HomeMy WebLinkAboutSP200700010 Staff Report 2007-11-14COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
STAFF REPORT SUMMARY
Project Name: SP 2007-10 Cutright
Staff: Joan McDowell
Planning Commission Public Hearing:
Board of Supervisors Public Hearing:
June 19, 2007 Deferred from June 5 2007
July 11, 2007
Owner/s: Arley E. Cutright, Jr. and Patsie H.
Applicant: Patsie Cutright
Cutright, Trustees of the Cutright Family Trust
Acreage: 9.620 acres
Special Use Permit: SP 2007-10
TMP: 08800-00-00-006A 1
Existing Zoning and By -right use: Rural
Location: 3544 Red Hill School Road; southeast
Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses;
corner of Red Hill School Road (RT. 760) and
residential density (0.5 unittacre)
Monacan Trail Road (RT 29) - North Garden
Magisterial District: Samuel Miller
Conditions or Proffers: No
RA (Rural Areas) 10.2.2 (28) Divisions of
Requested # of Dwelling Units: One additional
land as provided in section 10.5.2.1.
dwelling unit that is not permitted by -right
and Section 10.5.2.1 Where permitted by
Special Use Permit
Proposal: Special Use Permit to acquire
Comprehensive Plan Designation:
two additional development rights to
Rural Areas - preserve and protect
construct one dwelling unit and donate
agricultural, forestal, open space, and
approximately 2 acres to the Albemarle Fire
natural, historic and scenic resources/
Department
density ( .5 unit/ acre); Entrance
Corridor - Overlay to protect properties
of historic, architectural or cultural
significance from visual impacts of
development along routes of tourist
access; Flood Hazard - Overlay to
provide safety and protection from
flooding
Character of Property: Residential with large
Use of Surrounding Properties: Residential
area of cut lawn and pond
and agricultural
Factors Favorable: (Updated)
Factors Unfavorable:
1. The Department of Fire Rescue has
1. This application does not represent a
indicated that a proposed land donation
unique circumstance that would permit a
to the North Garden Fire Department
favorable recommendation.
would benefit fire rescue service by
2. Approval of this application would set
providing permanent access to an
an unwanted precedent.
existing dry h dy rant(pond.
3. An additional residential structure would
cause added demand for services.
4. The proposed subdivision would
increase rural area density above the by -
right density.
5. The proposed subdivision would further
increase fragmentation of land.
6. The proposed subdivision for an
additional residence would increase
impervious surfaces in the rural areas
The Fire Depattment has net indie
that the would n ept the land
additienal dwelling units.
iP 07-10 Cutright
UPDATE: This item was deferred from the June 5, 2007 Commission meeting to resolve
conflicting comments received from the County's Department of Fire Rescue and the
North Garden Fire Department. Attachment G is the revised comments from the
County's Department of Fire Rescue regarding the proposed donation of land to the
North Garden Fire Department. Staff has reviewed this proposal based on the new
information and modified the report appropriate. Updated information in this report is
provided in blue and underlined or strikethrough print.
PETITION: PROJECT: SP 2007-10 Cutright - Development Right
PROPOSED: Special Use Permit to acquire two additional development rights
ZONING CATEGORY/GENERAL USAGE: RA -- Rural Areas: agricultural, forestal, and fishery uses;
residential density (0.5 unit/acre)
SECTION: 10.2.2 (28) Divisions of land as provided in section 10.5.2.1.
and Section 10.5.2.1 Where permitted by Special Use Permit
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN LAND USE/DENSITY: Rural Areas - preserve and protect agricultural,
forestal, open space, and natural, historic and scenic resources/ density ( .5 unit/ acre); Entrance Corridor -
Overlay to protect properties of historic, architectural or cultural significance from visual impacts of
development along routes of tourist access; Flood Hazard - Overlay to provide safety and protection from
flooding
ENTRANCE CORRIDOR: Yes_X_No_
LOCATION: 3544 Red Hill School Road; southeast corner of Red Hill School Road (RT. 760) and
Monacan Trail Road (RT 29) - North Garden
TAX MAP/PARCEL: 88-6A1
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: Samuel Miller
Character of the Area: The area primarily contains agricultural uses, and includes scattered residential
structures. The property is accessed by a gravel road. Both a property under the Acquisition of
Conservation Easement program and several properties in the Hardware Agricultural and Forestal District
are in the area.
Specifics of the Proposal: The applicant, Patsie Cutright, has requested two additional development
rights on 9.62 acres in order to create a minimum 2 -acre parcel to establish a residence for herself. Mrs.
