . b) VRS Early Retirement Program - $358,185, (Form #95007). 5.2 Resolution designating Robert W. Tucker, Jr., as agent of the Board of Supervisors for purposes of obtaining Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act. 5.3 Resolution to accept Woodcreek Drive in Woodcreek Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. FOR INFORMATION: 5.4 Copy of Planning Commission minutes for June 27, 1995. 5.5 Letter dated July 11, 1995, from the Honorable Thomas J. Bli1ey, Jr., Member of Congress, offering his assistance as Albemarle County prepares to repair the damage caused by recent floods. 5.6 Comparison of Crime Statistics for first six months of 1995 to first six months of 1994. David P. Bowerman Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins While Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H Thomas Samuel MiJ1er MEMORANDUM To: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive V. Wayne Cilimberg, Director, Pla~ning & Community Development From: Ella W. Carey, Clerk ~~ Date: July 20, 1995 Subject: Board Actions of July 19, 1995 The following is a list of actions taken by the Board of Supervisors at its meeting on July 19, 1995. Agenda Item No.1. Call to Order. Called to order at 7:02 p.m. Agenda Item NO.4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the PUBLIC. THERE WERE NONE. Agenda Item No. 5.1.a. A. T. Williams Service Road (Route 29 North) - $29,268, (Form #95005). Approved as presented. Original forwarded to Finance (copy attached) . Agenda Item No. 5.1.b. VRS Early Retirement Program - $358,185, (Form #95007). Approved as presented. Original forwarded to Finance (copy at- tached). Agenda Item No. 5.2. Resolution designating Robert W. Tucker, Jr., as agent of the Board of Supervisors for purposes of obtaining Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act. Adopted the attached resolution. Agenda Item No. 5.3. Resolution to accept Woodcreek Drive in Woodcreek Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. Adopted the attached resolution. Original sent to Engineering. Agenda Item No.6. Appeal: SDP-94-067. Virginia Oil Minor Site Plan Amendment. Proposal to locate a ±1150 sq ft car wash bldg on approx 1.25 ac znd PD-MC & EC. Property on SE corner of Rolkin Court and Rt 250 E inters. TM78,P73A. Rivanna Dist. (Applicant requests deferral until August 2, 1995.) Deferred to the August 2, 1995, meeting, at the applicant's request. * Printed on recycled paper , ) ~1.. To: Robert W. Tucker V. Wayne Cilimberg July 20, 1995 2 Date: Page: Agenda Item No.7. ZMA-95-07. Rio Associates Limited Partnership. Public Hearing on a request to amend ZMA-88-06 in order to modify proffers limiting vehicle trip generation on property located on W sd of Rt 29 between Rt 29 & Berkmar Dr. Site recommended for Regional Service in Neighborhood 1 by Comprehensive Plan. TM45,P109. Rio Dist. (Indefinitely deferred by the Planning Commission.) Deferred ZMA-95-07 to an appropriate time after work has been completed by the Planning Commission. Agenda Item NO.8. SP-95-16. The Covenant School. Public Hearing on a request for a private school on 9.0 ac zoned CO located on E sd of Rt 780 S of I-64. TM76,P46F. Scottsville Dist. Approved SP-95-16 as recommended by the Planning Commission, with condition number three amended, as follows: 1. Use is limited to 400 students¡ 2. Any expansion of the building, parking or provision of athletic fields shall require amendment of this request. 3. Prior to the start of school, left and right turn lanes shall be provided as required or as recommended by the Department of Transportation. Agenda Item No.9. ZMA-95-08. George W. Clark. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 7 ac from RA to VR. Property in NE corner of inters of Rt 29/Rt 779. Site is recommended for Village Residential in the Village of North Garden by the Comprehensive Plan. TM87,P35D. Samuel Miller Dist. Approved ZMA-95-08 to rezone 7 acres from RA to VR subject to the following proffers submitted by the applicant in a letter dated June 30, 1995 (copy attached): 1. The applicant shall drill wells and these wells shall be subject to pump tests and shall meet the specific requirements of the Engineer- ing Department, and the Department will make a determination based on the results of adequate or inadequate groundwater to supply the development. This determination (verification of suitable water supply) will be made prior to approval of the final plat. In the event that adequate water supply cannot be verified not more than three (3) parcels/dwellings shall be permitted. 2. Lots 1, 2 and 4 as shown on a plat by Roger Ray dated April 13, 1995, and revised May 22, 1995, shall have all access restricted to Route 779. These lots shall have no direct access to Route 29. Lot 3 may continue to use the existing entrance on Route 29 and Route 779. Agenda Item No. 10. ZMA-95-09. Sam Enterprises. Public Hearing on a request to rezone 82 ac from R1 to R4 located on N sd of Rt 250 approx 0.6 mi E of Rt 250/Rt 240 inters at Brownsville. Site is recommended for low density residential in the Community of Crozet by the Comprehensive Plan. TM56,P96&108. White Hall Dist. Approved ZMA-95-09 to rezone 82 acres from R1 to R4 subject to the following proffers submitted by the applicant in a letter dated June 15, 1995, and as amended by the applicant at the meeting on July 19, 1995 (copy attached). The Board added that this approval does not guarantee or imply that a special use permit will be granted for a road crossing Lickinghole Creek to access the rear of this property. ì ' ,I To: Date: Page: Robert W. Tucker V. Wayne Cilimberg July 20, 1995 3 1. Owner will reserve a 120 foot strip of land in the approximate location shown on the plan as "Potential 240/250 Connector Road" and will dedicate upon demand of the County, this reserved area to public use without compensation. Reservation of the reserved area shall not be deemed to prohibit the owner from constructing roadways in the reserved area in a manner which would not interfere with future construction of the connector road, or making other temporary use of the reserved area not inconsistent with such construction. No residential driveways will access directly into the 120 foot right- of-way with the exception of the relocation access to Tax Map 56-96A. 2. Owner will reserve a 50-foot wide "Greenway" along each side of Lickinghole Creek as shown on the plan within the boundaries of Tax Map 56, Parcel 96. The owner does not proffer to maintain the Greenway, but rather the Greenway Area, at such time as the County of Albemarle commits to establish and maintain a public area, park or pathway, and assumes responsibility for maintenance thereof, will upon request of Albemarle County, be dedicated by the owner(s) or its successors to the County, subject to the right of use for residents living on the property. The proffer shall not be interpreted to prohibit the location of utilities, storm sewer or stormwater control devices or easements in the Greenway. 3. Development will be limited to a maximum of 190 single-family attached, detached and townhouses units. These units will be located approximately in the areas shown on the plan. The maximum average lot size will be 15,000 square feet. 4. Internal roads on the property will be located approximately as shown on the plan. Additional internal roads will be located pursuant to normal subdivision review. 5. The possibility that a four-lane road will be constructed within the reserved area shall be clearly disclosed in the subdivision covenants and restrictions and on the subdivision plat. 6. The owner or Home Owners Association will plant, at such time the "potential 240/250 connector road" is built, two rows of white pine trees 15 feet on center (four to five feet tall) along both edges of the "potential 240/250 connector road" right-of-way only in areas contiguous with single family attached or detached as is shown on the plan. Agenda Item No. 11. SP-95-19. Gabriele & Eugenia Rausse. Public Hearing on a request for a stream crossing in the flood plain of Slate Quarry Creek. Property of approx 76 ac is zoned RA & is located on E sd of Rt 627 approx 1.1 mi S Rt 795. TM103,P43K. Scottsville Dist. Approved SP-95-19 as recommended by the Planning Commission, with number six amended, as follows: 1. Water Resource Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assess- ment¡ 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final driveway and culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction 100 year flood elevations and boundaries. The limits of WRPA Buffer must be shown and labelled¡ ; , To: Robert W. Tucker V. Wayne Cilimberg July 20, 1995 4 Date: Page: 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and water courses¡ 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. These computations must demonstrate compliance with Sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance¡ 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or single family erosion control agreement¡ 6. All future divisions seeking access to Route 627 shall use this stream crossing. Agenda Item No. 12. SP-95-25. Wendall Wood/United Land Corp. Public Hearing on a request to establish a mobile home park on property of approx 57 acres zoned R-15 is located on E sd of Rt 606 approx 0.6 mi S of Rt 649. TM32, P50,53,54,55&56. This site is recommended for High Density Residential (10.01-34 du/ac) in the Community of Hollymead. Rivanna Dist. Approved SP- 95-25 as recommended by the Planning Commission subject to the following ten conditions: 1. Deletion/relocation of all lots within fifty feet of an adjacent parcel; 2. Planning Commission approval of final site plan¡ 3. Staff approval of all mobile home units proposed for location within the mobile home park to ensure compliance with the acoustical performance standards of Section 30.2.5¡ 4. Staff approval of private road maintenance agreements at such time as the property may be subdivided; 5. Maintenance of recreation facilities shall be the responsibility of the property owner in accord with Section 4.16.3.2¡ 6. No direct connection to Route 29 shall be made without amendment of this permit¡ 7. provision of conventional "T" intersection with Route 606 construc- ted in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation requirements. Access is shown on a plan initialized "WDF" dated 7/8/93; 8. No plan of development shall be submitted for review until the necessary easements and/or right-of-way acquisition for the Route 606 entrance have been obtained¡ 9. provision of access to Tax Map 32, Parcel 46; 10. Approval of the special use permit shall expire on January 1, 1996, unless the use or activity is commenced in accord with Section 31.2.4.4 prior to January 1, 1996. .' To: Robert W. Tucker V. Wayne Cilimberg July 20, 1995 5 Date: Page: Agenda Item No. 13. Selection of Board members to serve on Compensation Plan study. By consensus of the Board of Supervisors, the Chairman and Mr. Bowerman were appointed to serve on a joint subcommittee of School Board and Board of Supervisors members for the Compensation Pay Study. The subcommittee will interview consultants and bring back a recommendation to the two Boards. Agenda Item No. 14. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. Adopted the attached resolution opposing Sections 107 and 243 of House Resolution 1555, the Telecommunications Act of 1995. The Board directed the Chairman to send a letter to Chairman Thomas Bliley and Congressman L.F. Payne strongly opposing this legislation. Adopted the attached resolution for the expansion of the Albemarle- Charlottesville Joint Security Complex. Mr. Marshall said his new address is 2356 Scottsville Road, Charlottes- ville, VA 22902. Agenda Item No. 14a. Executive Session: Legal Matters. Move Bowerman, seconded Humphris to go into Executive Session, at 10:08 p.m., pursuant to Section 2.1-344(a) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding a specific legal matter concerning reversion and a specific legal matter concerning a Zoning Ordinance violation, and a specific legal matter regarding a contract. Agenda Item No. 14b. Certify Executive Session. Certified. Adjourned at 10:47 p.m. EWC/TPF Attachments (8) cc: Richard E. Huff Roxanne White Pat Mullaney Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley Bruce Woodzell Larry Davis File , . APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 95/96 NUMBER 95005 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND CAPITAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: A T WILLIAMS SERVICE ROAD AGREEMENT. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1901041000950030 SERVICE ROAD-A T WILLIAMS $29,268.00 TOTAL $29,268.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2901018000189908 SERVICE ROAD-A T WILLIAMS $29,268.00 TOTAL $29,268.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: ENGINEERING APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~...ð" -.?s- 7-;!()-iS- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS . . . APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 95/96 NUMBER 950D7 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND DEBT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR FY 95/96 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT PROGRAM. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1990068000910110 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT $358,185.00 TOTAL $358,185.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 2990051000512011 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT $358,185.00 TOTAL $358,185.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: FINANCE APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE ~-1tJ-~S- 7- Þ -f,r DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~~A?~...~~ b.l1~ ú/ ~ BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DESIGNATION OF APPUCANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Viq~inia. that Robert W. Tucker. Jr.. County Executive. is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of the Board of County Supervisors. Albemarle County. Virginia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) or otherwise available from the President's Disaster Relief Fund. FURTHER RESOLVED TIlAT the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Virginia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. hereby authorizes the agent to provide the State and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for all matters pertaining to such Federal disaster assistance the assurances and agreements printed on the reverse side hereof. Passed and approved this 19th day of July. 1995. .......... CERTIFICATION I, Ella W. Carey. duly appointed and Clerk. Board of County Supervisors. of Albemarle County. Vir¡inia. do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Virginia. on the 19th day of July. 1995. Date: July 20, 1995 & j Ær. ~.~/) âuf¿, /~~f¡p:li~ ~WS The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin- ia, in regular meeting on the 19th day of July, 1995, adopted the following resolution: RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the street in Woodcreek SUbdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Reauirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor- tation to add the road in Woodcreek Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Reauire- ments; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. * * * * * Recorded vote: Moved by: Mrs. Humphris Seconded by: Mr. Martin Yeas: Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin and Perkins. Nays: None. A Copy Teste: The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: 1) Woodcreek Drive from the edge of pavement of state Route 20, to the end of the cul-de-sac pavement as shown on a plat recorded 8-26-93 in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1336, page 565, showing a 50 foot right-of-way, length 0.6 mile. Total length - 0.6 mile . ~ ::s .... 0 U >t III ~ .... 0 '" t!I .... H l"- II: .... 't r:iI CD .... E-t OS CD oc< ¡:¡ .... r-I E-t R ¡.¡ CD tI.I ~ lIS .... a rz. R t) CD CD os .Q § .... .... r-I k .c oc< .... III R H >- .... CD k ::! tI1 0 R 0 .,. .... ::! n 0 III CD I>: III k 0 III ~ .,. E-t t GI H §' Q ~ tI1 .... Q 0 r:iI 't tI.I k os 0 III III CD >. n R 0 GI ~ R 0 0 'r! ~ III t) 'r! GI > .<: 2 'r! 'tJ 0 '§ .... tI.I .... R ow GI 0 ~ t) CD oa ~ .... .... .c Z 1- M - :> 15 ~ - en '- - 0 ... ~ - 0 a: ~þÞ. ~ ~ ~ en ð Ê ~ o en .... .<: .... m III R CD CD \D ..:I .... . .,. 0 R :t: ... 0 CD a .... .... R '" .,..,. .,; 'tn 't k .c CD .... R CD U III CD CD m .... lIS 0 CD :.; r-I III 'r! ::! ~ 0 GI r-I R lIS oa n .¡J n 0 GI E-t t) III .,. :t: ~ .... 3:.... 0 I .. 0.<: I .... I>:'t .,. 3: : .,. .. R G G · · · .,. .. .. .. .. ~ e · · · · .. .. .. .. .. GI Eo< '" ... R ... .. 0 ... ¡¿ ¡¿ ¡¿ ¡¿ .,. .... 0 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 .,. .. .. .. .. .. 't .. '" '¥ '¥ 1 '" ~ i · · · · · · · A A A A A .... t ... GI .. GI .. ..... k '" u .. .... . ..... tI1 ':' .. . · · · · · 0 'i' .. .. .. .. .. .. · · · · · .. .. A A A A A .. lJ '¥ '" '" '" '¥ .. · -3 · .. ~ '" ~ ~ .. 0 .. .. 0 0 0 0 0 0 .. 11 u u u u U G · · · · .. .. .. .. .. Ü .. ~ .. ø .. ~ .. Ü .. · ä · · · · .. f, .. .... .. f, .... f, .... .. f, .... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .... GI GI k .... tI1 . .... ~ ... 0 .. A i ~ . .. :.; ~ ~ ow ~ .. GI I>: .. ... . .. GI m os R .,. oa k 't 't R oa m n .... .,. .... m .... ::! t) k 0 .... III .... R GI II GI GI III :>- oa 0 GI ,Q t- al 't oa CD III .... III os CD ~ t) t) .,. GI 't R ~ R ~ .,. .... aI Ë5 R .... i 0 E-t oc< t) GI 0 :>- 't .,. rz. III 0 GI ::! .<: n Z .... t) I< 0 .... GI H 0 >- ~ .... oa k ~ aI I H ø. .... roo 0 aI I H .... E-t III .<: II:: os m r:iI .,. 't k U CD .,. .... .... 0 .,. .<: .... k .... GI 't t) .,. ~ III 't .,. GI .... GI R .... GI R ~ aI k t) oa aI ::! .... CJ .... oa III III .,. GI .<: .... Eo< 0 :.; "';'.. I t , t , Origlhal Þroffet Amended Proffer - (Arnehdmeht # ) PROFFER FORM Date: t'- Jp ,- 15 ZMA # 1.{;-p f' Tax Map Parcel(s) # 27·---1£-:1) /" Acres to be rezoned from /f'.1 to V Æ' I " Pursuant to S~ction 33.3 of the Albemarle COUhty Zonihg Ordihahce, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the cOhditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These cOhdUions are protfered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezohlng itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasohabla relation to the rezoning requested. (1) The applicant shall drill wells and these ~ells shall be subject to pump tests and shall meet the specific requirements of the Engineering Department, and the Department will make a determination based on the results of adequate or inadequate groundwater to supply the development. This determination (verification of suitable water supply) will be made prior to approval of the final plat. In the event that adequate water supply cannot be verified not more than three (3) parcels/dwellings shall be permitted. (2) Lots 1, 2, and 4 as shown on a plat by Roger Ray dated April 13, 1995 and revised May 22, 1995 shall have all access restricted to Route 779. These lots shall have no 'direct access to Route 29. Lot 3 may continue to use the existing entrance on Route 29 and Route 779. ~k'~ Signatures All Owners . , , ð¡Jf/~ uI e¿¡f/(/) Ptlnted Nah1es of All OWhets t· f tJ .. :f.J bate OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper PoWer at Attorney) Prlhted N~h1ê bf Attöthöy-It1-Fátt 1.1' PROFFORMWPD Rev. December 1994 '~·':V"""""'.~'_~ -,......~_~j~,~.. .,_L . .,. l _ LJL. '. _ ._. . .~ .~, ._ '. '.. . ,. n-" ~'''''''''Ä >, - . ., .. e e I ATTACHMENT B I I Page 11 PROFFER STATEMENT: IN SUPPORT OF REZONING REQUEST DATE: JUNE 15, 1995 RE : ZMA - 95 - 9 TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 96 AND TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 108 81.83 ACRES TO BE REZONED FROM R-1 TO R-4 Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. References in these conditions to "the plan" are to the attached plan titled "General Development Plan" and dated April 24, 1995, with revisions through June 13, 1995. 1. Owner will reserve a 120 foot strip of land in the approximate ~ location shown on the plan as "Potential 240/250 Connector ROad"/~ and will dedicate upon demand of the County} i$his reserved are~~ to public use without compensation. Reservation of the reserved area shall not be deemed to prohibit the owner from constructing roadways in the reserved area in a manner which would not interfere with future construction of the connector road, or making other temporary use of the reserved area not inconsistent with such construction. No residential driveways will access directly into the 120 foot right-of-way with the exception of the relocation access to Tax Map 56-96A. 2. Owner will reserve a 50-foot wide "Greenway" along each side of Lickinghole Creek as shown on the plan within the boundaries of Tax Map 56 Parcel 96. The owner does not proffer to maintain the Greenway, but rather the Greenway Area, at such time as the County of Albemarle commits to establish and maintain a public area, park or pathway, and assumes responsibility for maintenance thereof, will upon request of Albemarle County, be dedicated by the owner(s) or its successors to the County, subject to the right of use for residents living on the property. The proffer shall not be interpreted to prohibit the location of utilities, storm sewer or stormwater control devices or easements in the Greenway. 3 . Development will be limited to a maximum of 190 single-family attached, detached and townhouses units. These units will be located approximately in the areas shown on the plan. The maximum average lot size will be 15,000 square feet. ·.. .. ~ - e ¡ATTACHMENT BI r Page 21 Page 2 June 15, 1995 Preston Stallings 4. Internal roads on the property will be located approximately as shown on the plan. Additional internal roads will be located pursuant to normal subdivision review. 5. The possibility that a four-lane road will be constructed within the reserved area shall be clearly disclosed in the subdivision covenants and restrictions and on the subdivision Platc.r¡ -aH l~ adj~ccnt ~~·240/~50 connocter rcscr~~d~~./;P (~ 6. The owner or Home Owners Association will plant, at such time the "potential 240/250 connector road" is built, two rows of white pine trees 15 feet on center (four to five feet tall) along both edges of the "potential 240/250 connector road" right-of-way only in areas contiguous with single family attached or detached as is shown on the plan. Submitted by: ~4,^ /(t{l4~ . rest<;m St'a lings . Managlng Partner SAM Enterprises, L.L.C. &-7£1 -75 ate ... \... II . RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board has requested approval of a $15 + million project to renovate and expand the Albemarle-Charlottesville Joint Security Complex; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on April 5, 1995, voted to support the $15 + million renovation and expansion project; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council adopted a resolution on May 15, 1995, supporting the $4.8 million renovation component of the renovation and expansion project and adopted a resolution on July 17, 1995 supporting construction of additional new bed space in an amount not to exceed 115 beds; and WHEREAS, no part of the project can proceed without concurrence of the County and City; and WHEREAS, it is in the public's interest to proceed as expeditiously as possible with at least the renovation and expansion components of the project approved by the City; and WHEREAS, to secur~ state funding for the $4.8 million renovation and 115 cell expansion project, the Jail Board must receive approval for the project from the State Board of Corrections and meet other deadlines and requirements specified in Title 53.1 of the Code of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereby requests that the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board take all necessary steps to proceed with the $4.8 million renovation component and a 115 cell expansion of the renovation and expansion project for the Albemarle-Charlottesville Joint Security Complex and to qualify the project for state funding pursuant to Title 53.1 of the Code of Virginia. ..**. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of 5 to 0 on July 19, 1995. 0.1- ; ~~ ... RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE SECTIONS 107 AND 243 OF HOUSE RESOLUTION 1555, THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1995 WHEREAS, Sections 107 and 243 of H.R. 1555, the Telecommuni- cations Act of 1995, would strip Albemarle County and other local governments throughout the United States of their authority to control the location, height, or lighting of transmission towers used for cellular tele- phone communication and; WHEREAS, Albemarle County has a reasonable review procedure which balances the interests of the industry and the public in the siting of these increasingly numerous towers and; WHEREAS, the significant interest of the citizens of Albemarle County in insuring that such towers are reasonably located should not be sacrificed to industry convenience and; WHEREAS, throughout this Congress the emphasis has been upon returning power to localities and states and; WHEREAS, these provisions of H.R. 1555 represent a dramatic and inappropriate reversal of this policy in a manner which will be resented by citizens and localities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County to formally oppose Sections 107 and 243 of H.R. 1555 and to urge Chairman Bliley and the members of the House Committee on Commerce, as well as the Congress, to reconsider and withdraw these provisions from the Act. * * * * * I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on Wednesday, July 19, 1995. ~&rd4!county S David P. Bowerman Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel MlI1er MEMORANDUM FROM: Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance Ella W. Carey, Clerk~ July 20, 1995 TO: DATE: SUBJECT: Board Actions of July 19, 1995 At its meeting on July 19, 1995, the Board of Supervisors took the following action: Agenda Item No. 5.1.a. A. T. Williams Service Road (Route 29 North) - $29,268, (Form #95005). Approved as presented (original attached). Agenda Item No. 5.1.b. VRS Early Retirement Program - $358,185, (Form #95007). Approved as presented (original attached). Agenda Item No. 5.2. Resolution designating Robert W. Tucker, Jr., as agent of the Board of Supervisors for purposes of obtaining Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act. Adopted the attached resolution. EWC/tpf Attachments (3) cc: Roxanne White Juliet Jennings Jo Higgins * Printed on recycled paper ~ ... D¡ST1~WUTS¡) fa 8UA'ZO N.Gll\ôb1S COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE '7-/if,-9S- EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TlTI.E: A. T. Williams Service Road (Route 29) AGENDA DATE: July 19, 1995 ITEM NTJMBEj 95: ¿} 71'7 ('::>-./a ACTION: INFORMATION: SIJR,JFrTIPROPOSAI./REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #95005 in the amount of $29,268 for funds to be placed in an expenditure account in oroer to pay VDOT. CONSF.NT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: - ST AFF CONT ACT(S): Tucker, White, Higgins REVIEWED BY: BACKGROIJND: 'The COI.iŒy eŒered imo an agreement with A. T. Williams dated 7 Apri11994 for the construction of certain improvements in connection with the service road to access TMP 45BI-05-OA-I0. These improvements are to be performed by VDOT as part of the Route 29 Improvements. A. T. Williams is to pay the construction cost for this work as stated in the 4/7/94 agreement. DISCUSSION: VDOT awarded a coŒract on 31 May 1995 for the Route 29 (Rio to River) Improvements which includes the A. T. Williams service road. A check in the amount of $29,268 has been received from A. T. Williams to cover the cost of construction for the service road improvements. RECOMMF.NDA TlON: Request approval of Appropriation #95005 in the amount of $29,268 for funds to be placed into an expenditure account in oroer to pay VDOT. atwiliam.exe 95.118 (. ~ ~ APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 95/96 NUMBER 95005 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND CAPITAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: A T WILLIAMS SERVICE ROAD AGREEMENT. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1901041000950030 SERVICE ROAD-A T WILLIAMS $29,268.00 TOTAL $29,268.00 2901018000189908 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ SERVICE ROAD-A T WILLIAMS $29,268.00 TOTAL $29,268.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: ENGINEERING APPROVALS: SIGNATURE DATE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE ~-i/9 ~~ tiC í&;' -" r.:' ..ßd -.?s" 7-20-fS- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS " " c::~; "\. ", - ,\'.~) ¡....~~.:,~j~, :; ? - I t.j ~7-S- _._ COUNTY OF ALBEMARL~ EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITI,E: Appropriation - VRS Early Retirement Program AGENDA DATE: July 19, 1995 ITEM NIJMRE"R: 9.j-'a'i/ij (5~ /J.j ACTION: INFO"RMATION: SIJlQECTIP"ROPOSA I ,/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #95007 in the amount of $358,185.00 CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X INFO"RMATION: ATTACHMENTS: STAFF CONTACT(.~: Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Ms. White "REVJEWF.D BY: r BACKG"ROIJNO: In 199<¥the School Board elected to participate in the early retirement option offered by the Virginia Retirement System (VRS). At that time iey also elected the twenty year payment option. DISCUSSION: In an effort to reduce the cost of this election, two efforts are being made. The first is to make payments based on a ten year schedule instead of the twenty elected. The second is to make the payment in July of each fiscal year instead of June as required to further reduce the 8% interest cost. Funds for the 1995/96 fiscal year in the amount of $358,185 were budgeted in the School Fund to be transferred to the Debt Service Fund; however, this item was not appropriated in the Debt Service Fund and needs to be done at this time. "RECOMMEND A TION: Staff recommends approval of the Appropriation #95007 in the amount of $358,185 as detailed on attached form #95007. . í \995 95007. WPD 95.119 '. " APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR 95/96 NUMBER 95007 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW x ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO x FUND DEBT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR FY 95/96 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT PROGRAM. EXPENDITURE COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ 1990068000910110 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT $358,185.00 $358,185.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT ************************************************************************ TOTAL 2990051000512011 VRS EARLY RETIREMENT $358,185.00 TOTAL $358,185.00 ************************************************************************ REQUESTING COST CENTER: FINANCE APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE SIGNATURE ~~A7~ð'~~ ð& tU ~ DATE (¿, -1(/ Ai S- 7- 2..Þ -í,Ç- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS c DESIGNATION OF APPliCANTS AGENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Viq~inia. that Robert W. Tucker. Jr.. County Executive. is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of the Board of County Supervisors. Albemarle County. Virginia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) or otherwise available from the President's Disaster Relief Fund. FURTHER. RESOLVED TIlAT the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Virginia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. hereby authorizes the agent to provide the State and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for all matters pertaining to such Federal disaster assistance the assurances and agreements printed on the reverse side hereof. Passed and approved this 19th day of July. 1995. ..... CERTIFICATION I, Ella W. Carey. duly appointed and Clerk. Board of County Supervisors. of Albemarle County. Virginia. do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Virginia. on the 19th day of July. 1995. Date: July 20, 1995 & 11.(, Id GAj . (Signature) âulL, /~~¿p:.[.{~ ~YM í ~ '" DESIGNATION OF APPLICANT'S AGENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED BY the Board of County Sgpervisors of Albemarle County, Vi~9"in (Gouerning Body) (Public Entity) --....~'. THAT Robert W. Tucker, Jr. · (Name of Incumbent) n/ a , Governor's Authorized Representative, · (Name of Incumbent) . h b th' ed t t f d· b half f the Board of County Supervisors, Albemarl is ere yau onz 0 execu e or an 10 e 0 . _ County, Virqinia ,a public entity established under the laws of the State of Virqinia , this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) or otherwise available from the President's Disaster Relief Fund. , THAT the Board of County Superviso~~ public entity established under the laws of the State of the Commonwealth ot Vlrgll;i'I€reby authorizes its agent to provide to the State and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for all matters pertaining to such Federal disaster assistance the assurances and agreements printed on the reverse side hereof. I OR County Executive (Official Position) Passed and approved this 1 q t- 11 day of Jùlv' ,192.L. n/a (Name and Title) (Name and Title) (Name and Title) CERTIFICATION I, F,] 1 a W. Carey ,duly appointed andClerk, Board of County SUP%fviso (Title) of Albemarle County, Vlrglnla h th . ..' . ,do ereby certify at the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the Board of County SuPGfr'visors of Albemarle County, (GouerningBody) (Public Entity) Vlrqlnia on the 19th day of July 95 ,19_. Date: July 20, 1995 Clerk, CMC (Official Po,ition) *Name of incumbent need not be pro/Jided in tho.e caul where the ,0uern;T16 body of the public entity de.ire. to authorize an)' incumbent of the de.i,nated offici41 po.ilion to repreunt it. FEMA Form 90-63, MAR 81 .. \ APPLICANT ASSURANCES The Applicant hereby uau.... and certiCies that he wül comply with the FEMA reculationa, polic:iea. cuidelinea, and requiremento indudin¡ OMB's Circulan No. A·95 .nd A-I02. .nd FMC 74-4, u they rel.te to the .pplic.tion, .cceptAnce and use of Federal fun~ for this Federally- . uaiated Ihoject. Alao. the Applicant ¡iv.. auuranc:e aDd cenifies with respect to and .. . condition Cor the ¡r.nt that: 1. It poaeuea le¡aI .uthority to .pply lor the ¡rant. and to tinance .nd conatruc:t the propORd {aeilitie.; th.t . RaOlution, motion or similar .ction hu been duly .dopted or paaaed u .n oCCicial .ct of the .pplic.nt's ¡overnin¡ b<>dy. .uthori&in¡ the filin¡ of the .pplication, indudin¡ all undentAndin¡s .nd uaurancel contAined therein. and directin¡ and .uthori&in¡ the peBOn identified u the oCCici.1 representative of the .pplicant to .ct in connection with the .pplication .nd to provide such .dditional in(orm.tion .. m.y be ..quired. 2. It will comply with the proviaiona of: Executive Order 11988, relatin¡ to Floodplain Man.¡ement .nd 'Executin Order 11990. relatin¡ to Protection of WeUanda. 3. It will have sufficient (un~ .vail.ble to meet the non.Feder.1 sh... o{ the coat {or conatruction projecto. Sufficient funCÍa will be .v.ilable when conatruction ia completed to uau.. effective operation and maintenance of the (acility for the purpose conatructed. 4. It will not enter into. conatruction contr.ctls) for the project or unden.ke other .ctiviti... until the conditiona of the ¡rant pro- ¡r.ml s) have been met. 5. It will provide .nd m.intAin competent .nd .dequ.te architectur- al en¡ineerin¡ supervision .nd inspection .t the conatruction site to iRau" that the completed work conforms with the approved plana .nd specifications; that it will furnish pro¡re.. repons .nd such other information u the Federal ¡rantor .