Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-05-19 ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of May 19, 1999 May 21, 1999 AGENDA ITEM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT Call to order. Meeting was called to Order at 7:00 p.m., by the Chairman. All BOS members present. 4. Others Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. · Mr. John Martin and Mr. Jim Bennett addressed the future of the County's water supply, and requested that the RWSA hold public hearings to discuss and receive public comment on water supply alternatives. 5.1. ApPropriation: Education/Grants, $182,281 (Form #98070). APPROVED. 5.2. A'.'thcr!-"~ Ccu,-,.~J ~ ..... *;,,~ tc si~,~ Blue Rid?,e r'~+~n+i~n F'~,~-q~i~r~ ~,~,i~-,~ A ....... + DEFERRED to June 2, 1999.) 6. SP-98-70. StarBase Alpha Dance Hall. APPROVED w/two conditiOns. 7. SP-99-06. Northway & Avis Truck Rentals (Signs #69&70). APPROVED wi4 conditions. 8. SP-99-08 Northway & Avis Outdoor Display (Signs #71&72). APPROVED wi3 conditions. 9. SP-99-09. CFW CV203 (Lickinghole Repeater (Sign #59). APPROVED w/14 conditions. 10. SP-99-10. CV 159 Scenic Lookout (Signs #57&58). APPROVED w/12 conditions. 11. SP-99-11. CV154 Ivy & 1-64 (Sign #55). APPROVED w/13 conditions. 12. SP-99-14. CFW CV137 (Lickinghole) (Sign #54). APPROVED w/8 conditions. Clerk: Acknowledge Mr. Martin's and Mr. Bennett's comments. Clerk: Include in appropriations letter to Melvin Breeden and appropriate persons. Clerk: Place on JUne 2, 1999 agenda. Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). County Executive's staff: Push dance hall permit through the process quickly; place in on June 2, 1999 consent agenda, if possible. Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). Clerk: Attach cOnditions (see attachment A). Clerk: Attach conditions (see attachment A). 13. ZMA-98-24. Grayrock N (Signs ~6,67&68. APPROVED None. subject to application plan which limits development of the property. 14. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board. · Mr. Tucker thanked Juan Wade for his efforts in encouraging staff to participate in Give Air a Brake Day. The County had the largest participation of any organization/company in the area. · It was the consensus of the Board to ask that a joint public hearing be held between the County, the City, and RWSA regarding practicable alternatives for the future of the area's water supply. · Mr. Tucker said staff will begin helping the PDR Committee as they prepare a final report to be presented to the Board, , possibly in August. · Mr. Perkins objected to people saying the DAIS Committee has made decisions regarding sidewalks, etc. No decisions have yet been made. · Ms. Thomas said the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations is preparing a report on the Commonwealth's economy, and that Albemarle County received a high rating. None. County Executive Staff: Notify RWSA and the City. None. None. None. · Ms~ Humphris noted that Roxanne White is an "iron woman", None. participating in multiple volunteer events over the past weekend. 15. Executive Session: Legal Matters. None. 16. Certify Executive Session. None. 17, Adjourn Attachment A CONDITIONS SP-98-70. StarBase Alpha Dance Hall (Sign #95). Use shall be limited to indoor activities only; and The owner, operator, and their successors and assigns agree not to apply for or use any permit under the Alcohol Beverage Control Act which would allow for the service or consumption of alcoholic beverages during any dance hall use of the property and further agree to prohibit all consumption of alcohol on the property during such use. Violation of this agreement shall be deemed grounds for revocation of the special use permit and shall cause the use to be susa)ended pending the process for revocation. SP-99-06. Northwa¥ & Avis Truck Rentals (Signs #69&70). Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by the ARB for the site plan; Vehicles shall be displayed only in areas shown on the site plan; Vehicles shall not be elevated; and Use shall not commence until fire official approval is obtained. SP-99-08 Northway & Avis Outdoor Display (Signs #71&72). 1 Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by the ARB for the site plan; Vehicles shall be displayed only in areas shown on the site plan; and Vehicles shall not be elevated. SP-99-09. CFW CV203 (Lickinghole Repeater (Sign #59). o The height of the tower shall not exceed seven (7) feet above the height of the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the tower. Antenna may not extend above the height of the tower; The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color; The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Prtr CV 203"; The panel antennas, with attached supporting electrical conduits, shall be painted in color to match the wooden pole tower; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antennas shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Rptr CV 203"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited; The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunication providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and o 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle county. (The use of this facility by additional telecommunication providers will require amendment of this special use permit. The presence in this condition in no way implies approval of additional uses for this facility or this property.); Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit .consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two-hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access; The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and The access road shall disturb no more than seventy-five (75) feet in cross section. SP-99-10. CV 159 Scenic Lookout (Signs #57&58). o The height of the tower shall not exceed seven (7) feet above the height of the tallest tree located at the same base elevation as the facility within fifty (50) feet of the facility; The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color; The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The proposed facility shall be located adjacent to the existing access easement, shown on the site plan, and no tree shall be removed; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antennas shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless Scenic Lookout CF 159"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited; The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunication providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan 10. 11. 12. requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle county. (The use of this facility by additional telecommunication providers will require amendment of this special use permit. The presence in this condition in no way implies approval of additional uses for this facility or this property.); Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted ~s projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; The access road sha~l be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and The access road shall disturb no more than seventy-five (75) feet in cross section. SP-99-11. CV154 Ivy & 1-64 (Siqn #55). The height of the tower shall not exceed seven (7) feet above the height of the tallest tree within twenty-five (25) feet of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the tallest tree. Antenna may extend three (3) feet above the height of the tower; The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color; The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154" and a plan titled "Tower site for CFW Wireless CV154~, Any fencing shall be of a design similar to that found on the property currently. The ground base of the tower shall be fenced with a design of fence similar to that found on the property currently and shall be screened with shade- tolerant screening materials planted inside the fence; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a Antenna shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154"; and b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited; The tower shall be used, or have the ;)otential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunication providers to locate 10. 11. 12. 13. antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle county. )The use of this facility by additional telecommunication providers will require amendment of this special use permit. The presence in this condition in no way implies approval of additional uses for this facility or this property.); Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access; The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not ~ater than July I of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and The access road shall disturb no more than seventy-five (75) feet fn cross section. SP-99-14. CFW CV137 (Lickinghole) (Sign #54). The antennas and supporting elements shall be painted to match the existing tower; The vacated television reception antenna shall be removed; The attachment shall be limited to a total of two (2) panel antenna, the dimensions of each which shall be approximately six feet by one foot (6'x1'), whose height shall not exceed a maximum of sixty-five (65) feet; Structural improvements to or replacement of the tower shall be similar in design, size and appearance as the existing tower unless the existing tower is replaced by wooden pole not exceeding sixty-five (65) feet; Construction of the telecommunications attachment on the existing lattice tower shall be in general accord with the plan titled "CV 137 Lickinghole" attached to the report and initialed ELM 04107199; The permittee shall submit a report to the Zoning Administrator once per year, by not later than July I of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; and Albemarle County Architectural Review Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. Ladies and Gentlemen; We are here to support the comments of Mr. Martin. The development of future water supplies for Albemarle County will have a profound impact on how this County grows. You, our elected representatives, must be involved in this very important decision. At the April 20h meeting, members of your public raised a number of important questions about the proposed list of alternative water supplies. Yet, we. do not know howthose and other questions will be responded to by RWSA and their consultants. It remains unclear to us whether we presently have any meaningful input at all into this process. Over 20 years ago after the 1977 drought RWSA convened a panel of advisors to draw up an improved water conservation policy. The report of that panel reads like a modem blueprint for water conservation applicable to many communities. We remain baffled as to why such foresight was not heeded, but we also are unaware of any public input into the decision not to implement thOse recommendations. We plead with you not to allow such a mistake to be repeated again. Donna and Jim Bennett 6430 Sugar Hollow Road Crozet, VA 22932 David R I~ Charlotte Y. Humphris COUNTY OF AI REMARLE Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, V'wffinia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 May 21,1999 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins Sally H. Thomas Mr. John C. Martin 5115 Catterton Rd. Free Union, VA 22940 Dear Mr. Martin: Thank you for your recent comments to the Board of Supervisors on May 19,. 1999, concerning the future of the County's water supply. The Board appreciates you taking the time to appear and make your views known CSM/Ibh Again, thank you for your comments, Sincerely, Charles S. Martin Chairman Printed on recycled p(~per Charlotte Y~ Humphfis Fon'est R. Marshall, ,Ir. COUNTY Of ALBEMA~I F. Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 May 21, 1999 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins Sally H. Thomas Samuel ~ Mr. Jim Bennett 6430 Sugar Hollow Rd. Crozet, VA 22932 Dear Mr. Bennett: Thank you for your recent comments to the Board of Supervisors om May 19, 1999, concerning the future of the County's water supply. The Board appreciates you taking the time to appear and make your views known. Again, thank you for your comments. Sincerely, Charles S. Martin Chairman CSM/Ibh Printed on recycled paper INTER AR~n~'~e ~ of Co~mty S~p~rvi.so~ Office of the Clerk Io ~e l~a~ 401 Mclnfire Road Cha~ottesx,ille. Virginia 22902--1596 804-296-5843 OFFICE MEMO To: From: Subject: Date: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance Laurel B. Hail, Senior Deputy Clerk Appropriation Apprbved on May 19, 1999 May 21, 1999 Attached is the original appropriation form for the following item which was approved by the Board at its meeting on May 19, 1999: 1) Appropriation: Education and Grants, $182,281.00 (Form #98070). Attachment CC; Roxanne White Robert Walters Kevin Castner Jackson Zimmerman 3an/vNglS $~OSIA~3dNSdO G~O8 ~ONVNMSO ~O£O~alQ :STYAO~dd¥ S~B4SNV~£ 00' ~9E'~9 ~$ ~VIO/ 00'000'~ /SNI-S~OIAM~S =lO~Jd O0~E~ ~g~09 ~O~S ~ O0'O00'E S~ITddRS O~/O3 009~09 98E~9 OOSS ~ O0'O00'L £SNI-S~OIA~3S 40~d OOS~S ~gKo9 t;Ol.£ SIN~d~OOHOS :0NI73 X ON $ O~I~OB~ IN~3SIL~3AGV N~N ~gJSNV~L 7VNOI£1GGV :NOIJ.¥1~ldO~ddV JO :JdX.L 0Z096 ~13a~nN 66~96 :~V-~, 3VDSIJ /S~NO~ NOl.l¥1~dO~dd¥ COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education / Grants SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #98070 in the amount of $182,281.00 for contribution to schools, Upton Foundation Grant and reappropriation of school carryover funds and building rental fees. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tu(~ker, Castner, Breeden; Ms. White AGENDA DATE: May 19, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: INFORMATION: Yes BACKGROUND: , At its meeting on April 12, 1999, the School Board approved the following appropriations: Appropriation of $1,000.00 for Western Albemarle High School. Western Albemarle High school received a donation in the amount of $1,000.00 from Randy and Donna Canterbury, II. This donation will be used toward the purchase of new band uniforms. Appropriation of $1,000.00 for Henley Middle School. ,~ Henley Middle School received a donation from Douglas and Sarah Dupont in the amount of $1,000.00. This donation will be used to help provide Henley Middle School students with an interdisciplinary arts program. Appropriation of $2,000.00 from the Department of Education Secondary Services Unit. Monticello High School has received a grant award in the amount of $2,000.00. The grant funds will be used to purchase traffic safety instructional resources for the Driver Education Program at Monticello High School. Appropriation of $1,000.00 from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation. J. T. Henley Middle School received a grant in the amount of $1,000.00 from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation. This g rant will provide Henley students with an interdisciplinary arts program. This will include three artists in residency, which the entire school will participate in. Reappropriation of $160,295 of school carryover and $16,986 of building rental fees. School Board Policy DB-E allows schools to carry forward up to 10% of their operational budgets from year to year. School Board Policy KG-R allows 40% of the base fees collected for building rental to be returned to each school. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriations, totaling $182,281.00, as detailed on Appropriation #98070. 99.082 ~,~RD OF SUPERVISORS ~BE~E COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS Memorandum DATE: TO: FROM: RE: April 20, 1999 Robert ~~er, Jr., County Executive Kevin C~/~,'. Division Superintendent Request ~ Appropriation' At its meeting on April-12, 1999, the School Board approved the following appropriations: o Appropriation of $1,000.00 for Western Albemarle High School. Western Albemarle High School received a donation in the amount of $1,000.00 from Randy and Donna Canterbury II. This donation will be used toward the purchase of new band uniforms. o Appropriation of $1,000.00 for Henley Middle School. Henley Middle School received a donation from Douglas and Sarah Dupont in the amount of $1,000.00. This donation will be used to help provide Henley Middle School students with an interdisciplinary arts program. o Appropriation of $2,000.00 from the Department of Education Secondary Services Unit. Monticello High School has received a grant award in the amount of $2,000.00. The grant funds will be used to purchase traffic safety instructional resources for the Driver Education Program at Monticello High School. o Appropriation of $1,000.00 from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation. J. T. Henley Middle School received a grant in the amount of $1,000.00 from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation. This grant will provide Henley students with an interdisciplinary arts program. This will include three artists in residency, which the entire school will participate in. o Reappropriation of $160,295 of school carryover and $16,986 of building rental funds. School Board Policy DB-E allows schools to carry forward up to 10% of their operational budgets from year to year. School Board Policy KG-R allows 40'% of the base fees collected for building rental to be returned to each school. It is requested that the Board of Supervisors amend the appropriation ordinance to receive and disbursed these funds as displayed on the attachment. shim xc: Melvin Breeden Ella .Carey Donation -Western Albemarle High School Revenue: 2-2000-18100-181109 Donation Expenditure: 1-2302-61101-601300 Ed/Rec Supplies $1,000.00 $1,000.00 Donation - Henley Middle School Revenue: 2-2000-18100-181109 Expenditure: 1-3104-60252-312500 Donation $1,000.00 Prof Services-Inst. $1,000.00 Grant Award - Monticello High School Driver Ed Program Revenue: 2-3300-24000-240305 Monticello High-Dr. Ed. $2,000.00 Expenditure: 1-3300-61238-601300 Ed/Rec Materials $2,000.00 Frederick S. Upton Foundation Grant Revenue: 2-3104-18000-181221 Frederick Upton Grant $1,000.00 Expenditure: 1-3104-60252-312500 Prof Serv. Inet $1,000.00 School Carryover and Building Rental Funds 1-2201-61101-601300 BROADUS WOOD 1-2202-61101601300 BROWNSVILLE 1-2203-61101-601300 CROZET 1-2205-61101-601300 HOLLYMEAD 1-2206-61101-601300 MERIWETHER LEWIS 1-2207-61101-601300 RED HILL 1-2209-61101-601300 SCOTTSVILLE 1-2211-61101-601300 STONY POINT 1-2212-61101-601300 WOODBROOK 1-2213-61101-601300 YANCEY 1-2214-61101-601300 CALE 1-2215-61101-601300 VIRGINIA L. MURRAY 1-2216-61101-6{~1300 AGNOR-HURT 1-2251-61101-601300 BURLEY 1-2252-61101-601300 HENLEY 1-2253-61101-601300 JOUETT 1-2254-61101-601300 WALTON 1-2255-61101-601300 SUTHERLAND 1-2301-61101-601300 ALBEMARLE 1-2302-61101-601300 WESTERN 1-2304-61101-601300 MONTICELLO Total Cat.over & Building Rental Funds Carryover $8,927 Building Rental $275 $9,2O2 Carryover $1.110 Building Rental $10 $1,120 Carryover $4,789 Building Rental ~ $4,885 Canyover $2.578 Building Rental $1,225 $3,803 Carryover $9,010 Carryover $3,587 Carryover $1,135 Carryover $6,463 Cam/over $1,367 Building Rental $1,062 $2,429 Carryover $1,054 Carryover $5.063 Building Rental $356 $5,419 Cam/over $896 Building Rental ~ $931 Cam/over $4,212 Building Rental $378 $4,590 Carryover $1,325 Building Rental $418 $1,743 Cam/over $14,042 Building Rental $210 $14,252 Carryover $16 Building Rental $1,778 $1,794 Carryover $732 Building Rental $20 $752 Carryover $7.987 Building Rental $821 $8,808 Carryover $81,972 Building Rental $9,387 $91,359 Carryover $I ,846 Building Rental $915 $2,761 $2,184 $177,28t R. J. CAN'I:ERBURY II MD. o?-98 1037 DONNA L. CANTERBURY ~"~/~'~"~// 455 HICKORY DRIVE 68-~/5~0 VA ~RLYSVILLE, VA ~9~ ~ ~ ~. NafionsBank Professional and Executive Banking · ' :~ q E, 00 S rman: Please accept the enclosed $1000 donation to Western Albemarle High School for new band uniforms. My wife, Donna, and I are pleased to support the excellent band at Western and your outstanding leadership. Sincerely, BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission Service Agreement SUBJ ECTIPROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission Service Agreement. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White BACKGROUND: AGENDA DATE: May 19, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY:' .~?~ / The Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission was formed by resolution in December, 1997 and has been officially meeting since March, 1998 in preparation for the construction and operation of a juvenile detention facility in the Charlottesville/Albemarle area. Since its inception, the Commission has hired an attorney and a financial consultant and with their assistance has worked out the details of a service agreement between the four representative jurisdictions, the City of Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Greene and Fluvanna. The attached service agreement was approved by the Commission at its May 13t" meeting and is being submitted to each of the governing bodies for their approval. DIScussION: In the attached service agreement, the Commission and the member jurisdictions agree to: · Design, finance, construct and operate a new 40 bed detention facility and to use the Commission's statutory authority to incur debt obligations; To pursue state construction reimbursement with caveat that if the General Assembly does not indicate its intent to appropriate the necessary funding, the Commission will not proceed with construction without the approval of each governing board; · To accept non-member detainees in the center on a per diem rate basis, however, member jurisdictions always have preference over non-members; · To provide transportation of detainees while at the facility for medical and other required appointments, however, each member jurisdiction will provide transportation to and from the facility; · To approve Commission actions by a majority vote, however, in the event of a tie both Albemarle and Charlottesville will have an additional vote. To charge a per diem rate for operating costs, to be paid by all the member jurisdictions based on usage. It is projected that operating costs will be shared 60% Charlottesville, 30% Albemarle, 5% Fluvanna and 5% Greene. · To charge debt service on all capital and capital related costs to Albemarle and Charlottesville to be shared equally (50%/50%), however, both Fluvanna and Greene counties will pay a per diem debt service charge AGENDA TITLE: Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission Service Agreement May 19, 1999 Page 2 based on usage, with a minimum annual charge for 2 detainees or 5% of the capital costs. To facilitate the best interest rate, the County and City agree to prepay 100% of the Commission's debt service payment (50%/50%) and to then receive credits from the other member jurisdictions based on their per diem debt service payments. To provide for an operating reserve fund in an amount equal to 90 days of the projected annual budget; To allow any member to withdraw from the Commission by resolution of its governing body, however, no member jurisdiction will be permitted to withdraw while obligations are outstanding except by unanimous consent of the other members u pon agreement to assume the debts of the withdrawing member. To allow this agreement to be changed or amended only with the consent of the Commission and each member.jurisdiction. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the attached Service Agreement for the Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission and authorization for the County Executive to sign such agreement. 99.083 2 April 1999 draft for submission to localities SERVICE AGREEMENT THIS SERVICE AGREEMENT (the "AGREEMENT") is made as of ,1999, by and among the BLUE RIDGE JUVENILE DETENTION COMMISSION (the "Commission"),the CITY OF Charlottesville and the COUNTIES OF ALBEMARLE, FLUVANNA and GREENE (collectively the "Member Jurisdictions"), each of which is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia. RECITALS WHEREAS, the Commission previously has been created by the governing bodies of the Member Jurisdictions, to enhance public safety within the region by financing, constructing, equipping, maintaining and operating a regional juvenile detention facility (the "Detention Center"); and WHEREAS, the Commission has conducted an assessment of the present and future needs of the Member Jurisdictions for space to house juvenile offenders in secure detention, which needs assessment has been reviewed and approved by the state Board for Juvenile Justice; and WHEREAS, the Member Jurisdictions agree that to fulfill their collective needs so identified for 40 detention beds, the Commission should design, finance, construct and operate a new detention facility; and WHEREAS, the Commission will need to use its statutory powers to incur debt obligations and secure partial state reimbursement to finance the construction of that new facility; WHEREAS, the Member Jurisdictions want to detail their understanding and agreement with each other and with the Commission governing the parties' respective obligations concerning the design, financing, construction and operation of such new facility. NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows: ARTICLE I Definitions The capitalized terms in this Agreement have the meanings set forth below unless the context otherwise requires. "Annual Budget" has the meaning given to that term in Section 3.7. "Applicable Law" means all applicable laws, ordinances, judgments, decrees, injunctions, writs and orders of any court, arbitrator or governmental agency or authority and all rules, regulations, orders, interpretations, licenses and permits of any federal, state, county, municipal, regional, or other governmental body, instrumentality, agency or authority. :'Bonds" means revenue bonds isSued by the Commission to obtain funding for the design, construction and other costs of the Detention Center. "Capital Member Percentage" means the percentage of the Commission's Expenses for debt service and related capital costs allocable to each Member Jurisdiction based on usage, (provided that the Capital Member Percentages for Albemarle and Charlottesville respectively shall be one half of their combined Capital Member Percentage), calculated as described in Section 4.1 (b). "Commission" means the Blue Ridge Juvenile Detention Commission. "Commission Default" has the meaning given to that term in Section 8.1.. "Detainee(s)" means juvenile offenders committed to the custody of the Detention Center by the appropriate authorities in the Member Jurisdictions or of other jurisdictions for whom the Commission agrees to hold juvenile offenders for consideration when space is available to do so. "Detention Center" means the facility to be designed, financed, constructed and operated by the Commission, together with any future additions or improvements thereto. "Expenses" means all expenses which may reasonably be determined by the Commission to be attributable directly or indirectly to the ownership or operation of the Detention Center, and payable as operating expenses in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles and shall also include debt service payments and other capital costs related to the Detention Center, required payments to the Operating Reserve Fund established in Section 4.3, required payments to any debt service reserve established in connection with any Bonds and other reasonable or necessary payments required to comply with debt service coverage requirements imposed in connection with any Bonds. "Fiscal Year" means the annual accounting period from July 1 of one year to June 30 of the following year. "Member Jurisdictions" means the City of CharlottesVille and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna and Greene, each a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and any other political subdivision hereafter joining the Commission, but excluding any political subdivision that may have withdrawn from the Commission, as provided in Sections 5.7 and 5.8. 2 "Member Jurisdiction Default" has the meaning given to such term in Section 8.2. "Net Expenses" means Expenses reduced by an amount equal to revenue from (i) non- member jurisdictions (including the federal government), (ii) expenses of the Commission reimbur, sed by the Commonwealth of Virginia, (iii) interest income on Commission reserve funds and (iv) all other non-member revenue. "Notes" means revenue anticipation notes issued by the Commission. "Obligations" means the Notes or Bonds issued by the Commission. "Operating Member Percentage(s)" means the percentage allocable to each Member Jurisdiction for prepayment of the Operating Component, as set forth in Section 4.1. "Operating Reserve Fund" means the reserve fund established in Section 4.3. "Per Diem Charge" means the charge to Member Jurisdictions for each Detainee held in the Detention Center, as set forth in Section 3.7, which shall consist of an "Operating Component" and a "Debt Service Component." "Placed in Service" means the first day on which the Detention Center has been certified by the Department of Juvenile Justice of the Commonwealth to accept Detainees. · ARTICLE II Construction and Financing Section 2.1 Construction of Detention Center. The Commission agrees to construct and equip the Detention Center, designed to initially hold a rated capacity of 40 beds, located at such site as the Commission may determine. The initial construction of the Detention Center shall include core facilities to accommodate the construction of at least 40 additional beds. At such time as the Commission determines that the construction of such additional beds is necessary, the Commission shall proceed with such additional construction, subject to the requirements of Section 3.10, and provided that funds for debt service on any Obligations attributable to the construction of such additional beds shall be collected through a separately calculated component of the Per Die~n Charge that shall only be allocated among and payable by those Member Jurisdictions that have approved in writing the Commission's undertaking to construct and finance such additional beds. Section 2.2 Permits. The Commission shall construct the Detention Center in accordance with the requirements of all Applicable Laws. The Member Jurisdictions agree to provide reasonable assistance to the Commission in complying with any such requirements, and shall provide the Commission with any and all information that may be necessary in this regard. 3 Section 2.3 Agreement to Finance. A portion of the eligible construction cost of the Detention Center is expected to be funded by the Commonwealth of Virginia pursuant to Section 16.1-309.5 of the Code of Virginia. The Commission agrees to pursue all state reimbursement which may be available for construction. In the event the Department of Juvenile Justice does not approve funding of its share of the eligible construction cost at the rate then prevailing, or the General Assembly does not indicate its intent to appropriate the necessary funding for such reimbursement, the Commission shall not proceed to construct the Detention Center unless approval is received from the governing body of each of the Member Jurisdictions. The Commission may, however, subject to Section 4.1, proceed to obtain either short term or permanent financing prior to construction, and may proceed with design and preliminary site work. The Commission agrees to finance the cost of constructing and equipping the Detention Center, including expenses associated with the financing, through the issuance of revenue bonds. In addition, the Commission may issue Bonds or Notes or other short-term obligations for this purpose. ARTICLE III Provision of Services, Operation and Maintenance Section 3.1 Acceptance of Detainees. Immediately after the Detention Center is Placed in Service, the Commission shall be responsible for accepting and housing all juvenile Detainees committed to it by the appropriate authorities in each Member Jurisdiction. To minimize the cost of operations and debt service to the Member Jurisdictions, the Commission shall exercise its best efforts to keep the Detention Center full of Detainees at all times. To accomplish this, the Commission shall seek and may accept Detainees for consideration from other jurisdictions, including the federal government and its agencies, at such rates and upon such terms as the Commission may deem advisable, to fill space not being used by the Member Jurisdictions. When space is limited, however, Detainees of Member Jurisdictions shall be given a preference over those of non-members. In the event the Detention Center cannot house any additional Detainees, and it is necessary for a Member Jurisdiction to commit a Detainee to the Commission, the Commission shall accept the Detainee and secure space in some other appropriate facility. The cost of such other placement shall be a Commission Expense, and the committing Member Jurisdiction shall be responsible only for paying the Commission its then-current Per Diem Charge for such Detainee housed in the other facility. Section 3.2 Commitment of Detainees. Each Member Jurisdiction agrees to commit all of its juvenile offenders requiring confinement to the custody of the Commission, and the Commission agrees to accept such juvenile offenders. 