HomeMy WebLinkAbout1953c
0
AWmt'y 200 19
mr„ C s Parmu s abate
Board of d vel't Albraalrlo
COINAW Court Now"
cbmiettolovillot Virgin"
Dear o XoDmos
p for IM* 7W for dt7 noWdWdt was walled to
Not five timmo• TwOm ve vors ablo to bold abr mostUss but so tbrow ea -
orate me did Wk ba re a
AS Cb"ll" at v � 1 trd Me, tam► to Tali a
wasting tar the m ' t of ja� to how a Poutue f"m Y"*
bW 3lb um or for dbw%0t$"WUI r Eorlift nvbo I rWvW 4" for
taxi► to arrrrtwft how ' i i k i 1-i a of ttar "GUO am Im"O aftemao
Code wore r t to 1S per * repUm axe b ek ffts d- 4 mylft
tbor +aid att+aa t the ~ 4 solift tbW OMU aot. Nowmr", to my, the
mostift me posto to a aaa** ' ,,
ths, Mary bad ;W to SOWINS WO. arIrree Of tbs ftetbW.
l boo attempled 40 end +ant ► tlea Plated Commilsolft baa been
a f*Ur,► err aWO soms, at the, reasons I boUsft apAys
1* dp latift mmbw* mi4bout their t and SAMAY nKUWM tam by
Mau at ant.
2. Pallurr of tho Dowd at d ror (ter the Coteft It, to take
OW I*tWftt 10 00 SWOMP. hw map these, at for modws I tees set-
PIP06401M
19 o t0 as % ado as S4406W 15ths, and no now sppoint*
a osts bow beam m".
3. Look of say toward for attrar medals, Or p ty fbr f"IWe to st-
71" of Ust m ea pow dtdnet Isomm, to a eta la one, of the five
SWUA r we atboorw 10 bays.
I " Lao to sagessu
1. Ott tort proosat lawd" -awelaal m be, trd abmt am qjIllatmostas
and that illmiam be made without our oommento
in
. co PWOOS to 2 • erg20t 1953
2, That AU am q*oiut000 be Wiled on I& nee=& by a at tbrw,, No
ON& fsss the #Mv V*# seiea and an attmVt
=do to mll bin# or her,, on th* lipwtamm ct the of the comisolm,
3. TbAt &,—fft of #5*00 pw SWUng be pldA* It the fiftow pe%4* Est
the G eedavalt =V% $75*00 a soMM to the Courkr# tba the
of the se Imit mast MONO to jutify Ita rxtotsaft
►.To stmlaft unsomed aboomm dip quaify a for 41s,
sie f"m the sol=*
S. Tho soaroftw of tine cowassum tw a &oft of "o as and ja a
**I+.
6. An owtva xdw Ott attvA wq aeet s last yew bo to coign.
If tbo" eogpwtims vmtt vwkt Z givo vp t
siaoesyfi,
/s/ ch"I" itt*
cbwloo s arot Cbdswa
County Piwus
GV
Mrs, E. M. Williams before County Planning Commission
May 21, 1953
The survey referred to by Mrs. Nelson was made by the State Highway
Commission at the request of the Joint Committee on Highways of the Garden
Clgbs of Albemarle County in order to determine the feelings of the driving
public concerring highway advertising. On five days of the week of Mondays,
August 20, 1953, the State Highway Commission set up road blocks at which
drivers were stopped for questioning. These road blocks, shifted daily,
were located north and south and east and west of Charlottesville on U. S.
Routes 29 and 250.
A total of 5997 drivers were interrogated. They were requested
to give their personal opinions on these main questions:
1. Do billboards on the highways influence your purchasing?
2. If billboards do influence, in what way?
3. If billboards do influence, to what extent?
4. Do you have any objections to billboards?
5. Do you have any other remarks to make concerning billboards?
A study of the various answers to these questions leads to the fol-
lowing conclusions:
Of the 5997 motorists interviewed, 84% were not influencedin
their purchases by billboards.
Approximately 30% of the motorists interviewed had objections
to billboards. Half of these were opposed to all types of
billboards, while the others had specific objections.
Less than 1% of the 5997 motorists stated they were greatly
influenced by billboard advertising.
Of those persons whose purchasing was influenced by billboards,
only 12% were influenced greatly and over half of that number,
or less than b%, knew how they were influenced.
These conclusions are supported by figures which I will give in
detail.
x W
rM
UM
As stated, 5997 drivers were questioned. 5042, or 84%, were not
influenced in their purchasing by highway advertising. Since we are dis-
cussing the situation in Albemarle County only, your attention is invited to
the feelings of motorists residing in the State of Virginia and in Albemarle
County.
Of 3849 residents of Virginia exclusive of Albemarle County and
Charlottesville, 3298, or 36%, were uninfluenced. Of 1813 residents of
only Albemarle County and Charlottesville, 1603, or 89%, were uninfluenced.
This demonstrated that ttk the persons whom the merchants wish to influence
the most are the least affected.
Fourteen percent, of 944 of the 5997 persons queried, believed
that highway advertising did influence their buying. On the basis of
5997, 8% could not state how, 5% weee assisted with traveling accommoda-
tions, 2% were reminded of products needed, and less than 1% each were
informed of new products, recreational facilities and points of historical
interest. Further analysis of this group influenced, on the same basis
of 5997, shows that less than 1% were grettly influenced by billboard adver-
tising, less than 1% were influenced slightly, and between 1% and 2% were
unable to state to just what extent they were influenced.x
Thirty percent of the drivers objected to highway advertising.
Fifty-four percent of these objected to any and all types of billboards.
Others specified particular types as being objectionable.
Only 464 persons made additional remarks concerning the presence
of billboards on highways. Of these
56% felt that they sp9il the scenery;
22% believed them to be unsightly and unnecessary; and
22% felt that they distracted attention from the business of
driving.
The interesting point of these last figures is the percentage of drivers
who believe that billboards distractmattention. It can be assumed that
these persons believe that billboards are a hazard to safe driving.
