1996-05-08May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 1)
000094
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on May 8, 1996, at 7:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr.
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and
Mrs. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County
Attorney, Larry W. Davis, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m., by the
Chairman, Mrs. Humphris.
Agenda Item No. 2.
Agenda Item No. 3.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
Public. There were no other matters from the public.
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman,
seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to approve Item 5.1 on the consent agenda and to
accept the remaining items for information. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
None.
Item 5.1. Resolution to accept Berkmar Drive into the State Secondary
System of Highways.
Memorandum had been received from Mr. Mark B. Henry, Civil Engineer,
stating that the Virginia Department of Transportation has determined that a
deed book reference was excluded from the resolution adopted by the Board on
March 2, 1994. They requested that a new resolution be adopted to correct
this omission.
By the above recorded vote, the following resolution was adopted:
RE S 0 LUT I 0 N
W~EREAS, Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-88-003) described on
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated May 8, 1996, fully
incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in
the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County,
Virginia; and
W~EREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department
of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the
requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of
the Virginia Department of Transportation.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of
County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transporta-
tion to add Berkmar Drive Extended (RIP-88-003) as described on
the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated May 8, 1996, to the
secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Sec. 33.1-229,
Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Require-
ments; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Board guarantees a clear
and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary
easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the re-
corded plats; and
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Mee~ih~) 000095
(Page 2)
FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be
forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of
Transportation.
The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is:
Berkmar Drive, from Station 78+41, right edge of
pavement of Rio Road (State Route 610), 973 lineal
feet, to Station 88+14, end of previous dedication of
Berkmar Drive as recorded by plat dated March 1, 1993,
in Deed Book 1295, pages 107-140 in the office of the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, with a
right-of-way width of 60 feet. Additional sight,
drainage easement, and right-of-way plats recorded in:
Deed book 1298, pages 450-458; deed book 1392, pages
76-83 and pages 91-98; deed book 1330, pages 501-504;
deed book 1384, pages 18-21; and deed book 985, pages
698-704.
Item 5.2. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for April 2, 1996, and
April 23, 1996, were received for information.
Item 5.3. Notice from the State Corporation Commission dated April 12,
1996, that United Telephone-Southeast, Inc. has applied for a certificate of
public convenience and necessity to provide interexchange telecommunications
services and to have its rates determined competitively, was received for
information.
Agenda Item No. 6. ZMA-95-21. Cathcart Properties & Denico Develop-
ment. Public hearing on a request to rezone approx 11.6 ac from R-1 to PD-SC
located on E sd of Avon St opposite entrance to Mill Creek North & Mill Creek
Drive Site is recommended for High Density Residential (10.01-34.0 du/ac) in
Neighborhood 4 in the Comprehensive Plan. TMgl, P2. Scottsville Dist.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 22 and April 29, 1996.)
(NOTE: Mr. Bowerman abstained from the discussion on this zoning
petition. He left the room at 7:03 p.m.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's Office with the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors. He
said the applicant requests a rezoning of approximately 11.6 acres to Planning
Development-Shopping Center, PD-SC, to allow construction of a retail center.
Access will be from the proposed Route 20/Route 742 (Avon Street) connector
which will actually split the commercial zoning, with an area to the north,
and an area to the south of the intersection to be created. The applicant
proposes construction of 85,000 square feet of various commercial uses and
submitted a detailed description and justification for this use. Mr.
Cilimberg said this area was recommended in the 1989 Comprehensive Plan for
high density residential. With the level of development that has occurred in
the neighborhood, an area of commercial will be necessary to support the
neighborhood. The area proposed for development has been recommended by the
Planning Commission as Community Service use in the update of the Comprehen-
sive Plan which has not yet been adopted. The proposal is consistent with the
land use proposed.
Mr,-Cilimberg said reservation of the land for the connector road was
reserved under.a prior plat. The applicant designed the access to the site to
allow for entrances involving left-turn lanes on the connector road about 400
feet to the east of its intersection with Route 742. There will be two points
of access on each side. The applicant has proffered to restrict the PD-SC
area retaining those uses which are appropriate under the Community Service
designation in the proposed Land Use Plan. There is one modification in-
volved, and that is the buffer zone adjacent to residential zoning districts
(all adjacent areas are zoned residentially or developed in nonresidential
uses and are not anticipated to be residential). Staff recommended that the
reduction of the buffer areas be allowed. Staff found this site to be a
reasonable and appropriate location for commercial uses, so recommended
approval subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffers (today a proffer
with the most recent wording was handed out). In addition, the Planning
000096
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 3)
Commission, at its meeting on April 2, 1996, unanimously recommended approval
of ZMA-95-21 subject to acceptance of the applicant's prof.fers.
Mrs. Thomas asked at what stage the Board might be able to ask that this
development be as pedestrian-friendly as possible. Mr. Cilimberg asked for a
definition of ~pedestrian-friendly". Mrs. Thomas said if this is a community,
and the proposal is for a neighborhood shopping area, and there are many
people within what could be called "walking distance", is it possible to walk
to the shopping area? Mr. Cilimberg said there is the question of how
pedestrians would get to the site. Route 742 is not scheduled for improve-
ments, and it does not have sidewalks. Without knowing what the ultimate
improvements of Route 742 might be, it does not make sense to require side-
walks on this application because the sidewalks would connect to nothing.
However, on the connector road from Route 742 to Route 20 there will be
sidewalks, and the applicant will have sidewalks on both sides of the connec-
tor road along their frontage. There is also the issue of pedestrian-friend-
liness within the complex. The applicant does not propose to construct any of
the buildings along sidewalks. If there is a design feature the Board is
interested in for pedestrian access, that should be discussed at this stage of
the hearing. One of the issues that arose at the Planning Commission meeting
was the opportunity to get a crossing between the two sides. That was the
pedestrian discussion that occurred at that time. One of the Commission
members felt it would have been good to have this whole development on one
side of the connector road. Unfortunately, the connector road was already
located and their property did not lend itself to doing that. There was the
question of crosswalks which could be signalized. The crosswalk issue would
be one to discuss with the Department of Transportation in conjunction with
signalizing the intersection. Potentially that discussion could take place as
part of the connector road construction.
With no further questions from the Board members at this time, the
public hearing was opened.
Ms. Denise LeCour, President of Denico Development, was first to speak.
She and Rip Cathcart, President of Cathcart Properties, are the applicants for
the rezoning. The property faces Route 742 and is directly across from the
entrance to the Mill Creek Community. The proposed connector road is not due
to their request, it has been in the County's Capital Improvement Program for
many years. There is no direct ingress or egress to their property from Avon
Street Extended, is limited to the connector road. The two westernmost
entrances are right-hand turns only and the concrete median will be built by
the developer. The two easternmost entrances will be both ingress and egress.
VDOT has said that with completion of the County's new high school, and with
completion of the shopping center, the intersection will be signalized. VDOT
also said that when the shopping center is fully developed, should the need
arise, the developer will need to have another left-turn lane with possible
signalization. This is hoped to be a community shopping center, but the
developers cannot put crosswalks on VDOT lands or streets, or across from Mill
Creek. They are receptive to anything that will make the development
pedestrian-friendly.
Ms. LeCour said the properties around theirs are residentially zoned,
but there are no residences adjacent. The property immediately to the north
is the Calvary Baptist Church, to the south is a water tower owned by the
Albemarle County Service Authority, and the 140 acres to the rear and east of
them is owned by the County of Albemarle and that is where the new high school
will be located. She said the physical size of the high school itself is more
than one-quarter of a mile from the shopping center. Ms. LeCour said when the
Architectural Review Board reviewed this property in 1994 they recommended a
35-foot vegetative buffer along the connector road and Route 742. The buffer
will be landscaped and there will be no building in it. If Route 742 is
widened in the future, the 35 feet is measured from the right-of-way, and they
assume that any expansion of the road will be within their right-of-way, so
the buffer would remain intact.
Ms. LeCour said they wanted a community shopping center, and they did
not want uses that would attract people from other parts of the County. To do
that, they proffered out 14 by-right uses in the PD-SC zoning. They believe
there is a need for this shopping center. In Neighborhood 4, which is the
area south of 1-64, east of Biscuit Run, west of Route 20, and north of the
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meetihg)
(Page 4)
000097
intersection of Routes 20/742, as of 1995, there were 932 residential dwell-
ings and no community shopping center. In 1998, the estimate is for 1400
dwelling units. The developers of Lakeside will add another 200+ units in the
next year.