4 Section 3.3 Transportation of Detainees. Each Member Jurisdiction shall be responsible for the initial transportation of Detainees from such Jurisdiction to the Detention Center for processing into the Detention Center population. Thereafter the Member Jurisdiction shall continue to be responsible for any further transportation of Detainees to and from court appearances, or to other detention facilities. The Detention Center shall be responsible for transportation of Detainees for medical care and other personal needs that arise during detention. To minimize the need for transportation to court appearances, the Commission shall use its best efforts to include appropriate video and telecommunications equipment in the Detention Center and to assist the Member Jurisdictions in securing such equipment for their respective juvenile court facilities. Section 3.4 Operation and Maintenance. The Commission shall operate and maintain the Detention Center in accordance with all Applicable Laws. The Commission shall be an equal opportunity employer. Section 3.5 Insurance. The Commission shall maintain hazard, liability or such other insurance as may be required by Applicable Law, or that the Commission may deem prudent and advisable. Section 3.6. Annual Report. The Commission shall provide to each Member Jurisdiction on or before each October 1 a report showing the activities and the revenues, expenditures, and employee compensation schedules and other similar data of the Commission for the preceding Fiscal Year. Section 3.7 Annual Budget. On or before each December 1, the Commission shall provide to each Member Jurisdiction the Commission's Annual Budget for the next Fiscal Year, including any proposed capital projects. For each Fiscal Year in which the Detention Center will be in operation, or in which Obligations will be outstanding, such Annual Budget shall set forth the Per Diem Charge, including Operating and Debt Service Components, for each Detainee committed to the Commission by the Member Jurisdictions as well as the projected number of Detainees from each Member Jurisdiction. The Commission agrees to set, and revise at least quarterly, a uniform Operating Component of the Per Diem Charge that is sufficient to generate revenue adequate to pay Net Expenses (exclusive of debt service) and to fund any required reserves attributable to the care, maintenance and subsistence of Detainees. The Commission also agrees to set, and to revise immediately as necessary to reflect any failure of a Member Jurisdiction to pay in accordance with the provisions of Section 4.1, a Debt Service Component of the Per Diem Charge that will generate adequate revenue to pay debt service on the Commission's outstanding Obligations and to fund any required debt service reserves therefor. Within ten days of any revision to the Per Diem Charge the Commission shall notify each Member Jurisdiction of such revision. Any such revision to the Per Diem Charge will be based on factors affecting the Detention Center's revenues or expenditures, including but not limited to changes in assumed or actual occupancy levels, operating expenses, State operating or capital cost reimbursement, and any nonpayment of Per Diem Charges by any Member Jurisdiction or other jurisdiction housing Detainees at the Detention Center. The Commission shall promptly provide copies of any amendments to its Annual Budget to each Member Jurisdiction. Section 3.8 Books and Records. The Commission shall maintain proper books, records and accounts in which proper entries shall be made in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles for governmental bodies, consistently applied, of all of its business and affairs related to the Detention Center. The Commission shall also establish and maintain adequate financial policies and procedures to ensure the safeguarding of Commission assets. All books, records, accounts and documents in the Commission's possession relating to the Detention Center shall at all reasonable times be open to inspection by such agents or employees of the Member Jurisdictions as they may designate. Section 3.9 Preliminary Responsibilities. Before the Detention Center is Placed in Service, the Commission shall be responsible for (i) the final design, construction and equipping of the Detention Center, (ii) the employment or procurement of administrators and staff, (iii) the adoption of rules, regulations, policies and guidelines for the operation and maintenance of the Detention Center, consistent with standards of the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice, and (iv) the arrangements for financing the Detention Center. Section 3.10 Majority Required for Commission Decisions. All actions of the Commission may be taken by a majority of all the members, or their alternates voting in the absence of the principal members. Each member of the Commission shall be entitled to one (1) vote on matters before the Cormnission. In the event of a tie, however, the members representing Albemarle and Charlottesville, or their alternates voting in the absence of their principal members, shall each have an additional vote. If there is still a tie after the casting of such additional votes, the subject motion or proposal shall fail. ARTICLE IV Funding Provisions Section 4.1. Payments frmn Member Jurisdictions. (a) The objective of this Agreement is to provide the Commission, in each Fiscal Year in which the Detention Center is in operation, with sufficient revenues to fund fully the Commission's Expenses for such year. The Member Jurisdictions have agreed that the operating cost portion of such Expenses will be shared among them in proportion to their respective usage of the Detention Center, and to that end have agreed to pay the Operating Component of the Per Diem Charge, as described in Section 4. l(c), for each detainee they commit to the Commission's custody. The Member Jurisdictions have further agreed that the debt service portion of the Commission's expenses will be allocated among the Member 6 Jurisdictions except Albemarle and Charlottesville by billing them for the Debt Service Component of the per Diem Charge based on their respective usage. Albemarle and Charlottesville agree, however, that their share of the debt service will be calculated by applying the Debt Service Component of the Per Diem Charge to their combined usage and billing the resulting amount equally, 50% to Albemarle and 50% to Charlottesville. To facilitate issuance of the Commission's obligations at the most favorable interest rate, Albemarle and Charlottesville have further agreed to prepay 100% of each Commission debt service payment (divided equally between them) before it becomes due, and thereafter to receive credits, also applied equally, for the Debt Service Components received from other Member Jurisdictions, all in the manner described in Section 4.1 (e) below. The net result shall be that Albemarle and Charlottesville each shall pay 50 % of the debt service on the Commission's obligations not paid by the other Member Jurisdictions. This Agreement with respect to debt service allocation shall apply to all obligations issued to fund pre-opening and financing expenses, capitalized interest, required initial reserves for operations and debt service, land acquisition, design, construction and equipment of the Detention Center. (b) The Commission shall establish in its Annual Budget for the Fiscal Year in which the Detention Center will be Placed in Service and in each Fiscal Year thereafter, a Per Diem Charge for the care, maintenance, transportation and subsistence of Detainees from Member Jurisdictions equal to the Commission's Projected Net Expenses. The Per Diem Charge shall consist of an Operating Component, and a Debt Service Component for each series of Obligations of the Commission. The Operating Component shall be determined by multiplying Projected Net Expenses (excluding debt service and related payments on Obligations, but including any required deposits to a repair or replacement reserve fund related to such Obligations) for such Fiscal Year by the ratio of each Member Jurisdiction's Detainee Days to the Commission's total Member Jurisdiction Detainee days during the preceding Fiscal Year (the "Operating Member Percentage"). The Debt Service Component shall be determined by dividing the total amount required to pay debt service, replenish reserve funds, pay credit enhancement fees and such other expenses on or related to such Obligations during such Fiscal Year by the total number of Detainee days anticipated during the subject Fiscal Year (the "Capital Member Percentage," provided that the Capital Member Percentages for Albemarle and Charlottesville respectively shall be one half of their combined Capital Member Percentage). (c) The Operating Component of the Per Diem Charge shall be payable by all Member Jurisdictions and shall be collected in advance for each quarter of each Fiscal Year, based on the Operating Member Percentages established by the Member Jurisdictions' respective usage during the preceding Fiscal Year. Such amounts shall be invoiced by the Commission to each Member Jurisdiction by the first day of each quarter of each Fiscal Year and shall be payable no later than the last day of the first month of each quarter. Such advance payments shall be subject to an annual adjustment based on actual usage after the end of each Fiscal Year, as described in Section 4. l(e) below. 7 (d) The Debt Service Component of the Per Diem Charge shall be payable by all Member Jurisdictions and shall be collected in advance for each quarter of each Fiscal Year, based upon the Capital Member Percentages established by the Member Jurisdictions' anticipated usage for the Fiscal Year. Such amounts shall be invoiced by the Commission to each Member Jurisdiction by the first day of each quarter of each Fiscal Year and shall be payable no later than the last day of the first month of each quarter. Such advance payments shall be subject to annual adjustments based upon actual usage after the end of each Fiscal Year, as described in Section 4.1 (e) below. Notwithstanding the foregoing paragraph, the prepayments due from Albemarle and Charlottesville in each quarter shall be calculated to total in the aggregate 100% of one quarter of the Commission's annual debt service, allocated 50% to Albemarle and 50% to Charlottesville. The quarterly payments received by the Commission in each quarter from Fluvanna and Greene shall be applied equally against the next quarterly payments due from Albemarle and Charlottesville. (e) By October 1 st, the Commission shall adjust the Per Diem Charges for eaCh Member Jurisdiction to reflect the amount each Member should have paid during the preceding Fiscal Year based upon actual proportionate usage of the Detention Center and compare it to the amount paid by each member, taking into account any future credits due. In making that adjustment for the Debt Service Component, however, the usage of Albemarle and Charlottesville shall be combined, to the end that Albemarle and Charlottesville each continue to have paid 50% of the debt service not paid by the other jurisdictions. In the event that a Member Jurisdiction's actual usage has averaged less than two Detainees for the Fiscal Year, such Member Jurisdiction's adjustment to the Debt Service Component shall reflect a minimum charge for two Detainees. Any Member Jurisdiction that has underpaid shall be billed by the Commission for the amount of the shortfall, which shall be paid not later than October 31st. Any Member Jurisdiction that has overpaid shall be entitled to a refund or a credit, as such Member may elect, in the amount of such overpayment to be applied against the Per Diem Charge due in October; provided, however, that no Member shall be entitled to a refund or credit until such time as the Commission has received payment of all underpaid amounts. In the event the Commission receives a portion but not all of the payments due for underpaid bills, the Commission shall apply the amount received ratably as a partial credit to Members that overpaid. (f) Except for the payment of the Per Diem Charges attributable to the Detainees whom it has actually committed to the Commission, the obligation of each Member Jurisdiction to pay the Per Diem Charges shall be subject to and contingent upon appropriations being made for such purposes by the governing body of such member. Those governing bodies hereby direct their respective chief executive officers to include in their annual budget and appropriation requests to the governing bodies funds sufficient to pay the both components of the Per Diem Charges expected to come due during the Fiscal Year for which such budgets are applicable. 8 (g) The Commission shall notify all Member Jurisdictions not later than 30 days after any payment due date if a Member Jurisdiction fails to pay any charge when due, and shall pursue with diligence the collection of such past due amount. If not paid when due, the charge shall bear interest at a rate determined by the Commission until paid; however, that this provision shall not apply in instances where Applicable Law prescribes some other due date or late payment charge. The notice shall include a statement of the Commission's intention to adjust the remaining payments due during the Fiscal Year (and thereafter if such default is not cured) from all non-defaulting Members and shall state the amount of the adjusted charge. The ' adjustment shall be based upon a reallocation of Capital Member Percentages and Operating Member Percentages to all non-defaulting Members. Upon payment in full of the amount in arrears by the defaulting Member Jurisdiction, the Commission shall readjust Member charges to pre-default levels and credit all non-defaulting Members in the appropriate amount for any excess payments previously made at the default adjusted rate. The Commission shall make other adjustments as may be necessary to the Per Diem Charges during the Fiscal Year to meet Expenses and to comply with any covenants entered into in connection with any Obligations. Section 4.2 Payments from Other Jurisdictions. Within the limits allowed by law, the Commission shall establish a per diem charge or charges as it may deem advisable for the care, maintenance and subsistence of Detainees from non-member jurisdictions, including from the state, federal government, and other states or localities. Such charges shall be due and payable to the Commission from non-member jurisdictions having Detainees in the Detention Center no later than 30 days from receipt of the charges and if not paid when due shall bear interest until paid, at such rate as the Commission shall establish; provided, however, that this provision shall not apply in instances where Applicable Law prescribes some other due date or late payment charge. Revenue received from all sources other than the Member Jurisdictions shall be used to reduce Net Expenses. Section 4.3 Operating Reserve Fund. The Commission agrees to provide for an Operating Reserve Fund in each of its Annual Budgets in an amount equal to not less than 90 days of its projected Annual Budget for each year less debt service. The Operating Reserve Fund shall be established as a separate account and shall be used to cover periods of revenue shortfall when the Commission's revenues are not sufficient to cover its Net Expenses associated with the operating of the Detention Center (non-debt charges). The initial Operating Reserve may be funded with the proceeds of Obligations; however, annual additions to the Operating Reserve shall be treated as an operating Expense. Section 4.4 Commonwealth Reimbursement Grants. Any funds that the Commission receives from the Commonwealth of Virginia as reimbursement for the cost of constructing, equipping or operating the Detention Center shall be paid into the general fund account of the Commission and become part of its funds, subjectto the provisions of any bond indenture or other financing document requiring a specific application of such funds. 9 Section 4.5 Limitation of Liability. The only obligation of the Member Jurisdictions to pay for the establishment, operation or maintenance of the Detention Center arises out of this Agreement. No such payment responsibility shall constitute a debt of any Member Jurisdiction within the meaning of any constitutional or statutory limitation. ARTICLE V Additional Agreements Section 5.1 Sale or Other Conveyance. The Commission will not sell, lease (except in the ordinary course of business), sublease, assign, convey or otherwise voluntarily dispose of the Detention Center unless the Notes, Bonds and any other debt incurred by the Commission have been or will be paid, or deemed defeased, in accordance with the agreements pursuant to which they were issued. Section 5.1,1 Future Disposition of Commission Property. In the event the Authority is dissolved or its powers and responsibilities are transferred by operation of law to some successor public entity, the Commission shall, subject to the provisions of Section 5.1, convey all its real and personal property to such other entity for a consideration of One Dollar. In the event the Commission determines that the real estate and improvements comprising the Detention Center are no longer needed for the Commission's purposes, the Commission shall reconvey the same to Member Jurisdictions as joint tenants, in shares that are, as nearly as can then be determined, directly proportional to their respective accumulated net payments of the Debt Service Component of the Per Diem Charge. Section 5.2 Further Documents and Data. The parties to this Agreement will execute and deliver all documents and perform all further acts that may be reasonably necessary to perform the obligations and consummate the transactions contemplated by this Agreement. Section 5.3 Right to Access.. Each Member Jurisdiction will have reasonable access to the Detention Center in order to monitor the Commission's compliance with the terms of this Agreement. Section 5.4 Confidentiality. The Commission will maintain all records and files on the Detainees on a confidential basis in accordance with all Applicable Laws. Section 5.5 Notification. The Commission will promptly furnish to each Member Jurisdiction a copy of any notice or order of any governmental Commission asserting that the Commission or the Detention Center is not in compliance in any material respect with any Applicable Law. 10 Section 5.6 Tax-Exemption Covenant. (a) The Commission intends to issue the Notes and Bonds in a manner such that their interest is excludable from gross income for Federal income tax purposes under Section 103 (a) and related provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and applicable rules and regulations. The Commission and each Member Jurisdiction agree that after the Notes and Bonds have been issued they will not take any action or omit to take any action which would adversely affect such exclusion. (b) Pursuant to Section 15c2-12(b) of regulations issued by the Securities and Exchange Commission, the Commission and the Member Jurisdictions may be required to agree with the owners of the Bonds, for as long as the Bonds are outstanding, to supply certain national securities information repositories (1) annually, certain financial and statistical information, and (2) periodically, notification of certain specified material events affecting the Commission, the Member Jurisdictions and the Bonds. The particulars of this ongoing disclosure requirement will be set forth in the indenture or loan agreement for the Bonds and in a continuing disclosure agreement for the Bonds. Each Member Jurisdiction agrees to execute and deliver a continuing disclosure agreement and to cooperate with the Commission in fulfilling this requirement, including providing the Commission with timely notice of the occurrence of any of the specified events that are material to its operations. Section 5.7 Additional Members. AnyrCity or county in Virginia may, with the approval of its governing body and with the consent of all of the Member Jurisdictions, join and participate in the Commission under such additional terms and conditions for membership as may be prescribed by the Commission. Section 5.8 Withdrawal of Membership. Any Member Jurisdiction may withdraw from membership in the Commission by resolution or ordinance of its governing body; however, no Member Jurisdiction shall be permitted to withdraw from the Commission while any Obligation is outstanding except by unanimous approval of all Member Jurisdictions, which approval shall not be granted unless the remaining Member Jurisdictions agree to assume the payment and other obligations of the departing Jurisdiction under this Agreement. ARTICLE VI Representations, Warranties and Covenants of Commission In addition to the covenants in other Articles of this Agreement, the Commission represents, warrants and covenants as follows: Section 6.1 Organization, Authorization and Validity. The Commission is a political subdivis ion of the Commonwealth duly organized and validly existing under the laws 11 of the Commonwealth and has duly authorized, executed and delivered this Agreement. Section 6.2 Authority. The Commission has all requisite authority under Applicable Law to execute and deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement and is not a party to any indenture, contract or other agreement or arrangement, the performance of which by the Commission would prevent or materially and adversely affect the Commission's ability to perform the terms of this Agreement. Section 6.3 Non-Contravention. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by the Commission and the consummation of the transactions contemplated in it will not conflict with or result in a breach of or constitute a default under or violate any of the terms, conditions or provisions of Applicable Law, the bylaws of the Commission or any material indenture, contract or other agreement or arrangement to which the Commission is a party or by which any of its properties are bound. Section 6.4 Litigation. The Commission is not a party to any legal, administrative, arbitration or other proceeding or controversy pending, or, to the best of the Commission's knowledge, threatened, which would materially adversely affect the Commission's ability to perform under this Agreement. Section 6.5 Approvals. Except for approvals that may be required by the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice, and as otherwise stated herein, the Commission does not require the consent or approval of any governmental, body to carry out the terms of this Agreement. ARTICLE VII Representations, Warranties and Covenants of Member Jurisdictions Each Member Jurisdiction represents, warrants and covenants for itself as follows: Section 7.1 Organization, Authorization and Validity. Each Member Jurisdiction is a political subdivision of the Commonwealth duly organized and validly existing under the laws of the Commonwealth, and each has duly authorized, executed and delivered this Agreement. Section 7.2 Authority. Each Member Jurisdiction has all requisite authority to execute and deliver and perform its obligations under this Agreement and is not a party to any indenture, contract or other agreement or arrangement, the performance of which by it would prevent or materially and adversely affect its individual performance under this Agreement. Section 7.3 Non-Contravention. The execution and delivery of this Agreement by each Member Jurisdiction and the consummation of the transactions contemplated in it will not 12 conflict with or result in a breach of or constitute a default under or violate any of the terms, conditions or provisions of any charter, resolution or ordinance, any material indenture, contract or agreement or arrangement to which it is a party or by which any of its properties are bound, or any Applicable Law by which it is bound. Section 7.4 Litigation. No Member Jurisdiction is a party to any legal, administrative, arbitration, or other proceeding or controversy pending, or, to the best of its knowledge, threatened, which would materially and adversely affect its ability to perform under this Agreement. ARTICLE VIII Defaults and Remedies Section 8.1 Default by Commission. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will constitute an "Event of Default" by the Commission ("Commission Default"): (i) if the Commission fails to pay principal of or interest when due on any Notes, Bonds or other temporary or permanent financing for the Detention Center issued or obtained by the Commission pursuant to this Agreement; (ii) if the Commission is for any reason rendered incapable of performing any of its material obligations under this Agreement; (iii) if the Commission makes an assignment of all or a portion of its obligations under this Agreement without the prior consent of all the Member Jurisdictions; (iv) if the Commission defaults on any of its material obligations under any agreement pursuant to which any Note, Bonds or other temporary or permanent financing for the Detention Center is issued or obtained by the Commission pursuant to this Agreement and such default is not cured within the applicable cure period; (v) if any proceeding is instituted, with the consent or acquiescence of the Commission, for the purpose of effecting a composition between the Commission and its creditors or for the purpose of adjusting the claims of such creditors pursuant to any federal or state statute now or hereafter enacted, if the claims of such creditors are under any circumstances payable from the funds of the Commission; or (vi) if the Commission defaults in the due and punctual performance of any other of the covenants, conditions, agreements and provisions contained in this Agreement, and the default continues for thirty days after written notice specifying the default and requiring it to be remedied has been given to the Commission by any Member Jurisdiction. 13 Section 8.2 Default by Member Jurisdictions. The occurrence of any one or more of the following events will constitute an "Event of Default" by any Member Jurisdiction ("Member Jurisdiction Default"): (i) if any Member Jurisdiction fails to make payments of Per Diem Charges when due; (ii) if any Member Jurisdiction shall for any reason be rendered incapable of fulfilling its obligations under this Agreement; or (iii) if any proceeding is instituted, with the consent or acquiescence of any Member Jurisdiction, for the purpose of effecting a composition between such Member Jurisdiction and its creditors or for the purpose of adjusting the claims of such creditors pursuant to any federal or state statute now or hereafter enacted, if the claims of such creditors are under any circumstances payable from the funds of such Member Jurisdiction; or (iv) if any Member Jurisdiction defaultsin the due and punctual performance of any of the other covenants, conditions, agreements and provisions contained in this Agreement, when such default continues for thirty days after written notice specifying the default and requiring it to be remedied has been given to such Member Jurisdiction by the Commission. Section 8.3 Remedies of Member Jurisdictions. Upon the occurrence of an Commission Default, any Member Jurisdiction, after giving notice of such Commission Default to all parties, may bring suit by mandamus or other appropriate proceeding to require the Commission to perform its duties under Applicable Law or this Agreement or to enjoin any acts in violation of Applicable Law or this Agreement. Section 8.4 Remedies of Commission. Upon the occurrence of a Member Jurisdiction Default, the Commission, after giving reasonable notice of such Member Jurisdiction Default to all parties, may bring suit by mandamus or other appropriate proceeding · to require the Member Jurisdiction to perform its duties under the Act and this Agreement or to enjoin any acts in violation of Applicable Law or this Agreement. Section 8.5 Remedies Not Exclusive. No remedy in this Agreement conferred upon or reserved to the parties is intended to be exclusive of any other remedy, and each remedy is cumulative and in addition to every other remedy given under this Agreement or now or hereafter existing at law, in equity or by statute. ARTICLE IX Miscellaneous Section 9.1 Severability of Invalid Provisions. If any clause, provision or section 14 of this Agreement is held to be illegal or invalid by any court, the invalidity of the clause, provision or section will not affect any of the remaining clauses, provisions or sections, and this Agreement will be construed and enforced as if the illegal or invalid clause, provision or section has not been contained in it. Section 9.2 Notices. Any notice or other communication under or in connection with this Agreement shall be in writing, and shall be effective when delivered in person or sent in the United States mail, postage prepaid, to the following persons and addresses or to such other persons and addresses as any of such persons may from time to time specify in writing. If to the Commission: To the then-incumbent Chairman, at his or her regular business address. If to the City of Charlottesville: City Manager City of Charlottesville P.O. Box 911 Charlottesville, VA 22902 If to Albemarle County: County Executive County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 If to Fiuvanna County: County Administrator County of Fluvanna P.O. Box 299 Palmyra, VA 22963 If to Greene County: County Administrator County of Greene P.O. Box 358 Stanardsville, VA 22973 Section 9.3 Execution of Agreement. Each party shall authorize its chief executive officer or other appropriate official to execute the original of this Agreement on its behalf, and 15 the Commission shall'thereafter distribute a certified copy to each signatory. Section 9.4 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by, and construed and enforced in accordance with, the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. Section 9.5 Amendments. This Agreement may be changed or amended only with the consent of the Commission and each Member Jurisdiction. No such change or amendment may be made which will affect adversely the prompt payment when due of all moneys required to be paid by the Member Jurisdictions under the terms of this Agreement, and no such change or amendment shall be effective which would cause a violation of any provision of any resolution, indenture or agreement pursuant to which any Notes, Bonds or other temporary or permanent financing for the Detention Center is issued or obtained by the Commission. Section 9.6 Effective Date of Agreement. This Agreement will be effective from the date of its approval by all of the parties. Section 9.7 Waiver. Any waiver by any party of its rights under this Agreement must be in writing, and will not be deemed a waiver with respect to any matter not specifically covered, Nothing in this Agreement authorizes the waiver of any Member Jurisdiction's obligation to make payments when due of all monies required to be paid by the Member Jurisdictions under the terms of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date above written, by their duly authorized officers and pursuant to the approval of their respective governing bodies. BLUE RIDGE JUVENILE DETENTION COMMISSION By: Chairman CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE By: City Manager COUNTY OF FLUVANNA By: County Administrator COUNTY OF GREENE By: County Administrator COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE By: County Executive 16 DAVID R. GEHR COMMISSIONER BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMMONWEALTH o[ VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 1601 ORANGE ROAD CULPEPER, VA 22701-3819 DONALD R. ASKEW DISTRICT ADMINISTRATOR May 4, 1999 Mclntire Road Extension (Meadow Creek Parkway Phase 1) Project: U000-104-102, RW201, C501 0631-002-128, C502, B612, B657 Fr: 0.227 Mi. (0.83 kin) S Rte. 250 Bypass To: 0.05 Mi. N. Rte. 631 (Rio Road) Bridge Over Norfolk Southern Railway City of Charlottesville & Albemarle County Ms. Ella W, Carey Board of Supervisors 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Carey: A Design Public Hearing utilizing an open forum, will be held for the above mentioned project on Thursday, May 27, 1999 between 5:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. at the Charlottesville High School located at 1400 Melbourne Road in the City of Charlottesville, Virginia. The purpose of this Public Hearing is to provide you a chance to review and discuss, in an oPen thrum, proposed plans fbr the extension of Mclntire Road/Meadow Creek Parkway, a four lane facility on new location, extending from 0.14 mile (0.23 kilometer) south of the Route 250 Bypass (Mclntire Road) in the City of Charlottesville to 0.05 mile (0.08 kilometer) north of the Norfolk Southern Railway (Route 631) in Albemarle County. A copy of the public notice and map is attached. Robert H. Cormock, Jr., P.E. District Construction Engineer RHCjr:wlr pc: Mr. M. W. Coffey Ms. A. G. Tucker TRANSPORTATION FOR THE 21ST CENTURY MclNTIRE ROAD/MEADOW CREEK PARKWAY City of Charlottesville & Albemarle County DESIGN PUBLTC HEAR/NG Hearing: Thursday, May 27, 1999 * * between 5:00pm and 8:00pm To be held in the Charlottesville High School located at 1400 Melbourne Road in the City of Charlottesville. Pnrnose: To provide you a chance to review and discuss, in an open forum, proposed plans for the extension of MeIntire Road/Meadow Creek Parkway, a four lane faeilityonnew location, extending fi'om 0.14 mile (0.23 kilometer) south oftbe Route 250 Bypass (Mclntire Road) in the City of Charlottesville to 0.05 mile (0.08 kilometer) north of the Norfolk Southern Railway (Route 631) in Albemarle County. Review: Maps, drawings and other datapertainingtothe project are available in the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) Culpeper District office located at 1601 Orange Road in the Town of Culpeper and at the VDOT Charlottesville Residency office located at 701 VDOT Way, offRoute 250, 3 miles east ofthe City of Charlottesville. To review the above material, please call the Charlottesville Resi- dency at (804) 293-0011. If you require special assistance to attend and participate in this meeting or just need additional information, please use the above number. 