In closing, allow me to i1form you that Mr. H. J. Neale, Landscape
Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways, has stated that this is the first
time that a survey of this nature has been ehld in this state and probably
the first time in the United States.
Mrs. Goodwin will now speak to you.
- 2-
.. W r
Mrss William S. Goodwin before the Counter Planning Commission
May 213 1 53
I want to thank the County Planning Commission for permitting me
to express an opinion on a subject about which I have said so much for es
many years. I assume you do this because your reason for being here is
mine. We are all interested in the progress and continued improvement of
all conditions that make for better living in Albemarle County. My sug-
gestions as to our assets and liabilities, my reaction as to wherein lies
the enduring charm of life in our city and county, may not be yours; but
with this common goal we cannot be too far apart.
In our survey, which you have just heard, tangible facts are
assembled for you. My approach is through the intangible qualities
of (1)mharmony and fitness (2) good taste and beauty. I make no apology
for this. I feel that these values will outlast any statistics ever
compiled. American people have come to reali.zerWhat we have destoyed
of our natural heritage and have set forces of conservation to work.
Where our towns and cities have just spread or sprawled, with no design,
we are now replanning and rebuilding at tremendous and painful cost.
The modern store, the modern factory of today is a far cry from the grim,
ugly structures of my youth. At long last we have found that beauty is
good business, is better business.
Much of this education has been done by travel. We learn how
other countries, other states have handled their treasures of nature or
have preserved their historic spots. The automobile has kwKx brought
our roads and roadsides into sharper focus and leads us to a comparison
of the regulations for "highway improvement and beautification" in our
own and in other states.
Please do not think we are condemingor unduly criticizing
advertising per se. It is a definite recognized medium of American
life and business. And is done in so many instances with artistic skill
and effect. We desire only to hold outdoor and roadside advertising to
decent and proper proportions. Our suggestions will be given by Mrs.
Nelson.
We are appealing to the good sense and pride of the countiesof
our Commonwealth, three of which have billboard control, Arlington,
Fairfax and Loudoun.
The Supreme Court of Massachusetts has handed down the first
degision against billboards based on aesthetic grounds (1947) which I
Em
In
quote: "The rules and regulations have been administered by the defen-
dants (Mass. Outdoor Advertising Authority) so as to protect the scenic
beauty of the Commonwealth, grandeur and beauty of scenery,contribute
highly important factors to the public welfare of a state. To preserve
such landscape from defacement promotes the public welfare and is a
public purpose."
I am sure you have all enjoyed some of our beautiful highways
unmarred by large flaring advide and commands, - The New Jersey Turn-
pike from the George Washington Bridge to the Delaware Memorial Turn-
pike, the Pennsylvania turnpike stretching 317 miles from Philadelphia
to Pittsburgh, Maine and Connecticut, and other New England States,
operate long established parkways and turnpikes, - some of the most
beautiful are in California. Each of you could mention many more.
In Virginia we have the Federally operated Skyline Drive
and Blue Ridge Parkway, with beautiful views of uninterrupted scenery.
We believe that the Albemarle County approach to the Parkway should be
fr8e of signs which mar the natural beauty of the area.
As the custodians of Mr. Jefferson's home and University we
have a great inheritance. We are not unmindful of this, but surely
we want to feel that we are doing our part in keeping Albemarle County
worthy of that heritage.
Mrs. Gordon Smith will speak of some other phases.
W -2-
y i 1
UX
rZ
Mrs. James Gordon Smith before the County Planninq Commbsion
May 21. 1953 w
I think few of us realize what a tremendous revenue comes to
our state from tourists. In 1950 they brought in $400 million which
was almost as much as was taken in from the same source by Maryland,
West Virginia and Nor*h Carolina all put together. Since that time
the increase has been great. Twe#tty-eight million people visited us
last year, but hww much they spent I don*t know.
For years Albemarle has been a great mecca for tourists,
second only to the Richmond -Williamsburg section. This is partly ac-
cpunted for by Monticellow and the University, but obviously, the innate
beauty of the countryside with the preservation of many scenic areas in
their natural state is intimately related to the number of tourists
attracted to this County. Once attracted, many a traveler has decided
to buy a home and become one of us.
There are, of course, people who are so bent on getting some-
where as quickly as possible that they are indifferent to sights along
the way. These could not be expected to understand the point of view
of beauty -loving tourists, of city dwellers seeking to escape from
bricks and mortar and find peace and relaxation in a simple drive in
the country or of those of us who keep on being thrilled with familiar
views as we go from place to place on our business and pursuits.
Few could deny, I am sure, that billboards are an uOly intru-
sion on the landscape. Please forgive me for repeating something Mrs.
Nelson has already said but it is important enough to be emphasized.
The number of billboards in Albemarle has increased more than
60% in the last two years, a greater increase than anywhere else in
the state. If the powers that be do nothing about this and the increase
continues, we shall just have to forget, if we can, ttat the country
used to look beautiful from our highways and try to reconcile ourselves
to hiding some of our greatest natural assets -- assets that money
could never buy.
From the point of view of the traveler, the advertiser, the
State and the renting landowners, just what good do billboards do?
As I see it, all the constructive service to the traveler is
to point the way to a hotel, restaurant or some point of interest.
Certainly this result could be obtained just as well by directional
signs.
Em
f
M
The point of view of the advertiser seems a little more compli-
cated and controversial. Naturally it is important to advertise but
there are other means that are more effective and more widespread. In
any case there are very few people, I feel sure, who are directly influenced
in their purchases by billboards. It does not make sense for dealers in
anything to constantly offend so many of their potential customers as high-
way advertisers are doing today.
re cefte s
The state/revenue from the tax on billboards, but not enoughto
really make any difference, and the same is true in regard to the rent
received by the landowner. He receives from $5 to $25 a year and that
could not count very much in his annual assets, but the decrease in sur-
rounding real estate values does count.