Originally, there were 6.88 acres of designated commercial lands in the
1989 Comprehensive Plan which were located north of the entrance to Mill
Creek. The topography did not lend itself to being developed as a shopping
center, so in 1993 the owners asked that the property be down/zoned to medium
density residential. At that time, County staff was directed to find an
alternative site for commercial. In the proposed update to the Comprehensive
Plan, staff chose this site, and they believe this is an excellent choice.
People from Willow Lake can access the connector road, so will not have to use
Route 742 (Avon Street Extended). That is not true of any other site on Route
742. It will alleviate the increased traffic that might otherwise occur.
Ms. LeCour said one of the major concerns expressed by the public has
been traffic. She said that at this time many people go along Route 742,
through the City and to Route 29 North for shopping, and then retrace those
steps. If these people would use this shopping center instead, it would
eliminate that trip on Route 742. She feels that many people will stop at the
shopping center on their way home from work, so that is not an additional trip
on Route 742. She believes there will be reduced traffic on Route 742 because
of the uses they have proffered out.
Ms. LeCour said they have heard many times about aesthetic appeal, and
what the shopping center will look like. She and Mr. Cathcart believe they
are high quality developers. She suggested that the Board members look at
some of their other developments in the City and County. They are committed
to being long-term developers. If anyone doubts that, she said they will have
invested $21.0 million in Lakeside upon its completion. They have a vested
interest in making sure that shopping center will look nice.
Ms. LeCour said the property is in the Entrance Corridor and under the
control of the Architectural Review Board. The ARB has high and strict
standards, which she supports. She said Avon Street rides along the spine of
the hill. In Mill Creek, Mill Creek South and Lake Reynovia, the houses at
the entrances are actually below the grade of the street. The same thing will
happen on the other side of the road. The buildings at the rear of the
property will be ten to 15 feet below the grade of Avon Street. The fact that
this is a retail development will help because retail is usually constructed
only on one-story. The visual impact will be minimized. The last concern is
about light pollution. They are using fixtures which direct the light down
into the shopping center. There is no bleaching or washing of light onto
adjacent properties. Also, lighting is a very sensitive issue with the ARB.
Ms. LeCour said they believe the shopping center will be of benefit to
all of the residents of Neighborhood 4 and Albemarle County. There will be
85,000 square feet of retail space and this will add to the tax base of
Albemarle County without putting a burden on the school system. In addition,
with all the retail, it will create a lot of jobs. These are two tangible
benefits to the County. She requested that the rezoning be approved tonight,
and she then handed in a petition containing 286 signatures of people who are
asking that this be request be approved.
Mrs. Humphris said since there were so many people present tonight to
speak about this rezoning, she was going to limit the number of comments. She
asked for a show of hands of those who wished to speak in opposition (five
people raised their hands). She then asked for a show of hands of those
present in support of the issue. Mrs. Humphris then said she would allow five
people to speak on each side of the issue.
First to speak was Mr. Joseph Gottlieb from Mill Creek South. He said
he is a retired engineer and real estate developer. Personally, he opposes
the shopping center in order to keep the area in a pristine nature, but he
recognizes that many of his neighbors feel it is a convenience and it should
go forward. Putting his personal feelings aside, if the Board feels the
petition has merit and should go forward, he asks that some of the points made
by the developer be considered, i.e., some limitation and the type of stores
be imposed on the developer in order to control future expansion of the
shopping center. If this is to be a modest development, he believes it should
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting) ·
(Page 5)
000098
serve the 1400 residences in the immediate area. If traffic is induced to
this area as the shopping center expands, the whole traffic pattern might be
quite different.
Mr. Dave Shaw said he lives in the village homes in Mill Creek directly
across the street from the proposed development. He supports the development.
When he bought his home four years ago, he signed an agreement that he knew
the development would occur and one of the reasons he bought in Mill Creek was
because he knew there would be a shopping center. They like the urban style
of life. They are a little confused as to why there is trouble getting the
shopping center there. It is a beautiful community, and the developers are
doing a good job. He bought only one-tenth of an acre, and he loves it. The
area is becoming a community unto itself. He knows his neighbors. They walk
in the evenings. There is a school coming in. This will only add to that
sense of community. He supports Mrs. Thomas' idea of sidewalks. With the
elementary school, and now the high school, he thinks bikepaths along Avon
Street would be good. He believes this shopping center would reduce the
traffic pressure on the Belmont area of the City. With the traffic light
going up when the school is opened, he believes people who now use Avon Street
coming into town, may stay on Route 20 and that might ease the traffic
pressure on Avon. He understands that the Highway Department has agreed the
speed limit on Avon should be 45 mph. The reduced speed limit and the light
will be an aid to the people in the area. Mr. Shaw believes this developer is
an excellent developer. It is a good project, good for the neighborhood,
gives a sense of community, and he supports it.
Mr. Dave Martin said he supports the proposal before the Board tonight.
The shopping center is welcome to him, his family and many of the residents in
the Mill Creek Subdivision. They moved into Mill Creek because of its
aesthetic value; because it is close to the University Hospital where he and
his wife work; several friends recommended the area for its schools; it was
close enough to town to be accessible, but far enough away to be in the
country; and because development in the area is well-planned and would not
disrupt much of the natural beauty. Mr. Rip Cathcart presented his plan for
rezoning and development at several meetings where the homeowners in Mill
Creek were able to express their comments. There was opposition expressed at
these meetings. Some individual legitimately expressed concern that any
development across Avon Street might increase traffic, light and noise in the
area. However, with the new County high school in the area, development is a
given, and it is in the community's interest to express concern about the
type, and not the existence, of development.
Mr. Martin said the Homeowners' Association Board recently stated in a
letter: "It is the feeling of the Mill Creek Homeowners' Association Board
that since it is inevitable that a shopping center will be built in this
location eventually, Mill Creek homeowners would prefer to see it built by
someone with a commitment to the neighborhood and a proven track record in
building high quality projects." Mr. Martin said this project will not add
redundancy to the area, it will bring community services to an area whose
residents now add to the traffic downtown as they cross town to find the
services proposed in this plan. He encouraged the Board to approve the
rezoning petition. (A copy of Mr. Martin's full statement is on file in the
Clerk's Office with the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors.)
Mr. Charlie Vials, a resident of Mill Creek Village Homes, spoke to
oppose the development. He does not doubt the good intentions of the develop-
ers. His house is right across the street from the proposed development. His
son's window faces the development. There is no way he can be convinced that
this is a good thing for his son. Traffic will get higher, etc. In reference
to pedestrian traffic, everybody lives to the west of Avon Street, so if one
wants to walk on foot, they will have to cross Avon Street. At this time,
there is no way to do that except to sprint across. If that is of concern,
that should be taken into account.
Ms. Peggy Booker said she lives in Mill Creek South. When this develop-
ment was defeated a few months ago, she was disappointed. It is not conve-
nient to go to.the grocery stores on Route 29 North, particularly for only an
occasional item. She thinks a small shopping development is needed in the
area. It has been discussed by the residents in the development, and it seems
to meet all of the aesthetic considerations. She is happy with what Mr.
Cathcart has done in his Lakeside development. She is sorry that the people
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 6)
who own homes right along the road will be disturbed by traffic and lights,
but anyone who lives that close to a highway must expect to be disturbed by
traffic. She asked the Board to approve this request.
Ms. Susan Stuttman said she lives in southern Fluvanna County just
outside of Scottsville. She travels 20 miles each day to work at the Univer-
sity of Virginia Medical Center. She thinks a shopping center on Avon Street
Extended would save her at least 30 minutes travel time. She said the traffic
is already coming in from the southern part of the County, so Albemarle County
would benefit by bringing in tax revenue, but the biggest thing for her is the
convenience, and to cut down on travel time. She helped to collect some of
the names on the petitions. She noted that her only concern had to do with
the lighting, and she understands that issue has been addressed. She urged
the Board to approve this shopping center.
Ms. Donna Thomas said she lives in Lake Reynovia. They have quite a few
people present tonight who are in support of this development. She contacted
just about everybody in her development to get their feelings on this issue
and there were two people who would not say they supported the petition. Of
the 60+ people who live in the neighborhood now, there were only two who would
not support the request. She hopes the Board will consider that when they
make their decision.
Mr. Stu Gardner said he lives in Mill Creek South and is in favor of
this development. He was president of his homeowners' association for two
years. He said there are many babies and small children in the neighborhood.
