HomeMy WebLinkAboutACSA198800003 Staff Report 1988-11-04 LT\
,ice® F
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
(804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO: Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
FROM: John T.P. Horne, Director jet
DATE: November 4, 1988 ��L�-1
RE: Jurisdictional Area Amendment Requests - Martin Schulman,
Roslyn Ridge Subdivision
Enclosed is a package of materials for review by the Board of
Supervisors at their work session on November 9 in conjunction with two
requests to amend the jurisdictional areas of the Albemarle County
Service Authority. The proposed Comprehensive Plan draft submitted
by the Planning Commission contains policies relating to these issues
on page 191. Enclosed is a copy of that page for Board of Supervisors
review in conjunction with both of the above requests. The first
individual request is by Roslyn Ridge Subdivision. Enclosed is a
copy of the section of the staff report presented to the Planning
Commission at which they discussed this specific request. At that
meeting the Planning Commission recommended that the jurisdictional
area not be amended given that such an amendment would be inconsistent
with the proposed strategy on page 191.
In relation to the Schulman request, enclosed is a package of materials
relating to this request, including the minutes from the Planning
Commission meeting at which the special permit for the veterinary clinic
was discussed. At that meeting the Commission discussed the juris-
dictional area request extensively with the decision being that an
amendment to the Comprehensive Plan would be necessary in this case.
The Commission did not arrive at a recommendation on the specific
request. Staff recommends that the Schulman request not be approved
in that staff cannot distinguish this request in any way from similar
A. v��/uc��ti u�� e,� 16 v��. /n� fin/
•
-2-
requests that could be made outside the designated growth areas,
within a drinking water supply watershed, for new development.
Approval of the Schulman request would appear inconsistent with
the proposed strategy on page 191 of the draft Comprehensive Plan.
If you have any questions please don't hesitate to contact me.
Water and Sewer Service to the Urban Area and Communities
Objective: Provide public water and sewer services to the Urban Area
and Communities.
This is the overriding policy guiding the planning and provision of
these services. Public water and sewer availability are to be actively
used by the County as an incentive to growth. They are to be provided
to the growth areas, and will be established so as to accommodate the
growth anticipated in accordance with the land use plan. Conversely,
such utilities are not to be extended to the rural areas as these
services can increase development pressures.
Sewer and water service jurisdictional areas provide the
implementing measure for directing utilities according to the land use
plan and overall growth management policies. They also permit these
services to be provided in a manner which can be supported by the
utility's physical and financial capabilities. The jurisdictional areas
are those portions of the County that can be served by water and sewer
service (see Map 16). Delineation and adoption of utility project
jurisdictional areas by a local governing body is provided in Title
15.1-1247 of the Code of Virginia.
Strategies:
1. Follow the boundaries of the designated growth areas in delineating
jurisdictional areas.
2. Only allow changes in jurisdictional areas outside of designated
growth area boundaries in cases where the property is very near or
adjacent to existing lines and public health or safety is
endangered.
The development of private central water and sewer systems are a
concern due to the financial and administrative responsibilities the
County must assume should they fail. Also of concern are the public
health and potential environmental impacts should these systems be
improperly managed or maintained.
The following procedures have been previously recommended for the
review and approval of non-public central water and sewer facilities:
- Private water and sewer systems of three to ten residential
connections, or the equivalent, would be subject to Chapter 10
of the County Code, which requires Board of Supervisors review
of the system.
- Publicly owned and operated systems of more than ten
residential connections, or the equivalent, would be required
to obtain a special use permit to construct or operate the
system (except for RSWA and ACSA projects), and the facility
would be subject to 15.1-456 review as to its conformance with
the Comprehensive Plan.
191
0„,
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville. Virginia 2290 1-4 596
(804) 296.5823
MEMORANDUM
TO: Albemarle County Planning Commission
FROM: Wayne Cilimberg, Chief of Community Development
DATE: August 23 , 1988
RE: Staff Reasoning Behind Selected Comprehensive Plan
Recommendations
In response to requests by the Albemarle County Planning
Commission and Board of Supervisors, as well as several public
requests, staff has prepared this memorandum to elaborate on
several recommendations of the proposed Comprehensive Plan.
Item #1 . Public Water and Sewer to Rural Area Parcels Adjacent
to Growth Areas: The Comprehensive Plan recommends "follow the
boundaries of designated growth areas in delineating
jurisdictional areas" and "only allow changes in jurisdictional
area boundaries in cases where the property is very near or
adjacent to existing lines and public health and safety is
endangered."
Staff Reasoning:
1. Public water and sewer services are intended for growth
areas as a stimulant to growth.
2. Extension of public water and sewer services to rural areas
increases development pressures in areas not intended for
growth.
Albemarle County Planning Commission
Page 2
August 23 , 1988
3 . Extension of public water and sewer services, even when
services are directly adjacent to the growth area, private
well and septic systems can be provided for each lot, and
the developer pays for the extension, still pose a public
cost in terms of infrastructure maintenance and consumption
of a portion of available capacity in the utility system
intended for growth area development.
It should be noted that the County Board of Supervisors has
requested the Planning Commission advise them as to the
consistency with the Comprehensive Plan criteria in allowing
public water service to the Roslyn Ridge Subdivision. Based on
the above policies, the staff would recommend that the Commission
find that the Roslyn Ridge request is not consistent with the
Comprehensive Plan. It should be noted that past Board actions
have not been totally consistent with the proposed Plan
guidelines.
LEAGUE OF
WOMEN
VOTERS
���� OF CI3ARLO'1-1'ESV ILLE &ALBEMARLE COUNTY
RE: REQUEST TO AMEND SERVICE AUTHORITY JURISDICTIONAL AREA
413 East Market Street
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
June 28, 1988
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
County Office Building
401 McIntire Road •
Charlottesville, Va. 22901
Dear Mr. Way and Members of the Board:
Numerous times in the past ten years, the League of Women
Voters of Charlottesville and Albemarle County has called
attention to the necessity of protecting the Rivanna Reservoir.
We used to feel rather lonely in our pursuit of protection, but
the county citizens, when once they were informed, became strong
advocates for the protection of the source of their drinking
water. Albemarle County has a national reputation, we have
found, as a leader in reservoir protection. Since recently there
have been fewer cries of alarm about the quality of the water and
the holding capacity of the reservoir, it is tempting somehow to
think the problem was solved.
Reservoir protection is never going to be "solved" ; it
requires constant vigilance by the Board of Supervisors.
A main provision of the county ' s reservoir protection plan
has been to place the western side of Hydraulic Road outside the
growth area where public water and sewer would not be extended.
There have been repeated efforts by developers to build high
density projects on this land which drains into the Rivanna
Reservoir and its tributaries. One of these requests even went
to court, where Albemarle County was upheld in its effort to
protect the reservoir.
Now another applicant with an innocent-sounding request for
public water may open the door to more development . The original
application for the Rosalyn Ridge subdivision stipulated lots to
be served by private wells and septic system. It was on that
basis that the development was approved. Buyers must have been
aware of this condition before purchasing lots. Now owners want
to change these conditions and have public water.
There are owners of undeveloped land on the west side of
Hydraulic Road who are just waiting for this request for public
water to be approved. If this Board sets the precedent, these
owners will be in with requests for high density development
which it will be difficult for the Board of Supervisors to
refuse. Then the west side of Hydraulic Road will look like the
east side of the road. Run-off from all these roads, parking
lots, driveways, lawns and gardens will further degrade the
source of our drinking water.
The applicants have stated that the precedent was already
set when public water was approved for the Inglecress
subdivision. While we believe that approval was misguided, the
developments are not comparable. Inglecress is in a rural area,
not across the street from high-density residential and
commercial development. It is also farther from the main body of
the reservoir so some pollutants may filter out before reaching
the water intake . However, the example of Inglecress is
instructive -- the difficulty you have in turning down Rosalyn
Ridge' s request shows the corrosive power of small exceptions to
firm principles . Please don' t add another "exception" to make
the job of protecting our water even more difficult.