¡ency may 6. It will operate .nd maint.in the (.cility in .ccord.nce with the minimum .t.ndar~ u m.y be r...quir...d or preoc:ribed by the applic.ble Feder.I, State .nd loc.1 .¡enci... (or the maimen.nce .nd operation of such facilitie&. 7. It will live the ¡rantor .¡ency .nd the Comptroller General, throu¡h .ny authorized representAllve, acce.. to .nd the ri¡ht to examine all records, book., papen. or documento ..I.~d to the ¡rant. 8. It will requir. the facility to be deli¡ned to comply with the "American Standard Specifications for M.kin¡ Buildin¡s .nd Facilities Accellible to, and U...ble by the Physically H.ndi. capped," Numb...r AI17.1-1961. as modi tied (41 CFR 101.17. 703H The .pplicant will be reoponsible {or conductio¡ in. spectlona to in.ure compliance with the.. specific.tiona by the contr.ctor. d,g 9. It will c.use work on the project to be commenced within. ..asonabl... time .fter reoceipt o( notification (rom the .pprovin¡ Feder.1 .¡ency th.t {un~ have been .pproved .nd will ..... th.t work On the project will be prosecuted to completion with reuon.ble dili¡ence. 10. It will not dÎlpo.. of or encumber ito tiUe or other intereato in the site and (acilitiel durin¡ the period o{ Federal interest or while the Government holda bon~. whichever ÎI the lon¡er. 11. It. a¡rees to comply with Section 311. P.L. 93·288 .nd with T,tle Viol the Civil Ri¡bto Act o( 1964 (P.L. 83.352) .nd in .ccordance with Title Viol the Act. no paBOn in the United St.tes shall, on th.... ~ou!'d 0.1 race, color, or n.tional ori¡in. be excluded (rom. p.nlClp.t,on In. be denied the beneCita oC. or be oth.'~wlle sub~ted to discrimin.tion under .ny pro¡ram or .~tlY\ty Cor which the .pplic.nt rec.iv.. F.d.ral fin.neial u. 'I.tanc. and will imm.di.t.ly tak. .ny m.uures neceaary to erl.c.tu.t. thia .¡re.m.nt. 11 .ny r.aI property or .tNCtUre ia provld.d or improved with the .id 01 Fed.ral financial &laiaL' .nc. ,.xt.nd.d to the Applicant, thla &auranc. allall obll..t. the ApphcanL, or In the c~ Of .n.y Lranal.r of luch propeny, .ny tranaf.r..~ for the period dunn. which the real propeny or It~cture II u..d for a purpoaa for which the Fed.ral financial "'lItanc. Ia ext.nded or for anoth.r purpou Involnn. the proviaion of limilar Mrvic.. or ban.fita. 12. It :will ~~ablilh aaCe,u.rdl to prohibit .mploy... from uainr th!1f poclt!ona for a purpoae th.t is or ,ive. the appear.nce 01 beln. motivated by a d...ire for priute ..in Cor themaelv... or othen, p.rticularly thoca with whom they b.". family buain_ or other ti.... ' . 13. It will ~omply with ~e requirementa of Titl. II and Titl. III of ~! Uniform R.'oc.tlon A.istance and IWaI Propeny Acqui- IItj~na Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-646) which proYid.. lor ralr and equitable treatm!'nt 01 persona displawd .. . ....ult 01 Fed.ral and Federally·...llted prorrama. 14. It will comply with all ..,ulrernenta Impoeed by th. F.den! ¡ran~or a¡eney coneemin, .~iaI f!'«Iuirementa of law, procram requlrementa, and oth.r adlltlluatrat.ín requirem.nta .pprond in aecord~ce with OMB Circular A'102, P.L. 93-288 u amended and .pphc.ble Fed.ral IWIIII.tione. .' 15. It will comply with the proviaiona of the H.tch Act which limit the politic:al activity of employ....... 16, It will comply with the minimum w.¡e and maximum hou.. provisiona of the Federal F.ir Labor SLandar~ Act, as they .pply to hocpital and educ.tional inaLituLion .mploy"". of St.n .nd local ¡overnmenIL 17. (To the beat of hia knowled¡e .nd belief) the diauter relief work deoc:ribed on e.ch Federal Emer¡:ency M.n.....ment A¡ency (FEMA) Project Applic.tion for which Federal Fin.ncial u· liatance ia requelted ia eli¡ible in .ccord.nce with the criteria contained in 44 Code oC Federal R"'CUI.tions, Part 205, and .pplic.ble FEMA H.ndboolu. 18. The emer¡ency or diauter relief work therei~ deac:ribed for which Federal .AMiatance ia requested hereunder doel not or will not duplic.te benefito received for the urne Iou from .nother source. 19. It will (1) provide without COlt to the United Statel all landa, euemento .nd ri¡hto-of·w.y neceuary for accompli.ahment of the approved work; (2) hold .nd aave the United States free (rom dam.¡eI due to the approved work or Federal fundin¡. 20. Thia ....ur.nc.. is ¡inn in consideration of .nd for the purpo£e 01 obtAinin¡ any and .11 Federal ¡r.nl4, 10&111, reimburaemenu, .d· v.nc..., contracta. property. d~ounta of other Federal fin.ncial uaistance ..",...nd..d after th... d.t.. hereof to th... Applic.nt by FEMA, that such Feder.1 Fin.nclal auistance will be ext...nded in reli.nce on the representationo and .¡reemento made in this .a- lur.nce and that Lhe United States shall have the ri¡ht to _k judicial enforcement of thia ....ur.nc.... This a..uranc... is bindin¡ on the .pplic.nt, ita .ucceuon, tr.naf...ree.. and ....i¡ne.... .nd the peBOn or p...rson¡ whole ¡i¡natures appear on th... r.......rs... as au· thori:ted to si¡n this ....ur.nce on beh.lf of the .pplic.nt. 21. It will comply with the nood in¡uranc. purchaH requir...menta of Stoc:Lion I 02(a I of th... Flood Di£llter Prot...ction Act of 1973. Public Law 93-234. 87 Stat. 975, approved December 31. 1973. Section 102(a) requirea, on .nd after March 2, 1975, the purchaH of nood insuunce in communities wher... ¡uch innlrance is .v.ilable as a condition (or the receipt of any Feder.1 fin.ncial a.saÎlt.nce for constructi"n or .cquisition purpo.... for u"" in any area that haa be...n identified by the Director, Federal Emer,ency Mana¡em...nt A¡ency .s .n area havin¡ .pecial nood huar~. The phr..e "F...d..r.l fin.ncial ....iltanc..... indud.... any form or loan. rr·nt, ¡uaranty, insurance payment, rebate, subsidy. disaster uailtance lo.n or ,r.nt, or .ny oth...r form o{ direct or indirect Feder.1 ....iat.nc... 22. It will comply with the inaur.nce requiremento of Section 314. PL 93·288. to obt.in .nd maint.in any other iRaurance ... m.y be reuonable. .dequ.t., and nec:euary to protect a¡am.t funher 10.. to .ny propeny which w.s repl.ced, re¡tored, rep.ired, or con. Itructed with this uailtance. '23. It will deCer fundin¡ of any projecta involvin¡ nexible {undin, until FEMA m.kes . {avor.ble environmental dearance, if thia ia required. 24. It ~iII ....iaL the F..d.ral ¡r.ntor a¡ency in ita compliance with Section 106 of the N.Lional Hiatoric Preservation AcL of 1966 ... amended, (16 U.S.C 470), ExecuLive Order 11593 .nd th~ An:haolo¡ical and Hiatoric Praervation Act of 1966 <i6 U.S.C. 469a'l .t Mq.) by (a) conaultin¡ with the Stat. HiaLoric P....r. .ation ~Clic:er on ~h. conduct of ¡n""ti,ationa, .. nac:eu.vy, to id.ntlfy propenl.. liat.d In or .Ii,lbl. for Incluaion in the N.tlonal IW.iat.r of Hiatoric plac:aa th.L are IU bject to .d "..... .CCecta (... 36 CFR Pan 800.8) by the .ctivity, and notifyln. the F.deral ¡rantor .,.ney of the exiaune. of any luch proper- ti., and by (b) complyin.· with all r.quirem.nta eatabliall.d by the F.d.ral ,rantor a¡.ncy to avoid or miLi,aL. .d".... .CCaeta upon luch propeni.... 25. It, will, Co~ .ny rep. in or conatruction financed herewith, comply :WIth apphc~ble .t.and.rd. of ..,..ty, decency .nd sanitAtion and In conformity. wlLh .pplic.ble c:ocI.... lpecific.tiona and .tan. dude; .nd, will evaluate the n.tural huar~ in are.. in which the procftd. of th. ¡rant or loan are to be uaed and taka ap- propri.te .ction to miti¡.te IUcb huarda, includin, aaC. land u.. .nd conatruction practlc.... STATE ASSURANCES Th. State acr- to taka an)' neeeuary action within State capablllti.. to require compliance with thae auuranc:n and ......m.nta by th. applicant ~r ~ aaaum. responaibility to the Federal .onnuaent lor aD)' d.lic..ncl.. not remlyed to the aatialaction of the Re,ional Director. ,J( '- 1 DESIGNATION OF APPUCANrS AGENT RESOLUTION BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Vir~inia. that Robert W. Tucker. Jr.. County Executive. is hereby authorized to execute for and in behalf of the Board of County Supervisors. Albemarle County. Vir~inia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Vir~inia. this application and to file it in the appropriate State office for the purpose of obtaining certain Federal financial assistance under the Disaster Relief Act (Public Law 288, 93rd Congress) or otherwise available from the President's Disaster Relief Fund. FURTHER RESOLVED 1HAT the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Vir~inia. a public entity established under the laws of the Commonwealth of Vir~inia. hereby authorizes the agent to provide the State and to the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) for all matters pertaining to such Federal disaster assistance the assurances and agreements printed on the reverse side hereof. Passed and approved this day of . 1995. (Name and Title) (Name and Title) (Name and Title) CERTIFICATION I, Ella W. Carey. duly appointed and Clerk. Board of County Supervisors. of Albemarle County. Vir~inia. do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct copy of a resolution passed and approved by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County. Vir~inia. on the 19th day of July. 1995. Date: (Signature) (Official Position) r , David P. Bowerman Charlottesville Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville MEMO TO: FROM: Mark B. Henry, Civil Engineer II Ella W. Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors ðZ<J¿'- DATE: July 20, 1995 Woodcreek Subdivision SUBJECT: Attached is the original resolution (plus four copies) adopted by the Board of County Supervisors on July 19, 1995, requesting acceptance of Woodcreek Subdivision into the State Secondary System of Highways. EWC/tpf Attachments (4) * Printed on recycled paper Charles S. Martin Rivanna Walter F. Perkins WhIte Hall Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller l, r , , The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin- ia, in regular meeting on the 19th day of July, 1995, adopted the following resolution: RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the street in Woodcreek Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the SUbdivision Street Reauirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor- tation to add the road in Woodcreek Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's SUbdivision Street Reauire- ments; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as describedt and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. * * * * * Recorded vote: Moved by: Mrs. Humphris Seconded by: Mr. Martin Yeas: Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Messrs. Marshall, Martin and Perkins. Nays: None. A Copy Teste: , \' ' , The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: 1) Woodcreek Drive from the edge of pavement of state Route 20, to the end of the cul-de-sac pavement as shown on a plat recorded 8-26-93 in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1336, page 565, showing a 50 foot right-of-way, length 0.6 mile. Total length - 0.6 mile I ~ . 1- M - ~ ~ - In ~ - ~ fþÞi g¡ Çj ~ ~ t.. . ~ ri .... 'tI GJ ... '" :I ... : GJ ë ... III : H >. ... GJ W =' tI2 o : o ~ ... =' ri o III GJ I>: III W o III ~ t GJ ø. =' tI2 II-< o 'tI W os o Q II >. ri : o GJ : o ~ U GJ .d ~ o ... ... :- GJ 11 u os ... ... ..; ¡:: ::s ri U II-< o 1 ... : GJ 11 u aI ... ... ..; .d on ... a 171111 : GJ ID GJri . ,.:¡~ 0 : :t: ... 0 GJ II ~ ... : ... ~~ 0 'tIri 'tI W ..; GJ ... : GJ tJ '-- III GI GJ t1I ... RS 0 GI :z: r-I III 'n =' :e: 0 GJ r-I : RS os ri .J ri 0 GJ E-t u III ~ :t: - ~~ 0 I ~ .. O.d '... 1>:'tI ~ ~ .. ~ ... .. : · · · · · ~ .. '" .. .. .. e · · · · · .. .. .. .. .. GJ E-< ... : ::: ... 0 ... ,;¡ ,;¡ ,;¡ ,;¡ ~ ... g g g 0 g 0 ~ .. .. .. .. .. 'tI ... ." 1 ." 1 ." ~ I · · · · · · · · Q Q Q Q Q ... Þ ::: GJ · GJ .. ..... w u ... .. ... · ..... tI2 '? .. · · · · · · 0 ~ ... ... ... ... ... .. · · · · · .. ... Q Q Q Q Q '" B ." ." 1 ." ." ., · · · .:J .. ." ." ." ~ .. 0 It It It It 0 ." 0 0 0 0 0 .. u u u u u a · · · · · '" '" '" '" '" ö ... ! ... § .. § ... ö ... ö · ö · · · · It ... ... ~ ... ~ ... ~ ~ ... .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ... GJ GJ W ... tI2 . II-< Þ ... 0 It Q GJ ~ ~ . .. :z: u '8 0 a ~ Ö ... GJ I>: :z: .. ... . .. r-I I( :I: .. ¡:: o on IQ 'n > on 'tI -§ tI) ~ o GI 9 z GJ 171 os : ~ os W 'tI 'tI : os rà ri ri ~ II-< rà ... =' u w 0 II-< III ... : GJ iii GJ ~ III os 0 GJ ,Q t- al 'tI os GJ III ... III aI GJ t u u ~ GJ ~ 'tI : s:: ~ ~ ... os ~ : GJ II-< § 0 E-t I( U GJ 0 :- rr. 'tI ~ III 0 GJ =' .d ri Z ... u Ie 0 II-< GJ H 0 >. E-t ... os ð w I os I H ø. II-< rr. 0 os I H ... E-t III .d ~ '" 171 ~ ~ U 'tI W GJ ~ II-< II-< 0 ~ ... .d W ... GJ 'tI u ~ I III 'tI ~ GJ ... GJ : ... GJ : 11 '" w U aI '" =' ... CI ... os III III ~ GJ .d ... E-< 0 :z: · COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Mark B. Henry. Civil Engineer II (1\~ FROM: DATE: July 12, 1995 RE: W oodcreek Subdivision (SUB-92-118) The road serving the above referenced subdivision is substantially complete and ready for a VDOT acceptance inspection. Attached is the completed SR-5(A) form for a resolution, which I request be taken to the Board for adoption at your next opportunity. Once the resolution has been adopted, date and sign the SR-5(A), and please provide me with the original and four (4) copies. Thank you for your assistance. Please call me if you have any questions. MBH/ctj Attachment eng\mark\ woodcree. res I' JUt , 2 199.~ · ']. - ~ ~~!:> btstrlb~ted,\{¡ -ßo~~þ,~ m. ' ~; \ ~s. ()?/,(.J I~ ~ ~~é' ít@~ No The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgin- ia, in regular meeting on the 19th day of July, 1995, adopted the following resolution: RES 0 L UTI 0 N WHEREAS, the street in Woodcreek Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transpor- tation to add the road in Woodcreek Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated July 19, 1995, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Reauire- ments; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. * * * * * Recorded vote: Moved by: \ Seconded by: r{~ Yeas: \. Nays: i' A Copy Teste: Ella W. Carey, Clerk, CMC THOMAS J. BULEY, JR. 7TH DISTRICT, VIRGINIA WASHINGTON OFFICE: 2241 RAYBURN OFFICE BUILDING (2021225-2815 CHAIRMAN, COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE Q:ongress of the ilníted ~tates ~ousc of 'RcprtsfOtatíots ÐJashíngton, ÐQ: 205J5-1607 DISTRICT OFFICES: SUITE 101 4914 FITZHUGH AVENUE RICHMOND, VA 23230-3534 (804) 771-2809 1-(800)-438-3793 -. í CULPEPER OFFICE PARK SUITE 207 763 MADISON ROAD CULPEPER, VA 22701-3342 17031 825-8960 July 11, 1995 Board of supervisors County of Albemarle 401 McIntyre Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Board Members: I wanted to take the opportunity to offer my assistance as Albemarle County prepares to repair the damage caused by recent floods. Immediately following the flooding, I had the opportunity to tour parts of the Seventh Congressional district. Although there was extensive damage, I believe we will be able to rebuild our community. I have met with representatives from the Federal Emergency Management Administration (FEMA) and the Small Business Administration (SBA) and they have assured me they are working swiftly to ensure that all flooded counties in Virginia receive assistance and funding for repairs. If you need assistance in contacting FEMA or the SBA, however, please do not hesitate to contact me. Again, please contact me if I can assist Albemarle County in any way. with kindest regards, I am Sincerely, ]"-'-- , ,( ~''-- Thomas~ J. Bliley, Member of Congress Jr. TJBj/aco o ./ CRIME STATISTICS JUNE 1995 I I 1 9 94 (YTD ) I 1 99 5 (YTD ) I % CHAN G E I , :t'tt~t:~tt~:f:¡~:ttt~:~:~:~ñlil§:tmRtsêRUIGEft@t:tf]t;:~:~f:~:~ttff 1 4, 667 1 3 942 -4. 94 % ¡;;tt¡t¡¡¡¡¡¡¡¡~j~~~j~¡;~¡¡¡~¡l¡j¡~¡;t¡~t~~:::;;;;i~;::::::;;:::;~;::::~;~i::;::J~t:~~~~:::~;~:::::::j:::~¡¡¡ii::;:::i:::;:;::::~:::;¡~::;:::L~::;;;;;;:;:;:;}j~¡Jt¡~~~~¡~~f}¡¡¡ttmm~t¡~t~r¡: , ::!:ii!l¡jliiil!II!!¡lill!li!I!!i:¡::/I:III~1111Iiili/1IIIIIIillli/i:/:I:I¡I¡lllllllli:lliiiii¡II¡lli:i:¡:¡:ij:i:iiil:ili:l:lliil:I!:I¡¡ii:!:/:/!:!:///!IIII!:illijlil:/:/!!I::I:liiii::::: Homicid e 1 4 300 00 % Rape 1 4 9 -3 5 7 1 % Ro bbery 8 8 0 00 % Ag 9 ravated Assa u It 1 7 33 94. 1 2 % 8 u rg la ry 1 5 5 1 5 6 0 . 6 5 % - Larceny 68 7 693 0 8 7 % Motor Ve h ic Ie Theft 5 6 3 6 -3 5 7 1 % Total 938 939 0 1 1 % :i:/:I!:¡¡ill!\'I!l~IIII!li//:IIIII¡li¡!\\i/II¡II¡!II¡1¡11!!j!IIIIII¡llllllllji¡l¡i¡i¡I/¡iijl¡/::¡¡ii/!:¡¡iil¡i¡i:I:¡:I¡¡I¡I¡II¡¡II:I:::¡¡!¡::¡ii:iil:¡¡:¡,; Ad u It 1 1 7 1 22 4 2 7 % J uvenil e 1 2 1 00 00 % Tota I 1 1 8 1 24 5 08 % ¡¡//I:¡/I/i:i:I¡I//I¡/I\\I//illlli!///llllli1IBI:11111IIII/i///!//!I¡:¡!//!!/!:¡!I:. Total Accid ents 1 , 03 1 1 , 05 7 2 5 2 % I nj ury Accid ents 2 84 309 8 80 % Fatal Accid ents 4 8 1 00 · 00 % Total Alcohol Related Accid ents 74 73 - 1 · 3 5 % I nj ury Accidents I nvo Ivin 9 Alco ho I 3 5 25 -28 · 5 7 % Fatal Alcohol Related Accid e nts 1 0 - 1 00 00 % ~TE______~~~~~~____________________________ AGBn\ ITIMID. SDf ~9íf~éb 7 -# AffiN}\ ITIM_-JJ(iJ~7ji~~ OOFERRID mm ----f/1§lJ~LdfJ!1fi~~--- Form. 3 7/25/86 fJistf/bLlted io !:1oird' ;7///~4- >4 . __T /.,S . g~"'d, Item N ¿'Jç-. .b...~. O. 7..... / ¿, '7/~ .s~ ~--/ ; <- /~ ~ / .. , ) .. - ....~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 June 30, 1995 The Copeland School William B. Copeland, Headmaster 1000 Birdwood Road Charlottesville, V Ä 22903 RE: SP-95-16 The Covenant School Tax Map 76, Parce146F Dear Mr. Copeland: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on June 27, 1995, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Use is limited to 400 students; 2. Any expansion of the building, parking or provision of athletic fields shall require amendment of this request; 3. Prior to commencement of the school left and right turn lanes shall be provided as required or recommended by the Department of Transportation. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on Julv 19. 1995. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. ~~/~ William D. Fritz Senior Planner cc: Ella Carey Frank Cox I , , e STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ JUNE 20, 1995 JULY 19, 1995 SP 95-16 THE COVENANT SCHOOL Applicant's Proposal: The applicant has submitted a detailed description of this use which is included as Attachment C. The proposal is to use the existing facilities for a 400 student school. Petition: The Covenant School petitions the Board of Supervisors to permit a private school [23.2.2(9)] on 9.0 acres zoned CO, Commercial Office. Property, described as Tax. Map 76, Parcel 46F, is located on the east side of Rt. 780 just south of 1-64 in the Scottsville Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Office Service in Neighborhood 5. Character of the Area: This site is the fonner location of the Mountainwood Treatment center. Route 631 in this area has recently been upgraded. RECOMMENDATION: Staffhas reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the e Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Plan nine and Zonine History: This site has received rezoning, special use permits and site plan approvals which pennitted the Mountianwood facility. The special use permits authorized the use of the site as a 140 bed residential treatment center. Comprehensive Plan: This site is recommended for Office Service. Staffhas reviewed the non-residential land use guidelines of the Comprehensive Plan found on page 161. While schools are not listed as a use in the Office Service area, staff can identify no intent to exclude schools. Staff opinion is that this request is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the ria:ht to issue all special use pennits pennitted hereunder. Special use pennits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued qpon a findin~ by the Board of Su~ervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adiacent property. e No changes to the site are proposed. The existing facility is substantially screened from the public road and surrounding property. No play fields or organized athletics are 1 e proposed. Based on the existing development of the site and the schools intent to use only the existing facilities this use should have no impact on adjacent property. that the character of the district will not be chan~ed thereby. As no changes to the site are proposed no change in the character of the district is anticipated. Staffhas received comment from the City of Charlottesville addressing concern over the potential increase in traffic generated in the city by this use. The previous use of this site could have generated up to 1,648 vehicle trips per day based on I.T.E. I.T.E. contains no generation figures for this type of use (private school) which enables staff to detennine vehicle trips per day which would be generated. The applicant has stated that this use will generate up to 900 to 1000 vehicle trips per day based on observed data from the existing school. These numbers appear to be appropriate for a 400 student school. Therefore, this request does not appear to increase total traffic levels on roadways serving the site. e Staff does note that a private school will tend to have a more significant peak hour generation than the previous use. I.T.E. figures are available for peak hour generation. A.M. peak hour generation is anticipated to be 372 and P.M. peak hour generation is anticipated to be 244. Staff opinion is that the change in the nature of the traffic generation may change the character of the area due to the introduction of increased congestion during peak hours. It should be noted that plans do exist to operate a shuttle bus between this site and the school's city location. This will tend to minimize traffic impact. and that such use will be in hannony with the pur,pose and intent of this ordinance. Staffhas reviewed the purpose and intent of the ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6. This application provides additional educational opportunities and, therefore, may be considered consistent with the intent of the ordinance. with the uses pennitted by ri~ht in the district. Schools are pennitted by special use pennit in the CO district in accord with section 23.2.2(9) which allows by special use all uses pennitted by special use in Section 18.0, R- 15, Residential. Schools are pennitted by special use pennit in the R-15 district in accord with Section 18.2.2(5). This use will not affect pennitted uses on this or adjacent properties. with additional re~lations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance. Section 5.0 contains no additional regulations. e 2 e and with the public health. safety and ieneral welfare. The Building Official has reviewed the existing structure and indicated that the building is adequate for the proposed use. The primary safety issue identified by staff is the entrance to the site. The Department of Transportation has stated that right and left turn lanes will be required to serve this site unless information is received to indicate that the level of traffic does not warrant installation of these turn lanes. In the event that the level of traffic is not sufficient to require turn lanes the department of transportation recommends turn lanes. (Attachment D). In 1992 the Planning Commission reviewed a request for expansion of the aroadus Wood SchoQI. At that time VDOT recommended the installation of a left turn lane for safety purposes. The Planning Commission required the construction of the left turn lane due to concerns over safety particularly during peak hours. Broadus Wood has an enrollment of just under 400. Based on the previous review of Broadus Wood provision of a left turn lane for this use appears appropriate as the uses a very similar. Staff does note that based on discussions with the Department of Transportation adequate area turn lanes may be available with restripping of the existing pavement. With the provision of the turn lanes requested by VDOT staff opinion is that this use is consistent with the public health safety and welfare. SUMMARY: e Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. The request satisfies the criteria of Section 31.2.4.1; 2. Approval of this request will allow for the use of an existing structure which has remained vacant for a number of years; 3. Approval of this request will allow for increase educational opportunities. Staff has identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request: 1. Approval of this request may tend to increase congestion during morning and to a lesser extent evening rush hours. RECOMMENDED ACTION: The increase in potential congestion caused by this use may be minimized with the provision of adequate turn lanes. Staff opinion is that the request is consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and e 3 e e - Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: Recommended Conditions of Approval: 1. Use is limited to 400 students; 2. Any expansion of the building, parking or provision of athletic fields shall require amendment of this request; 3. Prior to commencement of the school left and right turn lanes shall be provided as required or recommended by the Department of Transportation. ---------------- ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicant's information D - VDOT Comments . C:\ WP51 \RPT\SP9516.RPT 4 / I ATTACHMENT A I ........ FOX MOUNTAIN ~,... ." ,...~ro../ \.., v~ ~ ~ -.) o e~ e e ATTACHMENT B\ ALBEMARLE COUNTY 60 , ~. ~1J9~ ¡/ "'",,}~_ J ~ I· ( v:-y.. \\ ,// " , n; ,,,. ".... \ lfffGJiLAIR ES~, __.j '\\/'- ____.8 r.- \~ ¥ . '7\\ \ / ~ -~~, ~DIII/,.",/~~~'--J_____ ~ ._. 'I ~ \/ ~ '. - 101 .~~~.--,--_ ~tJ/~', ~ ~-+ .~~ 10E"') 4 ___/ . __ \ ~:' /!). I' ~' CT'ON T6H:::::¿ V- ·1"0".,\ ,{- _ ______~ ~ "" {~, T /7 "}ì: IOC LIBERTY HILL \ I 'V~ I J '~ ,Of I ,--n-n_!J \"\ V . ~~f-- I- ¡ j i' .--: - ..~ ., =-: ~"D ";.f ~!g~ ~ï j ( ..L 5 J\~' . ':~ / I~T :-r=-- ~ I '\ ~;~~~ .., A / -- '\ -¿ ~..-/ - L SEe 76E ~ '/. \__n__ ,/ ~ "\ , ;;;;:;;L ", ~ j / SMD ~ _ _n ------;... _ ~J /: "A \. jjII'\ I, -o=b- ~ ..----:: _ _ _ \-: V) \.;'~·C / 1761 , . - ~~ \ ... ,1C 1~\ J-- -- ~ \ ~ ':'; 17 17CI1I ~ \ /" .: Ilel ,i¡---- ____.:;,--: ;ttE~N--;;- L--- n _" \ 11, '1:. -ll..~~ 50~ - )_ ___--~ 01= ......~ ~~ 11A l-<~ / CITY t \ I~ ..... ~ .1.:........ ~ //- -/'1/1 ~ . \ 75 1 \ ~~ ~~~ SEcTION 168 <> ~¿_ \ ec~ -7Þ f"~"'\. c.æ _.; \~.:_-::" \ ~~ ~~ "~~/ :~?'6 \ ,,,,., , ~=- -- ì\ \-...................... ..~"'~... 24 '4A~ ~ ___ ~ - , ", ~.::=:: (';ro. ,,- I '" "~~~~ /\;~ .. ('~ }---- ,?"'- ....,,"-" i- ~~~. 46 \ (" s 'II ~.~ m ~ 4I-J- ..>- __j ¡';,,~ __ ~~ J:.::-... ~1'" f I ... //L~ SECTION 16N''-; - _'_ - ~ ___ I _ ~ 'H[RWOOD fARM. '-IIIII??~ file ~~l~l -~- -= ',. OK '~~b~' 7,0 ____ ~ ". "'-~. ___ .>' =--=~ --- -6Æ Qj .....,. --............. ~ _______ .5s[ ----- ........ -- -.!!£UTE _ l. "c ~ ---~ /46<: < .. ~ .IT ........ _ ::,. ~ --- ,- '----------- ~ - ........ 64 :--..: ~ .~:~ .x ~---........::"... - ~ ~~.~___ ---~ ~:6E . 4 . 54 ~ ;:~, ~;~ ~ , .1. ~~ ~ 1/4/f ~. ~ ~16MC!!:!hMI2E3 "~~rf'" .. ~~rr:rr;{) :;,:·¡¡,,~~~//.;t~ ~ ~ ~ ---... . oj';;) .~~:¡; J?ljl...v:'...// ~////; ~ . .~ ( If'" \~~~:. ~.jZ:>:;~~'l ~~. :/J>< .-!-J.....ct..'.'a.~~~''l..:~ 'U\'~?:~;;H:L~h~ ~~~~ 11 _-:-_/>_x ~/r- (_ ""_ ~ 01 ~ %~íØ§/IÍ'):~í;0>,0~I'-.."'~""'-.~ ~ V --........___1 ,1'-.../' ~ \ Q:.*~ 1//,~:0(;; .:/ '//////; .......................;ILL~"'it ~~~ 77 -- "- "'........ SCAL.E IN FEET .00 1100 90 SAMUEL MILLER, SCOTT$VU...LE AND JACK JOUETT DISTRICTS SECTION 76 L/ e e e I ATTACHMENT C I Special Use Permit The Covenant School Special Use Permit Narrative THE COVENANT SCHOOL The County of Albemarle, Virginia 1. Existing Zoning: CO, with approved Special Use Permit for a hospital. The site was formerly operated as Mountainwood Hospital, an alcohol and substance abuse hospital and out-patient clinic. Uses permitted by-right in the CO District include business offices, professional offices, financial institutions, churches, libraries, daycare facilities, nursery facilities, and residential dwellings. 2. Existing Property Owner and Address: Mediplex of Virginia, Inc., SOO Old Lynchburg Road, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901. A letter from Mediplex authorizing The Covenant School and the current contract owners of the property to submit the Special Use Permit on their behalf accompanies this application. 3. Existing Use: Vacant. The property has been unoccupied for the previous four years due to the closing of the previous user, Mountainwood, an alcohol and substance abuse treatment hospital. The existing buildings contain approximately 70,000 SF, with 141 parking spaces available. 4. Proposed Use: Private School. This application addresses the operation of an independent school at the former Mountainwood facility for the purposes of providing secondary education and high school academic prograr'ns for The Covenant School. The Covenant School is a private Christian school with a current enrollment of 450 students. The proposed use is requested pursuant to uses permitted by Special Use Permit in the CO District (which defaults by reference to the R- 15 District's special uses with respect to accommodation of private schools.) The Covenant School has been in operation for ten years with its existing campus located at the old Mcintire High School on the Route 2SO Bypass. and is accredited through the Virginia Association of Independent Schools. Rapid growth of the school has given rise to facility expansion needs. Site location and feasibility studies were performed for numerous properties in and around Charlottesville and the County's contiguous Urban Area, and after extensive evaluations, the Mountainwood site was deemed the best location to serve the school's constituencies. RECEIVED April24, 1995 APR 24 1995 . 1 . AJ.BEMAHu: ~OUNTY ZO~.\11-!r.: T)~PJ.v~T~,~Etff Special Use Permit I ATTACHMENT C I The Covenant SChOO/1 Page 21 e It is envisioned that the Mountainwood facility will be used initially for primary level instruction, with three sections each of Kindergarten through Fourth Grades. Approximately 250 students would occupy the facility during the first year of operation. The ultimate use of the facility may serve as many as 400 students. However, no definitive program has be~n established for the mix of grade levels and total occupancy. 5. Land Use Impacts: None. There are no additional improvements proposed to either the existing building or the site, as originally approved with the Special Use Permit and the Final Site Plan for the Mountainwood facility expansion in 1988. The site has been fully landscaped and buffered in accord with previous County planning requirements and is fully compatible with the requirements of the proposed use. 6. Environmental Impacts: None. The facility is fully served by County water and sewer. Areas of environmental sensitivity were preserved in accord with County stipulations as a part of the previous site development effort for the Mountainwood facility expansion. e e 7. Traffic Impacts: The primary access to the property for Covenant School students is via the new Fifth Street Extended and Interstate 64. The existing public street systems serving the facility have abundant demand/capacity ratios and are ideally designed and located to serve the traffic characteristics of the proposed use. The impact of site generated traffic is projected to be modest in comparison to permitted uses. Private school utilization for 400 students, based on actual generation figures developed by The Covenant School at its current location, would create approximately 450 - 500 vehicles per day. Applying commonly accepted ITE trip generation factors for elementary schools, the projected site traffic would yield an ADT of 400 410 vehicular trips. The private school use will generate significantly less traffic than either the previous hospital use or other alternative by-right uses, such as business offices and professional offices. For example, by-right, medical offices could create as much as 2000 - 2200 vehicles per day, based on ITE ADT traffic generation standards. The predicted traffic generation level for the approved hospital use (140 beds) was 1500 - 1650 vehicles per day. RECFIVED April24, 1995 APR 24 1995 AJ.BEiMnu.;. wuNTY ZONm DEPAR'f1ØIf ·2. e e e Special Use Permit I ATTACHMENT C I page 31 The Covenant School 8. Parking Impacts: Significantly less than that required for by-right uses. The measured parking needs for the proposed grade levels at the current Mcintire School campus require less than forty spaces. Based on County parking standards for elementary schools, 37 spaces would be required for 400 students. The existing 167 parking spaces at the site are well located to serve the intended distribution of facility users--including teachers, administrators, visitors, and parents. Fo.ur ADA spaces are located close to the entrance to the building. Comparing the school to other permitted uses on the site, the potential use of the property for professional offices would require approximately 350 spaces if the existing buildings were fully occupied. 9. Hours of Operation: The facility will be occupied in a fashion similar to existing County elementary schools, with morning arrivals and aftemoon departures for Grades 1-4. Kindergarten classes will be dismissed at midday. Since there are no gymnasiums, auditoriums, or interscholastic athletic fields at the subject location, there will be no scheduled performing arts events, athletic events, and/or leasing of facilities to private users for athletic activities. Occasional evening meetings will be conducted in conjunction with programmed school activities. 10. ADA Compliance: The property complies will current ADA regulations and includes handicapped parking, handicapped loading/unloading, handicapped bathrooms, handicapped halls, and handicapped elevators. 11. Other Supporting Information: A site plan of the subject property accompanies this narrative. This plan is based on the original 1988 Preliminary Site Plan for the Mountainwood Special Use Permit which was approved by the County. The realignment for Old Lynchburg Road is depicted thereon. RECEIVED APR 24 1995 April 24, 1995 ~';·~:~~:~~~,:~....Utll\T\/ · 3 · ':\,'.r.... r--!:"'-,r ----fí"~f\r- e (ATTACHMENT D I ,~ \\ Page 2 May 18, 1995 Mr. Ron S. Keeler Rezonings e e SP-95-16 The Covenant School. Route 780 The maximum of 400 students has potential for 800 peak hour trips, therefore left and right turn lanes are required. If a traffic study can show different splits, the left turn requirement may be reduced to recommended. However, for safety of such intense peak hour trips it would be strongly encouraged to have a protected left turn lane. This entrance is in close proximity. to turning movements for Sherwood Manor Complex. Sight easements will be rëquired of 350' on each side of entrance. The vegetation along this embankment will need to be kept at a minimum height to achieve sight distance. ZMA-95-06 Forest Lakes Associates. Route 29 The transportation network should support this development. ' We are recommending that the south entrance have a minimum iOO' taper with 30' entrances and 25' radii. ZMA-95-07 Rio Associates Limited Partnership. Route 29 N. We recommend that the proffers not be changed to allow additional traffic. It is inevitable that a traffic signal will be needed at some-point at the Kegler's cross-over, however it appears that additional vehicle trip generation will reduce the level of service at this location. A traffic study should be made to determine a traffic signal need and the developer to install if needed. All access should be onto the road leading into Kegler's. If direct access is allowed onto Route 29, it will have to be right in and right out, which will create U-Turn movements at the Woodbrook signal. ZMA-95-08 Georqe Clark. Route 29 This was addressed in site plan comments for Site Review Meeting of May 11. 