He knows what it is like to come home and then have to go back out to go
shopping. He believes that all of the aesthetic issues, and all the traffic
issues will be taken care of. He knows the developers and believes they will
do a good job. Everybody is going to save time, but what will they do with
that time? There is a need for two parent, working families to have a place
close by to put their kids. That need is not going away. The question is, if
you want to spend time with your family, one of the things the community can
do is to promote that, and that is one reason to approve the shopping center.
He asked that the Board take that into consideration.
Mr. Glenn Reynolds said he lives in the village home section of Mill
Creek North. He has heard many statements here tonight, and at the Planning
Commission meeting, that trouble him. First, a Commission member said the
need for the shopping center came from the applicant. That is only the
applicant's opinion, and is not his opinion, or others living in his neighbor-
hood. No one called him to ask for his opinion and no one came to the
neighborhood to discuss it. His neighborhood is so new that they have not yet
had their first homeowners' meeting. People from Mill Creek South, Lake
Reynovia, and from even further down Route 20, say this shopping center is
badly needed. It will not be in their backyard, but it will be in his
backyard. The owners in the village homes in Mill Creek North will have to
pay with the loss of their quality of life, their peace of mind, and the loss
of the character of their neighborhood. Those things are worth more than
simple convenience to some people.
Mr. Reynolds said some people said they have been wanting a shopping
center since they moved in. He does not know of anybody who intentionally
buys a home because it is in sight of a shopping center. He said Mr. Cath-
cart's representative stood before the Planning Commission and said the people
in the village homes bought with ~their eyes wide open" because they were
shown a map with the shopping center areas laid out in pink. Mr. Reynolds
said he was never shown any such map, and the neighbors he spoke to were not
shown any such map. He and his wife tried to find such information to insure
that this would not happen. He thinks this shows how much the developer
really cares about the community. He does not care about how many people
spoke about Mr. Cathcart's integrity tonight. The issue is not his integrity,
but about putting a shopping center in a place where it does not belong. He
said several people from Lakeside Apartments said how much this shopping
center is needed. These people do not even own their own homes. They have no
idea what it is like to ~be in his shoes" right now. Most of the people in
Lakeside Apartments do not have Virginia license plates.
Mr. Reynolds said the only real reason people seem to be able to give
for having this shopping center is convenience. How convenient do things have
to be? Within minutes from Mill Creek there is plenty of shopping on Fifth
Street five minutes away~ Pantops just ten minutes away, Barracks Road is ten
minutes away, Seminole Square is ten minutes away. Most drive further than
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 7)
000i00
that to get to work every day. So where is the inconvenience? Mr. Reynolds
said he believes that if Mr. Cathcart requested $100.00 from every homeowner
to get the shopping center started, not a person would come forward to say
they want it. That shows how much convenience is really worth. At the
Planning Commission meeting, a gentlemen said that Pantops is only convenient
during off hours, and not during morning or afternoon rush hours. He wonders
how many people do their shopping during the morning rush hour. Another
person said the shopping center would save fossil fuel and would be good for
the environment. If that is a concern, he suggested that people should do
their shopping on their way home from work at many of the shopping centers
already in existence, and which they pass by on their way home from work.
Second, he has never heard of 11 acres of asphalt being good for the 'environ-
ment. Even with this shopping center, people will still get in their cars and
drive all over town and out to Route 29 because that is where the majority of
restaurants are. As for the traffic, if you reduce the traffic on Rio Road
alone by one percent and put that one percent on Avon Street, you will not
notice the change on Rio, but it will double the traffic on Avon Street. VDOT
estimated that there will be 12,000 more cars each day created by this
shopping center. The Planning Commission tried to reduce that number, and the
lowest number he heard was 6000 cars per day. Because it is a shopping
center, the majority of that traffic will be between 5:00 P.M. and 8:00 P.M.
That is 2000 cars an hour, or one car every second. When turn lanes are
installed, that will be three or four lanes of traffic at the entrance, and
who will walk across that street. There is no crosswalk there, and the
sidewalks will be down toward Route 20.
Mr. Reynolds said he keeps hearing about ~massive" growth. That is just
a buzz word. It is being used to give credence to this plan. He has lived in
Charlottesville all his life and knows the area well. He used to fish and
swim in Lake Reynovia, and have picnics there when he was a kid. He has seen
the growth and it is not something that just sprang up over night. He has
heard it said that there are about 1000 homes in the area now, and that the
number will rise to a maximum of about 1500. The process has taken well over
10 years so far. There is no massive growth. He has heard people say a
shopping center is needed to make them a complete community. Since when is a
community defined by a shopping center? A community is about people. There
will be a new high school in the area soon, and that will be a good thing.
Does a shopping center built uphill from a high school sound like a good
thing? Something to tie the school to the community would be a better choice.
A community center, a recreational area, or a library. He would never
conceive of it being a shopping center.
Mr. Reynolds said that every day you read about the people moving out of
the City and into the County. He does not think they are doing it so they can
live next to one of Albemarle's shopping centers. They are doing it to get
away from that type of thing. He and his wife bought their home for the
character of the area and its rural appearance. He asked that the Board not
let the character and charm that embodies the neigb_borhood be destroyed by
such a frivolous and unnecessary project. He said that if one looks at the
plan, his particular neighborhood was conveniently left off of the plan. It
has been said that the shopping center is not adjacent to any residential
areas, but there are two village home sections which are right across the
road, and some of those homes are the bare minimum allowed by zoning from the
road, about 25 feet. Those people have no protection. In these two little
neighborhoods, there are $60.0 million worth of homes. Many people bought
their property because they wanted to get away from the City, and they wanted
the character that was there. Part of the money he spent on his house was to
buy into that character and that atmosphere, and he does not want to see that
ruined.
Mr. Corb Audrey said he lives in Mill Creek South. A couple of things
people said ~hit home." He has five children and all were vying for his time
tonight, but he came to this meeting because it is important to his family and
neighbors that the shopping center be done well, but that it be done. A
design is needed so all traffic is not focused on a single point, where
perhaps the entrance is separate from the exit so traffic flow is spread out
in order to facilitate some of the foot traffic people hope will be accommo-
dated. He trusts that the Board will be sure it is done within certain
guidelines° He has trust in Mr. Cathcart and the whole family of Craigs. He
said the Board's job is not easy, but he does support the petition.
Mr. William Florence said he lives in Mill Creek South. He supports the
project for two reasons. While living for six months at Lakeside, he found
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 8)
000 0 1.
Mr. Cathcart's word to be good. Second, his wife and he wish they could get
to some of the necessity's a little more conveniently. He has talked to a
number of people in Mill Creek South and all except one person was in favor of
the project. He said this would save them all a lot of car fuel and a lot of
effort.
Ms. Naomi Aiken said she lives in Mill Creek North. She has two
children who attend Cale Elementary. She is in favor of the shopping center.
If apartments go on this property instead of a shopping center, Cale is
already building on. There are three trailers there already. The shopping
center will make after-school jobs for the high school students.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
Mr. Martin said that because the Board is closing the public hearing
without listening to everyone, he wants to reiterate that the Board has heard
what was said. He wants to be sure that the Board appreciates all of the
people who attended this meeting tonight.
Mr. Marshall said a few months ago he was campaigning in that area and
knocked on a lot of doors in the community. The number one question he got
was "Why did you vote against that shopping center?" He is going to support
the request tonight because it is buffered. The entrance is not off of Avon
Street but from a road not perceived to be there the last time the Board voted
on this request. There is new lighting proposed. The most important reason
is that he was elected to represent the people, and the least he can do is to
support the majority of the people and that is what he intends to do. He
feels it will be an asset to the area. The area has developed rapidly. It is
a matter of convenience, and is necessary for this area. He feels the Board
should support the request. He then offered motion to approve ZMA-95-21
subject to acceptance of the applicant's two proffers.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin.
Mrs. Thomas said she will continue with what she said earlier about
pedestrian traffic. A developer can't be required to do something the County
has not been requiring all along. With a stop light at that intersection, she
believes this will become a shopping center that people can walk to. She
would hate for anything to be done by the developer to make it less easy to
walk to. Even though there is a tree buffer and a dark green line all around,
she hopes it breaks for pedestrians at the appropriate place. It is not
designed with pedestrians in mind. It is a difficult shopping center with the
cars coming first so pedestrians will have to walk all the way across the
parking lot in order to get to the buildings. She said the Board can only
urge that it be as pedestrian-friendly as possible. She appreciates getting
all the letters she did. The letters were similar, but different from one
another, and that takes a lot of effort. She appreciates that and the people
who came to the meetings.
