Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
1963
MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 8. 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Beck, William C. Smith and Perkins. Mr. William H. Brown and Mr. Donald Carroll appeared before the Committee with the problem of a fall out shelter in Scottsville District on property to be acquired from W. D. Willis. After discussion of the matter it was recommended that at least2..00000 square feet be acquired. A plat or description will be presented at a later date. Final approval to a 1 lot division known as Lot 1 Block A "Westfield".. property is adjacent to U.S.I. and is owned by Charles W. Hurt. Final approval to a redivision of a portion of "Flordon" consisting of Lots 6AP 6B and ll,, Block B, Lots 2A. 2B, 3A, 3B, 4A, 4B, 5A and 5B. Block C. This approval was given with a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors that they check into the water conditions before they give approval. Final approval to a revised plat of a part of Page 1 of Section 3 "Hessian Hills".. Lots 5-14 Block I and Lot-5 Block J. Preliminary approval to subdivision of William E. Duke property on Barracks Road excluding area shown in red. Preliminary approval to Section 2 "Westfield"formerly Harry Robertson's property. Final approval to Section 3 "Clearview". Redated corrected survey of Lots 5, 6, and 7 and park area in Block F "Key West." Final approval to a 2.5 acre lot., a portion of the property belonging to Margie H. MQntgomery located on Route 795. Final approval to "Ardwood" Subdivision located off Earlysville Road. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary C ha irma n REPORT OF THE i'RCCEDURFS CCjwi I TTEE ALBS',AARLE COU11TY PLANNING CCR1H I SS I ON MEMDE; 3: a'J I LL I XA A. PL-i"X I NS, JR. , Cwd iAdl NELSON BECK CEC I L NIAUP I N THE COMMITTEE WISHES TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING REPORT: IT IS FELT THAT THE MOST IMPORTANT PART OF THE PLANNING PROGRAM OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY LIES BEFORE THE COMMISSION; THAT THE STEPS TAKEN TO PRESENT A LAND USE PROGRAM TO THE PEOPLE SHOULD BE PROPERLY SET UP AND MUST FOLLOW A DEFINITE PATTERN. ONLY BY SUCH A PROGRAM CAN THE PRESENT CITIZENS OF ALBEMARLE EXPECT THEIR COUNTY TO GROW, DEVELOP, AND PROSPER IN SUCH A MANNER THAT THEY WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO A CONDEMNING FlWHY" FROM THOSE WHO WILL LIVE HERE IN LATER YEARS. CARE MUST BE TAKEN TO PREVENT THE OVER LOOKING OF ANY SMALL DETAIL THAT MIGHT RESULT IN A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE PURP03E OF THIS PROGRAM, THE BEST INTEREST OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY AND ITS CITIZENS. WITH THIS IN MIND, THE COMiITTEE WISHES TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATION OF A DETAILED TIMETABLE AS A GUIDE TO THE COMMISSION, 1. THAT A MEETING SH-)ULD BE HELD NOT LATER THAN MARCH 15 OF ALL CIVIC LEADERS AND INTERESTED PEFSONS IN ORDER THAT THESE PEOPLE CAN BE APPRAISED OF WHAT HAS BEEN ACCOMPLISHED AND WHAT THE PLANNING PROGRAM IS ATTEMPTING TO DO* A, AT THE JANUARY 17 MEETING OF THE COMMISSION, A COMMITTEE SHOULD BE APPOINTED TO PREPARE THE PROGRAM AND HANDLE THE PRESENTATION BEFORE THIS IMPORTANT MEETING. (HARCH 15 - PROGRAM COMMITTEE) B. TRAINING AIDS SHOULD BE PREPARED FOR USE IN THIS MEETING AND SUB- SEQUENT ONES. THESE SHOULD SHOV COUNTY GROWTH, LAND USES, PROPOSED DISTRICTS, AND PERSONAL TESTIMONIALS CONCERNING UNDESIRABLE CONDITIONS AND OTHER INFORMATION THAT WILL ASSIST IN GETTING THE MESSAGE ACROSS* 2. AT THE JANUARY 17 MEETING OF THE COMMISSION, A COMMITTEE SHOULD BE APPOINTED BY THE CHAIRMAN TO WORK OUT DETAILS FOR A SERIES OF MEETINGS THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY* CITIZENS INFORMATION COMMITTEE) IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT: A, THE EXISTING COUNTY POPULATION MAP BE USED AS A GUIDE TO SET UP MEETINGS IN EACH COMMUNITY AND AT EACH SCHOOL. B. THESE MEETINGS COMMENCE NOT LATER THAN APRIL 15 AND BE COMPLETED BY MAY 1. C. Two MEETINGS MAY BE HELD ON ONE NIGHT IN DIFFERENT SECTIONS OF THE COUNTY. D, EACH MEETING SHOULD HAVE SOMEONE AVAILABLE TO RECORD SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ASKED AND ANSWERS GIVEN2 AS WELL AS COMMENTS MADE. E. THESE MEETINGS MUST BE CONDUCTED IN A VERY BUSINESS -LIKE MAINER WITH EMPHASIS ON OBTAINING THE OPINIONSY COMMENTSt AND SUGGESTIONS OF �rrrr THE CITIZENS ATTENDING. 3, TWO MEETINGS SHOULD BE HELD IMMEDIATELY UPON THE COMPLETION OF THE AREA MEETINGS OF THE COMMITTEE CONDUCTING THESE AREA MEETINGS AND THOSE DRAFTING THE ORDINANCE IN ORDER THAT ALL PROPOSALS SUGGESTED CAN BE CONSIDERED, IT IS SUGGESTED THAT THE FIRST MEETING BE HELD ON APRIL 299 FOLLOWED BY A SECOND MEETING ON MAY 6. 4. THE FINAL TENTATIVE DRAFT PREPARED BY THE DRAFTING COMMITTEE SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON �4AY 16 FOR CONSIDERATION. 5, UPON COMPLETION OF THE PROPOSED DRAFTt THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD BEGIN IMMEDIATELY TO PROPOSE CHANGES IN OTHER ORDINANCES WHICH WILL BE EFFECTIVE BY ZONING REGULATIONS, 6. IT APPEARS TO THE COMMITTEE THAT THE ENTIRE PROGRAM MAY BE COMPLETED AND PRESENTED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS AT ITS JUNE 20 REGULAR MEETING FOR THEIR CONSIDERATION. - 2 - 7, IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED THAT A SPEAKER'S BUREAU BE SET UP BY THE CITIZENS INFORMATION COMMITTEE FOR THE PURPOSE OF HAVING AVAILABLE PEOPLE WHO CAN TALK WITH ORGANIZATIONS CONCERNING THE PLANNING PROGRAM DURING THE PERIODS MARCH 15 - APRIL 15. 8. THE COMMITTEE FEELS THAT MATERIAL SHOULD BE PRINTED AND DISTRIBUTED TO COMMISSION MEMBERS AND THE PUBLIC IN AN EFFORT TO SHOW THE CITIZENS ALL FACTS. THE COST FOR THESE PUBLICATIONS SHOULD BE BORNE BY THE COUNTY. 9. THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD ASK EACH CIVIC CLUB OR ORGANtZAT10N THAT MAY BE INTERESTED TO APPOINT A PERSON TO ACT AS LAISON DURING THE REMAINDER OF THE PLANNING PROGRAM. IF THIS IS DONE, THEN INFORMATION THAT MAY BE AVAILABLE TO THESE CLUBS CAN BE READILY ACCESSIBLE. 10. THE FOLLOWING DATES ARE SUGGESTED FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE PROGRAM: MONDAYO JANUARY 21 TIEETING OF DRAFTING COMMITTEE [IONDAYt FEBRUARY 4 MEETING OF DRAFTING COMMITTEE THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14 UEETING OF ENTIRE PLANNING COMMISSION MONDAY9 FEBRUARY 18 (t9EETING OF DRAFTING COMMITTEE THURSDAYO PARCH 7 r�IEETING OF ENTIRE PLANNING COMMISSION FRIDAYV MARCH 15 MEETING WITH CIVIC LEADERS(40087MOUSE) MARCH 15 - APRIL 15 SPEAKERS AVAILABLE FOR CIVIC CLUBS APRIL 15 - 1IAY 1 SERIES OF AREA MEETINGS MONDAY,, APRIL 29 I'IIEETING OF COMMITTEE CONDUCTING AREA MEETINGS AND DRAFTING COMMITTEE MONDAY, MAY 6 SAME AS NIONDAYt APRIL 29 THURSDAY9 MAY 16 PRESENTATION OF PROPOSED ORDINANCE TO PLANNING COMMISSION THURSDAY, JUNE 20 PRESENTATION OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND REGULATIONS TO BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS - 3 - 11. THE COMMITTEE REALIZES THAT THE ABOVE SCHEDULE IS AN AMBITIOUS ONE AND WILL REQUIRE A GREAT DEAL OF WORK ON THE PART OF THE ENTIRE COMMISSION. HOWEVER, IT MUST BE REALIZED THAT EVERY EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO CONCLUDE THE PROGRAM WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY, THE COMMITTEE SUBMITS THIS REPORT FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. CHAIRMAN I-VILLIAM A, PERKINSY JR, NELSON BECK CEO I L MAUP I N 4 MINUTES OF THE JANUARY 179 1963 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date at 7:00 P. M. in the Board Room of the County Office Building. The followin.v members were present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Beck, Perkins, William C. Smith, Palmer, Carr, Maupin, Birckhead, Catlin, Barnes, MacGregor, Boggs, Arnold Smith, Johnson, Brown and Pence. Also present were Lionel Key, Dave Lyster, Alan Bruns, Paul Daniel. The minutes of the last regular meeting were read and approved. Mr. Johnson welcomed the new members. Mr. Pence gave a brief history of the Albemarle County Planning Commissior which was formed in April, 1944. Mr. Palmer welcomed the new members and thanked both old and new members for serving on the Commission and stressed the importance of land use in Albemarle County. Mrs. Liady gave a report on the Classification Committee which is attached hereto. Mr. Perkins gave a report on the Procedural Committee in which he sent out a time schedule, which the report is attached hereto. Mr. Johnson appointed the following Committ6es: Drafting Perkins, Chairman Liady Beck Maupin Arnold Smith William C. Smith Birckhead Bo-*gs Program Liady, Chairman Arnold Smith Dure Carr Trevillian Catlin MacGregor Barnes There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Chairman R Citizens Information Liady, Chairman Beck Arnold Smith William C. Smith Perkins Johnson Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary REPORT - CLASSIFICATION COMMITTEE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING CCMMISSION JA NUARY 17, 1963 MEMBERS: NANCY LIADY, CHAIRMAN ARNOLD SMITH WILLIAM SMITH L.