1995. We recommend that Lots 2 & 3 only have one access, either to Route 29 or Route 779. If the access is onto Route 29 at the cross-over, the access onto Route 779 should be closed. An access onto Route 779 will require sight distance improvements. Lots 1 & 4 should be accessed to Route 779. EASTER ASSOCIATES INCORPORATED 630 Country Green Lane, Charlottesville, V A 22902-6478 804-977-3716; Fax: 804-979-2439 RECEIVE[) June 13, 1995 JUI~ 1 5 1995 p'-:)tlnìn""J Dt..ìï"·· . -.. .. ,.. . b '-' ;--' 1. County of Albemarle Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesvi-lle, Virginia 22902 Subject: SP-95-16 The Covenant School Dear Commission Members: Thank you very much for notifying me as an adjoining property owner of the special permit request by The Covenant School for the property that has been the Mountainwood Drug Rehabilitation facility. It has been a concern to us in the neighborhood that this facility was vacant for so long; therefore, we were delighted to learn that The Covenant School wishes to locate on the property. I feel that this is a very appropriate use for the land and buildings that now exist and feel that The Covenant School will be a great addition to the immediate community. Therefore, I urge your approval qf this petition. ..-.. Òì PE/rs Trade & Professional Association Management Legislative Representation Member of: Insti¡ute of Association Management Companies . American Society of Association Executives . Virginia Society of Assoclatibn Executives I '44- ¿~~-\--1.-\,1~-<) PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. I?~ Z_ %--- IDe.¡ ('2A,tJf::L,'N Glv qì 1-6579 2. 3. 4. \ 1\. (' \1 Å l \ \ ~o\ '0\ \\)2_ (\ \ : I' \\,-~-, ÍJ" ~'ì - (' ì,-J ' , /-' ó '" \ 5. u¡,~ 2,/;¿ 7]0? 177c-~,",f'o ~ ¡;-cIß 1.4 é/~j/r 6. CR illh (t¡U7 td?iTrv ~\{{ 1£0 k' 6~~æt6mJ IL 7. f[ì~~ (, LruL '97/--77£5 8. JtJ(o-ó(t.f~ ~ vD 0 t-c-W £ci ' (h-~ \ l~ ~av~o~J g, -Lf).SY 9. / 1 'O';d}/) I ., ~ . ;¡ f~ I I \Vj,1 /'.¡) '-.?, ¿/J ',;1:// .' , /) l ',r' h7 ".....7-¿ cr / ",--, ' -;I /'-.J~ ,- / 11. /-'.... r ,r'- //'J " , / // 1·2 //, .'. /, ,", p, \~~. :-.¿ ( ( .',,, , ~ .. , 13. ;Í-:~S.J 11'1 r,ðt¡!cL C/ ~ 14:ßóOk..J--~ òf~~ I~¡"D ~ (51, 15. '~ L lJ.u¿zI 72/5 t:.~1:. . -, I' ; ,:" '....,,_..J ') ¡ ::") " {j 17/ t jJ ( 177- J99T) q1(-~/2 f.£a¡~ '7 J l q )qJ PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. Ml\(k L. ~(kt\>1 2. flo.,;w LR· ~ 3. (!~j( tJwf)¡'rt 6f(5 7á-VlV1ers ~fùtt¿ EÚJ/ s{)¡/Je ¡Ja...JJ /; 1l3-CJ7¿,c-;¿ 4. ~ (~ *eÜ ;¡¡" 36 J ~ec'i£«. ~ CÚ-dle., ('9.;. w"f"?;t.(];;VI.\ 2Qr;, .q'/ú4 5./)^~ þ: ~II . p~ ß~ ~S~q~ V~3ì -;l..uz.... 6.' c-I"€ -l. )} ~/ /56S ð0¿ , F '-/ ~{. /' j, Iv.,,¿Lc(;p'-¿!v/ 29) 65j/ n "---\{\ n ;r . \ I l:1. t4 3 7. ~ a ~. ~ì'l5 /fIc.Zt'1;- DiLl rt c..fIl ;,1!e.. jI.. 91/- me, I j U·· ! " "·1," ". \_..,... .' i / ' " , ,f ,f"" ~ 8. '. / i ! ! \..r ; / /. . ,. :.-:., f I; 6 '.! ! " f'. - .' ~_. (I _' '.! ( ~ "' II d \ (Z \ J):( Oe,Jq LAíÛ , C k 'v,d If ~l10 , q¿J' -I tf 2-} ~~fl ~Óß'X)R.rJ. Ch'~ VA- a~qo ~S:(¿,87r¡ '""' "',1 ~l~' 9. :;-;; ~ /oJ S J;,v þ- ~ &oIL ')} 2- :c '~) 1f",. J;j..1 if ~'- ;j.1C X.o T 10. -L"..;.. {L'-Jt,.! " - ;T ~,.'\fq (ÁJ_~' U~ lX, t, ;~ \l.t .)à,~o 3 '117- ~>fl ~4~ ',' .1// /),{~ . Ij 11. /tt~. . ! /lJ ,:)~()I.t ,-,hlfttUJl'¡./1ft ~ _ " 1<.- , ( / IIJ, ! J. ! )) i) () 3 {,1 77/ ? J- 3 {' f / '. j£l / - 12. 13. 14. 15. PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 40/ d q ". --~V ~d- 5. (~ S ~ RJ 5 1'k~J7-J> 2j¿))U ~~ (r7J7675~ ~¥~ tw/~ ~~ 5295-0103 7. ß ~ ;;¡"I ~t-_1 ~ ~ -..""" 8. qJ~ 0 9. ~ ~QdJ.- 3/8 f41fi/ I2r/ (,If~ 10. i I I 1. ð"MJ.~i) G"chjJ'lJ ~ 1!(515\iT1w~ Ct, C.tw~ I \~ ~ ..../1 2. I ~£ ~2 /c.'/~ .JÞrz:yßßh!OfJCJ () I (,' 1)';_Lf'~ 3. J~ 1 . ') 1<-{oci (,~/~~ RJ. cA~/It-(lt!t 'zqç,- 40'7-S c; 7/ -,/7 i / 4. e ()J f n ¿ç;nëA 311:,0 A\..t-t\..t""'''' w~ Ù(':~ c L...at lò+te.5v: lie cr78 -'"'/ b 8 I" 973-Jf613 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1.)1lVtltéJ,w"J~A~ 3&06 ~Mh~L?~ T~ 2. ~ß'df P.1'flk1vu:J.;Lu ~Â:gqOI 3. ~ þ, ~ ~o'l p~#> CA'v7l!.¿ Uk 4. cPe/Q ttft~ /7/f So!O(tJtr11!J.. ~''i()/ f7/~Q~ 5. ~ltõfl U200fu I) 1-=1- \ 1\ So ID '" ,,"-'Y. fANfY1<. 2 -;) 11> 1 f7J- /,15"1 &- 6. }f~ ~ ~I~ w_~ ~\I ~;:).qol 7 .jy¡.£I~ ~~' . ;;/-1;;0 "vJ4r,"'" , ?,il ,'hot. 221~ I . 2B5 -1 i!O '" 8. I'f My LeD l J "" ì P u)<ó It J ¿¡ ,t'h, v-W l ct. !\JoY" lL ~~ un 2f{ 3 - 6~cc 9. J q j - (~J 7/ , 977- 6'1-&9 9'ìQ- 5/fq5 ~b':-1 <go ~ 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. PIITJTION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County·s full support and approval of The Covenant Schoors special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area·s elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The Schoors record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name 1 <;ß:¡¿ e (/t lu__ A O!." 2. }'{~__Þff'-V - ',-->-- 3. 4. 7. 8. It t L 9. l_~' / ,.1 /7 ¡J 10., ,J ~AiuØ- ----or -.J~ - - 1/ -/ 1~-' ,,":. 11. I~ /'" !, _' ' 12. /ltbfV}~ (;JtLzJ . 13. ;fo¡,.,,, --r:- a,,~ 14. 15. Address Telephone ~. -{3 ð 799 "2-~~ Go (j)'-'I d ~ f C' (." Il 1 1/1- '1...-7 {r 'I0l'7'7 L'L C! pc\.~· L-, ( '- j/ l{'\ (~ .,/ I ! !-<. q "7 'd Y -~: ?_ $10 ~ AiJ" k. é;(~; T ,-- ! 171- '13 tJ ð' I ., f D.~ '1058~ 3)7 f(¡.J¡/kJ Uk / {1't ~ 5 rD Ire r<d.. Cv¿ ~(~{ if r+ 9&/- OJ "!> ~'ll-<.f gf.}! I . PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. .J//Cr/I VjlldVl~~ CT C~\j,J)\2 c ~·--5 d 5- 2. O)a~ DolG.o!-t:af¿.J 6//G ÞU!.umtO/tZ 9it¿IA1 £'!â'7Jitb,9(3-/0/10 3. /ifw·jca. 6nd.(}Yl'{Û-~(JIlAA(13/S? &aUfYYJí'1T fq,;nRd, Ch'v/lo Q'¡3--3/=tf aJJAQ M~J J 0 ~ ~ {~OJ( Z (y íFÚ ~ ~ 6. ~-1:~~Q.{ 3743 ft"'1\'-I\e.;Ú~ ~r) ~<O?:> ~ =~;(~~ . '... l \,-<. 1''1- 61q:o q18-754Lf qlß -)Stf1 9. ,~9.:T ~Jf l;¿ 13. 14. 15. I . PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1 < ;5~,v/; j';:'/i ¿f:l / h ¡¿,/ .' / . ,r ;1 ( / l , ,'" r, . I . " ¡iI', r/ I ;' ! I.',·, I .j' ji 2 _/'f/~<?-/) i, "--l'-~.,t·,,'~_ ' ' ,-':'1)}' 3:/~£~ 5:0cLŸAl~J'=, 4. .~~ !7rJO W~ ~. \ .F/,' . l, ,/:: .\/. (, ," '--/¡ {" ~ i 5. y~hC lZ~~CAjC_', ,,\.-0.(':" c-lC.Oc' / C- jv-d' / þ /~ ~ .' , ,/,. ' ~ 1/ - fýtltJ 1 97/-goo7 'Í ~:;¡, c¡ 6. /1 > ",\__/1; V'/' , / ,>¡t)¿y, '''-.< ;,~ ;-"", /~( (I"~<I 1.~.1.,,:...-y ) ( ~ ..(-"/ :. ,/. Il' 7. -I "-", ,. --) ,,( o / _ . j L'~. " (:, ê' I.¡ ~- ~- i /_ ',~ /; .;)/,.}/ , j r:.... (. ,,~ ~ / --. I ," ,c J . -j: x::. 8. :/, ~ ¡~S·;.'>-. (. ¡ " --./, .. ~-",...""'--~ ", ro'--' ( " .I ,. ',-, / / /) ? J ~ ( / I 9. '. ../lJLI--< ( /~ <- //~d":~,.'--- /~"i".. i.i.! (I. ) 10 ,,' ...... . .' "J) v I, 1. : _. :::~~~¿' 21J;J; ~A.(')M~ ? 1 3. ~.2. 0 ~ ~.......t..... .:. S"3'7 J..I.II. },.... 'h . ¡ í Y'- '. 11/ t._~ I , , )" '¿' _ L.:J/Í,L/ .,..\' 2/l, - )77 ' 91/ð7f'/ «!1J/"3"''' 14. 15. , , PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. '>" , ; , ;." J /' .-<~; ,'- ,....... /Tf/ ::-' . . J f 2. ¡;~J/,1()()dif 5tJ (};u¿~ £,d 3. AI 6 ,.,.; fÎ. -r.S if "'_ 7 A· " i"/ / (> 7'" ~<>J .r ". 7 -.." "'. T ~--- ~7 ---- / / ./ V / /-7 4. ~ J~ ¡(.Jì. '7 13# J/./7D p~ ¡£ sgq-S-~l.f..9 5.;e Z ;¿ð..2d ~~~ ðv; c:vt~370h ~~ d 7:.3· r?r??9 6. /Ú?Ç// -37ìJ2... rcz7&111 / /-2901 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. · . PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. t~~/ Il, f,o-1"pd{l¡-~ ),,,!() / (~__"/; (/r ,~:,~,~ J ~~_¿1 -þ'_' J,. ") - q -'ê/- -.^¡ /',~ i j <~"'. "I-) / 2. f!;,J;¡cR~ lSoT¿rtJlRJ £>t- r!}v~& Z2'l{)( ) 3. ~1<.w:r '30Jvr¡~ßIt,. c.~ 2..211() 411/"''18'18 4. .It; ^:r (llfrl ix4' ,f!;;;y:J· F !bm.øwrkl{,1Æ Wr, /I/'flt 1'/!- ::JJZ7 /I) , ." /./' ('I' í' /I, VJ / ",' i y? I / /,- 1-"; r )" ! '(J r. ~ ,1 (~" : ¿. j" tj:<' f -- 4 .....--- , 7., r - 0 y 'I d-.... ::>,;2-Îé)! :;276" -3? ~s=- 9'17.-£.( (.,,3 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. . , . . PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1.L: ·C/ ! ','t_ t '-r 2 ~ú() /J, /( L' (., ~ ~ ~i -. / I 2.; y1"~' / . , ..J 3. ,. " 4. ,/ ÓÌ6'¿,. ..-9/c/4!'U'~~ tIP d d é),. 9ð'y ¿;¿ ~ - ¿¿9 F.,l../ \'1 JS ¡::IC.A,v\<..L-,1'o.) ÇJr, .<2£1 0 \ q 1 L - 4 () Z { 7. lC\.1Ç¡ f~r1./¡".¡}(/..IN iJ(lltlðJ 1. ~C¡ùl <77 -~"J"L), 8. 1/ I ii' i r , ( 9. /)' ..~~ ' , ./ . " /,/, /\,,- 1·'- " ." J ... c .' ., t j ! /L'/f:' . ) ~:. . , ."- -, 10. ~CU.Ul~ ~~. Q~ 61(;0 A'1"-4rv-,r, 11. f ~ ~iJ-n<.... IS:;Ö (:/ I I I 12..r t·.r \rJoo,-). ~ D é· 2. 2..')0 I ':> 78 - 4<-;84- ^ ;), 'd10 ( q,-:¡ Q. //:' .0., , , ::;-- .' ~ :::J,.~ .' c..} 13. 14. 15. .. .. . PETITION. To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone 1. ~;-~ ' .' .') II '- 1.1 /v..· , t'Î ! , ! ': 2. \~¿A~ D!~){Îl ::,?~, \ ".... ./ I. 5. ,~--,-} I C/V-"Zl I n r- Q> , ~\ 1 (1 n,y-!", I.....Ji'L , ¡ q 1,-) 0--, d (/ ~..,;- 970 ROUU~ q7¿; lþc . LM. 1 .1 / (. (/~I!J""r~; q~1 - ßB4-0 fJ7/-fflfÞ / i)- . ) L > 6. l -, .-, l / .. .' /G- -/ L/ A..·,/{/IIA d . 'I/l-L ' .- " I v ~ , . ~ \ i.. / . /.J- /-- ' f/vL -:t'<.. } ,'y ;¡'1;:¡ , ? / ::-j /-~. /- ) < . '- 7. ~~-/ ¡) '~---' 8. I!~,~"þ /7ð&. ~/~__ -æ"-r- //£Jt. fÁ;~IV_d ¿-1 qrrf'-/o'1Ço 77F~/iJ7~ 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. . 1 I . PETITION To: Members of the Planning Commission Members of the Board of Supervisors I respectfully request Albemarle County's full support and approval of The Covenant School's special use permit application to use the former Mountain- wood property for a private school. The Covenant School provides the area's elementary and high school-aged children with an extraordinary educational opportunity. The School's record of achievement over the past ten years speaks for itself. The Mountainwood site has excellent access and the facility is very well suited for utilization for private school purposes. Name Address Telephone '/'j, / .' 1 :~__" / ,~/ i-P-J ~ ~\i\V\¡J .'J ~_, 0 '1 ~\ 3. p~- \\), ~"Î \-c ~)A- 4. ~Pc.'·"--../ \". '. () . /'i, ( / " L,) " ),'. ( . . . . ." I ~- ,'- j' > . ~:..'!- .../.-z. . -.,'~. '-( " ,. "'\I;.')'\"( :).: ':,j.' , \0(0 '( c~ ~ 1 /" I .~ ./ ".,>," ¿cs.ö \ ~ \ ~ . 'l<b 7. ~ \, . ,. (. \.A .\ \<,," ])<¡() I cn'( .. ~':/ 5 -~'\' . (',j ~o ' ., --J \ ~~ \.. "J ~! ' I', "., .J ) ./ ~ 6. ~~, /' ) C';¡ .~, " J . ) :'cJ-./ <6í;L /\ ft-. ::2::<. 7 Q / ~(!! 77/-/ g?>y qt/ - #fo/ 7. .._, '.:) ,I' .". \ ""_, ':) \, \ \ ~ r \. ) ~~. . '= ("Yi..QQ\(I.')C)'"X") J','''" /.'t, ,'it ~_:i' ,. ~ ,J'!// 0a; ):1,! OJ 315 "'/ Cß /-ff'lA.., ~ W6-t C...P7fi2.{þ-rr(;'j 1/'(.0' ~c¡ ç- 'ß £) /455 ()/j {)Lil/c.tyc! Kj, C/,aJ~/tsuJJz Z 7)-3711 ~lUØ/~'(!~~/!@~~-?~j;; uR9/;'-:5'1'<f-/ 7 ÚI?M1{!J £i I C /-(h t)~ I 72 q D8 ZCj (p~oLJc; & :<~ )2 ~ ff), (j¡ ~~ ;l2 9õ I 973 ~5~ ¡ tD "':J/' .. ,I iF _ 20 q ,I 10; 11.æuÙ~ 12. /f~L/ /.Lf. ' 13. ~~?11~~1 /~f:> 14. &A;;¿l./!/',) 15. ilbß-4.4, ~XA ·, , I j¡:;lribufed to Boird' '7-/<£-7S- . T "-:.- Aí~·'::1. Itp.m No. _ 9 ~ -: () ?/?'S-6~ 1.....w.,.. June 30, 1995 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of PI~nning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 -5 I Edward D. Campbell Roudabush, Gale & Associates, Inc 914 Monticello Rd Charlottesville, V A 22901 RE: ZMA-95-09 Sam Enterprises Dear Mr. Campbell: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on June 27, 1995, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note thåt this approval is subject to proffers as outlined in letter dated June 15, 1995, and signed by Preston Stallings (copy attached). Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on July 19. 1995. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, ~J~ Ronald A. Lilley (] Senior Planner RAL/jcw > cc~rey Jo Higgins Amelia McCulley Sam Enterprises, LLC · t J ¡ATTACHMENT 81 I Page 11 PROFFER STATEMENT: IN SUPPORT OF REZONING REQUEST DATE: JUNE IS, 1995 RE : ZMA - 95 - 9 TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 96 AND TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 108 81.83 ACRES TO BE REZONED FROM R-1 TO R-4 Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (I) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. References in these conditions to "the plan" are to the attached plan titled "General Development Plan" and dated April 24, 1995, with revisions through June 13, 1995. 1. Owner will reserve a 120 foot strip of land in the approximate if locat~on sho,":Jn on the plan as "Potential 240/250,Connector Road"~ and wlll dedlcate upon demand of the County J ·t1hlS reserved areD<J to public use without compensation. Reservation of the reserved area shall not be deemed to prohibit the owner from constructing roadways in the reserved area in a manner which would not interfere with future construction of the connector road, or making other temporary use of the reserved area not inconsistent with such construction. No residential driveways will access directly into the 120 foot right-of-way with the exception of the relocation access to Tax Map 56-96A. 2. Owner will reserve a 50-foot wide "Greenway" along each side of Lickinghole Creek as shown on the plan within the boundaries of Tax Map 56 Parcel 96. The owner does not proffer to maintain the Greenway, but rather the Greenway Area, at such time as the County of Albemarle commits to establish and maintain a public area, park or pathway, and assumes responsibility for maintenance thereof, will upon request of Albemarle County, be dedicated by the owner{s) or its successors to the County, subject to the right of use for residents living on the property. The proffer shall not be interpreted to prohibit the location of utilities, storm sewer or stormwater control devices or easements in the Greenway. 3. Development will be limited to a maximum of 190 single-family attached, detached and townhouses units. These units will be located approximately in the areas shown on the plan. The maximum average lot size will be 15,000 square feet. Page 2 June 15, 1995 Preston Stallings ¡ATTACHMENT BI r Page 2 J 4. Internal roads on the property will be located approximately as shown on the plan. Additional internal roads will be located pursuant to normal subdivision review. 5. The possibility that a four-lane road will be constructed within the reserved area shall be clearly disclosed in the subdivision covenants a. nd restrictions and on the subdivision pla~~~ l-ots adj':lOcnt -t,.e -t;.he. 21.0/.z50 connoctðr rcocr'Ve'd ~~r'àa:.W 6. The owner or Home Owners Association will plant, at such time the "potential 240/250 connector road" is built, two rows of white pine trees 15 feet on center (four to ¡ive feet tall) along both edges of the "potential 240/250 connector road" right-of-way only in areas contiguous with single family attached or detached as is shown on the plan. Submitted by: ~4't\ I!;fÆ~ reston Sta lings Managing Partner SAM Enterprises, L.L.C. ~~71)-?5 ate e e e . " STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: RON LILLEY JUNE 27, 1995 JULY 19, 1995 ZMA 95-09. Sam Entemrises (Con' Farm) Applicant's Proposal: The applicant proposes to develop single family detached residences, possibly mixed with single family attached dwelling units, with some common areas and open space primarily around environmentally sensitive areas. A general plan of development has been provided, with the major features of the plan being proffered. The number of units is proffered to be limited to 190 units, with a maximum lot size being established to help prevent underutilization of the Growth Area. The development would be served by public water and sewer and by public roads. The plan provides for access from Route 250 by way of a road that would ultimately be part of the proposed Route 240/Route 250 Connector shown in the Comprehensive Plan, and right-of-way for the Connector Road through the parcel is being proffered. Petition: To rezone approximately 82 acres from R-l (1 dwelling unit per acre) to R-4 (4 dwelling units per acre), with proffers. The property, described as Tax Map 56, Parcels 96 and 108, is located to the north of u.S. Route 250, between the Blue Ridge Building Supply store and the Route 635 intersection in the Crozet Community, in the White Hall Magisterial District (see Attachment A). This site is within the Crozet Community Growth Area, with a designated land use of Low Density Residential (1 to 4 dwelling units per acre). Character of the Area: This site is not actively used at present and contains substantial cleared areas, some wooded areas, and areas of steep slopes and floodplain associated with Lickinghole Creek which runs through the northern portion of the site. The surrounding area contains a variety of land uses, with some single family residential uses as well as some farming uses on either side of and across the street from the subject parcels and a commercial area about 1/3 mile east of these parcels. Plannin!!: and Zonin~ History: There have been no rezoning or special use permit applications for this property. Comprehensive Plan: This property is part of the Crozet Community Growth Area and is recommended for Low Density Residential use, with the proposed new Route 240/Route 250 Connector running through this property. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and finds that the rezoning can be supported and recommends approval. 1 e e - " STAFF COMMENT: The proposed zoning is in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan with respect to the land use recommendation. The plan for the physical development of the property has been assessed with respect to the other aspects of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and is addressed below. Comprehensive Plan Issues: Aside from conformance with the basic land use designation, issues to address for this proposal include its compatibility with existing and planned infrastructure, the overall density expected to be achieved, and protection of the environmentally sensitive areas associated with this site. Regarding compatibility with existing and planned infrastructure, the applicant has proffered to accommodate the proposed Route 240/Route 250 Connector shown in the Comprehensive Plan (proffers are provided as Attachment B). Although construction of the new road is not currently planned, it is shown in the Comprehensive Plan as an alternative to upgrading the existing Route 240 (Crozet Avenue), so it is important that it be provided for. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) is expected to provide a cost estimate and/or feasibility study of upgrading the existing Route 240 (Crozet Avenue) in the near future, which may provide the impetus for this alternative to be pursued more vigorously. Based on preliminary schematics, staff opinion is that upgrade of existing Route 240 through Crozet to current VDOT standards may be undesirable. The proposed alignment through this property is a bit different from that shown in the Connector Road alignment study, but appears to be a reasonable variation and has not been deemed problematic by VDOT. The General Development Plan provided by the applicant (see Attachment C) brings the Connector Road right-of-way a bit further west (100 to 200 feet) than shown in the Connector Road alignment study, which prevents the demolition of a house on an adjoining parcel. As proposed, a small part of the Connector Road right-of-way would need to come from the adjoining parcel. Staff notes that it would be easier and cheaper for the County to acquire all the necessary right-of- way for the Co~ector Road if it were all on the applicant's property, which could be accomplished with a relatively small shift of the right-of-way to the west, however this could adversely impact the number of lots achievable on this property, would represent a bit more divergence from the right-of-way shown in the alignment study, and would provide less sight distance to the west along Route 250. The plan and proffers also provide for a "greenway" along Lickinghole Creek as recommended in the Comprehensive Plan and Crozet Community Study. It should be noted that the Code of Virginia relating to proffers says, in essence, that when a substantial contribution to a facility whose need is not caused solely by the rezoning (such as the 240/250 Connector Road) is accepted as a proffer, then the property becomes immune 2 , . e from downzoning. This is not seen as problematic for this case, but is pointed out for informational purposes. e Regarding the overall density expected to be achieved with this development, a fairly broad range of units has been provided for by the applicant, with a maximum of 190 being proffered and a maximum average lot size also being proffered to prevent underutilization of the Growth Area. In general, the Growth Areas are intended to capture the majority of development in the County and achieving- overall densities toward the higher end of the recommended density range is encouraged, provided that overall densities are compatible with the local environment, the availability of public facilities and utilities, and the character of development in the vicinity. In this case, those factors tend to mitigate "against trying to achieve the higher end of the recommended density range. At approximately 82 acres, achieving 4 units per acre overall would result in approximately 326 units and, since approximately half of the property is lost to critical slopes and floodplain and substantial additional area is lost to the Connector Road right of way, this number of units would require upwards of 8 units per acre in the areas that could be developed. Much of the developable area of this property does not lend itself to such densities because of the extensive grading that would be necessary. Also, such densities and the necessary housing types to achieve them would be significantly different from the character of development in the vicinity of this site. Based on the developable area delineated on the plan (approximately 35 acres), the proposed maximum average lot size is estimated to yield a minimum of about 70 lots after factoring in area needed for roads. The applicant has not yet determined whether this development would include units other than single family detached. The burden that the proposed development would place on Route 250 and on the local schools should also be addressed. Based on the estimated range of units, traffic generation would range from 700 to 1113 trips per day, all of which would use Route 250. Based on the most recent counts available (1993), Route 250's design capacity (6100 VTPD) would allow for about 400 additional trips per day. Based on these figures, the traffic generated by the proposed range of units would put Route 250 at 105% to 111 % of its design capacity. VDOT is recommending turn lanes onto and off of Route 250 to support this development (the VDOT comments are provided as attachment E). The projected traffic load for Route 250 for the year 2010 is 7116, at which point 4 lanes are recommended. The need for a traffic signal will be assessed as subdivision plats are submitted, but is not expected to be warranted based on the proposed range of units. As for schools, based on present district boundaries this development would be served by Brownsville Elementary, Hewey Middle, and Western Albemarle High, all of which have current enrollment exceeding capacity. System-wide, there are similar capacity constraints at many schools that are being addressed by the School Board and Board of Supervisors. While these constraints do not imply that growth should not continue to be accommodated in the designated growth areas, they may indicate that the maximum achievable density based on the recommended densities called for in the land use plan is not appropriate in this case. e 3 e e e . , The estimated range of the number of units to be developed would result in an overall density of from about 0.85 to about 2.3 units per acre. Given the characteristics of the property, available infrastructure, and the vicinity, and providing for some flexibility as to what unit types can be supported, the proposed range appears compatible with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. The Albemarle County Service Authority has indicated that adequate water and sewer capacity exists to support the proposed development. Regarding the protection of environmentally sensitive areas associated with this site, the Open Space Plan identifies Lickinghole Creek stream valley, with associated floodplain and èritical slopes as significant resources which should be protected. The General Development Plan submitted in support of this rezoning provides for the protection of these resources. These and other aspects of the General Development Plan are discussed in more detail under the following section of this report as physical development issues. Physical Development: In terms of the general development plan provided with this proposal, there are a few site design issues that should be noted. The plan indicates the approximate locations for development, which for the most part remain out of the critical slopes. As shown, portions of some lots may encroach onto the critical slopes to a relatively minor degree, but a suitable building area outside of the critical slopes, including area for yard grading, will be ensured for each lot at the subdivision stage. The road crossing Lickinghole Creek to access the rear of this parcel would require a special use permit under current regulations, and it should be made clear that if this rezoning is approved, there is no guarantee or implication that such a special use permit would be granted. Staff recommends including a statement to that effect with any approval action on - this request. Since this development would be potentially near a major rural collector road, buffering from the road should be addressed. The applicant is proffering to provide a double row of pines between the residences and the Connector Road, which should help maintain the livability of the development and the efficiency of the Connector Road. An existing house on the property was included in a survey of historic properties, but the survey report does not indicate any particular significance of the structure or property. There does not appear to be any special reason to try to save the structure. 4 e e e , í . , ~ Route 250 is a designated Entrance Corridor, so any development other than one or two family dwelling units within 500 feet of Route 250 will be subject to review by the Architectural Review Board. DeveloDment Impact to Public Facilities: At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the pianning staff reviews rezoning requests for their fiscal impact on public and transportation facilities. This analysis is limited to those rezonings that have some effect on facilities that are identified in our Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or Six Year Road Plan and have a cost associated with them. The analysis is based on the fair share determination of a particular development's impact on affected facilities. It must be pointed out that this analysis is cursory, due to the lack of information on revenues attributable to this development. The cost outlined by staff only indicates the proportionate share of construction costs from the additional development generated by the rezoning over by-right development. This analysis is based on 190 units, which has been proffered as the maximum number of units for this development and assumes that all of those units would be single family attached. The by-right development on these two parcels is 12 dwelling units, so a development of 190 dwelling units represents 178 units more than would be allowed by right. Based on average household size and occupancy rate, this development would generate approximately 361 more persons than would be generated by 12 dwelling units. Based on typical student generation factors, this development would generate approximately 74 additional elementary school students, 34 additional middle school students, and 41 additional high school students over those generated from by-right development. The following are those facilities which will be affected by the rezoning request and have a cost associated with them: A. Schools This development would be served by Brownsville Elementary School, Henley Middle School, and Western Albemarle High School. Schools affected by this proposal which have costs identified in the CIP are: Project Scheduled Cost Brownsville Elementary Improvements Western Albemarle High School Improvements $1,299,470 $2,897,500 5 e e e , ; Based on the estimated additional students generated by this development and the proportion of students to school capacities, costs associated with this extra development are $511,148, or $2,690 per dwelling unit. B. Libraries This proposal is considered to be in the service area of the Crozet Branch Library, which has no scheduled improvements, so no additional capital costs should be associated with this development. C. Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation facilities affected by this development which have costs identified in the CIP are: Protect Crozet Park Scheduled Cost $ 150,000 Based on the proportionate impact to these facilities, costs associated with this extra development are $5,415, or $28.50 per dwelling unit. PROPORTIONAL COST PER PROJECTS TOTAL COST SHARE OF ADDITIONAL ($) ADDED DUs DU ($) ($) Brownsville Elementary Improvements 1,299,470. 397,358. 2091.36 West. Alb. High School Improvements 2,897,500. 113,790. 598.89 Crozet Park Improvements 150,000. 5,415. 28.50 TOTALS 4,346,970.00 516,563.00 2,718.75 6 e e e , ¡ Consideration of the fiscal impact of the development needs to be balanced against considerations of the County's growth management policy and other County policies. Excessive development exactions could have the effect of discouraging utilization of the holding capacity of area, and thus, lead to accelerated development in the Rural Areas. SUMMARY: In summary, this proposal is in line with the Comprehensive Plan goal of containing the vast majority of residential development within designated growth areas even though this site does not lend itself to development at the upper end of the recommended range for the low-density residential designation. The range of the expected number of units to be developed, while fairly broad, appears compatible with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan, given the characteristics of the property, available infrastructure, and the vicinity, and providing for some flexibility as to what unit types can be supported. This proposal provides for the Route 240/250 Connector Road identified in the Plan as well as for a "greenway" along Lickinghole Creek and the preservation of the critical slopes identified in the Open Space Plan. Staff opinion is that this rezoning request can be supported. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval of this rezoning request with the attached proffers, noting that approval does not guarantee or imply approval of any special use permit necessary for the stream crossing indicated on the General Development Plan. ---------------- ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map wi Zoning B - Applicant's Proffers C - General Development Plan D - Applicant's text E - VDOT comments I:\general\share\lilley\zma95-09.rpt 7 · ¡ ALBEMARLE COUN~ 40 _ I 92 _55 17C _ 25 ..---- --- 25 ZMA-95-09 Sam Enterorises 72 v v,-/,' 100 . , -=-=-- SCALE It FEE T ... '0.0 1400 __.._=:..J WHITE HALL DISTR ICT SECTION 56 ALBEMARLE COUNTY ATTACHMENT AI I Page 21 . . 40 - R4 e I . ~ I I I I I 11 I 11< '. I , "'- ~ --r~ ý. \,~ IIJ ._ '(;ALE.. fEET .-r_ _~- '!:--..:r.. ~~r WHITE HALL DISTR lOT SECTION . 56 PAGE NUMBER 19 · . e PROFFER STATEMENT: IN SUPPORT OF REZONING REQUEST I ATTACHMENT BI I Page 1\ DATE: JUNE 15, 1995 RE: ZMA-95-9 TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 96 AND TAX MAP 56 PARCEL 108 81.83 ACRES TO BE REZONED FROM R-1 TO R-4 Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested. References in these conditions to "the plan" are to the attached plan titled "General Development Plan" and dated April 24, 1995, with revisions through June 13, 1995. 1. Owner will reserve a 120 foot strip of land in the approximate location shown on the plan as "Potential 240/250 Connector Road" and will dedicate upon demand of the County. This reserved area to public use without compensation. Reservation of the reserved area shall not be deemed to prohibit the owner from constructing roadways in the reserved area in a manner which would not interfere with future construction of the connector road, or making other temporary use of the reserved area not inconsistent with such construction. No residential driveways will access directly into the 120 foot right-of-way with the exception of the relocation access to Tax Map 56-96A. e 2. Owner will reserve a 50-foot wide "Greenway" along each side -of Lickinghole Creek as shown on the plan within the boundaries of Tax Map 56 Parcel 96. The owner does not proffer to maintaïn the Greenway, but rather the Greenway Area, at such time as the County of Albemarle commits to establish and maintain a public area, park or pathway, and assumes responsibility for maintenance thereof, will upon request of Albemarle County, be dedicated by the owner(s) or its successors to the County,· subject to the right of use for residents living on the property. The proffer shall not be interpreted to prohibit the location of utilities, storm sewer or stormwater control devices or easements in the Greenway. 3. Development will be limited to a maximum of 190 single-family attached, detached and townhouses units. These units will be located approximately in the areas shown on the plan. The maximum average lot size will be 15,000 square feet. e e e - . . I ATTACHMENT B I , Page 2 , Page 2 June 15, 1995 Preston Stallings 4 . Internal roads on the property will be located approximately as shown on the plan. Additional internal roads will be located pursuant to normal subdivision review. 5. The possibility that a four-lane road will be copstructed within the reserved area shall be clearly disclosed in the subdivision covenants and restrictions and on the subdivision plat for all lots adjacent to the 240/250 connector reserved area. 6. The owner or Home Owners Association will plant, at such time the "potential 240/250 connector road" is built, two rows of white pine trees 15 feet on center (four to ¡ive feet tall) along both edges of the "potential 240/250 connector road" right-of-way only in areas contiguous with single family attached or detached as is shown on the plan. Submitted by: ~Z'1l ~~:r restc;)ll Sta lings ManagJ.ng Partner SAM Enterprises, L.L.C. ~-71)-C¡5 ate . ; IATTACHMEN~ I , , I e ª I __=-' Z JI13N9'1H :.. t I I ..':' Ole .a .'" ..z ~o I-N e K: .~ !~,,; I·~ OC ;1 I:; ~~ ~~I if" ;:.1 ~~u ,iI." r~ "a cll. ..... .. c 5!! i~~ aN . . .11: .a ..'" ..z ~o I-N e ( ¡ ( ¡: ~ ! : i. :. ,1:/ ~ ¡~ §: f=:¡ æ ~ N S (] ~ ~ :i :D ~ '-2:.... ~~~ ~ (,Jto-..... ~ ~~~~::; ~~lu~~ Qg¡vja~ c.. L,Ht: -' ..q; I.u-JI.U Lu-,~~-J ;i~~~~ ..,,;;;èi:'~:D ....'" ~'- ~Luvi ..