The Board of Supervisors, by refusing public water for the
west side of Hydraulic Road, has been able to limit growth there
to large lots and so has protected the reservoir. To change this
tactic by allowing this sub-division to have public water will
endanger all the county ' s previous efforts for reservoir
protection. The granting of public utilities is an incentive to
development that would be difficult to stop should this request
be granted.
Thank you for your continued vigilance.
Sincerely,
2 /V 1€-/7f-s.+t-d-J
Sally H. Thomas
President
P.S . If you' ll excuse my repeating from LWV presentations
made to the Albemarle County Board in 1980 :
"Research by Dr. John Thillman at VPI has proven that run-
off from lawns in clean, modern-planned developments contains ten
or more times the suspended sol ids, phosphorus, chlorides,
aluminum, arsenic, iron and manganese than rainwater. Run-off
from driveways contains mercury, lead, asbestos from auto
engines. "
and
"Recent scientific research shows that multifamily density
results in four times more biological oxygen demand (BOD ) and
almost 14 times more suspended solids in surface water run-off
than does single family density. BOD uses up oxygen and hastens
eutrophication of the reservoir. Suspended solids reduce water
quality since they carry dange46 toxins like heavy metals,
fertilizers and pesticides. They are expensive for the water
works to remove, to the extent that their removal is even
possible. "
cc DJuanc. 4ce,
•
8t ram*,
J'�i►L"�i L
*7innN\'
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Dept. of Planning & Community Development
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
' (804) 296-5823
MEMORANDUM
TO: Guy B. Agnor, Jr. , County Executive
FROM: John T. P. Horne Director of Planning & Community
Developmentj"p(4
DATE: February 25 , 1988
RE: Albemarle County Service Authority Jurisdictional
Area Amendment Request - Roslyn Ridge Subdivision
This Department has briefly reviewed the request by Dennis ' -
Rooker for the extension of public water to Lot 9 in the
Roslyn Ridge Subdivision. Roslyn Ridge Subdivision is a
recently subdivided area west of Hydraulic Road near
Neighborhood One. This area is designated for rural
development in the Comprehensive Plan and is currently zoned
RA, Rural Areas . It also lies within the watershed of the
South Rivanna River Reservoir. Mr. Rooker has not stated
that there has been any quantity or quality problems with
water on this property. In fact the property is currently
undeveloped. Extension of water or sewer facilities to this
property would be inconsistent with Goal 11 of the
Comprehensive Plan and would be inconsistent with past
actions by the Board to limit utility extensions into areas
outside the designated growth areas . In staff ' s opinion, it
would set a very broad based precedent for extension of
utilities into the rural areas which would be inconsistent
with the overall intent of the Comprehensive Plan and the
rural area zoning district. Staff recommends denial of the
request.
If you have any questions , please do not hesitate to contact
me.
JTPH/jcw
,, .4,.• II". .
3 / \ ..--..........4 31/R.t "+%.1
Q.*-
.4.
....%.**< \el .. .....". -. 3+1‘ ,......: a, ...
, •
. ./ .,
*I .r V #4.. _.,..../7L
--..•,1... ,., • "4\
, .
41
•
- y ,
N\ 7.- •---.----. . ii,.... /...1.4 7 . /41 .1113°:.")
44 1 45 /0 IC C
40 911A . , • .;••=.1_,, 44•i1113
/• , ,
-,-- ,
• • \ 9;1, 39 e I
.
- '
4 4_ ' / • • 39 C -----'"• i) ,J)-'
..
ill
Illt\\ -----..----.3S
001 •
N • '?. (3481 ) Cr A • •.. . dr*It'..:.3? .
i 144 31
///,
/ . el, \ i, ,............,
.„ ... ..A . ,I.
3 4 .'IIN.44.:e '-73:4;4 F. 1 #. '44:'''':4- 477tillt1 ‘a :::4 '".- il. d'
/ /.MO' i.14 *54 /i/9 me irl NO ''''Cr41114'4.' 4 4•ill C
‘ie..•... 33
71 II A ........ , : i 4'.'.4.'i•.{ *,'?",rY 1/'4".
' 5 G , 0•4 f -,.7.
,...„ \ ......._,-- . 310 , .
i . • /i?. . fa,031r ''',f.11 '', ,•Xj.,../Ax.
417.,
---•
34 1
••• •
Ilv 31T sin• :,.14- .A0'•,) ...stc, .•••'',.:.....' , •
\ 13. 310 • .,..,1 69 . 'A'73/...', -. i I ".7.51,."0'30 i..
. 11. / '" 44. \I• -....____
4 .1%.:Y.*,. ,ii.t: '.,,...--k:;f:•-- „.
•t ... ,., ,
.14„.A,,,., ,,,, , " ••.-,--f..-.-..„ -,,,_SIB
. ,. 31:)---1 -...'"".• 4 :. 4 i ,.4 ..*2'..• ',,i'g., ' ""'.,.1,-' .,.
.,.. s, ''"<,/,-• .1,u,3.N• 311. , , • '..00;1". ' 4 Ile,,,,,,,.....;1:-.1.17•, 3114.19,14_,. k , 4'
# 4•• , ' i").J.:•,.., ,.•:::„."J".._::,;,,,...„:„.:„.....4.
'N,•'.::•? -. \ ,. ks
. .f.
----.„..2.7,.........„._.7"----1.. ,i... .......\_. ,, f-•;,..../,,A•-'-'2.••„.,--',.••••-••
.
, iksikor .t......:)..L4' ,,.•;. • •„..,„....,t..-.;,..•,, .,,-.•,- ,-11,-
-----:_.......•- 6 / . , •' oia• -.4g• -.. •;.,W.,,• g -0-1, 1,7,4,,...,:,,,,..fr „r,
....-,,.. ..,\mole ,,a*)4,'
'f..'...i..r ,•• ,, ,,L. . „,. ,
:auw.....;.... .....i..,..„, , /
‘;', ' A .''t'''..,':.•'1,'.•...e"N!or:e. '.... V :Lt.' •f•<;;::'''' '.'.'i''. '''
i ...•,,. .- ..... ,„„....
.,..4. / ,,s, i. „, ,: 06. .de..4.;!...t.i..q.., •••;;;;;;:ef"'"';':•,„".:•;71'.'..c.;,'"fi,,:::.
J7 ./ 4. '‘ Jrd-4-" #0 ':(',:ft7..,....;-;..'1',:)•'.do:.,:::.M.,,,,110,00. '• ..%-tv:=,;,5,...;-..A.,..-....10.r.f.:.-40:x0;
;:y ,.. .p.,----. ". , .,.,,......:,,,,.,.4. ::‘,0,1,•0A:::,..i.:404... .„,„;,,sr..::„.,-;,....,...r,A•,;;;;.,;,,„:..,,,,....•.--„,,,,,
,, ,-,,,.., ,e. 0., .. .3.:.7.w.,. :••••,,,,-,,-e,_,r...,,,,._....._ • ..
14• 1n I ii r„• '1" ,.. , .,t,_, -1 4. "". . "46‘%.•:;,` ,a..;.:,.„:'440,4iilliAN:.'"..,£. ; •S'f••• :',.:t;.•% :;,,,,,,';';'.:',.r.7,. /rg
''"`•7 7 -- -"'" .
,.rit, 4 4140014`).10,:401/40.. .A.AtAW...;-''...,:' ,X..,..°40*. I'l •, ''.X;A:f-%;,,-'%;;.'