Now I come to the only group of people who, as I see it, really
have anyth ng to lose; the out-of-door advertising industry. The pro-
posed restriction would mean a certain readjustment in their lives and
businesses and this we regret. Howevee, regardless of wkat we do in
Albemarle County, I believe that that is a readjustment they are going
to have to face anyhow, as it looks as if highway advertising as it now
exists, will be doomed in most of the United States.
I regret, as I'm sure everyone would, the inconvenience and
hardship this may cause, but we know that every advance of civilization
has taken away certain current sources of livelihood. This is one
seeming disddvantage of progress, but the experience and training of
those engaged in this business could surely be used tD advantage else-
where. One fact remains, to us clear and important, and that is
that the right to see our landscape from the highways, together with
a probable increase in travel and in real estate values, should notq
be sacrificed.
-2-
M
MINUTES OF THE APRIL 9, 1953, JOINT MEETING
OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY SUPERVISORS AND
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
A joint meeting of the Planning Commission and the Board of Supervisors
was held at the Thomas Jefferson Inn at 6:00 p.m., April 9, 1953.
The following members were present: Mr. Charles Barham, Jr., chairman,
Messrs. C. Nelson Beck, A. Gaines Fray, Cecil Maupin, William T. Stevens, Mrs.
Fred Liady,and Dr. McLemore Birdsong. The supervisors present were Mr. C. Purcell
McCue, chairman, and Messrs. E. H. Bain, Edward L. Smith,and W. W. Wood. Others
present were Downing L. Smith, Commonwealth Atty., D. A. Robinson, County Executive,
and Samuel S. Clark.
Mr. D. A. Robinson presented Mr. Barham's letter to the Board of Super-
visors, and a discussion of its text followed. All members of the Board of Super-
visors present declared a need for the Planning Commission and felt that it should
contribute effective service to the Board of Supervisors in studying the various
problems that arise in the county.
The size of the Planning Commission membership and the difficulty of
carrying on official business because of the lack of a quorum was discussed.
Members of both boards agreed that a more effective working group would result
if the membership was reduced from 15 to 9 members.
The question of a $5.00 fee per meeting for Planning Commission members
was discussed. Mr. Downing L. Smith held that the law did not provide for the
compensation of Planning Boards but stated the Board of Supervisors could finance
dinner meetings held by the Planning Commission.
The duties of the Planning Commission were discussed and Mr. Downing L.
Smith proved
from the 1950 Code of Virginia Title 15
Section 915-926
that
the
activities of
a Planning Commission could be broad
and expansive
and
that
it
should be interested in any phase of development and its effect on the life of
the county.
Page No. 2
It was decided that a regular meeting should be set so that members
could schedule their time and insure better attendance. The third Thursday of
each month was voted as most satisfactory and the next meeting was set for May
210 1953, at 6:00 p.m.
Mr. Barham appointed Mr. C. Nelson Beck to investigate a trash dump
location in the vicinity of Howardsville as suggested by Mrs. Mildred S.
Covington and requested him to report to the Planning Commission at its May
meeting.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 8:30 p.m.
S el S. Clark, cretary
OR
0
Mrs. Wilbur A. Nelson before County Planning Commission
May 21, 1953
Mr. Chairman and Members of the County Planning Commission of Albemarle
County:
We appreciate the opportunity to appear before you and present
to you a matter which we consider is the concern of every resident of
Albemarle County.
Aroused by the alarming billboard increase on the highways
in the County, Mrs. Clark Lawrence, two years ago when President of the
Charlottesville Garden Club, appointed a Committee on Highways and sug-
gested tothe Albemarle and Rivanna Garden Clubs that they also appoint
such committees, the members of the committees from each club to work
together for the betterment of the highways. The Garden Clubs Joint
Committee on Highways was formed.
After considerable study it was decided that the most objec-
tionable feature on the highways were the billboards which were increas-
ing in number on all roads leading into Charlottesville.
As the Committee wished factual data upon which to base its
arguments against billboards we obtained an interview with General
Anderson, Chairman of the Virginia Department of Highways, and requested
that a traffic survey on billboards be made on the highways leading into
Charlottesville. This request was granted and the survey made. This
survey will be analyzed by the next speaker.
When the results of the survey were available, and were known
to be favorable from our point of view, the Committee immediately began a s
study of all phases of this problem, including the work done in other
states and counties. We had been advised that an orfinance on bill-
boards, submitted to a referendum of the people of the county, was en-
tirely proper, but that it might be regarded by the courts as too restric-
tive. We went forward with our work.
Upon Mr. Downing Smith's taking over the duties of the Common-
wealth Attorney in 19529 a suggested ordinance restricting billboards
was subm tted to him for approval of its legality. Mr. Smith's opinion
was as follows:
"From an examination of the statutes, it does not appear that
the General Assembly has enacted legislation authorizing the Board of
County Supervisors to restrict or regulate billbeards located on pri-
vate property. Therefore in the absence of legislation, the Board is
En
Is
without authority to enact a billboard ordinance. However, counties
have authority to enact general zoning ordinances, in which the regula-
tion of billboards may be included as a part. The procedure for adopt-
ing a zoning ordinance is that the County Planning Commission studies
and drafts the zoning ordinance, which is then recommended tothe Board
of Supervisors for its consideration. If the Board adopts the zoning
ordinance, then it has to be submitted to the people of the County for
approval by referendum before it can becom effective."
After further study of the matter a billboard petition was
printed and signatures of county and city residents were requested. In
not too long a period the petition had 2,896 signatures, of which a vast
marjority were county signatures. This petition was presented to the
County Board of Supervisors on December 17, 19529 Under the law it
was, of course, referred to this Commission and is now in your hands.
When we started this work leas than two years ago, there were
a total of 177 billboards in the county; today there are 2962 an in-
crease of approximately 65% and a larger increase in number than any-
where else in the state. Billboards have increased not only in bumber
but in size at an alarming rate and, if permitted to continue, it will
not be long before this will be the worst county in the state in this
regard.
Mrs. E. M. Williams will now give you an analysis of the
billboard traffic survey.