-. ~l.L.a:~C) r.tJ~~~«i ""':tCl.Lu <l1li:[ a ::. :t: g..q;Q: t..J a: ~ ~ , lO CO C\j""T co~ ~c::. ......,J ltJ~ ~~ l.t..t-;: · . e CORY FARM PHASED DEVELOPMENT ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA REZONING APPLICATION APRIL 24, 1995 PREPARED FOR: S.A.M., L.L.C. e PREPARED BY: ROUDABUSH, GALE & ASSOC., INC. 914 MONTICELLO ROAD CHARLOTTESVILLE, VA 22901 e 'ATTACHMENT D' \ Page 1\ · . e e e 1. I ATTACHMENT D I l Page 2] PROJECT DESCRIPTION The purpose of this request is to rezone two parcels totaling 81.83 acres within the Crozet Growth Area boundary. The property consists of Parcel 96 and Parcel 108 of Tax Map 56. Parcel 96 contains 65.87 acres and is zoned R-1. It is proposed to be rezoned to R-4. Parcel 108 contains 15.955 acres and is zoned R-1. It is also proposed to be rezoned to R-4. It is the intent of the applicant to de"'{elop both parcels as parts of a common development, and that development will be carried out in phases. The comprehensive plan land use designation shows low density (R1-R4) for this property. At the R-4 density level, this development has a maximum of 326 residential units (15.955 acres X 4 D.U./Ac. + 65.87 acres X 4 D.U./AC.) Both parcels may be developed in mixed, Single-Family detached, Townhouse, Single Family attached and other uses permitted under Section 15.2.1. Space has been reserved for the proposed alignment of the Route 240/250 connector road and required stormwater detention for Parcel 108. A contribution to the Regional Lickinghole detention basin is anticipated for Parcel 96. Water service for this project would enter the site from the western edge of Parcel 108 along Route 250. This waterline will be an extension of the water service at the existing Route 240/250 intersection. This parcel lies along an entrance corridor and development is subj ect to review by the Architectural Review Board. Sanitary sewer service can be accomplished by using the existing Crozet Interceptor Sewer near Lickinghole Creek. Land is reserved for a "Greenway" along Lickinghole Creek as proposed in the "Crozet Community Study." As proposed in that study, the developer anticipates maintenance of the "Greenway" to be performed by the County Parks and Recreation Department or by volunteer groups. Portions of the Northern part of this parcel (Labeled "Future Development" on the application plan) would be constructed after the 240/250 Connector and/or Park Road extension is constructed. PURPOSE AND INTENT The intent of this attractive and infrastructure as ordinance, in an Comprehensive Plan development is to provide a convenient, harmonious community with adequate described in Section 1.4 of the zoning area designated for development in the as part the Crozet Growth Area. e RELATION TO ENVIRONMENT l ATTACHMENT D J (Page 3] This development is in keeping with lands that are similarly situated and already developed in the area, while conserving natural resources and floodplain areas. By allowing for some flexibility in housing types described in Section 8.5.6.3 of the ordinance, this development is in accord with Section 1.5 of the zoning ordinance by considering " the trends of growth and change..." and ".. .the requirements of the community for ... housing. ..". RELATION TO COMPREHENSIVE PLAN As proposed in the comprehensive plan, this development an area designed as part of the Crozet Growth Area, services and utilities available. It is an accord Section 1.6 of. the zoning ordinance. is in with with Summary e This development proposes a mixed housing strategy while protecting a considerable area of wooded slopes and floodplain, effectively creating a "cluster" development. The proposed "Greenway" provides valuable recreational space to the community and the allowance for the 240/250 connector road provides space for road infrastructure as proposed by the existing Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. Residential densities are in keeping with the intent of the Comprehensive Plan. e - - . . . e ..J < § ¡,¡.¡ E- o ¡:¡.. ..Jt/:) ~t: oZ E-::> I ATTACHMENT D I ¡Page 5\ ..J ;S ~ ¡,¡.¡ E- ot/:) ~E- E-- OZ E-::> 10 N r<"J o 00 ..J ..J < < - - ~ t/:) ~ t/:) ¡,¡.¡ E- ¡,¡.¡ E- E- Z E- Z r<"J 0 ::> .,... .,... 0 ::> r<"J 10 ¡:¡.. - 10 ¡:¡.. ION e e t/:) ¡,¡.¡ E: - t/:) Z ¡,¡.¡ o ..J < § ¡,¡.¡ o - t/:) ¡,¡.¡ ~ > - d Z Z o N ~ ¡,¡.¡ ~ ~ ::> u -- ~~ Z ~~ ~ti) ~Z O¡,¡.¡ -.:t-.:t UO ~~ t/:) ¡,¡.¡ ~ U < .,... .,...r-- ~oc¡ .,... .,... - 10 .,... .,... r-- 0\ 00 ".;".; - 10 ..J ¡,¡.¡ U ~ ~ ¡:¡.. < ~ ~ 00 010 - 0\ ~J:> .,... .,... 00 010 - 0\ I , 10 10 .,... .,... .' J .. e I ATTACHMENT EI "'DoT Cot-\~e:Nf5 Page 3 May 18, 1995 Mr. Ron S. Keeler Rezonings ZMA-95-09 Sam Enterprises. L.L.C. Route 250 W. e The right of way for a four-lane facility should be reserved of 120' if this to be part of the 240/250 Connector Road. A traffic study is needed to determine total impact of this development and future improvements of Connector Road. Please be advised that this ultimate connection to Route 240 is a non-tolerable road. Right and left turn lanes will be required and most likely a traffic signal in the future that will need to be inståiled by the developer. It appears there is a prime drainage culvert at the' centerline of this connection to Route 250 that will need to be addressed. Yours truly, cf/¡Jt :,)(, 1:/ W. Mills Assistant Resident Engineer HWM/ldw cc: J. H. Kesterson e · ..¡O. _. -, ~:>~·I~:.~~_"2;..Z~2~·0ß;~;'}'''.~:. Thomas 1. Goodrich 3680 Country Lane Charlottesville, VA. 22903 July 7, 1995 Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, VA. 22901 ~- 1 1995 Dear Supervisors: Your agenda as published in the Daily Progress for your meeting on July 19th includes consideration of a rezoning request in Brownsville. ZMA- 95- 09 indicates that 82 acres near the intersection of Rt. 250/240 are being considered for rezoning from R -1 to R -4. May I ask you how you plan to deal with the impact on the environment, schools, public services, and roads that the addition of up to 328 families will create? I am not pleased already that you plan to allow additional homes on Rt. 240 near the Highlands. And now you plan to increase even more the amount of people impacting on everything good that Western Albemarle has to offer. Are you aware that Rt. 250 West in Ivy is still one lane in each direction and improved traffic flow is extremely limited due to the railroad bridge and the additional cars that the zoning change will bring will only further take away from the still pleasant drive to and from town? Are you also aware that there is still only one (1) county patrol car assigned to the western part of the county? Are there any funds available to improve the police services that the families near the Highlands and now Brownsville will impact on? I am against the zoning change because the overall rural nature of this part of the county is being adversely affected by the increase in population and cannot be undone once we discover we have created another 29N. If I wanted the experience of driving in traffic I would have bought my home North of the city. , t .4' """ ',. Please consider my comments in your decision to allow the zoning request. Sincerely, j~~ Thomas 1. Gooârich ~ ,~ or June 30, 1995 George W. Clark Rt. 2, Box 75 North Garden, VA 22959 RE: ZMA-95-08 George Clark Tax Map 87, Parcel35D Dear Mr. Clark: ¡):$Iribut[~d to Ba¡rd: 'l-/)'-7~- '···..~1:!".,? ~,!(! _ 9.s; cJ 7¿~~c) COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Pept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 -5 The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on June 27, 1995, by a vote of3-2, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following proffer: "I proffer the following test and verification shall be performed: The applicant shall drill wells and these wells shall be subject to pump tests and shall meet the specific requirements of the Engineering Department, and the Department will make a detennination based on the results of adequate or inadequate groundwater to supply the development. This detennination (verification of suitable water supply) will be made prior to approval of the final plat. If the test does not detennine adequate water supply, this rezoning shall be null and void." The Planning Commission action included the understanding, as stated by the applicant, that access would be limited to Route 779 for all new dwellings. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on JULY 19. 1995. Any new or additional infonnation 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. ;;';:;,,: /1d/ '#~~/-~ William D. Fritz Senior Planner Ella çfey cc: Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins , t , Original Þroffer Amended Proffer - (Amendment # ) PROFFER FORM Date: t'- Jtf ,- 15 ZMA # tj'J'--tJ ¡:' Tax Map Parcel(s) # 37·-·../..{-:IJ '/ Acres to be rezoned from ¡(If to Y"f' i , ,I 'to , ..; Pursuant to S~ction 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinahce the oWner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the cOhditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditiohs are protfered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezohlng Itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such conditions have a reasohabla relation to the rezoning requested. (1) The applicant shall drill wells and these ~ells shall be subject to pump tests and shall meet the specific re~uirements of the Engineering Department, and the Department will make a determination based on the results of ade~uate or inade~uate groundwater to supply the development. This determination (verification of suitable water supply) will be made prior to approval of the final plat. In the event that ade~uate water supply cannot be verified not more than three (3) parcels/dwellings shall be permitted. (2) Lots 1, 2, and 4 as shown on a plat by Roger Ray dated April 13, 1995 and revised May 22, 1995 shall have all access restricted to Route 779. These lots shall have no 'direct access to Route 29. Lot 3 may continue to use the existing entrance on Route 29 and Route 779. ~w.~ Signatures All Owners . , , 6ft!.£' tAl eL;fj(J) Printed Nal11es of All OWhers ¿~ f ð ,. :f.r Date OR Ptlhted Néh1ë tif AUötMV-Ih-Fåct Signature of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power ot Attorney) " PROFFORMWPD Rev. December 1994 ,·,·':r-""'''''......~\"iI'7It~~''''''''l..''',,...~~__, ....._. _~_ -.. .~. :_, . ~,__""__ .. -~~-.vH~·,.t""j;*.ð" .; I. e e e ,f ~ STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ JUNE 20, 1995 JULY 19, 1995 ZMA 95-08 GEORGE CLARK AND SUB 95-39 GEORGE CLA~ PRELIMINARY PLAN Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to rezone to VR in order to allow for a four lot subdivision. The property is currently zoned RA and may be divided into three lots. Petition: ZMA 95-08 George Clark petitions the Board of Supervisors to rezone 7 acres from RA, Rural Areas to VR, Village Residential. Property, described as Tax Map 87, Parcel 35D, is located in the northeast comer of the intersection of Route 29 and Rt. 779 in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Village Residential use in the Village of North Garden. SUB 95-39 Preliminary Plat Proposal to create four lots averaging 1.6 acres. Property, described as Tax Map 87, Parcel 35D, is located in the northeast comer of the intersection of Route 29 and Rt. 779 in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District. This site is recommended for Village Residential use in the Village of North Garden. Character of the Area: This site lies between Route 29 and 779 with frontage on both roads. This site is currently developed with a single family residence which has access to both public roads. A stream is located in the western comer of the property. The property rises from the stream, no areas of critical slopes exist. Several houses are located in this area and are served by Route 779. RECOMMENDATIONS: ZMA 95-08 - Staffhas reviewed this request for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends denial. SUB 95-39 Preliminary Plat - The Site Review Committee has reviewed the plat for compliance with the provisions of the Subdivision and Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval subject to approval of the rezoning application. This report contains no comments regarding the subdivision plat which require Planning Commission or Board actions as all requirements of the Ordinance have been met, based on approval of the rezoning application. Plannin~ and Zonine History: None available. 1 e e e , . Comprehensive Plan: As the Board is aware the Comprehensive Plan is currently undergoing review. Under the guidelines adopted by the Planning Commission no growth areas were to be designated which were not served by public utilities. North Garden is not served by public utilities, and therefore retention of the Village of North Garden appears unlikely. However, no actions have taken place to formerly amend the Comprehensive Plan and this request ~s in keeping with the land use map recommendations. This site is recommended for Village Residential use in the Comprehensive Plan. The plan contains two recommendations which are particularly applicable to this application. These recommendations are found on page 189: "The North Garden Village has a large amount of cleared, open land highly visible from area roadways, particularly Route 29 South. Provide appropriate landscaping and screening in residential development to soften the visual effect of the development. Additional landscaping and screening along Route 29 South as it passes through the Village would help to reduce noise and make the roadway less obtrusive. Development plans along Route 29 South are to be sensitive to its status as an entry corridor to the Village." "Verification of suitable water supply shall be required for development proposals due to the uncertainty of available groundwater and studies indicating difficulty in providing central utilities. " Due to the topography and the existing characteristics of the property (open field) screening or landscaping would have limited value. The Board in adopting the current landscaping provisions specifically exempted single family dwellings. Likewise, EC zoning provisions do not apply to single family development. As a guide in the determination of available groundwater the applicant and the Engineering Department have referred to previous proffers on property rezoned in North Garden. This has resulted in a proffer (Attachment C) which requires verification of water supply prior to final plat approval. This approach complies with the Comprehensive Plan recommendations. Staffh~ received letters in opposition to this request (Attachment D). These letters state concern regarding the availability of groundwater in the area. The Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan identifies a buffer strip adjacent to Route 29 which is an entrance corridor. Relationship of this site and Route 29 has been discussed earlier in this report. The plan also notes sensitive soils associated with the stream which has resource protection area associated with it. No disturbance of the resource protection area is proposed. 2 , , e STAFF COMMENT: e e Staff typically prepares fiscal impact analysis for rezonings resulting in additional dwellings. By-right development of this site could result in 3 units and maximum development of this site under VR zoning is 4 lots. An increase of one lot will have minimal fiscal impact therefore, staff has not prepared a study of the impact. The Site Review Committee has reviewed a subdivision plat for this site and while the plat is not proffered it does allow staff to address access. Access to this site is proposed to both Route 29 and 779. Access to Route 29 is limÜed to a joint entrance serving two lots and the access is proposed at the crossover. These lots, shown as lots 2 and 3 on Attachment E also have access to Route 779. (Lots 1 and 4 have access limited to Route 779 only.) The applicant has stated in Attachment F the justification for retaining the dual access for these lots. (The house on this site currently does have access to both Route 29 and Route 779.) The Virginia Department of Transportation has recommended that the access for lots 2 and 3 be limited to only one road. Staff has recommended to the applicant that the access to lots 2 and 3 be limited to Route 779. This recommendation is based on: 1) The prevailing building pattern, all houses in this area including the one located on this site front Route 779, 2) Route 29 is a high speed road not- desirable for direct residential access. The applicant does not desire to limit the access to these lots. Section 18-37(0) allows the Planning Commission to approve all entrances to public roads upon the advice ofVDOT. VDOT has stated that access for Lots 2 and 3 should be limited to either Rt. 29 .QI Rt. 779. The applicant has not revised the plat to reflect these comments and staff opinion is that the issue of access is best addressed in the rezoning. Staff is unaware of any historic safety hazard posed by the existing access to Rt. 29. Staff is reluctant to endorse increased use of the entrance. In addition, limiting access to all lots to Route 779 will preserve and re-enforce the prevailing building pattern in this portion of the village and would be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan Residential Development Design standards intended to encourage internal orientation of development. These standards are found on pages 155 and 156. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. The proposed use is consistent with the land use map recommendations; 2. The roads serving this development are adequate to accommodate the development; 3. A method for verifying water supply has been proffered. Staffhas identified the following factor which is unfavorable to this request: 1. The access for the proposed development, although not proffered, does not as designed, insure maintenance of the prevailing building pattern or provide for internal orientation. 3 J , I e RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff is concerned about access being proposed for two lots directly to Rt. 29. This is inconsistent with the Residential Development Design Standards of the Comprehensive Plan and, therefore, staff recommends denial of this request. Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve this request, staff recommends acceptance of the applicant's proffer. ---------------- ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Letters from the public D - Subdivision Plat E - Applicant's information e C:\ WP51 \RP1\CLARK.RPT e 4 J') ~.. . \, ~ -\ - , ~~i ("> o " ~ \ c- "I- ~ e m':157i I I I I I I I I I I I I I , ~aJ _ ___~, X."' ·'.d'lId , ... 'I '.!W ./ I:TTACHMENT AI ~ ~. .f [!! ~~~tHAIN Too. J", , , ----~------t ATTACHMENT B I ALBEMARLE COUNTY . (?' " \ , '\ \ \ ~ \\ \ \ ~,,-\-+J-~ \ .\ ~\l \ / .~. '-'- ) i) I ~._..... (~ . ~. . pi f--_______~~.. ~. I J \ / ~ .~. \ _ SUB-95-039 George Clark \ \ \ \ 88 . \ RI.760 ~& I "'"i/ " o. . os / ~~.r--.---.; ~~ "~~I. ,-(.X .r SCALE IN FEET ..0 ... .... '.0. . ..0 --- . SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT SECTION 87 ... HARbW.RE AG'UCULTU"N.. I!tI 'ORESTAL ÞSTRI(:t e e e , . I ATTACHMENT C 1 Onglnal Proffer Amended Proffer - (Amendment # _) C", PROFFER FORM Date: (;) 12/ c¡s ZMA # ots -08 Tax Map Parcel(s) # 8Î - 35D u. Y 0 Acres to be rezoned from fA to 'V R Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance, the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such condilions have a reasonable relation to lhe rezoning requested. I proffer the following test and verification shall be performed: The applicant shall drill wells and these wells shall be subject to pump tests and shall meet the specific requirements of the Engineering Department, and the Department will make a determination based on the results of adequate or inadequate groundwater to supply the development. This determination (verification of suitable water supply) will be made prior to approval of the final plat. If the test does not determine adequate water supply, this rezoning shall be null and void. / _\//?-'"" /,,/, _ <...-<: .c . I,;' .' ;'./ /'// // ? ,i _ C, ¡,¡:¿ , Signatures c.f All Owners . . / 1// / / v \ , /-, ." . , (/ . / _n .' 7 Date -Printed Names of All Owners OR Signature of Attorney-in-Fact (Attach Proper Power of Attorney) Printed Name of Attorney-in-Fact PROFFORM WPO Rev. OecemtJer 1994 - \)-, e e e , . ATTACHMENT DI ~~~~I!~. t-.,,'£iII!ðI)~~ .-:.' 1:.::'" th -. ~ .~ '1.-.-r ~"'~'. i.'~ ' ;1 Ii'.li..o:vL.~ 'l 4- >1../ May 16, 1995 MAY 2 2 1995 County of Albemarle Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902-4596 P' .' '...... -¡s:nr1!flO Ueot ,;:J ~ Dear Mr. Fritz: The undersigned hereby wishes to notify the County of Albemarle, Department of Planning & Community Development their desire to object the approval of a subdivision site plan submitted by George Clark (SDP-95-039).- Our primary reason for this action is due to the scarcity of drinking water in this area. /í¡ Ru~ t: '--..- (' u/ ..¡, Y. <Jtf{þ- /c/1rd C¡l~4~ . · . , e e - ¡t:.L· ¡'IC~ 10, :):' Co .:1,,) i'1l.l .,-.lI~I..L r .\...i.J.. IATTACHMENT D I , Page 21 May 16, 1995 County of Albømarle Department of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Oharlottesville, VA 22902-4596 Dear Mr. Frit~: The undf!rs igned hf!n~by wishBS to notify the County.of Albemarle, Department of Planning & Community Dç;velopmertt their desire to object thE! approval of a subdivision site plan submitted by George Clark (SDP-95-039). Our primary reason for this action i$ due to the scarcity of drinking water 1n this area. RECEIVED MAY 31· 1995 Planning Dept. ATTACHMENT El N NOTES 0 I OWHERISJ: GEORGE WASHINGTON CLARK RT. 2 BOX 75 NORTH GARDEN, 'l/A 22959 2 PROPERTY ZONED RA {APPLICATION TO BE REZONED VA}. J TAX MAP 81 - PARCEL 3~D. 04. SETBACK REOl1lREMENTS FOR VR ZONING: FRONT.. 25", SIDE- 15' 1 REAR. 20', I ~. THE STOAM WA TEA RUN OFF FROM THIS PROJECT WILL ENTER THE NORTH FORK Of' THE HARDWARE RIVER WA HRSHED. . THIS PROJECT 1$ NOT LOCATED W1THlN A WATER SUPPLY WATERSHED. 7. BENCHMARK: CONTOUR DATA SHOWN HEREON WAS TAKEN FROM THE U.S.G.S. TQPOGRAPHtC MAP I COV(SVLLE QUADRANGLE 1 IS' CONTOUR INTERVALS wERE INTERPOLATEDI. ~-_. t. -------------.- "'.... ' "'d'"V~ '" . . ~~ <3'> 8~AÑCH .~ ""6. ROÞ.D ;>C5'. ~,).,9".. flOC.~ .g.,.".~ ~ _._ ...t.,........¡..;>.;..~ \g\.'!88' ~ -------- Ä TEL. v.- I , OCK.....WAl' I I Þe.< I LOT 4 Ill»< I 64,008 SF I \ r 0.8. 583 - 284"'. I IC .. \ .' / , ì '..¡ " I LOT /..... f J 87,120 SF .. I '/ 0 I "' 0.8. 583 . 28'4 .. 1 .,. , r / ~ Ó 1 o I 5 "01\< I ' / " .- I "'I " LOT 3 I "- , ''''<>0- 67,519 S.F. ~- I 1;;1 I , ' 0 -_D.fI.~u.._2II1I---- I 0 ~ 220.08 ; 0 - ~?~ 122.85 230.35 573.28 --- -- - _.- j SOUTHBOUND .... -. :::-:-- - -- - LANE - ROUTE 29 ROAD - TflAL VARIABLE - - =--- WIDTH - NORTHBOUNO R/W - LANE - ~ "'... - - --- T.M. 87 .. 358 ROY L. I. SETTY N. CRESS DB. 11]1 - 222 0.8. ...., - 281 ~< s1~t~ --.-J ::;::;:; ~ . . ~\\\\\\\\\\\\\\~DENOTES RESOURCE PROTECTION AREA. 9. ONt. y ONE OWELllNG PER LOT. roo NO FURTHER SUBDIVISION WITHOUT PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVAL. II. BOUNDARY SUAVEY QATA SHOWN HEREoN BASED ON A CURRENT F1ELD SURVEY BY ROGER W. RAY a ASSOC., INC. 12. lOTS I AND 4 SHÅLL HAVE ACCESS OM,.V FROM STATE ROUTE 779. 13 LOTS SHALL BE.SERVED BY PRIVATE WEllS AND PRrvATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL. 14. A 20' PERMANENT DRAWAGE EASEMENT CENTERED OVER ALL STREAMS t DRANAGE COURSES IS TO BE DEDICATED FOR PURPOSES OF DRAINAGE AND MAINTENANCE THEREOF. \ \ ' \"'.... \ \"V.... \ \<" \ \ "- \~ \c:. / \ <" ITEL \ t PED. \g I \ (" '" \ \~~\ ..,.?- \ TEL I ~ '- PED. J \ ,__ I / ./ tAOtl"c.Þ.N U.S. '.6~'" ST A TE ROUTE 801 4-13-95 5-22-95 DATE REVISED & PRELIMINARY PLAN LOTS I THRU 4 LOCATED ON U.S. ROUTE 29, STATE ROUTE 779 NEAR NORTH GARDEN SAMUEL MILLER DISTRICT ALBEMARLE COUNT'y , VIRGINIA FOR GE ORGE Cl ARK ROO£R W. RAY I ASSOC.. INt CHARLOTTESVUE. VA I SCALE 6- or)"2'" II. 1407.40 l· 3t.06 C. 3'.06 tit- N1'·"'O""E I o (j,a 17°3711'- A. "'07.40 l- 432.8' C. 431.14 C8- H""'84]"[ 8 . . .. . e e e !i ~ n J: J': m Z .... ." z i> ° ° ~ :::0 ca ::roCD Ci)c~ ~S'D) Q.N(I) CD ::r ~ -. w tu ~ <oce Þ><Õ N....~ N'"O CD _ '" D) CD * s: m '< tv tv ...... CD CD 0'1 ()~::Þ< :J'"0-< m......O"=.: -,~(1)= -::::..3m $2.0 3 __m (1)::J::!.o en::!:(1) < -, . =.:(1)()"TI (1) "T'I 0 :::::!. _ -'OJ c: - <0::J.J"I ::Þ ~ -< en tv ïJ(1) tv m 2. CD ::Jo o ::J-' tv -. ïJ ::J- ccm S205 ()(1) o -, 3 3 c: ::J ;::::¡.: '< o (1) < (1) o '0 3 (1) ::J - o (1) m -, s: ~ "TI -, ~ m...... ::J' a.O enc: --, e!.'O (1) a ::u'O o 0 c: C/J -m (1)- ""'-J- ""'-JO CDC/J (1) (ñ' :2 a. (1) (1)r ~. 0 ñ>Cñ 0" tv (1)S20 õ'w -, :f! (1):J'" õ'm ='(5' o _. :E ::J -.- ::J (1) cc::J -, - (1) -, m m C/J ::J o £ ~ 0 . ::J 0" o - :J'" C en ::u o c: - (1) tv CD 3 ~ m ~ g o -. 0 C/J en ::Þ < ::J:J'" _. :j"CC C/J Q 2 ~ cc c: -. 0 0 :J'" -~g.~m(1) ~a.00a.(1) 3__<0"::J 0_(1)......_ (1)a.:J'"-'--ñ> ..c m (1) m < ::J -5. ~ a 5. g £ 3Q~(1)~0 (1)-m::J:E::J ::J :J'" .... q' _. C -(1)..Jm_ mC/Ja.::J:J'"en Q(1)m'£:f. o'O-'<:(1)::U C/J c: 3 <:: -, 0 C/Ji3(1)m(1)C: C 0 ..c C/J_ 00 m · C/J c: en (1) -. 0 ::J tv · C/J '0 m C/J CD ::Um3002m o ::J (1) ::J C:a.::J°Sla. ~ -. - 3 õ' _ ", - 0 3 :J'" tvo-' ::J(1) CD-OOm · oC/Ja.::Jm ~ ~. e!. a.,g a. <5 (1) :E ~ :Em:fQ:(1) =':-(1)(1)::J -- ::J- o :J'" (1) -. 0 ,,, -. X ::J -, ..... C/J -. cc 0 c:_~ C/J C/J 0 -. 0 C/J (1)0::J_0 mmccc< ::!: -'. (1) :J'"O(1)en-, ~ ::J ~.' :E a.~ ~::Um C/J .... '" 0 C/J :J'"..J::Jc: -. a. 0 _ '0 -'ã)' (1) oC/JC/Jtv ::J~o~ =::J :fC:f (1) en (1) C/J' C/J OJ o (1). s.6'~~ :J'"C:0:J'" (1) m _ (1) m '" 0 (1) C/J '" - -CDen;;;t ~.' m ñ> a."TI::J::J (1)ma.o o -, :E (1) -300 C(1)C:::J · ..c a.- en c: 0 · -. cc en ::u '0 <' - 03(1)e!. c: (1) -, (1) m;;;t(1)::u tv m ã)' 0 CD--C: · en__ 00(1) C:-""'-J C/J:J'"""'-J (1) (1) CD C/J m :E :f30 (1) 0 c: (1)C:a. ::J ;;;t-C/J -, 0 (1) m _-, ::J _ <:: o -, (1) (1)~m m -'C/J C/Jom c: mC/J- _ -. :J'" :J'"::J-' -, cc c: c: _ 0 o :J'" 0 o (1) ::J ::J (1) ::J ::J ::J (1) (1)-0 0-'- _mo o ::J -, -'0õ' õ(1)-, o ::J 3 otv O· (0 c: ~ ~::Þa.:J'" -'::J (1) ::J C/J-, ccm(1)(1) m a. :2 _. ::J9:(1)C/J a.::!:tvm -0 ::J :J'"::J 0 (1) ~. m Cñ ~. -, :E' en 0(0 ::!: m_ ::J '0- cc m 0 <: o -, <:: ;::::¡.: :E (1) '<(0 = :E = 0 =.: C/J ::J 0" C/J r (O:J'" 0 m _ a.= tv -. C" ~(O :f Oa. e!. C/J -, _. (0 =.: C/J a. (0 '0 m a. -, C/J '0 0 -, a. C/J -. c: o 0 0 o -, _. ..... - ::J ..Jo cc m_ ~ cn:J'" '0 (1) cc o ïJ m C/J- _ C/Jm 0 -'::J ::J C" ::J C/J (0 -. .::J ~ cc -, () 3 o _. 3 ::J 3 S. -. (1) ~ m -. ::J o a. ::J G)~ m fl~~ m £ en - :J'" ~ :j" cc Õ ::J () m -, ^ , . > - '- ¡:: « - N - \0 \0 V\ ~ tI1 ~ o ....j o ~ (þ :3 r::r (þ "1 tIJ o o-t-, t:C o ä. o o-t-, en ¡:: ~ ~ -. tIJ o "1 tIJ 'T1 ~ o ~ en ~ - « ....j ::r o :3 ~ tIJ ~ o (þ o ~ (þ C'1 ~ ?; ~ :::3 S' ~ Õ r::r (þ ::r (þ ä. '- ¡:: - '< - \0 - \0 \0 V\ ~ tIJ g (") (þ ~ en "t: S' g~ ~ ~ ~i o ~ ~ 'ï' ~ :3 ~ (þ (þ õ a. tIJ :3 ~ ~g .... ~ ~ [~ 8 ê :3 tIJ 8 ~ g c::. fit E;' . ~ ~ :::3 _. ~ Õ r::r (þ [ p. S' ~ 5>;- (") :::3 ¡. ~ ~ ~~~ -~ o 0 (t o-t-,...."1 ~ ~.g (t....:I.) "1::rS- . ~~. 5'''t: p.(3 ~:;¡:¡ < ~ (þ ël. t;;. ~~ ~ s- o (t S;:« i~· tIJ e:.. ~ S' ~2: o tIJ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (þ g. ~o g.C'1 o 0 ¡:: ~ ~8;Pf~ ~:::3°8 ~82:a~ (") :I.) (þ ~ ~~::!(")a tIJ :::. e: ~ q :::3p. g 0 l~ ~ 8 ~ ~~ g g.~~ [~ 0- ....tIJ - 2-· tIJ -. .... .... '<........ ~< . tIJ .... "t: Et(ttIJe. 2.g·8 å ê-. ~ :::3 tIJ (") 0 (") tIJ ~ .... :::3 C". 0 0 e:...- o :::3:::3 :-. = "1~Õ'~ o (þ '< "1 o-t-,6:¡::8Š o (þ .., :I.) s: :::3 ~ S' 0 ~ C". tIJ I ij \Oe:..~ .~ en ~ ~ ..... . (").... " (") ~ 0 ~ ~N 0 tIJ en \0 = . r::r en N go~\O _tlJ~ . .... ~ ~ Š·~æ 02.0'< "gl¡::r::r :1 ~ ~ (þ '< (") ::r ~ ::r~e:~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :~~~ o p.~ p. ~ æ' ~ '< ~ g~OO~OW ¡::~~~8=' s: ~ "'" 0 F' ~g[õ[~~ "'" C/ ~ ~ .... = ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ;·i ~š2.õ~~g ....8r::r(")~C/ g"o§:šfg.g" :I.) ::r p. ;J '< =: "t:°õ~~~ a~g."1=2. :;¡:¡-0~2.e. ~~ ~ ~ s ~ ~. ~ (t' 5 g" 8. "g ;;~~'gg.'R :::3 ~ C/ .... 0. :1 ft ~ 0 5': '< ä~ä:g~8 =80:::3ge. p.g:::3....p.p. .... .... g. 9.. (") = .r :s:: ~ '<. 0 0 r::r ¡::¡. ::r g. :::3 ~ ag.g~~"1 _. g. 0.. :3 5' tIJ(þ= .-< ~C/~t-3~0 ~ g§'fij'g g. <' <5:: ~ ~ ~ S· .... ð ~ ~ ~.t;;. ¡:: (t g. e õ' - "1 :I.) g._=p.'-":::3 .... ..... -......, '"0 ~C/- ~p.~(þg.g ~ol:;"~~¡:: "1 . l:;"....tIJ P. . ~ ::r (") C/ "t: þoC .þ.. ~o~..,_. ~:::3(þ~en . ~.e ~ (i! 5' ~ cs.... < (") . ~.... C'1 t;;. 0 o 0 .... z .....c::.ago ä ~. ~ ~ ª ~C"·_~O 5' ~~ ~ ~ ä. '<.....~'Co ~ ~ ....~ = o~~"g ~ ¡:: a .... 0 §. s: .... tIJ r::r e~ ~ ~-o_ ....:9 ~ g '< ¡::.... 0 . p.(3"1 ~ ~ < ~~ =.: (þ (þ ¡;;r~._ a Og_ o g. "t: .... 0 aoaã~ .... (i! "g .... ~g~[~~ 5" ~ S _. ~ 0 g. ~ ~ .... -. .... ~ ¡::o-t-,<,"," o .... 0 ~ p. C/.... = =;.0 ~ a ~ 0 ~. ;:I. ~ ::r ~ ~ ~fit~[ê- ~ ~ ..... .... o' g ::r ::;.' = g C/ ~ p. 5. o 0 g 'g ~ ::r C/ g. g;~~~~ (") =: p. g. 0 ~~08 ~ p. "t: r '< o ¡:: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ r . c ~ -.,J I ~ cp ~ () () Ul ~ .to IU (I) OJ (9 f'> ~ IU .to (I) IU OJ c < þ m ::I UI ~. ::I Iþ Iþ .., ~. ::I (II (O o Iþ 1.0 10 ::I [~ ~, (9 ~~ ~ - ~ ~ V'1 C:' -< - we - \0 \0 LA ~ ~ 6 "'11 0 .. ~ if ~ ~ ~~. f I s:: CIQ !""'" ft ð~ ~ 0 ....09 . 0 ....- a c _10 ! 50 ~ g'~ ~ tØ ~Q g- ~ cø8 ~ ø. ~." !;- 0 e 'R 0 t'ot) PSo . UJ ~!: i .g !.ir ~ S. ." ~ ! "'£t ãiI o ~ J . 8¡ ~ , .....,,0:;." 1f.8:g 0 ~ !I'~:t¡ 8.g8g¡; Št:¡:¡;8.~ "'!~ !; Q.l:i'ëCD ~oª·i . e:lIQg Rifi 1:1 &- I§ g. 00.. ell if'O ::II "" äili g.fton a~g-8. oao'g C~Q.o ~~l! - S!.. c. '::<: c ¡¡" 0 ~ :I ~ _. ð' ell ~ [ ~1:t ~ ft~. e:r~g g§ä:-' ~a~1 O~eIICD If¡SI g !.~.g III =- goo = "",0 '< n II! I!L ~9~g. - 5 0 ::II 5-<f1ô f·· "'r>rl tQ Baird: :l.::!1:J/S- , :Uifl No. _Z6--;.:17/9...j:~3 - I COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 3 July 13, 1995 Gabriele L. & Eugenia 1. Rausse Rt. 9, Box 293 Charlottesville, Va 22901 RE: SP-95-19 Gabriele L. Rausse & Eugenia 1. Rausse Tax Map 103, Parcel 43K Dear Mr. & Mrs. Rausse: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on July 11, 1995, by a vote of 5-1, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Water Resource Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment; 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final driveway and culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction 100 year flood elevations and boundaries. The limits of the WRPA Buffer must be shown and labelled; 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement; Page 2 July 13, 1995 6. All future divisions of Tax Map 103, Parce143K shall use this steam crossing for access to Route 627. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on JULY 19.1995. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, fG~~ Ronald S. Keeler Chief of Planning RSK/jcw cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins e STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: RON KEELER JULY 11, 1995 JULY 19, 1995 . (SP 95-019) GABRIELE L. AND EUGENIA J. RAUSSE Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct a low water stream cròssing in order to build a dwelling unit (see attachment A). Petition: Gabriele L. and Eugenia J. Rausse petition the Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a stream crossing (30.3.5.2.1.2) on 76.120 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property, described as Tax Map 103, Parcel 43K, is located on the southern side of Route 627 approximately 1.2 miles south of its intersection with Route 795 (see attachment B). This site is located in the Scottsville Magisterial District but is not located in a designated growth area (RA III). Character of the Area: The property between the state road and the stream is wetlands and low in topography. There is a culvert located west ofthe proposed crossing which carries water from under Route 627. Most of the property on the southern side of the stream is heavily wooded and rises steeply. e Plannin~ and Zoninf: History: (SUB 82-103) John G and Marion M White- On September 23, 1982, the Planning Department signed a plat which created this parcel. A total of six (6) development rights were assigned to this parcel. Staff Comment: Given the floodplain and required setbacks, the area between the state route and the stream does not contain an adequate building site. Thus a stream crossing is necessary to access a building site from Route 627. Historically, staffhas reviewed stream crossings for multiple users. Parcel 43J, adjacent to'the north, has an existing stream crossing. The applicant has stated that if the owner of 43J were to allow usage of this crossing, its location relative to the desired building site would not provide good access. (The proposed crossing would be located near the southern boundary of the site to provide reasonable driveway grade to the building site). The applicant also owns Tax Map 103 Parcels 39A, 39,40,41,42, and 38. Parce139A has direct access to Route 795 which would not require a stream crossing. However this frontage is located approximately 0.8 mile away and, in staff opinion, is not reasonably available to parce143K. e 1 l e e e l The County Engineering Department has also reviewed this request (see attachment C). Staffhas reviewed this request with compliance with section 31.2.4.1. Given further review by the Engineering Department, staff opinion is the use should not be of substantial detriment to adjacent properties and should be in harmony with the purposes and intent of the Zoning Ordinance. Recommended Action: Staff recommends approval of SP 95-019 Gabriele L. and Eugenia J. Rausse subject to conditions: RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Water Resource Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment; 2. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final driveway and culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction 100 year flood elevations and boundaries. The limits of the WRP A Buffer must be shown and labelled; 3. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. 4. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance; 5. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement; 6. All future divisions of Tax Map 103, Parcel43K shall use this steam crossing for access to Route 627. NOTE: As to condition #1, please contact David Hirschman of the Department of Engineering. As to Condition #3, the applicant is encouraged to contact Federal and State agencies in the early stages of the design process. ----------------------- ATTACHMENTS: A- Applicant's proposal B-Location map C-Engineering comments 2 e e e ..J-. t\ þ- , , , ~ = \\ \- G -;0. ¡- Ç'c. --t '. ~ Ç1 .~ Eo \ ' 6'l,,- \- ã co ~ z;. 1ft .._.. . ~ C/ ~ . SI '* I .~. . b' ~/ f .' e e e ~ ~ II¡:=: bl. , , ~ i ! . '" 11b ,," ~u ..--.--- - , , . I ;c!f 1\ (\ j~ ~~ ~~ ~ j ~ .' e e e , - l // / ; , ¡ i I; I ! I I... I I -t\~- -:-_ : ....,.. . --- ~--- . - ----, . . 1f'. ~t:JUTêr_ cP.zl__ .. ---- ---~~ \ \ \ \ ----.-- . , ,. C-~ '" '- ". ~ " _~ . '::. I ./ . .~ ~---' J> ~ . . . Nil '. ---- _'-..j . ' v .1 . -....... "'- I I ! ¡ I / ,-/ / 0- r' a p.. 4,) alld 39 of lax Mop IU,)), Located 011 Slale Houle b¿ ï about ¿.~ MI. Norlh of 'enheim I Albemarle County, Virginia. e Scole I I" = 400' 400' 2~' 0' ~.;;;;;. 300' 100' Sept. 23 , 1982 '100' 200' 1200' Nött' R. 0. Snow 8 R. W. Ray, Inc. P. C. Charlot lesville I Virginia . Tht land U.. Revulallonl Lllled Belo. are Imr, ..d PUfluonl to the Alberarle Caunly 20nlnv OrdlnanCtln tUect Ihle Dote and ,lFe Shawn for In'ormallon Purpo"l Only. Thty are not R"lrlcllve Coven...'a Runnlno with land and Ihtlr Appearance on thla Pla'la nollntended 10 IlIIpGI' 'htm 01 auch. A. Tlie 76.12 Acr.. Shown Hereon la Aaalvned SII 161 Dlvlalon RIVhll. That la , Thr" 131 Dlvlalon Rlvhta frolll Potctla 43 and 39 at Tal Map 103 I Each. . 8. Tht 2!I.00 Acrt R..ldut of Parctl 43 of Tax Map 103 , lylnv 10 Iht Eaa' and AdJacen' 'A Ih. 76.12 krll,'a AIIlvned Two 121 Dlvlalon Rlvht,. . '" C. Th. a.5 . Acr. Rllldut 01 Pare.' 39 a' Tax '" -:. ". Map 103 II Alllvntd Two 121 Olvlalon RIVhll. '" "'", '" D. The Ruldu. 01 Pare. I 43 of Tax Map 103 :1 ~'" LylnV to Ih. Soutll and Adjac.nt to Pore. I 39 ~'l- "'; at Tax Map 103 Retalna all Flv. (5) of Itl " "'..... Dlvlllan R1Vht.. . N61°19'53"E 40.69' "....." N65046'54"E 101.65' "",,. '. '" N67oS6'la"E 93.72' \. /....." \ . . N70043'3a''E 75.02' :\" e ".:" . N74022'2S"E 129 2" ~ ?-OÛ\"'''' . N76026'12"E 99.06' . -......." "' "" ~"'" Iron (Sell N73°17"5"E 100,42' _ ~ ~ ~ .... N66°36'25"E loo.aa' -......r;\n\e -;;.::" ~ 30.00' NS2°18'45"E 98.52' ---..... ~ N60007'45''E '245.23' ---...... ...,,'" ~ ""'>' ."" . ",} 4--'477' A:,.:',' -;.."'....,-;,I~on '. W,., . ,To ,,/'; I Found I J:Ar,br..J1ds!lV' -.- - .. 0;,. ¡. ',¡,I Tax Mop 103' Porcel 43 John G. a Marion M, White D. B. 392 . 461,4631Plotl TO/' State Raul. 795 ./"' " . ---.-.-- N2B"ðO'28" W 646.82' PIpe (Sell ~....., ..' 9.> ~ ..' '" ~fJ""~ ~ ..' ~c; ~. .....~Cj &.I .... . ~/&.I ~ ....~ ~oq.... .....oq \ 1JÇ¡ .' .~ 1. .' A.,O:..··· . \'o~~~······Å~ ...·:.....0... \O~...·....~O(c.~\ . , ~o~...····\01J . ~ .... oq .ft..-<.~~..... ~ \ · ~2'==.1 --.... V 17.77' tI1·,Ot .,1 \V In 'if;' 1· .. .