Mrs. Humphris said she will support the motion. She understands the
negatives that have been brought out by Mr. Vials and Mr. Reynolds, and the
cautions given by Mr. Gottlieb. She feels the positives overall outweigh the
negatives. It is too bad that this can't be a win-win situation. Obviously
it will not be 100 percent that way. She does think the proposal provides a
lot of benefits for that area of the County.
With no further comments being made by the Board members, roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Mr. Bowerman.
(Note: The Proffer is set out in full below.)
PROFFER FORM:
Date: May 7, 1996
ZNL~ ~95-21
Tax Map Parcel(s) #91-2
11.6 Acres to be rezoned from R-1 to PD-SC
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 9)
oooloe
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance,
the owner, or its duly authorized agent hereby voluntarily prof-
fers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the
property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of
the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning
itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and, (2) such
conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested.
1. The following uses shall be prohibited:
22.2.1.a.3
22.2.1.a.7
22.2.1.b.9
22.2.1.b.22
24 2.1.2
24 2.1.4
24 2.1.9
24 2.1.20
24 2 1.21
24 2 1.22
24 2 1.23
24 2 1.24
24 2 1.25
24 2 1.32
24 2 1.34
Department Store
Furniture & home appliances (sales & service)
Indoor theaters
Automobile, truck repair shop excluding body
shop
Automobile, truck repair shop
Building materials sales
Factory outlet sales-clothing & fabric
Hotels, motels & inns
Light warehousing
Machinery & equipment sales, service & rental
Mobile home & trailer sales & service
Modular building sites
Motor vehicle sales, service & rental
Sale of major recreational equipment & vehicles
Wholesale distribution
Development of the property shall be in accordance with the
plan titled "Avon Street Retail Development" initialed WDF,
dated 3/27/96.
Hillcrest Land Trust
Charles W, Hurt (Signed)
Signatures of Ail Owners
Charles W. Hurt (Printed) 5/7/96
Printed Names of Ail owners Date
Shirley L. Fisher, (Signed) Shirley L Fisher (Printed) 5/7/96
Trustee
(Note: The Chairman called for a recess at 8:10 p.m. The Board
reconvened at 8:16 p.m., with Mr. Bowerman present.)
Mr. Cilimberg said he could summarize both ZMA-95-23, Berkmar Land Trust
and First Interstate Charlottesville, Ltd., Ptr. and ZMA-95-25, Gilray,
L.L.C., together since they are adjoining properties. Mr. Bowerman said he
did not object as long as the Board members know he will abstain from any
discussion on the Gilray petition. Mrs. Humphris asked the County Attorney if
this will be all right. Mr. Davis said as long as Mr. Bowerman does not
participate in that aspect, it is all right.
Agenda Item No. 7. ZMA-95-23. Berkmar Land Trust and First Interstate
Charlottesville, Ltd., Ptr. Public Hearing on a request to rezone approx 3.6
acs from R-6 to C-1. Located on W sd of inters of Berkmar Dr & Woodbrook Dr.
This site recommended for High Density Residential (10.01-34.0 du/ac) in
Neighborhood 1 by the Comprehensive Plan. TM45, Ps 108, 91 (part) & 93A1.
Rio Dist. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 22 and April 29, 1996.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's Office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board. He said
the property is located on the west side of the intersection of Berkmar Drive
and Woodbrook Drive and fronts on both roads. The majority of the site is
wooded. The Agnor-Hurt School is located immediately to the south and the Rio
Hills Shopping Center is to the southeast. Pursuant to SP-95-15, a building
to be used as a day care center has been erected on part of this site. All
adjacent property on the west side of Berkmar Drive is currently zoned R-6.
Staff reviewed the request for compliance with the draft update of the
Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and recommends approval with
acceptance of the proffers, provided that the Board adopts the recommended
land use designations for the updated Plan. The Planning Commission, at its
meeting on April 23, 1996, unanimously recommended approval of ZMA-95-23
subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffers. The Commission also
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 10)
000 I.03
approved the modification of Section 21.7.3 to allow grading within 20 feet of
adjacent property as shown on the preliminary site plan. No action is
necessary by the Board on these modifications.
Agenda Item No. 8. ZMA-95-25. Gilray, L.L.C. Public Hearing on a
request to rezone approx 2.2 acs from R-6 to C-1 located on W sd of inters of
Berkmar Dr & Woodbrook Dr. Site recommended for High Density Residential
(10.01-34.0 du/ac) in Neighborhood 1. TM45, P109C. Rio Dist. (Advertised in
the Daily Progress on April 22 and April 29, 1996.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's Office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board. He said
this site fronts on both Berkmar Drive and what will be an extension of Wood-
brook Drive. The Agnor-Hurt School is located to the south, and the Rio Hills
Shopping Center is to the southeast. Pursuant to SP-95-15, a building to be
used as a day care center has been erected on the parcel immediately to the
southwest. All adjacent property on the west side of Berkmar Drive is
currently zoned R-6.
The intersection at Berkmar/Woodbrook Drive is signalized, but will now
have to include a signal phase to capture the Woodbrook Drive west traffic
coming into the intersection. Staff has worked with both developers to
determine a location where the entrances on both sides of Woodbrook can be
aligned. The Western Bypass routes which have been discussed and presented to
the public are further west off of the end of the cul-de-sac, so these
properties are not immediately affected by that route.
Mr. Cilimberg said that at the present time, the area which covers both
properties is recommended for residential development in the Comprehensive
Plan, but the draft update of the Plan recommends a change of this area to
Transitional Use. Their proposal for C-1 zoning, with the proffers offered,
is consistent with the Transitional Use designation. This property is
adjacent to the Agnor-Hurt School, so they proffered their uses taking that
into consideration. The developers worked with the County regarding fill
activity in conjunction with the School, which will take care of what could be
considered an undesirable situation on the school grounds below the school in
terms of the existing swale.
Mr. Cilimberg said the only inconsistencies staff found with this
proposal have to do with the current Comprehensive Plan designation, and
efforts over time to limit areas to the west side of Berkmar Drive to residen-
tial development. The proposed Land Use Plan will address the inconsistencies
by a change in the Plan.
Mr. Cilimberg said the operator of the Montessori School, who at one
time intended to occupy this building, sent a letter in opposition to changing
zoning on this part of the property and indicted that they were the contract
purchaser. The applicant would like to address that issue. That relationship
is no longer in effect.
Mr. Cilimberg said staff reviewed this request for compliance with the
draft update of the Comprehensive Plan and the Zoning Ordinance and recom-
mended approval with acceptance of the proffers, provided the Board adopts the
recommended land use designations for the updated Plan. The Planning Commis-
sion, at its meeting on April 23, 1996, unanimously recommended approval of
ZMA-95-25 subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffers. The Commission
also approved the modification of Section 21.7.3 to allow grading within 20
feet of adjacent property as shown on the preliminary' site plan. No action is
necessary by the Board on these modifications.
Mr. Martin said he remembers the amusement park, which is now off of
Berkmar Drive, was denied at one time because of the need to maintain high
density residential near the school. It was said that the topography limited
residential in that particular area. He asked Mr. Cilimberg to explain that
and how it works out with this proposal. Mr. Cilimberg said the developer
does not propose to rezone the end of the Woodbrook Drive cul-de-sac. That
area would be retained as residential. The updated Comprehensive Plan
identifies all of the area for Transitional which can include residential
development. The proposed Western Bypass has really limited the use of this
area for residential use. The use will be retained in the Plan in case
someone does propose some kind of a residential development.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 11)
O00Zt04
Mr. Martin asked if the land closest to the Bypass has been retained for
residential use. Mr. Cilimberg said "no", and pointed out the areas on the
map. What staff has heard is that with the Bypass, the possibilities for
residential development in this area have decreased significantly. At one
time, the County had a proposal to develop this area with a townhouse complex.
It would have required a rezoning, and it was complicated by the fact that the
Western Bypass had not been sited, and the County had agreed with the State
that zoning in this area would not be changed until that siting had occurred.
Now that the potential alignment is known, residential does not seem as
likely.
Mrs. Thomas asked if consideration has been given to what this will do
to the school. Just because the Western Bypass is coming close, and it has a
huge shopping center on the other side of the road, should there be other
commercial uses beside it? She asked for a better explanation. Mr. Cilimberg
said the Transitional Use designation was put in the Plan to create the best
opportunities for either residential or light office types of use. He
suggested that Mrs. Thomas question the owners about the potential for
residential. If the land is not rezoned, and it stays as residential, he does
not know about any real possibility of it being developed in that way.