Cutright also intends to donate approximately two additional acres that contains an existing pond/da
hydrant and fronts Route 29 to the North Garden Volunteer Fire Department, as this portion of the property
has been used for an annual fund-raiser picnic by the Fire Department. Her existing 1,600 finished square
foot residence would be sold. (Attachments A and B).
Planning and Zonine History: No previous planning applications or zoning history has been found for
this property. However, two parcels have been created from the subject parcel, extinguishing the allowable
development rights on the parent parcel:
TMP 88-6A2 subdivided in 1985; 2 -acres; residence constructed in 1986
TMP 88- 6A6 subdivided in 2004; 2.355 -acres; undeveloped
Since 1981, 19 applications for additional development rights have been considered
• 9 applications approved
• 10 applications denied
The Board of Supervisors typically based its approvals on finding that the applications adequately met the
criteria of Sec. 10.5.2.1, such as a location next to a development area or existing development, for a
SP 07-10 Cutright
family member, or some unique circumstance. (Attachment C)
Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan: The proposed additional development rights are not
consistent with the County's Comprehensive Plan that consistently guides development, specifically,
residential development toward the Development Areas to "...facilitate economical service delivery in
those areas ... and to conserve the Rural Areas." The Growth Management Plan also recognizes that the
loss of resources to development is irreversible and irreplaceable. Further, the Plan states, "In the interest
of this growth management strategy, residential development is considered a secondary use in the rural
area." The Land Use Plan provides guidance for development that will be harmonious to the natural and
man-made environments and consistent with the County's Growth Management goals — which are to
channel development into designated Development Areas while conserving the balance of the County as
rural areas." A goal of the Rural Areas section of the Plan states, "Reduce the level and rate of residential
development in the Rural Areas, and minimize the impact of permitted development."
This property is also within the Entrance Corridor Overlay District and a Flood Hazard Overlay. As
residential dwellings are exempted from review by the Architectural Review Board, the ARB did not
comment on this application. The area of the Flood Hazard Overly is located adjacent to the pond and
would not be affected by an additional residential dwelling.
Regarding the proposal to donate one of the two proposed lots to the North Garden Fire Department the
County's Department of Fire Rescue has provided revised comments supporting this offer (new
Attachment G). Chief Eggleston has indicated that an existing dry hydrant located on site provides an
important service to the North Garden Fire Department and that "it is in Fire Rescue's best interest to
maintain the dry hydrant for fire protection purposes " The Comprehensive Plan does not identify this site
for a public use. While the dry hydrant and pond provides a benefit to fire service in the area, maintaining
the Fire Department's access to the hydrant does not require the creation of two additional lots as proposed
in this request. Permanent access to the hydrant and property can also be secured by means other than
subdividing the land (such as an access easement).
Staff Comment: The applicant would like to subdivide approximately 2 -acres in the area next to her existing
house and construct a house with less square footage. The reasons given for this request are as follows:
1. I would like to build a house with lesser square footage than now owned. (Taxation and cost
of living make it a practical solution to change in economic status.) I would not build
anything that would be a detriment to the valuation of adjacent property.
2. My husband and I have always felt that we'd like for the local fire company [to] own the
corner property. The fire company, in the past, has held a fund-raiser each summer.
Additionally, there are local churches who have used the lot for various activities.
Although the applicant only intends to construct one additional residence, this application is for two additional
development rights. The second development right would allow the subdivision of a minimum 2 -acre parcel
at the corner of Route 29 and Red Hill School Road to be donated to the North Garden Volunteer Fire
Department. The donated parcel would remain undeveloped for the use of the Fire Department for their
picnics and other outdoor events. Please see the Department of Fire Rescue's comments (Attachment G) and
staff comments in the Conformity with the Comprehensive Plan (above) i-lowe: e;, the Fife. De fail ent has
expressed eeneerns regaMing the additienal demand that would be plaeed eH eurfeRt reseurees, should an
1. Staff will address each provision of Section 10.5.2.1 of the Zoning Ordinance:
SP 07-10 Cuttight
1. The board of supervisors may authorize the issuance of a special use permit for more lots than the total
number permitted under section 10.3.1 and section 10.3.2; provided that no such permit shall
be issued for property within the boundaries for the watershed of any public drinking water supply
impoundment, and further provided that no such permit shall be issued to allow more development
lots within a proposed rural preservation development than that permitted by right under section
10.3.3.3(b). (Added 11-8-89; Amended 5-5-04 effective 7-1-04)
The subject property is not in a watershed of any public drinking water supply impoundment or within an
RPD.