N 4,' sr j
11010.10,41Se$A10:4eNtinN.::rk''fit.' ,//). ::%;;;%, •,•',. ..,::1-:%_.......-17'1,,A''''.,1':.„
/ . , \II.1/- • ed - -.-..,.,. • og.....:ckz.... ..C,,...;',,te.A4.x,a....41, ,,'.-ii .' , -..,•_•-'":',;••• ir'.'.'"'''';^..*•:,';',f';',1.:115'..:::
'',' ,-,-.fect.. l ,, .4,4),:,. .ipoien."'F'i",iii0,,s,' ' : ,1,--,-•-'' ••,:'•''"- -.:•'...•.... ...f.,,...,
''\ 4 I. k kZ.'..r '' `Pi 4432'.'i 1.1.40I,As.)>,,I ,'"*rail.t.1/?,Y.:i''' :§''. ,. A 1:r ..!,:,•.',,,:rt•r .;;i.;•,....,V.,'..;;;;.,S,'.!;....;,:,
. \k 9 .; . kqt,,,-3`" 67A . '':(6.-"L-14':,,t,. iN.41,;x4;1504i4%,..W,tc:...N.:,-.0,' ,,,;;;;-=-:-.,0-.--0::,,s5f-;,.=.,,,,:.'.---.r.A.'::,,,,,' •
r.-: ,.....1.r.......,,..?....v4,-...,,,z:..),...;:. , ... , .....,-. ---:-:,-;.,..-:-., --.......
.,..
N e' 4. ... i 4,.:,.:,!!!.44 • 4., ' •,,• 7.,:. ,.....,.....„....„.„.......„...,„:„......„-, ...,.-
, • .. .- ....) `...•"4 4.(1:'P 4 toilit',"'I:4•1".,...'4••'••Viv. •••'!. .f0: 161;:FOi.,.. %,..,.'••• 0i,<- --,:..•,,,,;:s...;„;,•-•,r.-,1.-,,...;:r...,,,,,;•;:-„_-,,.,:,
. .
--..„ : ... . ttr.,,:t• oet `: •:s::q.kftf:.. ri4 .-.'''''."'".'...',..,PV.'it'lli "y ik4fys.:. ----;.•;•,:•-;.:•-• -..••••-•" •.•".;;.-::;;',71„:1--...,-,•.•
• a ---1 _w to
..........1,......•
3 0 . I'Vt' 1M' • & . '4.;'..4':N.4'444 4tr*.14 '1 411114 V r.;'.. . ,'. r;,.' '.‹.51;7•S::... •
.4'4 trsivE trpb11 ' '':‘,14*.v •:: ;IWO*'.,,' '40',.,,.-:'-,:','„,,,.;_., ,•••,-'_;,,,,.1.:,,,As,„._.., ..trr, trr,401'il •''-""::*";?.:'•.7.51::',•-' ="-1.-,sc-rf•'
-----. w ? k ff... '''.`,„' 2,..V',. ..:'.9..'M it,„,..At . ..:...*N1A0.1.r. .,....,,..1741,4,4 \1: ----••••:ss.75.--s•:------,
_ • - = • ift•
:: ‘.1 .• efts ..4. to,- .. ....; r...,,„ ‘‘, "'":•• ....„..,..f.0
e.'` '1) ' ,44i k 4.•... 'N : ..>•1.,,*.iilg 1 '`. 444`•• • •,-;:•%:%-•'44.
,• foUditArsky .1- 1. ...:1,1, , .' .,,W ',„..14,.....' AiltSPA,.:''':,i,,;..;.**.L.,h ''Ws:.c'......1111104100010,40.,i41'2* ,,,,l).. •lie 4,47,:liiii, • ...i..,44::;,4. i' •••••••0. .joiNI-i'ets.....1;.§,.. \ \ ' . 'S-r;f:
19 .. 01/3 ;;''S.... "1"6043 ;',,i.,:k .0•0 $-."I.*..44,f‘„,„.i',. 1,,,:vt,14,4-,,, ,f,4„*:, •...;1„.i..1,, •. :::,A„,;?,,,, .14,, ,-,
4.,......
•,. ..,f'f,.',11 tl.C.. 4.0%sV...1.P..: 0. !,. ',I.. 4;,,,t,....;.• ,'," '. e.,SVS ,. ,
•Ma N'/•‘ ei 114°144.41‘rliir.#3.1414A 40'i;'•'iiiii?.)V4• 1'61,..'4 ."14'4.4)•ije•%:›dP.'..e. .:,„,*-4•.. .. ,,Ligi.••• k \\% \ \ #4.•i•-:
Al lea 4".....844'llit' ''..% AAg.'..f.'r'xi,; 1•ZA4 • .i.4•.::4"--AC'''W ::•::. ' A V % :Ill 4,take-'4 ii.r ' -^ ,r-•
4:::"(2° 1.1/4,•', , ',.yr ••' ny.,‘ • V1•',...it.... •. ...:,:::: .,. '...''..f(..•.‘. :.4.: 4, ''....4: .1P,14:ii ...'.' , - • ''.' --' 4:),Aa..-,, ,„„,....). 4,..70z0‘4,1,4 gi'%IA. A.7):44,1j ...'', .aouv., zi. •,'.-,1,4t,'..:...1).%.1:-..'"i'ir ;.-A4. . ....it.ki
• -^",t4t,•,,,-. 4.141t ..44,,,,45 . ...y..v.,:,.. ••, s'I.',....e./..V44::::r •,!..,,, . .''' it;.4 Y.:•:,.4k. •,-..,„ /044. \ \ . •.•'...:t11)i•F"ti
. ..,, ... ,t,..,,h. ,i.:, ,,., 4. • .• ':1 ;••• N, ' ,L4. 1.04040,,,.'s
. .. ... .
• "tt • 'cet.).'" ...,•::::-T-..--,..z.:::::::. .' •. • ,:..," <.,-4.1,', „.. .....P.N. ... t ",v. •,.. t ', ' Av.:. 44:-:-..tt
- "• ' ' •-•.-4tiz- - • •
.... \ : t4*, •• • •'41,• . t' ..1••A• • ,_ ,,,44 ...kg 4.........,4...\:: ‘‘..
. p....„4"; . J, ..z-,...::::4•41.4.•••:....r.::.....V..0*.,11,i• iii4;ij:••••ji',;§k • .3:043 :C4."9/4 "..::-..;4. ‘
7103yir. --..•:-.:-i;.'-',--iF..::-R•1::`..Q.-.::-.7.-AX. 41f ::f,. ....fifs'iiii-Iffii, '...i.:',., '...1..:1'.'s!':Nis .,,,,;, •'-','•-•:',"`.," N % \ A•'.:;.,'rt,-* '.1.