~ \ \ ~ ,,\~ \ ° ''P C?o. ~ ~ ~ t -. ~. .~~~~ \ c" 't1' $I ~ . C). .~ '6 1- ~ JIi>!.? ~~~~ '. \,.~'~ ~ \ ~ ~~. ...~~ " / \ " "y{\ Tall Mop 103' Porcel 40 /" John G.8 Morlan M. White e... ..... . .D.B. 392· 461',463IPlo) .' 0 ø. \ :; "+ . rS1 q>t \ ....." ... '" , "'- 'rS1"'" ..." \ .,. 'ð't~ \ ~.,.._ ~ tø 1;':0 . ./ ",. ~.~" '. /' \"T~~ Y" J' \. ~ " // . ..... Tax Map 103 . Arcer 43G Jon H. a Untie S Blumhordt 0.8,695' Ol,031Plol) ---- Tax Mop 103' Parcel 43 John G.8 Morlan M. While D.e.392·46I,463IPlolI Residue 76.12 Acres 0.8. 392·46'.463(Plof) Tall Mop 103' Parcel 2A Janel e. York a BenJamin Brewster W.B.55·3IB ;.:, D.B. 399 . 98,I00IPloI) .).'.~: ·:·'~JW'"'~1Jjf;f·,;,;I'" . . 'J4l.'~·~!~r\··'·',,··· -~ ' RECEIV'ED, 5 ALBEMARLE COUNT', I ATTACHMENT B I 91 '" ..' '- . ",-~";.,,.,-.-,.:-.. __, I· . .,," .~'- /" \( .... ...:.. .... '.é" ......... ..'!f:"~':: \ ,.. ,..;. ,i' ," 1/": ,~.~; .'~' If.'!-!f.-· . ) ( SP-95-l9 Gabriele & Eugenia Rausse ..~ - IE ~ \. 15 Y"'< / -......... .. '9 .. '- /../ ~~*B_Y , "-- 20 17 \, ~ 114 SCALE IN FEET - --- .... , SCOTTSVILLE DISTRICT SECTION 103 e e e COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: Yolanda Hipski - Plann~r FROM: Glenn E. Brooks - Civil Engineer II <:i2El3 DATE: 28 June 1995 RE: Rausse Special Use Permit For A Stream Crossing The sketch plan received on 2 June 1995 has been reviewed. The applicant is proposing a low water culvert crossing in Slate Quarry Creek off of Route 627 in the Southern part of the County. Slate Quarry Creek is shown as a perennial stream on the USGS maps. On a visit to the site, the stream was observed to be about 12' wide and less than I' deep. The banks on either side are approximately 3-4' high. The edge of the stream is approximately 94' from the edge of the road. Slate Quarry Creek, as shown on the FEMA maps, has an associated 100 year storm floodplain as determined by approximate methods. According to·these maps the floodplain is approximately 250' wide and may cover route 627. In the field, the floodplain co~ists of a parallel channel (approx. 12' wide) followed by a steep rise opposite the road, and a gradual bank on the road side. This limits the potential spread of floodwaters to abQut 200', which includes the spread of watet: over Routet 627. Trees and large bushes have recently been cleared along the route of the proposed driveway. The proposed driveway crossing will fill in the gradual floodplain on the road side of the stream, and cut into the steep rise on the opposite side. It appears from the sketch plan provided that the fill will exceed cut in the floodplain. This will constrict and shift the floodplain away from the state road. The constriction will cause a backwater, but it is reasonable to expect that this may be contained on the property and not adversely affect the stream. Balancing the cut and fill in the floodplain would help to minimize the impacts. Local affects on the character of the stream can be minimized by reducing the shift in the flood plain, and allowing the flow to follow the natural stream morphology. The effects to the environment from clearing and grading should be minimal if this drive is built as a typical private driveway. However, because this is a perennial stream, it has ån associated 100' Water Resource Protection Area Buffer measured from the edge of either side of the stream. This may have some bearing on the clearing in the vicinity of the stream. Refer to coIIiments "a" and "b" below. - ·e MEMORANDUM Yolanda Hipski 28 June 1995 Page Two Repeated constrictions in the flows with the accompanying backwater affects have been a concern expressed by the Department of Environmental Quality. There is evidence of a . similar driveway being constructed upstream on adjacent property. Some distance upstream from that, there also appears to have been some earthwork in the stream to create a low dam. These kinds of disturbances, together with the proposed stream crossing, have a large impact on the natural state of Slate Quarry Creek in this area. This Department will follow the leads of the State and Federal agencies regarding these concerns. Refer to comment "c" below. Based upon the observations noted above, Albemarle County Engineering recommends approval of the special use permit subject to the following conditions. a. Water Resource Manager approval of a Water Quality Impact Assessment. Please contact David Hirschman of this office for more information. b. Albemarle County Engineering approval of the final driveway and culvert crossing plans. These plans must clearly show the before and after construction 100yr flood elevations and boundaries. The limits of the WRP A Buffer must also be shown and labelled. e c. Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance with Federal and State agencies regulating activities affecting wetlands and watercourses. The applicant is encouraged to contact the Federal and State agencies in ~e early stages of the design process. d. Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and hydraulic computations. These computations must demonstrate compliance with sections 30.3.2.2 and 30.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. e. Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control plan or a single family erosion control agreement. Please contact me at your earliest convenience if you have questions regarding these comments or require additional information. GEB/ctj e Copy: SP-95-019 David Hirschman, Water Resources Manager Robert Shaw, Erosion Control Officer Jim Brogden, Army Core of Engineers eng\glelUlb\rausse.l ""r''''UTED TO BOAR.O MI.:f,\BEW' boO; ¡du ,7 ~ / '-/ - is-- _.~. Ot-i_ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMrv1ARY AGENDA TITLE: SP- 95-25 United Land Corp~endwlVVood AGENDA DATE: PC: July 18, 1995 BOS: July 19, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: 1''>: ~ 7/ 7,,1:: 4> .3 SUBJECTIPROPOSALIREOUEST: Request for Re-approval ofSP-93-13 ACTION: x INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Cilimberg, Fritz CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: x 3 REVIEWED BY: ~IC BACKGROUND: The Board of Supervisors approved SP-93-13 which authorized the Mobile Home Park on July 14, 1993. The Planning Commission approved the Preliminary Site Plan on June 27, 1995. e DISCUSSION: In accord with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.4 of the Zoning Ordinance the approval of SP-93-13 expires on July 14, 1995. The applicant experienced delays in receiving approval due to the need to obtain a sight easement ffom the Charlottesville/Albemarle Airport and Federal Aviation Administration as well as reduction in the speed limit of Route 606 to 45 mph from the Virginia Department of Transportation. These delays affected the applicant's ability to obtain the necessary approvals to keep the special use permit valid. . . RECOMMENDATION: Staff is unable to identify any negative change in circumstance or conditions since the original approval of the special use permit and therefore recommends approval of this request subject to the original conditions. The previous staff report and Board of Supervisors' action letter is attached. Staff does note that the recently adopted airport Master Plan does not include this site in the noise impact area. Staff opinion is that re-approval of the special use permit until January 1, 1996 would be appropriate. The land use component of the Comprehensive Plan is anticipated to be approved by that time. Expiration of this permit on January 1, 1996 would allow for additional analysis to be performed at that time to determine if any changes in circumstance have occurred. Staff recommends approval ofSP 95-25 subject to the following conditions: 1. 2. 3. e 4. Deletion/relocation of all lots within fifty feet of an adjacent parcel; Planning Commission approval of final site plan; Staff approval of all mobile home units proposed for location within the mobile home park to ensure compliance with the acoustical performance standards of Section 30.2.5; Staff approval of private road maintenance agreements at such time as the property may be, subdivided; e Executive Summary July 10, 1995 Page 2 5. Maintenance of recreation facilities shall be the responsibility of the property oWner in accord with Section 4.16.3.2~ 6. No direct connection to Route 29 shall be made without amendment of this permit~ 7. Provision of conventional "T" intersection with Route 606 constructed in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation requirements. Access is shown on a plan initialized' "wDF" dated 7/8/93' , 8. No plan of development shall be submitted for review until the necessary easements and/or right-of-way acquisition for the Route 606 entrance have been obtained~ 9. Provision of access to Tax Map 32, Parcel 46. e A\SP9525.SUM - NORTHFIELDS HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIA TION ALICE FEEHLEY-MAUS, PRESIDENT 2805 HUNTINGTON ROAD CHARLOITESVILLE, VA. 22901 804-974-7220 July 19, 1995 Chainnan Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Albemarle County Office Building Charlottesville, Va. 22901 Dear Mr. Chainnan: This is written in opposition to SP 95-25, the proposal to approve the establishment of a mobile home park near the airport. While the residents of the Northfields area are not directly affected by the mobile home park, they are clearly indirectly affected by it. At the Planning Commission hearing on July 18, 1995 it was stated that there will probably be 2.3 cars per "home." That means 400-600 extra cars per day will join the already congested, if not gridlocked, road network in the northern part of the county. This will have an extremely adverse impact on this part of the county and on the quality of life for those who live here now, as well as the residents of the new mobile home park. The park is touted as being a partial solution to the county's alleged problem of not having enough "affordable" housing. If such a problem exists (its existence seems unlikely as virtually every developer claims to be doing his part to alleviate it), it will not be solved by putting rapidly depreciating assets, such as trailers, on a twisting, two-lane road, from which the park residents will most often proceed to US 29 and its intenninable traffic problems. To meet the supposed need, housing must not only be affordable, it must also be accessible. At this time, and for the foreseeable future, the traffic congestion on Route 29 stands as a clear caution sign when any new development is proposed. The developer was given two years to get the project underway. That he ran into problems with those entities whose cooperation he needed should be seen as yet another caution. The lapse of the original pennit provides a renewed opportunity to take an in-depth look at the proposal in light of the conditions as they exist today. Disapproval does not mean that the project will never be completed. It only means conditions have changed and that, at this time, the park will put more traffic in a confined area than the county is willing to accept. I urge that the pennit extension be disapproved. Sincerely, 7~~'- -:;YßúA Alice F eehl au/" President, orthfields Homeowners Association "1 --.... ( 11.lln1L111 {II I!W Bo.1rd I Jt'.hUH" I;, .",' Pn·~H.h_·nl l'lolh'rl [;1"lnl' -------------.---- Board of Directors Alb~marl,' County & Ch.ulúttesville J " n;.· . ~ !'", ~! I . ' , J/~;: t- ~ I', j I ! \1.· . r.. .!'" ~~~'.i,:d, ill 1.'.J. ,I:" ;I.L ..:;' 1_.:;-:,.-: U.·. '! ~\'1 .:1': d¡,¡I'1 Clark,' County . J.' ¡: ¡.~ I: ' ¡, \1, ',: .0" .. ~ t. ¡ I . , 1'1 l oj. 111 } .!HI:H"; \ 1\ L ,; '" f,,' '" , ;"'~'. f I ~ ; ',-:11.," . t, t', ,I, ., '¡:.J:',','" .\ .r {,il,;¡,¡II.II\lìl'.":: \. (,lI,I' ( h,lIll11.111 i"l11\'ritu.. , :. . \ ,,~ ~ I I. I :.. \:. ¡ . '., ..!.\ ,- I "I:d:..!:'...· PIEDMONT ENVlROf\JMENTAl COUNCil R~~ 7//~S Protecting 1he f.n1>/ronlllmt Is Everybody's Business July 14, 1995 The Hon. Sally Thomas Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 901 West Leigh Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Ms. Thomas: We would like to take this opportunity to reaffi~ our support for SP-95- 25, the Airport Mobile Home Park. We understand that the complexity of dealing with both the Airport and the Virginia Department of Transportation has made it difficult for the applicant to complete the work needed in order to keep the special use permit from expiring. Because this permit would merely replace the special use permit approved two years ago, we will not repeat our public statement; however, we would like to remind you of our support for this project. In our opinion, the circumstances which caused us to support this request two years ago remain the same. Housing for those in the mobile home market is extremely limited in Albemarle. Over the past decade, a number of existing manufactured housing parks have been closed and not replaced. While it is unlikely that such housing is fiscally beneficial to the County, fairness dictates that it should be provided in reasonable amounts. One big change has occurred in this area since the Planning Commission and Board approved SP-93-l3: 300 acres owned by the University Real Estate Foundation have been added to the Comprehensive Plan's industrial inventory. Other industrial land in this area includes 225 zoned acres owned by UREF and the 100 acres added to the industrial inventory when Industry X showed some interest in a site in Albemarle County. These two sites offer the potential for 600 acres of industrial development along the Route 29 North corridor. qur population will most assuredly increase as these sites develop and it makes sense for people to live where they work. 45 Homer Street, Box 460, Warrenton, Virginia 22186/703-347-2334/Fax 349-9003 1010 Harris Street, Suite 1, Charlottesville, Virginia 22901/804-977-2033 \ ... -.. The Hon. Sally Thomas July 14, 1995 Page 2 Finally, we do not believe it is good policy for the County to ignore those who work here, but cannot afford to live here, in the hope that they will move to some other cou nty. Unless Albemarle provides some opportunities for affordable housing along the Route 29 corridor, Greene County will be forced to house most of the people earning modest wages at Albemarle's new industrial sites. For all of these reasons, we support SP-95-25. Sincerely, ~~~ Reuben Clark, Chairman Charlottesville / Albemarle Board r ~ '" DRAFT SP-95-25 United Land/Wendall Wood Partial transcription of Commission discussion on motion to approve: (7-18-95) Comments made prior to motion: IMHOFF: "I have been torn by this project. In its favor, it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and it provides a housing opportunity that is, to some degree, unmet in the County. I am always looking for ways to have density in the urban area where it is served by water and sewer and I believe that manufactured housing projects can be very attractive and can be well done. On the other side, to say this is not an ideal site is a real understatement. Everything that I would not want a residential property to have, whether it is manufactured or any other kind of housing- it's proximity to the airport says to me this is what we should be using for Light Industrial or Office Park Development or regional attractions of micro-industries. The fact that it is isolated and will make people incredibly auto dependent and is not linked to other residential areas really concerns me. The traffic on Airport Road for this level of residential development concerns me. I am very torn by what message to send on to the Board of Supervisors. ... I truly question whether the Comp Plan R-15 designation is appropriate on this piece of land, but I have been trying to weigh these issues." HUCKLE: "I feel this is an appropriate placement for what is, at best, a questionable facility. ... I ask is it humane to subject people and children to noise and pollution from planes simply due to their need for affordable housing? Is it sensible for people to invest their money in housing which depreciates so rapidly that in a few years they will have little equity? Is this really affordable? Is it sensible for the County to subsidize this facility by providing schools at over $5,OOO/year/pupil when the tax returns last year on trailers were $25.14/year? Would the County be wiser to put these subsidies into helping low income people buy real houses which appreciate in value and will provide taxes to help pay school costs? Some localities help low- income families with down payments or closing costs for existing homes. Rt. 606 and 743 are overused at the present time and very dangerous. ... I can't support this now any more than I could before." IMHOFF: She had concerns about the temporary nature of the park and what will happen to the residents if the park closes at the end of the 15 year period. NITCHMANN: "Two years ago I supported this for a number of reasons. The key . . reason, which I still believe today, is that this IS an affordable housing issue. (Research done at local banks) says that (a lot ot) and people who are just starting out in life can afford these. I've had some experiences with mobile home parks and the ones I've had experience with are not the ones we see in this County. They are kept up and the people are proud of their homes. They provide many different people, young and old, with a safe place to live. Looking at the applicant's background, and some of his other trailer parks, I have to believe that he, as a businessman will have to keep this looking nice or it will not continue to be a profitable item for him. It has received Airport and VDOT approvals. The development restrictions on a mobile home park are more restrictive than for R-4, and taking all those things into consideration, I continue to support this. I haven't seen anything here tonight that changes my mind. It is unfortunate this has been delayed so long because there are people out there who might have a home today if this has proceeded faster. Because of those reasons I am going to recommend approvaL.." Motion was made for approval by Bill Nitchmann, seconded by Monica Vaughan, subject to conditions in staff report, including addition of No. 10 as read by Mr. Fritz. (Motion did not include the deletion of conditions 3 and 8 as had been suggested by staff nor did it delete the requirement for Commission review of the final site plan.) Comments made after the motion: HUCKLE: "This project was originally justified as providing low-cost housing and there has been much talk, as there was again tonight, criticizing those opposing this use as treating low and moderate income families as second-class citizens. To the contrary, I feel that those who support this use are saying, effect, let's put low and moderate income priced housing under the flight path. These people don't deserve anything better. " VAUGHAN: "I take a different view. I do have some concerns about safety, but then I look at it from the aspect that this does give another FORM of housing, not necessarily low-income, but another FORM of housing. Though many comments referred to this as a trailer park, when my notes say we are discussing a mobile home park. I see there is a difference between the two. I understand the restrictions on this mobile home park will be higher than some subdivisions. One speaker addressed the issue of 'attractiveness.' Does attractiveness only mean a Forest Lakes or Glenmore? Attractiveness can also mean clean and neat. I believe the developer in this instance is going the extra mile and I hope other developers will do the same. He has spent two years working on this. The delays occurred, why or whose fault is not important. They occurred and now he has come to us, in good faith, to help him continue with the project. I think we have to start somewhere in this County (to provide affordable housing), because it's not there," IMHOFF: "This has been very difficult because I do think the County has an obligation to provide affordable housing. I just don't think this is the site to do it. ... think it has all the wrong reasons for being residential property, and for that reason I will be voting against it." BLUE: "The reason I am going to vote for this tonight--well there are several. There were many questions asked tonight by the residents of the area that it is not our responsibility to answer, but they have actually already been answered in the staff report. They are available. If they have not been answered, I an sure staff can answer them, and will. I believe that it is not necessarily the most ideal place for a mobile home park, but you have to take what you can get, and the most ideal place, for many reasons, primarily financial and availability, is not going to be there and I think this is the best we can get. I agree it is probably not affordable housing to a lot of people, but, nevertheless, you have to admit, regardless of what the interest rates are or what the payments come out, there are an awful lot of people who can only afford to live in a mobile home park, at least initially, and for those reasons, I think it is essential that we provide this opportunity for them to have this park. I do think the traffic problem that has been mentioned is going to happen and. unfortunately, the schools are going to get crowded, but that happens every time we approve something. It is almost impossible to get the County, supported by the taxpayers, to approve money for schools in advance of the needs, or roads in advance of the needs. It is just a fact of life. So even though I sympathize, I think staff and the applicant have done a good job, together with VDOT, to try to solve these problems as much as they can be solved at this time. I am going to support the motion. The motion for approval passed (3:2) with Commissioners Blue, Vaughan and Nitchmann voting in favor, and Commissioners Huckle and Imhoff voting against. (Commissioners Dotson and Jenkins were absent from the meeting.) CHARL/A~B AIRPORT TEL No.804-974-7476 ]ul 12,95 9:21 No,OOl P,Ol Post.lt" Fax Note 7671 Dale 1 To Phone II F81C , Phone fal( , VIA FACSIMILE July 12, 1995 ~i.''''.~ c ·~"t.I"" '" I·"~ "~'"'.c, ~ 't. ¡j"'1' 1\1-'_"~. -' -! \í¥ ill",", ~ ~ ~ !tt:...i:J .:.>:-..r ,~W1I;¡ ~ ,h~. 1£:-...),1 ,-iUl t 2 1995 Mr. v. Wayne C!limberg, Director Department of Planninq & Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, vir9inia 22902-4596 ':~ i ~.'. N" -'~tµ ~ "'.... 'n' ,_, ~i...,.,j, Ii ..__.--.........~._",.-.- n , 2 1995 Re: (SDP 94-058) Airport Mobile Home Park Preliminary site Plan Dear Wayne; I would like to take this opportunity to clarify several issues which have been raised during consideration of the above matter. In terms of the acquisition of the 300 square feet of airport property by Uni tad Land Corporation, the Airport Authority was approached in December 1993 about this matter. In January 1994 the Authority had coordinated and received preliminary approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for this transaction. Since the mobile home park is sited contiguous to the airport the FAA. required further analysis of the potential airport noise impacts on this land use. 8etween January and April of that year this matter was sufficiently addressed and on April 15, 1994 the FAA issued a letter indicating that release of the 300 square feet vas acceptable. At the May 11, 1994 Airport Authority 80arCl meeting release of this property was finalized and we moved to have deeds and plats prepared for this transaction. On July 14, 1994 a proposed deed was forwarded to United Land Corporation for consideration and on September 12, 1994 the documents were executed by our Chairman. While finalization of the deed and plat did take several months to complete, you will note that both FAA/Authority Board approval for this transaction were completed in approximately four (4) months. I have also learned that concern has been expressed about the reduced size of the 1994/2014 airport noise exposure contours as reflected in our Master Plan. You will recall that when the County Airport OVerlay District was enacted in the early 1980' s the airport maintained an average of 3-4 Boeing 737/727 jet aircraft arrivals and departurè5 per day. Charlott08ville-Albemar1e Airport Authority """.. b_~...__ . ___ """1... _ --I..... ,.. ... _...___ ~-- ~. ---- -... CHARL/A~B AIRPORT TEL No.804-974-7476 Jul 12,95 9:21 No.OOl P.02 .. Mr. Cilimberq Page 2 July 12, 1995 As such, the 1980 Airport Master Plan, which provided the basis for this overlay district, maintained 8 noise exposure map which reflected these daily jet aircraft operations. Accordingly, the dimensions of the noise contours were generally rather elongated off of our runway ends and also spread to the east and west of the airport. The noise exposure map for the 1994 Airport Kaster Plan Update does not reflect the impact of these noisier jet aircraft since USAir cut our jet service in 1992. While our year 2014 map reflects the return of daily jet operations, please know that the federal government has established 1999 as the date when noisier aircraft engines are to no longer be utilized. Hence, with the reduction in daily jet operations and consideration of the use of less noisier jet enqines in the future it is plausible to conclude that the airport noise exposure contours would indeed be reduced from our 1980 study and the original county airport overlay district boundaries. Please also know that our noise exposure map was prepared utilizing the FAA Integrated Noise Model (INK) version 3.10. Inputs to the INM include airport geometrics, aircraft mix, runway use, flight tracks, approach and departure profiles, and day/evening/night aircraft arrivals and departures. As you can see, we utilized an FAA approved methodology for determining the contours of our noise exposure map and believe that it represents the current and future noise exposure con~ours for this facility based upon our forecasts for a1rcraf~ operations. It you should have any questions concerning ~his information, please do not hesitate to contact me. RainTree of Albemarle Homeowner's Association 1086 Snowden Drive Charlottesville, VA 22901-1295 Tel: 978-4699 FAX: 974-9374 ~~~v-c-I. 71Ii/f~- July 18, 1995 Planning Commission County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 The RainTree of Albemarle Homeowner's Association does not concur with the proposed rezoning ofthe Mr. Wood's parcel ofland from light commercial to residential. The requested rezoning was not in the county's long ra.I\ge comprehensive plan for this type of development. It's redesignation will create additional problems for us all. Most significantly, the proposed establishment of200 temporary, low cost housing units will exacerbate an already overcrowded school situation. This is an un- programmed student load. How can we get a handle on our school districting and the county's budget if developers rezone at the first sign of profit? While the petitioner has the right to develop property and generate revenues, it should not be at the expense ofthe citizens. Taxes paid on the property programmed for development have been at a lower rate than residential. Minimal funds have been paid to the county to offset the expenses that will be incurred with that land's residential development. Left unchecked, this un-programmed rezoning and development will leave the county and the citizens at the expense of any developer's fancy. Construction costs for utilities, road improvements and schools will all be borne by county citizens. We have no objections to a developer making a profit. But, when his profit becomes the county's and its citizens' burden, then we say no! ~~~~ 000 D. McDowell V ice-President ~~o~·-?- President t.. . , COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Q '\j July 19, 1995 Wendell Wood United Land Corporation P. O. Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22905 RE: SP-95-25 Wendell WoodlUnited Land Corporation Dear Mr. Wood: The Albemarle County Planning Commission at its meeting on July 18, 1995, by a vote of 3-2, recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Deletion/relocation of all lots within fifty feet of an adjacent parcel; 2. Planning Commission approval of final site plan; 3. Staff approval of all mobile home units proposed for location within the mobile home park to ensure compliance with the acoustical performance standards of Section 30.2.5; 4. Staff approval of private road maintenance agreements at such time as the property may be subdivided; 5. Maintenance of recreation facilities shall be the responsibility of the property owner in accord with Section 4.16.3.2; 6. No direct connection to Route 29 shall be made without amendment of this permit; 7. Provision of conventional "T" intersection with Route 606 constructed in~~.c~ce with Virginia Department of Transportation requirements. Access is shown on a plan i~ianze~ "WDF" dated 7/8/93; ~ l , , , ..J Page 2 July 19, 1995 8. No plan of development shall be submitted for review until the necessary easements and/or right-of-way acquisition for the Route 606 entrance have been obtained; 9. Provision of access to Tax Map 32, Parcel 46; 10. Approval of the special use permit shall expire on January 1, 1996, unless the use or activity is commenced in accord with Section 31.2.4.4 prior to January 1, 1996. Please note that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their July 19, 1995 meeting. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Vßß/ William D. Fritz Senior Planner WDF/jcw cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jo Higgins 07/19/95 07: 14 ~ 804 978 4456 H¡:¡SH-LEE'S-¡:¡CS P. 01 R-e£eI~ (llq )9s /. 1"0" é~1~)~ .t- ~ -yU~ FACSIMILE OF 2 PAGES r.:ynthia Hash 2065 Whispering Woods Driu~ Charlottesvi lle, VA 22911-7203 Telepnone: 804-978-1822 Facsimile: 804-978-4456 Ju 1 y t 9, 1995 Cnarles Martin, Rivanna Dist. Board of Supervisor Other Board of Supervisor Members Tom Blue~ Rivanna Dist. Planning Commission Chairperson Other Planning Commissioners RE: Item SP-95-25 - Wendall Wood Mobile Home Park off of Rt. 606 as 1 isted on Board of Supervisors~ Agenda dated July 19, 1995. To All Parties Above, PI ease make cop i es of th i s 1 e t ter for each member of yol.""' organization. I am in favor of affordable housing and the abnv~ agenda item so long as the following criteria are met. I real ize some of the below have been suggested by your staff, but, Item 1 below, especially needs to be looked into further. 1. Investigate further the probabíl ity that the noise impact area may need to be widened in the future with the threat of engulfing the mobile home park. The de-regulation of the federal government may prevent the FAA from regulating quieter engines. The airport~s expansion plans wit} probably require the widening of the nois... impact area. 2. Require a vegetation/natural buffer around the mobile home park and property landscaping on each lot. 3. Require vegetation/natural buffer as a ceiling. In other words, I imit the developer~s clear cutting of mature trees. 4. Require the use of a forestry expert to help save vegetation and save all Tarleton Oak trees (an endangered species of tree). 5. Decrease speed 1 imit on Route 606 and Route 743. 6. Continue with plans or make plans to widen Airport Road, Route 606, and Route 743. 7. Requi~e specially insulated mobile home requirements to deaden airport noi !U,. 8. Do not a 11 ow any add it i ona 1 ingress and egress on Rou te 29. The design of the Western Bypass intersecting with the Meadow C~eek Pa~kway~s "W" A1 ignments which para11el Route 29 f~om north of the ." .' o 7/ 1 9 / 9 5 0 7 : 1 6 ::II: 8 0 4 9 7 8 4 4 5 6 H¡:¡SH-LEE'S-¡:¡CS P.02 ¡ """~ Sou th Fork of th~ R ¡vanna River to Ai rpor t Road w j l} prov i de adequate access. 9. Require sidewalks throughout the neighborhood leading to school bus stops. 10. Require rigid controls over si It run-off and pollution since there are 3-4 streams on or near the above referenced property. 11. Require strict restrictions, covenants, and easements and archit.ctural control. 12. Requir~ at least 30~ between each mobile home. 13. Require mobile home placement in accordance with the natura} lay of the land and not I ¡ned up in plain rows. If all of th~ above sugg~stions are m~t, I would be in favor of th~ above-referenced project. Sincer-ely, ~.#¿ Cynthia Hash CCI Warren Laws, FLTC Member John Macdonald, FLTC Chairperson Bob Watson, FLCA Chairperson ... ... .~' .~ ..... \. . K~~~ 1iýi5t[J " . - To : Fro M '. SL{~'~ : 13 (') C\ V' cl Q f\ S ~ ~,) ~ v v " .s c) yo S T -t .\0-- r 'J S ~ h ~ } t 2. E, A \ (~I L I A '\ 'r P ð v- t-. rl tJ b, I ~ 1-1 0 """ ~ Par k 7 - f 9- 7 r- (MHP) IV)-\,.. ù ~, M .... V\ ~ ~ -(.. \ ~ l..t V'< ~ 'I s ~ h\{I f L I 0, ~ E. 0.. \- ) '/ ~ v', ) J <- Y' ~ 5 " ~ ~ '" + ~ c. h ~ \ \.-" IV"\ (I ~ c + t~, -( E' '" I.r /....1 <'.. v \ J I -( Ay~o... í2~~',e(QV\f l<.o..j 4~ (l2,AJ?L) 1Y'"'«'V\~f(H.,1",I,o.\ c o~ VV'\ \ t1"e~ J-. I' of 1\ I"'-t +0 + h Q t-,~' 'j (J t\ q rI -P c v + h ~ ð P f ð ~ -l tA '-\ ; I., -J- ö ~ ~ ¥J I-'" ~ ')) 0 U ,~. C c\,,-\ c~V'V\ S ð \) ~ \.-. -t h-t N H P. r Y\ tv- D -¿. 1- h ~ .... ~ q ¡,...c::.. ~ """ "" """" 6Q ~ ð +. C 0 ~ ~ ~ '- V\'4! Cil '- \ + \ '"'t.. eo "" S {) V" .e. ":> ·e 11\ + + () ~ \ ) ~ t I I~ 0 w ~ ve ..- t + 0 0.. \J 0 ~\ J 0\ u.. P \ '\ ç, ct 1 " ð V\ D --f s + C( -I' I ¡.-, í -f h - ~ \ ,,- c.. t) ~ C ~ v- ~ 5 Y\ ö t- ct I ( tAl' \ I ( '5 P 'l c·t ), \ ~ \.{ + -r- w 0 ~ \ ~ J \ k ~ + ~ ~ ~"\r\ + ð S + q V\ ,/ d- 6 -(( (.. () lÂ !I\ ·t Q r-( . ;3. Q b\~ t.-t.~~.~~.. H'I C) b \ Q.~" \\J 'l 'j') to br ì ~-(rl Y.l(. v \ <t W "';:) ð ~ ~ Q {- -t ~.~ c.. ~ a "" '1 e s . --f (J -+ h .~ C c ~ {~. f I Q V\ C V ~ v- i l.-\ c... \ c:( s. f -¿ ~'J .~ Qr '.~ (j 'y e. - c. V ~ ( "-t a. '1 ~ u...J ~ ct + ',.) + "".~ b.R <ê.; f- I (·d·, '" ( v. S t... -+ 0 I.- -+ ~ ì S f r ð f.e ~ -/'/ + 0 S·Q v-- ¡) Co.. -1 ~\ .<:. .e ~ -+ ~ ~ (.. '- 0 ~ Þ'V) ~ Y\ " ~ ..( \ "" A lb. ~ yv\ Q v- J'(. (0 tA '\ .( I c h ~ lI' \ ...0. S 1. S \ 1 V\ \1 \ c:.. 0, ~ f' -'r~ ~ ') ~ cI ('~ .¡ " i¡ II " ~ d If S -I r ì ~. / I o 1- f -- c ~, J- 1-\r ct ~ 'S rJ ð '- + q, -+", ð ~ c::' '" q V'\ -e S CÂ. 'v' 0 U. ~ J +. h..(., C\" r Pc)"" t '\ h ~ {.q r:)e. \ , c?) - Tow ~ v 5 L a v.. r.1 T ~ '-I S r (' I( Q ~ " d ~ l-'î t II ( ) CI L\ (( E r:: ('I V\ d "t ~..,.. I" l q 110 () {'I \. C J . · ei n~ '/ H . <.{" +. '¡ '" Cr. '-\J t ~ A" (" ere S ,de,,-/', .I! A·\'.--6=>0....-t <2-'/rGt~ sì o~ >II e + I ~ ~ ~ ..ç ~ 0,.-.." (( -1. "2 9 +- 0 <l " r f c! ..- t ~ ... C\ ~ 'C '\ ;V-1 r r ð v ~ ~ -E ~ t" .. : (2 t \ ~ ~ 0 +. ù b.t. r"'~~' y.. 0 4 + e rI q ~ 0 "-\ ¡.., d q ~ r ð.J 0 t ,1 · A· d d '1 -1 " ð vt q ( W ~ + (! ~ } S -{ v...J C ~ + ò s ~ y' v ~ q6c)v~ ~.'I'Cq ç · W C. 'S 1-.~.... Y\ B 'J - P 4 S, S c. ~ ~ ~ J e ç , H ~ Q cl ð t......J (V" ~ -(' (~ ~...J" ¡..- k w ", 'J 1', c ¡) '" t\ e t -f ~J ,. ~_ ~ C 0 v... , r ~..e h t ~ ~ 'I V ( _f ~..~. ,~._._L~._~~~._ - "\ "'.~ \.....,\ r 0. <: f- ß 1-- + h~ ~ ~ <:.. h C\ h,\ è4::. '\ '5 'V'\ tI W ~:;J.~' \ ""' C>I d... J ~ 'v- ~ ~ "J ~ d d v. It'- \ "", i k ~ \ <1 \1 S L{ ¡) d q .¡ c. ../ I 4- h.ct... Co V'Y\ P \ r> J q ~ b 4 + V\ ~ 1- k:. n ó ~) ~ ,'\ t- +·h\~ 1'1~-t1 'N~ do k.V\ow + h~f- ~ J. J., f\ cJ"" ¡f '" \^ \ \,J ,4 l ~ \ it· V\ 0 \ ').~ f 0 {I \{ 1 ., ð t., '(J I u ç ~ q 4 (' ·f I C") 4 ~"v·Q ¡..... -\or' 4. h '3 P ð v .¡. q f··} ð ~ f 'r Ô ~ )·f ~ '5 tAl" I ( 'r ~ ~ '"'\ I + w '\ + ~ 0 v-. ~.. ,-) () 0 cI l.o..!.:.¡..:.._.:c_~ \.", ~).. \. p(~~V\ìhtl' .' , l)) \...:'--' & , 2 t') h ; '..-\_(1. . 1'" \V\.{ \ 'I V\ ('I f () L-. 1 h <-- t-1 t-\ d.J i ~ 'r '\ ., ~ of \ ~ + 'r.. -Il VV\ \ ~ d Ie ð 4 ct: {r + h e j ~ c.h~\A\c~, r VI '" d J ì + ì 0'1 I c:¡ l ( + hot ~ IA .... I- 0 _i V1 1 " " , \ ~ '" c;,( \ S "ë- ð V\ ~ d '\ h J t( S 1, \'" , q ( tjJ h. ì í {., W '1 ' + hoo\.. O'r \ ,\Y'\ ò... \ '- â \.1\ \ \.t\' -f 0..... '\ h ~ H~' ~ J Q h c{ v..."'+\ I J\..t/, \Q'i3 . (J, ~ w c... 'h Q" J (. ct. ({ ~.Q e., h \ V\ 0 1- h.