+NDON BIRCKHEAD THE COMMITTEE VIJISHES TO MAKE THE FOLLOWING REPORT TO THE COMMISSION ON THE DISTRICTS NEEDED IN ALBEMARLE COUNTY AND USES ALLOWED* IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT NO EFFORT HAS BEEN MADE BY THE COMMITTEE TO RELATE THE SUGGESTED DISTRICTS TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAPS SINCE IT WAS FELT THAT USES DESIRED SHOULD BE DETERMINED PRIOR TO RELATING THEM TO SPECIFIC AREAS OF THE COUNTY. THE COMMITTEE SUBMITS THIS REPORT IN RUUGH DRAFT ONLY, FULLY REALIZING THAT ADDITIONAL WORK MUST BE DONE* THE COMMISSION SHOULD BE APPRAISED OF THE PROGRESS TO THIS DATE. THE FOLLOWING DISTRICTS ARE PROPOSED: AGRICULTURAL, LIMITED, A-1 err AGRICULTURAL, GEi !ERA L, A-2 RESIDENTIAL, LIMITED, R-1 RESIDENTIAL, RESTRICTED, R-2 RLS I DENT I AL, GENE,-,iAL, R-3 BUSINESS, LIMITED, D-1 BUSINESS, GENERAL, B-2 YIDUSTR I HL, LIMITED, fvl-1 111DUSTRIAL, GENERAL, M-2 - 1 - AGRICULTURAL, LIMITED, A-1 STATEMENT OF INTENT THIS DISTRICT SHOULD COVER THAT PORTION OF THE COUNTY OCCUPIED BY OPEN SPACES, FARMING, NO COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND ESTATE PLANTATIONS. THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED FOR THE SPECIFIC PURPOSE OF FACILITATING EXISTING AND FUTURE FARMING OPERATIONS, CONSERVATION OF WATER AND OTHER NATURAL RESOURCESt PROTECTING THE LARGE SHOW -TYPE OF FARMING. USES NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING CHARACTER OF THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE PROHIBITED• EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO KEEP SUCH PORTIONS OF THE COUNTY AS FREE OF ANY USES THAT WOULD REFLECT UPON THE AESTHETIC VALUES OF THE AREA, USES AND STRUCTURES PERMITTED SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS GENERAL AGRICULTURE DAIRYING AND FORESTRY CHURCHES PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS CONSERVATION AND PRESERVATION AREAS LODGES HUNTING CLUBS CEMETERIES PUBLIC UTILITIES (NECESSARY TO PROVIDE SERVICES FOR THE AREA) BUSINESS SIGNS CHURCH BULLETIN BOARDS AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS DIRECTIONAL SIGNS HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS -2r r , AREA REGULATIONS MINIMUM LOT SIZE SHOULD BE AT LEAST 400000 SQUARE FEET, ACRE) FRONTAGE REGULATIONS SHOULD BE AT LEAST 200 FEET AT BUILDING LINE YARD REGULATIONS BOTH SIDE AND REAR YARD MINIMUM YARDAGE SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR LOTS. SIDE YARD SHOULD BE AT LEAST 25 FEET AND REAR LOT SHOULD BE AT LEAST 50 FEET. AGRICULTURAL, GENERAL, DISTRICT A-2 STATEMENT OF INTENT GENERALLY, THIS DISTRICT SHOULD COVER THAT PORTION OF THE COUNTY THAT IS ENGAGED PRIMARILY IN THE BUSINESS OF FARMING AND ALSO THE AREA THAT CAN BE EXPECTED TO HAVE URBAN -TYPE DEVELOPMENT AS THE NEED OCCURS. NOT ONLY SHOULD THIS DISTRICT COVER THE MAJOR PORTION OF THE COUNTY THAT CAN LOGICALLY EXPECT TO CONTINUE AS FARMING AREA, BUT THIS DISTRICT SHOULD INCLUDE THOSE AREAS WHICH MIGHT BE CONSIDERED IN THE TRANSITION PERIOD OF DEVELOPMENT FROM RURAL FARMING TO RESIDENTIAL* SUCH DISTRICT SHOULD HELP DISCOURAGE THE RANDOM SCATTERING OF COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL. USES IN THE AREA. USE REGULATIONS 11 SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS 2. MULTIFAMILY (OF LIMITED NUMBER) 3. AGRICULTURE 4. DAIRYING AND FORESTRY 5. GENERAL FARMING 6. SCHOOLS 7. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS S. CHURCHES 9. PROFESSIONAL OFFICES (IN OCCUPANTiS DUELLING) -3- 10, GIFT SHOPS AND ANTIQUE SHOPS 11. GENERAL STORES 12. BEAUTY SHOPS AND BARBER SHOPS 13. FRUIT PACKING SHEDS 14. MOTELS VITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 15. SAWMILLS 16. PLANING MILLS 17. AIRPORTS 18. CONSERVATION AREAS 19, LODGES AND HUNTING CLUBS 20, CERTAIN HOME OCCUPATIONS 21. MOBILE HOME PARK WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AND MEETING CERTAIN PROVISION 22, CERTAIN PUBLIC UTILITIES 23. BUSINESS SIGNS 24. CHURCH BULLETIN BOARD AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 25. HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS L0T SIZ S A. LOT SHOULD BE 20,000 SQUARE FEET.. OR MORE B, SETBACK LINE SHOULD BE 25 FEET FROM ROAD ON 50 FEET RIGHT OF WAY C. MINIMUM FRONTAGE AT SET BACK LINE SHOULD BE 100 FEET YARD REGULATIONS A, SIDE YARD - AT LEAST 15 FEET PER LOT B. REAR YARD - AT LEAST 35 FEET -4- 4 RESIDENTIAL, LIMITED, DISTRICT R-1 STATEvUNT OF I LATENT likw THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE COMPOSED OF HIGH CLASS QUIET, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS, PLUS CERTAIN OPEN SPACES THAT APPEAR LIKELY TO DEVELOP IN A 6ft,8iILAR MANNER. THE REGULATIONS IN THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO STABILIZE AND PROTECT THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT, TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE A SUITABLE.ENVIRONMENT FOR RESTRICTIVE FAMILY LIFE. ALL ACTIVITIES OF A BUSINESS NATURE SHOULD BE PROHIBITED, DEVELOPMENT IS LIMITED TO RELATIVELY LOW CONCENTRATION AND PERMITTED USES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO STRICT RESIDENTIAL USES, NO HOME OCCUPATIONS OR BOARDING FACILITIES SHOULD BE PERMITTED. USE REGULkT I ONS 1. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS 2. TWO FAMILY DVELLINGS 'r✓ 3. SCHOOLS 4, CHURCHES 5. PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS 6. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 7. PUBLIC UTILITIES 8. BUSINESS SIGNS, ADVERTISING "FOR SALE" ONLY 9. CHURCH BULLETIN BOARDS AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 10. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS LOT AND AREA REGUL'M ONS 1. LOT SIZES SHOULD BE ONE ACRE OR MORE. THIS IS NECESSARY IN ORDER TO INSURE THAT DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS DISTRICT WILL BE COMPATIBLE. 2. SET BACK LINE SHOULD BE AT LEAST 50 FEET FROM RIGHT OF WAY 3. MINIMUM FRONTAGE SHOULD BE FROM 100 TO 200 FEET IN ORDER TO PREVENT ELONGATED LOTS. - 5 - 4. WITH A ONE ACRE MINIMUM IT DOES NOT APPEAR NECESSARY TO HAVE A REAR YARD RESTRICTION, 1% HEIGHT REGULATIONS 1t A HEIGHT LIMIT OF 50 FEET FOR BUILDINGS USED AS DV,'ELLINGS 2, HEIGHT OF 75 FEET FOR PUBLIC BUILDINGS m 3, HEIGHT REGULATIONS SHOULD BE IMPOSED ON ACCESSORY BUILDINGS RESIDENTIAL, RESTRICTED, R-2 STATEMENT OF INTENT THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE COMPOSED OF LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AREAS PLUS CERTAIN OPEN SPACES AND AREAS THAT APPEAR LIKELY TO DEVELOP IN LIKE MANNER. THE COMPOSITION OF THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE SIMILAR TO THAT FOUND IN RESIDENTIAL, R-11 WITH THE EXCEPTION OF LOT SIZES. THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO PROMOTE AND ENCOURAGE SUITABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR FAMILY LIVING, FREE OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES. ESSENTIALLY., THIS DISTRICT SHOULD AFFORD THE SAME PROTECTION FOR LOG1 TO MEDIUM PRICED HOUSES AND LOTS AS R-'I PROVIDES FOR HIGHER CLASS DEVELOPMENTS. USE REGULATIONS 1. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS 2, SCHOOLS 3. CHURCHES 4, PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS 5. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 6. PUBLIC BUILDINGS 7. BUSINESS SIGNS FOR SALE OR RENT ONLY 8. BULLETIN BOARDS AND IDENTIFICATION SIGNS 9. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS -6- LOT AND AREA REGULATIONS 1, LOTS WITH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWAGE DISPOSAL SHOULD HAVE A MINIMUM OF 100000 SQUARE FEET (81125). 2. LOTS WITH EITHER WATER OR SEWAGE SHOULD BE 15,000 SQUARE FEET (12,000) 3. LOTS WITH NEITHER SHOULD BE 20,000 SQUARE FEET. 4• LOTS CONTAINING MORE THAN ONE PERMITTED USE SHOULD HAVE LARGE LOT SIZE RESTRICTIONS, 5, LOTS INVOLVING SEPTIC TANKS SHOULD BE COORDINATED WITH HEALTH DEPARTMENT, 6. SET BACK LINE OF 25 TO 35 FEET SHOULD BE PROVIDED, 7. LOT WIDTHS SHOULD RANGE FROM 75 TO 100 FEET, DEPENDING, ON THE SIZE OF THE LOTS. 8. SIDE YARD MININlUIVIS SHOULD BE 10 FEET, 9, REAR YARD RESTRICTIONS MAY OR MAY NOT BE REQUIRED, HEIGHT REGULATICIIS 1. BUILDING USED AS DWELLINGS SHOULD BE ALLO!"cD UP TO 35 FEET IN HEIGHT FROM GRADE. 2. ADDITIONAL HEIGHT MAY BE ALLOWED IF ADDITIONAL SIDE YARD SPACE IS ALLOWED PROVIDED. (EXAMPLE: ADDITIONAL 10 FEET/IF TWO SIDE YARDS ARE PROVIDED PLUS ONE FOOT FOR EACH ADDITIONAL FOOT IN HEIGHT.) 3. PUBLIC BUILDINGS SHOULD BE ALLOWED UP TO 60 FEET IN HEIGHT WITH ADDITIONAL SIDE YARD REQUIREMENTS, 4. ACCESSORY BUILDINGS SHOULD BE 014E STORY IN HEIGHT ONLY. RESIDENTIAL, GENER 1, D I STR I CT R-2 ST;1TEf�iENT OF I NTEi7 THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE COMPOSED OF MEDIUM TO HIGH CONCENTRATION OF RESIDENTIAL USES. THIS DISTRICT IS USUALLY FOUND BETWEEN RESTRICTIVE RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, PLUS CERTAIN OPEN SPACES THAT APPEAR LIKED TO DEVELOP IN LIKE MANNER, r 7 r ALTHOUGH MORE USES ARE USUALLY PERMITTED IN THIS DISTRICT THAN IN MORE RESTRIC- TIVE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTSp THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO STASLIZE AND PROTECT THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DISTRICT, TO PROMOTE A SUITABLE ENVIRONMENT FOR FAMILY LIFE COMPOSED OF AN ADULT POPULATION WITH SOME CHILDREN, AND TO PERMIT CERTAIN COMMERCIAL USES OF A CHARACTER UNLIKELY TO DEVELOP GENERAL CONCENTRATION OF TRAFFICS CROWDS AND MAJOR OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, GENERALLY, THIS DISTRICT WOULD ALLOW ALL TYPES OF RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURES FOR BOTH PERMANENT AND TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY, INCLUDING INSTITUTIONS. ALSO, COMMERCIAL USES CONFORMING TO THE PATTERN OF THE DISTRICT WOULD BE ALLOWED. THIS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT IS NOT COMPLETELY RESIDENTIAL IN CHARACTERV SINCE IT INCLUDES PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC BUILDINGS, PLUS SOME BUSINESS. HOWEVER, ITS PREDOMINANT USE SHOULD BE RESIDENTIAL AND EFFORT SHOULD BE MADE TO AVOID CON- CENTRATION OF COMMERCIAL USES* USE REGULATIONS • LAND TO BE USED OR STRUCTURES ERECTED SHOULD BE ONE OR MORE OF THE FOLLOWING USES: 1. SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS 2. TWO-FAMILY DWELLINGS 3. MULTI -FAMILY DWELLINGS 4. ROOMING AND BOARDING HOUSES 5. TOURISTS HOMES 6. SCHOOLS %. CHURCHES 8. REST HOMES 9. GENERAL HOSPITALS WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS) 10. CLUBS AND LODGES 11, PARKS AND PLAYGROUNDS 12. PROFESSIONAL OFFICES - 8 - 13. HOME OCCUPATIONS 14. MOBILE HOME PARKS 1�4yr 15. OFF-STREET PARKING 16. CERTAIN ACCESSORY BUILDINGS 17. PUBLIC UTILITIES 18. BUSINESS SIGNS (ADVERTISING ON PREMISE BUSINESS) 19. CHURCH BOARDS AND SIGNS 20. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS 21. HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS LOT AND AREA REGULATIONS 1. WITH PUBLIC WATER AND SEWAGE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES SHOULD BE AT LEAST 101000 FEET (8,125). 2. WITH PUBLIC WATER OR PUBLIC SEWERAGE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES SHOULD BE 15,000 SQUARE FEET. (12,000). 3. WITH NEITHER WATER OR SEWERAGE FURNISHED, LOT SIZES SHOULD BE 202000 SQUARE FEET (20,000). 4. LOTS CONTAINING MORE THAN ONE PERMITTED USE SHOULD HAVE ADDITIONAL SIZE REQUIREMENTS. 5. SET BACK REGULATIONS OF FROM 25 To 35 FEET SHOULD BE REQUIRED. 6. LOT WIDTHS OF FROM 75 TO 100 FEET SHOULD BE REQUIRED. 7. SIDE YARD AND REAR YARD WIDTHS SHOULD ALSO BE REQUIRED (10 FEET SIDE YARD AND 25 FEET REAR YARD). HEIGHT REGULATIONS 1. BUILDINGSFOR RESIDENCES UP To 35 FEET IN HEIGHT 2.. ADDITIONAL HEIGHT ALLOWED PROVIDED ADDITIONAL SIDE YARD 1S PRO- VIDED, (EXAMPLE: REQUIREMENT OF TWO SIDE YARDS PLUS ONE FOOT FOR EACH FOOR OF HEIGHT.). 3. PUBLIC OR SEMI-PUBLIC BUILDINGS UP TO 60 FEET WITH SIMILAR PRO- VISIONS OF ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. -9- BUSINESS DISTRICTS THE COUNTY MAY HAVE ONE OR TWO TYPES OF BUSINESS DISTRICTS. THESE DISTRICTS SHOULD INCLUDE THE LIGHT COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS THAT REQUIRE DIRECT AND FREQUENT ACCESS BUT WHICH IS NOT CHARACTERIZED EITHER BY CONSTANT HEAVY TRUCKING OR BY UNUSUALLY PRONOUNCED NUISANCE FACTORS. BUSINESS DISTRICTS SHOULD BE ESTABLISHED FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROVIDING AREAS FOR BUSINESS AND NOT MERELY A "CATCH-ALL" AREA FOR A MULTITUDE OF USES. BUSINESS SHOULD BE AFFORDED PROTECTION IN A MANNER SIMILAR TO PROTECTION DE- SIGNED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS, TWO BUSINESS DISTRICTS ARE BEING CONSIDERED, ONE STRICTLY LIMITED AND ONE GENERAL, BUSINESS LIMITED, DISTRICT B-1 STATEMENT OF INTENT THIS DISTRICT SHOULD BE DESIGNED FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING SMALL COMMERCIAL AREA TO SERVE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS• TRAFFIC SHOULD BE TO A MINIMUM AND PARKING CONGESTION SHOULD BE CONTROLLED IN ORDER TO PRESERVE PROPERTY -VALUES IN SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT COULD TAKE PLACE IN THIS LIMITED BUSINESS DISTRICT. THIS AREA SHOULD INCLUDE ONLY THOSE ACTIVITIES AS ARE NECESSARY FOR DAY TO DAY OPERATION OF A NORMAL HOUSEHOLD. LIMITED BUSINESS SHOULD NOT BE LOCATED ON MAJOR TRAFFIC ARTERIES, USE REGUATIONS STRUCTURES AND USES SHOULD FALL INTO ONE OF THE FOLLOWING: 1. GROCERY STORES 2. BAKE SHOPS 3. DRUG STORES 4. LAUNDRY PICK-UP AND DELIVERY STATIONS 5. LAUNDRIES, COIN OPERATED - 10 - F. BARBER AND BEAUTY SHOPS 7. GIFT SHOPS S. SPECIALIZED CLOTHING SHOPS 9, OFF STREET PARKING 10. PUBLIC UTILITIES 11. BUSINESS SIGNS 12. CHURCH BULLETIN BOARDS AND ID SIGNS 13. DIRECTIONAL SIGNS 14. HOME OCCUPATION SIGNS NJA AND LOT REGULATIONS 1. NO LOT SIZES APPEAR NECESSARY UNLESS WELL AND/OR SEWAGE SYSTEMS ARE PROVIDED INDIVIDUALLY. 2. BUILDING SET —BACK LINES SHOULD BE PROVIDED. 3. SIDE YARD RESTRICTIONS OF AT LEAST 10 FEET SHOULD BE REQUIRED WHEN LOT ADJOINS RESIDENTIAL OR AGRICULTURAL DISTRICTS. 'err✓ HEIGHT REGULATIONS IT HAS NOT BEEN DETERMINED WHETHER HEIGHT REGULATIONS SHOULD BE INCLUDED. BUSINESS, GENERAL, DISTRICT B-2 STATEMENT OF INTENT GENERALLY, THIS DISTRICT COVERS THAT PORTION OF THE COMMUNITY INTEND— ED FOR THE CONDUCT OF GENERAL BUSINESS TO WHICH THE PUBLIC REQUIRES DIRECT ACCESS. THIS AREA SHOULD NOT INCLUDE HEAVY TRUCK TRAFFIC AND CAN CONTAIN SUCH USES AS RETAIL STORES, BANKS, THEATRES, BUSINESS OFFICES, NEWSPAPER OFFICES, PRINTING, RESTAURANTS AND TAVERNS, AND GARAGES AND SERVICE STATIONS. USE REGULATIONS 1. RETAIL FOOD STORES 2. BAKERIES — 11 — 3. DRY CLEANERS 4. LAUNDERIES 5. WEARING -APPAREL STORES 6. DRUG STORES 7. BARBER SHOP -?,BEAUTY SHOPS 8. AUTO AND HOME APPLIANCE SERVICES 9. THEATRES AND ASSEMBLY HALLS 10. HOTELS AND MOTELS 11. OFFICE BUILDINGS 12. CHURCHES 13. LIBRARIES 14. HOSPITALS, GENERAL, 15. FUNERAL HOMES 16. SERVICE STATIONS 17. CLUBS AND LODGES 18. AUTO SALES AND SERVICE 19. LUMBER AND BUILDING SUPPLY 20.. PLUMBING AND ELECTRICAL SUPPLY 21. WHOLESALE AND SOME LIGHT PROCESSING 22. MACHINERY SALES AND SERVICES 23. PUBLIC UTILITIES 24. OFF-STREET PARKING 25, PUBLIC BILLIARD PARLORS AND POOL. ROOMS, BOWLING, DANCE HALLS, AND OTHER PUBLIC AMUSEMENTS ONLY AFTER PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD BY GOVERNING BODY. 26. BUSINESS SIGNS 27. GENERAL OUTDOOR ADVERTISING 28. LOCATION SIGNS - 12 - LOT AND AREA REGULATIONS 1. NO LOT SIZES ARE SUGGESTED 2. SETBACK LINE MAY BE PROVIDED INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT TWO INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS BE SET UP IN THE COUNTY. INDUSTRIAL, LIMITED DISTRICT M-1 STATEMENT OF INTENT THE PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THIS DISTRICT IS TO PERMIT CERTAIN INDUSTRIESS WHICH DO NOT DETRACT FROM THE GENERAL DESIRABILITY OF THE COMMUNITY,TO LOCATE IN AREAS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL USES, STRICT LIMITATIONS ON HEIGHT OF BUILDING, HORSEPOWERS EXPLOSIVESt HEATING, FUMES, ODORS AND/OR NOISE, LANDSCAPING AND THE NUMBER OF PERSONS EMPLOYED SHOULD BE IMPOSED TO PROTECT AND FOSTER RESIDENTIAL DESIRABILITY WHILE PERMITTING INDUSTRIES TO LOCATE NEAR AVAILABLE LABOR SUPPLY. USE REGULATIONS USES OF LAND OR STRUCTURES ERECTED SHOULD FOLLOW THESE USES: 1. ASSEMBLY OF ELECTRIC1AL APPLIANCES, COILS, CONDENSERS, TRANS- FORMERS, ETC. 2. AUTOMOBILE ASSEMBLY, REPAIRING, RECONDITIONING, RETREADINGV OVERHAULING, BATTERY MANUFACTURE, 3. BLACKSMITH SHOP, WELDING, EXCLUDING LARGE PRESSES AND DROP HAMMERS. 4. LABORATORIES - PHARMACEUTICAL AND/OR MEDICAL. 5. PACKAGING MANUFACTURE, CANDY, BAKERY GOODS, DAIRY PRODUCTS, DRUGS, TOILETRIES AND FOOD PRODUCTS. %. MANUFACTURE, FROM ONE PRODUCT TO ANOTHER, SUCH AS CELLOPHANE, CLOTHS GLASS, LEATHER, PAPERS PLASTICS SHELL, TOBACCO, WOODS YARN. i. MANUFACTURE OF POTTERY. S. MANUFACTURE OF METAL PARTS3 TOYS, ETC. - 13 - 9. BUILDING MATERIALS SALES YARDS 10. COAL AND WOOD YARDS 11. MONUMENTAL STONE WORKS 12. VETERINARY HOSPITALS 13. AIRPORTS WITH CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS 14. WHOLESALE BUSINESSES AND WAREHOUSES 15. PUBLIC UTILITY GENERATING, RELAY STATIONS1 ETC. 16. BUSINESS SIGNS 17. GENERAL ADVERTISING SIGNS 18. LOCATION SIGNS REQUIREMENTS FOR PERMITTED USES 1. BEFORE A BUILDING PERMIT IS ISSIfED OR CONSTRUCTION BEGUN, THE PLANS, IN SUFFICIENT DETAIL SHOULD BE PRESENTED SHOWING THE OPERATIONS AND PROCESSES. THE ZONING ADMINISTRATORS MAY REFER THESE PLANS TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION. 2. PERMITTED USES SHOULD BE CONDUCTED WHOLLY WITHIN A COMPLETELY ENCLOSED BUILDING OR WITHIN AN AREA ENCLOSED ON ALL SIDES BY A SOLID MASONARY WALL OR LIKE ENCLOSURE. 3. LANDSCAPING MAY BE REQUIRED WITHIN CERTAIN CONDITIONS. 4. SUFFICIENT AREA SHOULD BE PROVIDED FOR (1) SCREENING PERMITTED USES, AND (2) OFF-STREET PARKING. 5. AUTOMOBILE GRAVEIAARDS AND JUNKYARDS IN EXISTENCE AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION SHOULD BE CONSIDERED NONCONFORMING. THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED A DEFINITE PERIOD OF TIME TO COMPLETELY SCREEN THE YARD FROM PUBLIC VIEW WITH AN ADEQUATE WALL OR HEDGE. THE PERIOD OF TIME SHOULD NOT BE GREATER THAN 3 YEARS. LOT AND AREA REGULATIONS ' REGULATIONS ON LOTS, SIZESI SIDEYARD RESTRICTIONS MAY BE PROVIDEDf AL- THOUGH NO RECOMMENDATION HAS BEEN MADE BY THE COMMITTEE AT THIS TIME. r 14 - 5, 1963 MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY/MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Beck, William C. Smith, Arnold Smith and Perkins. Final approval was given to a 1 lot division containing one-half () acre owned by D. B. Willis to be sold to Route 6 Survival Group, Inc. Final to a 1 lot division containing one-half (J) acre belonging to Forrest Via to be sold to Charles F. Moon. Final to the division of Lot 11 Block C "Flordon" into Lots 11A and 11B. Final to Section 1 of "Westfield", located on Route 29 North adjacent to U. S. I. Final to Sections 1 and 2 "Canterbury Hills" on Barracks Road, developed by Dr. Hurt. Section 1 contains 12 lots and Section 2 contains 23 lots. Final to "University Heights" Subdivision adjacent to Deer Path Road, subject to letter being written to owners and Board of Supervisors putting them on notice that the By -Pass will pass approximately through the center of the property. Final to Section 4 of "Clearview" located on Route 660 (Rays Ford Road). Redated and approved division of lots 5 and 6 block F and redivision of lot 3 block F and lot 16 block F of "Key West". Final to a 10 lot division of Mt. Alto belonging to J. F. Bishop. Final to the division of John W. Boyers' property subject to showing a 55 foot set back line on entrance road. Redated a plat showing Parcel A located on Route 651 belonging to Susie D. Brown. Approval was refused on a 3 lot division of property belonging to J. W. Baker located on Route 250 East because of substandard lot size. 