Mr. Martin said he feels the decision to put Agnor-Hurt behind the Rio
Hills Shopping Center rather than on Whitewood Road was a bad decision. Mrs.
Humphris said she disagrees. Mr. Martin said he thinks that is why the Board
is presently fighting to build dwelling units around a school that is placed
between a shopping center and a bypass. Mr. Cilimberg said staff tired to
make sure that as a Light Commercial development area, this request is not
going to create uses which are in conflict, or a threat to the school. He
thinks that has been covered by the uses which were proffered out because
there are some higher skill uses which could go in C-1.
Mr. Bowerman said that without reopening the issue of where the Agnor-
Hurt School was build, this was considered to be a good area for the school
because of the possibility of residential development between Berkmar Drive
and Woodburn Road. It is unfortunate that the location for the Western Bypass
has changed the benefits of having that residential area. He agrees that it
should be residential, and that is what was intended to be around the school.
The change in circumstance was not anticipated.
Mr. Marshall asked if there is any likelihood of it ever being developed
as residential. Mr. Cilimberg said anything that would develop as commercial
would certainly be toward Berkmar and would be higher density such as apart-
ments.
Mrs. Humphris asked the proposed location of the Bypass. Mr. Cilimberg
said most of the locations for the Bypass will cause some relocation of
Woodburn Road. It will miss the school and a small cemetery on Woodburn. It
is behind the cul-de-sac. Until the design is in final form, the County does
not know where it will be. There are some issues about houses along Woodburn
and some family cemeteries on some of the properties.
With no further questions from Board members, the public hearing was
opened.
Mr. Steve Melton said he would be representing the applicants for both
ZMA-95-23 and ZMA-95-25. He gave a short history of how they arrived at this
particular development. They gave been planning for more than one and one-
half years with Gilray, for the people who will purchase these buildings, and
with County staff. There are probably only three users for the area high-
lighted in orange on the map. For the area highlighted in yellow, the use
will probably be for a school of some type. That area is the closest to
Agnor-Hurt and they want to keep that commercial use as far away from the
school as possible. In Phase 3 they have considered some townhouses for that
area, probably 23 or 24 homes avoiding the Bypass alignment. They feel their
proposal is the best use for the property considering the volume of traffic,
and the number of calls they receive each week from people who want to be off
of Route 29~ but in a high traffic area for business. He does not feel this
is an ideal spot for apartments or residential homes right on Berkmar Drive
with the volume of traffic using that road.
Mr. Melton said that at the Planning Commission meeting there was a
letter of opposition from the contract purchaser in Phase I, but he has
tonight handed to Mr. Cilimberg a letter addressed to Ms. Claudia Paine,
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 12)
000105
Senior Planner, stating that there is no signed contract to purchase the
property in question (copy of the letter is on file in the Clerk's Office).
Mr. Melton said there are four large oak trees on the property and they
have installed a retaining wall to save those trees. There will be trees
along the back of the property buffering Agnor-Hurt from the school on this
property. The commercial property will be toward the front of the property so
it will not be near the playground of the school.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing on
ZMA-95-23 was closed.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bowerman to approve ZMA-95-23
subject to acceptance of the applicant's proffers. He thinks this is an
appropriate use in this location because of the change that has occurred
because of the Western Bypass Alternate 10 location being so close to the
property. He does believe that the area is no longer suited for residential
use.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Marshall.
Mrs. Thomas said she knows the staff feels this will not have an adverse
affect on the Agnor-Hurt school property, and she hopes that is true. She
does not think it is an ideal use to go next to the school.
Roll was then called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
None.
(Note: The proffer is set out in full below.)
PROFFER FORM;
Date:
5-8-96
ZMA 095-23
Tax Map Parcel(s) 045-108, 93A1, 91(part)
3.7 Acres to be rezoned from R-6 to C-1
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance,
the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily
proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the
property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of
the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: (1) the rezoning
itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such
conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested.
Permitted uses of the property and/or uses authorized by special
use permit shall include only those uses allowed in Section 22 of
the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in effect on May 8, 1996, a
copy of the sections being attached hereto, except the following:
Section 22.2.1 Item # 3:
Section 22.2.1 Item #10:
Section 22.2.1 Item #16:
Section 22.2.1 Item #22:
Department Stores
Newsstands, magazines, pipe and tobacco
shops
Automobile service stations
Automobile, truck repair shop excluding
body shop
Berkmar Land Trust
Charles W. Hurt (Signed)
Signatures of Ail Owners
Charles W. Hurt (Printed)
Printed Names of Ail Owners
4/~?/96
Date
Charles W. Hurt (Signed)
First Interstate Ch'ville
Ltd Partnership
Charles W. Hurt (Printed)
Contract Purchaser
4/17/96
Stephen M. Melton (Signed) Stephen M. Melton (Printed) 4/17/96
Agent, William W. Stevenson
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 13)
ooo o6
(Note: At 8:35 p.m., Mr. Bowerman abstained saying his conflict is not
due to a business interest on this project, but because he has a business
relationship with the applicant on another project. He then left the room.)
The Chairman immediately opened the public hearing.
Mr. George Ray said he is one of the two developers of the project
requested under ZMA-95-25. Mr. George Gilliam is also present. Most of the
issues have already been discussed. They see the principal use of their
project on the north side of Woodbrook Drive Extended as being professional
offices. Ms. Marilyn Gale is also present to answer questions.
With no one else rising to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Marshall to approve ZMA-95-25 subject to
acceptance of the applicant's proffers. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Martin. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSTAIN: Mr. Bowerman.
(Note: The proffer is set out in full below.)
PROFFER FORM:
Date:
12-22-95
ZMA %95-25
Tax Map Parcel(s)~: TM45, Parcel 109C
2.28+ Acres to be rezoned from R-6 to C-1
Pursuant to Section 33.3 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance,
the owner, or its duly authorized agent, hereby voluntarily
proffers the conditions listed below which shall be applied to the
property, if rezoned. These conditions are proffered as a part of
the requested rezoning and it is agreed that: {1) the rezoning
itself gives rise to the need for the conditions; and (2) such
conditions have a reasonable relation to the rezoning requested.
Permitted uses of the property, and/or uses authorized by special
use permit, shall include those uses allowed in Section 22.2.1 of
the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance in effect on December 22,
1995, a copy of that section being attached hereto, except the
following:
Section 22.2.1(a)
Section 22.2.1(a)
Section 22.2.1(a)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
Section 22.2.1(b)
3)
15)
3)
4)
7)
9)
11)
13)
16)
20)
22)
23)
(department store)
(drug store, pharmacy)
(retail nurseries and green houses)
(churches, cemeteries)
(clubs, lodges, civic fraternal patriotic)
(funeral homes)
(indoor theaters)
(laundry mats)
(nurseries, day care centers)
(automobile service stations)
(dwellings)
(automobile, truck repair shops)
(temporary non-residential mobile homes)
RIO ASSOCIATES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
BY:
Charles W. Hurt (Signed)
General Partner
Signatures of Ail Owners
Charles W. Hurt (Printed) 5/11/96
Printed Names of Ail Owners Date
(Note: Mr. Bowerman returned to the meeting at 8:41 p.m.)
Agenda Item No. 9. SP-96-08. Dr. Charles H. Wood, Jr. Public Hearing
on a request to establish veterinary office & hospital for small animals in
existing bldg at Airport Plaza. Property at NW corner of Rt 29N & Airport Rd
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 14)
00010?
(Rt 649). TM32, P38. Rivanna Dist.
April 22 and April 29, 1996.)
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's Office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board of
Supervisors. He said this will be an "outpatient~ clinic, and will not
involve pet boarding or outside runs or kennels. The applicant will be
required to provide for noise attenuation. There are no design changes or
peculiar design aspects to the proposal that will cause any need to alter the
site. In appearance, it will be an office type setting. To the northwest is
commercial which does contain a residential unit. There is no requirement to
meet setback standards adjacent to residential because the residential ~nit
sets on commercial property. The fence and existing tree line between the
site and that property to the northwest will likely prevent any potential
conflict caused by animals briefly outside when being brought to the facility.
A condition is included which requires that the fencing be retained on the
rear of the property. This use will have its own entrance to the building.
There is a side area of the building where dogs can be walked. Also included
is a condition to assure that the wall is sound-proofed.
The Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 23, 1996, unanimously
recommended approval of SP-96-08 subject to three conditions.
With no further questions for Mr. Cilimberg, the Chairman opened the
public hearing.