The board of supervisors shall determine that such division is compatible with the neighborhood
as set forth in section 31.2.4.1 of this chapter with reference to the goals and objectives of the
comprehensive plan relating to rural areas including the type of division proposed and specifically,
as to this section only, with reference to the following: (Amended l 1-8-89)
1. The size, shape, topography and existing vegetation of the property in relation to its suitability
for agricultural or forestal production as evaluated by the United States Department of
Agriculture Soil Conservation Service or the Virginia Department of Forestry.
The subject property contains mostly locally important with two areas of prime soils and one area of
unique soils near the southeast border of the property. The area of the pond does not contain agricultural
soils.
2. The actual suitability of the soil for agricultural or forestal production as the same shall be
shown on the most recent published maps of the United States Department of Agriculture Soil
Conservation Service or other source deemed of equivalent reliability by the Soil
Conservation Service.
The soils on this property have been identified as suitable far agricultural production. (Attachment D)
3. The historic commercial agricultural or forestal uses of the property since 1950, to the extent
that is reasonably available.
This parcel was part of a 142.54 -acre parcel that was operated as `farming properties " at the time of
Francis R. Cutright will, dated June 10, 1975.
4. If located in an agricultural or forestal area, the probable effect of the proposed development
on the character of the area. For the purposes of this section, a property shall be deemed to be
in an agricultural or forestal area if fifty (50) percent or more of the land within one (l) mile
of the border of such property has been in commercial agricultural or forestal use within five
(5) years of the date of the application for special use permit. In making this determination,
mountain ridges, major streams and other physical barriers which detract from the
cohesiveness of an area shall be considered.
Approximately 61.5% of the land within one mile of the property is in parcels that are enrolled in use -
value taxation for agricultural or forestal uses. Enrollment in the tax categories indicates the presence of
active commercial agricultural or forestal uses. The parcel is considered to be in an agricultural or
forestal area. A farming operation is located on the opposite side of Red Hill School Road. Other farming
operations are located within one -mile of the subject property; a property under the Acquisition of
Conservation Easement program is within one -mile of the subject property; and it is within one -mile of the
Hardware Agricultural and Forestal District.
5. The relationship of the property in regard to developed rural areas. For the purposes of this
section, a property shall be deemed to be located in a developed rural area if fifty (50) percent
or more of the land within one (1) mile of the boundary of such property was in parcels of
record of five (5) acres or less on the adoption date of this ordinance. In making this
determination, mountain ridges, major streams and other physical barriers which detract from
SP 07.10 Cutright
the cohesiveness of an area shall be considered.
Approximately 4.3% of the land within one mile of the property was in parcels offive acres or less on the
Zoning Ordinance adoption date. This area is not considered to be a developed rural area.
6. The relationship of the proposed development to existing and proposed population centers,
services and employment centers. A property within areas described below shall be deemed in
proximity to the area or use described:
a. Within one mile roadway distance of the urban area boundary as described in the
comprehensive plan; (Amended 11-8-89)
b. Within one-half mile roadway distance of a community boundary as described in the
comprehensive plan; (Amended 11-8-89)
c. Within one-half mile roadway distance of a village as described in the comprehensive
plan. (Amended 11-8-89)
The subject property is surrounded by Rural Areas land use designation properties; the North Garden
commercially zoned property is located over one -mile to the south, at the Plank Road/Route 29
intersection.
7. The probable effect of the proposed development on capital improvements programming in
regard to increased provision of services.
The additional residence may not directly result in a need for development of capital improvement
programs, an additional residence results in an increased need for future equipment, a concern raised by
the Fire Department.
8. The traffic generated from the proposed development would not, in the opinion of the
Virginia Department of Transportation: (Amended 11-8-89)
a. Occasion the need for road improvement;
b. Cause a tolerable road to become a nontolerable road;
c. Increase traffic on an existing nontolerable road.
Traffic would not be increased to the level that would require improvements; Route 29 is not identified as
intolerable in this area.
9. With respect to applications for special use permits for land lying wholly or partially within
the boundaries for the watershed of any public drinking water impoundment, the following
additional factors shall be considered:
a. The amount and quality of existing vegetative cover as related to filtration of sediment,
phosphorous, heavy metals, nitrogen and other substances determined harmful to water
quality for human consumption;
b. The extent to which existing vegetative cover would be removed or disturbed during the
construction phase of any development;
c. The amount of impervious cover which will exist after development;
d. The proximity of any paved (pervious or impervious) area, structure, or drain field to any
perennial or intermittent stream or impoundment; or during the construction phase, the
proximity of any disturbed area to any such stream or impoundment;
e. The type and characteristics of soils including suitability for septic fields and erodability;
f. The percentage and length of all slopes subject to disturbance during construction or
upon which any structure, paved area (pervious or impervious) or active recreational area
shall exist after development;
g. The estimated duration and timing of the construction phase of any proposed
development and extent to which such duration and timing are unpredictable;
h. The degree to which original topography or vegetative cover have been altered in
anticipation of filing for any permit hereunder;
10 cuwght
i. The extent to which the standards of Chapter 17 et seq. of the Code of Albemarle can
only be met through the creation of artificial devices, which devices will:
1. Require periodic inspection and/or maintenance;
2. Are susceptible to failure or overflow for run-off associated with any one hundred
year or more intense storm.