• ...,....,p:,..-.77,....,:c.,,:,;-?..4.5.:t.F43-;,,,,,:=1, ,,,,d,;:•• :-., ."...:-..yag••,„o,.$4,....,, 4 7/,, it, ••',i;r:1::•'.• ..: ::. .,;.V .4•411*;,,t.'i ••Am
;141$14110,. -iy•lZ0'..'.'1.'/..i1.'‘4,'.•;,‘".„,.vN,4,.".1t..A•1:f44.•4''il,4..1,4;..-''."..-....'4'..,3',,..;00.','.._;k.1*',.,t"1..4.'.'4''„4\',•,•'''c,''.,.f.S..'".-,s4„'0.:,?'0.,.k,0,'•,,,,t,',.-L,:',Z-../-.,,`s/,•.c/.44f,.'.4„.,;j,7'.,,.;.,,'i1).liki",i,,0%$.•3,.sb 0l:A,,,i,:.f'ss'.r4s,.,W..'.',z•,;..:Il*.7,.s s.i,4f":,1•'3,S;,,jt'.4...„‘.'i.,,,'i0''!,,,..'**..:,,,-.•.-:.,..4--:-..3,:r:..4„.--•.„.•.":;.•..:...••,...'.%.',.:,.:_•'.;-'.";.'-1.:...:-"..:74..,...4•.7":-,":,.'.*•..2".•.•":....•7.""r;.z..'.:.:..., -.-7 nt"•.-
'''1 ,. /I/b .•W,-,:,=•.:..I.,,.:!•1N,/',4',1,.:.f..o:;..:s..4.,.:1',.1.:.19.....4;-,-a,V::,.,:,ti,.,*.:,•t1•.K•,i•."?.0„:.1.,./......,4..t`i..(:,,,.,,:.'\•1,.4.•i4-\::,.•4.';.4......i..•4.-...‘'..._../i,,,•..J•*r,..:1..,tf,1,,5 I.•':;t...'..,':,',;,.,,,..,,,.,•./,•°,.,•'1.,.,,..f„..:2::,/,.:„.'/,.,.Z„-->,',':./-P,..-..,...?.-"?...'4...'.,.4."...,::..e,..1,::.1'%".".1`:•.::i1.4i,.,7i,,i'_,...:•.t'.1v'.!.,:..&,.:4,:.i:':..-;-...4'.:.."..`4:1.fY.":,A:-..•.y,.'V..i'.,,‘12.--;,.$).Nh',"1,::4:b:,,'7::,•;'::\.,\•i,.'....Af''•t.-''.e-:t..,•w'.,,‘i.,,t:''v 0r':4.-,..t'..iK,':'.1..:ii.•l•..`:,;:!,.V.•,,*..vS,f•;'.:,*,.*,,.,..,w1,:,0.::::,'4:.i e.!5,„:'„,'7,'--.•e,'..',:.4,•:,.V'‘'..:.i....-ot:.,t,..RA*''-..•O
0t * V .
7 . /a 4
i:•',oi!...-l...*I..,,O'r''.:..,....g1....,„:.e't..4.T?,,:,(.C‘t,.4.:,.•::!:,,:4',w
..4V
1 1 / ..,,
* , t '
'•' \.:;, '' \ II
•`Zki „ ' 41:-40%l'i.:',' A"''''''''ss'1,;,,,•.*:-.4)i, ' ' ''... /1:. ... i 44'414- ."*. I.':..4...44.9.,:•Si:I. ''....: L''..'2;?L'''':' '4';•‘,.••. I ' .'...',' .''''. 'CI \\\:
s ''''. AP.*."4•4t...41..i,.... ' , . -/' . %. i i.zki;,'''.4.,:y, , .•....f:•,'$6.§.40•`4"; '''‘,4„,1 .. le,'• '.,`<•'.,.,,' ‘ ‘ : i 1 ik,* .° ''' ' ''A/ .' . : / . ; • '.' "ILA. .I.4',,,,•$,''''.t.s.....:4;'''.4', .:_...• i:•'.. '/64.. . ,',.. .'.'....,' \• ' * 't
sr,41/' 3, .,,, .,„il 4( . At : ,:, • ,. ... .." .,./1401,,,...f4i S'A.*'','"t•:NI.;......5k,„ ..77...7„‘;',a:< 4i, \ I
.401174- A.,,,. "4:.1 : . )1.1:.:: •• , i .,••e.:'....,,..-:•••:., m,..et...,.', .-.. .,,,,,,z,,,, -4-,, .,. • \ \\.\ . \ . :. ,
it;.:'.14 lif 4`jis,..i .1.4pS,), ,,:,:... :...41.,V.R .:',... :;I: :. .: / , ve.„,.f.t.,,,i ,\' ,„..' .....% .... .,,,u... .:zoT*,,..t.., y.:•,.aximrismitto**1/4.
A:1' 0,),.'''- *41::$4.114,// ... . i .. • '.. / 1
, ,,,.:.,. ,,,, ,,„,,,,,, ..,..., ....A',30 -,44k,,,w.:7•.,..0, V,,%\s?, s \ .. A,X/.,44,••- -,_. //„.it . . ' -c.---- ,,..24---'-..;: i '.. '- •I' - . , .0
.f'''''...7 . .' ''°• ..." .121'.' ' . ••........:••••_'• ••-• 1 1 .•-• ../ 41;.."=-17.7.-.47-%%-,..ii::,•:-..-.---.,- . :::::.;•:f.;,...i...4.''.W1.„4..7:t kk ,v, V &•,\,.,
‘..‘. . -.,:`,1,,,,,,_,,,„;,, :,$;,,,. ,..., •„,,,,, .,,, ' ::.•,-,, ,.,:,-,-,;.,,,,N 1.,„.40/ _........1:- ... - Tzt.....i.w - •,...0,
LI , 1 s.,1,,%---.74. .... ; • ‘,. : e.,' '1,.-,,...'It '.ef\ ' V 40/4V
ii. ` •1*, ..t...? '......z.„..0",4.,<•;,,,„.:..„..,;;;4; . „..,,,,,,,,N.,. s..‘,...„...:".t. .,__.,_,..---• .-,,„.:...,_.„„.:fro..., ,=...,,, -.,,4,,:.....,:.4.1.7,,,-.1..,......-. ..... .,,. - ,.,!.•••.*::,,.... i
••••••., '...,g-::;:4:111.kt,'`'1-'`• W.,Mk...ii,..*:$,..*:::::5°,44 •.":"."'"...7:j=.-.*: ".:72,-;•.---7,7C-Z:ii:7•77XX,-•••••=•;•-•••*••••:;„,„;:;,,,,asi,=
^.'"*"*"'•"*... \ •.' l''''''''''ist.N•t.• :;:::::',..„....4%,%.4.4?Z`s.t. .414,0. ..1,..r. ,...4.,, s‘ P.t.II).. .,!..44›.,..,we •s •••••••••-••• s..,„::::„...........=.3••=====,-........1:::::= , , . . ..,...• ,!.r„5.. ii
.::-.'..,1 ll.ktt • .7%',SAi,„).,,,,,:•„,3,7•:%,.,,,,,„ W:s 4.11:•,...;`,Nss ... ..$..:,`,V•kse 0,(:::::4,. •••.:,-.%-"X...„7..V.i.F..:1=7:........„,;,..,,Z,;;;:."..1:.77::::,:"........ 7.1:17=4.„7::::\\N,,, 4 .%• ', '
. -\S•V‘''
''Z'..),-.1,- ,4.4.----.-.J .,,,,-,-ii,„,,,, ''s•ii.:.,......„-;:-.,,,...:,... . ..-,,,,:,,,:....;:-_ ,,,-;-:,› ..---,:::::::::-...:E4T-p_w..t.!1.y....,-..,...--,--F.-:::.-5-.=:-.:...:.i.-,,-.:FE,-...E:.- ,,,,, \ Np •,,.. y,'1,:„. .