1)eviee for the Hearing Impaired (TTY): 1-800-307-4630 PnblieComment~: Verbal comments will be taken at the hearing. Written comments and other exhibits relative tothe proposed project may also be submitted at the public hearing or to the Department at any time within 10 days after the hearing. Relocation assistance, right ofway acquisition, together with tentative schedules and constmction information will be discussed. the project limits may be altered by this proposal. % ~ Virginia Dep~:.,,ent of Tran~mrtation ~rojeet~: U000-~04-] 02,PE-]0! ,RW-20!,C-~0! 11117 I~clNTIRE ROAD EXTENSION fUEADOW CREEK PAl:ti{WAY- PHASE Vlrglnlo Deportment of Tronsl~ortotlon HIGHWAY IWPROVEWENT PROJECT PROJECT= UOOO-104-102. R/W-LPOI. C-501 0651~02-1~8. C-502. B-612. B-657 FROM= 0~7 tm (054 Mile)SOUTH OF ROUTE 250 BYPASS TO= 0D85 tm (0~5 Mile)NORTH OF ROUTE 651(R10 ROAD) BRIDGE OVER NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY LENGTH= $.325 km (2~76 MILES) PROJECT LOCATIOIV MAP PROJECT LIMITS CH:' VIRGINIA · Sco~* Sfadlum RIDGE RD CITY F CHARLOTTESVILLE SOUTHERN CINTIRE ROAD MCINTIRE MUNICIPAL liVE ./ TRAIL AVON ST. LOCUST TY COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 April29,1999 Bob Colley 475 Westfield Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 SP-98-70 Starbae Aipa Dance Hall Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2 Dear Mr. Colley: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 27, 1999, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following condition: 1. The use shall be limited to indoor activities only. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled heating date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincer~ely,. ~- William D. Fritz, AICP Senior Planner WDF/jcf Cc~ Ella Carey Jack Kelsey Amelia McCulley Harold Harrison STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: William D. Fritz, AICP April 27, 1999 May 19, 1999 SP 98-70 Starbase Alpa Dance Hall Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to expand the existing commercial recreation use of the property by converting some areas and making them available for dancing. This requires a dance hall permit.which is being reviewed as an amendment of the previous special use permit for this property, SP 96-55. The site is the location of Starbase Alpa which currently provides a variety of recreational activities including laser tag. Petition: Proposal to amend the existing special use permit for a commercial recreation activity to add a dance hall to the permitted activities. A special use permit is required in accord with the provisions of Section 22.2.2(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. The property, described as Tax Map 61W, Section 1, Block A, Parcel 2 consists of 1.650 acres zoned C-1, Commercial and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District and is located on the south side of Westfield Road approximately 600 feet north of Greenbrier Drive in the Rio Magisterial District. This site recommended for Community Service in Neighborhood 1. Character of the Area: This property is the location of Starbase Alpha. The area surrounding the site is a mixture of office space and restaurant and other commercial uses. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Plannin~ and Zonine History: This site received a special use permit, SP 96-55, on March 17, 1997. That special use permit allowed for commercial recreational activities. However, the approval did not specifically permit a dance hall which has resulted in the current application. Comprehensive Plan: This area is recommended for Community Service in the Comprehensive Plan. No resources are identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan which would be impacted by this use. Recreational Facilities are typical primary uses in Community Service areas. Therefore, this request may be considered to be consistent with the Comprehensive Plan. STAFF COMMENT: Staff has limited review of this proposal to the public health, safety and welfare impacts of the prOPosed use as it relates to land use impacts created by the proposed additional use ofthe site for a dance hall. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial'detriment to adjacent prope .rtY, The applicant is proposing interior renovations' of the building which will not result in any change to the appearance of the site. All of the adjacent property is zoned commercial. The nearest residential properties are located approximately 1,000 feet away and are not be impacted by the use of this site. The additional use of this site for a dance hall is not anticipated to have any greater impacts than the existing use of the property. that the character o~'the district will not be changed thereby, This site has been used as a recreational use since 1997 and staff is unaware'of any change in the character of the area which resulted from the prior special use permit approval. The use of the building for dances will not be inconsistent with the existing recreational use of this site. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. A dance hall is not clearly supportive of any stated purpose and intent nor is it in conflict with any stated purpose. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed dance hall permit, if approved, would not restrict permitted uses on adjacent property or the surrounding area. with additional regulations provided, in Se.c. tion.5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.0 contains no additional regulations. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The proposed use does not occasion any changes to the entrance to the site or modifications. Therefore, this use may be considered consistent with the public health and safety. The Police Department in the past has commentdd that dance hails may result in additional calls for service which results in an increased demand on the available manpower. No written comments are available from the Police Department the concerns have been expressed to staff verbally. The Police Department is concerned about parking/traffic management, security (mixing of teens and preteens at dance events) and hours .of operation. Parking/traffic management has been reviewed by staff. Access to this site is adequate and prior to the issuance ora zoning clearance for the Zoning Administrator will verify that adequate parking exists. [Based on the information submitted by the applicant adequate parking does exist on site. The parking ratio may be changed if the dance area is enlarged. This will be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator to insure that adequate parking exists.] This proposal is different from other dance hall permits which have been submitted as it is not associated with a restaurant. The applicant's proposal is "We wish to hold non-alcoholic dances targeted to different age groups either in conjunction with current laser tag operations (dances would be held in the lobby) or in the laser tag arena without laser tag". The applicant has stated a concern about providing a controlled atmosphere for all activity on site. Based on the existing nature of the commercial recreation operation staff opinion is that the existing security measures are adequate. No hours of operation have been proposed by the applicant. Staff has not recommended limited hours of operation as no conflict with adjacent uses can be identified. The Board may wish to set operational limits during its review of the dance hall permit. This approach is different than has been proposed in the past, Staff opinion is that the method of operation of the existing facility along with the proposed operation of the dance hall is such that no additional calls for Police service will result. Approval of this request will provide for organized and supervised entertainment. Therefore, staffopinion is that this use is consistent with the public health, safety and general welfare.. SUMMARY: The proposed dance hall is generally consistent with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the ordinance based on the land use impacts of the use. Staff has not identified any unfavorable land use issues arising from the proposed use. The Planning Depmtment is able to support this request from a traditional land use standpoint and based on a general consistency with the Comprehensive Plan, Land Use Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Provided that the Board of Supervisors finds this use to be consistent with the public's general welfare, staff recommends approval of SP 98-70 subject to the following condition: 1. The use shall be limited to indoor activities only. ATTACHMENTS: A - LocatiOn Map B - Tax Map C - Approval letter for SP 96-55 D- MoUNTAI1~ White H StarBase Alpha Dance Hall (Sign 095) ATTACHMENT A Farmington ' Country Club ,STLE ROCK , ,~TAINS TO RT. 29 TOM TOP No~h Garden Alberene~ Esmont I Store Poner 8r*dge Redle~ I Canem Mtn. F~ ALBEMARLE COUNT. ATTACHMENT B ~ ~ "/,/2"-~. SP-98-70 StarBase Alpha Dance Hall (Si~n #95) 6A 19A '"=--' - - .?. CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRI(;T SECTION 61-W ATTACHMENTC April 1, 1997 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 Robert C. Colley 3000 Copper Knoll Road Charlottesville, VA 22911 RE: SP 96-55 Robert Colley,'Tax Map 61 W, Section I, Block A, Parcel 2 Dear Mr. Colley: The Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, at its meeting on March t 9, 1997, approved the above-noted request to establish commercial recreation on 0.4 acres zoned C-1, Commercial. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: Use shall be limited to indoor activities only. No sale of alcohol shall be permitted. In the event that the use, structure or activity for which this special use permit is issued shall not be commenced within eighteen (18) months after the issuance of such permit, the same shall be deemed abandoned and the authority granted thereunder shall thereupon terminate. For purposes of this section, the term "commenced" shall be construed to include the commencement of construction of any structure necessary to the use of such permit within two (2) years from the date of the issuance thereof which is thereafter completed within one (1) year. Before beginning this use, you must Obtain a zoning clearance from the Zoning Department. Before the Zoning Department will issue a clearance, you must comply with the conditions in this letter. For further information, please call Jan Sprinkle at 296-5875. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate 'to contact me. cereJy, . -. Director of Planning ~~hnity VWC/jcf Development cc: Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey ATTACHMENT D I request an amendment to my existing Special Use Permit that would allow me to hold non-alcoholic dances at StarBase Alpha. We would target different dances to different age groups, and anyone under 18 years of age would need to be accompanied by a parent or guardian, or have written permission from them to attend. The dances, on Friday, Saturday or the nights before a Holiday, would end no later then 2 AM. We would provide security for all events. The music will be rock, alternative rock and techno formats. Our arcade and snack bar would remain open during these dances. There would be no changes to the existing building exterior or grounds. I have talked with the property'owners or managers of the Wood Grill Buffet, Grills Hair Stylist; Orkin Exterminating and Albemarle Veterinary Clinic, my adjacent neighbors, and all have supported this proposal. I have also talked with numerous County parents who all say this is needed. I have met with the Police Chief Miller, and during that meeting he agreed with my plan tbr security. We are currently serving the same clientele our dances would attract and have not had the need to call the County Police to quell any. disturbance in our 18 months of operation. I have held two dances during the summer in conjunction with our laser tag operations, both went smoothly and were well received by county residents. There is a need to provide safe, non-alcoholic entertainment to County youth. The StarBase has a proven track record of providing this and we wish to add dances as another attraction. ~¢©ARD OF SUPERVISORS May 7, 1999 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Planning & Community Developmem 401 Mclntire Road, Room 218 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296 - 5823 Fax (804) 972 - 4035 C. Carter Wa[les, Attorney 406 West Broad St Richmond, VA 23220 SP-99-06 Northway/Avis Track Rental SP-99-08 Northway/Avis Outdoor Display SDP-99-50 Northway-Rt. 29 Charlottesville, Inc--Waiver Dear Mr. Walles: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on May 4, 1999, unanimously recommended approval of SP-99-06 and SP-99-08 to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: 1. Use shall not commence umil a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by the ARB for the site plan. 2. Vehicles shall be displayed only in areas shown on the site plan. 3. Vehicles shall not be elevated. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. The Planning Commission also approved a site plan waiver to allow expanded parking of rental vehicles with associated site improvements on parcels of less than one acre. This approval is subject to the following conditions: The plan shall be in general conformance with the sketch plan dated March 24, 1999, included as Attachment C to the staff report. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness by the ARB. Page 2 May 7, 1999 The Planning Commission also approved a request for shared parking according to the provisions of Section 4.12.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you have any questions or comments. Sincerely, Margaret Pickart Design Planner Cc~ Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Nortway Service Station, Inc Steve Allshouse John Tighe 2 STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Margaret M.M. Pickart May 4, 1999 May 19, 1999 SP-99-06 NORTItWAY/AVIS TRUCK RENTAL SP-99-08 NORTHWAY/AVIS OUTDOOR DISPLAY SDP-99-50 NORTltWAY-RT. 29 CHARLOTTESVILLE INC. WAIVER Applicant's Proposal: The applicant proposes to expand the current motor vehicle rental and display from an existing site in the Entrance Corridor to include an adjacent site, and to renovate the adjacent site to accommodate the expanded parking. The applicant currently stores and rents vehicles on the parcel described as Tax Map 61W, Section 2, Block C, Parcel 1. This rental and storage is non-conforming because it was occurring prior to the adoption of the regulations that require a special use permit. The applicant proposes to expand the display parking from Parcel 1, to Parcel 2, which is adjacent to the south. No permit has been issued for the storage or rental of vehicles on Parcel 2. Approval of the special use permits will bring the current use into compliance with the zoning ordinance and allow it to be expanded to include the adjacent parcel to the south. The applicant is also requesting a site plan waiver. The plan that accompanies the waiver request addresses both sites, the expansion of the display parking, and the related proposed renovations. The expansion of display parking to the southern parcel constitutes shared parking, which requires Planning Commission approval. Petition: Proposal for special use permits and a site plan waiver to allow motor vehicle rental and to allow outdoor display of rental vehicles in the EC on parcels of less than I acre located at the northeast comer of the intersection of Route 29 North and Westfield Road. The properties, described as Tax Map 61 W, Section 2, Block C, Pamels I and 2, are located in the Rio Magisterial District. The properties are zoned C1 Commercial and EC Entrance Corridor Overlay District and are designated for Community Service in Neighb}>rhood 2. Character of the Area: Parcel 1 (the northern parcel) is currently occupied by Avis Rent-a-Car. Structures currently standing on site house office, shops and service space, and existing parking accommodates rental and customer vehicles. Parcel 2 (the southern parcel) was most recently used as a service station. A service station building, fuel pump islands, dispensers and canopy, a miler, a metal vending machine shelter, pole lights, and a freestanding sign frame currently occupy this site. Both sites are almost completely paved. Adjacent'properties are developed with a variety of commercial and business establishments. The display of automobiles exists in the vicinity along Route 29 North. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance Sections 31.2.4.1, 30.6.3.2.b (which allows for outdoor storage, display and/or sales of automobiles when visible from the EC), 22.2.2.8 (which allows for motor vehicle rental in the urban area), 32.2.2 (which allows for waivers of the drawing of a site plan), and 4.12.3.3 (which provides for shared parking), and recommends approval of SP 99-06, SP 99-08, SDP-99-50, and the shared parking request, subject to conditions. Planning and Zoning History: 1983: SDP-83-007: Avis Rent-A-Car (Tax Map 61W, Section 2, Block C, Parcel 1): Proposal to enlarge the existing repair and shop area, to remove accessory structures, and to re-delineate parking on parcel 1, resulting in the most recent site plan for this parcel. March 15, 1999: ARB-P(SDP)-99-08: Avis/Northway Outdoor Display (Tax Map 61W, Section 2, Block C, Pared 2): Proposal for 9utdoor display of rental vehicles in the Entrance Corridor, ineiuding 30 parking spaces to be located behind the existing service station building, with minimal improvements to the property. The ARB expressed no objection to the special use permit, subject to conditions. April 19, 1999:ARB-P(SDP)-99-08 (REVISED): Avis/Northway Outdoor Display (Tax Map 61W, Section 2, Block C, Parcels 1 and 2): A substantial revision to the March 15 proposal for outdoor display of rental vehicles in the Entrance Corridor, including approximately 54 parking spaces on two parcels and significant renovations to Parcel 2, including the demolition of the service station building, the trailer, and the vending machine shelter. The ARB expressed no objection to the special use permit, subject to conditions. The ARB action letter is included as Attachment D. Comprehensive Plan: This site is recommended for Community Service in Neighborhood 2 of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan recommends community-scale commercial, professional, and office uses providing retail, wholesale, business, medical offices, small office buildings, mixed-use core communities and/or employment services in this service designation. The proposed use is compatible with such community scale activities. STAFF COMMENT: Staffwill address the issues of this request in three sections: 1. Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. 2. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. 3. Shared parking in accord with Section 4.12.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. 1. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance: The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, It is anticipated that the addition of vehicle rental and display will have no negative impact on the surrounding uses or on the site itself, due to the existing development of adjacent properties and the designation of the area for community service in the Comprehensive Plan. Vehicle rental currently exists on Parcel 1. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, It is not anticipated that the proposed use will change the character of the district, due to the commercial activity on nearby properties and the commercial character of the corridor. The potential impact of the use on the character of the district has been addressed by the ARB, which has expressed no objection to the use based on the Entrance Corridor guidelines. Conditions have been recommended by the ARB; those conditions are incorporated into the recommended conditions of approval for the special use permits. 'In addition,'Pareel 2 has a dilapidated appearance that could be improved with the renovations proposed by the applicant and the conditions recommended by the ARB, thus improving the character of the overall district. and that'such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staffhas reviewed this request for compliance with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the EC Overlay District. With the incorporation of the recommendations of the ARB, this use would be in harmony with the purpose and intent of the EC district. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed rental and display use will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent property. The proposed use is similar to other uses permitted by right in this district. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, There are no additional regulations in Section 5.0 specifically addressing the rental or display of vehicles. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. It is not anticipated that the proposed use will negatively impact the public health, safety, and welfare. Issues related to the EC Overlay District will be addressed by appropriate conditions of approval. 2. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest: The parcels in question are already significantly developed. It is staff's opinion that the character of the proposed changes does not necessitate the submission of a full site plan. The Site Review Committee has provided preliminary comments on the plan and supports the request for a site plan waiver. Staff believes that the approval of this request, with conditions, will address all development issues and will not be contrary to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. With conditions, Staffrecommends approval of the site plan wavier request (SDP-99-50). 3. Shared parking in accord with Section 4.12.3.3 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4.12.3.3 states: Where practical difficulties prevent location as required in section 4.12.3.2 or where the public safety or the public convenience would be better served by the location thereof other than on the same lot, the commission may authorize such alternative location of required parking space as will adequately serve the public interest, provided that such space shall be located on land in the same ownership as that of the land on which is located the use to which such space is appurtenant or, in the case of cooperative provision of parking space, in the ownership of at least one of the participants in the combination. In the rural areas district, the board of supervisors may issue a special use permit to allow off-site parking for a historic structure or site pursuant to sections 5.1.38 and 10.2.2.46. (Amended 12-10-97) The applicant wants to increase the amount of rental vehicle parking currently existing on Parcel 1, and wants to accommodate a POrtion of the Expanded parking on the adjacent parcel, Parcel 2. Parcel 1 is owned byRt. 29 Charlottesville Properties, Inc. and Parcel 2 is in receivership. The receiver (appointed by court order) and contract purchaser is the owner of Parcel 1.. Proposed improvements associated with the parking proposal would improve the appearance of the properties and would improve access between parcels. Staff cannot identify any public purpose that would be served by the denial of this request. (The applicant could accommodate the propOsed parking by recording a plat that combines Parcels 1 and 2; this action would not require Planning Commission approval.) SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors that are favorable to this request: The proposed renovations will improve the character of the site. The proposal will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties. The Architectural Review Board has reviewed this request for its impact on the Route 29 North Entrance Corridor. Their action, which is included as Attachment D, expressed no objection to the proposed use, subject to conditions. Due to existing commercial development in the area and the character of the proposed improvements to the site, staff opinion is that this use will have minimal impact if the recommendations of the ARB are satisfied. Consequently, staff finds that with the ARB's approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness, this use is consistent with the intent of the Zoning Ordinance and the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff.recommends approval of SP-99-06 and SP 99-08 subject to the following conditions: 1. Use shall not commence until a Certificate of Appropriateness is issued by the ARB for the site plan. 2. Vehicles shall be displayed only in areas shown on the site plan. 3. Vehicles shall not be elevated. Staff recommends approval of SDP-99-50 subject to the following conditions: 1. The plan shall be in general conformance with the sketch plan dated March 24, 1999, included as Attachment C to the staff report. 2. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness by the ARB. Staff recommends approval of the request for shared parking. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map C - Site Plan Delineating Parking Area B - Tax Map D - Architectural Review Board Action Letter -...~-.99-06 N0rthwaY/Avis ' Truck Rental SP-99-08 N°rthway / Avis - Outdoor Display A, SDP - 99-08 Northway - Rt. 29 Charlottesville, Inc, Site Plan Waver ATTACHMENT ,.INS ROCK' TOP TOM MOUNTAIN Bridge ! ;.'3 ATTACHMENT B ALBEMARLE COUNTY SP-9~6'l~rthway/Avis - Truck Rental SP-99-08 Northway / Avis - Outdoor Display "'~ SDP - 99-08 Northway - Rt. 29 Charlottesville, Inc, Site Plan Waver ' /~-//,o /'"~i' t,i-~"-t !~:::1 ' -- ·-'"--U - -'~ i I. Line SECTION 61 W CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICT - f Lot X-1. Section Two, 'Westfiold" ' (shown on plal in D.B. 414-433 as a portion ot Lol X) March 24. 1999 (k.lO 'I:1-,-1-H ~;:J 0 U/'/D L,/k,'} PLAT SHOWING TWO PARCELS Parcel 002-OC-2 (showh on sheet 61-W} ' Albemarle County Tax Maps ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA Scale 1" ATTACHMENT C NOTES: CLOSE ONE ENTRANCE ROLP~ 29 TREES AND LANDSCAPING NORTH AND SOUTI~ PROPERTY UNES AND ALONG ROUTE 29 LANDSCAPING TO MEET ARB STANDARDS SITE UGHTiNG TO MEET ARB. APPROVAL CANOPY TO BE RAISED TO 15.0' CLEARANCE REPAIRED AND PAINTED NEW UGHTING TO MEET ARB APPROVAL VENDING MACHINES AND TRAILER WILL BE RI~IOVED Sc.e cl ~,cu ' RECEtVED Planning Dept. TITLE COMBINED SITE PLAN NORTHWAY SERVICE STATION, INC. ROUTE 29 CHARLOTTESVILLE PROPERTY, INC. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE ATTACHMENT D PAGE 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 April 21, 1999 C. Carter Wailes, Attorney Chaplin, Papa & Goner, PC 406 West Broad St Richmond, VA 23220 ARB-P(SDP)-99-08 AvisfNorthway - REVISED Tax Map 61W, Section 2, Block C, Parcels I and 2 Dear Mr. Wailes: The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on April 19, 1999, conducted a review of a revised plan for renovations to the above referenced parcels, related to an application for a site plan waiver and special use permits for the rental and display of vehicles in the Entrance Corridor. The Board continued to express no objection to the special use permit, subject to the fpllowing revised conditions: 1. The proposed appearance of the service building, particularly the concrete block, is not appropriate for the EC. The building should not be visible on site. Move it further back on the parcel and provide .immediate screening. An alternative is to redesign/he building to make its appearance appropriate for the EC. 2. If the existing canopy will be replaced with a new canopy, the new canopy shall meet the ARB canopy guidelines in terms of size and overall design, and manufacturer's information on the canopy should be provided. It is recommended that the canopy be sized and located to allow for increased landscaping along Rt. 29. 3. Provide information on the appearance and location of new fuel dispensers. 4. Add these notes to the plan: "Vehicles shall not be elevated" and "Vehicles shall be displayed only in areas shown on the site plan." 5. The ARB will require street trees along Rt. 29 to soften the appearance of the development. Any landscaping in the right-of-way must be coordinated with VDOT. One alternative is to move the landscaping strip that is located along Rt. 29 so that it is contained within the property lines, a change that will likely require a change in the size and/or location of the canopy. AT;F_-&CHMENT D PAGE 2 6. Add a planting strip_~l~ng the north side of the double parking row to help soften the appearance of the additional parking. 7. Add street trees in the vicinity of the existing Avis building to help soften the appearance of the additional parking. ' 8. The abelia that are proposed for the landscaping strip in front of the parking area should be replaced with taller plants that provide more screening. 9. Provide information on all proposed lighting, or indicate that no lighting is included in this proposal and submita site plan amendment at a later date. - 10. Add taller landscaping in the island at the southwest comer of the site, particularly around the sign. 11. Please note that the proposed change in sign location must be coordinated with the Zoning Department. Please note that the above conditions are those that have been identified at this time. Additional comments may be added or eliminated based on further review and changes to the plan. Please submit revised drawings addressing these comments at your earlieSt convenience. If you have any questions regarding the above-noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Margaret M. M. Pickart Design Planner cc: ARB-P(SDP)-99-08 SP-99-06 SP-99-08 SDP-99-50 John Tighe BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-.5823 April 30, 1999 Dick Shearer Clew Communications 1150 Shenandoah Village Drive Waynesboro, VA 22980 SP-99-09 CFW CV203 (Lickinghole Repeater) Tax Map 57, Parcel 41L Dear Mr. Shearer: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 27, 1999, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet of the toer. Antenna may not extend above the height of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and, d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entire "CFW WirelessLickinghole Pm- CV 203" The panel antennas, with attached supporting electrical conduits, shall be painted in color to match the wooden pole tower. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antennas shall be limited to those shown in a plan tiffed "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Rptr CV 203", b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a~ The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunication providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (I) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, Page 2 April 30, 1999 10. II. 12. 13. 14. 2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the penuittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle county. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane nmning through the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this.condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only. Prior to beginmng construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access. The permittee shah comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessop~ uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. The Planning Commission also approved a waiver of the drawing of a site plan in accord with provisions of Section 32.2.2 subject to the following conditions: Approval of' an erOsion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. The Planning Commission deferredaction on a request for a reduction in setback until after a variance for setback from the public right-of-way is obtained. Page 3 April 30, 1999 If you should have any questions or comments regarding the,above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Eric Morrisette Planner E jcf Cc~ Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Robert Cross ALBEMARLE COUNTY CFW WIRELESS LICKINGHOLE RPTR CV 203 VIRGINIA LICEINGHOLE RPTR CV 203 VICINITY MAP SITE LATITUDE: 38' 03' 21' N SITE LONGITUDE: ?8° 39' 41.6' E INDEX: DRAWING NO, TITLE TITLE SURVEY SITE PI,~N ANTENNA GROUND DETAIL ANTENNA DESIGNS STRUCTURAL DETAILS APPROVED DATE,: 20' X 20' GRAVEL COMPOUND INCOMING POWER 3' CONDUIT FOR POWER TO BE FIELD LOCATED POLE LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE ENGINEER REPEATER TO ~ BE MOUNTED TO POLE COAX TO ANTENNAS REPEATER TO SCALE GROUND LEVEL GPS 2-5" POWER TELCO ~CAD -WELD ,j ID LIiHTNING GROUNO TO BUSSBAR, jCOPPER STAPLES ~-EVERY 36" FRONT SIDE OF POLE ROD \ \ ANTENNA .____.______.~POLE GROUND TO LIGHTNING RD0, COPPER STAPLES EVERY '~'-~"---SOLID GROUND (~2 TINNED) CABLE FROM BUSS BAR TO ROD CAD-WELD BACK SIDE OF POLE ANTENNA CAD-WELD GROUND TRANSMIT 87~ POLE RECEIVE ANTENNAS ARE TI] BE LI]CATED AT 40' AND ~87) 7/8' COAX TO lie USED TO Bi: FURNISHI:D liY ClrV CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAIL ~ ~a~ ~ ~) ~ DOUBLE SWING GATE ~ ~ ~ FR~O 'c~COAX ~NOm (Fr)' c~COAX t sr~z*~ ¢~c PRIMARY RA~O 7/8" t~' 7/8' t~' CABINET I __ * ES~MA~ ~NG~S ~ ~VAI~ INFOMArt. RE~ ~NEER TO UPDA~ SECTION THROUGH TOWER YARD ANTENNA LINE SCHEDULE ~ ~:7_' m AZ,UUm 60'I O~LT;O AZ,UU~ 265I FRO~/1'O ' COAX ~NGm (F~)' COAX ~NGm (FI)' C~ C~ s~z~ ax~ ~?E RX/~ "~NNA TO' " " PRIMARY RAnG 7/6' 1~' 7/6' 1~' ,CABINET ...... STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Eric L. Morrisette April 21, 1998 May 20, 1998 SP 99-09 CFW CV 203 LICKINGHOLE REPEATER Applicant's Proposal: This application includes a request for reduction in setback from the public road. This reduction requires a waiver which may be granted by the Planning Commission and a variance which may only be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Typically, variances are considered prior to Planning Commission review of the proposal. The applicant has been advised of this and has requested that this application proceed to the Planning Commission prior to review by the Board of Zoning Appeals. [The variance will be heard prior to Board of Supervisors review of this special use permit.] Staff has reviewed this request under the assumption that the variance has been granted. The Commission has the following options: 1. The Commission may choose to defer action on thespecial use permit until the variance is heard. Or; 2. The Commission may act on the special use and the setback waiver. Or; 3. The Commission may act on the special use permit and delay action on the setback waiver until the variance request is heard. The applicant is proposing to construct a tower slightly above tree top level to provide PCS, Personal Communication System, coverage for western Albemarle County (Attachment A). Currently, no PCS service is provided in this area. The proposed tower will receive a signal from the proposed. Greenwood Motel tower [SP 98-14 CFW Lickinghole] and transmit the signal further east along Route 250 West, thus minimizing the necessity for a taller tower to be constructed. The applicant has provided information indicating that the surrounding site trees are approximately 80 feet tall (Attachment B). The applicant originally requested a tower height of 90 feet (10 feet above the surrounding tree height), but, at the request of staff, has reduced the request to a total tower height of 87 feet. The requested tower height of 7 feet above the tree canopy [87 total feet] will allow for additional vegetative growth and thereby an unobscured transmission signal. Two panel antennas [approximately six feet by one foot] will be attached to the pole. The receiving antenna will be placed at a height of 40 feet and the transmission tower will be placed at a total height of 87 feet. The proposed tower is a wooden pole. The specific D:\ location and design of the proposed tower is shown on Attachment C. Staffhas indicated the location of the proposed tower and access to the tower on a topographic map, which is included as Attachment D. A detailed description prepared by the applicant is included as Attachment A. Petition: Petition by CFW Wireless to construct a telecommunication tower slightly above tree top level [87 total feet] with associated grourid facilities on a portion of 6 acres zoned RA, Rural Areas, and EC, Entrance Corridor [10.2.2(6)]. Property, described as Tax Map 57, Parcel 41L, is located on the southern side of State Route 250 West, approximately 1 mile west of the Mechums River crossing (Attachment E). The proposed tower site is approximately 6 feet from the 'Route 250 West right-of-way. This site is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District and is not located within a designated Development Area. Character of the Area: The location for the proposed tower site is approximately 6 feet from the Route 250 West right- of-way and approximately 35 feet higher in elevation than the corresponding Route 250 pavement section. The tower site is located in a stand of trees approximately 80 feet in height (Attachment B). Attachment D is a topographic map that shows the location of the proposed tower and nearby houses. The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 675 feet Above Sea Level [ASL]. The closest dwelling, which is on the same parcel as the proposed tower, is approximately 400 feet distant. Another dwelling, located to the northeast, is also approximately 400 feet distant. Twenty-nine [29] houses are located within 2,000 feet [0.6 miles] of the proposed tower. No existing towers are located within the area. The nearest tower is located approximately 3.5 miles to the east, on the slope of Newcomb Mountain. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends .approval, with conditions. Planning and Zoning History: No planning or zoning history is available for this site. A residential structure currently exists on site. Comprehensive Plan: Staff notes that in order to construct the proposed tower, clearing for access and the provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, these impacts, in addition to the impact of the D:\ tower itself, have been reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. This property is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan discourages uses not related to bona fide agriculture or forestry. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of telecommunication towers. The Open Space Plan does provide some guidance for the protection of identified resources of the County. The only resource identified in the plan and potentially affected by this application is the Entrance Corridor. The Architectural Review Board [ARB] currently addresses the Entrance Corridor Overlay District. This proposed tower, and the property, is entirely below any Mountain Resource Area as identified in the Open Space Plan: No provision of the Comprehensive Plan prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting Personal Wireless Services. The limited area included in the lease area for the facility will not substantially reduce the existing or potential for use under the intent of the Rural Areas designatiOn. The current use is residential. This tower is intended, primarily, to provide service to the Route 250 West corridor. Route 250 West is designated as an Entrance Corridor. It is anticipated that the tower will be visible from the Entrance Corridor, and therefore will require ARB approval prior to construction. Although the tower will be visible, it is anticipated that the tower's visibility will be minimal as a result of site location within a stand of tall trees. The tower location is higher than the surrounding area, as the southern slope of the site drains to Mechum's River and the northern slope of the site drains the Route 250 West. The applicant has had a preliminary conference with the County's Design Planner, in which no concerns were raised to deter possible issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness by the ARB. It is anticipated that the ARB will require the panel antennas, as well as the supporting electrical conduits, be painted brown on color to match the proposed wooden pole. Therefore, staff has included such a condition as Condition 4. The impact of this tower on resources identified in the Open Space Plan is, in the opinion of staff, not significant due to the limited visibility of the tower. STAFF. COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of this request in four sections: o Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance; Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance; and, Waiver of site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance; and, A. Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance: Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the fight to issue all special use permit~ permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that ~such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, The proposed tower is located approximately 6 feet from the nearest property line, the fight of way for Route 250 West, and does not comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance. The applicant has applied for a variance for setback from a public road. [The required setback is 75feet. Staff did not determine that a variance was required until late in the review process. The applicant has requested that work on the special use perm#proceed while the variance is under review by the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board of Zoning Appeals will hear the variance request prior to Board of Supervisors review of this special use permit request. If the variance is denied the applicant will have to either withdraw the request or modify the request in order to meet a minimum 75foot setback. In the event the location is revised the application would be referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration.] A waiver to allow the tower closer to the property line than the height of the tower is also required. The site is located such that it meets setbacks from all other property lines. The site is located in a grove of trees adjacent to Route 250 West. These trees are approximately 80 feet tall based on information submitted by the applicant (Attachment B). The supporting electrical equipment located at the base of the tower will not be visible, because the site area is vegetated. The view from 250 West will be substantially screened by topography, vegetation on site, and undergrowth within the right of way. The top of the facility will slightly extend above the existing tree canopy in the area, but it is anticipated that the additional seven feet above the tree canopy will have minimal impact on the overall aesthetics of the site. The minimal visibility of the site does not, in the opinion of staff, result in a substantial detriment to adjacent property. Additional information may be provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue of · potential impacts. · that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, · As stated previously the siting of this facility in a grove of trees will allow for it to be visible from Route 250 West. The visibility of utility type use in the Rural Areas isnot uncommon (power lines and telephone switching stations). However, the County attempts, where possible, to limit the visibility of these uses. The County has over the years, by its actions to approve and deny applications for wireless facilities, attempted to site these facilities in areas where they have limited impacts on the surrounding area. This facility is located in a wooded area, which has been the favored approach of the County. The existence of the trees will serve to hide most of the facility. Although the panel antennas will be located seven [7] feet above the canopy of the trees, staff finds the increase above the canopy to be minimal and thereby not altering the character of the district. The existence and visibility of this facility will not on its own result in a change in the character of the district to an extent that the area is no longer considered rural. However, it will have a visual impact on the area and to some extent the character will be changed. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated Sections 1.4, 1.5, and i.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions .address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile telephones clearly provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase ion use. Based on the provision of a public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the Ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The provision of this facility does increase the availability and convenience for users .of wireless phone technology. However, this proposal may not be contributing to an attractive community because of the potential visual impacts. Therefore, staff opinion is that this request does not comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses or other by-right uses available on this site; or .by-right uses on any other property. w~ith additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.1.12 of the Ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate co~iditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the Ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health and safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. The Telecommunications Act addresses issues of environmental effects with the following language, "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commissions' regulations concerning such emissions". In order to operate this facility, the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This requirement will protect the public health and safety. B. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of The Telecommunications Act of 1996: The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal wireless service. Staffdoes not believe that the special use permit process or the denial of this application has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless service. The applicant has not demonstrated that there are any other locations within the proposed area of service currently available for new tower construction. For this reason, staff does not believe that denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of services. Staff and the applicant have been unable to identify any location for collocation, which would eliminate the need for construction of a tower. Alternate sites for the construction of a new tower have not been discussed. C. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance:. Section 4.10.3.1 states: "The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultUral museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, spires, flag poles, monuments or transmission towers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the structure; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". By the requirements of this provision the proposed tower would need to be located approximately 87 feet from the edge of the property. (This assumes an 80 foot tree height with the tallest portion of any part of the facility extending 7 feet above the trees.) The proposed tower is located approximately 6 feet from the right-of-way for Route 250 West. The site is located approximately 45 feet from the nearest portion of the paved travelway of Route 250 West. The right-of-way in this area is approximately 40 feet from the property line to the pavement section. [VDOT allows telecommunications facilities to be located within the right-of- way.] Staff opinion is that this setback provision is designed to prevent undue crowding of the land and to prevent safety hazards should a tower fall. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requiring approval of a tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure. This condition protects the public safety. Relocation of the tower is an option, but would result in the facility being moved out of the trees and closer to the existing residential dwelling located on the subject parcel. Staff has.historically supported requests for modification to allow towers to be located closer to the property line than the height of the tower when no option to relocate exists. In previous applications denial of the modification request would require relocation of the tower to areas of critical slopes or to areas which would require a substantially taller tower. In this case denial of the modification would likely result in the site being moved out of the trees. The County has approved reductions in setback in at least one prior wireless facility adjacent to a roadway. (That approval was for the tower located on Camp Holiday Trails adjacent to 1-64.) If the Commission is able to support this request on the basis of its evaluation for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 approval of this modification is appropriate. Staff opinion is that approval of the modification does not result in undue crowding of the land and does not represent a safety hazard. Therefore, is able to support this request for modification of setback. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. Generally the site review committee has endorsed the use of site plan waivers for the establishment of telecommunication facilities. This general endorsement is based on the relatively small area impacted by the proposed use and the ability to obtain the required information through an erosion and sediment control plan and the building permits. In this case the construction of the facility will require activity onl.y for the extension of utilities which are currently on site and the placement of the tower and ground equipment. Based on the minimal activity necessary for installation staff is unable to identify any purpose, which would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit; and, 2. Provision of one parking space. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this request: The tower will provide increased wireless capacity, which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5; 2. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; and The design and siting of the toweris such that it will have limited impact on adjacent property or Route 250 West.' Staff has identified the following factors, .which are unfavorable to this request: This site and tower will be visible from Route 250 west, which may result in a change in the character of the district. The following factor is relevant to this consideration: There is an existing reasonable use of the property; and, This' proposal may not be considered to be contributing to an "attractive community" as outlined in Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff's review has resulted in mixed findings. The conclusion of staff is that no alternative site analysis could provide for superior siting options. However, the impacts created by this site are not such that staff is able to make a finding that approval would be inconsistent with the ordinance. Staff recommends approval of this request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: (In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff offers the following comment: In order to comply with the provisions of the Telecommunication Act, staff request consensus direction from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staff to return to the Board with a written decision for the Board's consideration and action,) RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet of the tower. Antenna may not extend above the height of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; o co The tower shall have no lighting; and, The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Rptr CV 203". The panel antennas, with attached Supporting electrical conduits, shall be painted in color to match the wooden pole tower; Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antennas shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Rptr CV 203", b. Satellite and microwave dish' antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal fights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fially shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access; The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required; 10. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; 12. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; 13. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, 14. The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section. Should the Planning Commission support a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of asite plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit; 2. Provision of one parking space; 3. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. Should the Planning Commission support a reduction in setback, the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to permit the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower as shown a plan titled "CFW Wireless Lickinghole Rptr CV 203". 10 ATTACHMENTS: At B- C- D- E- Applicant's Application for Special Use Permit Letter Dated March 23.1999 Referencing the Surveyed Tree Canopy of Tower Site Site and Details Plan Titles "CFW Wireless: Lickinghole Rptr CV 203" Topographic Map Tax Map County of Albemarle -:. Department of Building Code and Zoning Services OFFICE USE ONLY L O Sign# Mag. Dist. Staff Application for SpeCial Use Permit [ATTACHMENT AI Project Name {how sm,ula we relcr to m:s applicationT) *Existing Use /~'"~ · *Zoning District. Wh)~e t-lOll ~:'q~O,,'~ Li6Yi~y, tote i~e?ccuter Proposed Use (~b~i.~ ~qA 6~ tC¢c/lO~'~ *Zoning Ordinance Section number requested (*staff will assist you with these items) Number of acres to be covered by Special Use Permit (ira portion it .... t be delineated on plat) Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit? Are YO9 submitting a site development plan with this application? Contact Person (Whom should we call/write concerning this project?): Address 1150 5iqev, ctr~c{~o.~ ~/ilivge Pdv'¢ City DaytimePhone(5-~0 ) ~'}b' ~5} Fax~ ~qO-'qY2-22t~ State ',/A Zip E-mail. clitk' ~(~.~ O-fw Owner of land (As listed in the County's records): Address &lO ~Oci.fvo~,cf (.~2~cd City ~'{q0~lO~¢09;}{¢ State YtCl Zip22C103 ]DaytimePhone( a0'-t ) <~23 - 5clfo Fax# E-mail ! Applicant {Who is the contact person representing? Who is requesting the special use?): ~J(~' 5i/le'(qt~lr Address 1150 .Sh¢t,'ic~,~doo b~ V'~l{ctS¢ tg;$ve City ~6t?~._ bert State VA Zip . DaytimePhone((fl0 ) qq~' t~5~ Fax~ ~40 ~32- 2~i0 E-inail ci,,~ ~) C~w ~2q¢o ~Tax map and parcel · Physical Address (i fassigned) ! Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership interest in) any abutting property? If yes, please list those tax map and parcel numbers ~O OFFICE USE ONLY Fee amount $ History: ~ Special Use Permits: El Variances: DatcPaid 2)-~alt;[0 Check" 50[ Receipt. Ul ZM A s and Proffers: Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? Letter of Authorizauon Yes ~ No 401 Mclntire Road ':' Charlottesville, VA 22902 -:- Voice: 296-5832 o:o Fax: 972-4126 ' IATTACH' mTAr- Section 31.2.4.1 of the Alb~marle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and that .such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in secuon 5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of youi' request. If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available. What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property? !,tO i I I How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district surrounding the property? How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent ofthe Zoning Ordinance? L O Cc('i(o~ ~.t / / How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district? What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use? .~(:'d41'0~'1 5~. 1. 12 How wilt this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the commumty?. ~VOViC.ie$ 2 IATTACHPIENT Al Describe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of persons involved in the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use: ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each: Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number. Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing. Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS: Drawings or conceptual plans, if any. Additional Information, if any. I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge, t Signature Date Printed Name Daynme phone number of Signatory Hap ~3 99 01:4Sp PHR&R (540) 8~8-S437 p.2 Tel: 540,82&26~6. F~x: ~40.828.607 Patto. ~rz'i$ ~u.~ & Asso¢iaLes, pc IATTACHMENT BI March 23, 1999 Albemarle County 401 Mcimyre Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 ROBERT L. CROSS PROPERTY CV #203 PHR&A #10419-11 To whom it may concern: On February 8, 1999, PHR&A's field crew shot the height of the trees in the immediate area of this site and determined that they were an average height of 80 feet. Cordially, PATTON HARRIS RUST AND ASSOCIATES ! GAJ/tlb;9~-t0-~ ER~lleefs, Su~Yeyors Plaflfie~s & Londs(ape RECEIVED I','IAR ~ ~ ,. Planning Dept. ALBEMARLE COUNTY CFW WIRELESS LICKINGHOLE RPTR CV 203 LICHINGHOLE I~TP~ CV 2O3 VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCA~E SITE LATITUDE: 38° 03' 21' N SITE LONGITUDE: 78= 39' 41.6" E VIRGINIA INDEX: DRAWING NO. TITLE TITLE SURVEY SITE PLAN ANTENNA GROUND DETAIL ANTENNA DESIGNS STRUCTURAL DETAILS I ENGINEER: APPROVED DATE: 20' X 20' GRAVEL COMPOUND .....-- INCOMING POWER f 3' CONDUIT FOR POWER J TO BE FIELD LOCATED / POLE LOCATION TO BE DETERMINED BY SITE ENGINEER REPEATER TO ~ BE MOUNTED TO POLE COAX TO ANTENNAS REPEATER NOT TO SCALE GROUND LEVEL GPS POWER TELCO × \ CAD-WELD LIGHTNING ROD GROUNO TO BUSSBAR, COPPER STAPLES EVERY 36" FRONT SIDE OF POLE POLE ANTENNA GROUND TO LIGHTNING ROD, COPPER STAPLES EVERY 36" ~SOLID GROUND (#2 TINNED) CABLE FROM BUSS BAR TO ROD CAD-WELD CAD-WELD GROUND ROD I. I I I I I I I I 1 I ! I ! I I I ! I I ! I I I I I I , BACK SIDE OF POI, E ANTENNA /18" / GROUND ROD JMSF (N(~,I-~OJ~ SIC) I · \\\ ,, ,, . ,A 1 3~' ~ ~ A 1 S~' P~ (P~-~ ~ 75 .~ ~ ~. CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAIL ~~ ~ . ~ DOUBLE SWING GATE ~ -~ · ~ ~ ~ ~ u*~ ~s~G ~ AN~NA ~E 7221.11 A18A2[U ~ m ~ AZIMU~ 60 ~ OO~LT=0 AZIMU~ 255 I DO~LT=O [~'1 ~*w*Y m~ To~ Y~o FROM/TO COAX LENG~ (FT)* COAX LENg~ (FT)* ~J  a' x ~- x C-s- c~ SIZE RX/~ SIZE RX/~ ~ ST~ AT ~'-~ O.~ PRIMARY RADIO .7/8" 100' 7/8' 100' S,~ r~c . ~ ~ c~c~ CABINET ~ , ES~MA~D LENG~S ~OM AVAI~BLE INFORMA~ON. FIELD ENGINEER TO UPDA~ ON AS-BUILT DRA~NGS. 12 ~ 2-22-99 SECTION THROUGH TOWER YARD ANTENNA LINE scHEDULE m ANTENNA i'~PE 7221.1'& A18A24EU I 0OWNTILT=0 AZIMUTH 25.5 I DOWNllLT=O AZIMUTH 6O FROM/TO COAX LENGTH (FT)* COAX LENGTH (FT)* CABLE CABLE SIZE RX/TX SIZE RX/TX ANTENNA TO · PRIMARY RADIO ·7/8" 100' 7/8' 100' . CABINET TRANSI~IIT POlE RECEIVE ANTENNAS ARE Trl BE LOCATED AT 40' AN]3 ~87) 7/8' COAX TD BE USED TI] BE FURNISHED BY CF~ ATTACHMENT D i '~.-__.-__~ ~ .~, SECTION 57 689 ALBEMARLE 4.1 68 COUNTY 9O 6O ?0 69 T'?' ?~ 56 / / '"/ MEt, HUM ./ 46 79~r . ,469 x, 'x SAMUEL MILLER AND WHITE HALL DISTRIOT$ ?'g& / 79A1 828 gO SECTION 57 ................. ~ ?ERVISORS BO~; - ~ Dept. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902.4596 (804) 296-5823 April 3O, 1999 Dick Shearer CFW Wireless 1150 Shenandoah Village Drive Waynesboro, VA 22980 SP-99-10 CFW (Overlook) Tax Map 53, Parcel 6 Dear Mr. Shearer: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 27, 1999, unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree located at the same base elevation as the facility within 50 feet of the facility. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and, d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The proposed facility shall be located' adjacent to the existing access easement, shown on the site plan, and no tree shall be removed. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless Scenic Lookout CF 159", b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunication providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, Page 2 April 30, 19999 10. 11. 12. (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers (o locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal fights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle county. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running through the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only. The permittee shall comply with Section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. The Planning Commission also approved a waiver of the drawing of a site plan in accord with provisions of Section 32.2.2 subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. Page 3 April 30, 1999 If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me: Sincerely, William D. Fritz, AICP Senior Planner WDF/jcf Cc~ Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey James & Julie Herring STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: William D. Fritz April 27, 1999 May 19, 1999 SP 99-10 C~vV (Overlook) Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to construct a treetop tower to support PCS antenna. The specific location and design of the proposed facility is shown on Attachment C. The applicant hag indicated the location of the proposed facility and access to the tower on a topographic map, which'is included as Attachment D. Petition: CFW is a personal wireless service provider. The applicant proposes to construct a tower approximately 10 feet taller than the trees as part of its system network. The request is for special use permit to allow a personal wireless service facility in accordance with Section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for radio-wave transmission and relay towers. The property, described as Tax Map 53 Parcel 6, contains 83 acres, and is located in the White Hall Magisterial District on the west side of Newton Road [Route # 690] at the end of Green Hill Lane just north of the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 3. Character of the Area: This area is located north of 1-64 and is heavily wooded as are the adjoining parcels. A scenic overlook is located on the east bound lane of 1-64 approximately 1,000 feet to the southwest. The surrounding properties are zoned RA, Rural Areas with some residences to the east. 1-64 is designated as an Entrance Corridor Overlay District. A house is located approximately 750 feet to the east. Attachment D is a topographic map which shows the location of the proposed tower and nearby structures. IA large scale map is available and will be presented at the public hearing. The size of the map is such that it cannot be reproduced and included in this report.] The nearest existing tower is located approximately 1.3 miles to the north on top of Bear Den Mountain. These towers are located in Augusta County. The nearest CFW facilities are located on Bear Den Mountain. The existing facilities on Bear Den are not providing the de~ired coverage'in Albemarle County. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning and Zoning History: No history is available on this property. Comprehensive Plan: Staff notes that in order to construct the proposed tower some clearing for access and the provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, these impacts, in addition to the impact of the tower itself, have been reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. The mountain resource area as identified in the Open Space Plan starts at the 1,200 foot contour. The proposed tower is at an elevation of approximately 1,320 feet ASL. The Open Space Plan states that, "Mountains are a major open space system recommended for.protection in the Rural and Growth .Areas" (page 27). In addition the plan states, "Resources associated with mountains include critical slopes, scenic views, wildlife habitat, extensive forests, unique soils for orchards, natural areas (including geologic features, and habitat for rare and endangered plants and animals), and headwaters." (page 5). Location of the proposed facility outside of the Mountain Resource Area while remaining on this property would involve the establishment of an access road which would require clearing and grading. An existing road will provide access to the proposed site. Staff recommends a condition limiting additional clearing which will reduce the potential visual impact created by clearing. The Open Space Concept Map "is intended to serve two functions: to guide open space decision-making in the County as a whole, and to provide a starting point for the ongoing identification and protection of Rural Area open space resources" (page 2). The location of a facility in this mountain resource area upslope from 1-64 baekdroped by Bear Den Mountain and the existing forest will make this site difficult to see from 1-64 and other areas. The location of the proposed facility near an existing access road limits the need for additional grading/clearing in a Mountain Resource Area. The Proposed facility is located in an area with critical slopes. Isolated areas not involving critical slopes are present. Generally staff is not supportive of activity on critical slopes within the Mountain Resource Areas. With the level of topographic information submitted to date it is difficult to verify the eXact location of the facility on a plan and determine the slope at that point. To address both the Mountain Resource Area and critical slope issue staff recommends the following condition: "The proposed facility shall be located not more than 25 feet from the existing road and at a base elevation not to exceed 1,320 feet ASL. If the facility is proposed in an area which requires disturbing any slopes of 25% or greater a modification of section 4.2 of the zoning ordinance will'be required. Approval of this special use permit does not insure approval of any modification of section 4.2." This tower is intended to provide service to the 1-64 corridor. This road is an Entrance Corridor. The tower will be in an area which may allow it to be visible from the Entrance Corridor and, therefore, the facility will require ARB approval prior to construction. The impact of the proposed facility, with the conditions proposed by staff, will result in limited if any negative visual impact on the entrance corridor. Staff opinion is that this condition will substantially limit the clearing necessary to install the facility and will, therefore, not result in the adverse impacts which the Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Plan seek to prevent. STAFF COMMENT: Staffwill address the issues of this request in four sections: 2 Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staffwill address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use. permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will.not be of substantial detIiinent to adjacent property, The proposed tower is located approximately 340 feet from the nearest property line and does comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance. The tower location is entirely wooded with the exception of the existing road. These trees will provide substantial screening of the equipment at the base of the tower from public roads and adjacent Rural Area properties: 'Based on the field observation these trees are approximately 50 to 60 feet tall. The proposal is to construct place a wooden pole which will extend 7 feet above the tree line. Panel antenna would be mounted flush with the pole extending 3 feet above the height of the pole. This approach is different than previous CFW treetop sites. In previous sites CFW has installed a pole not higher than the trees with omni (whip) antenna extending 7 feet above the trees. The current proposal does not limit the pole to tree top height. CFW has experienced some difficulty in attaching cross bars near the top of the pole to support antenna as it places stress on the pole which has resulted in some cracking. In addition, the current proposal makes use of panel antenna which require a more solid mounting surface in order to prevent'movement in the wind. These factors have resulted in a modification of the site design resulting in the pole itself extending above the treeline. Staff opinion is that the design of the facility is such that it will have limited visibility from adjacent property and will therefore not be of substantial detriment. Staff notes that the use of natural materials (wood pole) to support the antenna and the antenna design and mounting technique (flush to the pole) will allow this site to blend into the existing forest. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, Based on the.limited visibility of the facility and the lack of additional clearing to accommodate the facility staff opinion is that approval of this request will not result in a change in the character of the district. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staffhas reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5 All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile telephones clearly provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase in use. Based on the provision ora public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The provision of this facility does increase the availability and convenience for users of wireless phone technology. 3 The limited visual impact of the facility does not conflict with the attractiveness of the community. Therefore, staff opinion is that this request does not comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed tower will not restrict the current uses, or by right uses on any other property. The proposed conditions will limit tree clearing on this site in order to maintain the screening of the facility. While this condition will limit some use of the property it may be considered with the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan and the purpose and intent of the ordinance as it will insure the retention of tree cover in a mountainous area which has scenic value. with additional regulations provided in Section 5~0 of this ordinance, Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health, safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. The Telecommunications Act addresse~ issues of environmental effects with the following language: "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions". In order to operate this facility the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(!)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any sta~e or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit' or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal wireless service. Staff does not believe that the special use permit process or the denial of this application has the effect of prohibiting the provision or personal wireless services. The applicant has not demonstrated that there are no other locations within the proposed area of service currently available for new tower construction. Staff and the applicant have been unable to identify any suitable location 'for collocation which would eliminate the need for construction of a tower. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. Generally the site review committee has endorsed the use of site plan waivers for the establishment of telecommunication facilities. This general endorsement is based on the relatively small area impacted by the proposed use and the ability to obtain the required information through an erosion and sediment control plan and the building permits. Staff is able to support the request for a site plan waiver as the information submitted by the applicant generally meets the requirements for a site plan. Based on the review this application has received and will receive during the approval processes of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan, issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board and Building Permit issuance, staff is unable to identify any purpose, which would be served by requiring the. submission of a site plan. Staff recommends'approval of a full site plan waiver subject to the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. A site plan shall be required ifactivity on slopes of 25% or greater is proposed. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The facility will provide increased wireless capacity, which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5. The facility will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties; The design of the facility will not result in adverse visual impacts to adjoining land or roads. Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this request: This site is within the Entrance Corridor District, Mountain Resource Area and areas noted as having critical slopes in the Comprehensive Plan and Open Space Plan. The following factor is relevant to this consideration: 1. There is an existing reasonable use of the property. RECOMMENDED ACTION': Staff opinion is that while this site is located within resource areas identified in the Open Space Plan and the Comprehensive Plan, the design of the facility and the existence ora road on the property reduce the impacts such that approval would not be inconsistent with the goal of protecting the resources. Therefore, staff recommends approval of this proposal. (In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff offers the following comment: In order to comply with the provisions of the Telecommunication Act, staff request consensus direction from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staffto return to the Board with a written decision for the Board's consideration and action.) Recommended Conditions of Approval. ,' The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet downslope of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the tallest tree. Antenna may extend. 3 feet above the height of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no.lighting; and, d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The proposed facility shall be located not more than 25 feet from the existing road and at a base elevation not to exceed 1,320 feet ASL. If the facility is proposed in an area which requires disturbing any slopes of 25% or greater a modification of section 4.2 of the zoning ordinance will be required. Approval of this special use permit does not insure approval of any modification of section 4.2 Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless Scenic Lookout CV 159", b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County.. Each outdoor iuminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting of a lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Plarming to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the pe.rmittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access; o The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; 10. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; 11. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; 12. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, 13. The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section. Should the Planning Commission support a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: 2. 3. 4. Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance ora Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. A Site plan shall be required if activity on slopes of 25% or greater is proposed. ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicant's Information D - Topographical Map ~ouNT/S, iN SP-99-10 CV 159 Scenic Lookout (Sign # 57 & 58] I I ATTACHMENT A. __ : Farming~n -- Country Club Critzers Shop CASTLE Hearos Mtn. F.T BOAZ MOLJ NTAINS \ \ \ TO LOVINGSTON / ROCK TOP TOM MOUNTAIN SOUTH Bungletown Alberene. Esmont -- Po~ter Caners Bridge TO RT. 29 ATTACHMENT B ALBEMARLE COUNTY ALBElV .J · WHITE HALL DISTRICT / -4, / '.~ \ ! SP-99-10 CV 159 Scenic Lookout (Sign # 57 & 58) ~ SECTION 53 ~,,,__ ...... WHITE rP ATTACHMENT C A~'tMG~' ~ HEI~qT ~ Sl)~ . ~0' C~ PROPO~"D ~0' A~TSS £~'NT TO~ER SITE FOR C F ~ ~YlRELESS CV- 159 PROPERTY OF J~hfES h~.HERRING JR. & JULIEt. HERRING. ~HITE H~LL DISTRICT, ~AEhf~RLE CO., V~. SCALE: 1"= lOO' DEC. 14, 1DD8 ~ tK H~IRRIS~ L. S. - S TUiqR TS DR~qFT, V~ ALBEMARLE CFW WIRELESS COUNTY SCENIC LOOKOUT CV 159 JII VICINITY MAP 8rl'E LATITUDE: ~8' 02' S2' N SITE LONGITUDE: 78' 47' 34' E I I VIRGINIA INDEX: DRAWING NO. TITLE 2 4 5 6 7 TffLE LOCATION 'H" FRAME DETAILS SITE PLAN ANTENNA GROUND iDETAIL ANTENNA DESIGNS STRUCTURAL DETAILS/ PAD STRUCTURAL DETAII.S I el APPROVED EER: DATE: ATTACHMENT C PAGE 2 ATTACHMENT C O  I~'LONG I' ABOVE PAD -~ TYPIC4L EACH ""-" POWER CONDUIT FOR CABINET 4" x 10" OPENING --- FOR CONDUIT --I-I /I-- II II ~ II I0' " H" FRAME OR A SINGLE 4" CALVANIZUED PIPE PAGE 3 ATTACHMENT C COAX Alq'PENNAS CONCRETE PAD It I l, II -IrOqstorms m-~ "I-T~ FRAME 8 'X5' ~I. EEVE 2' DIA. X12" - I PAGE .4 ATTACHMENT C NOT TO SCALE GROUND LEVEL COAX TO ANTENNAS GPS SC 611 POWER TELCO GROUND TO RING GROUND RING 00000 0000000 _.--. MONO-POLE BUSS BAR FOR CABLE GROUNDING GROUND TO RING GROUND POLE ",'O ~'~:.~UN~ ~-~1~ GROUND ROD Date: 1-4-99 I PAGE $ PANEL ANTENNAS _l I 5/8' CDAX TD DE USED TO BE FURNISHED DY CF'V SCENIC OVERLOOK CV 159 SPECIFICATIONS CFW WIRELESS ATTACHMENT C FOUNDATION AND PAD B. P~ESUI,4P11'~ 9E.4.qff4G CAPAQ'TY: 2.000 PSF EXCAVAllCflS/I:'QUNOAll~J A. FOUNOA11~N EXCAVA1104 SHALL. BE HN4~-IRIIA~D B. TO IKM0t~ LOOSE MAILqlALS. EX1Eg.~ FGUNOA*II~d ~ SHN.,L BE SELECIED GRANULAR FILL N.L $~dC1URAL BACXFIJ. AND ~ ~ SLABS-CN-GRN~ NJD FOOLINGS SHN,.L ~: 'SW' Ql~ BET~R I~ AS~ D-2487 C:QMPACIED 10 A r ~ K.4/aNG SUI~AC~S, Pt~"MOUSLY ACCF..Pll?D BY 0MdEIrS I~PfiX~f. HTA'I1W., R~'ItJ~I~ED TO ~A11~FACllON OF O~4ER'S REI~[,S~ITA'II~_ ir. OO NOT AU.OW GN(~ND HEN~'~ rOOT1N~ TO FI~'~ G. FOOllNG EXCAVA11ONS SHALL BE CUT I~.AT. OtI~R'S RD~NTA1W~ BEFOi~ ~ SI. A8 ~T. CONCR[1E - I -4-98 PAGE 7 ATTACHMENT C ~ LINK T~ ~;LVA{~ BARBED ~ ~ BOTTGM IMUO~t.ED. INSTN. L Faamc CH O.D. I-1,/2' m' ~AX.) CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAIL MALLEABLE IRON FORK -- ~ LATCH MIH D~P BaR AND MIH I~1~1 F~R PNx.oc~ {PAG~-~LSCH TYK 7S ~ G~'I~ lATCH ASSEMBLY 0R EQU~L) 1/4' SLOT. 1 3~. SK4HK IN A I 5/8' DOUBLE SWING GATE ANTENNA TYPE PCSA 03,3-1,,~-2 PCSA 065-19-2 AZIMUTH 05 I DOWNTILT-2 AZIMUTH 22,5 I DO'M~ITILT-2 : FROM/TO ' COAX LENGTH (F'i? COAX LF. NGTM (FT)* "' CABLE CABLE ' '~ ' S~ZE RX/TX S~ZE RX/'D( ANIENNA TO PRIMARY RADIO 1 ,5/8" 90' 1 CABINET ESTIMATED LENGTHS FROM AVAILABLE INFORMATION. FIELD ENGINEER TO UPDATE ON AS-BUlL' SECTION THROUGH TOWER YARD ANTENNA LINE SCHEDULE GAlZPQST 4' O.D. 6'-0' DRA1MNGS. P: I I=.1 PAGE ATTACHMENT D BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 April 30, 1999 Dick Shearer CFW Wireless 1150 Sehanadoah Village Drive Waynesboro, VA 22980 SP-99-11 CV 154 Ivy& 1-64 Tax Map 73, Parcel 31D Dear Mr. Shearer: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 27, 1999, unanimoUsly recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the following conditions: The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the tallest tree. Antenna may extend 3 feet above the height of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and, d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154" and a plan tiffed "Tower site for CFW Wireless CV154." Any fencing shall be of a design similar to that found on the property currently. Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be limited to those shown in a plan tiffed "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154", b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: Pge 2 April 30, 1999 10. 11. 12. 13. (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, (2) The permitte~ shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected bdow a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminairo is a complete lighting unit consisting ora lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps, and to connect the lamps to the power supply. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only. Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permitteo shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing tre~s on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which tr~s may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) f~t of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility access. The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the dat~ its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued. The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July I of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. Page 3 April 30, 1999 The Planning Commission also approved a waiver of the drawing of a site plan in accord with provisions of Section 32.2.2 subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. The Planning Commission deferred action on the request for a setback waiver until a variance for setback from public right-of-way is obtained. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, William D. Fritz, AICP Senior Planner WDF/jcf Cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: William D. Fritz April 27, 1999 May 19, 1999 SP 99-11 Ivy and 1-64 Applicant's Proposal: This. application includes a request for reduction in setback from-the public road. This reduction requires a waiver which may be granted by the Planning Commission and a variance which may only be granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals. Typically, variances are considered prior to Planning Commission review of the proposal. The applicant has been advised of this and has requested that this application proceed to the Planning Commission prior to review by the Board of Zoning Appeals. [The variance will be heard prior to Board of Supervisors review of this special use permit.] Staff has reviewed this request under the assumption that the variance has been granted. The Commission has the following options: 1. The Commission may choose to defer action on the special use permit until the variance is heard. Or; 2. The Commission may act on the special use and the setback waiver. Or; 3. The Commission may act on the special use permit and delay action on the setback waiver until the variance request is heard. The applicant is proposing to construct a treetop tower to support a PCS antenna. The specific location and design of the proposed facility is shown on Attachment C. The applicant has indicated the location of the proposed facility and access to the tower on a topographic map, which is included as Attachment D. Petition: Request for special use permit to allow for a personal wireless service facility in accordance with Section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance which allows for radio-wave transmission and relay towers. The property, described as Tax Map 73 Parcel 31D, contains 10 acres, and is located in the Samuel Miller Magisterial District on the east side of Taylors Gap Road [Route # 708] south of 1-64. The property is zoned RA, Rural Areas and EC, Entrance Corridor Overlay District. The Comprehensive Plan designates this property as Rural Area 3. Character of the Area: The location of the proposed facility is on the east side of Route 708 south of 1-64 in a grove of trees. The Peacock Hill subdivision is locatedon the north side ofi-64 west of Route 708. Land to the east, south and west &the site is pasture. Scattered residences are located south ofi-64. The closest dwelling is located 400 feet to the northwest. The closest CFW facilities are those located on Route 29 South. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance and is able to recommend approval. Planning and Zoning History: No history is available. Comprehensive Plan: Staff notes that in order to construct the proposed tower clearing for access and the provision of electrical service will be required. Therefore, these impacts, in addition to the impact of the tower itself, have been reviewed for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance. This site is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan. The only resources identified in the Comprehensive Plan, Open Space Plan for this area is the Entrance Corridor (1-64). Currently the Comprehensive Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of telecommunication towers. No provision of the Comprehensive Plan prohibits or has the effect of prohibiting Personal Wireless Services. The limited area included inthe lease area for the facility will not substantially reduce the existing or potential for use under the intent of the Rural Areas designation. The current use is for grazing. The location and design of the facility is such that the view from 1-64 will be limited. (The site is approximately 500 feet from 1-64.) The impact of this tower on resources identified in the Open Space Plan is, in the opinion of staff, not significant due to the limited visibility of the tower. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of this request in four sections: 2. 3. 4. Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the ZOning Ordinance. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff will address each provision of Section 31,2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be isSUed upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adiacent property, The proposed tower is located approximately 15 feet from the nearest property line, the right of way for Route 708, and does not comply with the setback requirements of the ordinance. The applicant has applied for a variance for setback from a public road. [The required setback is 75 feet. Staff did not determine that a variance was required until late in the review process. The applicant has requested that work on the special use permit proceed while the variance is under review by the Board of Zoning Appeals. The Board of Zoning Appeals will hear the variance request prior to Board of Supervisors review of this special use permit request. If the variance is denied the applicant will have to either withdraw the request or modify the request in order to meet a minimum 75 foot setback. In the event the location is revised the application will be referred back to the Planning Commission for consideration.] A waiver to allow the tower closer to the property line than the height of the tower is also required. The site is located such that it meets setbacks from all other property lines. The site is located in a grove of trees adjacent to Route 708. This grove of trees is clear of undergrowth as it is used for grazing. These trees are approximately 95 feet tall based on information submitted by the applicant. This application is different than other"treetop" facilities proposed by CFW. The proposal for this site is to have the wood pole extend 7 feet above the treeline. Unlike other requests by CFW for "treetop" facilities this site is not in a densely wooded area. The siting of this facility is such that the lack of undergrowth will allow for visibility of base station and poli~ from Route 708. The view from 1-64 will be substantially screened by topography, . undergrowth within the 1-64 right of way and between the site and 1-64. The top of the facility will blend into the existing tree canopy in the area. Visibility alone does not in the opinion of staff result in a substantial detriment to adjacent property however, it is a detriment. Additional information may be provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue of potential impacts. that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, As stated previously despite being sited in a grove of trees, this facility will still be visible from Route 708. The visibility of utility type use in the Rural Areas is not uncommon (i.e. power lines and telephone switching stations). However, the County attempts where possible to limit the visibility of these uses. The County has over the years by its actions to approve and deny applications for wireless facilities attempted to site these facilities in areas where they have limited impacts on the character of the surrounding area.. This facility is located in a wooded area which has been the favored approach of the County. The existence of the trees will serve to hide the facility. However, staff opinion is that the lack of understory in this grove of trees is such that it will not mask the site to a degree which has occurred in some other locations. Alternative locations may exist which provide for superior siting options. The use of shade tolerant screening materials may serve to reduce the visibility of ground based equipment. If landscaping is installed it will need to be protected from grazing. Any fencing used to protect landscaping should be ora design similar to that found on the property currently. The existence and visibility of this facility will not on its own result in a change in the character of the district to an extent that the area is no longer considered rural. However, it will have an impact on the area and to some extent the character .will be changed. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5 All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile telephones clearly provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase in use. Based on the provision of a public service, staff opinion is that.this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The provision of this facility does increase the availability and convenience for users of wireless phone technology. However, this proposal may not be contributing to an attractive community because of the potential visual impacts. Therefore, staff opinion is that this request does not comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposed tower will not restrict the current use, other by right uses available on this site, or by right uses on any other property. with additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of this ordinance, Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and appropriate .conditions are proposed to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health, safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. The Telecommunications Act addresses issues of environmental effects with the following language: "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification.of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions". In order to operate this facility the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of personal wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal wireless service. Staffdoes not believe that the special use permit process or the denial of this application has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The applicant has not demonstrated that the?e are no other' locations within the proposed area of service currently available for new tower construction. For this reason, staffdoes not believe that denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of services. Staff and the applicant have been unable to identify any location for collocation, which would eliminate the need for construction of a tower. Alternate sites for the construction of a new tower have not been discussed. Reduction of setback in accord with the provisions of Section 4.10.3.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. Section 4.10.3.1 states: "The height limitations of this chapter shall not apply to barns, silos, farm buildings, agricultural 4 museums designed to appear as traditional farm buildings, residential chimneys, spires, flag poles, monuments or transmission towers and cables; smokestack, water tank, radio or television antenna or tower, provided that except as otherwise permitted by the commission in a specific case, no structure shall be located closer in distance to any lot line than the height of the structure; and, provided further that such structure shall not exceed one hundred (100) feet in height in a residential district. This height limitation shall not apply to any of the above designated structures now or hereafter located on existing public utility easements". By the requirements of this provision the proposed tower would need to be located a approximately 105 feet from the edge of the property. (This assumes a 95 foot tree height with the tallest portion of any part of the facility extending l0 feet above the trees.) The proposed tower is located approximately 15 feet from the right of way for Route 708. The site is located approximately 40 feet from the nearest portion of the travelway of Route 708. The right of way in this area increases to 80 feet as Route 708 crosses 1-64. [VDOT allows telecommunications facilities to be located within the right ofway.] Staff opinion is that this setback provision is designed to prevent undue crowding of the land and to prevent safety hazards should a tower fall. Historically, towers reviewed by the County are approved subject to a condition requiring approval of a tower designed to collapse in the lease area in the event of structural failure. This condition protects the public safety. Relocation of the tower is an option, but would result in the facility being moved out of the trees. Staff has historically supported requests for modification to allow towers to be located closer to the property line than the height of the tower when no option to relocate exists. In previous applications denial of the modification request would require relocation of the tower to areas of critical slopes or to areas which would require a substantially taller tower. In this case denial of the modification would likely result in the site being moved out of the trees. The County has approved reductions in setback in at least one prior wireless facility adjacent to a roadway. (That approval was for the tower located on Camp Holiday Trails adjacent to 1-64.) If the Commission is able to support this request on the basis of its evaluation for compliance with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 approval of this modification is appropriate. Staff opinion is that approval of the modification does not result in undue crowding of the land and does not represent a safety hazard. Therefore, is able to support this request for modification of setback. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. Generally the site review committee has endorsed the use of site plan waivers for the establishment of telecommunication facilities. This general endorsement is based on the relatively small area impacted by the proposed use and the ability to obtain the required information through an erosion and sediment control plan and the building permits. In this case the construction of the facility will require activity only for the extension of utilities which are currently on site and the placement of the tower and ground equipment. Based on the minimal activity necessary for installation staff is unable to identify any purpose, which would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver subject to the following conditions: 5 Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit; Provision of one parking space. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: The tower will provide increased wireless capacity, which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5. The tower will not restrict permitted uses on adjacent properties. The design and siting of the tower is such that it will have limited impact on adjacent property or 1-64. Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this request: This site will be visible from Route 708 and other rural area land and may change the character of the district. The following factor is relevant to this consideration: 1. There is an existing reasonable use of the property. Staff's review has resulted in mixed findings. The conclusion of staff is that alternative sites may provided for superior siting options. However, the impacts created by this site are not such that staff is able to make a finding that approval would be inconsistent with the ordinance. Staff recommends approval of this request. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends approval subject to the following conditions: (In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff offers the following comment: In order to comply with the provisions of the Telecommunication Act, staff request consensus direction from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staffto return to the Board with a written decision for the Board's consideration and action.) Recommended Conditions of Approval. The height of the tower shall not exceed 7 feet above the height of the tallest tree within 25 feet of the tower. The applicant shall provide a certified statement on the height of the tallest tree. Antenna may extend 3 feet above the height of the tower. The tower shall be designed, constructed and maintained as follows: a. The tower shall be of wood; b. Guy wires shall not be permitted; c. The tower shall have no lighting; and, d. The tower shall not be painted and shall be natural wood color. o .7. 10. The tower shall be located on the site as follows: a.. The tower shall be located as shown on the attached plan entitled "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154" and a plan titled "Tower site for CFW Wireless CV 154". Antennas may be attached to the tower only as follows: a. Antenna shall be.limited to those shown in a plan titled "CFW Wireless 1-64/708 CV 154", b. Satellite and microwave dish antennas are prohibited. The tower shall be used, or have the potential to be used, for the collocation of other wireless telecommunications providers, as follows: a. The permittee shall allow other wireless telecommunications providers to locate antennas on the tower and equipment on the site, subject to these conditions: ' (1) Prior to approval of a final site plan for the site or the waiver of the site plan requirement, the permittee shall execute a letter of intent stating that it will make a good faith effort to allow such location and will negotiate in good faith with such other provider requesting locate on the tower or the site; and, (2) The permittee shall provide to the County, upon request, verifiable evidence that it has made a good faith effort to allow such location. Verifiable evidence of a good faith effort includes, but is not limited to, evidence that the permittee has offered to allow other providers to locate on the tower and site in exchange for reciprocal rights on a tower and site owned or controlled by another provider within Albemarle County. Each outdoor luminaire shall be fully shielded such that all light emitted is projected below a horizontal plane running though the lowest part of the shield or shielding part of the luminaire. For purposes of this condition, a luminaire is a complete lighting unit consisting ora lamp or lamps together with the parts designed to distribute the light, to position and protect the lamps,. and to connect the lamps to the power.supply.. Outdoor lighting shall be limited to periods of maintenance only; Prior to beginning construction or installation of the tower, or the equipment building, or installation of access for vehicles or utilities, the permittee shall obtain authorization from the Director of Planning to remove existing trees on the site. The Director of Planning shall identify which trees may be removed for such construction or installation. Except for the tree removal expressly authorized by the Director of Planning, the permittee shall not remove existing trees within two hundred (200) feet of the tower, the equipment building, or the vehicular or utility acceSS; The permittee shall comply with section 5.1.12 of the Zoning Ordinance. Fencing of the lease area shall not be required; The tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than 7 July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; 11. No slopes associated with construction of the tower and accessory uses shall be created that are steeper than 2:1 unless retaining walls, revetments, or other stabilization measures acceptable to the County Engineer are employed; 12. The access road shall be built with side slopes on cut and fill slopes at 2:1 or flatter; and, 13. ' The access road shall disturb no more than 75' in cross section.' Should the Planning Commission support a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit. Provision of one parking space. Issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness from the Architectural Review Board. Should the Planning Commission support a reduction in setback, the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to permit the tower as requested by the applicant: A modification of Section 4.10.3.1 has been granted to allow location of the tower as shown a plan titled "Tower site for CFW Wireless CV 154". ATTACHMENTS: A - Location Map B - Tax Map C - Applicant's Information D - Topographical Map E MouNTAiN AlBemarle ATTACHMENT A J Farmington ,SP-99-11 CV154 Ivy and 1-64 (Sion # 55) CASTLE ROCK TOP TOM MOUNTAIN Cross 8OAZ MOUNTAINS \ TO LOVINGSTON / TO RT. 29 Red Hill NOrth Garden1 Alberene. Esmon; Porter ALBEMARLE COUNTY ATTACHMENT B 32A 5 72 SP-99-11 CV154 Ivy and 1-64 (Sign # 55) \ / ALBEMARLE c~NTY 87 .- SAMUEL MI~ER AND WHIT5 DISTRICTS SECTION 73 T. A4~ 7`%. PARCEL ,%1C SUPPI ~'S UNLIMITED. INC. ZONE: RA Z -I N 17m41 '~7=W ~OO' Z -3 S 17~41 '~7"~ ~'~EV. ~ SIT~' . 700' ( ASSUMED FROM AVEt~C~ TREE t~MHT ~'8" REBARS ON COI~'RS TOkyER SITE FOR C F kY kYlRELESS CV- 154 PROPERTY OF DAVID C kYEBER SAMUEL MILLER D/STRICT, ALBEMARLE CO., V~ · SC~ E: I" = ,%0' DEC. 14, 1998 ~. HARRIS, L.S. - STUARTS DRAFT, VA~ ALBEMARLE COUNTY CFW WIRELESS 164/708 CV 154 V VIRGINIA INDEX: DRAWING NO. TITLE TITLE LOCATION 'H' FRAME DETAILS SITE PLAN ANTENNA GROUND DETAIL ANTENNA DESIGNS STRUCTURAL DETAILS/ PAD STRUCTURAL DETAILS ATTACHMENT C PAGE2 VICINITY MAP Sfl'E LATITUDE: 88' 01' 57' N SITE LONGITUDE: 78" 38' 13' E APPRgVED BY: DATE: ATTACHMENT C ..am 0 12' 0 _1 -r 0 r PVC 12" LONG I' ABOVE PAD ~ EACH CORNER ~WOODPOLE, ~ OR SELF BUPPORT TOWER. TO BE LOCATED W THE FIELD J INCOMING POWER AND TELCO TO BE LOCATED IN THE FIELD FRONT V/EW POWER CONDUIT _j/ FOR CABINET 2,'--2.0" ~ I 4" x 10" OPENING CONDUIT 10' "IT' FRAME OR A SINGLE GALVANIZUED PIPE NEMA 4X HENNEE~Y CABtJ~? I PAGE3 ATTACHMENT C ANTENNAS 8C ~11 x~ ~'GALVANiZED~/ FRAME 8'X5' ~-4-98 PAGE 4 ATTACHMENT C NOT TO SCALE GROUND LEVEL COAX TO ANTENNAS GPS SC 611 POWER TELCO GROUND TO RING GROUND RING I I I I ooooo o000o00 _---- MONO-POLE BUSS BAR FOR CABLE GROUNDING GROUND TO RING POLE TO GRO~JhD ROD GROUND ROD 1-4-99 4 PAGE $ PANEL ANTENNAS I 5/8' COAX TD DE USED TO BE FURNISHED DY CFV 164/7.08 CV 154 SPECIFICATIONS CFW WIRELESS ATTACHMENT C PAD SURFAC~ ~,IALL R~C~./~*-~ ,/-4x4 ~4~ ~ / ~ ~ D~S ~ ~T ~ ~D BY ~S F~ TO ~Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~R~ ~TA~ ~ t ~l~T ~ ~L~: 4~ ~ - FOUNDA~ON AND PAD 9flOMl~ CORNER ~kRS AT r~ C~RNER (~' PNZ MATCH FOOTI~G R~IF. D. E. Ir. G. 3, CONCRETE COVER AROUND I~INFOR'C3NG BARS (U.N.O.) SHALL BE: I, CONCI~TE CAST A~NST ~D K~Y ~ ~ ~D ~ ~. ~ ........ . .............. 2" ~ ~ .................................................... 3/4' 4, ~ 0~ ~ ..................................... 1 ~ ~ 0~ ~ ~ ~AM~ ~ENT ~S ~X~RES ~ ~ ~ ~T ~ ~ T~ ~G ~ENT. ~ ~~ '~ ~ TO F~TA~ ~~ ~ A~ ~ EN~ ~ ~NT ~Y ~ ~T. ~~T ~A~ K ~~ ~ ~YM~ ~S~ ~ ~ ~ AS ~G~AT~K~BY~.~A~ ~L~ (1~) ~ KT ~ ~ ~(2~) ~ ~T ~T. [ P~~K a~r~T~G~[ ~ATA 4. ~ ~ ~-~0 1. C04X I~NTS I~FORE MI~G TO MJdNTAJN CCNC~I~ ~EBd~IUR~ AT ~ OF PLACE~J~IT ~ gOT(3~). MI~NG WA~R MAY BE C1~ OR GHOgPED IC~ MAY BE U~r*n TO C(~I1R~L 'r~MI~A1URI~ WAI'~R £GUP/ALENT OF ICI IS ~TED TO TOTN,. ~ 2. COIt~R I~INFORCING ~ Wl14 WAll~ ~OAKED BURLAP IF IT B~COME~ TOO HOT. SO THAT THE $1~[L l~UPERAllJRE MU. NOT [XCEED AMBIENT AJR I[MPI;I~A1UR[ IMM[DIA1ELY ~OR~ IMB(OM;'NT & FOG SI~AY FORMS, REINFORCING ~ AH0 SUBCRAOE 4. U~*' WA'~R-R~DUC3NG R~TARDJNG ADMIX'lURE IHE:N I~GUIR~D BY PAGE 7 ATTACHMENT C -- CH.NN LINg TOP ~gl. VAGl~ BARBED AND ~J~[ED BOTTOM ~LVAGE gNU~XI.ED. INSTAl/. FABRIC ON 0UI~I~ WE ARM O.D. TOP RJUL LIN[ PO~T POST 1~S FOOI~ CHAIN LINK FENCE ,DETAIL SECTION THROUGH TOWER YARD 1-l/2 PNR INDUSTRIAL ;qN H~NGE (PAGE-VJt. S~ U-6 ~ I' 12'-0' GA~E OI~qNG SA'[EPOST 4' O.D. GN. VdqMIZI~D ~ MN. LEAiILE IRON FORK -- ~ LATCH M*IH ~ ~ ANO MIH PROM~ION F~R P~X.OC~ (P.,k~-WLS~I ~ 75 ~ GATE LATgH ASSE~I.¥ ~ EGUN.) I 3/~' SHN4K IN A I S/~' DOUBLE SWING GATE A. TE..A ~E PCSA033-,9-O .CSA03~-,9-O AZ, MUM BO I DOW. TILT=O AZ,MU~. ~'6S I oow. Ti.~'=o rR(:rM~d COAX LENGTH' (rT)* . COAX LEN¢~-'(FT)'' i CABLE CABLE SIZE RX/TX SIZE RX/TX ANTENNA TO I PRIMARY RADIO 1 5/8" 110' 1 ,5/8' 110' CABINET ESTIMATED LENGTHSiFROM AVAILABLE INFORMATION. FIELD ENGINEER TO UPDATE ON AS-BUILT DRAWINGS. ANTENNA LINE SCHEDULE PAGE 8 (I ,LbI~IIAIH~)VJ,,LV r~ ;,:. ~.~RD OF SUPERVISORS April 22, 1999 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (8O4) 296-5823 Dick Shearer CFW Wireless 1150 Shenandoah Village Dr Waynesboro, VA 22980 SP-99-14 CFW CV 137 Lickinghole Tax Map 56, Parcel 104 Dear Mr. Shearer: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 20, 1999 unanimously recommended approval of the above-noted petition to the Board of Supervisors. Please note that this approval is subject to the f011owing conditions: The antennas and supporting elements shall be painted to match the existing tower. The vacated television reception antenna shall be removed. The attachment shall be limited to a total of two (2) panel antenna, the dimensions of each which shall be approximately 6'x 1', whose height shall not exceed a maximum of 65 feet. Structural improvements to or replacement of the tower shall be similar in design, size and appearance as the existing tower unless the existing tower is replaced by wooden pole not exceeding 65 feet. Construction of the telecommunications attachment on the existing lattice tower shall be in general accord with the plan titled "CV 137 Lickinghole" attached to this report and initialed ELM 04/07/99 (Attachment C). The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later'than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider. The tower and antenna on the tower shall be disassembled and removed fi.om the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued. Albemarle County Architectural Review Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this Petition and receive public comment at their'meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted ~o the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled hearing date. The Planning Commission also approved a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit if the area of disturbance exceeds 10,000 square feet; and, Provision of one parking space. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sinc~ Eric L. Morrisette Plannier ELM/jcl Cc: Ella Carey Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey Steve Allshouse Helen L. Lang STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Eric L. Morrisette April 20, 1998 May 19, 1998 SP 99-14 CFW CV 137 LICKINGHOLE Applicant's Proposal: The applicant is proposing to attach two panel antennas on an existing television reception tower, located in the rear of the Greenwood Motel on the southern side of State Route 250 West. The applicant proposes to remove the television reception antenna from the existing sixty-five (65) foot lattice tower and replace it with two panel antennas for telecommunications. The existing tower is nonconforming and requires approval of a special use permit in order for additional use to be made of the tower. The applicant has provided detailed information about the location and design of the proposed facility. The applicant's information is included as Attachment C. Petition: The applicant petitions the Board of Supervisors to allow for the attachment of a Personal Wireless Service Facility on an existing television reception tower (Attachment A). This requires a special use permit in accord with the provisions of Section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance. The proposal is to remove the television reception antenna and locate two panel antennas to the top of the existing tower, therefore maintaining the existing sixty-five (65) feet in height. The tower site is located at the rear of the Greenwood Motel, which sites on the southern side of the State Route 250 West and within the Samuel Miller MagiSterial District (Attachment B). The property consists of approximately 3.4 acres and is described as Tax Map 56, Parcel 104, zoned RA, Rural Areas, and EC, Entrance Corridor. This site is not located within a designated growth area of the Comprehensive Plan. Character of the Area: The 3.4-acre site is the site of the Greenwood Motel, which was constructed prior to the adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance and is therefore nonconforming. The motel constructed a sixty- five (65) foot television reception tower to accommodate the customers. Since then, the motel has subscribed to satellite service and no longer uses the existing reception tower. Since this proposal seeks attachment to an existing tower on a developed site, it is anticipated that the physical impact to the site will be minimal. The property is surrounded by property also zoned RA, Rural Areas to the north, east, and south. State Route 250 West abuts the parcel to the north. The tower site is approximately 220 feet from the Route 250 West right-of-way. The attachment of panel antennas does warrant some minor structural improvements to the existing lattice tower. Due to corrosion, the top 1/3 of the tower will have to be replaced to support the weight of the proposed panel antennas. The proposed replacement will resemble the existing lattice portion that is proposed for removal (Condition 4). The clOsest dwellings (2), not located on the parcel under review, are located approximately 250 feet distant. The nearest telecommunications facility is approximately 2,500 feet east, on the slope of Newcomb Mountain. Although this site may offer co-location oppommities, the applicant has indicated that they will not functionally serve the existing void in the Route 250 West corridor. Planning and Zoning History._: The 3.4-acre site is the site of the Greenwood Motel, which was constructed prior to the adoption of the 1980 Zoning Ordinance and is therefore nonconforming. The owner conslzucted a sixty- five (65) foot television reception tower to accommodate the customers. Since then, the motel has subscribed to satellite service and no longer uses the existing reception tower. Comprehensive Plan: Planning Staff has worked with the applicant to determine alternative height or design improvements. The applicant has indicated that without the requested height of 65 total feet, their coverage of the subject section of the Route 250 West corridor would be minimal. Planning Staff has traditionally supported co-location for the siting of telecommunications facilities. This property is located in the Rural Areas of the Comprehensive Plan. The Plan discourages uses not related to bona fide agricultUre or forestry. Currently, the Comprehensive Plan contains limited review criteria for the siting of telecommunication towers. The Open Space Plan does provide some guidance for the protection of identified resources of the County. The only resource identified in the plan and potentially affected by this application is the Entrance Corridor. The Architectural Review Board [ARB] currently addresses the Entrance Corridor District. Critical slopes are unaffected by this proposal. Staff notes that in order to construct the proposed facility, no clearing for access and provision of electrical service will be required. The applicant has indicated that the "...intended purpose is to provide PCS [Personal Communications Service] along highway 250 from Interstate 64 to the 250 bypass at Charlottesville" (Attachment D). Route 250 West is designated as an Entrance Corridor. The tower site is only 220 feet from the Route 250 West right-of-way and is currently visible from the Entrance Corridor. The attachment to the existing lattice tower may actually decrease the visibility of the tower, as removal of the large, broad reception antenna is proposed (Condition 2). The ARB has reviewed the applicant's request and has found no conflict with this proposal (Attachment D). As a condition of ARB approval, Planning Staff has included a condition that the "antennas and supporting elements shall be painted to match the existing tower" (Condition 1). With regards to visibility, Planning Staff also finds no conflict as it is anticipated that visibility of the structure may actually decrease with the removal of the large television reception antenna. Staff opinion is that the use of the existing lattice tower for antenna location, with conditions, will not have any significant additional impact on the Entrance Corridor. Therefore, staff finds this proposal to not be contrary to the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the provisions of Section 10.2.2.6 of the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval with conditions. STAFF COMMENT: Staff will address the issues of this request in three sections: 2. 3. 4. Staff comments regarding the "Attachment on a Tower" concept; Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance; Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996; and, Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. Staff comments regarding the applicant's "Attachmem on a Tower" Concept. tall] on an existing lattice tower. Staff review is based on the applicant's proposal to locate two panel antennas [Approx. 6 feet Staff offers the following diagram to aid in the review of the Attachment Concept: 65' NOTE: ' 3 The Use of existing structures has generally been endorsed as a means to facilitate t_he provision of wireless service with minimal impact to the County. Attachment on existing structures has occurred "by-right" on some towers, buildings and water tanks. These attachments to existing conforming structures have not, in the opinion of staff, resulted in negative impacts. The proposed attachment to an existing television reception tower makes use of an existing toWer structure. While staff views existing television reception towers as having negative visual impacts in many instances, the placement of antennas on these towers does not result in significant additional negative impact as utilization of the existing towers maximizes the potential service area. The equipment installed by. the personal wireless service provider appears similar/compatible with the nature of the existing television reception tower. With a large number of these types of vacated towers located throughout the County, the total number of sites required by a personal wireless service provider can be reduced and, therefore, potentially reduce the overall impact on the County. Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Board of Supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder: Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the Board of Supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, Approval of this special use permit will permit the construction of two panel antennas at the top of the existing 65-foot tall television reception tower. The applicant is not requesting additional height above the top or the tower. As previously discussed, the applicant has provided a justification for the attachment of antennas as Attachment A. Staff opinion is that the additional two (2) panel antennas will result in a limited change in the appearance of the tower, because the total tower height will not be increased and the panel antennas will tend to appear as part of the existing tower features (insulators, connectors and wires). Staff's opinion is further reinforced by the applicant's proposal to remove the broad television reception antenna from the tower, thus reducing the overall visual appearance of the tower. Since the existing power pole is silver in appearance, staff has included conditions to ensure that the new attachment is painted a matching color (Condition 1). The matching silver color will aid in camouflaging the appearance. The applicant will provide more information regarding the method of camouflaging at the public heating. No new entrance onto Route 250 West will be required and no additional clearing will be necessary. The Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed this request and has determined that no new entrance upgrades are necessary. The existing Greenwood Motel entrance will serve the tower site. The supporting utilities structure [3'W x 5'L x 7'H], will be placed beside the lattice pole. The supporting utilities will be screened from the Route 250 West Overlay District by the existing motel. Therefore, staff opinion is that approval would not cause a substantial detriment to adjacent property. Additional information may be provided by the public during the public hearings on the issue of potential impacts. 4 that the character of the district will not be changed thereby, Based on the limited change in the visibility of this tower and the utility corridor, staff opinion is that this request will not affect the character of the district. and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, Staff has reviewed the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance as stated in Sections 1.4, 1.5 and 1.6 with particular reference to Sections 1.4, 1.4.4, and 1.5. All of these provisions address, in one form or another, the provision of public services. The use of mobile telephones provides a public service as evidenced by the expanded and rapid increase in use. Based on the provision of a public service, staff opinion is that this request is in harmony with the purpose and intent of these sections of the ordinance. Section 1.4.3 states as an intent of the Ordinance, "To facilitate the creation of a convenient, attractive and harmonious community". The provision of this facility does increase the availability and convenience for users of wireless phone technology. Staff in prior reviews for telecommunication facilities has noted that the visibility of the site may be inconsistent with the intent of providing an attractive community. As approval of this permit will result in limited change in the visibility from surrounding areas staff opinion is that this request does comply with this provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Ordinance. with the uses permitted by right in the district, The proposal will not restrict the current uses, other by right uses available on this site, or by right uses on any other property. with additional regulations provided in Section 5. 0 of this ordinance, Section 5.1.12 of the ordinance contains regulations governing tower facilities and no conditions are necessary to ensure compliance with this provision of the ordinance, as this is an existing facility. and with the public health, safety and general welfare. The provision of increased communication facilities may be considered consistent with the public health, safety and general welfare by providing increased communication services in the event of emergencies and increasing overall general communication services. The 1996 Telecommunications Act addresses issues of environmental effects with the following language: "No state or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent that such facilities comply with the Commission's regulations concerning such emissions". In order to operate this facility the applicant is required to meet the FCC guidelines for radio frequency emissions. This requirement will adequately protect the public health and safety. Section 704(a)(7)(b)(I)(II) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996. The regulation of the placement, construction and modification of perSonal Wireless facilities by any state or local government or instrumentality thereof shall not prohibit or have the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. Neither the Comprehensive Plan nor the Zoning Ordinance prohibits the provision of personal wireless service. Staff does not believe that the special use permit process, nor the denial of this application, has the effect of prohibiting the provision of personal wireless services. The applicant has not demonstrated that there are other locations within the proposed area of service currently available for new facility construction: For this reason, staff does not believe that denial of this application would have the effect of prohibiting the provision of services. Waiver of a site plan in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2 of the Zoning Ordinance. The Commission may waive the drawing of a site plan if requiring a site plan would not forward the purpose of the ordinance or otherwise serve the public interest. Generally the site review committee has endorsed the use of site plan waivers for the establishment of telecommunication facilities. This general endorsement is based on the relatively small area impacted by the proposed use and the ability to obtain the required information through an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and the building permits. In this case the construction of the facility will require activity only for the construction of the ground equipment, provision of a parking area (additional gravel) and adequate drainage. Based on the minimal activity necessary for the installation staff is unable to identify any purpose that would be served by requiring the submission of a site plan. Staff recommends approval of a full site plan waiver subject to the conditions listed under the recommended action. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors which are favorable to this request: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. The tower will provide increased wireless capacity, which may be considered consistent with the provisions of Sections 1.4, 1.4.4 and 1.5 of the Zoning Ordinance; Reuse of an existing tower; The use will not restrict permitted useS on adjacent properties; This request generally complies with the provisions of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance; The additional antennas, with the removal of the television reception antenna, will result in little change in the tower's visibility; and, Approval of this request allows for collocation on a structure and alleviates the need for the Construction of new facilities elsewhere. Staff has not identified factors which are unfavorable to this request. The following factor is relevant to this consideration: There is an existing reasonable use of the property; and, o The applicant has not demonstrated that there are other locations within the proposed area of service currently available for new facility construction. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff opinion is that the site will accommodate the proposed telecommunication facilities without any additional adverse impacts. Therefore, staff is able to recommend approval of this request. Should the Board choose to approve this request, staff has provided conditions of approval. (In the event that the Board chooses to deny this application staff offers the following comment: In order to comply with the provisions of the Telecommunication Act, staff request consensus direction from the Board regarding the basis for denial of the application and instruction to staff to remm to the Board with a written decision for the Board's consideration and action.) RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APROVAL: o o o The antennas and supporting elements shall be painted to match the existing tower; The vacated television reception antenna shall be removed; The attachment shall be limited to the total of two (2) panel antenna, whose height shall not exceed a maximum of 65 feet above ground level; Structural improvements to the tower shall be similar in design and appearance as the existing tower; Construction of the telecommunications attachment on the existing lattice tower shall be in general accord with the plan titled "CV 137 Lickinghole" attached to this report and initialed ELM 04/07/99 (Attachment C); The permittee shall submit a report to the zoning administrator once per year, by not later than July 1 of that year. The report shall identify each user of the tower and shall identify each user that is a wireless telecommunications service provider; The antenna on the tower shall be disassembled and removed from the site within ninety (90) days of the date its use for wireless telecommunications purposes is discontinued; and, Albemarle County Architectural Review Board issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness. Should the Planning Commission support a waiver of the requirements of a site plan the Planning Commission only must take the following action in order to authorize a site plan waiver. A waiver of the drawing of a site plan has been granted in accord with the provisions of Section 32.2.2. subject to the following conditions: 7 Approval of an erosion and sediment control plan prior to the issuance of a building permit if the area of disturbance exceeds 10,000 square feet; and, Provision of one parking space. ATTACHMENTS: A - Applicant's Application B - Location Map and Tax Map C - Tower and Site Information D - ARB Memo Dated 3/4/99 E - Topographic Map County of Albemarle Department of Building Code and Zoning Services Application for Special Use Permit IATTACHMENTAI *Existing Use (:,.,>,,.',',:'"/'t~.f Proposed Use *Zoning District ~>,q~.¢~r~fft fi~fL *Zoning Ordinance Section number requested I (*staff will assist you with these items) Number of acres to be covered by Special Use Permit .r a portion it .... t be Is this an amendment to an existing Special Use Permit? ~ Yes~ No Are you submitting a site development plan with this application'.' ~Yes3 No Contact Person/Whom shouia w~ eau,m,° concem,.g thi~ p~oject'?): ,~if~- ~<)'q&~W/ Daytime Phone ( 5~L/0 ) ~q~' '- /87'[ Fax fl f~0 I 'i ~]~ZI Z ~/0 E-mail Owner of land {as listed in the County's records): Address //~,~e?%"- /~ / ~ / · - ^ ~'C/<' /%-; DaytimePhone(gCC): 77,- Fax ~ E-mail Applicant CWho is thc contact person represent:ns7 Whois requesting the special use?i: C?/'~d-U /~/1'./': /fi'K?:, Address ,' ,' :, ,'. ..... ':'.--.'l'':'~O' I ' . - ,,,- / State i?o. Zip.?29gd?' :, Daytime Phone ()Zy~) ) q~,- /'~J?2;/ Fax# ..5"Z/O-?'Y-2'"2Z/O E-mail (f)'~k'k~fi.~.)(?~-~/.(i:,i,n ':Tax map and parcel 5'&' ~/Off Physical Address fifass;gned) : Location of property (I,mdmarks. :ntersect:ons. or ol~rI ~?~t'6~// ~}~ I le/u' .7 rr: ~;5..0,9,v~ ,'~'Z't-e'~5l('C? ' O,q 0(' ~0~ ~'~ Does the owner of this property own (or have any ownership tnteres~ iii) any abutting property? If yes, please list 'those tax map and parcel numbers .~,J (? OFFICE USE ONLY Fee amount $ :7 ~q0~t)~ History: ZI Special Use Permits: Date Paid Variances: Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? ~ Letter ¥~ Authorization ~.1 Yes 5.%-, e~,~4-- 5'-3a-Iq;7. 401 Mclntire Road .~. Charlottesville. VA 22902 -:- Voice: 296-5832 -1' Fax: 972-4126 JATTACHM ENT AJ Section 31.2.4.1 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance states that, "The board of supervisors hereby reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding bv the board of supervisors that such use will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be changed therebv and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general u :aze. The items which follow will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please complete this form and provide additional information which will assist the County in its review of your request. If you need assistance filling out these items, staff is available. What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property'? /~,k/z~CL.C . ,7'?~ ,~:,.{., , ~ ~*~.,~ '/r~y..~'~.' /' ~ ~ ,;- /~ ~:. , -~' / , How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district surrounding the property'? How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent oftheZoning Ordinance? ~/~;::' /( ~- :.'.',:~",,,~,," c"~5/:"~"" "' ~,,., ' ,~.~,.,.... .... .,',,..., ,.,..,..x. ~ .. ~x/~/~..~/ /1:,.;.3 ' ~z,l :,:.,,,. - ~d: /, .-,.,. ,./~/~"<< ~z~.".~ How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right ~n the district? ~.~:cZ,/. ~-, ...... i ct~.~,-.~ ..... '~7' ' / ..... '~' "" .....," ' ' -,,v ,..'./....', , , ,- ~, ' ' ' ....~ ..... 4-, ..... 