-2-
M
r
in
Mrs. Wilbur A. Nelson before the County Planning Commission
May 21, 1953
Our several years study of billboards and the roadsides, the
facts we have gathered, and personal conversatiln with many county resi-
dents, led us to the conclusion that a modified roadside zoning plan is
needed for this county.
We believe that the views of the public have changed with the
passing of the years. What was looked upon as unreasonable in the past
is very often considered perfectly proper today. The attractiveness of
our highways tends to increase the number of travelers and tourists and
will further increase the prosperity and the welfare of the people of the
county.
In conclusion, we, therefore, wish to make the following sug-
gestions for the improvement of Highways 250, 2.99 209 22 and 231 to be
embodied in a modified roadside zoning plan.
That no storage of wrecked vehicles or a wrecking of vehicles
should be permitted without a permit from the County and such storage
should not be within sight of the highway.
The official standards for drive-in theaters, as prepared ;by
the Amercian Association of State Highway Officials in cooperation with
the National Association of Drive -In Theaters, should be adhered to by
all drive-in theaters.
Driveway entrances should be kept to the absolute minimum num-
ber consistent with the type of roadside use to be servad. Entrances
on state highways should be of a design and at locations approved by
the State Highway Commission, but in no case should any siUlu driveway
entrance exceed 36 feet.
A minimum setback of 50 feet from the right-of-way of all sub-
urban arterial routes and 75 feet from all rural arterial routes should
be required for all roadside structures and display of wares.
The sale of wares by itinerant vendors from temporary stands
on the highway right-of-way of arterial routes should be prohibited.
All roadside commercial establishments should be required to
provide adequate off -highway parking and loading areas/ This also
applies to temporary stands for the sale of locally raised produce.
rM
M
Service areas necessary to the operation of ;commercial estab-
lishments along the roadside should be screened from the public highway
by planting or other appropriate method.
All highway maintenance storage areas should be adequately
screened from the public highway by appropriate planting or other method.
Landscaping used in connection with roadside protection and development
should conform to the natural contour of the area and planting should,
insofar as possible, be of types native to the area.
Sites for refuse dumps should be designated at appropriate
places in the county and bull -dozing dquipment used in burying such refuse,
it being recognized that today many county residents have no satisfactory
place to bury their refuse.
Roadside rest and emergency parking turnouts shaid be established
and maintained at appropriate locations and at intervals consistent with
needs and the general topography of the area.
In addition to other standards no new pumps on gasoline stations*
should be closer thanl0* to the state property line.
Pedestrian paths should be provided along the roadway outside
of the shoulder and ditch or gutter, in the vicinity of schools and in
other areas of pupulation concentration.
The number of signs at a commercial establishment should be
limited to 2.
No sign of any type should be erected on the roof of any
building so as to be silhouetted against the sky.
No flashing or moving sign of any type should be permitted in
view of the motorist except danger signs or traffic signals erected by
public authority.
The use of red or green in lighting of signs should be prohibited
except for danger signs or traffic signs, wing signals or devices erected
by public authority.
No billboard shall be erected, constructed, enlarged, painted
or altered after the effexctive date of the zoning ordinance with the
exception of non-commercial informative and identification signs. Every
-2-
& Insert after "stations" the words "hereafter constructed"
person, firm or corporation owning, possessing or having control of any
billboard should remove or cause same to be removed within 2 years.
Penalty provisions should be stated.
Directional business areas should be established at suitable
points. Such areas should be recessed places off the highway and
should be landscaped. Adequate provision should be made for commer-
cial advertising and information signs in these areas, such signs to be
uniform.
We thank you for your patience and your courtesy in allowing
us to present these facts.
-3-
E9
M
Mr, merles Borhamoiro#
Chou""
C le county
awlettesvill,at
Dear Mir. Ifthoft
Planning Ca"Ission
Virows
May z t l
Our Several yours, at* of billboards and the roadside of
Albemarle Countye the facts we have gathered, and oral de versa-
than with many county residents„ have led us to the sWluesieeea that
a modified roadside zoning plan is needed for this County*
We believe thst the views of the public have changed with
the passing of the yeaars. What we looked upon as uv reasonsble in
the past is very often considered perfectly property today, The ottrasst-
tiveness of ear hijbways tonds to se the number of travelers
and tourist* and will bArther Increase the prosperity and the welfare
of the pssople of the sty.
ire, therefb ro# wish to make the following suggestion* for
the is grovement of Ht#wnys 250# 29* 20# 22 and 231 to be embodied in
a Modified roadside teaming plans
That no stesc s" of weed vehicles at a warockin of veeM les
should be permitted without a putt from, the County and such Storage
should not be within sight of the highway*
Tho, official standards for drive-in thosters, as prepared
by the American UAsseesiation of Rate Hig1wity Officials in cooperation
with the National Association of Drivo-In Theateesss, should be adhered
to by all drive-in thsate rs *
IM
M
E5
porivomy art * should be kWt to the absolute WieeieW
MAbor oonsistaeast with the type, of xoedside use to be surd,
al trano" on state hi s sherd be of a desigea and at loestions
approved by the $tat* Highway OwiLssionp but is no as" skald any
single driveway *ntre nsae Pateod 36 feet.
A abAxm sotb sk of 50 feet how the AOK- cef-ay of
all Suburban arterial routes and 79 feet freer all moral arterial
routes should be Y*gAeretd for all roadsida► struetwes and display of
sale of waxes e►s by Itinerant you de►rs b twiporavy
stands an the hi x1ght-ol-my of arterial routes should be pro-
hibited.
All roadside eromerctal establis eretar should be required
to provide adw*wte off-U#any parking sad loading Brea TM*
also applies to M stands tor the sale of loerally revised paro-
dt.
$moo arrant essa y to the operation of 00MOSV481
establish"Ats slow the roadsides Obould be Screened how the Pali*
highway by plaftbq or otter apprqWiatv method.