The property is not within a public drinking water impoundment watershed.
Staff will address each provision of Section 31.2.4.1 of the Zoning Ordinance
31.2.4.1: Special Use Permits provided far 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 staffs opinion that there would not be substantial detriment to an adjacent property.
that the character of the district will not be changed thereby and
An additional residence would not change the character of the area; however, the property provides a natural buffer
between Route 29 and other properties in this area.
that such use will be in harmony with tee purpose and intent of this ordinance,
The purpose and intent of the Rural Areas zoning is to preserve agricultural and forestal lands and activities, to
protect the water supply, to limit service to rural areas, and to conserve the natural, scenic, and historic resources of
the County. This request does not comply with the purpose and intent of the ordinance. As it would allow
additional density not permitted in the Rural Areas zoning district by -right..
with uses permitted by right in the district,
The proposed subdivision and eventual residence would increase the density of this district beyond what is allowed
by -right.
with the additional regulations provided in section S.0 of this ordinance,
There are no regulations in section 5.0 of this ordinance that apply to this application.
SUMMARY:
Staff has identified the following factors favorable to this application:
1. The Department of Fire Rescue has indicated that a proposed land donation to the North Garden Fire
Department would benefit fire rescue service by providing permanent access to an existing dry
hydrant/pond.
However, it should be noted that the donation of land to the Fire Department does not require the subdivision of
two lots as proposed in this application. Furthermore, there are other means of ensuring permanent access to the
hydrant and land other than by creating an additional lot (access easements).
Staff has identified the following factors unfavorable to this application:
SP 07-10 Cutright
1. This application does not represent a unique circumstance that would permit a favorable recommendation.
2. Approval of this application would set an unwanted precedent.
3. An additional residential structure would cause added demand for services.
4. The proposed subdivision would increase rural area density above the by -right density.
5. The proposed subdivision would further increase fragmentation of land.
6. The proposed subdivision for an additional residence would increase impervious surfaces in the rural
areas.
?. The Fire Depaftment has net indieated that the), would aeeept the land denation, but have expressed a
eeneerR for the inereased serviee demands of additional dwelling units.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Based on the findings contained in this staff report, staff recommends denial of Special Use Permit 2007-10.
ATTACHMENTS
A SP 2007-10 Cutright Application
B Concept plan on the survey by B. Aubrey Huffman & Associates. LTD, dated April 2, 2004 and received
by the Community Development Department on February 22, 2007.
C Summary of Request for Additional Lots Heard by the Board of Supervisors
D Agricultural Soils TMP88-6A1
E Short Review Comment
F Location Map
G (NEW) Department of Fire Rescue Comments (June 8, 2007), updating prior comments from the
Department noted provided in Attachment E
SP 07-10 Cutmght
ATTACHMENT A
0 IV 11 Application for �. S���D� :
S �? 2661- O/ D Special Use Permit Ip . 2.2 (2Q)
Please See the List at the bottom of page 4 for the Appropriate Fee
PROJECT NAME: (how should we refer to this application?):
PROPOSAL,: +
EXISTING COMP PLAN LAND USEIDENSITY:
LOCATION: C "fflay Q,� - ,N . cv,1A Pf1
TAX MAP PARCEL(s): 'S a l
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT: %n n
�- tf
# OF ACRES TO IIE COVERED BY SPECIAL USE PERMIT (if a portion it must be delineated on a plat): 1
Is this an amendment to an a 'sting Special Use Permit? If es provide that SP Number. ❑ YE NO
Are you submittinga preliminarysite Ian with this application? ❑ YES ❑ NO
Contact PG�on (Who should we call1write concerning this project?):
�2 I S r f C ce -f
r G A -f
\P\Ad_dress ��[�u %�EC� 4: /� .SCi1r-I
,{
RG
/!�t
City NdTV( l4ct rCl Pll
StateV'�_
Zip�
L
y Daytime Phone (113�) a 93 --31 $- I
Fax # (�)
-mail
\V `Owner of Record L' LC tN` � a A+ Fk
mr l.i �fws'l
I / /�
pat--sry 'fe- t��J(-,�4Af.
pat
,/
TrksS -e2
l� Address Jay q Ep.L{ 4; 11 'yeah
R14
City (VOCI✓1 41'1
StateVLP,.