'c., :: z~,'; : What additional regulations provided ~n Sccuon 5.0 ot thc Zonm_ Ordinance apply to this usc? How will this usc promote the public hcalti~, safely, and general welfare of thc community'? IATTACH MENT A De'scribe your request in detail and include all pertinent information such as the numbers of persons involved in the use. operating hours, and any unique features of the use: ~,z_5,~c..; .~.'/,, r'/, ,.5~ ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - provide two(2) copies of each: [~/ l. Recorded plat or boundary survey of thee property requested for the rezoning. If there is no recorded plat or boundm,-y survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number. Note: If you are requesting a special use permit only for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing. Ownership information - If ownership of the property is in the name of any type of legal entity or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or associauon, or in the name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to thc County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS: Drawings or conceptual plans, if any. Additional Information. if any. I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to-act on behalf of the owner in filing this application. I also certify that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. Signature Printed Name Date Daytime phone number of Signatory ALBEMARLE 4O GOUNTY IATTACHMENT ~1 5'5 ¸58 · "~' ............ WHITE HALL DISTRICT SECTION IRON PIN ~ INGRESS EGRESS EASEMENT , · ~ ~, Fo. CFW ~RELESS ~, . HEL~N H. LANG ~ .... ' ALBEMARLE COUNTY, ~RGINIA · '"~ :..-' · - ....... 4 LEASE PARCEL DERI~D FROM A RELD ""} .... SURLY AND DEEDS AND PLATS OF ~ ] Z~_P~L -~ ]~L .-- RECORD AS FOUND AMON~ TH~ LAND I ............ RECORDS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, I 2, O~ER EASEMENTS, IF ANY, NOT SHO~, DEED BOOK 365 AT PAGE 499 [ NO ~E REPORT ~RNISHED. DEED BOOK 261 AT PAGE 121 3, ~IS PARCEL IS NOT IN A DEED BOOK 1574 AT PAGE 126 ~ F.E,M,A. FLO~ HAZARD ~ ZONE "A" O~ "B" CU,~ I E~IUS I LEN~m I TANG~T I CH~O I SEARING DELTA CJ 25 00' 38.44' 24.18' 3~ 76' S 31'0673" W 88'05'1~" ..., " M N 18'22'30" E 19.57' ~ ...... ~ ~ N 00'22'56" W 20.00' 1 ~ N 89'37'04 E 20.00' I PA~U[NT ~ S 00'22'56" E 20,00' I ~ s ee'37'o4" w 20.00' ~ PIPE :'~t?--"~ U.S. ROUTE 250 ~- to 240 S 85'26'20" E ~ 138.54' ~ ~ l~t ~,~ SURVEY OF A LEASE PARCEL &: PHR&A 104-19-11 ALBEMARLE 4O 66 COUNTY IATTACHMENT B1 69 $8 5'7 94 95 L 92 ~4C WHITE HALL DISTRICT SECTION 56 MOUNTAIN 8 iT. 151 ~ CASTLE Heards Mtn. FT. BOAZ MOUNTAINS TO LOVINGSTON / IATTACHMENT BI ROCK TO RT 29 TOP TOM Cross Roads lin Bungletown / North Garden Alberene_ Esmon! ~ I 5 ALBEMARLE CFW WIRELESS VIRGINIA COUNTY LICKINGHOLE CV 137 LICKINGHOLE CV 137 [ cv ~s ~ VICINITY MAP NOT TO SCN..~ SITE LATITUDE: 38° 03' 04' N SITE LONGITUDE: 78° 40' 25' E INDEX: 0RAWING NO. TITLE 1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 !2 TITLE LOCATION ELEVATION SiTE PLAN SITE SPECIFICATIONS SITE SPECIFICATIONS STRUCTURAL OETAILS/ PAD STRUCTURAL DETAILS UTILITY &: GROUNDING DETAILS SPECIFICATIONS SPECIFICATIONS SPECIFICATIONS o /o APPROVED BY: DATE: NGINEER: DIRECTOR: CONTRACTOR: ; ) ) 65' 2- 7250,02 ANTENNAS AT 60' 2- 7220.14 ANTENNAS AT 270' NOTE: EXISTING 65' TOWER IATTACHMENT C I · "---SEE SABRE TOWER GROUND LEVEL DRA ~F/NOS ~l,~ ~.11~-'~' UCKINGHOLE cv~37 CFW J' Ig.._"ll ..... ELEVATION WIRELESS 2 - 6'x6' GATES ~ EASEMENT 20' X 20' COMPOUND GRAVELED AND FENCED 10'X10'X4" CONCRETE PAD INCOMING POWER ANO TELCO I' /w 2' CONDUIT FOR TELCO 5" CONOUIT FOR POWER ROUTINGTO BE DETERMINED IN FI[LO COAX TO ANTENNAS~ EXISTING 65' SELF SUPPORTING TOWER 2' CONDUIT FOR :CONDUIT FOR AC CONDUII FOR DC x x x x x x EXISTING BUILDING i ~wg By: MSF' 9EC]ION 02920 - TOPSOIL PART I - GENEDAL SUMMARY A. MINIMUM ]~IICKNESS IS SIX (6) NCHES~ FOR AU- AREAS DISTURBED OURING CONSI~UC1]ON AND NOT RECEIVING O~ER SURFACE I~REATMENT. PART 2 - PROOUCTS MA]~RIALS A. TOPSOI~ F[R11LE. FRIABLE. NA'DJRAL LOAM FREE OF SUBSOIL CLAY LUMPS. ]BRUSH, STONES. OR OTHER DELETERIOUS MATERIALS LARGER THAN ~ (21 INCHES IN GREATEST DIMENSION. 8. iTIS 'l~E INTEN~ON TOALLOW THECONTRACTOR TOU~MZEO~-SITE TOPSOIL FORAU. T0~SOIL REQUIREMENTS, RART5 -EXECUTION 5.1 STOCKPIUNG SECI~0N 02950 SEEDING PART 1 - GENERAL 1.1 SUMMARY PART 3 - EXECU]ION 5.1 PREPARA]ION OF TOPSOIL A. MIX FERTIUZER iNTO TOP 2 INCHES OF TOPSOIL ~,T A RATE OF 50 LBS PER 1000 SQUARE FEE~ 8. WATER 0RY TOPSOIL TO 0EPTH OF · INCHES AT LEAST 48 HOURS PRIOR [O SEEDING TO OBTAR~ A LOOSE FRIABLE SEED BED. 3.2 SEE01NG A. SOW HALF THE SERO WITH MECHANICAL SEEDER. SOW REMAINING HALF OF SEED AT RIGHT ANGLES TO RRST SEEDING PATTERN. USING THE SAME METHOD. APPLY SEED AT $ LBS. PER 1000 SQUARE FEET. B, COVER SEED TO A 0EP~H OF 1/8 INCH BY RAKING. HARROWING OR CULTIpACKINO. ROI_I. SEEOED AREA WITH ROLLER WEiGHiNG NO MORE THAN 150 LBS. PER FOOT OF ROLLER WIDTH. C. WATER SEEDED AREAS TO A DEPTH OF FOUR (6) INCHES. 5.3 PROTECllON IMMEDIATELY AF'~J~ SEEDING AND SODDING. ERECT BARRICADES AND WARNINGS TO PROTECT SEEDED AREAS FROM MSF FOUNOA~ON AND PAD ~. DO NOr US~ FROZEN UA'IT. RIALS C~IT~NINO I~ 0~ SNOW. 2. 00 (NON-SECURE CHAIN LINK FENCE DETAIL POST 1-1/2 PAIR INOUSTRIAL DOUBLE SWING GATE NO SCALE ANTENNA TYPE 72§0.02 I 7220.14 I ......... .. AZIMUTH 60' J BOWNTILT=O' AZh'..~UT'I 270' ! :":7'-,'.'4TILT=O' j AZ!"-i;';-~ j DC, W~I'I~L,~ - .... ~'ROMyTO COAX LENGTH (FT)'" "--~AX -- LNGGt (i-l)' COAX I ~;:NGrri (~1)' CABLE CABLE CABLE SIZE Rx/'rx RX SIZE RX/TX RX SIZE RX/TX RX ANTENNA TO PRIMARY RADIO 7/8" 80' 80' 7/8" 80' 80' CABINET ESI~MATED LENGTHS FROM AVAILABLE INFORMATION. FIELD ENGINEER TO UPDATE ON AS-BUILT ORAIMNGS. PRO'viDE MECHANICAL OOWNTILT BRACKET. SECTION THROUGH TOWER YARD ANTENNA LINE SCHEDULE QUNDERGROUNO CONDUIT ()FENCE GROUNDING DETAIL COPPER-CLAD STEEL GROUND ROD (SER~ACE POLE COPPER-CLAD STEEL GROUND ROD INSTALLATION FOR INSPECTION WELL QGROUNDING SYSTEM - SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM Oaf e: Albemarle County Development Departments SPIN Submission and Comments S P-1999-014 [ATTACHI~IENT D CV137 Lickinghole Architectural Review Board preliminary ARB review revision 1 reviewer received reviewed decision Margaret Pickart 3/4/99 3/4/99 approved with conditions The Albemarle County Architectural Review Board, at its meeting on March 1 1999, reviewed the above- noted request to install two antennas on an existing tower facility. The Board unanimously granted staff administrative approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness, subject to the following condition: 1. Antennas and supporting elements shall be painted to match the existing tower. Please indicate in wdting that the antennas and all associated equipment that will be visible from the Entrance Corridor will be painted to match the existing structure. 4/6/99 08:44 AM Page I of 1 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Dept. of Planning & Community Development 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5823 April 29, 1999 Charles J. Kieler 6551 Loisdale Court Suite 900 Springfield, VA 22150 RE: ZMA-98-24 Grayrock North, Tax Map 55, Parcel 65 Dear Mr. Kieler: The Albemarle County Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 27, 1999, 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 attached application plan which limits development of the property. Please be advised that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors will review this petition and receive public comment at their meeting on May 19, 1999. Any new or additional information regarding your application must be submitted to the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at least seven days prior to your scheduled heating date. If you should have any questions or comments regarding the above noted action, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, Eric L. Mordsette Planner ELM/jcf Cc~ Ella Carey Robert & Ann Savage Amelia McCulley Jack Kelsey RECEIVE FEB C 'c u~ Planning De D VICINITY MAP LAND USE SUHHARY STAFF PERSON: PLANNING COMMISSION: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Eric L. Morrisette April 27, 1999 May 19, 1999 ZMA 98-24 Grayrock North Applicant's Proposal: In accord with Proffer Four of ZMA 97-12 Grayrock, the applicant proposes to amend a portion (21 acres) of an approved PRD [Planned Residential Development] to reduce development potential from 70 townhouse units to.27 single-family detached dwellings. The proposed lot sizes average approximately ¼ acre. Approximately 11 acres is proposed for Open Space. Petition: Petition to amend a portion (21 acres) of an approved PRD to reduce development potential from 70 townhouse units to 27 single-family detached dwellings (Attachment B). Property, described as Tax Map 55, parcels 65 (part) & 65A (part) is located in the White Hall Magisterial District on Rte. 684 west and adjacent to Orchard Acres subdivision (Attachment A). This property is situated in the Crozet Community of the Comprehensive Plan and recommended for Neighborhood Residential Use (3-6 dwellings/acre). Character of the Area: The area surrounding the property is largely undeveloped and rural. In this part of Crozet, State Route 684 is a two-lane road, which has houses situated sparsely on either side. Adjacent to the east is the Orchard Acres Subdivision. Adjacent to the south is the residue of the Gray Rock Orchard, which was recently rezoned for 127 single-family detached dwellings [ZMA 97-12]. Property to the north and northwest is comprised of four residential lots zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property to the north, across Route 684, is comprised of a narrow strip of undeveloped land also zoned RA, Rural Area. Adjacent property owners to the east, which contains a portion of the dam, cannot be identified through title search. The applicant's council has advised that, should a situation necessitate any dam maintenance, a prescriptive easement could be obtained. Although a prescriptive easement could be obtained for existing conditions, such an easement would not allow for the establishment of any future improvements. Therefore, the walking trails or any other recreational facility cannot be established along the easternmost dam and are not included with this proposal. A summarization by the Chief of Zoning Administration is attached as Attachment D. The site is currently a cleared field formerly associated with an orchard. Except for the areas around the lakes, slopes are flat to moderate with slopes of less than ten [10%] percent predominating. The entrance for the proposed development is located on the western side and directly off of State Route 684 [Lanetown Road]. This site has approximately 350 feet of frontage along Route 684. A branch of Powell Creek flows through the property, in which it has been dammed and two ponds created. No buildings exist on site. RECOMMENDATION: Staff has reviewed this request for compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval. Planning and Zoning History: In November, 1978, 17.5 acres of the entire 74 acre tract were zoned from A-1 Agriculture to RS-1 Residential Suburban (ZMA 78-18 Walter H. Withers Jr.). Following the rezoning, Foothill Village Preliminary Plat (14 lots) was approved but final plat was never pursued. In July, 1979, the entire 74 acre tract (including the RS-1 area) was rezoned to RPN/RS-1 for development of 47 lots. In 1985, the County reviewed ZMA 85-29 Grayrock which proposed 294 townhouse units to be developed under a planned development approach. The orchard area south of the lakes was being replanted and staff commented that "the applicant intends to permit the orchard to mature before development of that area, (if at all), therefore, staff would anticipate about 70 units by 1990." Later in the report staff stated that "initial development would involve [the northern area] being served by Route 684 [Lanetown Road]. Timing of development beyond these phases would depend on the commercial success of the replanted apple orchard." Given this background, as well as developmental concerns addressed in the following section of the staff report, the area subject to the current rezoning [north of the lakes] was approved for 70 townhouse units, while the area south of the lakes remained under the prior plan allowing 37 single-family detached dwellings. The Board of Supervisors approved the applicant's request to rezone the southern portion of the site [53 acres] to allow for construction of 127 single family detached dwellings on August 19, 1998. Construction of the development has not occurred as of the date of this report. The development will be served by public roads accessing from Route 691 [Jarmans Gap Road] and will contain areas of open space around the two ponds. This petition was accompanied by multiple proffers addressing development issues (Attachment E: ZMA 97-12 Applicant's proffers and Conceptual Plan). Relevant to this review, Proffer Four binds the applicant to submit a request for rezoning the northern tract to reduce the permitted density from 70 townhouse units to a maximum of 27 single-family, detached units. The only conditions were that the "Applicant shall submit such rezoning request within six [6] months of the approval of ZMA 97-12" and that the "Applicant shall diligently pursue the rezoning request". Staff finds the applicant to be in compliance with these agreements- 2 Comprehensive Plan: Issues related to the policies, principles, objectives, and standards of the Comprehensive Plan are presented in two parts: 1) 2) Density recommended for the site over the several Comprehensive Plan amendments; and, Recommendations of the 1995 Crozet Community Study. Density: This property is located on the boundary of the Community of Crozet development area. At the time of review of this property, under the prior zoning petition in 1985, the comprehensive plan recommended a low density designation from 1 - 4 dwellings per acre. The subsequent 1989 Comprehensive Plan retained the recommended low density range. The 1996 Land Use Plan recommends this property for Neighborhood Density with a density range from 3 - 6 dwelling units per acre. Based on the objectives of the current Comprehensive Plan, the proposed rezoning represents too low of a density. Attachment F is a discussion of Residential Land Use designations with pertinent staff comment. Staff notes that "infill" development strategies and standards remain under development and, therefore, strict adherence to "minimum" density proposals of the Comprehensive Plan may not be appropriate at this time. Crozet Community Study: At a proposed density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre, the rezoning is consistent with the density recommendations [Low Density Residential] of the Crozet Community Study. The Crozet Community Study was prepared by a Board-appointed 13 member committee and has been incorporated into the June, 1996 Land Use Plan as a guideline for review. A majority of the review guidelines in the study such as impact on schools, public water and sewer, solid waste, and roads are considered to be a null consideration by staff as this proposal seeks to "downzone" the property and thereby reducing potential impact. Additionally, staff has not reviewed this rezoning request for the fiscal development impact on public facilities, because of reducing the potential impact. Improvements to Route 684 are not in VDOT's Six Year Secondary Plan. Residential Development Goal Statement: Develop Residential Neighborhoods that preserve the rural environment, provide a variety of housing types and price ranges, are developed at a human scale, and provide internalized amenities. Objectives: Employ innovative housing design and site planning techniques in housing development that minimize the amount of impervious surfaces. Comment: In subdivision design, homes, driveways, and roads generally represent impervious coverage. This proposal retains a 25 foot minimum building setback. Generally, residential developers seek to reduce roadway length/cross-section and associated costs. The original Conceptual Plan adopted with the approval of ZMA 97-12, depicted a road aligxnnent in general accord with this proposal. As a departure from the approved Conceptual Plan of ZMA 97-12, Planning Staff has worked with the applicant to decrease the overall length of the road by approximately 50 feet. Staff has also worked with the applicant to align the proposed roadway to abut the properties to the north, therefore accommodating access to any future development. The applicant will be constructing an emergency access road that connects the northern and southern portions of Grayrock, which will be gated. Provide Open Space and natural protection features. Comment: Approximately 50% of the subject parcel [11.1 acres] is designated for common open space. Although critical slopes are viewed as a natural resource in the Comprehensive Plan, only fi small portion of the site contains critical slopes. These areas of critical slope are primarily located along the ponds/dams. Three proposed parcels contain some critical slopes, but the approval of the final subdivision plat [to be submitted at a later date] will insure that disturbance of these slopes will not occur. It is also anticipated that the character of the slopes will be altered with the installation of the sewer line. Public utilities are exempt from Albemarle County's critical slope provisions. Provide neighborhood activity centers within convenient walking distance to new housing. Comment: The applicant is proposing to construct an extensive network of pedestrian paths throughout the areas of open space. Besides the emergency access road, the pedestrian paths will physically connect the southern portion of Grayrock with the northern portion. The proposed trail system will not connect across the easternmost dam. Adjacent property owners to the east, in which a portion of the dam consists of, cannot be identified through title search. The applicant's council has advised staff that, should a situation necessitate any dam maintenance, a prescriptive easement could be obtained. Although a prescriptive easement could be obtained for existing conditions, such an easement would not allow for the establishment of any future improvements. Therefore, the walking trails or any other recreational facility cannot be established along the easternmost dam. Staff has requested that the applicant provide sidewalks along the proposed road system in an effort to provide safe and convenient access for pedestrians and to compliment the rural road cross-section design, with sidewalks, of the southern portion of Grayrock. Since Section 14- 400.L of the Subdivision Ordinance requires construction of sidewalks only when the proposed density is two (2) or more dwelling units per acre, the applicant has elected to not construct an urban cross-section with sidewalks. The proposed road system will be of a rural cross-section as a result of the 1.29 dwelling units per acre density. Section 8.5.4 of The Zoning Ordinance Section 8.5.4 of the zoning ordinance contains the review requirements for planned developments. Staff will provide comment on each provision. 8.5.4 PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD OF SUPER VISORS At such time as f~rther conferences appear unnecessary, or at any time on request of the applicant, the commission shall proceed to prepare its recommendations to the board of supervisors. The date of the commission's determination to proceed, or of the applicant's request for preparation of recommendations, shah be deemed the formal date of submission of the application. Specifically, recommendations of the commission shah include findings as to: The suitability of the tract for the general type of PD district proposed in terms of' relation to the comprehensive plan; physical characteristics of the lan& and its relation to surrounding area; Comment: Staff has previously commented that this proposal is inconsistent with the intent,, of the Comprehensive Plan. The proposed density of 1.29 dwelling units per acre is not in accord with the recommended Neighborhood Density of 3 - 6 dwelling units per acre. Although this proposal is conflicting with the density goals, this application satisfies Proffer Four of ZMA 97-12 Grayrock: Additionally, the proposed density is consistent with the recommended Low Density Residential in the Crozet Community Study. As previously discussed, the physical characteristics of the land present no significant issues in the development of the property. It is staff opinion that obligation to Proffer Four of ZMA 97-12 supercedes the recommendations of the Comprehensive Plan, as the issue of density was an earlier consideration of the Board. b. Relation to major roads, utilities, public facilities and services; Comment: The Virginia Department of Transportation has reviewed and commented on this request [Attachment G]. Based on the comments of VDOT, the existing transportation infrastructure can accommodate the proposed development. The only comment in dispute is Comment #8, which calls for Lots 27, 22, 21, and 17 to be accessed from the minor streets rather than the primary street. Staff finds VDOT's comment to be a standard comment and finds the comment to be justified in an effort to minimize entrances on the primary road. The applicant wishes to reserve the right for lots 21 and 22 to have either access on the primary road or the minor roads. It is staff s intention to require Lots 27, 22, 21, and 17 take access off of the minor roads [shorter cul-de-sacs] at the time of final subdivision plat approval. The Board may wish to have further discussion at this time regarding 5 these details. The property is currently in the jurisdictional area for water and sewer and the applicant will have to submit water and sewer plans and information to the Service Authority during final plat review. The applicant proposes use of public water and sewer. Adequate water supply and sewage capacity is available in the system to accommodate the proposed lots. Staff opinion is that this application is consistent with this provision. c. Adequacy of evidence on unified control and suitability of any proposed agreements, contracts, deed restrictions, sureties, dedications, contributions, guarantees, or other instruments, or the need for such instruments or for amendments in those propose& and Comment: The applicant has met this requirement. The parcel is under a single ownership. d. Specific modifications in PD or general regulations as applied to the particular case, based on determination that such modifications are necessary or justified by demonstration that the public purposes of PD or general regulations as applied would be satisfied to at least an equivalent degree by such modifications. Comment: No modifications are being requested. Based on such findings, the commission shall recommend,approval of the PD amendment as proposed, approval conditioned upon stipulated modifications, or disapproval. Comment: Staff opinion is that the applicant's proposal is consistent with the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Although inconsistent with the Comprehensive Plan, this development is consistent with the Crozet Community Study. The inconsistency with the Comprehensive Plan is, in the opinion of staff, superceded by the applicant's obligation to fulfill Proffer Four of ZMA 97-12 Grayrock. Staff has not identified any conditions, amendments or modifications, which should be applied to this application. SUMMARY: Staff has identified the following factors, which are favorable to this petition: 1. This request satisfies requirements for Proffer Four of ZMA 97-12 Grayrock; 2. The proposed density is consistent with the recommendations of the Crozet Community Study and viewed as compatible to surrounding development; 3. The proposal substantially complies with the General Land Use Standards for Designated Development Areas of the Comprehensive Plan; 4. The proposal satisfies concerns of the Crozet Community Study that supportinginfrastmcmre be in place or planned before development approval; and, 5. Traffic Generated from the development would not create the need for a more extensive road improvement than what currently exists. Staff has identified the following factors, which are unfavorable to this petition: The proposed density is too low under the guidelines setforth by Land Use Designations: Residential Land Use of the Comprehensive Plan for areas designed as Neighborhood Density; 2. The issue of access to lots 27, 22, 21, and 17 remain unresolved, however, this matter is subject to the Subdivision Ordinance; 3. This development does not provide for a rural road cross-section, with sidewalks, to compliment such development in the southern portion of Grayrock; and, 4. The development does not provide for alternative dwelling unit types as outlined in the Specific Standards for Residential Land Uses of the Comprehensive Plan (Attachment F). RECOMMENDED ACTION: Based on the analysis of this project for compliance with Section 8.5.4 and review of the Comprehensive Plan staff recommends approval of this request. The application plan, which is attached to this report, limits the development of the property and, therefore, no other proffers or agreements are recommended by staff. ATTACHMENTS: A - Tax Map and Location Map B - Applicant's Petition for Rezoning C - Application Plan D - Chief of Zoning Administration Letter Dated March 24, 1999 E - ZMA 97-12 Proffers and Conceptual Plan F - Residential Land Use Designation of the Comprehensive Plan with Staff Comment G -VDOT's Memo Dated February 09, 1999 ALBEMARLE 39 COUN'I, IATTACHMENT Al 44 ZMA 97-12 Fried (Grayrock) 9 ./ / ~ / eo / I SG 71 SAMUEL MILLER AND WHITE HALL DISTRIGTS -____, - - - ',- SECTION 55 ZMA 97.12 Fried (Grayrock) L~ 0 .,; - C- CASTLE BOAZ MOUNTAIN \ \ Date Application for Zoning Map Amendmen Project Name (how should we refer to this application?) Gg~yrock North *Existing Zoning PRD Proposed Zoning PRo (*staff will a~ssist you with this item) Number of acres to be rezoned (ifa portion it must be d~lineated on plat) APproximately 20.9h Is this an amendment to an e,xisting Planned District? ~ Yes I~ No Is this an amendment to existing proffers? · Yes o No Are you submitting a preliminary site development plan with this application? ~ Yes a No Are you submitting a preliminary subdivision plat with this application? ~ yes m No Are you proffering a plan with this application? c~ Yes ~ No Contact Person (who should we call/wrRz concerning this project?): Charles J. Kieler Address 6551 Loisdale Court, Suite 900 Ci~ Springfield State VA .Zip 22150 Daytime Phone ( 800 ) 250-3390 · Fax# (703~ 922-7070 E×l~. 707 E-m~l' Owner of land (~ .,~ iu ,e co=¥s ~): Address 2332 N.W. ll9th Street Daytime Phone ( . ) Robert S. Fax# · and Ann S. Savage CityOklahoma City Stat~ E-mail OK Zip 73120 ApplicRnt6v~oi,U~cou~tpmonr~pr~nuug?Whoisr~qu~sansm~r~-zouing?): Fried Companies. Inc. ~,ddress 6551 T.n~gdal~ Court. SuPra go0 CitySpr~ngf~eld Stat~ VA Daytime Phone ( 800 ) ~50-33'90 Fax# (70}) 9.22-7070 E-mail Zip 22~50 Tax map and parcel Albemarle County Tax Map 55~ Parcels 65 & 65A (Portion) Physical Address (if assigned) Location of property (landmarks, intersectious, orother) Aoproximately 1.3 miles west of Crozet, Virginia on south side of Lanetown Road Does ~eownerof~ispropertyown(orhaveanyownershipinterestin)anyabu~ingpropemy? ~yes, ple~elist~osetax map andp~celnumbe~ Yes, approximately 53 acres within the 74 acre tract that comprise Tax Map 55, Parcels 65 & 65A. The subject parcel is also depicted on Application Plan for ZMA-84-29 OFFICE USE ONLY d~.~.[, a~-Check#~,.~..~(.) ReCeipt# /(~,~'0 .._By: ~,-)~'~ Fee amount $ Histo% (Under 50 Acres = $815 O Special Use Permits: Date Paid 50 acres or more = $1,255 Minor amendment to previous re~laest~,~ $175~ O ZMAs arid Proffers: o ~2 Yes O No O Variances: Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? 401 McIntire Road .:. Charlottesville, VA 22902 -:o Voice: 296-5832 -:' Fax: 972-4126 . "1 Section 'l 5. I.- 4~0 Of the Code of Virginia states that, "Zoning ordinances and districts shall be drawn and applied With reasonable consideration for the existing use and character of the property, the comprehensive plan, the suitability of property for various uses, the trends of growth or. change, the current and future requirements of the community as to land for various purposes as determined by population and economic studies and other studies, the transportation requirements of the community, the requirements for airports, housing, schools, ~parks, playgrounds, recreation areas and other public services, the conservation of natural resources, the preservation of flood plains, the preservation of agricultural and forestal land, the conservation of properties and their values, and the encouragement of the most appropriate use of landthroughout the county or municipality." These are the items which will be reviewed by the staff in their analysis of your request. Please provide any additional information you feel is necessary to assist the County in its review of your request. If you need assistance f'flling out these' items, staff is available. What is the Comprehensive Plan designation for this property? Growth Area; Urban Density Residential What public need or benefit does this rezoning serve? The App] ~cmnt' s proposed development will further the Comprehensive Plan's policy toward infill development and will contribute to the variety of housing types within the Growth Areas. Are public water, sewer, and roads available to serve this site? Will there be any impact on these facilities? Ade qua t e public water, sewer and transportation improvements serve the property. (See attached Justification Statement for statement on. impacts.) ~hat impact will there be on the Count's natural, scenic, and historic resources? The pr opo s ed r e zoning wil 1 have no negative impact on the COunty's natural, scenic and historic resources. ~PTI~NAL:D~y~uhavep~anst~deve~pthepr~penyiftherez~ningisappr~vea?If~p~e~edesc~: The applicant intends to develop the property for twenty-seven (27) single family dwelling lots. It is anticipated that the lots will be sold to local builders, subject to architectural guidelines and common area maintenance covenants. If you vffould like to proffer any restrictions on the development of the property, please list these proffers on the following optional attachment entitled, "PROFFER FORM". Proffers are v_o3mla~ offers to use property in a more restrictive way than the overall zoning district classification would allow. By State Code, proffers must have a reasonable relationship to the rezoning and are not mandatory. The rezoning must give rise to the need for the proffers; the proffers must be related to the physical development or physical operation of the property; and the proffers must be in conformity with the Comprehensive Plan. 2 Describe your request in detail including why you are req. U~$ting .this p .a~ticular zoning district? See attacl~ed Back~round and Justification ATTACHMENTS REQUIRED - Provide two(2) copies of each: Recorded plat or boundary survey of the property requested for the rezoning. If there is no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed Book and page number or Plat Book and page number. Note: If you are requesting a rezoning for a portion of the property, it needs to be described or delineated on a copy of the plat or surveyed drawing. Ownership information - ff ownership of the property is in the name.of any type of legal enaty or organization including, but not limited to, the name of a corporation, partnership or association, or in the' name of a trust, or in a fictitious name, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted certifying that the person signing below has the authority to do so. If the applicant is a contract purchaser, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted containing the owner's written consent to the application. If the applicant is the agent of the owner, a document acceptable to the County must be submitted that is evidence of the existence and scope of the agency. OPTIONAL ATTACHMENTS: 3. 4. 5. Drawings or conceptual plans, if any. Proffer Form signed by the owner(s). Additional Information, if any. I hereby certify that I own the subject property, or have the legal power to act on behalf of the owner in filing this ~' ' I also ~.rti7 ..