/
1:
0.247%.s ....."`"C.:::14 .",,,t;'%: •,Zit.:..1,,,.:‘.:: ;•.... ..,:.....*:.:ii ‘ 1$:4Z.-:s.:*'..:,'S.V:',,..•;: .".••••4•7•:. • :::',::••••,......"=:....'''''':::::=;:4",=.;.,:ii..7...:::H7•7.::,;;;.1.,..,:::!'"* i ' \\,.... ..1,1`, ,/,,....,04-147, ..,0
-,,,,o-.,,,s,---..._•,7,,-; ,„„,;),...„...i,,4,,,,,,,.., ,,,,,z, :...• ,-...,„•,,,-,:-.4-7,:-,: "...--••••••••:x-,==•.-.......=•••-•- II 1 . ... .,•• ......?„,1 4.,,,,.:4,,,,,ft if...et, ..,,,
41, • ..,..AiN.,,z,I.,_•-• -...;,,•••••.„st-,112..-s,7,:,,,,,••••;s:;.•••*...s-::::, .•i:,g,,••,:,;: t,-;........--,----.=•••••:••-i7:::-.....-.-....-7.7::=.....r..•- „,...4 A,
.4 „%..,';•••••• •-•%•-••,_'-.1:-...`v3zst;St`s"s.,:t.s.,"2:_s$,':=:•..ts:'•"':•• 4:$1*-•:'••,:s-i%‘,1c-4.;'''•"=••••=::--- :::::=:=::'" ' :ist \\•. 4- *:./ft.:7;ssi.",.1Ii: Viti''.., '•'1! ••`.•II'ft.'. 474/4"4")ike,,,,.'',‘,:* T‘,4, 1%••‘:,.;.,%`,,i‘::-:‘..„-•.,„_ -,4.,,,S,-„,t;if,,,:..k $.•:.,.._.;;;;;::„*,`".„...V.:Z;;-i: •,17-‘,T;:Zi--.:-•=7-.77.-:.::::..7,::::::•:•..7-.7.7- ,:,.. // \. d /.4,,,„,,,,,,,,ii!$4,f. . 1
...'- v i,,,,<:r s-,' , ';';',......,....„.... •,....3,;,,,,:z.--..; .:,....-;,,,,ttg:.:,z,_ L2.,:.;......,,=.-_,..-;;;;;;,--„;.:-...=7„...-=... ,,,,,
0,,-.5.7; •,. ' '44, ' ' '"%. s++,,, •ti,.... a._'`,14.:Z.,s,:,,*.-..,,,`.N.:1::',?..... .:: •••••••4"4'4::=4.44..4.7.7.:=7-* "•4‘ .4 4'' i • V
'4. f fr i,‘V.4,4,,„,,,,),.. • " '.*."-", ,„,,....s,'„•,•,,„.....,--•,..„ ,-‘----IJ'''‘,..; R;:::-....--==.•'------7"---- ''-' 7'.--..../j/.
4.,g1 :,..,,,..f --,. ._, •••,,. .,,•:••,.,•,,;..-....,,, (••••••-••.. 4.3.\`‘.,'4:.Z.`...st.,."7:.::::::.7..........••••••,..,,,„...*.:.„,^...,%Z. '`.... :.....r••• A - . - ,,:57.t.40:-. :A
*•••:,11 f.".?tim ..,;*
,..sr.w ,•,,,,Ni, • • 4, .
....,,„
.....:=7....,..-_:_-................_ .....„......, , .,i,/ -9 IS. . .04
/ .;‘ ,L,.,t. (.4.7..:,,, • ..‘., .
SO •.• "4 t' ' ..'s'%-:*'''‘*"... • •-•, %%•..., AL- ___.„-----•-----.-.7.--.--.7- P....--...• %,.•
..-- ....=.7...7:-...7....-=--........ ...,....,_..4.1„ ,i, ,....4. _,e,. :-4 i Iictt,,,•kli.•,*4°,•,1' 4
• sx: ,,. '‘• ' '`•.is,'"*.,...- ' , • •::•=•:...-=....7-7.:,...., .. 4::,:sz...-:.,....‘.„.„.....,.,.!......
t .V.,•ke
,,,,,,,Niv,- .it .' , , .- $,,,s,-,. . '4 1 ••••• ••••„...,r•
\.,
*..A. : It„ ,. . •''!4 in
,... .....1...i..."*. _
P"?:4' .4'4A*6.4' I'l^A'i: ',i•ji:
t,
lf"
y,fr.diiisoda``t` .. '
‘'..s' „ \ ....•
,E.-- .__-_ ...„,•
.„ . •., ....
. .....
. .,:,,,,,; ::
-•. __
•41.
'. '-' 1 II iA*0 At)Y ir t, '. •
'4'44 ' '-` • .6', ' .
. e..-..,.
...,...,„1
4411.11111111110, 4 N .. .
4.4• 4
,. . ,
4 -•4444.4 ay
•./„..'4:414szI,' .t.orr,,,,',.,'
. / CITY
. ..
IIIII'APY
FEB ctl 1988 E�_m
PLANNING DIVISION
Edward H Bain,Jr COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
C Timothy Lindstrom
Samuel Miller Jack Jouett
Office of Board of Supervisors
F R (Rick) Bowie
Rivanna
401 McIntire Road Walter F Perkins
W hire Hall
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596
Patricia H Cooke
Charlottesville (804) 296-5843 Peter T Way
Scottsville
February 22 , 1988
Mr. Dennis S. Rooker
175 South Pantops Drive
Charlottesville, Virginia 22901
Dear Mr. Rooker:
This will acknowledge receipt of your letter of February 18,
1988, in which you request extension of public water service to
Lot 9 in Rosalyn Ridge Subdivision. This request is being
scheduled before the Board of Supervisors for its meeting on
March 9 , 1988 . You, or a representative, must be present to make
a verbal presentation to the Board. An hour for the presentation
cannot be scheduled yet, but if you will call the office ( 296-5843 )
after March 2, a tentative time will be given.
Very truly yours,
Lettie E. Neher, Clerk
Board of County Supervisors
len/
cc: /ohn T. P. Horne
Bill Brent
Robert W. Tucker, Jr.
f
Dennis S. hooker, T.C.
A PROFESSIONAL LEGAL CORPORATION
175 SOUTH PANTOPS DRIVE C-.CA ti/ 1- 1 <E M AMA.
I G
CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA 22901 rt. r r C=1 ;; l
Ii t
(804)977-7424 ))
FEB 19 1988
DENNIS S. ROOKER 1;i?� -
PRESIDENT ` l U Li L .•�
February 18, 1988 .BOARD OF SUFERVI:•urc-S
Ms. Estelle Neher
Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
County of Albemarle
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901
Dear Ms. Neher:
I am the owner of Lot 9 of Rosalyn Ridge Subdivision in
Albemarle County, Virginia. Please accept this letter as a formal
request for an amendment to the jurisdiction area of the Albemarle
County Service Authority to allow public water to the Rosalyn
Ridge Subdivision and to my lot. Please advise me if any further
action on my part is necessary in order for this matter to be
brought for consideration.
In the event that this request is denied, I would like the
reasons for such denial set forth in writing along with an outline
of any available appeal procedures. Thank you for your considera-
tion in this matter.
Sincerely,
Dennis S. Rooker
DSR:dsm
cc: Frank Kessler
- I I c
N.c.1 OF ALSEMq
Gpv 0 AL "�
4 ieF
/P'
��RG IN�p
DEPARTMENT of PLANNING and COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
401 McIntire Road
Charlottesville, VA 22901-4596
804 296-5823
RT.-kr
March 25, 1985
Mr. Ethan A. Miller
414 East Market Street
P. 0. Box 1285
Charlottesville, VA 22902
RE: ZMA-84-30 Blue Ridge Land Trust
Dear Ethan:
The purpose of this letter is to comment on two issues related to ZMA-84-30. As
originally submitted, this rezoning petition proposed location of sixty-three (63)
dwellings on nine (9) acres of the Garlick Tract. It was thought at the time that
the entire nine acres drained away from the South Fork Rivanna River reservoir
watershed, however, subsequent study showed that only 3.846 acres drained away from
the reservoir and of that acreage, 0.65 acres is compromised by a 40 foot wide gasline
easement. In addition to the easement, this 3.846 acre area is of such shape as
to complicate design for development. In view of these revelations you have requested
guidance as to how to proceed with the Blue Ridge Land Trust rezoning petition. I
will provide you comment, not to be deemed as guidance, on three issues.
Firstly, as discussed previously, rezoning of any portion of the Garlick Tract would
likely occasion amendment of the Land Use Plan of the Comprehensive Plan and definitely
require amendment of the Albemarle County Service Authority service areas map to make
public water and sewer available. While you have made both requests, let me advise
you that last week the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors endorsed a
formalized procedure for requests for Comprehensive Plan Amendment (enclosed). Please
note that this procedure requires demonstration by the applicant as to the appropriateness
of the proposed amendment. In order not to delay pending requests, the twice-a-year
schedule has been waived as to initial consideration. The Planning Commission will
entertain pending Comprehensive Plan Amendment requests on April 9, 1985. It would be
to your advantage to submit information required no later than 5 p.m. on April 1, 1985
so it may be forwarded to the Planning Commission for consideration prior to the
April 9 meeting. Should you wish to proceed with Comprehensive Plan Amendment please
contact Ms. Katherine Imhoff; Chief of Community Development, in this office. Kat is
responsible for Comprehensive Plan Amendments.