'Where being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary MINUTES OF THE FEBRUARY 14, 1963 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The regular quarterly meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission was held at the Monticello Hotel at 6:00 P. M. this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Arnold Smith, Perkins, Catlin., Carr,, William C. Smith., Duren MacGregor, Barnes, Maupin, Beek., Boggs, Pence,, Brown., Downing Smith, and Alan Bruns from the Daily Progress. The reading of the minutes of the last r_egular`.pteeting and those of the Executive Committee were dispensed with. Mr. Pence stressed the importance of working towards the passage of the Land Use Ordinance., and also the possibility of inserting a Building Code into the Ordinance. Mr. Perkins reported on the progress of the Drafting Committee. Mrs. Liady reported on the Program Committee and stated that it had been divided into 2 sections. Mr. Dure reported on his section of the committee and Mr. Carr reported on his section. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF MARCH 51 1963 WETING OF THE MOUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE GOtrNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Chairman Johnson, Arnold Smith, William Smith, Nelson Beck and Nancy Liady. Approval was given to a plat of 61.190 acres adjoining "West Leigh" Subdivisioh. The acreage was divided into three tracts to be deeded as follows: Tract A to 'West Leigh, Inc.; Tract B to B. D. Mawyer; Tract C to H. D. Abbott. The land is owned by E. R. Martin. Preliminary approval was given to Section 3, "West Leigh" Subdivision containing 31 lots and substandard roads. Preliminary approval was given to "Hidden Lake" subdivision containing 27 lots and areas for community use. Lot sizes range from 1.5 acres to 3.5 acres. Developer is C. 0. Allen. Approval was given to Lots A and B property of Frances Johnson, 2.0 miles East of Shadwell, Virginia. Plat was approved on August 7, 1962, by the Commission and on August 16, 1962, by the Board of Supervisors. No recordation was made. Property is located off Route 250 adjoining property owned by William R. Hughs. Approval was given to redating the redivision of lots 1 and 2 Block G Section 1, "Northfields" Subdivision into Lots 1B and 2A. Original approval was given in August, 1962. Approval was given of Lots 1 and 2 Block E and Lot 1 Block F, "Westfield" Subdivision located on Route 743. Approval was given to plat showing 0.51 acres on Route 668 at Mount Fair owned by George E. and Hazel Shifflett. Plat prepared by 0. R. Randolph. Approval was given to plat showing lot on Route 708 between Red Hill and Scottsville owned by A. Lyle Gkxd, lot includes 1.13 acres. Plat prepared by Paul Saunders. Approval was given to redivision of Lot 1 Section B "Ca.rrsbrook" Subdivision into Lots lA and 1B, owned by Frank Ring. Approval was given to the following plats presented by the American Telephone and Telegraph Company of Virginia, of property located on Peters Mountain in Rivanna District: 1. Gardner property--100 foot road right-of-way through 130 acre tract. 2. Gardner pr6perty--100 foot road right-of-way through 60 acne tract. 3. Frost property --Tract C. A 65 foot road right-of-way through larger tract. 4. Gardner property --Tract showing 100 foot road right-of-way through 95f acre tract. 5. Montague property --road right-of-way across small portion of property. Page -2- Minutes of March 5, 1963 Meeting of Executive Committee of Albemarle County Planning Commission Copy of letter was presented by Otis Brown that was written by Robert Musselman, Attorney to T. R. Moore in reference to the platted subdivision on Pantops. Chairman Johnson, briefed the Committee on a meeting with Musselman, Supervisor George Palmer, High w ay Engineer H. D. Runkle, and Otis Brown. Mr. Musselman was informed as to what can and connot be done and the copy of the attached leter from Musselman to Moore refects substantially this view. It was pointed out to Mr. Musselman that this should be settled in order that this question would not continue to arise. A photostatic copy of this letter referred to above is included as part of the minutes of this meeting. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman �, ebTvall -tY III l(;69 Solo 06 o.100 r- to 0te4, °t able d pt oT � e n tt � l4 nta ,gat he � Cp '' �t • .� b• ®ox e , It ?°� and .{0 enttn9 t pltnn� tent. et R•F .p• ttetvtll got Yo T To � CP eY peP `0 qo at, 01eTlo oYk % the tiv , Palp �tta4 t ate Kt9� th 0e 01 qf% o be d.o at T9 ate gt t t1e d t eT ,�T • o2TY th '!s. tePt no the ttve, sum%*1 a see�"e the l a'e s Tnln9. �hnso T,tenti EX®cv teT to jheT tstend lvd�M g Y 1oYd TeP vntY s lettame • vnde c°ne th u s the s ,� • Rv4 "tent G° by t t th't s they Y°v to v+t Qtvtto T • K• v,n, Nsstt to trl stated to douI tl1 hel • • t° sett S isston, is nd '46Intons Ts,s o,pe of the t to �Tev s +AT • tY • oP Gov tY es�P �� lat do t and 'COP'�r f than sable a W� ld eat °n abet otded 9 can to a�`Y t t�rdtT\ `four oPe the 1 Me sh° �ettsntly tStete, � ppl n excas ih tt-,Tee o on • l h Y°v to es t° be he P=®s by the vpv�d 00 a e1� ot% goo 0{ sttvataPPTQech sT, see dtn� to ken ova• this 1.ott yet nay be ,xcass vhtoh tTSt, t is ec°° betnC3 te, Y40 the CA- Tyie h oTdad to bNt as. nY °{ tho the Toe�pp&T levee tt+Tkt ee+ dy beet attttc th* 1\00 t� the Oil Gtatton t0cvltY here to ante the a eltee sttbou t vndet don• j sa°`e tt exPe vt dt4 nt °t t aTee, s that 'D t,thtocn d exc49 to Flot vt the eat en9�°eGTas to he tots to that et�ttte lst%lTT lots eb° o{ 4L e� if Y be tN is bete {o c� hTOO acre over b tr; e -1 Tay act4 t o tt eY av00te then d taken no Is have a s tT aTTan9 tM Tv 1etted'PIetted eve th heT st �ht• v1Dv d dtto .�,, • t tY Mat p was t° wteh to *GIs th ,,,�sY • be oo gTad� Ids see Or �,ioPe pYo�eTty tt You• ttvnk oto f Tt9ht d hive tch Ma • ePtton to Y°vT Second eY tt, Qp to and wottot\$ any eX �t tv a9 n►sSaw tnts nta th lass thTovgyoe to tt Ye to �aT6 - out , and that wt et wad 'nee Otth outb that v can t° be t dtd rA e~ fvD to 1t dleatt kn4 acco ulc+ 1Mvb a,bgts v lei loot apoi e`tn9 �*0 oT Paved -The`1 a IO Vote epos of the of the tiO °Vt �xt a%d,'�°tninancnq e man lot e • dd Calhoy �0 has' to foTo the e° tuto t oat ant Cal ILn t w • o Te tot tht R►a th W to b vGh sat st t°Tt t tT�n! theTo e To n to het tee eop, 9ettt ske e fvTt' 'the vsoa all the P t wall At �v i � A4 • � ther *MOW `r. feet Te Attach to March 5, 1963 Minutes of Plannina Cormission ROBERT M. MUSSELMAN ATTORNEY AT LAW I-ebruary 27, 1 %3 Itl SEVENTH STRHE7, N. H Q(A1LL0T-M@VnL1, VtRMNIA P. O. SOX 254 Mr. T. R. Moore R.F.D. 6, Box 119 Charlottesville, Virainia Dear Mr. µcores I am sorry that the flu got you and you were not able to meet with us this morning. "ts. George Palmer representing the Board of Supervisors, Mr. Floyd Johnson representing the County Planning Com- mission, Mr. H. W. Runkle representing the State Highway Department, and Mr. Otis Brown, Assistant County Executive, met with me to go over the property, and I want to try by this letter to summarize my under- standing cf their opinions as stated at that time. There seemed to be three or four possible courses open to you, as they understand the situation. I hope that a sumwary of them will help you in concluding which approach you feel we should attempt to pursue. first, there seems to be no question that if you want to sell off any of the lots according to the presently recorded plat with no expectation of the road being taken over by the State, you can do this without difficulty. Apparently, however, this would not apply to any rearrangeatient of these lots, even if the new lots were also in excess of three acres in area, since the three -acre rule has now been abolished. In other words, the lots that have already been recorded in excess of three acres may be sold in that fashion without difficulty, but no rearrangement of them is being permitted except under the new rules. This is the rule they have enforced regularly in Flordon, where the property was platted in sore than three acre lots about the same time your property was to platted. Secondly, if you wish to have the road taken over by the State and maintained by it, * . Runkle feels that there is no way that he can do this with less than a 40 foot right-of-way. This would have to be at least 40 feet wide throughout and would have to be graded, ditched, and paved in accordance with the instructions which Mr. Shields sent you in 1956. They would have no authority to make any exception for the area adjoining the motel building, so that no arrangement involving state maintenance would be possible unless you can work out soave agreement with Mr. Calhoun for part of the 40 foot area to be on his land and for the road to be in the middle of the right-of-way. (I did not succeed in getting in touch with Mr. Calhoun before our meting this morning, but will make a further effort to reach his in the next two or three days.) As you know,the usual requirssaent for subdivision roads is now 50 feet rather than 40, but all the people there this morning were of 4r. T. R. 