Zipaao]5�(
Daytime Phone" A93--3/6-/
Fax #(__)
-,mail
Applicant ( Who is the Contact person relpresentin`g?):/
A t,5
I/ n SEL
',z li^� 1. t < ! , /
T _r
V u 5 7 -c 'C_
Address �"4 R+ N"1� Je{ie,d�
�d
_+f�r�
city No f14\ &IaP l'1
State Ci,
Zip
Daytime Phone 6431) 2L`11 3 -3 IT- I
Fax # (_)
E-mail
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
/T--t1(c GtD'u2.•-F�t`t-c,
I' ^rli..i
h -w. fir'.. h i t t _ - >. _ 1, l✓� .. _.7 a ✓/r,._ _..
❑ Special Use Permits: ❑ ZMAs & Proffers:
❑ Vanances:
❑ Letter of.Authonra[ion
Concurrent review of Site Development Plan? E] YES ❑ NO
FOR OFFICE USE ONLYqq SP # - / `
Fee Amount $ // r1O Date Paid d -/5 Y> (_..� G By who? P + ij i Receipt # 4 / /TN Ck# -q06 By:
County of Albemarle Department of Community Development
401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Voice: (434) 296-5832 Fax: (434) 972-4126
8/7/06 Page I of "'�
Section 31.2.4.1 of the Alt .arle County Zoning Ordinance states th. `The board of supervisors hereby
reserves unto itself the right to issue all special use permits permitted hereunder. Special use permits for
uses as provided in this ordinance may be issued upon a finding by the board of supervisors that such use
will not be of substantial detriment to adjacent property, that the character of the district will not be
changed thereby and that such use will be in harmony with the purpose and intent of this ordinance, with
the uses permitted by right in the district, with additional regulations provided in section 5.0 of this
ordinance, and with the public health, safety and general welfare."
The items that 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 you request. If you
need assistance filling out these items, staff is available.
How will the proposed special use affect adjacent property?
How will the proposed special use affect the character of the district(s) surrounding the property?
How is the use in harmony with the purpose and intent of the Zoning Ordinance?
How is the use in harmony with the uses permitted by right in the district?
v ,
What additional regulations provided in Section 5.0 of the Zoning Ordinance apply to this use?
How will this use promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of the community?
8/7/06 Page 2 of 4
1�
Describe your request in detail include all pertinent information such a. _ie number of persons involved in
the use, operating hours, and any unique features of the use:
(' .—c.c.L moi.
Q�
CILO 01 �
e 1- ,c
U 4d
JI /SL
A ACHMENTS REQUIRED — provide two (2) copies of each
1. Recorded plat or recorded boundary survey of the property requested for the permit. If there is
no recorded plat or boundary survey, please provide legal description of the property and the Deed
ook and page number or Plat Book and page number.
2. 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.
IONAL ATTACHMENTS:
3. Provide 16 copies of any drawings or conceptual plans.
❑ 4. Additional Information, if any. (16 copies)
Owner/Applicant Must Read and Sign
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 on this application and accompanying information is accurate, true, and correct to
the best of my knowledge. t
0 t fit h -I 'Faro- ly 7r ,,5
Signature of Owner, Contract Pufehaser
Tc��sie �. C,tiri .
Print Name
1 , 1;' / S, z eel rf
Date
q-3y-�Lg3-3/•5 i
Daytime phone number of Signatory
8/7/06 Page 3 of 4 46
11
FIRST AMENDMENT
OF
TRUST AGREEMENT
Pursuant to the powers reserved to Trustee in the CUTRIGHT
FAMILY TRUST dated March 1, 1995, Patsie H. Cutright hereby
amends that Trust Agreement as follows;
TRUSTEE HEREBY REVOKES Paragraph D(1)(c) of ARTICLE II of
said Trust Agreement, and replaces it with the following:
(c) If, notwithstanding the Donors' precatory wish, any
real property in the Trust is sold prior to the termination of
the Trust as herein provided, the proceeds of such sale shall be
distributed to my three daughters, Sandra C. Stanley, Carol C.
Gentry and Bonnie S. Cutright, equally, per stirpes.