Dr. Charles Wood said a mention was made of animals and noise. That is
an issue which always comes up when animal hospitals are considered. This is
a facility were if the animal is feeling better, it goes home. There will be
no boarding or grooming. If an animal is sick and must be hospitalized
overnight, it will be transferred to their main facility.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was
closed.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall,
to approve SP-96-08 subject to the three conditions recommended by the
Planning Commission. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
None.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
The building plans for renovations shall provide for sound
attenuation to the adjoining space such that sound levels
from this use will not exceed 40 decibels;
2. This use shall have no outdoor runs or pens;
3 o
Fencing shall be maintained adjacent to the agricultural/
residential property to the rear of this property (Parcel
39) .
Agenda Item No. 10. SP-96-13. Robert Aron. Public Hearing on a
request to enlarge existing dam and & pond located within 100 yr flood plain.
Property is Kinloch Farm located on W sd of Rt 231 about 1/2 mi N of Cismont.
TM65, P7. Rivanna Dist. Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 22 and
April 29, 1996.)
Mr. Cilimberg summarized the staff's report which is on file in the
Clerk's Office and made a part of the permanent records of the Board. He said
that the applicant wishes to enlarge the pond for scenic and agricultural
purposes and the new dam will provide a crossing to the applicant's property
on the other side of the stream from the house. The existing pond is located
on Parcel 7 along an unnamed tributary to Mechunk Creek and the proposed pond
is expected to cover a portion of the adjoining parcel (Parcel 7A) which is
also owned by the applicant. According to the County's Engineering Depart-
ment, the flood plain upstream from the proposed pond may be impacted by the
enlarged dam, but the impact is not expected to go beyond the applicant's
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 15)
000 08
property.
Mr. Cilimberg noted that a letter had been received from an adjoining
property owner posing many questions about this request, and suggesting that
the petition be deferred for one month while the answers to those questions
are gathered. He said the letter had been forwarded to Mr. Gloeckner, who
represents the applicant, as well as the County's Engineering Department for
their comments. Mr. Gloeckner, as well as Mr. Kelsey from the County's
Engineering Department, are both present tonight. There was one issue of the
dam being under way before any permits were granted. He understands that was
determined by Mr. Gloeckner in consultation with the applicant and he advised
them that they needed to stop work and go through this process first.
Staff reviewed this request and is of the opinion that the use will not
be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, the character of the
district will not be changed, the use will be in harmony with the purpose and
intent of the Zoning Ordinance and with the uses in the area, and that the use
will be consistent with public health and welfare. Staff recommended approval
and the Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 9, 1996, unanimously
recommended approval of SP-96-13 subject to the four conditions recommended by
staff.
Mrs. Humphris said the letter mentioned raises a lot of questions which
she hopes will be answered by Mr. Gloeckner and Mr. Kelsey. At this point,
the Chairman opened the public hearing.
First to speak was Mr. Kurt Gloeckner from Gloeckner Engineering. He
said the purpose of the dam is to replace an old dam which has silted in and
is no longer working. The old dam is just at the end of the flood plain for
that particular hollow, so a special permit is needed to increase the size and
replace that old dam. The new dam will meet all government requirements. He
has received approvals from the Corps of Engineers, the VMRC, DEQ and he wrote
to Dam Safety to see if they have any jurisdiction over the dam and they do
not. They did request a copy'of the plans because of its unique design.
Mr. Gloeckner said the new dam will use a ~channel within a channel"
design. The emergency spillway will actually have a primary spillway made out
of parent rock that is at the proper elevation so the stream will rise within
the pond and once it reaches the rock channel will go around the dam. There
will be no usual riser, or barrel, that goes through the dam. This type of
design is for two purposes. The downstream owners get the benefit of the
increased aeration of the water tumbling down to its original level, and also
get the benefit of a year round fairly constant flow, which is a State law. A
low water flow has to be put in which keeps the stream flowing even through
droughts uses up some of the storage capacity of the dam. That water is drawn
off six feet below the surface level and it essentially has the effect of a
more uniform temperature level year round.
Mr. Gloeckner said he saw the letter and the concerns that were raised
are all answered by his design or by law. He offered to answer any question
from the letter, or from the Board members. He said essentially this will be
a dam for farm use. This request is before the Board because the property is
just barely within the upper reaches of the flood plain.
Mrs. Humphris asked if Mr. Hugh Gildea (writer of the letter mentioned)
raised all of these issues to Mr. Gloeckner prior to the writing of the
letter. Mr. Gloeckner said "yes". They actually met on site and he took the
preliminary plans along and explained everything that was to be done. He told
Mr. Gildea that after 30 years of designing dams, he knew what he was doing.
Evidently Mr. Gildea has been in the review part of dams, and overseeing how
they are designed and the quality of water that is downstream from dams. Mr.
Gloeckner said he answered all of Mr. Gildea's questions. Mr. Gildea said he
was still going to write the letter.
Mrs. Humphris said one of the things she thought was of utmost impor-
tance was mentioned, and that is assuring an adequate downstream flow for
those property owners.
Mr. Bowerman asked about the statement that there is a pipe six feet
below the water's surface to provide water downstream year round. He asked if
the level of the pond drops six feet if there will be any water going through.
Mr. Gloeckner said Uno", but there are too many acre feet of storage between
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 16)
O00 t09
the seven acres at the surface and that level, for that to happen. He said
that is probably a month's supply of water without any recharge to the pond.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the pond is charged solely by rainfall. Mr.
Gloeckner said there may be springs upstream. It is a fairly significant
stream flow. It is generally 16 feet wide at the dam, and flows four to six
inches deep, so it is a good flow. They have studied lots of the watersheds
between Keswick and Gordonsville because there are a number of dams in that
region, and thirty percent of the annual average flow is generally the low
flow. That is about 0.7 cubic feet per second, and the low flow pipe that he
designed is about one cubic foot per second, so he has a safety factor of 1.3
discharge during low flow periods.
Mrs. Humphris asked Mr. Gloeckner to address the question about algae
bloom. Mr. Gloeckner said he and Mr. Gildea walked down to this property and
this particular stream is larger and a little slower so it developed algae
growth. This happens at this time of year with fertilizers and the tempera-
ture starting to rise. The first heavy rainfall and the cooling will dispel
the algae growth. This is a seasonal thing that happens to a lot of streams.
Once the dam is in place, the water temperature will drop and it will be more
aerated than it is now.
Mr. Martin said he did not receive Mr. Gildea's letter until yesterday.
There are a lot of questions in the letter. Mr. Gildea is not present
tonight, not was he at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Gloeckner has a
great deal of experience and he assumes the County's engineers have experi-
ence, and the applicant will have to meet requirements of all the various
agencies. The letter is a little alarming, but you have to ask "what is going
on here." Even if the Board went through and dealt with each point, he does
not know enough about the issue.
Mrs. Humphris asked that Mr. Jack Kelsey, the County's Chief of Engi-
neering, speak. Mr. Kelsey said the comments about the algae blooms is that
the season can have a lot to do with it. It could be just the function of the
existing pond itself. The purpose of the pond is to collect the sediments and
the nutrients. Phosphorus and nitrogen all settle out. When they reached the
old dam, it released a lot of these sediments down into the stream bed so a
lot of the algae blooms could be a result of the nutrients that were in those
sediments. Mrs. Thomas said that makes more sense to her. Mr. Kelsey said
the best way to resolve this issue is to build the dam back and reinstall the
pond so it continues to function as it is meant to by removing the sediments
and the nutrients from the flow. Right now, it is all open, exposed, and
eroding. The problems will only get worse.
Mrs. Thomas asked if contrary to wanting it to flow for awhile and flush
itself out, which is what Mr. Gildea proposes, it would be better to get the
dam built quickly. Mr. Kelsey said ~yes". Start trapping the sediments and
nutrients in the pond as it is supposed to function, allowing discharge of the
water from the pond to be cleaner. Eventually, normal flows released from the
pond will clean out the sediments which have already been released and the
stream's natural state will be restored. They feel that is the best solution.
The longer it sets, the more of the nutrient-laden sediments will be dis-
charged from the pond.