All highway aeaitttewaWe storMp areas should be adqwately
Screened Bear the puhlio hi by appropriate plaftUrIg Or other
Method. ndscaptreg used in towwation with VOWSW protection
&W development should oonfo rs to the natural oontour of the apnea+
and Plarfte s lde insofar as possiblesbe of types native to the
areea#
iters for *efU$o 4UMS sherd be designated at appropriate
places In the County and bull- x 4*4PW of used in bung such
refusee, it being recognized that today wW csaaa fty residents have
e
no setisfaotowy plsaso to bay their use.
Roadside "at and emwegency " tAmouta should be
established vW waintsiaued at appropriate i000tions and at Ifter-
Val$ Consistent with foods ared the *peeeearal topeeapraphy of the aarea,
In addition to other standards no now pAV* on gasoline
stations should be closer Von 100 to the state property lien.
Pedestrian paths should be ceded alb the roadway
outside of the shoulder and ditch o r gutterg &a the vieinity of
schools and In other areas of population euenAmntsatiort.
-2»
r • r
m
�,,.�
The AWANC of signs st a -xtisl eestablishowt Should be
heed to 20
so sign of any type should be a veasterd on the "of of a+ey
building so as to be Silhouetted AWAst the mayo
NO flOOdAl or mv4M sign of snY type Should be permAtted
In view w aef teas mouvist wept r signs or traffic $&Vol$
erected by publis authority.
The use Of W or green It lightiag of signs Should be pro-
hibited eaePt for OAM sigh* Or traffie, sigp►ss s pals or deviCes
eVeoted by pbliet authaitys
No bill al;l be OVOCW# OMStMt&dv Best
painted or altaredafter the #ffactivs date of the XmArq o rdi ea e
VNIth the *xcqUoA of 1Af ti" mW id*VUfl+satieen
*LOS- RVVVy IX4 f1 m or ee U40 0014MOo pe►sewsereieeg Or
hs 40OU01 of any blilimrd Should "mm or cause aame to be
removod within 2 years. Pene►lty PrmdSifts should be stated.
Directional business areas skald be established at suit-
able pests« SuCh amass Should be "COSeed plates off the h1ovays
and should be la i d. Ade ato provision old be made for
are al a4YO-lsln and Infammative signs to the" ems„ Such
Sig to be fo
Respostfully sub4ttedo
(SO) till Smith Mrs, We tie Goodwin,
M" # ass th and Vvs. We H # Goodwi ►
Al le Garden Club
( sod) Seatntos Ward NOISM Katheprxins 3'.ee m a
Charlottesville Oardon Club
(Sod) Margaret Willson and
Sw go aile Billions and Mrs*
Rivwm Garden Club
"3-
E9
ors Cba rl*s K. Weitz
Charles K. Woltz
14INUTES OF THE MAY 21, 1953 MEETING OF THE ALBEMARLE
ate. COUNTY PLANNING COISIISSION
The meeting was called to order by Mr. Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman,
at 6:00 P.M.
The following members were present: Messrs. Charles Barham, Jr., C.
Nelson Beck, McLemore Birdsong, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd E. Johnson, Cecil Maupin,
D. A. Robinson, W. T. Stevens, E. D. Tayloe, and Yrs. Fred Liady. Others
present were Downing L. Smith and Samuel S. Clark.
The minutes of the April 9, 1953 meeting were read and approved.
Mr. Barham explained that he had called on the Executive Committee to
study the proposed new Fire District to be established in the County. He then
read the recommendations of this committee to the Board of Supervisors and
asked for the Commission's approval of the Committee's work. On motion of Mr.
Tayloe and seconded by Mr. Beck, the commission members unanimously approved the
ti
Executive Committee's recommendation.
Mr. Beck reported that he had investigated suggested dump sites in the
vicinity of Howardsville, but that none were satisfactory and that no dump sites
were presently available in this area.
Mr. Downing Smith outlined for the Commission the program necessary to
formulate and the adoption of a Zoning Ordinance. He explained that no form of
Zoning was possible in Albemarle County without a referendum of the people.
Mrs. Liady commented on the policy recently adopted by the State High-
way Department to cut trees off the right of ways of its main highways and this
matter was discussed. The members approved Mr. Tayloe's motion that the Albe-
marle County Planning Commission go on record as opposing the indescriminate
cutting of trees along the main highways.
�w'
Page 2.
Dr. Birdsong brought to the attention of the Commission the antici-
pated route of the U.S. 250 by-pass through the County and suggested that a
more direct and less expensive route using to advantage the natural contour
of the land was possible.
Mr. Barham appointed a committee of Dr. Birdsong, Chairman, and Mrs.
Liady and Mr. Clark to investigate this matter.
Mr. Barham appointed Mrs. Liady a committee to work with the Chamber
of Commerce on the planting of dog wood trees along the highways.
Mr. E. D. Tayloe was appointed to work with the Albemarle Historical
Society in their effort to establish a museum.
Mr. W. B. Speck, Executive Secretary of the League of Virginia Counties,
presented the objectives of the Virginia Anti -Litterbug Council, and asked the
support of the Planning Commission. Mr. William T. Stevens moved that the
Commission cooperate with the council in its efforts. On the approval of Mr.
Stevens motion by the members, Mr. Barham directed the Executive Committee to
meet with the representatives of the council to discuss a campaign to improve
roadside conditions in Albemarle.
The Joint Committee on Highways of the Garden Clubs of Charlottesville
and Albemarle headed by Mrs. Wilbur A. Nelson and assisted by Mrs. E. M. Williams, __
W. H. i iliems and Ella Gordon Smith, presented a petition on billboards, statis-
tics on a recent survey made in Albemarle County, the progress made in other
States, and the degradation of roadside scenery by the billboards. Copies of
these talks are attached to the minutes. Mr. Bradley Peyton III explained the
position of many of the automobile dealers in the matter of roadside advertising
and said that they were compelled to subscribe to this form of advertising by
the manufacturers. Mr. Warner Wood stated that the Civib League was entirely
in sympathy with the Garden Clubs in the stand on the matter of billboards.