'more February 27, 1963 Page Two the opinion that, in the 'acts of your situation, they could expect to get approval for an exception which would permit you to limit the road to 40 feet all the way back (except possibly right at the entrance). Presumably, if you build such a road with the necessary 40 foot right- of-way all the way back, you would than be free to resubdivide the land on any reasonable basis that you wanted without any requirenw nt of main- taining three acre lots. Further, once the road was to constructed, it would be taken into the state system and you would be relieved of all further obligations for maintenance. There would probably be some problem at the location of your well, but Mx. Runkle did not seem to feel that this would be too serious. It might be necessary for the present well house to be put below the level cf the ground and covered by a manhole or so"thing of the sort. I would think that, if all this were done, you could very probably divide V)e property up into eight or ten lots, exclusive of any land on the north side of the road. The third possibility seems to me to have the most advantages as I understand the situation, though there are also some unresolved problems about it. This would be to plat the property in convenient sited lots (presumably you could have approximately the same number as you would have if the road were accepted) but to show on the plat that the road was not eligible for State maintenance since it did not conform to their standards. For this purpose it would be necessary to dedicate a 50 foot roadway (except in the area immediately adjoining the motel building) and it would also be necessary that the 50 feet be so placed as to leave all buildings (other than the motel building) set back at least 55 feet from the center of the 50 foot right-of-way. There would be no requirement as to the condition of the road cr its paving, and it would not matter that the road was not in the center of the right-of-way. The only requirement would be that the necessary lane was dedicated for road purposes. Also each deed to a lot on this basis would have to contain in the deed itself a specific reference to the fact that the road was substandard and not eligible for State maintenance. The big problem about this approach is that they do not have any specific experience with getting the city to approve a plat on this basis. There seems to be no doubt that the necessary county approval could be obtained, and it is my personal judgment that we would have a respectable prosp9ct of getting the city's approval. However, I do not believe that there is any practical way to get a decision from the city officials on this point except by having an actual plat prepared and submitted to theme. As indicated above, in my judgment this would be much the cheapest approach to the problem since it would permit you to make reasonable sized lots and more than twice as many as you have under the presently recorded plat, without having to go to the enormous expense of constructing and paving the road. Also, this procedure would be available to you without the necessity of working something out with 4r. Calhoun for a joint entrance and roadway back past the motel building. On the other hand, it does involve the prob- lem of having to sell the lots without a State -maintained road and the M~. T. R. '.bore February 27, 1963 Page Three uncertainty as to the city's actions. I do believe, however, that we are not going to be able to got an official ruling beyond what was worked out this morning on any of these matters except after the suhmission of a formal plat prepared by a competent surveyor. T hope that you will consider all of these matters, and at your convenience advise me what course of action you wish to pursue. I per- sonally feel very strenoly that any satisfactory arrangement which would permit you to make a reasonable use of your property would require a detailed subdivision plat of the property, whether you wish to follow the second sugnestion above or the third. Accordingly, I would recommend that you go ahead with this procedure as a next step, in any case. I believe I can properly summarize our discussion this morning by sayino that all those concerned were anxious to work out some practical solution but still were substantially hankered by the rules within which they were permitted to act. Mr. Runkle seemed to be particularly firm that he had no authority to do anything about the road with less than a 40 foot width throughout, including the area adjoining the motel building. Also I gather that he did not feel that there was any present prospect of taking into the State system a road of this sort except on the basis of its balm; broue`;t up to the State's specifications, which involves grading, ditching, and raving. If 1 have failed to make any part of this clear or if this raises other questions in your mind, I hope that you will call m* whenever you are sufficiently recovered to go into the matter further. Aeanwhilo, I certainly with you a speedy recovery. With best wishes, I am R*Vmsj Sincerely, Robart M. `Russolman SPECIAL MEETING OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COIVISSION On March 7. 1963 the following members of the Albemarle County Planning Commission met in the Board Room of the County Office Building: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Perkins, Beck., Brown, Dure., Arnold Smith., Carr, Birckhead) Boggs and Johnson. The purpose of this meeting was to discuss the proposed Land Use Ordinance. Thet:discussion at this time was mainly the Al and A2 Agricultural Districts. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr... Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE MARCH 29,1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date at the Monticello Hotel at 12:00 Noon with the following members present: Mrs. Liady., Messers. Johnson, Arnold Smith., William C. Smith., Beck, Pence, Brown and Alan Bruns from the Daily Progress. Mr. Brown reported on progress of presentation of Land Use Ordinance to the public. Considerable discussion was given to the matter of how many and where the public hearings would be held. It was decided that the meetings would be held at the following schools: Broadus Wood, Meriwether Lewis., Greenwood, Crozet., Red Hill, Scottsville, Stone Robinson, Stony Point, Yancey School., Va. Murray., Rose Hill and Albemarle. On motion made by Mr. Beck and seconded by William C. Smith it was moved to ask the Board of Supervisors to meet with the Planning Commission on April 9$ 1963 to discuss any --matters prior to starting the area meetings. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. C hairkian M Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary MINUTES OF THE APRIL 2. 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE CO*f,ITT , OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Arnold Smith and William C. smith. Final approval to the division of Lot 2 Block B "Colthurst Farm". Lot 2B on plat to become a part of Lot 1. subject to clarification of certain subdivision restrictions imposed by the developer. Redated the division of Parcel Y into Lots 4 through 7 located on Hydraulic Road, property belonging to S. 0. Ruday. Final approval to a 20 acre lot on Rio Road, a portion of the property belonging to Albemarle Development Corporation. Final approval to a 0.99 acre lot on Rio Road, a portion of W. H. Snyder's property. Final approval to * 1.16 acre lot on Old Lynchburg Road ( Route 631), a portion of J. A. Terrell's property. Final approval to a plat showing Lots 1 and 2 Block E and Lots 1 and 2 Block D. a portion of 130.55 acre tract belonging to William C. Smith located on Route 641. Final approval to a 1 lot division of property located on Route 651 belonging to Hunter and Susie D. Brown, containing 2.0,000 square feet. Final approval to Section 3 of "West Leigh", Pages 1 and 2. Final approval to " Ballard Wood" Subdivision located on Route 677 composed of 6 lots developed by Charles W. Hurt. Final approval to Section 1 of "Hidden Lake" located off Route 663 North of Earlysville belonging to C. G. Allen. Final approval to lots A and B on plat of rilenaire" located on Route 676 belonging to C. G. Allen. Action was deferred on plat of A. L. Kyser's lot so that study may be given to change certain property lines. Final approval to a 0.37 acre lot on Route 250 East belonging to Dora Swift, subject to owner's signature. Final approval to plat showing Lots 25 through 33 Block F "Oak Hill" fronting on Route 631 and to the redivision of Block A "Oak Hill". Final approval to a redivision of Lots 13 and 14 and part of Lots 15, 16 and 17 "Sunrise Acres, subject to showing substandard statement for road property belonging to Carl F. Barnes. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary G t� 9• 4xe� d k im sraw, Bg°vs Z s lashes Qg llo of o£ l- �aO ° • "TOY- 'S fast c0a • beco4, Q . pf og datg S�,it�'' V ovt 11 to 0 • i�Y' V As;ld lot $ acse 1° ela si�ate to G. 3 2e o'�e acse d 0 •'� bg1 be TOO 4 p Z 'So,�fiB •'�$ t gad o'ate a 5° stg pe go�vt'0 ° 9 trg O� ?- ov, O� pTl oge1 0 e se 1°t t l°ca ttea' 4 SOVIX, ��1 i G• ,s ti s44:yt 0 0•�`� ac SO 1, 113a� �e5� �ri W 0 o .00 o e $� a Sea '� to � ?5 "..`" c� ,jv a� t e� 0 ire a �,� Roue o� �ck. ,Or Sp�al 4�yari o£ 1°� 6�� �5yo� oq o� �,�a t is y ed a4 i all acre o��eoll sO�ayy 9ed See, 'Doc1 ri a ? ts � at t9 �►' � t� a 1 '�° asa5 die d• �t e5 s a �gc a��• S 4�so 14 ?00 ,,$1�e tte ` �aa�ell � ado 4S o4'e 19 mate ct�p1� 0' �� r 3 o� � � � • W tq cost T a44 a ash ti° of p's o t Ss E�y�t' to 5gc Se lot off. , weeDe 4s e 4,s 014al 0� ac sbso has ,ape1 a44s a 1� ``haste o�la 0 R°a� to ? ot oy g�0 ° a4411e� • gect'�or d�,�t�-o4e��9 �S ay to ,yot of 4s h'�o© 01' of Gea a4�s0� t° a 1 di�y�y°� as.