Mrs. Humphris said the Planning Commission has recommended conditions
which the County's Engineering Department would oversee that would deal with
all of the issues in Mr. Gildea's letter. Mr. Kelsey said essentially this is
an agricultural dam so it is exempt from erosion control regulations and it
would be exempt from the County's review altogether. The only reason it is
before the Board is that the applicant found out after the work began that
they needed a special use permit. Without that permit, the County could not
attach these conditions of review. Otherwise they would probably have had the
new dam in place all ready. Now there is a way to provide some quality
assurance that the dam which has been designed and constructed meets some type
of standard.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the continuing interests of the downstream riparian
landowners are safeguarded in any way other than flow. Mr. Kelsey said the
Department of Environmental Quality decides if there needs to be a continuous
released Any of the dams that have had that requirement attached in the past
have been perennial streams. This stream shows on the U.S.G.S. maps as
intermittent° From Mr. Gloeckner's comments, it sounds as though there is a
pretty steady flow even though it is intermittent. DEQ has the ability to
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 17)
000 . 0
look at these dams on a case-by-case basis and decide whether continuous
release is necessary. He is not familiar with the law regarding riparian
rights.
Mr. Davis said he has no great knowledge of this situation other than
that the upstream property owners cannot impede the flow to the detriment of
the downstream property owners. In this case they seem to be protecting that
right. With DEQ's requirement that there be a flow, he does not believe there
is any impairment of the riparian rights. If it does occur, the downstream
property owners have a civil remedy to address that. It is not an obligation
of the County to enforce those private property rights.
With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was
closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Bowerman,
to approve SP-96-13 subject to the four conditions recommended by the Planning
Commission. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The conditions of approval are set out in full below.)
Albemarle County Engineering approval of hydrologic and
hydraulic computations;
Albemarle County Engineering approval of plans for the dam
showing all grading activities and the existing and revised
flood plain;
Albemarle County Engineering approval of an erosion control
plan;
Albemarle County Engineering receipt of proof of compliance
with dam safety regulations through the Virginia Department
of Conservation and Recreation.
Agenda Item No. 11. ZMA-96-07. Berkmar Drive Extended Properties.
Public Hearing on a resolution of intent adopted by the Board of Supervisors
to rezone properties adjacent to Berkmar Dr to HC. This rezoning will allow
Berkmar Dr to divide the zoning, with commercial zoning on E sd & residential
zoning on W sd of Berkmar Dr. These properties comprise approx 2.8 acs
located on E sd of Berkmar Dr between Woodbrook Dr & Hilton Heights Rd. TM45,
P68 (part) zoned R-15, P68C(part) zoned R-15, P68CI(part) zoned R-6,
Pll2B(part) zoned R-6 & P109E(part) zoned R-6. These strips were created when
the right-of-way for Berkmar Dr was taken. This site is recommended for
Regional Service in Neighborhood I by the Comprehensive Plan. Rio Dist.
(Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 22 and April 29, 1996.)
Mr. Cilimberg said on November 15, 1995, the Board adopted a Resolution
of Intent to rezone strips of residential zoning that are on the eastern side
of Berkmar Drive between Woodbrook Drive and Hilton Heights Road to HC,
Highway Commercial. The strips were created when the right-of-way for Berkmar
Drive was taken. All plats for the Berkmar Drive right-of-way have now been
put to record and the road is open making the adjacent properties available
for development. Previously, it was the stated intent of the Board of
Supervisors to have the road divide the zoning, with commercial zoning on the
eastern side and residential zoning on the western side of Berkmar Drive.
The plats put to record in 1995 divided zoning districts and left
several parcels with strips of residential zoning alongside the larger
portions of HC, Highway Commercial, zoning on the eastern side of the road.
If left as is, the residential zoning adjacent to commercial zoning would
regulate certain setbacks for both structures and parking in the commercial
portions of these properties.
Staff notified all owners of properties involved that this rezoning was
proposed. There is no public purpose in leaving the zoning the way it is now
since it will only hinder the owners when they attempt to develop. It is a
benefit to both the property owners and the County for the Board to undertake
the rezoning in one procedure rather than having the individual owners deal
with it on a piecemeal basis.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 18)
Mr. Cilimberg said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on April 23,
1996, unanimously recommended approval of ZMA-96-07 to rezone strips of
residential zoning on the eastern side of Berkmar Drive between Woodbrook
Drive and Hilton Heights Road to HC, Highway Commercial.
At this time, the Chairman opened the public hearing. With no one
rising to speak, the public hearing was immediately closed.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to approve
ZMA-96-07 to rezone the following strips of residential zoning (approximately
2.8 acres) that are located on the eastern side of Berkmar Drive between
Woodbrook Drive and Hilton Heights Road to HC, Highway Commercial, as recom-
mended by the Planning Commission.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
None.
(The strips are identified as follows:)
TMP45-68: Parcel A of 7,453.87 sq. ft. (shown on a Wiley
and Wilson plat recorded in Deed Book 1446, page 129) zoned
R-15 which was added to Parcel 68 on 12/16/94. (TMP45-68E
to 68)
TMP45-68C: An unidentified strip of R-15 zoning (estimated
to be 9400 sq. ft.) is part of what is identified as Residue
A (shown on a Wiley and Wilson plat recorded in Deed Book
1439, page 196). (TMP45-68C divided into 68C and 68C2)
TMP45-68Cl: Parcel A of 1636.34 sq. ft. (shown on a Wiley
and Wilson plat recorded in Deed Book 1447, page 668) zoned
R-6 was added to Parcel 68C1 on 12/27/94. (TMP45-80 to
68Cl)
TMP45-112B: A strip of R-6 zoning was split into three
pieces. Two of these were added to parcels which are zoned
HC while the third piece was added to a parcel also zoned R-
6. Parcel Z of 2637.44 sq. ft. was added to parcel 68C1 and
Parcel Y of 4691.21 sq. ft. was added to Parcel l12B (both
shown on a plat by Thomas B. Lincoln recorded in Deed Book
1380, page 493). (TMP45-81 to 68C1 and l12B)
TMP 109E: A strip of approximately one acre of R-6 zoning
currently identified as Parcel 109E. (The right-of-way was
shown on Wiley and Wilson plat recorded in Deed Book 1428,
page 546, and was taken from what was then parcel 109.) The
other 3.18 acres of 109E is zoned HC. (TMP45-109 to 109E)
Agenda Item No. 12. Approval of Minutes: November 3, 1993, March 22,
1995 and April 9, 1996.
Mrs. Humphris had read the minutes of April 9, 1996, and found them to
be in order with the exception of two typographical errors.
Mr. Martin had read pages 37 (Item #22) to the. end of the minutes of
November 3, 1993, and found them to be in order.
Motion was offered by Mr. Marshall, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve
the minutes as read. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Marshall and
Mr. Martin.
None.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 19)
ooO± 2
Agenda Item No. 13. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the
Board.
Mrs. Humphris said she saw that the Route 29 Corridor Development Study
Committee was having a Steering and Technical Committee meeting at the
Forestry Department on Monday and she was able to attend for about one hour.
Part of the discussion involved the public hearings that will take place, one
being at the County Office Building on May 22, 1996. The consultant asked
Mrs. Humphris about Albemarle County and what needed to be done so this public
hearing would be a success. She told him that they had already had this
conversation. Most people in Albemarle County do not know what the Study is,
therefore, they would not know they had any reason to participate, and that
good public relations is needed. Mr. Carter Myers was there and did say that
hardly anybody knew this was an on-going study, and it is important to
Albemarle County. He suggested that the consultant make sure there were
plenty of announcements about the meetings.
Mrs. Humphris said in the morning paper she saw an advertisement that
says "Route 29 Corridor Study" and says nothing about what the study is about,
so nobody has any reason to go to this meeting on May 22. She called Ms.
Angela Tucker and she had also noticed the same thing. She agreed that there
would not be participation and she will make an effort to call the people in
Richmond and the people in Culpeper who placed the advertisement. She asked
Mr. Cilimberg to explain to the other Board members what he knows about these
meetings.
Mrs. Humphris said she also got in the mail this morning a letter from
the Friends of Route 29 which included a resolution that the Madison County
Board of Supervisors adopted in opposition to the study. The group called the
Friends of Route 29 are asking Albemarle County to join in this opposition.
She does not think the Board knows enough at this time to join in, but that
just shows that nobody knows anything about this issue at this time except for
Mr. Cilimberg and Mr. Bowerman who are members of the committees.
Mr. Cilimberg said he saw the ad and they did not agree with the ad that
went in the paper. The Planning District Commission is part of the consultant
team, so there may be things they can do in addition to the ad. He said this
became a hot issue in Madison because of their belief that this would be truly
a limited-access facility, and that there would be many properties cut off
from immediate access to the road so they would have to take service roads to
the interchanges. Mr. Cilimberg said when you drive through Madison you see
many large farms, and there are many parcels that have been divided off along
the road. There are dozens, and maybe hundreds, of parcels that could lose
immediate access if it is looked at on a parcel-by-parcel basis. He said that
was the beginning of the ground swell of opposition that arose in Madison.