TRUSTEE HEREBY REVOKES Paragraph A. Successor Trustees, of
ARTICLE VII. Miscellaneous Provisions, and replaces it with the
following:
Arley E. Cutright, Jr. is now deceased. Therefore, Patsie
H. Cutright shall serve as sole Trustee hereof. Should Patsie H.
Cutright fail or cease to serve as Trustee for any reason, then I
name our daughters, Sandra C. Stanley, Carol C. Gentry and Bonnie
S. Cutright, as Co -Trustees. All decisions made under this Trust
shall be made by at least two of our three daughters unless there
is only one surviving trustee. Should all of the aforesaid
persons fail or cease to serve as Trustee for any reason, then I
name the first of the following persons who is willing and able
to serve as the sole Trustee: Erin E. Stanley, Sarah M. Stanley
and Sean S. Kessler. Successor Trustees shall become qualified
upon their acceptance of the duties as a Trustee and the assets
of the Trust in a signed writing and without further formality or
court involvement. Trustees, Cc -Trustees or Successor Trustees
shall have all the powers, immunities and discretion which we
have granted to the initial Trustees, and references herein to
the "Trustee" or "Trustees" shall mean any Trustee(s), Cc -
Trustees or Successor Trsutees then serving hereunder. No
Trustees, Co -Trustees or Successor Trustees serving hereunder
shall be required to give bond as such.
IN ALL OTHER RESPECTS Patsie H. Cutright, Trustee, hereby
ratifies and confirms the provisions of said Trust Agreement
dated March 1, 1995.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Patsie H. Cutright, Trustee, has
executed this Amendment to Trust Agreement on this LA— day of
w'
2006.
PATSIE H. Trustee
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, to -wit:
Personally appeared PATSIE E. CUTRIGHT
that she executed the pregeding instrument a
deed, before me, this /62 day of,:
ary
My Commission
and duly acknowledged
s//her free act and
1K,, . 2006.
v
Expires
NOTE:
LOT A ANO THE REMAINING PORTION OF PARCEL 61-1
MAY NOT BE FURTHER DIVIDED.
BETBALEB
FRONT: 751
BIDE: 35'
REAR BE
TN BB
PARCEL G
` LOT A H s
1 2.355 ACRES
kiE
\\ TM 86
a -s. PARCEL
\L07
BA-111. B55 ACRES
2.385 ACRE
-PALRr
` zv
1
V /
O
POND L
f,.
NO
a
n C �\
�� C3 BB2'2B
PLAT SHOWING
DIVISION OF PARCEL 6A-1 }h IS /S-lj f -
AS SHOWN ON TAX MAP 68 e'{` wG, -
SOALE: 1 100' ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA APRIL 2. 2004
B. AUBREY HUFFMAN & ASSOCIATES. LTDy„6, � 8� jf
CIVIL ENGINEERING- LAND TTESVILRVE VIRGINIALAND PLANNING -fCHARL
ATTACHMENT B
RECEIVED
FEB 2 2 2007
OMMUN" DEVELOPMENT
Book:2812,Paoe: 490
NAME OF
SP # APPLICANT
SP -81-02 Coldspring Hill
SP -81-16 Libet Corporation
SP -82-3 Haley, Chisholm & Morris
SP -82-10 Haley, Chisholm & Morris
SP -82-20 Haley, Chisholm & Morris
SP -83-72 Melvin Dixon
sP-84-39 Harry & Helen Thornley
SUMMARY OF REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL LOTS HEARD BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
TAX MAP
NUMBER OF
TOTAL NUMBER
OF LOTS
DESCRIPTION
ACTION
AND PARCEL
ADDITIONAL LOTS
63-30
12
28
47-16
19
27
Average Lot size 2.61 acs
Denied
58-64E
9
17
Average Lot size 4.95 acs
Denied
and 27A (pt)
in watersuppLy watershed
64-49C
3
21
Average tot size 6.7 acs
Approved
Extension of Key West
30-27
5
15
Average lot size 8.39 acs
Approved
in watersupply watershed
100-27F
2
3
Previous divisions
Denied
exhausted development
rights. Site has
access problems and
soils with moderate to
severe limitations.
1
2
In watersuppLy
Denied
30-35
watershed previous
divisons exhausted
development rights.
93-58
8
12
Average Lot size 3.8
Denied
acres with 240 acre
residue.
SP -85-7
Edgar S. Robb
73-33
1
12
SP -85-42
James Barr
63-30
12
28
SP -86-53
Warren & Janet Maupin
17-18H
2
3
SP -86.67
Nettie Jones
59-781 (pt)
3
4
and 27A (pt)
SP -87-63 Stephen vonStorch 768-13 & 14 i 3
76-49
89-73
SP -88-103 Lois Beckwith 57-51B 1 1
and 51 (pt)
SP -89-57 Robert & Sandra Haney 93-48 1 2
Average lot size 10.3 acs
Average lot size 8.6
Average Lot size 6.3
acs. In watersuppLy
watershed. Previous
divisions exhausted
development rights.