~rmation provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge. ~~ 6/' Signature Date Charles J. Kieler ~800) 250-3390 Pdnted Name . Daytime phone number of Signatory 3 REZONING APPLICATION FI~IF, D COMPANIES, INC. TAX MAP 55, PARCELS (;5 AND 65A (PORTION) IATTACH M ENT B! Description of Request The Applicant is seeking modification of the existing PRD district classification for a 20.94 acre parcel of land on the Community of Crozet. The property is owned by Robert S., and Ann S. Savage and is under.contract to purchase by the applicant, Fried Companies, Inc. The existing zoning allows for seventy (70) townhouses, pursuant to the Application Plan approved with ZMA-84-29. The Applicant wishes to reduce the density to twenty-seven (27) single family detached units. The Property, which is the subject of this application, is part of a 74 acre tract now owned by the Savages and known as Grayrock Farm. The subject 20.94 acre portion of the 74 acre tract was zoned PRD in 1984, (ZMA-84-29). The southern 53.02 acre parcel was zoned K-4 in 1998 (ZMA-97-12). As part of ZMA-84-29, the permitted density for the subject tract was set at seventy (70) townhouse dwelling units. Attached is a conceptual plan depicting the Applicant's current plan for subdividing the property. Lanetown Road forms the northern boundary of the property. To the east is the existing subdivision, Orchard Acres. Two large ponds (approximately 5 acres each) are located on the 74 acre tract and separate the southern, ZMA-97-12 approved development from the subject parcel. It is the intention of the Applicant to retain these ponds in their natural state as open space amenities for the proposed development. The property is located within the designated growth area of the County. The Comprehensive Plan recommends an urban density for the area (minimum 6 DU/AC). Since the 1984 rezoning, the property has been added within the Albemarle Service Authority's jurisdictional boundaries. A main sewer line runs along a portion of the eastern boundary of the property. A 12" water main is located along Jarman Gap Road. II. Justification. A. Growth Areas. and Comprehensive Plan Objectives. The Applicant's proposal is justified because it is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan. The property is located within a Designated Growth Area. While the Land Use Map for the Community of Crozet (Map G) recommends for this property a higher gross density than is contemplated by the Applicant's proposal, the proposal is actually in-line with the Crozet Community Study's recommendations. (See Map N, page 42, Crozet Community Study). /The Crozet Community Study was prepared under the direction of a citizen committee representing the Crozet community. As it was adopted by the Board of Supervisors, the Crozet Community Study has become a component of the Comprehensive Plan. The Applicant's IATTACHMENT BJ proposal is consistent with the Study's recommendations for low residential development density (1 to 4 dwellings per acre). The Applicant's proposal for this property is more consistent with neighboring development and permitted uses than the Urban. Density suggested by the Land Use Map. The density for the property provides a logical transition between the R-6 permitted density on the Bargamin tract to the east of the property, and the R-I density found in the existing subdivision oflarman Gap Estates, to the west. B. Infill Development. The proposal is justified because it implements another of the Comprehensive Plan's goals: "to provide a variety of land uses, with emphasis on infill development". The effect of this change in zoning will be to: i) increase the stock of affordable housing for the County, and ii) contribute to the reduction of sprawl. The Applicant's intended dev~elopment would reduce the supply of housing attributable to this tract of land from seventy (70) townhouses to twenty-seven (27) single family homes. This means twenty-seven (27) families whose housing may be accommodated without expanding the Growth Areas of the County. The Applicant's intended development is a more efficient use of the County's inventory of residential land to satisfy future growth, while remaining in harmony with surrounding existing and planned land uses. Therefore, the Applicant's proposal is supportive of the Comprehensive Plan's policy toward infill. C. Public Facilities. The property will be served by public facilities sufficient to sustain the Applicant's intended development. The property has access to public water and sewer. Water service capacity is adequate to provide fire protection. Other utilities such as electricity and telephone are readily available to the property. The Applicant's proposal will not pose an undue burden on current levels of police crime protection. According to Chief John Miller, the recent opening of a County police satellite station in Crozet was in response to the Comprehensive Plan's recommendation for improvements to reduce police response times. The added number of families associated with the proposed development may be accommodated under existing police staffing and Sector B coverage. Access to the property will be off Lanetown Road (State Route 684). Traffic studies demonstrate that existing road improvements, including Lanetown Road can accommodate the proposed development. The existing public schools will be able to accommodate students attributable to the proposed project. According to figures provided by A1 Reeser of the Albemarle County Schools, with the completion of the new Monticello High School, both Brownsville Elementary and Western Albemarle High School should have sufficient capacity to accommodate the projected increase. The seven additional classrooms and the recent school redistricting also should accom~hodate additional students attending Henley Middle School. - III. Conclusion: The Applicant's proposal is consistent with the general goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan: to discourage development in the Kural Areas and to encourage a variety of land uses and infill development in the Growth Areas. At the same time, the proposal is in keeping with the Crozet community's vision, as set tbrth in the Crozet Community Study. Adequate public facilities are available to accommodate the projected build-out. For the foregoing reasons, the Applicant respectfully requests approval of its request. RECEIVE FEB "~: ,~ Planning De 3t. ViCI{ii [,Y HAP LAND USE SUNHARY Building Code Information (804) 296-5832 COUNTY OF ALBEMA~I F Department of Building Code and Zoning Services 401 Mclntire Road, Room 223 Charlottesville, Virginia 229024596 FAX (804) 9724126 'FFD (804) 972-4012 I ATTACHHENT D I Zoning Information (8O4) 296.5875 MEMORANDUM TO: Eric Morrisette, Planner FROM: Jan Sprinkle, Chief of Z__oning Administration DATE: March 24, 1999 RE: Grayrock North and South After meeting this morning with Amelia McCulley and Greg Kampmer, I have information that will effect your letter of March 17, 1999 to Charles J. Kieler. Since there is an area for which the ownership is unknown on both the Application Plan for Grayrock North (ZMA 98-24) and the proffered Conceptual Plan for Grayrock South (ZMA 97-12), those areas are not technically part of the rezonings. The rezoning for the South was based on tax map 55, parcels 65 and 65A only. The area of unknown ownership is. not subject to the rezoning or to the proffers. Therefore, the applicant does not have to revise the plan to eliminate the facilities which were not subject to the rezoning. Please place a copy of this memorandum in the file, ZMA 97-12 so that future interested parties will have access to this decision. Regarding your current review of ZMA 98-24, please have the applicant revise the plan to show only those improvements which will be on the parcels subject to the rezoning. A prescriptive easement over the dam shown on the area of unknown ownership will insure that the dam can be properly maintained. It is my understanding that counsel for the applicant is going to supply the Countywith a letter stating that a prescriptive easement exists or can be obtained. IATTACHPIENT E[ PROFFER STATEMENT FRIED COMPANIES, INC. REZONING APPLICATION: #ZMA-97-12 February 18, 1998 Revised August 11, 1998 FRIED COMPANIES, INC. (the "Applicant") is the contract purchaser, and ROBERT S. SAVAGE and ANNS. SAVAGE are the fee simple owners of that certain property described in rezoning application #ZMA-97-12 as a portion of Tax Map Reference 55, Parcels 65 and 65A. The property subject to the rezoning application is only the 53.02 acres of the total 74 acres contained in Tax Map Parcels 55- 65 and 65A, and at the time of the ~ing of the application was zoned PRD under ZMA-84-29, also referred to as larman Gap Estates II, PRD (the "Property"). The Applicant, Robert S., and Ann S. Savage hereby voluntarily proffer that if the Property is rezoned by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County (the "Board") to the R4 Residential District ("R4"), development of the Property shall be in accordance with the following proffers pursuant to Section 15.2-2298 of the 1950 COde of Virginia, as amended (the "Code"), and applicable portions of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance (the "Ordinance"). If Applicant's Rezoning Application is denied, these proffers shall immediately be null and void and of no further force or effect. All of these proffers are offered voluntarily pursuant to the Ordinance and relevant sections of the Code. The proffers herein shall not be interpreted to authorize any person to apply lesser standards than those contained in any: (i) state statutory, regulatory or code minimum standards, or (ii) County ordinance or regulation, including the Ordinance. These proffers shall supersede all other proffers made prior to this date, including those proffers made by Applicant in ZMA-84-29, but only to the extent that such prior proffers affect the Property. I. DENSITY No more than 127 single family, detached dwellings will be constructed on the Property. II. ROAD IMPROVEMENTS 2.1 Dedication. As a condition of plat approval for the first section of the subdivision, Applicant shall dedicate along the entire southern boundary of the Property, an area of land for widening State Route 691 (Jarmans Gap Road) not to exceed 30' to the centerline of the existing pavement. Applicant shall grant easements for temporary construction of improvements to State Route 691, as needed. ' I 2.2 Road Improvements. Access shall be restricted to an internal public road network to be designed and constructed in accordance with the Virginia Department of Transportation Subdivision Street Standards in effect at the time of subdivision plat approval. As a condition of plat approval for the first section of the subdivision, Applicant shall construct as a single improvement, a 100 foot right mm lane and 100 foot taper for westbound right turn movement into the Property on State Route 691. As a condition of plat approval for the section of the subdivision containing proposed Lots 67 and 68, and until such time as the property subject to ZMA-84-29 ("Northern Tract") is developed, Applicant shall provide an emergency access easement to State Route 691 in the area between Lots 67 and 68 shown on the attached Conceptual Plan dated May 28, 1998 prepared by Dewberry & Davis (the "Conceptual Plan"). At such time as the Northern Tract is developed, Applicant, or the developer of the Northern Tract will provide a gated access (gravel drive) for emergency vehicles through the Northern Tract to State Route 684. 2.3 Disposition of Dedicated Property_. In the event any of the property dedicated pursuant to proffer 2.1 is not used for the purpose for which it is proffered, with such use being undertaken within twenty (20) years of receipt of the property by the County, then the property shall be conveyed as common open space to the Association (defined in 5.5(a) below). 2.4 State Route 691 Contributions. The Applicant shall participate ia the improvement of State Route 691 by paying to the County a sum calculated at the rate of $500.00 per residential building lot platted within the Property after the date of the rezoning in accordance with the ZMA 97-12 application. The $500.00 payment shall be made at the time of recordation of the record, plat or plats, for each lot for the subdivision, or phases of the subdivision to be developed on the Property. In the event that the $500.00 contributions, after they are received by the County, are not used, within 20 years after recordation of a plat of the 127th lot, then the contributions may be used by the County for any other road improvements serving the Crozet area, deemed by the Board as at least in part being necessary by the proposed development on the Property. 2.5 Inter-Parcel Access. The Applicant shall reserve a 50 foot right-of-way for a future street to provide inter-parcel access to the adjoining parcel to the east of the Property, known as the Bargamin tract (Tax Map 55, Parcels 66, and 66A). The location of the reserved area for inter-parcel connection shall be between Lots 9 and 10, as shown on the Conceptual Plan. At such time as the Bargamin tract is developed with a connecting road between Lots 9 and 10, Applicant will construct and dedicate the street on Applicant's Property, and the remaining acreage; if any, within the area between Lots 9 and 10 shall accrue to the adjoining lots. In the event that the area reserved for a street is not used for the purpose for which it is hereby proffered within seven (7) years from the date of approval of ZMA-97-12, then such reservation shall be released and the Applicant then may use the area between Lots 9 and 10 for a building lot (notwithstanding the density limitation contained in Article I above) or at Applicant's option, such area may accrue to the adjoining lots. 2 ATTACHt"IENT El III. RECREATIONAL'AND BUFFER AREAS 3.1 Recreational Areas: Walking/Jogging'Trails. Applicant, or the Association, (defined in 5.5(a) below) shall manage the ponds, and shall establish and maintain recreational improvements and picnic areas in the open space areas adjacent to the ponds, as shown on.the Conceptual Plan, for use by homeowners within the Property. Except as specifically set forth herein, the recreational and picnic improvements to be constructed within the open space areas shall be constructed as a condition of the platting of the sixty-third (63rd) lot within the Property (50% of the lots to be developed). Applicant shall construct a tot lot and basketball court in the areas indicated o~n~the Conceptual Plan and shall construct an additional tot lot on the area designated LOt )Ifo~the Conceptual Plan. The two tot lots shall contain the equipment required by Section 4.16.2.1 of the Ordinance. The basketball court shall conform to the specifications of Section 4.16.2.2 of the Ordinance. Applicant shall establish a walking/jogging trail through the wooded area and along the ponds, as shown on the Conceptual Plan. The surface of the walking/jogging trail shall consist of wood chips, and tree clearing shall be kept to a minimum. Applicant shall construct a picnic shelter in the area shown on the Conceptual Plan. The open space, tot lot, basketball court, picnic shelter and walking trail located in the area of the ponds as shown on the attached Conceptual Plan shall also be for the mutual benefit of the residents in the development on the Northern Tract. In order to provide access to the open space and recreation areas, Applicant shall install at least one (1) pedestrian access at a grade of not greater than 10%. 3.2 Buffer Area Easement. As a condition of plat approval for the first section of the subdivision, Applicant shall establish a 50' Buffer Area along the western boundary of the Property, as depicted on the Conceptual Plan. Applicant shall plant within the 50' Buffer Area 50 shade trees (the equivalent of 1 tree for every 40 linear feet of Buffer Area). The trees to be planted within the Buffer Area will be spaced and grouped to take advantage of, and to supplement existing vegetation. Trees will be chosen from VDOT's major tree listing. Trees will be 2- 2-1/2" caliper at the time of planting. The 50' Buffer Area shall consist of 30' of dedicated open space to the Association and a 20' easement which shall run to the benefit of the Association and shall be enforced by the Association, as provided by the Declaration. The trees proffered herein shall be planted in the area dedicated to the Association. The 50' Buffer Area shall be maintained by the Association and by the owners of the lots encumbered by the easement in a natural state, and shall not be disturbed other than to: i) construct fences or walls, approved bY the Association, ii) remove underbrush, or iii) plant landscaping trees for screening. 3.3 Landscaping: Utilities. As a condition of plat approval for the first section of the subdivision, Applicant, or the Association shall maintain and replace as necessary, outside the 30' area to be dedicated for improvements to Jarmans Gap Road, (State Route 691) tree screening along Jarmans Gap Road for the length of the subdivision (except for the entrance area). Except in the areas where either the cul de sacs shown on the Conceptual Plan. 3 terminate near Jarmans Gap Road, or near the joining of Lots 80 and 84, Lots 84 and 85, and Lots 88 and 89, in which street trees will be provided, the screening shall consist of double staggered rows of evergreen trees planted fifteen (15) feet on-center, in accordance with Section 32.7.9.8.4 of the Ordinance and shall be located within a permanent open space area 20' in width (measured from the edged of the State Route 691 dedication). The 20' open space area along State Route 691 shall be maintained by the Association, and may include stormwater management BMPs. Applicant also shall plant street trees along the intern_al road system, at 40 foot intervals, (staggered, on both sides of the roads) as sections of the subdivision are platted. Street trees shall be maintained and replaced as necessary, by the Applicant, or the Association and shall be from species approved by the County in accordance with applicable Ordinances. All utilities installed within the Property shall be underground. 3.4 Walking Trail: Sidewalks: Greenway Corridor. Applicant shall install a walking trail along the internal loop road (and connecting to the interior road and cul de sacs, as shown on the Conceptual Plan). The surface of the internal walking trail shall consist of asphalt, and shall be maintained by the Association. The internal walking trail shall be a minimum of 6' in width and may be located within the area dedicated for internal streets. The internal walking trail shall be installed as each section of the subdivision containing that portion of the internal walking trail is platted. If the County Department of Planning and Community Development recommends pursuant to approval of the first preliminary plat for the subdivision that sidewalks be provided on both sides of the street, Applicant shall substitute 4' wide sidewalks for the 6' wide walking trail. At such time as the Board of Supervisors approves of a plan for a greenway, or hiking/biking system connecting Iarmans Gap Estates, Gray Rock, Orchard Acres and downtown Crozet, Applicant shall dedicate the walking/jogging trail along the area of the ponds, described in 3.1 above for use within such a trail system or greenway. 3.5 Stgrmwater Management Plan. As a condition of plat approval for the first section of the subdivision, AppIicant shall develop a stormwater management plan which incorporates best management practices that, to the extent practicable with the lot and street layout, minimizes pollution to the tributary of Powetl's Creek and to Lickinghole Creek. Such plan shall be approved by the Department of Engineering and may include utilizing the existing ponds in their present, natural state, retaining open space, and grass-lined swales along interior streets. This proffer is in addition to the required contribution for the regional stormwater retention under the Ordinance. IV NORTHERN TRACT The area depicted on the attached Schematic Plan for Grayrock North, prepared by Muncaster Engineering, dated June 3, 1998 (".Schematic Plan") is subject to zoning under ZMA-84-29, ("Northern Tract"). The Northern Tract is currently zoned PRD to allow 70 townhouse units. Applicant proffers to reduce the permitted density on the Northern Tract from 70 townhouse units to a maximum of 27 single family, detached units and to submit a rezoning request for the reduction of permitted density thereon to 27 single family, detached IATTACHPIENT E I units. Applicant shall submit such rezoning request within six (6) months of the approval of ZMA-97-12. Applicant acknowledges that its submittal of such rezoning request shall be for the consideration by the Board of Supervisors and that the Board's acceptance of these proffers shall in no way be construed as the Board's pre-approval of such request. Applicant shall diligently pursue the rezoning request (under either a PRD or R-1 classification). If Applicant diligently pursues the rezoning of the Northern Tract as provided herein, and such rezoning is denied, this proffer shall have been deemed satisfied and Applicant shall be free to develop the Northern Tract under the existing zoning. If the Applicant fails to submit its rezoning request or fails to pursue the application diligently, then the Applicant shall be deemed in violation of these proffers, and the County may exercise all available remedies at law or in equity against the Applicant and the Property, including but not limited to the suspension of issuance of building and other permits for the development of the Property until the applicant is in compliance with such proffers. Applicant shall submit as part of its re-zoning application for the Northern Tract, a proffer that the development of the Northern Tract shall be in general accord with the Schematic Plan, subject to adjustments for final engineering and to comply with the requirements of the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance and Virginia Department of Transportation Subdivision Street Standards. V OWNERS ASSOCIATION AND DECLARATION OF COVENANTS, CONDITIONS AND RESTRICTIONS 5.1 ~. The Applicant shall prepare and place on the Property, a Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (the "Declaration"). The Declaration's purpose will be to facilitate the planning and development of the Property in a unified and consistent manner. The Declaration shall set forth covenants, conditions and restrictions for private enforcement only by homeowners within the Property. The clear intent of the Declaration will be that the County of Albemarle will have no rights or obligations to enforce such covenants, conditions and restrictions. The Declaration shall not be interpreted as authorizing any relaxation of state or Albemarle County regulatory or minimum code standards, except as allowed by the regulations of the Ordinance. 5.2 Design Standards. The Declaration shall impose design and architectural guidelines for each residential lot within the Property; the architectural and design standards for the respective development areas (the "Design Guidelines") will ensure high quality architectural and landscape design and a harmonious residential community. 5.3 Fixed Standards. (a) The following elements of the Design Guidelines shall be referenced in the Declaration:. (i) Types of materials to be used in construction of dwellings; 5 ATTACHPIENT E ]' 5.4 (ii) Required setbacks from properties adjacent to the Property, lot/building ratios, height restrictions; and (iii) Types of materials to be used and standards for landscaping. Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines also shall: (a) Provide the standards for development within the Project and explain how such standards are implemented; (b) Provide for creation of a Design Review Committee. (The County of Albemarle will not participate on such Design Review Committee. The Design Guidelines shall not be interpreted as supplanting any applicable design review by the County's Architectural Review Board); (c) Provide an outline of the procedures and contacts for approvals by the Design Review Committee in connection with design and construction within the Project; and (d) Include requirements for builders to install water low flow showers and toilets as water conservation techniques. 5.5 Mairltenance 9f Landscaping. Open Space and Common Areas. The Declaration shall provide a mechanism for establishing and maintaining landscaping, open space, (including open space, and landscaping required by these proffers) and common areas within the Property, including the following: (a) The Applicant shall organize a Home Owners Association (the "Association") as a non-stock organization under the laws of Virginia for the care and maintenance of all such lands and improvements owned or entrusted to such association (the "Common Areas"). (b) The Association shall be bound by the Declaration' s covenants, conditions and restrictions running with the land. The Applicant or such Association shall be responsible for the perpetuation, maintenance and function of all Common Areas. (c) The Applicant or such Association shall provide a means for identifying. Common Areas as to location, size, use and control in one or more restrictive covenants, and such covenants shall set forth the method of assessment for the maintenance of such Common Areas. The Declaration's method of identifying Common Areas shall not supersede IATTACHPIENT E i any applicable requirements to identify common areas in a site development plan or subdivision plat. (d) The Declaration shall be in full force and effect for a period of not less than twenty-five (25) years and shall be automatically extended for successive periods of twenty-five (25) years unless terminated in a manner set forth in the Declaration. (e) The Association shall continue in effect so as to control the availability of the facilities and land thereby provided and to maintain the Common Areas for their intended function. Such Association shall not be dissolved nor shall such Association dispose of any Common Area space, by sale or otherwise, except to successor organizations conceived and organized under the same standards and principles set forth herein for the Association to own and maintain the Common Areas. VI. REZONING APPLICATION AND ILLUSTRATIONS 6.1 Plops and Illustrations. Applicant presented as part of its Rezoning Application, an initial conceptual plan. Except for the Conceptual Plan attached to these proffers, any plan submitted as part of Applicant's rezoning application, or as part of the rezoning process shall be deemed illustrative only, and such plan shall not be deemed a proffer. 6.2 Conceptual Plan Exhibit. These proffers refer to the Conceptual Plan which is being used to illustrate certain proffers, and to show the general lot and internal street configuration. Subject to adjustments for final engineering and to comply with the requirements of the Albemarle County Subdivision Ordinance and Virginia DePartment of TranspOrtation Subdivision Street Standards, development of the Property shall be in general accord with the Conceptual Plan. House locations shown on the Conceptual Plan are for illustrative purposes only. VII. MISCELLANEOUS 7.1 Certificate. The undersigned, Robert S. Savage, and Ann S, Savage certify that they are the only owners of the Property which is the subject of this application. 7.2 The Applicant. These proffers shall run with the Property and each reference to the "Applicant" within these proffers shall include within its meaning, and shall be binding upon, Applicant's successor(s) in interest and/or the developer(s) of the Property or any portion of the Property. FRIED COMPANIES, INC. 7 ANN S. SAVAGE d - Schematic Plan for Grayrock North Munc as ten 'Engn Sca ] e' 21" - 200 Date' 6/3/98 Land Use Designations [Attachment FI Residential Land Use OBJECTIVE: Establish flexible residential land use densities for the designated Development Areas. The success of Development Area development will depend greatly on the provision of residential land use areas that are developable, locationally desirable, and responsive to the changing market demands. Two density categories are provided in the Development Area, each with a range of acceptable density. Flexibility in residential density ranges leave some discretion to the market in proposing development characteristics (such as housing type and arrangements), but relies heavily on County standards to evaluate the suitability and acceptability of the proposal. Strategy: Establish maximum development density of each residential category, but determine density of development up to maximum based on specific standards. Two ranges of residential development densities applicable in the Development Areas stipulated below as follows: NOTE: THIS DEVELOPMENT IS WITHIN AN AREA RECOMMENDED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY AND THEREFORE, ONLY STANDARDS RELATIVE TO NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY ARE ADDRESSED HERE: Neighborhood Density Residential · Neighborhood Density Residential areas are intended to have a gross density of between 3 to 6 dwellings per acre. Comment: At a density of 1.29 dwellings per acre, this rezoning petition is not consistent with this residential density objective. · Neighborhood Density may be located within the Urban Area, Communities and villages. Comment: This property is located within a Community as designated in the Comprehensive Plan. · Neighborhood Density Residential areas are intended to accommodate all dwelling unit types. Comment: This subject parcel is currently zoned for 71 townhouses, which does provide for 8 alternative dwelling unit types when viewed in conjunction with the recently approved 127 single family, detached dwelling units of Grayrock South [ZMA 97-12]. Approval of this rezoning request [ZMA 98-24] would be for 27 single family, detached dwelling units only and does not accommodate additional dwelling types. I Attachment FI Any new development within an existing subdivision shall be in keeping with the character and density of the existing development. New development adjacent to existing subdivisions shall be developed at higher densities to support infill development efforts. Comment: This is a new development that is in conjunction with the approved Grayrock ZMA 98-24 located to the south. This development is in general accord with the ZMA 98-24 development and makes complimentary use of the open space area between the two. Comment: Although this proposal is complementary to the Grayrock South ZMA 98-24 development, this proposal does not meet the minimum density requirement, nor does it offer additional types of dwelling units. This request is driven by Proffer IV of ZMA 98-24, which commits the applicant to "diligently" pursue the requested rezoning of the property (Attachment E). IATTACHMENT G i W. MA- 9$- 24 Grayrock Route 68.%, A/~emarle County Rric Morriset=e of Plannin~ & Development Road 22902 Mr. Morrisecte: WiCk reference to your letter of January 29, 1999, we ~ave the ~ollowing : 1- This developmen= will mos= likely increase trips t2Lrough the OrchArd Acres Subdivision. Route 684 should be wide~e~ be=ween proposed entrance a~d Orchard Acres 'to non-tolerable. 3. Dedication of right of way a minimum of 25 feet from centerline along Route 684 is recommen~e~. 4. Remove sewer man holes from pavement. 5. Geometric design will nee~ to meet 20 mpk design as minimum. 6. Pavemen= structure will need to mee= minim~n of 270 vehicle trips up no first s~ree~ connection. 7. There will be a significan= sigh= easement require~ on Lot 9% for Cur~s, not Ail lots east of main line up =o Lot 17 will ~e required to access minor s~reets. February 9, 1~g9 Morrisette 9. We recommend joint entrances on the 50 to SO foot frontage size 10. Show all drainage easements for cross pipes and ditches =hat wil! empty across private property. 11. Who will control access gates? These should be c!ose~ a= all cimes except emergency. 12. Road plans and drainage computations required. 13. The 27 single family ~e=ached dwellings will have less traffic zmpact 70 Townkouses. If you have any questions, please advise before you release to the developer. H. W, Mills Assistant Resident ~n~ineer ld~ J. H. Kesterson MAY 19, 1999 EXECUTIVE SESSION MOTION I move THAT The BOARD GO INTO EXeCUtiVe SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2. I -344(A) Of The CODE OF VIRGINIA UNDER SUBSECTION (3) TO CONSIDER THE AC(:~UISITION OF PROPERTY FOR A SCHOOL SITE AND TO CONSIDER THE ACCEPTANCE OF PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC USE; UNDER SUBSECTION (7) TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF REGARDING SPECIFIC LEGAL MATTERS CONCERNING~¢~I¢ INTER~IURISDICTIONAL AGREEMEN~AND TO CONSULT WITH LEGAL COUNSEL AND STAFF CONCERNING PENDING ZONING LITIGATION.