() L- '- \ -t'\ e '¿ J I â S Q" '¡.o f> 0 v-1 ~ ) yo- ð w, i h.~ V\..Q..-Q. rl ·r ð ¡.... f ,I,J .. I" ¡ \ ~ d I...t S t ~" n, ( c f - ( . \ C. .{. d' I sir 1\ L ~{ 1 \ ð ~ J- \ . -\. y C\ V\ ~ f d v. +. l\ I-- " ð .., ':~J (p C\ C ~ 1 \-- 0 w ~ C\ S c,.J ~ I (.. T h ~ M i4 P I q ~ c~ '\ j 'I d Q d. ( { "'J \ () c (. ·f ~ Lt .- J ,) h.. \ r' eS '\ +-" ~.ç '\ +- ho. + h'-Q"~ (~ 7.. C () ¥"'\ .C:o, c.- ~ V\ 0 \J ~v- 11_ 0_~ ..- \.¡..J ~ Lq ~ q t\ "\ y. 'i! '\:. .¡..."" ,,+- ... d of) +', 0 " '" I q ç +0.... cI dJ ,-( h () "I ~',.., 'j \ <) 0.. v 0... \, 1 c) b ~ ~ Qi 'I \) €. J b '-\. +- + h-{ \ q h A I.A. V\ J ..(? "" C 0 V\ ~ \ d ~ v- ,\ i 'I D 1-1 h 4 <) 1-. Ò 0 VV",) Q ~ Y ~ì (f' \ ð ; LA V\ k V\ 0 W ~ S + 0 r"'t"" 0 V l. '- "'; <.ø -+ q '""" " lie) 'I Y) -f- 0 ""~ Gt \r M '~ w ~ 'f IJ - .-Q V Q "" () ~ a.. S J, ð I- + -1 " ,... ,... \ b q S 'I .$ \ L ~ 1 's ~ ~ " L<\ + ~ \ ~ -Ç' I ~ )( " l, j J ¡"').." ..¡ () e.+{~~+'lvr¿/\ C-Ö"""(J -l(4-\.. 1 h~ C\'\ ~'f ð~ + ~ -I- r Q, V\ c;;, \ ð ~\ ;_. V iD C) T \ Yv\ õJ ~ d ¡) e ,....."\ f', V) f- s W .\~ o ~ + ct 'I ç r 1..\ r -+ " h <"\ M ~ ,-",,/ M ô y, 1. -t: '\ vY\ " J it ) .. ",. ,-,. ~) .' a. R ~ (.. () VV'\___~ t V\ J \ + '10 ~-, ........-."'" -y.....-......-'"-"-.. -...." ,._.'..........~- W Q... ~j~ \ 't i. 'J t. ~- h ~ 6 Q .S + "::I ~ ~ v (... t ~.1I.t... Q"...... e ('1 '..... + " '" d I..( ~ -1 V'" ~ II \) ,f -f \ c.. ~ +'v-G\. V\C) to ,It \;, + 'I. + I, ð VI I \ q V'\ c I <..J ') ç + ð j ç \~ \..\ ~\ 1 . J ¡ os -f" ..... ct \ ..:. t \f'" '\ \, ",4 " ~ \_, J.- T\,..n.... \ 'N'(' b -l I ì .... ,,~ + h." i- 1- h « 0 v \ ') ì ~" "I ~ 0( \Æ ~ +- '" \ '\ \ ~. ð "'" 'I ~ <') -£ 4 '- ~~t--S)m-f·-fo<1 ~~, .., t cs + ì \ \ v ~ I "C/ d- r ~ c.. 0 V'Y\ Yh ~ V\ ({ -+ h ~ fill .~ ~ \ '" ~ V\ " ~ ') C 0 ~ M '¡ ç ') \ ð ~ J-!~ d q ~ d () t ~ ....r~ "''' " ~ ðl- $ 'f' Q -t 1/ ~ (,-\ ,,-Ie. -j h" '- ð "" \ '" ,.., .Ç 0'- + ~ \I.. f> V' 0 P -R V> -I- '( .... 1'\ 0 + 10. (-, P 'r 0 v <- + ~"- s f..l:J.. ~', ~ ( U ~_.\.. (.J.t I""' W\', + . \~ ~ '" k 'J U '" V t '" '\ ....... \.{ c:. '" .¡ 0 '-'J 0 tA >, +" n, ( ~ .5 \.A ffoV t, ~\ ..LL~2 .-, -." " . /' . - ---') -1 I::S _;.: ,- '-, t; ~_. ,.'.... ........ ~, S , I t's e. q ) " c. ~ + 0 ç h ~ '" J ~ ~- \, .,~ ð.:J I a ~ So. ð l- i J..Q.. v It· ( fI r It r- + h q "'"\ 2.., ~ -f Q ,.......,., J, c. S J -/ h ~ s u ¡... V' 0 1.4 ......) " ~ \ (Ó ~ ..--1 ~ ,I\, " -r) . ~ c.. ' , W ~ ( + ~v P.Q.v- \:. \ V\ S - ß o.ç S · ..... ~(!.R.A'~ ~ I~¡~ Earlysville Area Resident's League A community association for individuals residing in the 22936 ZIp code service area and/or within the Broadus Wood attendance area. The League was formed in October of 1993 after a few Earlysville residents trying to keep abreast of all of the issues with the School Board, Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors realized that this was impossible without a group of interested individuals willing to work together and share information on a regular basis. Our Articles of Incorporation state a four-fold purpose for the League, they are in brief 1) cultivation of good neighbor relations and good community spirit and maintenance of the area as a wholesome, pleasant place to live; 2) promotion of programs that will enhance the neighborly relations, community spirit and residential quality of the area; 3) promotion of equitable policies and fair and open procedures; and 4) representation of League members to all organizations and individuals. The Earlysville Area Residents' League has 104 paid members We have tried to give our members and other Earlysville residents a chance to become more familiar with the mechanics of County government and more aware of issues that affect the Earlysville area. We hope to continue to develop as a communication bridge between the residents of Earlysville and the government, business and volunteer groups in and around our County. We realize that to be most effecti ve ~s a group we have to be proacti ve as opposed to reactive. To this end we conducted a survey pertaining to growth and development issues in the Earlysville Area. We handed out just under 2,000 surveys. 339 were returned which is a return rate of about 17 %. Forty of those surveys, or 2 % were from League members. The Earlysville Post Office has informed us that they deliver to 1,500 residences in the Earlysville area. If we multiply that by the 2.53 persons per household in the community profile from. February 1994 we have approximately 3,795 residents in Earlysville. This means that we have input from just short of 9% of the Earlysville residents. The phone survey conducted earlier this year was for 500 people or .75 % of the population of Albemarle County. While our survey may not have the same demographics as the County survey we believe that the percentage of response warrants serious consideration. E.A.R.L., P.O. Box 684, Earlysville, V A 22936 · ... Dear Earlysville Residents, Albemarle County is in the process of revising the Comprehensive Plan establish- ing a blueprint for the County's future. Decisions on land use & development, transportation, public facilities and utilities, resources, housing and public services will be made. This type of review takes place once every five years providing us with an opportunity for us to examine our community. This survey is being conducted by the Earlysville Area Residents' League. We urge you to till it out and return it so that your ideas and concerns will be heard. QUALITY OF LIFE & SERVICES Please rank the following items in order of priority from I to 6 with I being the most important: QUALITY OF LIFE _Diversity of residential development _Types of commercial development _Quality of road system _Housing affordability _Small town environment _Natural beauty/Rurallandscape Please rank the following items in order of priority from I to 7 with I being the most important: SERVICES _Quality of public schools _Quality of police protection _Quality of fire protection _Availability of shopping facilities _Availability of recreational areas _Availability of Public transit _Availability of Professional services,(med., vet., dental...) Please list the two items from above that are the most outstanding strengths in Earlysville: Please list the two items from above that are the most glaring weaknesses in Earlysville: ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT If Earlysville were to work to attract additional industry or commercial businesses how would you rate each of the following: I strongly support 2 somewhat support 3 no opinion 4 somewhat oppose 5 strongly oppose assembly I 2 345 local retail I 2 345 manufacturing I 2 3 4 5 restaurants I 2 3 4 5 distribution I 2 3 4 5 hotel/motel I 2 345 office space I 2 345 hardware store I 2 3 4 5 cottage industries I 2 345 pharmacy I 2 345 dry-cleaners I 2 345 amusement parks I 2 345 research & development labs I 2 345 major department store I 2 345 major chain grocery store I 2 3 4 5 TRANSPORTATION Please check your most common commute direction on weekday mornings: Route 29 South _Route 660 Route 29 North _Other _Route 743 South _Route 743 North Plea~ list any state/county roads you know of in Earlysville that are in desperate need of repaIr. RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Albemarle County presently has a shortage of affordable housing. It is probable that Earlysville will be expected to play its part in working to alleviate this shortage. Please rate each of the following options: 1 strongly support 2 somewhat support 3 no opinion 4 somewhat oppose 5 strongly oppose apartment complexes I 2 3 4 5 mobile home parks I 2 3 4 5 duplexes single family units I 2 345 1 2 3 4 5 How would you prefer to see these homes situated: _interspersed throughout the community in small pods or _clustered in a designated high density housing area RECREATION Please put a check next to the four most important recreational needs in Earlysville from the list below: _Community Pool _Community Center _tennis courts _Par Course _walking path _children's playground _sidewalk from Downtown to Broadus Wood School _sidewalk from Downtown to the Murray Plant _Other _Senior activities _Teen activities _bike paths _amusement parks _ball field PROPERTY TAXES & SERVICES Please put a check next to the statement below that best describes your feelings: _I am willing to have a moderate increase in taxes in order to have additional County services _I am satisfied with things as they are and want no additional services or increases in property taxes. _I want a decrease in property taxes and am willing to have a reduction in County servIces. GROWfH Please put a check next to the statement below that best describes your feelings: _I would like to see a push for greater residential, commercial and industrial growth in Earlysville. _I would like to see growth in Earlysville continue at a slow and controlled pace. _I would not like to see any further growth in Earlysville. Thank-you for taking the time to participate in this survey. If you have areas of concern not addressed by this survey we urge you to attend the Public Hearings that will be held by the Board of Supervisors and/or bring your ideas to the next EARL meeting. You can return this survey to or drop it off at the Earlysville Florist or mail to: EARL, P.O. Box 684, Earlysville, V A 22936 Surveys should be returned by March 7 Earlysville Area Residents' League Survey Results - May 1994. Services and Quality of Life Strengths Weaknesses Recreational Needs/Desires (2 choices) (2 choices) (4 choices) Diversity of Res. Community Development 1% 4% Pool 50% Types of Comm. Community 45% Development 2% 8% Center Road System 2% 20% Tennis Courts 30% Housing Affordability 1% 10% Par Course 10% Small Town Environment 60% -0- Walking Path 60% Natural Beauty! Children's Rural Landscape 75% -0- Playground 35% Sidewalk Downtown Public Schools 26% 6% to Broadus Wood 10% Police Protection 1% 25% Sidewalk to Murray 5% Fire Protection 10% 1% Senior Activities 20% Shopping Facilities 3% 20% Teen Activities 30% Rec. Areas -0- 45% Bike Paths 65% Public Transit <1% 30% Ball Field 35% Professional Amusement Services 14% 2% Parks 5% QUALITY OF LIFE (Rank in order of priority) Highest Lowest 1 ,.., 3 4 5 6 "- Diversity of Residential 3% 4% 14% 21% 33% 19% Development Types of Commercial <1% 1% 10% 17% 17% 50% Development Quality of Road System 6% 10% 38% 29% 32% 6% Housing Affordabi1ity 5% 4% 23% 28% 15% 22% Small Town Environment 23% 60% 8% 4% <1% 2% Natural Beauty / Rural 62% 21% 7% 1% 2% 1% QUALITY 01<' SERVICES (Rank in Order of Priority) Highest Lowest 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Public Schools 48% 8% 13% 11% 3% 6% 3% Police 16% 34% 25% 12% 4% 5% 2% Fire 19% 34% 32% 8% 6% <1% 1% Shopping 2% 5% 7% 18% 27% 30% 14% Recreational Areas 6% 6% 9% 27% 25% 22% 9% Public Transit 1% 3% 3% 2% 8% 18% 63% Professional Services: 7% 10% 11% 22% 27% 18% 8% Property Taxes and Services: I want a decrease in property taxes and am willing to have a reduction in County services. General Pop. EARL 40% 50% 50% 43% 10% 7% I am willing to have a moderate increase in taxes in order to have additional County services. I am satisfied with things as they are and want no additional services or increases in property taxes. Growth: General Pop. EARL I would like to see a push for greater residential, commercial and industrial growth in Ea.rlysville. 2% -0- I would like to see growth in Ea.rlysville continue at a slow and controlled pace. 60% 75% I would not like to see any further growth in Ea.rlysville 38% 25% Residential Development-Affordable Housing: strongly somewhat no somewhat strongly support support opinion oppose oppose Apartments 1% 10% 5% 24% 60% Mobile Homes 1% 1% 4% 5% 89% Duplexes 5% 31% 15% 16% 33% Single Family Homes 48% 30% 8% 3% 11% Homes interspersed throughout the Homes clustered in a designated community in small pods high density housing area 70% 30% Transportation-Major Commute Routes: 29-South 29-North 7% 8% 743-South 60% 743-North 660 Other 5% 15% 5% Economic Development strong1 y somewhat no somewhat strongly support support opinion oppose oppose assembly 3% 15% 13% 24% 45% manufacturing 1% 9% 9% 21% 60% distribution 5% 12% 15% 20% 48% office space 15% 30% 19% 15% 21% cottage industries 21% 26% 20% 11% 22% dry-cleaners 16% 28% 20% 10% 25% local retail 22% 34% 15% 10% 19% restaurants 28% 40% 12% 7% 13% hoteVmote1 3% 8% 13% 20% 56% hardware store 40% 32% 10% 3% 14% phannacy 38% 34% 8% 3% 17% amusement parks 4% 5% 7% 10% 74% research & 13% 16% 17% 15% 38% development department store 2% 5% 6% 11% 76% major chain 6% 10% 5% 15% 64% . Prepared by Lisa Kerwien-Harman 973-9352 - J.,J_ ... 07/!:!/95 15: 19 :!!: 804 978 4456 .. H¡:¡SH-LEE'S-¡:¡CS D¡ST1~iBUT¡;D TO )30ARy--MtiMBERS ON 7-1'L-1S P. 01 3 ¡995 FÆ~b 2- ~(;S. Cynthia Hash FLTC MembE"1" 2065 Whispering Woods D~ive Charlottesville, VA 22901-7203 Telephone: 804-978-1821 Facsimile: 804-978-4456 7ô: g~ 1 ~ .J u 1 y 1 3 , 1 995 Wayne Cil imbe~9, Di~. oT Þlanning Dept. Albeco. Boa~d of Supervisors Met~opol itan Þlanning O~ganization Virginia Dept. of T~anspo~tatlon Charlottesville Transportation Board North Charlottesville Business Council Forest Lakes Community Asso. .John Macdonald,Chair of Forest Lakes Tr·anspo,..tation Committee(FLTC) Steve Runkle, Þres. oT Kessler Group To A'l Þarties Above, Please make copies of this letter and the attached diagram for each member of your organization. If i t has not a 1 ready been done, I wou 1 d like to see the Comprehens i ve Pl an, CATS, and/or TI P to be amended to i nc I ude requ I ring deve I oper-s to bu i 1 d ser-v j ce roads a long pr- i mar y r-oads and to include the other basic concepts as I have drawn on the attached diagr-am. If yoU wi 11 study the attached di agram, it wi 11 not be necessary fo,.. me to reiterate my points that are made thereon. To he 1 p ge t a mor-e accura. te coun t oT where commu ters a.r-e travel jng, please do a. sUr-ve)' of employers in Charlottesville and Albemarle County. The survey can be mail ed to espec i a 11 y the largest employer-s in the area asKing that they distribuh thl!' sur-veys to their- employees. The employees can return them by mai I or- to their- employers for return to VDOT, MPO, Þlanning Dept., or whichever governmental agency does this. The survey can ask where the employees 1 ive and what route they tr-avel, among other thin;s. ThanK YOU for your consider-ation. Sincerely, #'II~ /ch Cynthia Hash .............. 804 978 4456 15:20 z: 07/13/95 · ' ... '....-'s.i; ',c ~ ,~~ -~ W §'j ~ '~~og l ~'- ~-.:¡ ~ ~ :¿';t '~\D i ,-' t.~ IT -:z § ~ ~ j<1I1 ~'~ '- ~ ~ II! II) ~.J. 8 ~ '=' S ... \ ~ r~ ~ cJ u~ W \I'!J) :;? 0" ~ <. 1"-.) o ({.. cJ I\.U ",ct! LEE'S-¡:¡CS H¡:¡SH- P.02 . @ § ~ JI ¡:~~ ~ I~ ~,.,."...- ,~ 3 ~ 11\ ';(I\~{ ,- P. \LJ ~ ~.c.;J.. ~ 0,_ ê!: ;;)~~o VI ~ ~~ ,; ~'~ L- ~3Þ ~~ A~"" 03 ~~~ ~~ ~~d: ~ ~¡:~ 1-1. \!) ~ 1;; '- IJ" ~ \I,)~.::). ~ a R c.\I '~ I&i J~::I' > ~ 4 ~ ~ .'!: ~ l==,- 0 cot: ..,.. ~ ...êÏq) è ~~~111 ~~ Þ ....'1Ii w 4: ~~~~ Á~ 0() VI ~,_ _ tit ~ ct: \.I) ~ VI uJ ~b 0 \u ...~:=: IU ~ ~ ~ '>' 'J:; ~ ,- r ~ t Ÿ ~ ~ ,- 11.1 ~ ~ y):t..J~ ~\C~ ~ '~'e ~ 4J" to 0' i ~.- J \U ~ ~ ~ ~ ;~ ~:s a \L.;v ~J=¡::q. ~~~ E3\ùt II\...J~ o:el4.lF ~<~ ... Co <'L. 'k I,.J ø/. ~ ~ ~:¡¡ ¿jr. 11.1 ;3 t. ~ Þ ~ '1ft 4) ~ IU 'J\ "I: t)~~ª A~.J W4!~.J:::i ~ ~ <,- 3 q; ~..~ C,.¡ ~ 'J\ ¡..; :! ..;'1 f-<:i -< Vt'_;:$ ~ ~ 7.U.O II) ;;¡ ,E '5 ~ 3 ~.~ ~ 3 W ¡:: ,t: $ ~ $. i ~ ð~ ,~ ~ ~ ,,:z:. f"J g. ~ ;:. ~~~ ~ t ~ 'VI .~ ~ ~~c;: ~~~ ~'~t ~8\U w ,~ ~ .~ '" ~~ \J ,.,. ~[) 0~ y (:A ;~ ^ () ~ 1.11 ~ ~~ c¡!, I c; o ¡,... \'4 :t ~ :to ~ t"þ 'i' . w "-..J ë:.. ~ j <t: r- fJ cL W ~ ~ a ,~ t,¡J þ ~If,.'!; ~,- ~ . V\ .>- ~ ~~~~~ ~6l. ". ~ . V\W< :::'11\.- -1 <- ,,- (.) æ. \J.) ~ ~ () v ..'Q ~.......... .... ~ .~ 'I .~ \U :J: tf~ "j ~ ~ Ie :t: ~~ \b '- Uj ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,;; ~ ~ 0. <: <t: 71 - - :::. ~ V) ~ c::> X ~ ~ :t \.b '~ <:. ~ \10 ~ ~4.:J W<o G::S~ æ:. :s 0 CJ o:Q'ït:V) J) <. ~ A ct: c ~ ~ r ~ "¡ /"\ ~ jfW- Q. ~ qQ ~ ~ :z: .... ~ .~ ~ W ..- ~\:: -r '¥.. « ~ ,- et=. q... ~ ~ ~ ~ A ~ (f\ UJ ~ ~ .::$ V1 ~~ S ~' :¡;~ I4,)Cl>',)ø~.Å ~L~~::o~ ~~~~.i3<:IC ~ 0"" 0._ ~ >- \1\ () A'> ~'i u"'!IC. ~Â~A~\""~ O<ì¡)c~~ ~'_ OOwo ~ ~ ct.~ <~.!8 V\ ~ ~ '~ \U ~ ð ~ ~ J, r~l f oJ 141 -J ~,....~ ~ \.U ~_~ ~i¡~ <. \-¡~ -..;.,..o~ < J ¡. P.O. Box 564 Earlysville, Virginia 22936 1 3 July 1}9:gi~ I'JI 1 7 í(,¡qr.. \.~ t ~~ , " ...J Mr. walter Perkins Board of Supervisors representative Route 3, Box 79 Crozet, Virginia 22932 ; LI ,''', ioi!'''' '- ./ o Dear Mr. Perkins: The matter of the Airport Trailer Park will be brought before the Board of Supervisors next week. The developer, Wendell Wood, is asking for an extension of his expired special use permit. Mr. Wood has had two years in which to satisfy the necessary requirements of the permit. He has not done so. Since he has been given ample time, there is no compelling argument to grant him an extention, particularly when there are important reasons why his project should not be built. One of those reasons is that a public airport represents a substantial public investment. Nearby high density residential development tends to restrict the use of an airport. This kind of residential land use, of which a trailer park is an example, does not belong alongside a growing airport where it threatens the public's investment. Another reason is the 15 year time limit proposed for this development. After this time, Mr. Wood plans to use the land for a more profitable purpose. The resultant uprooting of the tenants seems hardly fair to people who will have settled into the community. They will have also invested extra money in customized mobile homes with special sound abatement qualities made to order for this specific location. We understand that the 1990 Comprehensive Plan was changed for the benefit of Mr. Wood's fifty acres that comprise this site. Such action runs contrary to county policy. This document was developed as a planning guide which would protect the interests of the majority. To disregard the agreed upon guidelines in favor of the business interests of one individual makes a mockery of the Comprehensive Plan. I .' We strongly urge the Board of Supervisors not to allow this individual to ride roughshod over the interests of the people of this county. Sincerely, C)1d.r-' 1 [. U/./!?fµ/,----- vV A!ít¡1J~õJ1 Jodie Webber Walter Koch Earlysville residents cc. Albemarle County Planning Commission , CHÂRLiALB AIRPORT TEL No.804-974-7476 Jul 12,95 ~,-~..,\,~ .J 9:21 No.OOl P~ Phone' Fa'( . fal(/ VIA FACSIHILE July 12, 1995 q¡'~ [:'" ('<to ¡r.'" If 'V" ~= ir"11 ¡j~1i~: :;':-~ I: 9 . It:: l~fQ JUL 1 2 1995 Mr. V. Wayne Cil1mberg, Director Department of Planning & Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, virginia 22902-4596 /'" I ,. L ,;. ·"t.., ,..~ , t''''. (" r:.....). ~,':.~. ,"',". ':". . -. -. " . -- -....! - - - '-' Re: (SDP 94-058) Airport Hobile Ho~e Park Preliminary site Plan Dear Wayne; I would like to take this opportunity to clarify several issues which have been raised during consideration of the above matter. In terms ot the acquisition of the 300 square feet of airport property by Uni tad Land Corporation, the Airport Authority was approached in December 1993 about this matter. In January 1994 the Authority had coordinated and received preliminary approval from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for this transaction. Since the mobile home park is sited contiguous to the airport the FAA required further analysis of the potential airport noise impacts on this land use. 8etween January and April of that year this matter was sufficiently addressed and on April 15, 1994 the FAA issued å letter indicating that release of the 300 square feet was acceptable. At the May 11, 1994 Airport Authority Board meeting release of this property was finalized and We moved to have deeds and plats prepared for this transaction. On July 14, 1994 a proposed deed was forwardeà to United Land Corporation for consideration and on SepteÞber 12, 1994 the documents were executed by our Chairman. While finalization of the deed and plat did take several months to complete, you will note that both FAA/Authority Board approval for this transaction were completed in approximately four (4) months. I have also learned that concern has been expressed about the reduced size of the 1994/2014 airport noise exposure contours as reflected in our Kaster Plan. You will recall that when the County Airport Overlay District was enacted in the early 1980's the airport maintained an average of 3-4 Boeing 737/727 jet aircraft arrivals and departures per day. CharlotlttBVille-Albemarle Airport Authorlry f' - · . C~ARL/ALB AIRPORT TEL No.804-974-7476 Jul 12,95 9:21 No.001 P.02 ,OJ Mr. Cilimberg Page 2 July 12, 1995 As such, the 1980 Airport Master Plan, which provided the basis for this overlay district, maintained 8 noise exposure map which reflected these daily jet aircraft operations. Accordingly, the dimensions of the noise contours were generally rather elongated off of our runway ends and also spread to the east and west of the airport. The noise 'exposure map for the 1994 Airport Kaster Plan Update does not reflect the impact of these noisier jet aircraft since USA1r cut our jet service in 1992. While our year 2014 map reflects the return of daily jet operations, please know that the federal government has established 1999 as the date when noisier aircraft engines are to no longer be utilized. Hence, with the reduction in daily jet operations and consideration of the use of less noisier jet engines in the (uture it is plausible to conclude that the airport noise exposure contours would indeed be reduced from our 198P stUdy and the original county airport overlay district boundaries. Please also know that our noise exposure map was prepared utilizing the FAA Integrated Noise Model (INK) version 3.10. Inputs to the INK include airport geometrics, aircraft mix, runway use, flight tracks, approach and departure profiles, and day/evening/night aircraft arrivals and departures. As you can see, we utilized an FAA approved methodology for determining the contours of our noise exposure map and believe that it represents the current and future noise exposure con~ours for this facility based upon our forecasts for a1rcraf~ operations. It you should have any questions concerning this information, please do n~t hesi~ate to contact me. · -'ALBEMARLE COUNTY POBox 1009 165 SPOTNAF RD CHARLOTTES\lILL~. SERVICE AUTHORITY VÞ, 22902 · (804) 977-4511 FAX (804) 979-0698 July 10, "1"1'~f' ',t·:.. ,-...;-~ tP~,:-7 ~ '",~ J ~~' ç;"';¡...~ 1995:'.';....~~u,~. ~w...oUr~.J: ~ \i.. ti'r.~ \"~~..~ ~iln ~ ·f~...t.,..:ø ~-:'-".' Mr. W. Thomas Muncaster Earth Tech 1115 5th st., S.W. Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 JUt 1 1 1995 D¡~:J'nr¡ìn"'i nlpn,·t c ~ ~~. ., '." !~....:) a.I ....~~...... ....' Re: Airport Mobile Home Park Offsite Water Dear Mr. Muncaster: The plans, with Albemarle County Service Authority specifications referenced, entitled "Airport Mobile Home Park Waterline Plan & Profile" dated November 22, 1994, last revised January 20, 1995, prepared by Earth Tech are approved for construction. These plans consist of 2 sheets. One set of approved plans is enclosed for your records. Any previously approved plans are voided with this approval. This approval is for basic compliance with the General Construction Specifications of the Albemarle County Service Authority and does not relieve the contractor from responsibility for his work as it relates to the plans and specifications. Albemarle County Service Authority requires that a copy of these construction plans be on the job site to ensure no misunderstanding and to expedite contractor's completion of as- built data for your client. This approval is valid for a period of six (6) months from this date. If construction is not in progress at the end of this time period, the approval shall be void. A preconstruct ion conference shall be scheduled with the project manager to ensure coordination and answer any questions. This will be a short meeting to review the project, materials, test methods and schedule, in order to expedite construction. Please have the proper party call me at 977-4511 to schedule the meeting. If you have any questions or if we can be of assistance, please advise us. PCG:dmg cc: Wendell Wood ~ate Health Dept. Planning Dept. Inspections Dept. C. Gorham, P.E. Engineer II Zoning Dept. Robert Shaw, Soil Erosion Inspector David Hensley, ACSA Inspector + -,ALBEMARLE COUNTY PO Box 1009 163 SPOTNAP RD CHARLOTTtS,/':_LE SERVICE AUTHORITY VA 22902 · (804) 977-4511 FAX (804) 979-0698 July 10, 1995 Mr. W. Thomas Muncaster Earth Tech 1115 5th street, S.W. Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-6465 ii;~~ E (:;; ~: ~ 1V ~:~~ ,JUL 1 1 1995 Re: Airport Mobile Home Park l:~~?~"1~'1¡r:n iDEl(}t" ...... Dear Mr. Muncaster: The plans, with Albemarle County Service Authority specifications referenced, "Airport Mobile Home Park Phase One" dated October 18, 1994, last revised June 13, 1995, prepared by Muncaster Engineering are approved for construction. These plans consist of 12 sheets. One set of approved plans is enclosed for your records. Any previcusly approved plans are voided with this approval. This approval is for basic compliance with the General Construction Specifications of the Albemarle County Service Authority and does not relieve the contractor from responsibility for his work as it relates to the plans and specifications. Albemarle County Service Authority requires that a copy ~f these construction plans be on the job site to ensure no misunderstanding and to expedite contractor's completion of asbuilt data for your client. This approval is valid for a period of six (6) months from this date. If construction is not in progress at the end of this time period, the approval shall be void. A preconstruction conference shall be scheduled with the project manager to ensure coordi~ion and answer any questions. This will be a short meeting to teview the project, materials, test methods and schedule, in order to expedite construction. Please have the proper party call me at 977-4511 to schedule the meeting. (The pressure for water may exceed 80 psi at some meter locations) . If you have any questions or if we can be of assistance, please advise us. C. Gorham, P.E. Engineer II PCG/lbt c.c: Wendell Wood I state Health Department L/"Planning Department . Inspections Department Zoning Department Robert Shaw, Soil Erosion Inspector David Hensley, ACSA Inspector ... . M';? ~; r.1 ~~ r\l t'::~: \r)) :ï Ii ~!.,,"O ,./¡..!' 1["", 1'1,. },,,,,. '". .. JUL 6 'l)Y~ . I ..~ ., r I \....",""_.:.. .',''','_', ~"~. . .. ..~,' .':.":~:"'3 " ,.' COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Inspections 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296-5832 MEMORANDUM To: Bill Fritz - Senior Planner From: Jay Schlothauer - Deputy Director ofInspection~ Date: July 5, 1995 Re: Airport Mobile Home Park (SDP-94-058) (94-01747) (plans revised June 13, 1995) The Inspections Department and the FirelRescue Division have no further comments. Approval may be granted by these offices. JS/js cc: Quentin Royer - Earth Tech file <t . ~.... e e e -. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mcintire Road - Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 July 21, 1993 United Land Corporation Attn: Wendell' Wood P. O. Box 5548 Charlottesville, VA 22905 Dear Mr. Wood: RE: SP-93-13 United Land Corporation The lUbemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on July 14, 1993, approved the above-noted request to establish a mobile home park on approximately 57 acres. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Deletion/relocation of all lots within fifty feet of an adjacent parcel; 2. Planning Commission approval of final site plan; 3. Staff approval of all mobile home units proposed for loca- tion within the mobile home park to ensure compliance with the acoustical performance standards of Section 30.2.5; 4. Staff approval of private road maintenance agreements at such time as the property may be sUbdivided; 5. Maintenance of recreation facilities shall be the responsibility of the property OvJner in accord with Section 4.16.3.2; 6. No direct connection to Route 29 shall be made without amendment of this permit; .r'· ·e e e United Land Corporation Page 2 July 21, 1993 7. provision of a conventional "T" intersection with Route 606 constructed in accordance with Virginia Department of Trans- portation requirements. Access is shown on a plan initial- led "WDF" dated 7/8/93; 8. No plan of development shall be submitted for review until the necessary easements and/or right-of-way acquisition for the Routè 606 entrance have been obtained; 9. Provision of access to Tax Map 32, Parcel 46. Before beginning this use, you must obtain a zoning clearance from the Zoning Department. Before the Zoning Department will issue a clearance, you must comply with the conditions in this letter. For further information, please call Babette Thorpe at 296-5875. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, , v~~C¡:;:r' Director of Planning VWC/jcw cc: Amelia McCulley JO.Higgins Development e STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: WILLIAM D. FRITZ JULY 13, 1993 JULY 14, 1993 ZMA-92-14 WENDELL WOOD SP-93-13 UNITED LAND CORPORATION Petitions: e ZMA-92-14 Wendell Wood - Proposal to rezone approximately 57 acres from RA, Rural Areas to R-15, Residential (proffered) on propertY'1 described as Tax Map 32, Parcels 50, 53, 54, 55, and 56 located on the east side of Rt. 606 approximately 0.6 miles south of Rt. 649. (The following additional parcels are affected by the proposed roád network: Tax Map 32, Parcels 44, 45, 42A, 42B, 42C, 42D and 42E and Tax Map 46, Parcel 5 to remain zoned RA, Rural Areas, but with proffers). The site is in the Rivanna Magisterial District and is located in a designated growth area (Community of Hollymead) recommended for High Density Residential (10.01 - 34 dwelling units per acre). SP-93-13 united Land Corporation - Proposal to establish a mobile home park [24.2(10)] on approximately 57 acres currently zoned RA, Rural Areas. (ZMA-92-14 is pending on this site). Property, described as Tax Map 32, Parcels 50, 53, 54, 55 and 56, is located on the east side of Rt. 606 approximately 0.6 miles sou~h of Rt. 649 in the Rivanna Magisterial District. This site is located in the Community of Hollymead recommended for High Density Residential. Character of the Area: This site is wooded and slightly rOlling. The trees are a mixture of evergreen and deciduous stands. The site is within the Airport Noise Impact Area and airport operations are adjacent. The site h~s limited frontage on Route 606. The nearest dwelling to the property line is approximately 40 feet. One intermittent stream crosses the property. ApPlicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to rezone approximately 57 acres and to establish a mobile home park for 236 mobile home units. Access to this site is shown on a new public road which intersects Route 606. All internal roads serving the mobile homes are proposed as private roads. Recreation facilities and parking for recreational vehicles are shown on the plan submitted for review. Proffers have been submitted (Attachment C). e SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff has reviewed these requests for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval of both requests. 1 e e e - -.. , Plannina and Zonina Historv: A Comprehensive Plan Amendment affecting this area was approved by the Board of Supervisors on October 7, 1992. The land use map and recommendation adopted by the Board is included as Attachment D. FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS: At the request of the Board of Supervisors, the Planning staff reviews rezoning requests for their fiscal impact on public and transportation facilities. This analysis is limited tp those rezonings that have some effect on facilities that are identified in our Capital Improvements Program (CIP) or six Year Road Plan and have a cost associated with them. The analysis .is based on the fair share determination of a particular development's impact to affected facilities. It must be pointed out that this analysis is cursory, due to the lack of information on revenues and the amount attributable to this development. The cost outlined by staff only indicates the proportionate share of construction costs from the additional development generated by the rezoning over by-right development. The fOllowing are those facilities which will be affected by the rezoning request and have a cost associated with them. A. Schools . Schools affected by this proposal based on school district boundaries at the time of this report which have a cost as identified in the CIP are: New Middle School Albemarle High School $8,079,000 $2,495,000 - Based on the additional students as estimated by multipliers currently used by the County, 81 additional elementary school students (Hollymead Elementary School), 33 additional middle school students (New Middle School), and 37 additional high school students (Albemarle High School) are anticipated. Costs attributable to this development based on the proportion of students is $410,366.00 or $1,738.83 per dwelling unit. B. Library This proposal is in the service area of the Northside Branch Library (Project cost = $130,000). Based on the proportionate impact to library capacity, the proportionate share cost of this project is $3,464.50 or $14.68 per dwelling unit. 2 e C. Recreational Facilities Recreation facilities affected by this proposal which have a cost identified in the CIP are: Hollymead Middle School Outdoor Recreation Rivanna Park Improvements Hollymead Elementary School Outdoor Recreation $225,000 $143,144 $37,000 Based on the additional population generated by this request, the proportional share cost of this project is $20,900.58 or $88.56 per dwelling unit. t PROPORTIONATE COST PER PROJECTS TOTAL COST $ SHARE $ DU $ (236 DU"s) New Middle School 8,079,000.00 355,476.00 1,506.25 Albemarle High School 2,495,000.00 54,890.00 232.58 Northside Branch Library 130,000.00 3,464.50 14.68 e Parks 405,144.00 20,900.58 88.56 TOTALS 11,109,144.00 434,731. 