\°� 2 y��'y a4�x°4a1 a lot 5yo fi of 9 Th@°l"�° y� cieg. opal ,°�°',• lot scrc o a b of ZA ho t►ur � ��,,� S0,4a'1 t �gy5�,o thor gts�4 1 a44 to a d � � 4so�a1 a4 40� y�oa ySB. �atq seo 4Seld of gal �'° Oa.4e o5e Aso 5+�,0 os�n co�4 g a4 ° a,3e ,,s 1 � lam a44so�0 a�g�,. b4 *a'`r0s 4M MINUTES OF MAY 7 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COR4ITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady� Messei-ts. Johnson,, Arnold Smith., William C. Smith', Beck and Perkins. Final approval to a 0.38 acre lot on Route 53, property of Isabel Shaw, subject to noting on plat that said 0.38 acre will become a part of a larger tract. Final approval to a 0.46 acre lot on Route 631 belonging to C. V. McCann. Declined approval to an 0.87 acre lot located on a 50 foot private right of way until an over all plan of the area is submitted, property belonging to C. V; McCann. Final approval to a 2.34 acre lot belonging to William C. Smith on Route 635 approximately 200 yards from Route 692. Deferred action on "Blue Ridge Acres" Subdivision on Route 250 West until adequate preliminary plat is submitted. Final approval to Section 3 of "Shadwell Estates" composed of Lots 13 and 14 Block A. Final approval to a 1.207 acre lot of M. H. *Hurdo property and to Section 2 of "Cedar Hills". Final approval to Section 2 of "Barterbrook". Final approval to a 1 lot division of Donald C. Barnes property containing 5.046 acres. Final approval to a 2 lot division of property on Rio Road showing 100 foot strip between church lot. Final approval to a 6 lot division of Barlow and Gordon property located on Route 631. B Final approval to a division of Lot 15 Block/Section C "Carrsbrook" into Lots 15 C and 15B. Gave preliminary and fiiaal approval to "Berkmor" Subdivision on Route 29 North composed of 6 lots. Gave final approval to Section 3 "Canterbury Hills" subject to removing note as to land use. Final approval to a plat showing Parcel X to be conveyed to Olivet Church by Katherine M. Craven. Page -2- MINUTES OF THE MAY 7V 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTVIE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION Gave preliminary approval to "Queen Charlotte" Subdivision located on property fbrmerly.;" belonging to W. C. Dorsey on Barracks Road. Recommended to Board of Supervisors that Mountain View Drive in "Sherwood Farm" Subdivision be accepted for state maintenance where same is brought up to state specifications. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman M MINUTES OF THE MAY 149 1963 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Commission met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Arnold Smith, William C. Smith, Beck, Palmer, Maupin, D. D. MacGregor, Brown, Pence and Perkins, also present was Ray Jones. A plat of "Blue Ridge Acres" located on Route 250 West composed of 107 lots and owned by Harry S. Phillips was presented for approval. After considerable discussion final approval was given with the suggestion that lots fronting on Route 250 be turned to front on Afton Drive to avoid possible accidents from cars entering from driveways. It was suggested that minutes from previous meeting be sent along with the agenda to each Executive Committee member prior to each Executive Committee meeting. Mr. Brown discussed 16 suggested changes in the Land Use Ordinance re— ceived from citizens either by petition, verbal or written. The suggested changes discussed at area meetings will be submitted to members as soon as they have been transcribed from tape. Mr. Arnold Shi.th suggested that another agricultural area be added to the ordinance. It was moved and seconded that the Attorney General be consulted in reference as to procedure for amending ordinances after passage. Final approval to a 2.65 acre lot in Crozet belonging to Vivian McCauley. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Chairman Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary MINUTES OF JUNE 4, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COKfITTEE OF THE ALBEM�RLE` COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, William C. Smith and Arnold Smith. Final approval to Lot 2 Block A, Additon 2 "Northfields" (Wakefield) to become a part of Lot 1 Block A. Preliminary approval to "Springfield" Subdivision on Route 29 at Intersection Route 649 consisting of 48 lots developed by Charles Wm. Hurt. Recommended to Thb Board of Supervisors that roads in "Northfields" Subdivision as shown in Red on plat be accepted into secondary maintenance. Final approval to a 2 lot division of property at intersection of Route 715 and Route 704 belonging to Arthur Gray. Final approval to a plat showing Parcel 25A to beco#e a part of Lot 25 in Town of Scottsville. Final approval to Parcel Z on plat to become a part of Lot 6 Block 2 "Carrsbrook". Final approval to a 1.7 acre lot on Route 641 belonging to A. Hampton Burnett, Jr. Final approval to a plat showing Pardel X to become a part of Lot 2X on Route 631 South of Charlottesville belonging to T. L. Clements. Final approval to a 1.0 acre lot on Route 630 belonging to J. M. Tinnell. Final approval to the division of a lot located on Route 20 South belonging to Andrew Clements. There being no fubther business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE JUNE 13, 1963 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The regular quarterly meeting of the Albemarle County Planning Commission was held at the C. K. Steak House at 6:00 P. M., this date with the following members present: Messers. Floyd Johnson, William A. Perkins, Jr., Avery Catlin, Cecil Maupin, S. W. Barnes, Sr., Landon Birckhead, C. Nelson Beck, William C. Smith, Arnold Smith and Leon S. Dure, Jr. Also present were Maupin Pence, Downing Smith, Otis Brown and Alan Bruns. On motion by Nelson Beck, seconded by Arnold Smith, the reading of the minutes was dispensed with. Final approval was given to a 0.41 acre lot near Highway 680, belonging to T. E. Thurston, showing note for substandard road. Final approval to a 0.77 acre lot on Old Jordan Road for Ernest L. Goolsby. On motion by Mr. Catlin, seconded by Mr. Dure, it was moved that in the future the minutes of the Executive Committee meetings would be sent to all Commission members. Considerable discussion was given to the matter of making certain changes in the Subdivision Ordinance, particularly the section as to whether the Planning Commission can give final approval to certain plats and eliminate the approval of the Board of Supervisors. The following Committee was appointed to study the above matter: Leon S, Dure, Jr., Chairman Avery Catlin Arnold Smith Landon Birckhead Otis Brown gave a complete summary of the Planning Program to date. He stated that 12 area meetings and 1 at McIntire were held and approximately 1000 people attended these meetings. Forty (40) other meetings were held at the request of Clubs etc. The smallest attendance was at Virginia Murray School where 6 attended and the largest attendance was at Yancey School at Esmont where 150 people were present. A number of suggestions have been made concerning changes in the proposed Ordinance, particularly the wording of the A2 District and conditional use permits. Mr. William C. Smith asked for a rising vote of thanks for the people who spent so much time and energy in the presentation of the Ordinance. Page -2- MINUTES OF JUNE 13, 1963 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION A report of the Drafting Committee was given by Mr. Perkins, Chairman. He listed some of the important changes to be made: (1) The lifting of restrictions in A2 Agricultural Districts. (2) The addition of lot size in Al Districts to be a minimum of 3 acres or more. It was thought by most members that it might be proper to add an AlA District in the area where a sufficient number of people desired same and their properties were contiguous. Mr. Perkins also gave good reasons why the Ordinance would not be completed in time for presentation to thelBoard of Supervisors at the June 20, 1963 meeting. There was considerable discussion as to the date of the next public hearing on the Ordinance. On motion by Mr. Beck, seconded by Mr. William C. Smith, it was moved that the Executive Committee be given the authority to set the date for the public hearing of the Ordinance. Mr. Beck stated that Mr. Bruns should be shown a debt of gratitude for the publicity he gave the Ordinance. Mr. Dure posed two questions. (1) Would signs be abolished in Al Area? After some discussion it seemed to be the general consensus of the members that they should be abolished but it will be put to a vote at the next meeting. (2) Will people be put in Al if they desire? Mr. Pence stated that he had received oral request from Citizens to have "Glenair" Subdivision put in a highly restricted area and also the area North of Woodhayven belonging to Wayland. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE JULY 2, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Messers. Floyd Johnson, William A. Perkins, Jr., Nelson Beck, William C. Smith and Arnold Smith. Final approval to a 1 lot division containing 1.7 acres, located near Free Union at intersection of State Routes 609 and 665, belonging to Nancy Spndridge. Final approval to "Merridale" Subdivision showing Lot Number 1 (one) containing 1.92 acres, located on Old Brook Road just North of Rio Road, belonging to Molly E. Searson. Final approval to a 2 lot division, located at Batesville, subject to showing substandard statement of roads, this property belongs to C. T. Page Estate. Final approval to a plat showing redivision of Lot 1 "Liberty Hills" and several small lots to be exchanged between Henderson Heyward, Charles 0. Gregory and Stephen Webster. Final approval to a plat showing Parcel A containing 2.16 acres to be deeded to T. M. Whitten and to become a part of a tract owned by him. Final approval to plats showing Blocks A and B "Springfield" Subdivision located off Routes 29Nand 649 and 785, containing 46 lots and developed by Charles W. Hurt. Redated a plat showing the division of Lot 4 Block K Section 7 "Northfields" into Lots 4A and 4B. Also to correction of Lots 3, 15, and 17 Block K. Final approval to a plat showing Parcel X, a division of Lots 1 and 2 Block E "Northfields", Parcel X to beome a part of Lot 1. Final approval was given to 208.71 feet x 208.71 feet about 3 miles Southwest of the Town of Scottsville on Route 726 to be sold to James Richard Ward and wife containing 1 (one) acre. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman ## Redated a plat showing Lot 14 Block B Section 2 "Oak Hill" Subdivision, water supply lot. MINUTES OF AUGUST 6, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the folliwng members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Beck, William C. Smith and Arnold Smith. Final approval was given to a 5 (five) lot division at intersection of Routes 631 and 659, developed by Dr. Hurt, subject to recommending to the Board of Supervisors that when approval is given to water system that the well house, pumps, etc be below the level of the ground except for vent pipes. Final to a 2.87 acre lot located on Route 684 and being a portion 71-34 on County I. D. Map. Final approval to a 2 (two) lot division of land on Route 743 belonging to Charles D. Phillips. Final approval to a revision of lots 1 thru 23 Block A "Oak Hill" into 43 lots. Final approval to a 2.4 acre lot on Route 795 and belonging to James Thompson. Final to Lot 1 Parcel C "Carrsbrook" containing 1.91 acres. Final approval to a plat showing lots A. B and C on Route 789 belonging to George McAllister located in White Ha11 Crozet Sanitary District. Final approval to QUeenCharlotte Subdivision, located on Barracks Road and Route 250 By -Pass, belonging to Robert M. Swift. Final approval to Sheets 2 and 5 of 6 Sheets "Colthurst FArm". Final approval to a 1 lot division of property, belonging to Harry Dickerson. Final approval to a 10 lot division of property, belonging to Farmington Incorpbrated on Route 601. Final approval to a 0.46 acre lot division of property belonging to L. M. Dudley located on Route 20 South, granting an exception to substandard frontage of 98,6 feet. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr.,Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 3, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee m et this date with the following members present: Messers. Beck and William C. Smith. Final approval was given to an 18 foot strip of land to be deed by Teora 0. Craig and etc. to Calvin F. Candy to become a part of a tract owned at present by Canody. Final approval to a lot containg 0.57 acre of land belonging to C. V. McCann located on Route 631. Final approval to a 1 lot division of property located on St. George Ave., Crozet, Virginia, belonging to Vivian McCauley. Final approval to a 1.61 acre lot on Route 649 belonging to Beatrice Foti. Final approval to a 2.0 acre lot shown as Lot 1 on Route 708 belonging to Dr. Charles W. Hurt in Ivy District. Final approval to a 1.0 acre lot just off Route 649 belonging to Beatrice Foti. Final approval to a 0.89 acre lot belonging to Cove Creek Industries, Inc. to be deeded to Presbyterian Church located on Route 633. Final approval to a plat showing Parcel lA to become a part of Lot 5 Block A "Kearsarge" . Final approval to a 1.63 acre lot located on a private road belonging to W. H. Birckhead. Final approval to the redivision of Lots 1 through 10 Block A "Oak Hill" (11 lots). There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER 1. 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Beck, Perkins., William C. Smith and Otis Brown. Final approval was given to a 1.0 acre lot, located on Route 805 near Covesville, belonging to T. M. Walker. Final approval to a 6 lot division of Parcel C., located on East side of Route 708� belonging to Dr. William Hurt. This is a portion of the W. F. Lindsay Farm. Final approval to a 22.2 acre tract shown as Lot C, located at the end of Shack Mountain Road., belonging to Dr. 4illiam Hurt, subject to showing substandard statement and future 50 foot acce-zs road. Final approval to a plat showing Lots A and B being a portion of the property belonging to C. R. Lilly, located on Route 631 South. zz Final to a 1 lot division of property belonging to Franklin W. Yancey on East side of Route 684 East of Yancey rills. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms Jr.� Secretary Chairman MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 6, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. Liady, Messers. Johnson, Beck, Arnold Smith and Perkins. Final approval to a division of 3 lots at Rio belonging to William Stevenson. Final approval to the division of Lot 1 Parcel C4 "Carrsbrook" into Lots lA and 1B. Final approval to a lot containing 1.71 acres about 6 miles north west of Earlysville belonging to M. P. Estes. Final approval to the division of Lots 12 and 13 Block A "Montvue", Parcel X to become a part of Lot 13. Final approval to the division of Lots 3 and 5 Section C "Carrsbrook", Parcel A to become part of Lot 5. Final approval to section 3 "Canterbury Hills". Final approval to a 1 acre lot West of Ivy, belonging to L. E. Evans to be deeded to Morrison Willis. Final approval to Section 2 "Cedar Hills" consisting of Lot 1 Block A. Final approval to a deed conveying 1 lot on old Scottsville to Warren Road, belonging to E. N. Skeen. Final approval to a 0.87 acre lot on Route 664, 4 miles West of Earlysville, belonging to W. R. Burruss. Preliminary approval to a portion of J. B. Murrays' property adjacent to Panorama Corporation Plant. Preliminary approval to a subdivision at the intersection of Route 601 (Woodson Store), belonging to George H. Barkley, subject to lot restriction size, of not less than three (3) acres. There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman c1 MEMBERS PRESENT: NONMEMBERS PRESENT: COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION NovEMaF�R 20, 1963 MINUTES JOHNSON PERKINS BIRCKHEAD LIADY PALMER BROWN BRANS A. SMITH TREVILLIAN BARNES CATLIN PENCE GARRETT CHAIRMAN FLOYD JOHNSON PRESIDED AND OPENED THE MEETING BY STATING THAT SOME COURSE OF EVENTS SHOULD BE MAPPED OUT FOR THE FUTURE IN LIGHT OF THE REFER- ENDUM OUTCOME. JOHNSON ASKED FOR DISCUSSION ON THE POSSIBILITY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION RESIGNING IN ORDER TO ALLOW THE NEW BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO APPOINT THE MEMBERS THEY DESIRE. HE STATED THAT PERHAPS A NEW APPROACH SHOULD BE MADE TO THE AREA OF PLANNING IN THE COUNTY SINCE THE PRESENT PLANNING COMMISSIONts ENDEAVORS HAD BEEN DEFEATED AT THE POLLS ON NpVEMBER 5. MRS. LIADY STATED THAT SHE DID NOT INTEND TO RESIGN, THAT SHE THOUGHT THE HOLDOVER MEMBERS ON THE COMMISSION WERE NEEDED TO HELP RUN THE COUNTY, SINCE THERE WERE SO MANY NEW FACES. SHE WONDERED IF THERE WOULD BE ENOUGH OLD OFFI- CIALS LEFT TO KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON. SHE STATED THAT THERE WAS NO PRECEDENT FOR COMMISSION MEMBERS RESIGNING SIMPLY BECAUSE THE BOARD MEMBERS CHANGED. SHE STATED THAT SHE WOULD HAVE TO BE FIRED IF THE BOARD DID NOT WANT HER ON THE COMMISSION. BIRCKHEAD STATED THAT HIS TERM ENDED ON DECEMBER 31$ 1963 ANYWAY, BUT HE WOULD HATE TO SEE THE COMMISSION RESIGN. HE NOTED THAT HE THOUGHT IT WAS WISE TO HAVE A CITIZEN GROUP ADMINISTER THE SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE AND THAT HE BELIEVED THE PEOPLE LIKED IT BETTER THAN TO HAVE A SINGLE ADMINISTRATOR. BIRCK- HEAD STATED THAT HE DID NOT BELIEVE THE RESIGNATION OF MEMBERS WOULD PROVE ANY- THING. PALMER STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT LIKE TO SEE SUCH A MOVE SINCE HE KNEW THAT THE PEOPLE WERE GOING TO DEMAND CONTINUED PLANNING IN THE FUTURE. MRS. LIADY ASKED CHAIRMAN JOHNSON WHO HAD SUGGESTED THAT THE COMMISSION RESIGN. JOHNSON STATED THAT NO ONE HAD ASKED HIM, THAT HE HAD PROPOSED THE QUESTION HIMSELF AND THAT HE HAD NO POLITICAL AXES TO GRIND WITH ANYONE. HE STATED THAT HE HAD SERVED FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AS A PUBLIC SERVICE AND WITHOUT ANY POLITICAL AMBITION. HE NOTED THAT HE HAD GOTTEN TIRED OF SPENDING TIME SIMPLY ADMINISTERING A SUBDIVISION ORDINANCE. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON ASKED IF THE COMMISSION FELT IT NECESSARY TO HAVE A SMALLER GROUP INSTEAD OF THE LARGE BODY OF FIFTEEN. BIRCKHEAD STATED THAT HIS TERM EXPIRED ON DECEMBER 31 AND THAT SOME OTHERS DID T00, HE STATED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COULD TAKE WHATEVER ACTION THEY DESIRED ON THESE POSITIONS AT THAT TIME. (2) ARNOLD SMITH QUESTIONED WHETHER YOU WOULD GET THE BROAD SECTION OF OPINION ON THE COMMISSION IF YOU REDUCED THE BIZE. NO ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THE QUEST ION• CHAIRMAN JOHNSON ASKED THE COMMISSION TO GIVE CONSIDERATION TO WHETHER THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SHOULD RECOMMEND THAT SUFFICIENT STATE LEGISLATION BE INTRODUCED TO ALLOW ALBEMARLE COUNTY TO ADOPT ZONING BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS. THIS QUESTION WAS DISCUSSED AT LENGTH AND SEVERAL MEMBERS PRESENTED VIEWS AND OBSERVATIONS ON THE MATTER. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY CHAIRMAN JOHNSON THAT THE PUBLIC HAD BEEN IN- FORMED AT THE MEETINGS HELD THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY THAT THECOMMISSION WAR -6000 TO ABIDE BY THE CITIZEN'S DECISION. HE QUESTIONED WHETHER WE W00LIN &C iAING BACK ON OUR WORD IF WE ASKED THAT WE HAVE PARTIAL ZONING. BROWN STATED THAT HE FELT THE C 1 T i ZENS HAD SP014EM AND TROT IRE MUST IIA GOOD FAITH A131DE BY THEIR DECISION. BIRCKHEAD STATED THAT HE FELT THAT IT SHOULD NOT BE DONE BY DISTRICTS BUT BY PRECINCTS AS ONE PRECINCT IN CHARLOTTESVILLE DISTRICT OPPOSED THE PRO— POSED ZONING PLAN. BIRCKHEAD MOVED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BE ASKED TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY'$ SENATOR THAT LEGISLATION BE INTRODUCED ALLOWING ZONING BY PRECINCTS AFTER A MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS HAD EXPRESSED THEMSELVES IN FAVOR OF SUCH A PLAN IN A REFERENDUM AND THAT AMENDMENTS TO ANY SUCH ZONING ORDINANCE MAY 8E ADOPTED ACCORDING TO GENERAL STATE LAW WITHOUT FURTHER REFERENDUM, A SUBSTITUTE MOTION WAS OFFERED BY MR. CATLIN, SECONDED BY PALMER, THAT THE BOARD REQUEST LEGISLATION ALLOWING ZONING BY MAGISTERIAL DISTRICTS IN THOSE D18TRICTO WHICH VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN THE NOVEMBER 5, 1963, REFERENDUM, AND THAT ALL AMENDMENTS TO ANY SUCH ADOPTED ORDINANCE PU1!-» SUANT THERETO SHALL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH GENERAL STATE LAW WITHOUT FURTHER REFERENDUM, WITH NO DISCUSSIONp THE MOTION PASSED % TO 2. MR. PERKINS STATED THAT THE COUNTY NEEDS EXPERT LEGAL COUNSEL ON THE QUESTIONS NOW BEING D MUSSEDO SPECIFICALLY FOR TWO REASONS: 1) TO DETERMINE IF THE SPECIAL LEGISLATION IS CONSTITUTIONALS AND 2) WHETHER WE CAN HAVE PARTIAL ZONING IN DISTRICTS OR PRECINCTS. MR. PERKINS MOVED THAT APPRECIATION BE EXTENDED TO ALL THE INDUSTRIAL LEADERS9 CIVIC GROUPSs AND CITIZENS IN GENERAL WHO SUPPORTED AND VOTED FOR THE ZONING PLAN PROPOSED IN THE NOVEMBER 5, 1963, ELECTION. SECONDED BY TREVILLIAN AND PASSED BY A 5 TO 3 VOTE. ON MOTION BY PERKINS, SECONDED BY CATLIN THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION WAS PASSED. THAT THE ALBEMARLE PLANNING COMMISSION AS CITIZENS DEVOTED TO THE NEEDS OF OUR BELOVED COUNTYp RECOGNIZE WITH DEEP APPRECIATION THE ABILITY$ INDUSTRYO CONCERN AND ATTENTION GIVEN BY OTIS BROWN WHO ABLY, CONSCIENTIOUSLY, AND FREELY 4 GAVE OF HIS TIME AND EFFORTS IN DRAFTING AND PRESENTING THE PROPOSED ALBEMARLE COUNTY ZONING ORDINANCE. MEETING ADJOURNED UPON MOTION AT 9:30 P.M. MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 3, 1963 MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING C0141ISSION The Committee met this date with the following members present: Mrs. L iady, Messers. Johnson, Perkins, Beck and Arnold Smith. Final approval to a one (1) acre lot cut off from a larger tract belonging to Morris and Julia Smith and located on Route 641 near the Orange County Line. No action was taken on a 0.53 acre lot on Route 53 belonging to I. Shaw until sufficient access is shown. Final approval to a one (1) acre lot belonging to Dallas Garland located off Route 647 about one-half mile South of Cismont. Gave preliminary approval, subject to further study as to showing streets connecting properties on East and West of a subdivision containing 15 lots, located. East of Crozet and belonging to Henry Goodloe and Henry Gordon. No action was taken on a 13 lot subdivision located near Red Hill belonging to Lery Snow until a topo map is furnished. , Final approval to "Springfield" subdivision located at intersection of Route 649 and 785, showing 10 additional lots and well lot, developed by Dr. Hurt. Final approval to redivision of Lot 1 Block D Section 2 "Oak Hill" located off Route 631 South of City, developed by Dr. Hurt. Final approval to plat showing Parcel A containing 1.33 acres located South of Route 799, belonging to Susan M. Musselman. Final approval to a division of three (3) lots on Hydraulic Road belonging to Dr. Huckle. Final approval to "Reynard Woods" subdivision consisting of 12 lots at Woodsons' Store, developed by George H. Barkley. Final approval to redivision of Lots 10 and 11 Block 2A "Bedford Hills". There being no further business the meeting adjourned. Hugh F. Simms, Jr., Secretary Chairman MEMBERS PRESENT: NONMEMBERS PRESENT: COUNTY I" `-;!Ni;�'-i CC: !' . +' MINUTES DAVID CA?^ AVERY CATLIN CEC i L NIAUP I N LANDON BIRCKHEAD ARNOLD SMITH BERNARD CHAMBERLAIN ALAN BRUNS OTIS BROWN MARVIN GARRETT WAYNE HARRIS WILLIAM SMITH GEORGE PALMER WILLIAM TREVILLIAN NANCY LIADY FLOYD JOHNSON, CHAIRMAP CHAIRMAN FLOYD JOHNSON PRESIDED AND OPENED THE MEETING WITH A STATEMENT CONCERNING HIS REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON NOVEMBER 202 1963, RELATING TO ZONING. HE STATED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TOOK NO IMMEDIATE ACTION BUT TABLED THE MOTION FOR FURTHER CONSIDERATION. THE MINUTES OF THE NOVEMBER 20, COMMISSION MEETING WERE READ AND APPROVED AFTER A CORRECTION WAS MADE IN THE VOTE ON THE MOTION MADE BY AVERY CATLIN WHICH PASSED BY A VOTE OF 6 - 3 INSTEAD OF A VOTE OF 7 - 2 AS SHOWN IN THE MINUTES. THE MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING OF DECEMBER 3, 1963, WERE READ AND APPROVED. Mgt. CATLIN ASKED IF MINUTES OF THE EXECUTIVE MEETINGS WOULD BE MAILED TO THE ENTIRE MEMBERSHIP AND HE WAS ASSURED BY THE CHAIRMAN THAT THEY WOULD BE MAILED OUT. MR. JOHNSON ASKED THE COMMISSION TO CONSIDER THE LOCATION OF RT. 64 THROUGH THE COUNTY AND OPENED THE FLOOR FOR DISCUSSION. MR. JOHNSON STATED THAT HE FELT THE PLANNING COMMISSION SHOULD RECOMMEND THE SITE THAT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE COUNTY FROM A PLANNING POINT OF VIEW, MRS. LIADY ASKED THE REACTION OF MORTON FROZEN FOODS TO THE SOUTHERN ROUTE. MR. PALMER STATED THAT HE HAD TALKED WITH THEM AND IT WAS INDICATED TO HIM THAT THEY HAD TAKEN NO SPECIFIC STAND BUT WERE INTERESTED IN SEEING THE ROAD BUILT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. MR, PALMER STATED THAT HE FELT MORTONS WANTED WHAT WAS BEST FOR THE COMMUNITY. MRS. LIADY ASKED WHAT MADE UP THE COMMUNITY AND MR. PALMER REPLIED THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING BIGGER THAN CITY AND COUNTY SEPARATION. MRS. LIADY REMINDED MR. PALMER THAT HE REPRESENTED THE COUNTY ON THE BOARD Of SUPERVISORS AND NOT THE CITY. A Y MRS. LIADY SAID THAT API EC�' .V' F. '7 ",_ 1 AELC '; 0 AI'FORD AN INTERSTATE COMING THROUGH ITS C^%?'_:' `' ' h:-',; ". ?MALL OVJCNrRSH I P OF FOUR ACRES. MR. PALMER AGREED WITH THIS BTA^ ]? AI:D STATED Ti-'AT IS W.xY HE WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE THE NORTHERN ROUTE CONSTRICTED COMING THROUGH BERKELEYt RUTLEDGE, AND GREENBRIER SUBDIVISIONO, MR. TREVILLIAN ASKED WHY THE CONSULTANTS FELT THAT THE SOUTHERN ROUTE WOULD SERVE MORE PEOPLE THAN THE NORTHERN ROUTE TO WHICH MR. BIRCKHEAD REPLIED THAT IT WOULD SERVE AS A BY-PASS AROUND CHARLOTTESVILLE ON THE SOUTH. MRS. LIADY INDICATED THAT THERE WERE ELEVEN INTERCHANGES IN FORTY- FOUR MILES WHICH IS ONE PER FOUR MILES. CHAIRMAN JOHNSON URGED THE COMMISSION MEMBERS TO BE FORESIGHTED ABOUT THIS AND NOT RELATE THE HIGHWAY TO WHOSE LAND IT GOES THROUGH. HE POINTED OUT THAT THE PROJECT HAS FAR REACHING EFFECTS AND SHOULD GO BEYOND THE PRESENT OWNERSHIP OF PROPERTY. MR. ARNOLD SMITH NOTED THAT THERE IS AESTHETIC VALUE THAT SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION, A GENERAL DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ON THE EXACT LOCATION'OF INTERSTATE 64 AND THE COMMISSION'S REPORT WAS QUESTIONED ON SEVERAL POINTS. MR. PALMER READ THE CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH OF THE REPORT AS TO THE REASONS FOR SELECTING THE SOUTHERN ROUTE . MR. WILLIAM SMITH STATED THAT THE COMMISSION WAS WORKING FOR THE GOOD OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY AND IF THE CITY RECOMMENDS THE SOUTHERN ROUTE FOR THE LOCATION THEN IT WAS APPARENT IT THOUGHT THE SOUTHERN ROUTE WOULD BE MORE BENEFICIAL TO THE CITY AND HE SUGGESTED THAT THE COUNTY GIVE CONSIDERATION TO A ROUTE NORTH OF TOWN IN THE INTEREST OF THE COUNTY. MRS. LIADY AGAIN STATED THAT SHE THOUGHT CONSIDERATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO MORTONS AND THEIR TRUCK TRAFFIC SINCE IT IS A LARGE EMPLOYER AND A BIG TAXPAYER. MR. BIRCKHEAD FURTHER STATED THAT THE BEAVER CREEK PROJECT WOULD INCREASE INDUSTRIAL DESIRABILITY IN THE AREA AROUND CROZET AND THAT THE NORTHERN ROUTE WOULD BEST SERVE THIS AREA. MR. TREVILLIAN COMMENTED THAT HE THOUGHT IT' WOULD BE BETTER FOR CHARLOTTESVILLE AT THE SOUTH LOCATION BUT THAT HE WOULD HAVE TO CHOOSE THE NORTHERN ROUTE IF HE WERE AN ENGINEER. MR. PALMER MOVED, SECONDED BY MR. CATLIN, THAT THE COMMISSION ENDORSE THE MOORE'$ CREEK ROUTE REFERRED TO AS C LINE AS SET FORTH BY THE CONSULTING ENGINEERS. A DISCUSSION ON THE MOTION FOLLOWED. MR. BIRCKHEAD STATED THAT THE REPORT WAS BIAS AND HE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HE WAS VOTING AGAINST ON THIS MOTION. MR. ARNOLD SMITH AGREED SAYING THAT HE STRONGLY FAVORED THE AOUTH BUT THAT HE DID NOT KNOW IN DETAIL WHAT IS PLANNED FOR THE NORTHERN ROUTE. m ME MR. WILLIAM SMITH iNDICOTED TI?.,l .`i'_ ?7RTAERN F•;OTZ woULD BE A BLOCK TO CITY DEVELOPMENT AND THEREFi.^.E H,::.P THE COUNTY 1N ITS ANNEXATION DEFENSE. MR. CARR FELT THAT THE NORTHERN F,OUTE WOULD IMPAIR THE PRESENT TYPE OF GROWTH THAT NOW EXISTS. MR. TREVILLIAN CONCLUDED THE DISCUSSION BY SAYING THAT NO ONE HAD CONVINCED HIM THE SOUTHERN ROUTE WOULD SERVE MORE PEOPLE THAN THE NORTHERN ROUTE. HE FELT THAT THE NORTHERN ROUTE WAS BEST BUT HE WAS CONVINCED THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE WANTED THE SOUTHERN ROUTE AND THEREFORE HE WAS GOING TO CAST HIS VOTE ON BEHALF OF THE SOUTHERN ROUTE. THE QUESTION WAS CALLED FOR BY MR. MAUP1N AND THE FOLLOWING VOTE WAS TAKEN: FOR: CARR, TREVILLIANp A. SMITH CATLIN, JOHNSON� PALMER AGAINST: BIRCKHEADp W. SMITHp LIADY ABSTAINED: MAUPIN MEETING WAS ADJOURNED UPON MOTION AT 9:30 P. Wi. 11