The billboard industry was represented by Messrs. L. W. Trester and J. J.
Page 3.
Hail of General Outdoor Advertising, Inc., Mr. F. T. Turner of Virginia
Highway Advertising Association, Mr. George Lex and Mr. William A. McClung.
Mr. Trester stated that his company was happy to work with the
Garden Clubs in restricting billboards, that they favored restrictions but
would fight any moment to prohibit billboard advertising.
Mr. McClung stated that he favored roadside advertising because it
was responsible for 35% of his business.
No action was taken on the matter.
The meeting eras adjourned at 8:35 P.M.
Samuel S. Clark, Secretary
011
MINUTES OF THE JUNE 12, 1953 MEETING OF THE
ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman,
at 12:00 noon.
In addition to Mr. Barham the following members were present: Mrs.
Fred Liady, Messrs. C. Nelson Beck, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd E. Johnson, Cecil
Maupin, Wm. T. Stevens, and E. D. Tayloe. Others present were Walker Turner,
State Highway Landscape Engineer; Earl J. Shiflett, Chairman, Virginia Anti -
Litterbug Council; W. B. Speck, Executive Secretary of the League of Virginia
Counties; and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The meeting was called by Floyd E. Johnson, Chairman of the Executive
Committee, to hear Mr. Shiflett outline the Virginia Anti -Litterbug Council's
program. Mr. Shiflett who was introduced by Mr. Speck,told of the interest in
and backing of various organizations in the plans to promote the Anti -Litterbug
scheme for keeping Virginia road side free of trash. Mr. Turner added to Mr.
Shiflett's remarks and exhibited an anti -litterbug poster to be used by the State
Highway Department in their promotion work. He further said that the Highway
Department was making educational films to aid localities in presenting the matter
to the public. Mr. Turner also pointed out that it cost the State $62,000 to
pick trash from the road sides during April. After some discussion it was decided
that the best approach to the people would be through the Civic Clubs. Mr. Johnson
suggested that Mr. Clark would call a meeting of the Civic Club leaders to discuss
the anti -litterbug matter in an effort to forma committee to direct a campaign
in Albemarle County.
Mr. Tayloe's motion to consider this called meeting the regular meeting
for the month of June was seconded by Mr. Stevens and unanimously passed.
M
Page 2.
The minutes of the May 21 meeting were read and approved.
The secretary was instructed to contact Downing L. Smith, Commonwealth's
Attorney, regarding a clarification of the definition of a Sub -division.
There being no further business the meeting was adjourned at 2:00 p.m.
Samuel S. Clark, Secretary
CORRECTION TO JUNE 12, 1953 MEETING
The meeting was adjourned at 2:00 P.M. and a committee headed by Mr.
Floyd Johnson, Chairman, inspected the County Dump on Route 250, West. A report
of the inspection with recommendations for a more satisfactory operation of the
dump was prepared by Mr. Johnson and presented to the Board of Supervisors at
their June 17, 1953 meeting.
A supplement to the above recommendations asked the Board of Super-
visors for the approval of the launching of an Anti -Litterbug Campaign in
Albemarle County.
cm
MINUTES OF THE AUGUST 20, 1953 MEETING OF
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman, at
6:00 P.M.
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present: Messrs.
C. Nelson Beck, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd E. Johnson, Cecil Maupin, M. M. Pence,
William T. Stevens, and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The minutes of the July 16, 1953 meeting were read and approved.
The T. R. Moore "Subdivision Case" was again discussed. On motion of
Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr. Beck, the secretary was instructed to ask the
Commonwealth's Attorney to render an opinion as to whether or not Mr. Moore is
subject to the Subdivision Regulations.
In a discussion of County dumps and a request for a dump located to
serve the Keswick area, the Planning Commission approved the following recom-
mendations for locating and operation of the dumps and instructed the secretary
to submit them to the Board of County Supervisors:
1. Expert advise should be obtained before locating and operation of
dumps. Consult Soil Conservation and Forest Service.
2. Dumps should be policed by local citizens groups to insure proper
use.
3. Local residents should find dump sites that may be effectively
operated and maintained. The Board of Supervisors would request
Keswick residents to locate a dump which would serve their area.
The attention of the Planning Commission was called to the fact that the
State Department of Game and Inland Fisheries were seeking a lake site in the
area. The following resolution was passed:
"Since it has been brought to the attention of this Commission that the
Isaac Walton League of the area has been requested by the State Department of
Game and Inland Fisheries to locate a site for a lake in this area', BE IT RESOLVED
Page 2.
that the Board of County Supervisors be and they are hereby requested to appoint
a committee to work with the local Isaac Walton League to study and locate a pos-
sible site for such a project in Albemarle County."
Mrs. Demas Craw was suggested as the person to head the Anti -Litterbug
Campaign in Albemarle County and to contact the local Civic Clubs to solicit
member participation in the Campaign.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:25 P.M.
Samuel S. Clark, Secretary
MINUTES OF THE JULY 16, 1953 MEETING OF
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING CO11TISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman at
6:00 P.M.
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present: Mrs.
Fred Liady, 1.4essrs. C. Nelson Beck, hzicLemore Birdsong, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd
E. Johnson, I,laupin M. Pence and E. D. Tayloe, and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The minutes of the June meeting were read and approved and the secre-
tary was directed to add the inspection of the 250 dump and Floyd Johnson's re-
port to the minutes.
The Anti -Litterbug Campaign in the County was discussed and it was
noted that the Board of Supervisors gave their approval but requested Mr. t'ence
to contact Mr. Speck to see how far the County was to go in the matter.
"Highway Billboard Advertising" was discussed and it was pointed out
that a committee from the Garden Clubs and representatives of the outdoor ad-
vertising agencies made a survey of billboards along the major highways in the
County. A copy of this survey will be seat to the Planning Commission for study.
The matter of Zoning in Albemarle County was discussed and the possi-
bility of restricting zoning to the two major highways, Route 250 and Route 20,,
was considered to be a solution to the problem of initiating zoning in the County.