08 1,842.07 The potential for redistricting this site into Broadus Wood Elementary exists. The capacity at that school is 497. The anticipated 1993-1994 enrollment is 393. Assuming redistricting, the Fiscal Impact analysis is based on a total CIP cost of $11,933,044.00 resulting in a proportionate share of $552,327.i1 or $2,340.37 per dwelling unit. Consideration of the fiscal impact of the development needs to be balanced against considerations of the County's growth management policy and other County policies. Excessive development exactions could have the effect of discouraging utilization of the holding capacity of Growth Areas and, thus lead to accelerated development in the Rural Areas. e 3 STAFF COMMENT: e staff has identified the following major issues which must be addressed: 1. Access 2. Airport Impact Area 3. Comprehensive Plan Each are reviewed separately. Access e The applicant is proposing a conventional "T" intersection on Route 606 to serve this development. The Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) has provided comments on this access (Attachment E). Their comments indicate that the concept of this access, is acceptable. (Final plans will be required for the design of the entrance.) Route 606 is anticipated to be adequate to support the volume of traffic generated by this use. An easement and/or right-of-way dedication from the Airport Authority may be needed to accommodate the proposed entrance. Comments from the Director of Aviation at the Airport regarding the entrance are included as Attachment F. In part these comments state "it is uncertain that· such approval of any such encumbrance would be granted given the fact that this land use is not compatible with airport operations." In order for easements or right-of-way dedication to occur, approval must be obtained· from both the Airport Authority and the Federal Aviation Administration. Historically, the Planning commission and Board of Supervisors have not entertained requests which involved off-site improve~ents without evidence that those improvements could be obtained. VDOT has not reviewed a detailed -plan for the entrance configuration and staff cannot verify at this time that access can be achieved without impacting Airport property. (Staff wi+l continue to review this aspect of the plan.) Should this rezoning and special use permit be approved, the applicant is put on notice that he accepts responsibility for obtaining permission for off-site improvements. Conditions on the special use permit will require that any change in the entrance will require amendment of the special use permit in order to exercise the allowances of the proffered rezoning. The applicant will serve the mobile home units with private roads. A 110 foot right-of-way is being provided for the proposed entrance road and would be available should a four-lane divided highway connecting Route 606 and Route 29 be approved in the future. (This connection is not proposed at this time and will be subject to review with subsequent development proposals.) e 4 e No plan has been approved for a possible Meadowcreek Parkway alignment for this area. The May, 1993 draft report of an alignment study being conducted by Sverdrup corporation identifies alternatives W1 and W2 which could affect this area. Wl is a north-south road parallel to Route 29 which connects to Airport Road. W2 is a combination of Wl and east-west connectors to Timberwood Boulevard, Hollymead Drive North, and Route 606. However, the exact location of these roadways is not established. Airport Impact Area The proposed mobile home park lies entirely within the Airport Impact Area Overlay District and is within the Noise Impact Area. Staff has contacted the Airport Authority which has stated in part: liThe proposed mobile home park development is located adjacent to the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport. In reviewing the Albemarle County Noise Overlay Area it would appear that this development is a non-compatible land use based on aircraft sound exposure emanating from the Airport. e Many communities across the united states have allowed the proliferation of residential developments in close proximity to airports only to find later on that a noise mitigation program is necessary. Such noise mitigation programs typically involves a very expensive and litigious process involving fee simple acquisition of residential property, payment of relocation/moving expenses, and numerous lawsuits filed by residents against local governmental jurisdiction. II The overall issue of locating a residential area within the Airport Impact Area was discussed during review of the CPA. Therefore, staff views the adoption of the CPA by the Board of Supervisors as recognizing this issue and finding the use to be acceptable within the Airport Impact Area. All mobile homes which propose to locate in the park must satisfy the associated performance standards of section 30.2.5 of the Zoning Ordinance.. staff notes that no relief from this ordinance provisions exists. (As of this writing, staff has not been provided information establishing whether or not any mobile home units will meet the acoustical performance standards.) Comment from the Inspections Department is included as Attachment G. Staff has included a graph taken from the Airport Master Plan indicating the aircraft annoyance anticipated in this development (Attachment H). Comprehensive Plan The full text, and map of the Comprehensive Plan recommendations for Hollymead are included as Attachment D. e 5 e staff op1n1on is that the mobile home park is substantially in compliance with the comprehensive Plan. Buffers from adjacent properties have not been adequately provided. As a condition of . approval, staff recommends deletion of any lot encroachment within 50 feet of adjacent properties. This setback will be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan recommendation and section 5.3.5.2,of the Zoning Ordinance. The stream valleys adjacent to the mobile home park are not be disturbed. One stream valley' located on-site will be utilized for recreation area. This stream is intermittent and should not interfere with recreational activities. The applicant has provided proffers binding this site to usage for a mobile home park for a period of not less than fifteen (15) years. SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATION: . Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 1. The area proposed for development is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. 2. The nature of the use, mobile home park, is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. e 3. A mobile home park may provide increased affordable housing stock. Several studies of mobile home issues identify a need for 250 replacement units for mobile homes due to mobile home park closures, potential closures or reduction in park size. Staff has identified the fOllowing factors which are unfavorable to this' request: 1. Access to Route 606 appears to affect property owned by the Airport Authority. The Airport Authority has not indicated that the necessary easements or right-of-way will be granted. 2. No information has been s~bmitted indicating that mobile homes satisfy the acoustical performance standards of Section jO.2.5 of the zoning Ordinance. The most significant unresolved issue is access (availability of right-of-way/easements for the entrance). Ideally, these issues are resolved prior to public hearing. At this time, the applicant has not resolved this issue with Virginia Department of Transportation or the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport Authority. However, conditions in the special use permit have been provided to address this issue. Should the Planning e 6 ·e commission and Board of supervisors believe this issue has been adequately addressed by conditions, staff believes that the favorable factors warrant approval of the rezoning and special use permit with acceptance of relevant proffers 1isted below. 1. The mobile home park is proffered for a period of not less than 15 years from the start of development in accorqance with the Comprehensive Plan. The start of development is defined as the date the first building permit ·is issued. . 2. The frontage of Route 29 containing Tax Map 32, Parcels· 43A, 43, 42E, 42D, 42B, 42C, 42A and Tax Map 46, Parcel 5 shall contain not more than three entrances. The county may require closure of any existing entrances at the time of establishment of any new entrance such that the total number of ehtrances does not exceed three. 3. An access road between the mobile home sales area and mobile home park shall be developed at the time of establishment of the mobile home sales use. This access road shall be used only for the movement of mobile homes between the two uses and for emergency access. Should the Board of Supervisors choose to approve SP-93-13, staff recommends the following conditions: e RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: 1. Deletion/relocation of all lots within 50 feet of an adjacent parcel; 2. Staff approval of final site plan; 3. Staff approval of all mobile home units proposed for location within the mobile home park ,to' ensure compliance with the acoustical performance standards of section 30.2.5; 4. Staff approval of private road maintenance agreements; 5. Maintenance of recreation facilities shall be the responsibility of the property owner in accord with section 4.16.3.2; 6. No direct connection to Route 29 shall be made without amendment of this permit; 7. provision of a conventional "T" intersection with Route 606 constructed in accordance with Virginia Department of Transportation requirements. Access is shown on a plan initialled WDF dated 7/8/93; e 7 e ·e e 8. No plan of development shall be submitted for review until the necessary easements and/or right-of-way acquisition for the Route 606 entrance have been obtained. ---------------- ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C- Applicant's Proffers D - Comprehensive Plan Recommendations for Hollymead E - Virginia Department of Transportation Comment F - Airport Authority Comment G - Inspections Department Comment H - 'Airport Annoyance Graph I - Letters from the Public 8 ~o~ . ~....('... "\ 1810' , ...'-' .. fQA. MVUNT.\IN O~\;r~ .": E~) ®J\' I , ~~'" ",",0.1",,11_.', ", \0 ;"" I' "J " . , d~l~J '1 . :"".j:'?:.:;~\~; ,( '[/r; . . "<0' 't'i"";-)..,· "',- c 'r~<~;t\:":" "', .~ l¡Lil'- __ ," lç.!-~ :t .... ~.~"ì 1 /'~'~'--_''''- fEJ ."J ,,' I~-" ',"', ~ ~I~ f/ " fIT..l "'\. "..1....,.1 ¡~IÕJ " ( '--"..ï\ ~ ': r..... ,1 ) . r!iffi.7r·, , - \\ I ~I:~ J ; ;;1., ... . \-. GillSON MOUNTAIN ( ~ o (¡ Iv IATTACHMENT ~ï ,..... '. ,1' ., "" 0(. ".~ \ ~ ~ (fll~-J'"" u \__ J I' ~': t StA!:i21 . ... ~\ \: ¿' c. ZMA-92":'l4 Wendell ~ '-.........~ - .,--~._,.. ._-- , ,rGiõI _ ;,,'," 0__ .......- \ (> ! ~~ ~ ,. / ;('.1 .,} ~1~ _.... ~-.,;.--- -=-_~ \ ;: ~;I '·b,.':~'oJ . lD ,,' \ '''-, ." /' I " / ~J ,sq..;-''''-'- Iill1; I -/ .... .¿.. ,. Co .,~, . , I '. J " \ I 6]"" \ \ I .l , ,. / L'~~] v ò ~. ~\j' o '" "- '\ (J ," ~,. g-~.' -;.... Ë~! .J .~. ( ,,' G· \' ........:-- .-..... --.--- \ J Y\ b-... IATTACHMENT 81 ZMA-93-06 United Land Corp. e e e r ~vf u n c: a s t e r lEngineering & Computer Applic:at1.ons C----'--~3j8-fT~ ~ oa d Charlottesville,- VA 22901 804-978-7879 - ---. I ATTACHMENT C I B IREOEIVED July 6, 1993 JUl 0 7 1991 Planning Dept. Mr. William D. Fdtz, Senior Planner Department of Planning & Çommunity Development Albemarle County 401 McIntire Road Charlottes\.fille, Virginia 22901 Re: Airport Mobile Home Park <ZMA-92-14, ZMA-93-06) Dear Mr. Fritz: The following proffers supersede all previous proffers and are offered in regard to this rezoning request: 1. The mobile home park is proffered for. a pedod of not less than 15 years from the start of development in accordance with the Comprehensive Plan. The start of development is defined as the date the first building permit is issued. 2. The mobile home sales lot use will be limited to mobile home sales and the existing grocery store and gasoline sales. 3. The mobile hOlfle sales lot entr ance will be closed or altered if required by the future plan of development for the remaining area designated office and regional service in the Comprehensive Plan. 4. The frontage on Route 29 containing Tax Map 32, Parcels 43A, 43, 42E, 42D, 428, 42C, 42Aand Tax Map 46 Parcel 5 shall contain not more than three entrances. The County may require closure of any existing entrances at the time of establishment of any new entrance such that the total number of entrances does not exceed three. 5. The site plan for the mobile home sales lot will not be signed until the site plan for a minimum of 100 mobile home units is signed. 6. An access road between the mobile home sales area and the mobile home park shall be developed at the time' of establishment of the mobile home sales use. This access road shall be used only for the movement of mobile homes between the two uses and for emergency access. Sincerely, \Jr¡~~ W. Thomas Muncaster, Jr., P.E. w n'1/ !:Zevised lO-1-~)2 ·e HOLLYMEAD LOCATION The eastern boundary of the Community is the natural stream boundary of Powell Creek and its tributaries, extending from RoUte 643 on the south to Route 649 (Proffit Road). The northern boundary follows Route 649, Route 29 North, and a stream swale leading to Route 606. The western boundary of. the Cooonunity follows the aligrunent of Route' 606 to .the Charlottesville- Albemarle Airport where it goes west and south around the airport to Route 743, following Route 743 to Route 643 and then heading east to Route 29 North. EXISTING LAND USE e Residential - Hollymead contains an estimated (1985) .826 dwelling units and approximately 2,250 persons. Over 60 percent of the total dwelling units in Hollymead are single-family detached units. The Hollymead Community also includes two large mobile home parks, totalling approximately 230 units. An estimated 7 percent of the total housing stock was constructed during the preceding five years. Commercial and Office - There exist a variety of commercial retail uses in Hollymead totalling in excess of 780,000 square feet of floor area. Most of these uses are highway oriented rather than for neighborhood shopping. Commercial office uses total about 19,000 square feet of building area. Industrial - There exist approximately twelve industrial uses in Hollymead. Together,. they include over 111,000 square feet of floor area. Other Land Uses - The Hollymead Community contains two e . I ATTACHMENT DI A ... churches, an elementary school, a large cemetary, and the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport. ENVIRONMENTAL CèUŒACTERISTICS The area is divided into two major watersheds by a ridgeline running along Route 649. Land to the south of the ridge line drains into the Powell Creek system whích leads eventually to the South Fork of the Rivanna. Land to the north of the ridge line drains northward into the North Fork of the Rivanna. The entire area consists of soils in the Elioak-Hazel-Glenelg Association. This association is limited for devclopment because of- moderately permeable subsoil, the clayey subsoil, and the shallow depth to bedrock. Most of thc area is forested with thc exception of developed areas nepr the intersection of Route 29 North and Route 649, the lIollymead property, and some open farmland in the northwest section. PUBLIC WATER AND SEWER Sewer service is available through the Powell Creek interceptor to the south and the Camelot Treatment system to the north based on natural drainage. Water service is available south of Route 649 from the South Rivanna system and north of Route 649 from the North Rivanna system. There is an interconnect of thc two systcms which has not been opened. e ROADS Route 29 is congested and access has been limited for developmen~ purposes. RECOMMENDATIONS o No commercial uses are to be established on either side öf Route 29 up to the entr.ance of the existing Hollymead Subdi vi's ion. It io (:lw-ii'rt-e-Ht -e-f--tfle Plan tha t the lar-ge ~~ ~ce area couth of the R-i-¥ttfIn.:l River not eJ~tend ~ ~1C river on tbe eaot or ..;eot G-i~e-l:*-tü 29. Service .:lre.:lO ac oho,/n or: the Plan ~re ouffieient for the foreoeeable future. e o The area between the southern boundary of Route 643 and the South Fork of the Rivanna River is to remain in an open state as a buffer between the Urban Area and the Community of Hollymead. This boundary is critical as it preserves the distinct identity of the Co~nunity from the Urban Area and prevents continuous development from the City of Charlottesville along Route 29 North to the North Fork of the Rivanna. This area is included in the Rivanna River Greenway corridor and provides. an opportunity for passive recreationàl uses. o Preserve the stream valleys and their tributary drainage- way, plus adjacent areas of steeply sloping terrain, as an open space network. This network is designed to tie into future residential development areas in Hollymead. e o Provide new landscaping with 'ATTACHMENT D I' Page 21 development along Route 29 North. o The ~rea west of Route 29 North is intended for industrial and office uses as a large employment area. It is expected that these uses will be of a large scale and have a significant airport ' orientation. EJliGting rcoidcntial areSD on the ~eot e-i:-d€-t)[ Route 29 North are ~~oGnized, but arc not ~ded to e)_pand encept "for HH-uf\èeveloped area of !Rediu!R òeHe-i-t.=:r-HeH4~f Cedar Hill ~r.:lilcr P.:lrk. The Office Service area consists of approximately 25 acres along Airport Road and 40 acres west of the Regional Service area on the west side of Route 29N. The balance of the employment generating area is Industrial Service. o Establish a regional service area on Route 29 North at Route 649. This area is intended to serve cOlIU11ercial service needs for the Hollymead Community, the airport, and Route 29 North traffic. This location is expected to accolIU11odate multiple uses for future commercial development convenient to a variety of users. o Establish a regional service Rrea of approximately 50 acres on the west side of Route 29 North to accommodate multiple uses for future commercial development convenient to a variety of users. Access to this area should be limited to three locations on Route 29. Development of the entire e e e commercial area shall be pursuant to an overall plan of development. Zoning action and development of this area consistent with this Comprehensive Plan shall occur after the development of the high density residential area (to a míminum of 100 mobile home sites as noted in the recommendation for the development of this residential area). o Establish a community service area south_of Route 649 on the east side of Route 29 North to provide general retail needs in the Community and the northern part of the County. o Establish a community service area centered around the entrance to the Hollymead Subdivision. This recognizes the approved commercial area in the llo llymead PliD. While: too large to be: a neighborhood service area, the scale of commercial development is to Lc ill h:(;pi("¡~ wich the: residential nature of the Hollymead subdivision and oriented to the subdivision rather than highway uses. The area is intended to meet local convenience shopping anJ professional service needs and is to be screened and buffered from adjacent residential areas. Access to high density residential al:'eas t'o the non:h and south is to be resel:'ved. o Establish a neighborhood service area on Route 649 in the northern portion of the Community intended to meet local convenience shopping and professional service needs, including medical and financial services. o Areas of mediwn and high ~- ~HMENT ~1 , Page 3 , density residential are to be located internally east of Route 29 North. They are located so as to access the internal road system and should not have direct access to Route 29 North. The medium density area adjacent to the Ridgewood Mobile HQme Park is envisioned as a possible expansion area for the ~ark. o Establish a high density residential area of approximately 50 acres west of Route 29 for the location of a mob i.le home park accomodat'ing a minLmum of 100 mobile home sites. This area is intended to provide affordable housing for Albemarle County low and moderate income persons. Consideration should be given to cooperating with and utilizing the assistance of area human service agencies in providing support services to these residents. This area is intended to be exclusively for the location of a mobile home park for a period of not less than 15 year from start of development. Because of its proximity to areas designated for commercial and industrial use, development shall provide an effective vegetative buffer around this area. o Public facility sites include: -A lal:'gc area northeast of the Routc 29 NOl:'th/Route 643 in t e r s e c t ion. Th i s is intended to be retained for passive recreation and greens pace and recognizes a site identified by the state as having possible historical and archeological significance. Should the County not acquire this property, the existing zoning e e e (R-l) shall apply, with higher density not to exceed four dwelling units per acre possible with preservation of the historic site, maintenance of greenspace and screening from Route 29. -The lIollymead School area to provide for expanded active recreational uses and future school expansion. -The Ch'arlottcsville-Albel11arlc Airport, which includcs the exis ting (ac i 1 i ties, the southern runway approach zone, and areas cast of Route 606 owned by the airport for future expansion and location of airport related services. o Development plans along Route 29 North are to be sensitive to its status as an entry corridor to the Community and the Urban Area. o Transportation improvements include: -Limitation of access points on Route 29 North to joint entrances, frontage roads, and side streets. -Development of the Meadow Creek Parkway and associated collector roads to prQvid~ more direct access to the Urban Area and downtown Charlottesville. With final aligrunent determination, right-oE-way should be reserved for these roads. -Alignment improvements and widening of Airport Road from its intersection with Route 29 North to the airport. Access to this road should be accomplished through joint entrances, frontage roads, and side streets. ,.. .rTACHMENT D IlPage 4} -The following crossovers (see Map 20 for number and location) are to be closed to maintain the desirable function and s·afet:y on Route 29 Nòrth. Crossover 1. This crossover serves as a U-turn device for Route 643. Crossover 2, This crossover serves only U-turns and has inadequate sight distance on southbound lanes. Cr-ossover- 3. (lIollymead southern entrance) This crossover has inadequate sight distance on the southbound lanes. Crossover 4. This crossover serves U-turns and has inadequate sight distance. Crossover 5. This crossover serves U-turns and has inadequate sight distance. Crossover 6. This crossover is too close to the Route 649 intersection. It serves U- turns and has poor sight distance on the southbound lanes. Crossover 7. This crossover serves U-turns and has inadequate sight distance. Crossover 8. This crossover- presently serves a commercial cntcrpl'i.sc, but should be closed to provide desirable spacing and sight distance. o Water and sewer improvements include: -Extension of the Powell Creek Sewer Interceptor and development of necessary collection lines to accommodate development in the Route 29 North/Airport Road area, the airport, and northern residential areas of Hollymead along Route 649. -Long range interconnection of . .TTACHMENT D 'IPage 51 e the Camelot sewer system with the Powell Creek Interceptor. While expansion of the Camelot Sewage Treatment Plan to 300,000 GPD capacity will meet short-term needs, in the 10nß term this interconnection will be necessary to meet ultimate development requirements. This can be ~ccomplished with a pumping station at Camelot and a force main back to the Powell Creek interceptor. Timin& and details for this interconnection should be addressed in the utilities master plan. -Analyze the long-term water supply capabilities of the North Rivanna system and evaluate the interconnection of this system to the South Rivanna system in the utilities master plan. e Developable Dwelling Acreap,e Units Residential-Low 587 . 587-2348 Residential-Medium 230 922-2300 Residential-High -140 190 -1-400 2800 1900-3800 RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL 9+l- 1007 ~9 7/, 'ds 3409-8448 . 10 - Neighborhood Service Community Service 75 Regional Service ~ 83 Industrial Service (:t-2G 480 Office Service .¿~ 65 Public 72 NON-RESIDENTIAL SUBTOTAL &-B 785 UNDEVELOPED TOTAL 1792 e e )'~ / I ._r· f r / I y . . ....".-...., ~TTACHMENT D 1lPage 6\ 'f. //' \ /f ,J .V- \ \ 1 \ ... ''1 ), ./ ;.¡", " .) \ ( ~/--<~.~. / ./ ,,-..- ·'-···V·'""-. i ~1 .......... r-··....... "'-. -( ;, \1 o. y '-._" CommunIty of Hollymead '\" ,1' '" \ --/ I l , \ í-"""'\ I ~ I \ / / f ( ) '~'--'ß \ \ "C> e .~ I ---- r' ( D _________ /. "\. '--..... I .. 'h {Ot!.: fi" / ..,..- .¡,\IU'OAD rf·:,\(".·::, \In -;..,.\ r.lOUN1^U~. I r;~;-0:~~:,:~c;ION^l OERVICE -11~í-\ :'~:::,:~~:::~;~" t.....J c.O~.!:.IIIt;1 T y ~(R VICE ¡:::.:iH UtlG. ttHO'UlOOtl S[¡(VICl ~,~:-:J VILt AGl SoLln'lCE - L:Ol-v.lutU1Y MIO VllL\CL: nou~~;"'{1I5 Ih 1 r;)~~ I,'II.LAC!. RG".Il)[UTlAL ~:::f LOW )IN'.,)IT'' ntSIDENTlAl ~~~:~ "1[(jiU:'¡ fH:U:;I, y R(~IOEUTlAL ,'J:J I~,.",;" tllGl1 0[::::"1 T Y R(StUlNTlAl . "VULlClS£W-PUOllC UUIVClISITY OF VIRemIA WtCIIU,TIO''''L . INSTITl!llml1\l. .... ..... I.,,,,, ~.YI.~üOL', ~; o OI'UJ ~'I'^CL ·\',;1 Ii.UI'1d (./0.:,:', e ,.... '-, .~ \\·cumod.lnd x^ /' ,)to, ~!!. j·r.OI'O~.(O ({GA')"'·"\ y 1~.\I'I·:e·:llJnI·, - STAll 01, "¡\IVAI I ROllO:. ...-. JlU'/f'IU[ lJ.;,\1I '., -- . TR,HJ~MI~,~IO~; U'C. -J ·1000 " S TlU....I.1S >~ V SCIIOOI. /./V \ \ --¡-.- --~---...:.'~~...... RAY D. PETHTEL COMMISSIONER JUN .)0 1'1'1,) COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINI~lanning Dept. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION P. O. BOX 671 CULPEPER, 22701 THOMAS F. FARLEY DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR I ATTACHMENT EI REOEIVED ·e June 28, 1993 Mr. W. D. Fritz Senior Planner, County of Albemarle Dept. of Planning and Community Development 401 McIntire Road- Charlottesville, Vi~ginia 22902 RE: SITE PLAN INVESTIGATION Airport Mobile Home Park Route 606 (SP 93006) Albemarle County Dear Mr. Fritz: e Upon review of the revised access roadway layout for the mobile home park, the following comments as outlined in your letter (Reference: Letter Fritz to' Hores; Dated: 6/22/93) were generated: 1. The concept of the intersection is correct. However some adjustments to the taper lengths and storage lengths of the turn lanes are necessary. For this section of Route 606, a design speed cQnsistent with the speed limit would establish criteria for a 55 MPH &ection. Such design speed will require minimum taper lengths of 200 If and minimum full width lane lengths of 200 1£. The transition lengths should also be based upon the 55 MPH design speed. 2. Regarding Route 606 capabilities of accommodating the additional traffic generated by the proposed mobile home park, it is always desirable to establish two access points for any subdivision in order to provision for continuous access should an incident block the main access. In this case, an access to Route 29 has not been seen as desirable due to the nature of Route 29 and its future intentions. e Preliminary review indicates that Route 606 should be able to handle the traffic. However, due to the characteristics of the vehicles which will be utilizing this ingress/egress, concern is expressed over the safety and operational characteristics of Route 606 following the introduction of the more cumbersome vehicular traffic. The available correspondence (Reference: Letter Muncaster to Fritz; Dated 6/18/93) indicates that a build out of 15 years is planned. It would be advantageous to examine the traffic after each phase is completed in order to more equitably evaluate the operations of the facilities involved rather than attempt to predict based on presumptions. . TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21 ST CENTURY e - e \ ATTACHMENT E' ( Page 2 , Mr. W. D. Fritz Page 2 6/28/93 It is recommended that some means of agreement based upon phased construction be established for determining the number of access point requirements for this development 3. Assuming that the maintenance responsibilities of the .road layouts are still consistent with prior submittals (Referenc'e: Submitted revised' plans; Dated: 5/24/93) whereby the only state maintained facility will' be proposed Road A, the conceptual layout is acceptable stipulative upon the incorporation of exclusive left-turn lanes at each proposed intersection with Road A. Again, similar with the Route 606 intersection, safety/operational concerns due to the nature of the vehicles accessing this facility are reiterated. Should there be any further questions regarding these comments, please contact me. Re~~, . W/'P'fP J. S. Hores Culpeper District Traffic Engineer JSH:ss cc: Mr. J. A. DePasquale Ms. A. ·G. Tucker (J~PORT Charlottesville/Albemarle .. ,.1\ ..fH~l!~· ~~~ r June 28, 1993 I ATTACHMENT F I . VIA FACSIMILE REOEIVED e Mr. William Fritz, senior Planner Department of Planning . , community Development County ot Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Va 22901 Re: Proposed Airport Mobile Home Park Dear Bl11: This will acknowledge receipt of your June 22, 1993 letter sUbmitting a revised design for the above proposed projeot. While fee simple purohase of airport property 1s no longer required, ~ sight easement across land owned by the Airport Authority is necessary. Granting such an encumbrance is a policy matter to be considered by the Airport Authority Board. Moreover, any encumbrance On land owned by the Airport Authority requires approval of the Federal Aviation Administration. As previously stated, it is uncertain that such approval of any such encumbrance would be granted given the fact that this land use is not oompatible with airport operations. "'UI~ 2 ð 1993 Planning Dept Sincerely, Elliott of Aviation e Charlottesville-Albemarlo Airporl Aulhority 201 Bowen Loop . Charlollesville. VA 22901 . (804) 973-8341 I ATTACHMENT GI e RECEIVED JUt 0 S lQOi COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Inspections 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 (804) 296 -5832 Planning Dept. MEMORANDUM To: Bill Fritz - Senior Planner From: Jay Schlothauer - Deputy Director of Inspections~1 L~ Date: July 2, 1993 Re: Airport Mobile Home Park Noise Standards e Today I spoke with Mr. Bim Scott, a corporate engineer with Oakwood Homes in North Carolina. He had not received a copy of my previous memo to you; so I faxed him one. I also read him the memo over the phone. Mr. Scott indicated that they do not have engineering data, on hand, concerning the noise performance of their homes, because HUD does not require it. (They have extensive records on thermal insulation performance.) His first off-the-cuff response was that their mobile homes will not be able to meet the acoustical performance criteria of the Zoning Ordinance for installation in the airport noise impact area. However, he indicated that he will get with his corporate people, after receiving my fax, and come up with more concrete conclusions. I suggested that he use you as has primary contact person, in my absence. He indicated that he would probably work through the local dealership in this situation. JS/js e cc: Jesse Hurt Amelia McCulley Jo ijiggins Bob Brandenburger Project File 'ATTACHMENT HI . II SOUND LEVELS ANTICIPATED WITHIN THE MOBILE HOME PARK AIRCRAFT-NOISE ANNOYANCE 100 80 NOT ~ ANNOYED E-i ...... ..... t::I 0 60 .... CJ) ~ c:: ~ :;:) 40 ,., - c..:> ~ ':"" Z ~ u 20 ~ ~ ~ 0 0 55 65 75 Dl\.Y-NIGHT A'1ERAGE SOUND LEVEL (LDrI) Figure 6.6 MINOYANCE CAUSED BY AIRCRAFT NO¡SE IN RESIDENTIAL COMHUNITIES ~lEAR ~~AJ()R Þ.IRPORTS Source: ~ic~ards and Ollerhead, 1I~10ise Burden Factor- New ~ay of Rating Aircort ~oise". 135 '[1 ã)c::m"tJC- o' CD' . ~ rn~ p;t ~;Þ~œ~ Q) =e::J . CI) ,.. ~ - ...... CO <c»CI) ~ -I\)'" a ::t Q) - 0 ::J ... ¡. ::J I\) I\) co (,) 0> ~ ~ n :J: J: m Z -f - e (').Þ-03: ::rorol1 ØI ~'C . 11 rt ~3:. tXI o n fJ· rtHO.... rt::sHl.... ro rt In fJ· "0 "Ij <:11.....11 fJ· ro ØI fJ· .... ::srt .....::u::sN ro 0 fJ·- - ØI::S p.1Q < ØI ØI . ::s p. N N (') \0 0 ~ ~ . o ro <: CD ..... o 'd 3 ro ::s rt -0 ~ - ..,. c: m .AJ ~. 5' ~ m _ r-- 0 111 :J' 0 - co cÞ m ..... '-- \0 0 '0 < \0 '0 W CD vJ m -g. 0 o ro ØI 11 3: 11 . "Ij 11 fJ· rt N - -.13"0 ,þ,ro..... w::sro . rt ØI en o ro Hln o ØI ::s ~ 3 fJ· op. O'ro fJ·11 ..... ro rt ::r fJ· ::ren o 3..... ro ro rt 'Crt ØI ro 11 11 ;;o¡' ØI ØI en rt ØI rt ::rrt ro 0 ;;o¡' u. ro c: ::s ::s 0 g.HI fJ· o 0 ::s'd 'd o ~ HI fJ. rt 11 fJ· o 0 c: ::s rt ro rt en 0 *rt ::r O\ro 0'C 0\..... ØI ØI n ::s ro P.I rtrtroH o::r~rt rort 11 ro fJ· rort::sen ØI en ..... f5 fJ· 3 fJ· 0 I.<; N ::s ro n 0 110'C rt ØI HI fJ· ::r en ::s ro ::r rt fJ· ::r·o P.oro::s gHll1rt IQ '" c: ::r ro ... ::s ØI 11 ~rt en 'd ØI . ....1.<; rt ØI ::r ::s fJ·ro ro en p. o fJ·ro ::s 11 <: 11 ro ØI ro ..... .... en 0 ....'C'C o 3 ØI ::s ro 'den::s 'd fJ·rt ØlO' 11 ..... 0 rtroHl 3 . roOØl ::s ::s rtro3 o 0'....0' c: P; fJ· fJ'en ..... ..... ro p. fJ.O ::r ::s ::s 0 IQ ..... 3 I.<; ro fJ· 'C ::srtØl o 11 :Þ' ;;o¡' 3 11 en ro fJ· rt3::S ro ro 113rt p.0'::r ØI ro ro 3 11 0M!"Ij O'OC: rtl1l1 ØI rt fJ' rt ::r ::s ::r ro rtro~ ::rroO ØI x 11 rtrt~ .....ro ØI ::s ~ ::sen::r p. fJ· ro . 0::s ::s fJ· o ::s HI rt rt::r ::rro roM! 11 c: c: rt ::s c: ~ 11 ØI ro I.<;rt - ::r ro fJ· rt..... ØI ~ ::s fJ· p. ..... ..... fJ· ::s 0'.0 ro c: ro ØI en ::s rt fJ· n 0 o ::s ~~ .... fJ· 1.<;.... ..... ØI 0' Hlro HI ØI ::s fJ·ro 11 ro p. rtro op. e ØI 8 In::r ro t>:I ØI 11 fJ· .....3 I.<;'C In ØI <: n fJ·rt ..... .....0 ro HI ~ fJ· N .....111 .....0\ O'HI ro ØI <: 3 ro fJ· 11 ..... I.<; fJ· ro p.1n ro ro fJ· 'd ::s ØI rt ::S::r p.ro ~ fJ· 'd .....ØI .....11 ;;o¡' ::s ro 0 ro ::s p. ØI rt ::r rtro ::r o 11 11 c: o 11 c: ØI IQ..... ::r en n rtO g,~ I.<; c: . ::s fJ· rt I.<; e \ /~ /~ " N J N ; E r' s' -ò AG-FOR AGRICULTURAL AND FORESTAL DISTRICT [",~~:J CO COMMERCIAl OffICE E:~?:-ò~~ II uGHT INDUSTRY ~ PD-IP PlANNED DEVElOPMENT·INDUSTRIAl PARK ~ PRD PLANNED RESIDENT1AL DEVElOpMENT [ ] RA RURAL AREAS 11/ / /2 R-4 RESIDEtffiAL E. . . . . .-:] R·1S PROFERRED NOre AIRpORT IS lOCATED IN THE RA DISTRICT. ... .. .. ~ .. . RA -,ç.[~~~0:?pt/ ~pJ( RA -~'-"!~ ¡ L.._. f' .._.._....Joof· ..- j i i RA RA , "\ ,. ,. ~ .. :. \ ~ -. '- ~ .. 4 .. ~ ,. . NOTE : CONTOURS WERE GENERATID USING FM INM 310 II j I .. .. .- . jj i .