What has been seen in the last several months are different alternatives that
could happen, one of which would be a limited-access road, and one would be
the arterial nature of the facility now with some improvements to deal with
the more congested areas. Another option which is probably the most difficult
to find a solution to during this study is something that relates to a Land
Use Transportation component so it is a design not to just build a road, but
to serve the land uses of the communities along the road. He does not think
it is time to take any position regarding this corridor study, but it is time
to get people to see what the concepts are and to be able then to pick the one
which is best for Albemarle County.
Mrs. Humphris asked how the public is to know they will likely be
affected by this, and they need to be there to see the proposals so they can
compare and give input. Mr. Cilimberg said he remembers that at one point,
the Planning District had compiled a mailing list of Properties along the
corridor, so it may be that they could mail some flyer or notice of the
meeting.
Mrs. Humphris said Mr. Bob Reid said that he had been contacted by a
newspaper which wanted to do a feature story. She said she hopes Albemarle's
citizens do get notified, and understands that this could be of importance to
a lot of people for future land use, and they get to the meeting. Mr.
Cilimberg said the meeting is to begin at 6:00 p.m. in the County Office
Building, and there will be a public comment period from 7:00 p.m. until 10:00
p.m. There will be a panel including the consultant team members and VDOT
members. The Commonwealth Transportation Board members have been asked to
attend, but will not be a part of the panel. It was suggested that the local
representative from the Steering Committee be on the panel.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 20)
ooo .a.8
Mr. Bowerman asked about the dates of the meetings. Mrs. Humphris said
the meeting in Madison is on May 15, in Bealton it is on May 20, in Stanards-
ville it is on May 21 and on May 22 it is in the Albemarle County Office
Building.
Mr. Tucker said the Board members were asked to attend because there may
be questions asked of them.
Mr. Perkins said he has a constituent who needs to have his application
for a Class B-Home Occupation permit fast tracked. He explained it in a
letter to Mr. Perkins. There were misunderstandings because he did not know
he needed a building permit, and did not know he needed to have a Class B
permit. This person currently has a Class A permit. He has talked to Mrs.
Carey about fast-tracking this permit, and she said it could be heard by the
Board on June 11. Mr. Cilimberg said he could not get it advertised for the
Planning Commission that fast. He did not know if an application had been
filed. Mr. Perkins said the applicant has filed the permit and paid the fee.
Under normal scheduling, it would not get to the Board until August. Mr.
Cilimberg said he could schedule it for the earliest possible Commission date,
and the Board could then hear the request the next week. After a short
discussion, it was the consensus of the Board to advertise Mr. Richard Allen's
Home Occupation-Class B permit request as soon as possible for a public
hearing.
Mrs. Thomas asked if everyone knew that the Greenwood/Red Hill move will
take place on Monday. Mr. Perkins said it has been on the radio.
Mrs. Thomas said the Solid Waste Task Force will not meet again on June
17 so it will be one month behind on making its report to the Board.
Mrs. Thomas said a constituent had written her asking if the Board would
consider a barking dog ordinance. Mrs. Humphris said the Chairman responded
to a similar request last week, and a copy of her letter was distributed to
the other Board members.
Mrs. Thomas said following the discussion earlier tonight about how
pedestrians will find their way to the new shopping center on Avon Street, she
would like to ask the Board to pass a resolution of intent stating that the
next time the Capital Improvement Program is reviewed, it will include a
pedestrian way on Avon Street, and a pedestrian phase in that new stop light
at the Avon Street/ Connector Road intersection. A pedestrian phase does not
have to be a formal sidewalk. She asked if the other Board members agreed.
Mr. Marshall said he agrees with phasing the light so that "walk" and
~'do not walk" signs can be put up. Mr. Martin said if the light is phased, it
will encourage people to walk, and that will encourage them to cross the road,
and most likely they will cross at a place where they should not cross.
Mr. Marshall said if there are people who want to walk from Mill Creek
to the shopping center, without a pedestrian phase in that light, they will
not be able to get across the road. He thinks the phasing is necessary. He
would like to have VDOT put a sidewalk all the way around. Mr. Tucker said
VDOT will not put in a sidewalk without curb and gutter. Curb and gutter are
not planned. The only thing the County can do is build an asphalt path within
the right-of-way. Mr. Marshall asked if there is enough right-of-way on the
left-hand side to do that. Mr. Tucker said staff is investigating the path at
least to the school. The entire roadway will have to be looked at. Mrs.
Humphris asked if VDOT will allow the County to build a path. Mr. Tucker said
"probably". He believes Mrs. Thomas is just suggesting that it be looked at
during the next review of the CIP. Mrs. Thomas said that is her suggestion.
Mrs. Humphris asked if the other Board members agreed. Mr. Bowerman said he
has no problem with looking at the issue.
Mrs. Humphris asked how the request gets to VDOT about the light. Mr.
Tucker said the County will have to install the light because it will be
building the connector road. He just wants VDOT to be aware that the pedes-
trian phasing of the light is desired.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 21)
ooo 14
Mrs. Humphris said she attended the virginia Association of Counties
Board meeting in Reston recently, and listed the following items of interest.
The Federal Communication Commission has determined that it will no longer
handle any complaints or concerns regarding cable television service. The
locality has to deal with them, and represent the complaints to the FCC.
Rockingham County wrote a very clear letter to their Congressman saying ~we
find this unacceptable. The county government does not regulate the cable
industry, and it does not have the resources to function in the capacity of a
referee in the argument."
People at the meeting were asked to list areas of concern, and everybody
there said cell towers were the major problem in their counties. The Board of
Directors called on staff to do a research of the problems with monopoles and
dishes 18 inches and under, to survey all the counties as to their policies
and how they are addressing these issues.
A major concern brought up by Mr. Flip Hicks, VACO Attorney, is school
board budget issues. With elected school boards and problems of whether
budgets are adopted by category or not, and the problem that in some locali-
ties superintendents are shifting money between categories. Mrs. Thomas said
she is chairing the VACO Finance Steering Committee and one of the things they
may look into in the coming year is the question of whether school boards
should have separate taxing powers. She asked if that is a question this
Board would be interested in hearing more about. In most states, the fiscal
needs of the school system equal the amount raised by the property tax. That
is probably true with Albemarle's budget also. If the school districts were
given taxing power, would they take the entire amount of the property tax and
leave the Board of Supervisors with the decreasing BPOL tax, etc. Mr. Martin
said he would let Mrs. Thomas be the one to bring it up. Mr. Marshall said he
does not want to bring it up. Mrs. Thomas said she does not think it will be
up to the Supervisors to bring up the subject. It is going to be in the
reacting phase.
Mrs. Humphris said the problem of sludge control was discussed. It was
mentioned that it is driving businesses out of Hanover County. She asked if
Albemarle County is likely to have sludge. Mr. Davis said it is not a problem
in Albemarle. Some localities regulate it by special use permit and have
other difficulties with odors, etc. Mr. Tucker said the Rivanna Water & Sewer
Authority had a problem, and had to spend some money on control.
Mrs. Humphris said the second big problem is the lack of impact fees
allowed to help with some of the costs of development. It was even suggested
that the name "impact" fee should be done away with because it is not a
pleasing term. It should be called ~'school construction fee" because that is
where most of the cost lies. Mrs. Thomas said Albemarle has more of an impact
fee than she had realized. Mr. Bill Brent went over the fee structure of the
Albemarle County Service Authority for her and some other people recently.
There is a bill before the Legislature that would remove the ability for
authorities to charge the type of initial hook-up fees that ACSA charges. She
thinks this Board should keep up with that legislation. Mr. Bowerman agreed.
They do not recover all of the costs, but they do recover some. Mr. Tucker
said VACO has opposed the legislation. Mr. Davis said the Supreme Court of
Virginia has determined that it is not an impact fee for purposes of legal
distinction. It is an availability and connection fee. Mrs. Humphris said
Hanover County said they are being sued by Richmond Homebuilders over their
water and sewer connection fees and their bond counsel has told them that they
would not be able to sell their bonds if that was changed by law. It would
diminish their value.
Mr. Marshall asked when the Board members were going to get new chairs.
Mrs. Thomas said the chairs in the conference room at the Albemarle County
Service Authority offices are very comfortable.
May 8, 1996 (Regular Night Meeting)
(Page 22)
O00ii5
Agenda Item No. 14. Adjourn. With no further business to come before
the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
~roved by
57o~rd of CoUnty
Supervisors
Date ~ ~
Initials