Mr. Barham appointed Mr. Beck as Chairman with Dr. Birdsong and Mr. Tayloe, members,
of a committee to review the proposed zoning ordinance for Albemarle County and
to revise it so that coning would be restricted to Routes 29 and 250, and having
revised the ordinance, draft a report to the Board of Supervisors recommending
its adoption. It would then become the duty of the Board of Supervisors to hold
a public hearing and possibly a referendum.
M
Page 2.
Dr. Birdsong reported on his committee's inspection of the preliminary
location of the Route 250 By -Pass through the County. Considerable interest was
aroused and variations to the preliminary survey were discussed. The discussion
was culminated by the following motion, made by Mr. Johnson and seconded by Mr.
Beck;
BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning
Commission does not feel that the Route 250 By -Pass as ten-
tatively proposed, Nest of Route 29, North, and connecting
with Route 250, West, accomplishes its intended purpose.
THEREFORE, the Board of County Supervisors is
urged to request the State Highway Department to make a new
survey which would locate the By -Pass further North and West
of the preliminary surveys as presently staked out.
The motion was unanimously carried and the secretary was instructed to inform the
Board of Supervisors of the Planning Commission action.
Mr. Johnson asked that the Planning Commission go on record as compli-
menting the County for the manner in which their section of the Jackson Park area
has been maintained.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
Samuel S. Clark, Secretary
2M
n
n
MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER 17, 1953 MEETING OF
THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman, at
6:00 P.M.
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present: Mrs.
Fred Liady, Messrs. C. Nelson Beck, McLemore Birdsong, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd
E. Johnson, M. Maupin Pence, William T. Stevens and E. D. Tayloe. Also in at-
tendance were Downing L. Smith, Commonwealth's Attorney, and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The secretary reported that the Anti -Litterbug Campaign was being
sponsored by the Civic League and was under way.
Mr. Smith, Commonwealth's Attorney, gave an opinion on the Moore Sub-
division case and indicated Mr. Moore could not be considered in violation of
the subdivision regulations until he attempted to sell the house and land in
question, or put a plat to record.
A report of the "Billboard Study" made by a committee representing the
Garden Clubs and Outdoor Advertisers was presented. The Planning Commission
could not take any action in either approving or disapproving the printing of
any material which the Garden Clubs wished to publish as a result of their
independent work, but will entertain suggestions from the Garden Club.
The matter of a meeting date was discussed and the date for the regular
meeting was changed to the second Thursday of each month. This was done so that
any recommendations the Commission might have for the Board of County Super-
visors could be presented at their regular meeting which is the third Wednesday
of each month, without loss of time.
The meeting adjourned at 8:20 P.M.
Samuel S. Clark, Secretary�M
MINUTES OF THE OCTOBER. 7, 1953 MEETING OF
THE ALBEMAUE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman, at
6:00 P.P.
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present. Messrs.
C. Nelson Beck, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd E. Johnson, Cecil Maupin, Mrs. Fred Liady
and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The Commission recommended to the Board of Supervisors the reappointment
of the three members whose terms expire December 31, 1953.
Trailer camps were discussed, with particular attention given to a camp
of six or seven trailers on Route 250, just west of the city limits. It was
developed that although Albemarle County had no trailer ordinance, the State
law required a permit to operate a trailer camp could be issued by the State
Health Department if the camp met certain requirements on sewerage and lot
size, etc. The secretary was instructed to investigate the camp in question.
Mr. Barham appointed a committee on County dumps of A. Gaines Fray,
Cecil Maupin and William T. Stevens. Mr. Fray was named Chairman.
The following committee was appointed to study Fire Insurance Rates
in the County: Floyd E. Johnson, Chairman, Mrs. Fred Liady and S. S. Clark.
Mr. Maupin reported on the lake site recommended by the Isaac Walton
league on Route 53, about 17 miles from Charlottesville on Cunningham Creek
in Fluvanna County.
Mrs. Fred Liady reported on the zoning meeting held by the Iaeague of
Women Voters at which Mr. Richard Kraft, Planning Consultant with the State
Department of Conservation and Economic Development, spoke on the principles
of zoning.
The law requiring a referendum on a zoning ordinance for Albemarle County
was discussed. Mr. Barham stated that the Planning Commission should take no
stand on zoning because its function was to study the problem and to make recom-
sT
cm
FM
R
Page 2.
mendations to the Board of Supervisors based on their studies. The Commission
felt that the law requiring a referendum in Albemarle County alone was discrimi-
natory and contrary to the principles established when Albemarle County adopted
the County Executive form of government.
The following resolution was moved by Yr. Beck and seconded by Mr. Johnson,
was passed, although Mr. A. Gaines Fray did not vote, and the secretary was directed
to present it tb the Board of Supervisors:
BE IT RESOLVED that the present act of the General Assembly to
require a referendum on Zoning in Albemarle County is contrary to
the principle established rhen the County lbcecutive Form of Govern-
ment was approved giving the Board of Supervisors the authority of
governing all phases of County Government. Therefore, the Board of
Supervisors are requested to ask our representatives in the General
Assembly to work for the repeal of the present law requiring a refer-
endum on zoning in Albemarle County.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:40 P.M.
Samuel S. Clark, -Secretary
R
6:00 P.M.
MINUTES OF THE NOVEtriBER 12, 1953 MEETING
OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COLEiISSION.
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barhay Jr., Chairman, at
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present: Mr.
C. Nelson Beck, Dr. T:fcLemore Birdsong, A. Gaines Fray, Floyd E. Johnson, Mrs.
Fred C. Liady, Cecil Maupin, William T. Stevens and E. D. Tayloe. Others present
were M. M. Pence, County Executive, Downing L. Smith, Commonwealth's Attorney,
S. S. Clark, Secretary, E. 0. McCue, Jr., State Senator and E. C. Compton, State
Representative. Also present were C. Purcell McCue, Chairman of the County Board
of Supervisors and E. H. Bain, H. Ashby Harris and John 5. Williams, Supervisors.