~ I t- i i ì ì ¡: ~ t t ·e Dean McWhorter Johnson 800 Quail Ridge Circle Early~villeJ VA 22936 (804) 973-1559 RECEIVED JUl 0 7 1993 Planning Dept. July 3, 1993 Mr. Bill Fritz c/o Department of Planning and Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Char1oUesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: - I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the application of Mr. W. Wood for a mobile home park to be located at the intersection of Routes 743 and 606. The addition of 256 families would overburden the road system that serves as an alternative to Route 29. To my knowledge, the scale of this mobile home park is unprecedented. A development of such density and size would greatly detract from the beauty of an area of Albemarle County that, despite growth, has managed to retain a rural character appropriate to the County's historical nature. Please do not be seduced by the argument that the area near the airport is unusable for any other purpose than a mobile home park. This is not Newark, Los Angeles, or Chicago. The presence of the airport in this area of the country in no way fouls the natural beauty of the area. With the substantial growth that has been witnessed on Route 29 North, I believe the acceptance of such a development will result in too great of a residential, commercial, and activity density. I urge you to oppose the proposal for this mobile home park and preserve this area for agricultural an~ wildlife purposes as it was originally planned. - REOEIVED e JUl 0 7 1993 Planning Dept. Maùrie D. Mcinnis 800 Quail Ridge Circle Earlysville, VA 22936 (804) 973-1559 July 3, 1993 Mr. Bill Fritz c/o Department of Planning and Community Development 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr. Fritz: e I am writing to express my vehement opposition to the application of Mr. W. Wood for a mobile home park to be located at the intersection of Routes 743 and 606. The addition of 256 families would overburden Route 743 and other roads that serve as an alternative to Route 29. A development of such density and size would greatly detract from the beauty of an area of Albemarle County that, despite growth, has managed to retain a rural character appropriate to the County's historical nature. Please do not be seduced by the argument that the area near the airport is unusable for any other purpose than a mobile home park. The airport traffic is not particularly heavy. The presence of the airport in this area of the country in no way fouls the natufal beauty of the area. With the substantial growth that has been witnessed on Route 29 North, I believe the acceptance of such a development will result in too great a residential and commercial density in an otherwise rural areal. I urge you to oppose the proposal for this mobile home park and preserve this area for agricultural and wildlife purposes as it was originally planned. Thank you for your consideration, Ai M)vLÁ_Lqt{(~ ~;ri~ D. Mcinnis e e Office of Planning & Development . County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, V A 2290 I RECEIVED JUt 0 6 1993 Planning Dept. Dear Mr. Fritz, We \-Vere very concerned yesterday when we heard the news that your office is planning to recommend that all children from the 250 trailer park being developed near the airport in Earlysville be sent to Broadus Wood Elementary School. We have a child entering Kindergarten in the Fall and were assured by the Principal at the school that the use of trailers as classrooms and ongoing construction would not be a problem after construction is completed this summer. We live in a small subdivision of fifteen homes e and nineteen school-age children as well as seven children under the age of five. We have agonized with our neighbors over the disruption in schoolwide and communitywide programs on site at Broadus Wood as a result of the construction over the last eighteen months or so. Our concern is that there is no way of knowing how many children will be added to the already near full capacity of the school by way of the trailer park. The school is incapable of holding additional trailers for classrooms without losing substantial playground or parking space, both which are at a premium on the site. We realize that you have the unpleasant task of trying to balance the need for development in a growing community with the use of existing resources, however, we feel it is both unfair and unwise to sacrifice the educational future of the children of a community in the interest of development and that includes the children from the trailer park. We understand that some parents object to the influx of a large number of students from a lower economic background and we want to assure you that this is e e of no consequence to us. We believe firmly in public education and diversity among student populations. Our question is whether the resources currently available can accommodate a large influx of students whatever their economic situation. Perhaps future development in our county needs to put additional responsibility on developers for an additional elementary school if all schools in the District are at/near / maximum capacity ? We hope that if you still feel that the current proposal is best you will help us to better understand so that we can continue to feel secure and positive about our public school system. Very S~ncerely, e ri4cv~~ Lisa & Dean Harman 4530 Mill Run Lane Earlysville, V A 22936 e REOEI·VED e JUl 0 6 1993 Planning Dept. July 1, 19cr5 ''''iI'-. E~i 11 Fr' i t~: County of Albemarle Office of Planning and Development County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Ch al'- 1 u,l". t. E~ !::; viI 1 t~ V(i :~~:::~(:¡)O 1. Dear- 1''''-. Frit;·: The purpose of this letter is to express our concern as a resident of Earlysville over the planed development of a 250 sight trailer park near the airport. e Thf?il" ar'f:? Sf?V~,~I"'"ìl r'easonf,; for' al~E' conc£-?rn ",¡hich includ,,~, the attraction of a disproportionate number of lower priced housing and the effects it will have on the property value of tl',E' E';::i ~>t:i. l"ïl.:: 1·)()rnE~!:.~ in t.he ¿H'ed, 'lra:i 1 E?r" par' kG Ili~-\V(2 a vel~y poor reputation for maintenance (I have never seen a traile~ pal'''kl...hi,lL Wi::\!5 in quod r"E'pëÜI-, :Lf? the CDI"TIE~r- of Hydr·aL.ll ic ,:;,nd r::IU), ,::.nd an C)VE~r- CToll-JcJinq c¡+ t.hE' f:~IE'mE·'ntar-y !sc:hool s;y!::;tE'r'i. We strongly urge the committee to consider the best int.erests of the community and reconsider their vete on this matter by rejecting the proposal tu build a 250 unit ·trailer pal'" k :[,1 F ,-;i I"1 y!:.v ill f2. Mc'r·el':-"J. '\ ~() David and Gail She 500 Village Woods ¡:::ar 1 y~-:>v:i 11 t·?, \l{~ - - _ _'_4 . _ .- ..-- --~ . ------..-- ._-_. -- . ..----..- .'. . . (j) Kathleen R. Stévenson REOEIVED . ,510 Village Woods Lane . . LlI.lysvillc, Virginin 22936 . JUl 0 6 1993 , & ytÆ. 7i1l ~i~~3·· _ 7 o~ JlIÁ/-P<J . . Ik &ã0 ð/I!.e-/~ I/::!:: .~ ¿ð , ÁIL ~ øII d Yj?1M æ¿¡ ~ :191)/, JrJ!j fU-h Iii- iL f~ ~ Wvrd ~ <J-6 b ÞmJ,¡,). Tl-v () ¡{tfµ~ k.,/ :t 13 ~, II· ø . fl.:l f~{~~5&1 (}11iwv! j( d ) If-¿ ß . - ~ CUv. ø-J i! ß· V ~,n/ drt dJd. j3hJ h ûtW4 ~. ~ tlAtw âdctJ¡nvJ~ ~ ~11 &;~~' M<dd 41 rd/v 10, '£JIL/ il .kl ~ i - ßi- Ñdtd1 ~Iku Øi tJ-. ßf I~/~ ~ ø Âutf/ 15/1; VmLI e "." - ·e .. ØM;t~ ¿<eh~ t7Wf - o/úd./,d ð~ 11/,,-r~''&!JØ ~/ ~,~ ' /Þz1!Mva!kø4d¿ &~ .M~ {W,lff ' ,'//10 ~_IL ~, . , '¡Jê£.¿ "YO ávü !Â/e£ ~ ku tt;/ tZfJt( - áInkJ d¡¿ tZl'}I a ¡orJ - TmJ,M A.J1iD, ~ / I!/~,; ~ /lMrW dlf:J6 .t ~ rhJ ~ i! ~lal~ ¡f/ -fi.¿ ~, (7 At ...'P>;\ - tML- ~d M125 -I'rf (þ-/ I ~ ßIUM 10 ;{;6. ./ ~ ¿#<>v ~ ¿1ú{ .&tc;:t:;¿¿t ~f'i~ ~ I ß~J, j)ßA¿1X4/V aJ ~1¿ ~ fLU ~-t " ~UI '/J;/Il.u ;/1fÁ~ d11~ ~1¿ (!¿:;¡¿~ ~ ~ ~/, j4J I~ ~ (( ~o IAklt~ / ~ (tiN! ffJdf 'h 01t¿-¿i j iL N.v 'ß.oI ðCtLtlvLf-f( , ¿ ~ ,0/ ~~- M kø,p. ¡if- ~ ~ ./tt!ttj/.¡'jI Adwt0 Ilv _~() #f VU1 - tÞ.ubj øJ -I~ t2Æe-a../, e e e @ '. Kalbleen 1\. Stevenson 510 ViHngc WOO<\8 Lane Eln.lys\'illc, Vil'ginil1 nCß() II~-w ¡¡f ILo ~ aJk~ vV Y'u;ð /Þ1j f/ ~V .døu~ rlw-I... 7L /Jd,¿~xd..P<lR/ ftMJ W.~~ fi#t£/ a¡ ~~ ~7 ;;; ['4^C~L¿/ J w:d t?Wt&¡ ~ ~ (ld¡;;J~ /IILj/k~ . ¡fIg ef.d;e;:/ iI-/; Ik £ck.J:;;~ {0~a-<v 1 ~ (}~ j¿ ~-r! ¿i'L /it. ß// ~:(; j {-:&N~.. (/.. I j- S~~£17 i ~ . /~ / ~¡l :!l#~ .. . q13-/161 P s. ¿J1w j) OtJA fl¡:;~J ~ i:; a tfffiL.d !u~1 J/t;;&~f, ,pt..J fLu L-j¡;;¡ì ()¡f/~ w~ ~/ /-v_~ e e Rr=(~E~VED e JUN 2 J 1~~!,) "" . '0 ... . ) I,., " ~~ ( ". p. 1(">, ¡;-. ;....., t !, II! ~g e iI.... t. \i .. t.....-, f . 1- 3230 Monroe st. Earlysville, ,Va 22936 June 21, 1993 Mr. Will Ii am Fritz, Senior Planner Albemarle County Planning Commission 401 McIntire Rd. Charlottesville, Va 22902-4596 RE: proposed mobile home park, airport vicinity Rtes 29 and 606, northern corridor, Albemarle County Dear Mr. Fritz: e It has come to my attention that the planning commission is shortly to make recommendations concerning the above captioned matter. I should like to voice my opposition and concern to such a mobile home park being located in this area. There are several reasons: 1. This area is close to the airport and would create instant high density housing in a potentially dangerous area, due to aircraft· landing patterns. 2. As an otolaryngologist (ear surgeon), Í would be concerned about noise levels for residents of this park, due to airport proximity. 3. For suchdensi ty of housing, little support services are currently available, such as bus routes, secondary roads, etc. 4. Such a large park will create a severe burden on schools in this area, already sorely taxed by the extremely rapid completion of Forest Lakes subdivision. It is unlikely that they will be able to adequately serve children from this park, without either construction or massive and vexsome bussing out of the community. Your attention to my concerns during your deliberation and recommendations to the Board of Supervisors is most appreciated. e Sincerely yours, @~,,~:h, )Q[M<;;"~ i¡Jì CharI es M. Johnson, I I I, MD e e e kl::.t.' ~11<~,1 - l\lPltl: )U ¡ u'-' ':j,) 'j:':::' 'w.uul ~·.Ul I I::. t : ç; U ...¡ - 'j I .:¡ - ':1 U 4'j J Illy 6. 1991 Greg IIncl Canm:.n Fischer llCI Box 16 F.ar1ysvillc. VA 22916 978- 1812 _fiill.fJitz , Onïcc: of Planning and DCv(~lopment Alhemark County Office Building 401 Mc}ntire Rù, Charl()UcsvJ\\(~. VA 22901 REOEIVED JUl 0 6 1993 Planning Dept. I'C: Mobi1~ Home Park near Enrlysvillc: (1n:eting Ml'. Fritz, As J flln sure you've, bç,e,n busy fir,hling and J'cscnn.:hing the dewlopmcnt uf the 256 mohile home park. I wish 10 view my opinion bl~f()n~ lonight mc.cling /IS nm unable to attend. 1 object to this lkvclopmcnI! Two hundred fifty mobile home~ in one nrl~n is just 100 nverwhe.1ming. Trnffic on RT 29 and 743 docš not l1t:e.d to be greater. I under- st.and the nc.e(1 for lnw im:ome housing fino we need to sUPPulllhis, tlwugh supporting Mll·.h /I mohilc home /Site woul(1 O~ /I miSlake. Lc.t'/ì look III smaller site.s thllt would c.neompn~.1:, fewer homes. Route 2C) sOllth is also and IIrefl Ihal'S under developed fino should he L'ollsidcrcd. Tho h:w trailer parks lhal 1 have he.e.n in seem to degrade. in short time and u¡,;cLlpandes turnovers an; high. therr-fom making Ìlunsuilahlc for the m-en nround EarJysvi1lc tlnd north wesl Alhe.mm"le County. NO to this development. Thank you for YOll consideration and time. Regnrds, Grc.g and Cnrmen Fischer (:>~) '-':¡Æ~<'~ e REOEIV~D . . . JvJ,jo1l1f'11 3 Planning Dept. e I - ¡ h(Jßl~ 7fI~~7~ :¿~ au..~~TÙ;(?/ --6- -f'~. ~..-r> -- ¡cc?~-c¿~ "..4~, - '. . >? V . ! rJncrl~ _ ~ & .. ~;;&'&,{Jb ~..... i:?{~ ~.~/.(lc?¡A,~ . I /í~ m kt£d~,JJ if a~ -~R~LJ _. ..-.' ¡~ ?~ . . .-ctud~~71"~.' Cc:1--ec,,¿. .'.. '. 'I.c!/J~"M ~..~. 0f,:ÞA74 /' .__..........~/*.~>t4. ~'\ , . . ri::2:Lt'-<'l i ~ ~~;,~. . . - . . . -j"'hrl~ß;- ~-z,/? r<:2é/~ ~ :-f'7-q - '. '. ~¿4'1 o.-U ~ -z~-z~/~«- . i¿~</;;;:~. 4Ú . .~. aYW4. ~~é~ . .. ~~hc1 aA~ ~. ._ !A¿>~,. ~-cr;¡~~l _ . <,-hd-¿'~__ ¿2-~ 'Cé~-z.d~ ~~~~.'.'~ -.4«V1 d~ / ~n~ .~ , !hc-zr'.::t{ A~. ./j ..~. _~ . _ ., CMcn1't-,~~~-tVC(. ;ø¿ C4.~~~ ·--·~·6.~~;;~ ~"-~7// /.~~~ ..."~~ ~~;~a-r.~~ - ._~ .- .tf7 ~- ~ÞJ 0'ø ~ dfJ i ..--?t-'7r7$~rl ~C~-/? ~/TZ(' '--.,R'r;Y~~ , , ::n t I ~ ;,')'·3 A ....iI1 V ::I ,....... ,... e -. ... -.. ~.' e-- e ' ,. ·e e . i¿/?f4 ~/4 '?nc''7Z£' &!J~ -bt'~';~ d~. ~ v ~ . ~4d ;rh.d aU(4. /fa!, ~ a ~ ;;¿ ~lR~ ~ú/ 4vA¿~-¡ JdI& . /I:;~t.~ A~?YJ ð .~ .-z~ ~ i ~.:.J' ~/ --fv7!J úl , ~J & ~ ¡.~ 7t4 <? . ~ ¿L /£~)( 4~e /UqL - ~L¿a~~. ~ d~~~~~4-~ . ~L~>r"'~ /2¿=¿~ ffi;;þ.'L"_ ~~~a/ ; d:.llv-de..-, ..~:/ t/z~ /j¿~/}..{-C-.6--</ ~ : 01~-? -óZ¿0v~H-'H '1-< v.~ -~ '. !A~ ~,~ - e4~d/t/~~ !ó7~ 50 ertA ~<-/ .7'k .~ c~ ~ex ~¿ ~ ~t -t.-2 ,Ú' ~ J - ~;¡~::/ ¿{AA:~ ~~¿; --& 4 . ~U'l Þ4¿~ &;r"k ~ C4-r~;:;¿' ðd ~72 C0:/A; ~ t2!W~ l.c~y h #'h~L~~~ ~~~ _ _ ~,,k:2ê>ë--iC- --ç/~4~ .~7i..ð /Øí/~--r-c-<. /tJ(!dIøtJ:~~t~ ¿'J~ ~ . '1G /d~f~~~.. (ZRo¿?~d. '. ..~~ ; '/ '-//& Q.." /AA~ -~FZ~ .~~¿ I ~ dtrcJP il!ff£ ~ .~ ~ C~'i'~d ~~ -é/vnd --01 ~ .4(~a~..~ ~~ e e e - _/~5;' . -- rJ1-r'o1 -;:L,~I ?f~---zún~~ ~ .[J,-~-~~. . LG-tÁ]Z2--J¢ a/ ~ ~~~ r ((2fl:~~~ Cõt-</t1?' <; £'vzþx.'éÞ_ /ì.~,.~ .. (.)t¿4'l.£VL? ¡:/" . '1£~:< ~~J~~~ ,{/ Þ~tld 7~r7./ ß7ð ~¿,.û;¿~¡ ·1í<¡·-Lj3¿7Ç- I I\'-)¿!. .L' /~ / £/. ~~ "-ftu; /'[ 1.--V-Þ'L-l- ~ -0::;/ ~~¿J ~~?~/! ~ ~ _ / ~ /¿c'( ê-",~, ~_ ~..¿þI~ ~/ d¿;¿¿d¿ð~ "'~t'g, ~té7;1% o"W; . a",-;-pv'2~ /!,-2"tf& .<:kZUf.;t¡C~'f. ~ C¿;........." é-4J~.. tf: ~/ . 4t cd &k-z(/ -4-<Åd-ert ß~·,-d-crl ¡{ a/2.1? -;1~7,/'- rh~t~ Utp-: -t '-~ ()L-(// -ÇÞCA-(YL~I c~v¡,"tU_,;~<:;:6;~ : ~.~. £u-r;~Æ ·,71_. ~/, ;;{/~ é~~-"~:dy ~GY~~~ -~ C<4~L1tf~ .¿~'~7 -P~/ ~~jIf~~~ . t;ð7~c h~'-.-z.7' cw--/ lJ~ê~ o-;¡,H . vf/¿n~7~ ~ A:n~ ~ ,. :-:.\.- . .. \, . e-d .'~ e "- -. . REOEIVED JUl 0 7 1993 iJ~ 4nAJJ~1 Planning Dept. 7 )6/13 ~-"" ... . ~~ ~;q'~~ ~~.~~~~ f~ -t;q-J ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ . f~~ ~ ¡n-/}J yCb. ú;()(P. ~ ~~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ (;r--/ '13 ~ tJ oui) r;d~ tJ éu-J ~ '~~~~~J tfJ~LJ~ ~ "^<-U ~ w .:JJ Cð-f~' W. ffi»-J ïí ~ ~ . I~ ~,!!JII-r~d~~/1 . c/-.LU~~ 'ð~ ~ .' ~ ~ r' {;rtX->-~ , J ~ (q,Hc3 J fNt-.-'b 'I~ &x1.!- ~ . ~~.U~/~ ~~ ~'f~ ~~~ ~ (f-:;.J ~ w ~ ¿;jc) ~ÇJ 0-Jv ~ f C<Æh-U ~ ku-r- ~.)~ ~ ~~~ j~ ~I ~~~_ .~. ~~ ~ .]{j ~ wr::u-J.0~~. ~ Øim ~~ð~7ð _. .....- -.- - .. .,-.. . ,,- ...,~ -. - -. e- o" _ .'.. - ..'" . .. - ."J\' ~,.. _ .....; ~~~~~~ ~~ } ~ /tIv--,-Æj þ'0 J.A-/ ~,.0·;<'ð .... _ ._.'-.__>_. ~ ~ :~J:::::~. ....... ·~~~t6~U~~·· ìfI ~ ~T~ ~v~ ~~ ~ ~ ìbU--J 7t;Iv~ ?5 ~ C4~f ~AM-.~~ ~ ~ cJ Ii ~r~~~. 1~ ~ ~-L '~~-¡r;¡J . ~~.?) 7:?c0 G .~~ ~ -;t¡,J ~ 1; cJL ;j:l) ~. .. .'. Q..-- d;ð ~ ~ ~ f~' . f~ ~ ~ ~~0U, ~~. '^ti-~ " ...QU~ ~~µu.f~ ~ LfL~. ~~ {~,c· ~ .1Jv.J:J, ~u. ~ cuJ ~.' e e .,. . .'.·'_0".. , ~ . .', e e e , Jeff & Diane Shriver 1355 Earlysville Forest Drive Earlysville, VA 22936 REOEIVED JUL O' 7 1993 Planning Dept. July 5, 1993 Bill Fritz Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Mr ..1 Fritz, We are writing this letter in regards to a proposed mobile home park near the junction of Rt 606 and 743. We are OPPOSED to any development of this nature for many reasons. It is inconsistent with plans for developing a high-tech industrial center near the airport, a mobile home park would detract from this. We do not want the additional burdens on our roads or schools. We are also against this because of the type of people such parks attract would only have negative impacts on the community. other such parks, for examplê, the one on Rio road, are an eyesore and add to community problems. Also we do not want the additional crime in our area that is normally associated with mobile home parks. Sincerely, J~S~ ~~ Diane Shriver e e e " RECEIVED 575 Hill Run Eerlysville, July 1, 1'393 JUL 0 7 1993 Planning Dept. Cou:ct VA 22936 Bi II F:c i -t.z Office of Planning and Development County Office Building 401 HcIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Hr. Fritz: We were v~:cy upset to learn of the proposal to build a 236 family mobile home park near Earlysville end, that all of the children would be attending Broadus Wood Schaal. As you must know, Broadus Wood will be· completing a major renovation this Fall, a renovation that those of us with school children just suffered through all year. As; I ur.derstand it the renovation did not allow for many additional children. If this 236 family trailer park is approved ve could be looking at almost 500 additional children, assuming an average of two children per home. If even half of these extra children came to Broadus Wood, the trailers needed to accommodate them would by necessity remove some of the playing fields or parking lots which are already of minimal size. We who have been living here and paying taxes here do not deserve to have our children's educational experience suffer because of same landowners' desire to make an income off of his land. Please help us prevent development of housing when the services are nQt available to accommodate the new families. Let's take care of the overcrowdir.g that already exists before ve bring in. more children to strain limited resources even further. ~2jIlf) Stephen G. Strickland Sincerely, j:Í)J.J4_ 4' -~~(-t~ß./I-~Løf Karen S. Strickland COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE. . ,I; ......¡;;..; at· 1.av". 7 - ;' ... ._ ç --- . .~ r / ;' -.So t¡,,...rt, ;. . d....L· .--.- 1'", 'i" 7'r :_!/~~'':;~Ý MEMORANDUM TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors FROM: Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive DATE: July 14, 1995 RE: Board Appointee-Pay Classification Study You will recall that with the decision to hire a consultant to prepare the County's pay plan, a committee made up of Board of Supervisors members and School Board members and possibly others was to be formed. Early discussions were that rrom the Board of Supervisors, the Chairman was to be joined by one other member rrom the Board. I am asking that you select a member rrom the Board to join the Chairman as Board representation on the committee. Should you have any questions concerning this, please do not hesitate to contact Mr. Huff prior to our July 19 meeting. RWTjr/bt 95.113 ,',1' ! aJL 4 ¡__H..._H_. ~r-. ... _,_··',,__-.,..c·""='·"'· /I l-eceitteJ "7 HIf/tt1 ~ULY 19, 1995 EXECLJTlVE SESSION MOTION I MOVE THAT THE BOARD GO INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2. I -344(A) OF THE CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF REGARDING A SPECIFIC LEGAL MATTER CONCERNING REVERSION PI,., 0 A- 5Pt;G.¡f,c. t.t6/h. rlli"íÍG,t ¿cJ~ c:.~A^',"'(.. ,4 "'20......'.....(;. óe.D,¡J~""c.;' \}¡"..A-ï,OJ'ol' I IÞ ¡J. " "ð11t,~1,I... t..6t:uiH. r'\ "'ï~"" ¡t.~t:""1."'4 ,4 ¿:'GI",-nt~"'ï . 07 1 995.WPD , ~ ,. ßece;tI€d Î /19!~ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE - _., .: . EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: AGENDA DATE: July 19, 1995 ITEM NUMBER: Resolution to oppose sections of House Resolution 1555, the Telecommunications Act ACTION: x INFORMATION: SUBJECTIPROPOSAUREOUEST: Request approval of resolution opposing sections of pending legislation, H.RI555" the Telecommunications Act,. CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, White ATTACHMENTS: yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: Pending legislation is now before the House Committee on Commerce, chaired by Congressman Bliley, that preempts state and local building codes (and all other local regulations) applicable to cellular radio telephone towers. DISCUSSION: The bill would allow the construction of many towers throughout the country for the next generation of cellular phones, so-called "personal communications service" or "PeS". PCS requires towers that are close together - some communities have been told that the towers must be within one-half mile of each other, with each tower in line of sight to adjacent towers. The effect on community property values from preempting the zoning of such towers, especially in residential areas, could be substantial. The effect on public safety if such towers are exempted fonn building codes is equally severe. In addition, this bill gives the FCC "exclusive Federal jurisdiction" over satellite dishes, which the satellite industry contends preempts all local zoning, building codes and other regulations applicable to such dishes. This would result in major safety concerns embodied in current and future building and zoning codes being preempted, along with the consequent impact on property values and visual blight. Many national organizations representing local governments have taken active roles in opposing these amendments and supporting an amendment that will protect the rights of local government. The attached resolution opposes Sections 107 and 243 of House Resolution 1555, the Telecommunications Act of 1995 and urges Chainnan Bliley and the members of the House Committee on Commerce to reconsider and withdraw these provisions from the Act. A letter will be prepared for the Chainnan's signature to accompany this approved resolution. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached resolution. RWW/rww celltowr.wp6 RESOLUTION TO OPPOSE SECTIONS 107 AND 243 OF HOUSE RESOLUTION 1555, THE TELECOMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1995 WHEREAS, Sections 107 and 243 of H.R. 1555, the Telecommuni- cations Act of 1995, would strip Albemarle County and other local governments throughout the United States of their authority to control the location, height, or lighting of transmission towers used for cellular tele- phone communication and; WHEREAS, Albemarle County has a reasonable review procedure which balances the interests of the industry and the public in the siting of these increasingly numerous towers and; WHEREAS, the significant interest of the citizens of Albemarle County in insuring that such towers are reasonably located should not be sacrificed to industry convenience and; WHEREAS, throughout this Congress the emphasis has been upon returning power to localities and states and; WHEREAS, these provisions of H.R. 1555 represent a dramatic and inappropriate reversal of this policy in a manner which will be resented by citizens and localities; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County to formally oppose Sections 107 and 243 of H.R. 1555 and to urge Chairman Bliley and the members of the House Committee on Commerce, as well as the Congress, to reconsider and withdraw these provisions from the Act. * * * * * I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a resolution adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, at a regular meeting held on Wednesday, July 19, 1995. ~~rd~county S foo.Þ . David P. Bo_nnan Charlottesville COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouelt Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scottsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller FAX (804) 296-5800 July 21, 1995 Congressman L. F. Payne 1119 Longworth HOB Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Payne: On behalf of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, I am forwarding the attached resolution that was unanimously approved by our board members Wednesday night. It is my hope that this resolution will convey to you our gravest concern with sections 107 and 243 of House Resolution 1555, the Telecommunications Act. Sections 107 and 243 of this Act are not in the public interest and circumvent the basic rights guaranteed in our representative political process by allowing private industry to dictate to the citizens of this country where cellular towers should be placed. In addition to the visual blight of cellular towers spread across Albemarle County in residential, as well as commercial areas, community property values will be significantly impacted. Along with the impact on property values, giving exclusive Federal jurisdiction over satellite dishes preempts all local zoning, building codes and other local regulations, thus stripping us of our ability as elected representatives to insure the major safety concerns of our citizens. Albemarle County has with citizen input instituted a reasonable review procedure for the location of these towers, one that attempts to balance the public interest with those of private industry. To remove this decision fÌ"om citizens at the local level who must live in the shadows of these towers, is a blasphemous reversal of the stated policy of this Congress to return power back to the states and local governments. By taking this power away fÌ"om localities, the federal government is in effect enforcing yet another federal mandate. * Printed on recycled paper Congressman L. F. Payne July 21, 1995 Page 2 of2 We urge you to exercise your Congressional leadership to see that the Telecommunications Act with sections 107 and 243 as proposed is not passed and to support any proposed amendments to Act 1555 that will reinstate the right ofloca1 and state government to regulate the proliferation of cellular towers within their own jurisdictional boundaries. Thank you for your attention to this issue. I hope I have been able to convey the strength of our united opposition and our grave concern if these sections of the Telecommunications Act are to go through as proposed. Sincerely, úJ~+~ Walter F. Perkins, Chairman Albemarle County Board of Supervisors RWW/rww 95-15,bt Attachment -' David P. Bowerman O\arlottesviUe COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mcintire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 972-4060 Charles S. Martin Rivanna Charlotte Y. Humphris Jack Jouett Walter F. Perkins White Hall Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Scoltsville Sally H. Thomas Samuel Miller FAX (804) 296-5800 July 21, 1995 Congressman Thomas J. Bliley 2241 Rayburn HOB Washington, D.C. 20515 Dear Congressman Bliley: On behalf of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, I am forwarding the attached resolution that was unanimously approved by our board members Wednesday night. It is my hope that this resolution will convey to you our gravest concern with sections 107 and 243 of House Resolution 1555, the Telecommunications Act. Sections 107 and 243 of this Act are not in the public interest and circumvent the basic rights guaranteed in our representative political process by allowing private industry to dictate to the citizens of this country where cellular towers should be placed. In addition to the visual blight of cellular towers spread across Albemarle County in residential, as well as commercial areas, community property values will be significantly impacted. Along with the impact on property values, giving exclusive Federal jurisdiction over satellite dishes preempts all local zoning, building codes and other local regulations, thus stripping us of our ability as elected representatives to insure the major safety concerns of our citizens. Albemarle County has with citizen input instituted a reasonable review procedure for the location of these towers, one that attempts to balance the public interest with those of private industry. To remove this decision fÌ"om citizens at the local level who must live in the shadows of these towers, is a blasphemous reversal of the stated policy of this Congress to return power back to the states and local governments. By taking this power away fÌ"om localities, the federal government is in effect enforcing yet another federal mandate. * Printed on recycled paper Congressman Thomas J. Bliley July 21, 1995 Page 2 of2 As Chairman of the House Committee on Commerce, we urge you to reaffirm your respect for the rights ofVlfginia citizens and exert your leadership to withdraw sections 107 and 243·ofthis Act. We also ask that you strongly support any proposed amendments to Act 1555 that will ensure the right oflocal and state government to regulate the proliferation of these cellular towers within their own jurisdictional boundaries. Thank you for your attention to this issue. I hope I have been able to convey the strength of our united opposition and our grave concern if these sections of the Telecommunications Act are to go through as proposed. Sincerely, úJ~r~ Walter F. Perkins, Chairman Albemarle County Board of Supervisors RWW/rww 95-14,bt Attachment Keao ~; ~ne Bo.rd July . , 1'»5 f-ec-€ï-vd 1 /1' /, ,. ~UL 19 1995 16:47 '.' ~ Pfton. II Fe1t ACtION'" 5. ;1 =o:.:~;;:. ;" ;~ ~~~ ~ ~Jg: .IJPARP or &IIPE1!.1l1soas m =~T~~ · --' I> M7IÏi~. RE~Iffif"'ES ~ ~~:;I~Š ';-nlJ~iA1'tðNt )I.t. l!.!t~-,,- 1 fUltIt : Authori&at1on for the chairMan to ..nd the a~t.ch.d l.~te~ to vixgln~als Un1ttd States )epr..tntativ.s çonc.~n'nq curIent f.à.~al t.l.e~unic.tinn8 le91s1at1on, B.R. 1~!&. .u;C~Nna.TtöN : 1 r.c~nð th.t the BOard oC $uperV1S0~8 (ao.~6) .utbo~11. the Chairman to ..nd ~b. ettacb.. lttt.~ tb.t convey. ~he co~ty'. .~pport .I~ concerns reg.rdlA; pend1n9 federal 1.;1,lat1on~ H.a. 1555, 'l'tMt~~ Board act10n r.~e$t.ð on J~ly 17, 19.5. BACK~I.OUlm ~ Tbexe are nOW Þotore tÞe Coft9~e" two billa (8. 6S2 and H.~. 155~J inteftd.d to to.t.~. . ~r. c~et1t1.. -arketplae. for cable. teltpbQA9, aDd oth.~ co..unlcatlo~ ..rv1ce.. The bill. are gen.~.11y GOfts14.~ed d..irable ~caUS. tb.y ~..oV. restrictions fro. ~oøp.t1t10Q ..oft9 th. tel.e~t~leat10ÞS companitS. When both w.~. under çon.ld.%a~1o~ in 1"., .. S. 1822 .nd M.a. 363~, the Board of sup.r.i.o~. tuthorlted l.tte~' to o~r con9~..sl&nal r.pre.entati.... 80th cut rent bills a~e t..u~~.ct1on. of that 1.91.1.tio~ ðrafted in 1994, whlCh died ~h.n tb. ....10n cloaeð. However, the b111 BOlt recently p"lec in ç~1tt.. ODd olated tOE a vote tb1s ~ntb, M.R. 155~, w1ll eliminate certain powers 0& local 90~.~Aa.nt.. The Sehate y.~.1on ot tb1$ bill, $. 6~2, v.. p....d on ~e 1$. tnclude4 1~ th. final draft of s. 6~2 was an ..-ndment prepared by Senator Hutch1soft ot T.... that supports ~ .~tbDrlty of loc.l iov.¡nment5 to manaqe pub11C r19bt.-of·way, .nd to ~.qu1~. fa1r .~d ~.a.on.Þle çø.,.n.ation for use of r1vhtl-of-way on a çomp.~~t1..1Y ft.ut~.l .nd noßd1.er~natoJY ba.15. ~h~ '1 69 ~JL 19 1995 16:48 ,. ..: P.02 MeMO to tn. loard July 17, 1995 amen~ent wa. .~ded to prot.ct local 90vernment3 1n the %aeo of . prov~sion r~ov1DV b~rt1.ra ~o entry by prOblb1t1ft9 any action by a local qovernmoht tbat would prohib1t or have tbe .ttect of pruh1bltift9 a n.w ttl.pbonv company from pa:ov1cUn9 S.~V1C4. There 1$ .teilax hbar¡lers to ~ntry· lanvuage 1n R.a. 1$55, but a8 of yet th.~. ¡co no ...nd1Ie"t equivalent to Senator Hutc1ûaon'l in the Qill to protect tbe rlpt. of locaJ. 90v.r..~t. Repr,..ntat1vo 8arl Stupak of MlcbtGan (joln~ by ~tp. Joe B.~ton of. Tex..), Iw",.ver, ba. aN\ðUAeed tbat he will offer aft ...ndlient from th- floo~ u,,1nl the lÞpa,. oC th. KV.tch1.on ....n...rat. A copy of b11 -D..r Colle.gue- 1.tte~ i. encloSed. 1nClud1av the propo..d ...ndaent. FUrther analysis of the House bill allo indicat.. that tbe bill ~equ1r.. the rederal Co.mun1cations C~a.lon tFCC) , tbzou9b aaendln9 lanqua,. ln8.~t.d by aept."Dt.~1v. kl~, (WI) 1ft the bIll'. comaltt., pb.'.' to larVlly þEt~t .tat. aDd local buildinv cod.. (and .11 other loç_l r6,ulat100.1 appllcable to ce!lQlar radio telepbono towe~.. the Þ111 would allow tbe COft.truet1on of ~V ~ow.~. tb%ougbo~t the COuntEY for thl next 9tDeE&t1oa of cellul.r phOne., lo-ealled ftporlonal c~un1e.t1on$ "rYlc.- or ·pes.- ,es ~.qu1~.. tove~' that &Ea clo.. tot.ther ~ ~ ~it1.. ba.. been told that t:.be tower. aU5t bt withJ.n one-half aile of .ach.other, w1th .ach tower in l1ne of a10ht to adiace"t tow.rs. ne a!!ICt OQ , CODmUft1ty propertl value. fro. pte.-ptinv the 10000g of .UCh I,. towora. ..peci.l1y in ¡-".14øt1al ¡reu, lI;ou14 b. .\abatut1.1. \Th8 .ffect on public ..fety 11 I~çh toweE. .~. ...-p~.~ t~ bu11d1119 codes 1. equallY .,vet.. lea ackl1tA,cm, tbi. bill ,lv,. the FCC ·ax~lut1v. Feder.l ~ur1'd1Ct10D· OYeZ ..tel11t. d1.ht. · wh1ch the ..tall1te iDduatry eont.ndl pr...,ta all local lOÞ~g, !bu1~d1n9 codes &Þd other rtgu1atio68 applicable to .ucb di,h8e. 1 TÀ1. wOUld r..w.~ in ..jor ..r.ty col\ce~n. .-bodl6d in QV.rr_t ~aDd tutQ~' b~ild1h9 ~ &oniD9 COd.. bein, pr.-.pt.~, alODl with l ~b. .;on..qu.nt bapaçt 91\ Pl'opa~ty valu.. and vi.ual bllth'=. National oxg.nizatl0~' repc...ntift' local qQverameÞC' have taken açtiv. roles 1n express1n9 the1t luPPOrt foe the stup.k-I.~ton amendment, aM th.1r oppollt1on to the Klut .......nt. The'· vroups; the U.s. COhte¥ence of Mayo~l, 'be Nat10aal AasoCiatign of counti.., the Mat10ftal '..VU. of Citi..s, the V1niJú.· KW\lc;lpal. Le.9\14Þ. an4 th. National Allociati.on of T.l~commun1c.t1on. OC'~oe~s .~d Advi.ar. t~~ ~ an affiliate of tbe N.t1onal Lea9\Þ1 of ei~1..~ all a:.c~nci that local Oov.:~nt. .110 communiç,te their CODe.~D. with K.a. ~$'5 to th*1r U.I. Rlpze,entat1vt.. '0 .- JUL-lg-:995 16:48 ... MelftO to the 5v6XO July 17, 1995 Th*~.fv~e. in vt~w of ~h. ~..~.nQ. ðf K.~. l;SS to ra1Kfax county .nd .11 lucal 90v.c~.nt5, s~.ft ~.co~Þd. that th. Icard ~~~hQr~l. the ~h.1ra&n ~o ,.nd th. 6~t~ch.d 19tt.. to Vi~t1A1.1. aepreaentltivol in Con~r.'s. rucJU. l~A,ÇT; Und,terained. l;IK"'O~£b fIN"QfV.M't~. Att.cnaen~ I, L.~tec tr~ a.p~.6.~t.ttve StQpøk to col1..g~.' Attachaent 2, Draft letter to V1rqlnt.·. Vn¡ted $tate. llepr.softtat1v.. Il)l.JT; James P. McDonald. Deputy County ixacutiVe tor IC&IWg....nl lad audO.t ~on Kalle;~, P1r.c'o./C~1. f.19W1.1on ~t~i.tr.tor, Depaztaent ot con'Uler AtC.i~. Michael \Gftq, ~.~,t'ftt county Atto~pey susan Mitt.reder. te9111atlv, L1a1.oft " .. r P.03 TOTAL P.03 ~UL-19-1995 16:55 ~M . .. ..... P.01 3uly XX, 1"$ OUFT LETT&R RE: M.a. 1~!~, the C~unic.t1on. A~t of 1995 Dea~ Repr...ntal1ve I .. w~iting O~ benalt Of tbt rairf.x County qoverneent to ..pees. our view. on tha eo.øun1catlon. Act of 1995 (H.~A 15~$). Tne .ncour.~"lnt the bill vive. to the development 0' .n open and coapetitS."'. t.l.co~cati.ol\s uztetpl&c., with the potential lowet1n9 of ratea, p~vi.1oa 01 alterftatlv.. to con.uatrs. .nù the po..1bl11ty of iftc~ea.i~g iob opportun1ti.. in thA field, i. v.r~ .p,ealin,. Local oo..un1t1e. .t.Dd to ~Defit trða thie OpeÞ1D9 of the maEketplace aDd tbis na.ç.nt dev'lo~nt Of ~~lc.·, national telec~unic.t1onl iAf~&.truct~r.. However, as th.t 1nfra.trycture touche. Ivery c~UD1ty in ~r1cap camauA~ti.' expect tbeic l~.l 90vernaent. to continy. to ...rei.e tb_!r p~ot.ctiOft of p~lic rtgbt.·o!-way &ad public proPerty. a~c.u.. it 1. only throu9b th. ace... aDd u.. of th... public ..,eta tbÞt th. t.l.~un1eatlon. infr..truct~¡. w111 ~ E..lizeG, it 1. n.ç....ry th.t tbe r1tbt. and Obl1,.\10n. of loc.l ,overaaenta Þv reCOQnI&ed In 11.1\. 1!!5. aecop1t1on of local fOYtrNleDt lnvolv...nt in this proc... wa. 1Dcluded by the Senata lu 5. 6~2 tÞrOU9h the WHutChl.on ...ftdmlntW .upport1Q9 tbe .uthO~1ty of . auni¢ip.lity to ..naVe th. public riOht.-of-way, aDd to requiro feir and r."oD~l. c~.nsatlon on I competltlvelt neutral and nvnd.1aGciainatory ..1,. Ne ..k that you .,.1st local 90vern.enta in two ways. rlratø lh.t you .uppo~~ the lnclu.lon In H.a. lS5~ Of aft ..en~t that will zeplaee anr language tÞat could" con.trued to deft)' loeal 90varnø.nt r1;btl with 1.n~9' that offer. the aaae pro'.ction .. the WHutcbison ue.nø..Dt~· We ~J;.tAnd that thi. aaeDðlMat: 11 belnt d~.ft.4 by ~epr...nt.tlve Ba~t Stupak (»-"1) w1tb Mep~e~.ftt.tlV. Joe a.rton ca-tx) and z..p.çtfully .at th,t YQU suppo~t it. (oS) TOTRL P.01 { RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board has requested approval of a $15 + million project to renovate and expand the Albemarle-Charlottesville Joint Security Complex; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on April 5, 1995, voted to support the $15 + million renovation and expansion project; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council adopted a resolution on May 15, 1995, supporting the $4.8 million renovation component of the renovation and expansion project and adopted a resolution on July 17, 1995 supporting construction of additional new bed space in an amount not to exceed 115 beds; and WHEREAS, no part of the project can proceed without concurrence of the County and City; and WHEREAS, it is in the public's interest to proceed as expeditiously as possible with at least the renovation and expansion components of the project approved by the City; and WHEREAS, to secure; state funding for the $4.8 million renovation and 115 cell expansion project, the Jail Board must receive approval for the project from the State Board of Corrections and meet other deadlines and requirements specified in Title 53.1 of the Code of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereby requests that the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board take all necessary steps to proceed with the $4.8 million renovation component and a 115 cell expansion of the renovation and expansion project for the Albemarle-Charlottesville Joint Security Complex and to qualify the project for state funding pursuant to Title 53.1 of the Code of Virginia. * * * * * I., Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Res"olution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of 5 to 0 on July 19, 1995.0 c RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Albemarle-Charlottesville Regional Jail Board has requested approval of a $IS + million project to renovate and expand the Albemarle- Charlottesville Joint Security Complex; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on AprilS, 199 S, voted to support the $IS + million renovation and expansion project; and WHEREAS, the Charlottesville City Council adopted a resolution on May IS, 1995, supporting the $4.8 million renovation component of the renovation and expansion project and adopted a resolution on July 17, 1995 supporting construction of additional new bed space in an amount not to exceed lIS beds; and WHEREAS, no part of the project can proceed without concurrence of the County and City; and WHEREAS, it is in the public's interest to proceed as expeditiously as possible with at least the renovation and expansion components of the project approved by the City; and WHEREAS, to secure state funding for the $4.8 million renovation and lIS cell expansion project, the Jail Board must receive approval for the project from the State Board of Corrections and meet other deadlines and requirements specified in Title S3.1 of the Code of Virginia. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereb)'" requests that the Albemarle- Charlottesville Regional Jail Board take all necessary steps to proceed with the $4.8 million renovation component and a lIS cell expansion of the renovation and expansion project for the Albemarle-Charlottesville Joint Security Complex and to qualify the project for state funding pursuant to Title S3.1 of the Code of Virginia. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of a Resolution duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County by vote of _ to _ on July 19, 1995. Clerk, Board of County Supervisors C\BOS\RESOLUTI\JAIL2.RES