Parcel 7B1 had 5
development rights,
but was entirely in
floodplain. In
watersuppLy
watershed. Proposed
73 acre residue.
Adjacent to Urban Area.
Average tot size it acs.
Permitted 2 dwellings
on one lot for family,
but did not permit
subdivision. In
watersuppLy watershed.
Previous division
exhausted development
rights. Parcel 92-48
was created as a
parcel of 21 acres or
greater.
Approved
Denied
Denied
Denied
ATTACHMENT C
SYNOPSIS OF
BOARD ACTION
Did not meet criteria of Section 10.5.2.1
Denied by tie vote. Some Board members felt criteria of
10.5.2.1 had been addressed. Others disagreed.
Board approved with no specific justification. Staff and
Planning Commission recommended approval.
Board approvedwith discussion centering on design of
project which improved water quality.
Board denied citing that request did not meet
criteria of Section 10.5.2.1
Board denied citing that request did not meet
criteria of Section 10.5.2.1 and that the site Was
in the watersuppLy watershed.
Denied by tie vote. Some Board members felt
criteria of Section 10.5.2.1 had been addressed,
others disagreed.
Board believed request satisfied criteria of Section 10.5.2.1.
Majority of Board felt that the request did not
meet the criteria of Section 10.5.2.1.
Board denied with limited discussion.
Board denied citing request was inconsistent with
the Ordinance and Comprehensive Plan.
Approved Board approved with limited discussion. Staff and
Planning Commission recommended that criteria of
Section 10.5.2.1 had been adequatley met.
Approved Board approved citing good faith effort by
epplicent to permit the second dwelling and that
the additional dwelling was for an eLderly family
member.
Denied Board denied citing that devleopment rights had
been exhausted and that approval would set an
unwanted precedent.
Page 1
SP -92.51 Allen Dunbar
SP -93.11 James Johnston
SP -94-01 Allen & Edna Dunbar
SP -94-03 Habitat for Humanity
(A:BOSLOTS.l1K1)
ATTACHMENT C
SYNOPSIS OF
BOARD ACTION
Board believed request sat'sifed criteria of Section 10.5.2.1
The subdivision was intended to provide lots for
family members (subdivision did not qualify as a
family division).
9
Previous division Approved Previous division which utilized development
2 tent iaL had been a family division. Th
89-52 1 exhausted development additional development right being requested was
rights. for additional family division (3rd generation).
Amend SP -84-38 which Denied Previous action utilized development
47-8 1 2 emitted reconfiguration potential. Criteria for issuance of an
ofdevelopment potential. additonal lot not adequately met.
Additional lot was for
a family division.
89-52 1 2 For Family Member Approved Previous development right granted for son, this for daughter
128-85 5 10 Approved
Page 2
SUMMARY OF REQUEST
FOR ADDITIONAL
LOTS HEARD BY THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS
NAME OF
SP # APPLICANT
SP -92-46 James E. Clark
TAX MAP
AND PARCEL
126-31F
NUMBER OF
ADDITIONAL LOTS
1
TOTAL NUMBER
OF LOTS
2
DESCRIPTION
Previous division
exhausted development
rigghts. Parcel
126-31F was created as
a parcel of 21 acres
ACTION
Approved
orreater.
SP -92.51 Allen Dunbar
SP -93.11 James Johnston
SP -94-01 Allen & Edna Dunbar
SP -94-03 Habitat for Humanity
(A:BOSLOTS.l1K1)
ATTACHMENT C
SYNOPSIS OF
BOARD ACTION
Board believed request sat'sifed criteria of Section 10.5.2.1
The subdivision was intended to provide lots for
family members (subdivision did not qualify as a
family division).
9
Previous division Approved Previous division which utilized development
2 tent iaL had been a family division. Th
89-52 1 exhausted development additional development right being requested was
rights. for additional family division (3rd generation).
Amend SP -84-38 which Denied Previous action utilized development
47-8 1 2 emitted reconfiguration potential. Criteria for issuance of an
ofdevelopment potential. additonal lot not adequately met.
Additional lot was for
a family division.
89-52 1 2 For Family Member Approved Previous development right granted for son, this for daughter
128-85 5 10 Approved
Page 2
ATTACHMENT D
TMP 88 -GAT
0 62.5 125 250 Feet
I mo_i i I I i i I
► Prepared by Albemarle County Community Development Dept.