Mr. Ethan A. Miller
Page 2
Secondly, you asked about altering natural drainage patterns so as to divert stormwater
away from the reservoir. I have discussed this issue with William K. Norris,
Watershed Management Official, and neither of us can endorse such an approach. While
emphasis has been placed on water quality, maintenance of reservoir capacity is of
equal importance. Again, we cannot endorse a proposal which would diminish utility
of the reservoir, whether it be in terms of quality or quantity.
Thirdly, you have inquired as to an approach involving the entire 88 acre parent tract,
which would permit "urban" development of some property within the watershed and prohibit
development of the remainder. Under this approach you would demonstrate that impervious
coverage and other negative aspects of development would be comparable to or less
than RA, Rural Area development as a matter of right. As I recall, a similar approach
was taken under ZMA-80-11 R. E. Lee, Jr. . You may wish to review Planning Commission
and Board of Supervisors minutes on that petition.
Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely, �/
/21T S. /�
Ronald S. Keeler
Chief of Planning
091
April 11, 1984 (Reg' Day Meeting)
Mr. Lindstrom pointed out that at the time the CATS study was adopted, there was no proposal
for an eastern by-pass; no road proposed which would funnel traffic through the City quite the
way an eastern by-pass could. Unless the Board wishes to change its position in terms of not
placing any roads through major subdivisions and watersheds, there is little to be done. Mr.
Fisher suggested the Board not attempt to reach any decision this morning but review the
eastern by-pass proposal and schedule a work session to review same. A date of May 9, 1984 was
scheduled to review this proposal.
Mr. Way commented on the trash in the area of Carlton Road Extended which has become a
dumping site for furniture and other forms of trash. Mr. Way said several citizens living in
the area have complained about the situation.
Mr. Lindstrom said that he too has some comments to make regarding trash and litter along
highways, but would discuss this under Agenda Item No. 25.
r '
[[ Mr. Fisher told Mr. Roosevelt that a citizen had commended the Highway Department on the
i_ improvements made to Hydraulic road saying this is one of the nicest projects he has ever seen.
Mr. Henley said a citizen also approached him concerning trash. Mr. Fisher asked Mr.
Roosevelt to present a report regarding trash collection. Mr. Roosevelt said after the matter
of trash had been discussed at the previous Board meeting he met with his maintenance people
and instructed them to begin using convict labor for trash pickup on the major roads. This
process was begun and will continue at least through Garden Week (the end of April).
Agenda Item No. 7. Public Hearing: CPA-84-4. Amendment to the County Comprehensive Plan
with regard to "Map 25: Albemarle County Service Autority Project Areas 1982-2002" as it affects
property located on the south side of Garth Road, Route 601, just north of Farmington, for
water service only (Advertised in the Daily Progress, March 27 and April 3, 1984). (Deferred
from March 21, 1984. )
Agenda Item No. 8. Public Hearing: Amend the project areas of the Albemarle County
Service Authority to include property located on the south side of Garth Road, Route 601, just
north of Farmington, for water service only (Advertised in the Daily Progress on April 3,
1984).
t Mr. Fisher had suggested that both these items be discussed together since they are inter-
related. Mr. Tucker then presented the following staff report relative to CPA-84-4:
"At its meeting on March 21, 1984, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
adopted a Resolution of Intent to amend "Map 25: Albemarle County Service
Authority Project Areas 1982-2002" as it affects property (Inglecress
Subdivision) located on the south side of Garth Road, Route 601, just north
of Farmington, for water service only. The Board requested that the
Planning Commission hold a public hearing and return its recommendation to
the Board prior to April 11, 1984.
Inglecress Subdivision (formerly Berta Jones Estate) was approved by the
Board of Supervisors, after appeal, on September 10, 1980. The subdivision
consists of 43 lots averaging 4.2 acres per lot.
It has been the Board of Supervisors' policy in the past to limit utility
service in those areas located outside of the County's designated growth
} areas and/or those areas located within the watershed of a drinking water
impoundment. This policy is a primary tool used in discouraging intensive
development in those areas not designated for growth, as well as areas most
sensitive to development impact.
The property is not located within a growth area nor is it contiguous to the
boundaries of any of the designated growth areas. It is also located along
the Ivy Creek, a tributary of the South Fork Rivanna River. The property
does fall within the Board's criteria for limited utility service. Inglecress
Subdivision was, however, approved for 43 lots by right.
Recently the Board of Supervisors did ap
prove pprove an amendment to the water
service area in Ivy based upon the number of existing development rights.
If water service is extended to this previously approved subdivision, no
additional impact from development would occur because the subdivision has
by right the same number of lots -- forty-three.
Should the Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors choose to include
the Inglecress Subdivision in Map 25: Albemarle County Service Authority
Project Areas in the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan 1982-2002, staff
recommends the approval of other categories (limited service for 43
connections)."
II
April 11, 15 (Regular Day Meeting)
• — —
Mr. Tucker explained that the "other categories" include water only, water only to existin:
structures, and limited service. Mr. Tucker said that the Planning Commission, at its meeting
of April 10, 1984 recommended that CPA-84-4 not be adopted. The concern of the Planning
Commission involved setting a precedent in this area by extending utilities outside of the
growth areas and in addition, the Planning Commission felt that with no history of water well
problems, approval of this request was not wise.
At 10:18 A.M., the public hearing was opened. Mr. James W. Gercke, President of Inglecress,
Ltd. , said that the Albemarle County Service Authority water line is approximately twenty-five
feet away from this property. Mr. Gercke noted that at the March 14, 1984 meeting, the Board
expressed its feeling that people freely choose to live in the country and in so doing, accept
the lack of existing services as opposed to urban area services. Mr. Gercke said he has a
difficult time accepting this premise, particularly as it relates to fire protection for the
residents of this subdivision. He spoke with Mr. Ira Cortez, the Fire Official, who stated he
favored fire hydrants wherever residential dwellings exist. Mr. Gercke said that as a develope
he has no interest in whether there is central water service or not; this is ultimately the
interest of the residents. He feels the Planning Commission's concern regarding precedent
setting and need were wrong. He does not see any injury to the County; upholding precedent
does not seem sufficient to deprive 43 families from having fire protection for their homes.
Mr. Gercke said the Planning Commission stated that at some time when the need presents itself,
water service to this area might be reconsidered. Mr. Gercke asked if this could be interpreted
to mean that several fires must occur before it is recognized that fire hydrants in this area
would have been desirable. He does not feel this is a compelling principle on which to deny
this application. Mr. Gercke reiterated that the water line is only 25 feet from the property
line, all expenses are being borne by Inglecress, and neither an impact on existing density nor
encouragement of future growth will take place with approval of water service to this subdi-
vision.
With no one else to address this application, the public hearing was closed at 10:25 A.M.
Mr. Fisher made reference to the wording in the staff report, specifically the second
sentence in the third paragraph which reads, ".. .Board of Supervisor's policy in the past to
limit utility service to those areas located outside of the County's designated growth areas. . . . "
He wondered if this should read "in those areas". Mr. Tucker said no, it should read as it
does. Mr. Lindstrom said the wording is confusing in that it implies service is limited only
to areas outside the growth areas while the intent of the wording is to restrict service from
going into areas outside the designated growth areas. Mr. Fisher then referred to the last
sentence in the fourth paragraph which reads, "The property does fall within the Board's
criteria for limited utility service." He asked if emphasis should be on "limited", rather
than on "service." Mr. Tucker replied in the affirmative, adding that in staff's opinion, this
property falls within the Board's criteria because it is outside of a growth area and does lie
within the watershed of a drinking water supply impoundment.