Mr. Barham introduced Mr. E. 0. McCue, Jr. and Mr. E. C. Compton and
announced that the Board of Supervisors were present to discuss zoning and the
question of a referendum in Albemarle County. The subject was discussed at
1*1
length and in conclusion, Mr. Barham asked the Board. of Superviscrs how the
Planning Commission should proceed, but received. no answer.
There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
�' ZV, Z46-" - Z-::�
Samuel S. Clark, ecretary
M
December 5, 1957
TOs MOMM OF THE AIXEMARIS COUNTY
PI,ANNIN I OOWSSIO:R
Dear Sir or Madams
The regular quarterly meeting of the Albemarle County
Planning Cowdesion will be held at the Thomas Jefferson
Inn on Thursday, December 12, 1957 at WO P. M.
We will have as our guest at this meeting the members
of the City Planning Commission. The Comissions will
discuss jointly the Proposed Subdivision: Regulations
drawn up by Harland Bartholomew and Asaceaistes.
The Executive Co mitteemet December 4, 1957, and gave
Preliminary approval to a revised Preliminary Plan of
University heights. They also discussed the Proposed
Subdivision Regulations, which will be given further
consideration at our regular meeting.
It is hoped that all members will be present At this
meeting,
.Ancerely,
HFSjrspan
OEM
Hugh F. Sium,o, Jr., Secretary
Albemarle County Planning
Comsaission
MINUTES OF THE DECEMBER 100 1953 MEETING
OF THE ALBEMARLE COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION
The meeting was called to order by Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman at
6:00 P.M.
In addition to Mr. Barham, the following members were present:
Mr. A. Gaines Fray, Mrs. Fred C. Liady, Cecil Maupin, William T. Stevens,
and S. S. Clark, Secretary.
The minutes of the November 123, 1953, meeting were read and approved.
A communication from Bernard P. Chamberlain, President, Albemarle
County Historical Society, was read. The secretary was requested to in-
form Mr. Chamberlain that a committee from the Commission would be appointed
to work with his group.
On motion of Mr. Stevens, seconded by Mr. Fray, the following resolution
was approved: The Planning Commission indorses the ideas of the group
proposing to locate the Blind School in Albemarle County on the State owned
land off Route 29, South of the City of Charlottesville, and recommend that
the Board of Supervisors urge and encourage the location of the school here.
The Commission voted to hold quarterly meetings on the second Thursday
of the months of March, June, September and December.
There being no further business, the meeting adjourned at 8:00 P.M.
uel S. Clan, Secretary
M
December 30, 1953
Mr. Bernard P. Chsmberlain, Pres.
Albemarle historical Sooiety,
219 Court Square,
Charictt"Ville, yr.
Bear Mr. Chamberlains
The Albemarle County Planning CcMInission is in receipt of
your letter of December lot, 1953.
Although there is no imediate need for Boning historical
areas in the Ceaunty, the planning Cowission will be happy to work
with the Albemarle County Historical Society should the Historical
Society solicit their help,
SSC/bh
act Mr. Charles Barham, Jr.
War
Charlottesville, Va.
C2
Very tra3,y yours,
S. B. Clark, Secaretary#
Albemarle County Planning Cam.
ALBEMAELE COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY
Charlottesville, Va.
December 1, 1954
Mr. Charles Barham, Jr., Chairman
Albemarle County Planning Commission
c/o J'JC HV
Charlottesville, Virginia
Dr. Lorin A. Thompson, Chairman
City of Charlottesville Planning Commission
1521 Oxford Road
Charlottesville, Virginia
Gentlemen:
By direction of the Council of the Albemarle County
Historical Society I am asking that you consider respectively
the suggestions made in this letter, to the end that if they
meet the approval of your Commissions they may be presented in
due course to the governing bodies of our County and City respectively.
The Albemarle County Historical Society feels that to an
important extent it is the custodian of the historical traditions
of this Community and that it should assume some leadership in
measures designed to preserve what is historic and best in our culture.
At the present time a Committee of the Society is selecting
for historic markers of some sort the buildings in this City and
County which have interesting historical associations and which exem-
plify archiktecture that is characteristic of older periods. Further-
more, it is our belief that the Court Square area of Charlottesville
has in general an attractive appearance that is a distinct cultural
asset to our City and County, and that it is in the best interests of
our community to preserve substantially the present general appearance
of this section. These brick buildings with white trim and adjacent
shade trees give an antique flavor of distinct charm to this part of
town and make it a source of enjoyment to local residentsand something
to be shown with interest to tourists and other visitors.
It is our suggestion that a joint City -County Architectural
Board of Review be established by proper governmental authorities, a
majority of the members of which will be architects, and that plans
for new buildings and for changes in the appearance of existing build-
ings within selected areas be required to have the approval of such
Board, to the end that replacements or additions in such areas may be
architecturally in keeping with the remaining old buildings. Possibly
it might be better to have one such Board for the County and another
1%A• for the City.
i
_2_
No suggestion is made at this time for selected areas in
the County, but in the City it is suggested that the area be the
territory bounded by High Street, 7th Street, N. E., Jefferson Street,
and 2nd Street, N. W*
Several questions arise in thinking of this plan, especially
with respect to how it may best be implemented, whether through design
zoning or through voluntary agreement by the property owners. Should
you desire further information that our Society can furnish, I shall
be happy to have you call for it.
May we have in due ti:�e your comment upon our proposal?
y�ith best wishes, I am
Sincerely yours,
1
7ernard 11. Uhamberl-ain,
President, Albemarle County
Historical Society
(219 Court Square)
(Charlottesville,)
(Virginia )
bou as tho so*" Tbnvdo ° In Vo awma of XWO14 avaso rs
ow boomdooro
t ve S*fjwo at go -- 0 mar I*Qwwos +r tal
emodsm at the "Ohio's wtu U soun4d,
l
♦ $r