Map created by Scott Clark, April 2007.
► Note: The map elements depicted are graphic representations and are not
to be construed or used as a legal description. This map is for display purposes only.
► Parcel boundaries reflect most recent available data.
ATTACHMENT
Application #:I SP200700010 Short Review Comments
Project Name: Cutright Family Trust
Date Completed: 03/16/2007
Reviewer: Amelia McCulley
Review Status: Pending
Reviews Comments:
IINew Special Use Permit
Admin Zoning Review
recommend that the Lead Planner review the policy & precedence of prior applications for addition,
ievelopment rights. I understand that this provision is intended to allow family divisions where there
ire more children than development rights.
s there is a clearly identifiable public policy that is forwarded by the approval of additional
:ipment rights, approval for private purposes can set a dangerous precedence. There is
rate and careful public policy in the establishment of a fixed number of development rights for the
Areas properties. Development rights are a valuable commodity.
Date Completed: 03/23/2007
Reviewer: Glenn Brooks
Review Status:
No Objection
Reviews Comments:
This does not appear to involve engineering.
Date Completed:
03/26/2007
Reviewer:
James Barber
Review Status:
No Objection
Reviews Comments: Verify adequate fire flow is available
Date Completed: 04/09/2007
Reviewer: James Barber
Review Status: Pending
Reviews Comments:
Engineer Z&CD
Fire Rescue
Fire Rescue
arding our phone conversation of this application, I was unaware that the property owner had
3usted the previous development rights and was applying for additional development rights. As we
ussed, the Department of Fire Rescue has concerns with granting approval for additional
elopment rights due to the additional demand that would be placed on current resources. Please
free to contact me if you have further questions.
Date Completed: 03/29/2007
Reviewer: Julie Mahon
Historic Preservation
Review Status: No Objection
Reviews Comments:Updated 4/2/07
Historic resources are located within the area. No historic resources have been identified within the
pro ect area.
Date Completed:
Reviewer:
Review Status:
Reviews Comments:
Dale Completed:
Reviewer:
Review Status:
Reviews Comments:
03/22/2007
Margaret Maliszewski ARB
No Objection
ARB comment is not required for this type of application.
03/21/2007
Tamara Ambler Planning
No Objection
The plat correctly shows the existing pond and the floodplain around the pond. The WPO stream
buffer limits match the floodplain limits. No new construction or development should occur within the
floodplain or stream buffer limits without additional authorization. It appears that there is sufficient area
outside of these limits for new construction.
Page: 1.00 County of Albemarle Printed On: Monday, May 21, 2007
1�
Page 1 of 1
Attachment G
Joan McDowell
From:
Dan Eggleston
Sent:
Friday, June 08, 2007 8:27 AM
To:
Joan McDowell
Cc: James Barber; 'Stephens [US], George A.'; John Oprandy; Bob Brown
Subject: Cutright Property
Joan
This email is in reference to the Special Use Permit for the Cutright Property (TMP # 08800-00-00-
006A1). I have talked to James Barber about the issue, and we would like to offer the following
comments on Fire Rescue's behalf.
The Cutright property as is stands contains a dry hydrant that is often used by the North Garden VFD.
Because the dry hydrant is adjacent to the properties that are within the 5 road miles of the North
Garden VFD, the residents in the area are rated at a lower ISO rating (6 out of 10) and thus enjoy a
lower fire insurance premium. In addition, the North Garden VFD uses the Cutright dry hydrant as a
water supply during water shuttle operations for fres in the southern portion of the County. Therefore,
is in Fire Rescue's best interest to maintain the dry hydrant for fire protection proposes.
We understand that the current land owner is offering to donate the subdivided parcel which contains
the dry hydrant to the North Garden VFD. Fire Rescue staff is in favor of this offer because it helps to
better ensure that the dry hydrant will remain in place to supply a much needed water source for the
southern rural area of the County. We further understand that the North Garden VFD will maintain the
dry hydrant and adjacent area to ensure that it remains a viable fire protection water supply.
Please let me know if you have any questions. I may be reached at ext. 3100 or via cell at 531-6600.
Thanks,
Dan
Dan Eggleston, Chief
County of Albemarle, Department of Fire Rescue
460 Stagecoach Road, Suite F
Charlottesville, VA 22902-6489
Voice: 434.296.5833
FAX: 434.972.4123
Mobile: 434.531.6600
E -Mail: deggleston@albemarle.org
wvvw,ACFi rgR_escue.o_rg
6/14/2007