Mr. Fisher asked for comments from Mr. St. John regarding the implications of taking
action to include this property, and how this action would relate to other issues which might
come before the Board. Mr. St. John said he sees no direct impact on existing or immediate
potential cases, though he cannot guarantee that some judge in the future will not find the
Board's action today significant. Mr. St. John concluded by saying the Board members need to
consider how the best interests of their respective constituents and the County can be served.
Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Bill Brent of the Albemarle County Service Authority if there is a
map indicating the location of all water lines in the County. Mr. Brent said there are a
number of maps showing the water lines although there is not one specific map. Mr. Lindstrom
said there are other developments in Albemarle County which have a higher density than Inglecres:
and there is no possibility of those subdivisions obtaining public water. Mr. Lindstrom feels
that if the residences were already built and the homeowners had been guaranteed public water,
that would place this situation in a different light. However, there are no buildings on the
property at this time and no lots have been sold with the promise that public water would be
available. Mr. Lindstrom feels there are many implications to the county's planning involved
in this application, not the least of which is that this subdivision and many other subdivisions
are contrary to the planning which has been done so far.
Mr. Henley said he will support CPA-84-4 for reasons he stated at the March 14, 1984
meeting. Mrs. Cooke commented that the waterline is easily accessible to this property,
therefore providing fire protection to these homes seems reasonable. At this time, motion was
offered by Mr. Bowie, seconded by Mr. Henley, to adopt CPA-84-4. Mr. Lindstrom then offered
motion to table Mr. Bowie's motion until a study could be done by staff of the County and the
Albemarle County Service Authority to determine the number of properties similarly located
adjacent to existing waterlines not in a designated growth area, and to draw a map showing
these areas.
Mr. Henley restated his feeling that extending water to properties is not a stimulus to
growth. While he does feel this would be true of sewer service, he does not feel it is so with
water service. The waterline is within 25 feet of the property in question and he has no
problem granting this request of the developer. Mr. Henley added that the developers right to
develop in this case has no relationship to public water; the property will be developed in any
case. Mr. Henley feels service to this property should be limited to water only.
p i
(U8,
April 11, 1984 (Re it Day Meeting) i
Mr. St. John stated that Mr. Lindstrom's motion takes precedence over the motion offered
by Mr. Bowie and seconded by Mr. Henley. With no second to Mr. Lindstrom's motion to table the
previous motion, the Chair ruled that the motion to table was dead. Mr. Fisher then called for
further discusson on the original motion. He asked if it was the intent of Mr. Bowie that the
motion specify the number of lots to be served. Mr. Bowie said he assumed it would be 43 lots
since that is the limit of the project; Mr. Bowie said that is the intent of the motion. Mr.
Tucker said it is not really necessary to limit the number of lots on the amendment to Map 25
in the Comprehensive Plan; limiting the number of lots is the action the Board should take on
Agenda Item No. 8. Mr. Fisher then clarified that the motion stands to amend the Comprehensive
Plan with regard to Map 25 (Agenda Item No. 7) by showing Parcel 1 on Tax Map 60 for water
service only. Mr. Fisher stated his opposition to this motion, feeling that allowing water
service to rural areas will increase the rate at which property develops and in that sense will
encourage faster rural development. He feels this is setting a precedent which will create
problems in the future. At this time, roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley and Mr. Way.
r' NAYS: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lindstrom.
Mr. Fisher then referred to Agenda Item No. 8, the public hearing to amend the Albemarle
County Service Authority Project Areas as it affects property located on the south side of
Garth Road (Inglecress). Mr. Tucker said the staff report for this request is identical to I
the staff report which directly preceded this request. The only difference is that if the
Board chose to amend the project areas that water service be limited to 43 connections.
Mr. Fisher then called for public comments relative to this request. There being no one
present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by
Mr. Way, to amend the Albemarle County Service Authority project areas as it affects the
property located on the south side of Garth Road (Inglecress) by adding Parcel 1 on Tax Map 60 1
for 43 connections only for water service. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
1
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley and Mr. Way.
NAYS: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lindstrom.
Mr. Bowie said that Mr. Lindstrom's suggestion asking staff to determine which properties
are adjacent to existing waterlines though not in a designated growth area is a fine idea, and
he expressed regret that he could not support Mr. Lindstrom's suggestion before the vote today.
He would, however, like to have this information provided on a map. It was suggested that Mr.
Bowie and planning staff look at the maps in the Albemarle County Service Authority offices and
indicate on county tax maps the properties that are adjacent to existing waterlines but not in
I] a designated growth area. Mr. Bowie and staff agreed to this suggestion. This information
L. will be presented to the Board at a later date for review.
Agenda Item No. 9. Proposed amendment to Albemarle County Service Authority Project
Service Area re: requests from Messrs. Seig, Kirtley and Javor on Route 250 West (Deferred from
March 14, 1984).
Mr. Fisher said the purpose of this agenda item is to decide whether to set a public
hearing on an amendment and refer same to the Planning Commisssion. Mr. Tucker said the
request before the Board is to provide sewer service to certain areas along Route 250 West.
Mr. Tucker said that at its March 14 meeting, the Board requested staff to study the drainage
area and sewer interceptor location along Route 250 West between Route 677 and the Boar's Head
Inn. The staff was to determine which portions of the properties involved in the request drain
toward Moores Creek (away from the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed) and which portions of
the properties drain toward the reservoir, or Ivy Creek. Mr. Tucker said the engineering staff
has completed a study and indicated the land area involved in the two drainage basins on a
survey map which also illustrates the location of the Crozet sewer interceptor (both force main
and gravity line).
In referring to the map, Mr. Tucker explained that the areas colored in red represent
those portions of the properties which drain away from the South Fork Rivanna River Watershed
and which could be connected to sewer service by gravity force alone, requiring no pumping.
The areas in red are currently limited to water service only. (These properties are Parcels
U 23C, F & N Land Company; Parcel 23F (portion only), J. W. Sieg and Son; 23B (portion only),
Henry Javor; 23B(1) (portion), W. J. Kirtley, Jr. ; and a very small portion along the highway
right-of-way on Parcel 23B(2) Woodvale Land Corporation; Tax Map 59. ) Mr. Tucker continued 1
that the uncolored area indicates those portions of the properties which would require pumping
to one of the manholes where the gravity line begins. Mr. Fisher said it appears that the red
area on the Woodvale property would be totally within the scenic highway setback. He then
asked if the Planning Staff had any recommendation.
Mr. Tucker said that if the Board follows its policy, the area in red (parcels noted
li above) could be defined as an area which could be served by sewer service. He does not know if 3
this would meet the request of the applicants, however, because some portions of these properties
could not be included for service. Mr. Tucker said that on Mr. Kirtley's property, the front
portion where the Kirtley Realty office building is currently located falls within the red area
(the property drains away from the watershed), but the back portion of the property where
Kirtley Distributing Company is located drains toward the South Fork reservoir. Should the
Board decide to allow sewer service to both existing uses, the Albemarle County Service Authorit
projects areas would have to be extended to include the part of the property that drains toward
Ivy Creek. Mr. Fisher asked how much of these three parcels is undeveloped. Mr. Tucker said
that Mr. Javor's property 23(B) is undeveloped; Mr. Javor had site plan approval for the propert
but the plan subsequently expired. Most of the area in red on the Sieg property (23F; is
undeveloped. Parcel 23D, Terence Y. Sieg, drains entirely toward the Reservoir, so could not
be served. Mr. Fibber noted that the Kirtley property has a larger area that could be served
I'than the Javor property and he asked if this is a result of the grading or. the property. Mr.
...cre said :,.es, adcf :E that r.r.e: t:.is area was graf!c.c, it ta:icalay race a change in the
/V4 `
comes--Crraz e�.�.'' '
cPA - QAtet.d. .er--cov ;
,rtD
Cab kad CAu re
4
March 21, ]"'"' (Regular Night Meeting)
Agenda Item No. 8. Request to connect Inglecress Subdivision to water service area
(Deferred from March 14, 1984).
Mr. Tucker explained the request (set out in the minutes of March 14, 1984) and
summarized the staff report as presented on that date. This matter was deferred since
the property lies in the Jack Jouett District and Mr. Lindstrom was absent that date.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if the area under discussion is clearly defined in the Comprehensive
Plan for water service or is this situation similar to a recent request where the exact
outer boundary of the service area was not defined. Mr. Tucker said, in this case, the
boundary is the watershed line.
Mr. James W. Gercke, President of Inglecress, Ltd., was present. He said he was
not involved in Inglecress subdivision when approval was initially granted in 1980. He
then summarized his memorandum dated March 19, 1984 as set out below:
"Re: Request for the expansion of the jurisdictional area of the Albemarle
County Service Authority to include Inglecress subdivision, to be
considered by the Board on March 21, 1984
Prior to your consideration of our request for the inclusion of Inglecress
subdivision in the Albemarle County Service Authority jurisdictional area, I
would like to provide the following background.
1. This subdivision was originally approved by the Planning Commission on
July 22, 1980. The approval was granted on the assumption that County water
was to be provided. The approved plat (then known as the Berta Jones final
plat) was appealed to the Board, which approved it on September 10, 1980,
but the Board declined to allow public water to be extended to this subdivision.
(Mr. Gercke said prior to that Board meeting in 1980, Mr. Bill Brent of the
Albemarle County Service Authority wrote a letter to Mr. Dave Wood, attorney
representing the Berta Jones Estate, responding to an inquiry and stating
that it was the unanimous decision of the Albemarle County Service Authority
Board of Directors not to petition the Board of Supervisors for water
jurisdictional expansion. The feeling of the Board of Directors was that
if the Board of Supervisors approved the subdivision, then the Service
Authority boundaries would be adjusted at the appropriate time to serve
the property. )
2. The plat for this property is now of record, a grading permit has been
issued, and work is scheduled to start this month. The expansion of the
Albemarle Service Authority jurisdictional area will have no impact on
whether this subdivision will occur, since that issue is a fait accompli.
The issue, as I see it, is whether or not, on balance, the provision of
public water to this project is beneficial to the County and to the future
ii residents of Inglecress.
3. Inglecress, Ltd., has no aim in this matter other than the provision of
fire protection and residential water service to the 43 lots currently of
record. Restrictions which would prevent hookups in addition to the 43
requested and prevent rezoning or future subdivisions are acceptable to us. A
major water line of adequate pressure is readily accessible and all costs to
construct the water lines in the project would be borne by Inglecress, Ltd.
4. Expansion of the water jurisdictional area to include Inglecress could be
done without detriment to County policy; benefits to the County and future
Inglecress residents in the form of reliable water supply and the presence
of fire hydrants are undeniable. It seems to me that the Board's concern for
the welfare of County residents after a developer's role has concluded (as
manifested, for example, in the changes it has recently voted in the private
road ordinance) makes the approval of water service for this project highly
desirable and in the interests of both the County and future Inglecress residents."
Mr. Gercke said he feels the request is reasonable since there is to be no additional
growth or change in the number of lots already put to record and approved by the County.
He feels a County citizen should reasonably expect the right to hook onto an existing
waterline when that line is adjacent to the property. Mr. Gercke then provided some
background of the subdivision and noted that when the project was first presented, there
was some controversy in the neighborhood and expressions of dismay about development of
this property. He does plan to make certain that when the development is complete, same
will be as attractive and compatible to the area as possible including the placement of
restrictive and landscape easements on certain parts of the property to preserve its
rural character. Mr. Gercke concluded by stating that he has no problem being restricted
to water service only for the forty-three lots of record.
Mr. Lindstrom asked the range of lot sizes. Mr. Gercke said lot sizes range from
two to twelve acres with the average being 4.2 acres. He then pointed out that a twelve-
inch waterline runs into the Vepco transmission easement, down to the road known as "21
Curves" and out to Garth Road. He noted that the plat shows a seventy-five foot easement
from Garth Road. Mr. Gercke said he is studying the lot configurations and considering
some adjustments of same since he personally did not care for the layout of the forty-three
lots. He further noted that some of the lot lines are desired to be readjusted from the
standpoint of the County staff to protect the building sites.
Mr. Fisher asked if anyone else was present to speak on the matter. There was no
one present to speak for or against the subject.
061
March 21, 1984 (Re 1.r Night Meeting)
Mr. Lindstrom recalled the debate and concern expressed when the project was previously
discussed. He has some concern about the request today and stated one concern is that
the Board has a policy to limit water service to the urban area only, and this policy is
gradually being "whittled" away. Although, he recognizes that public water will not
increase the density of this project since same has already been approved and any additional
units would require a special use permit, he is concerned that changing policies concerning
water service is setting precedents and water in the rural areas of the County is becoming
much easier to obtain. Mr. Lindstrom said that concern leads to his second concern
which is that water is a relatively limited resource. The Board has gone to a great
deal of effort, as well as some inconvenience to many citizens in the County, in order
to preserve this resource, and substantial amounts will be spent in the future to provide
another reservoir. Therefore, Mr. Lindstrom said he is very concerned about precedents
being established for public water use in nongrowth areas. Growth areas are designed
for development on small lots where public water is a necessity with the close proximity
of buildings and the need for fire protection. With the community growing at the fast
{ pace which has been seen in the past, and can be foreseen in the future, and the increasing
costs of housing, there will be a growing need for lower cost housing which translates
into smaller lots in the urban area. Mr. Lindstrom said water is a scarce resource and
opening the doors for use of the resource in the rural areas will cause availability
[ problems in the urban area where public water is a necessity. Mr. Lindstrom said despite
the Board's effort to protect the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, same continues to deteriorate
and again, he emphasizes the resource of public water must be used in areas where necessary
and that is the urban area. In conclusion, Mr. Lindstrom felt the Board must adhere to
its policies for planning of this scarce resource.
Mr. Henley said as he has stated in the past, he does not consider water as a
{ stimulant to growth. He then referred to a recent request, similar to this request,
where the area was adjacent to the public waterline and that request was approved restricting
connections to the number of lots already platted. Therefore, he intended to support
this request with the same condition. Mr. Henley said preserving water for the urban
area with small lots and apartments is fine, but everyone does not desire to live in
such surroundings. He then noted that after West Leigh Subdivision was developed, water
was often transported to the well, and finally public water was made available, and that
did not stimulate growth in that area. Mr. Henley said there is a distinction in this
request and future requests since the lots being discussed today have already been
platted, these are large lots, and the property is adjacent to an already developed
area. Further, he emphasized that he did not intend to support public water for any
subdivision far from a growth area, or if a new waterline would have to be run into an
area. This subdivision is adjacent to a developed area and adjacent to an existing
waterline. Therefore, he intends to support the request.
Mr. Fisher said he also is concerned. He noted that this subdivision could not be
built today without obtaining a rezoning because of the number of lots in the rural
Li
area. Mr. Gercke has stated that adjustments are being considered for the configuration
of the lots, and he asked Mr. Henley if the applicant were to apply for a special use
permit, if Mr. Henley would consider that as new business, or would he be committed to
the forty-three lots of record. Mr. Henley said he is only committing himself to the
forty-three lots of record and not stating where the lots have to be located on the
property. Mr. Fisher again noted that there could only be thirteen lots under existing
zoning if the applicant resubmitted a petition. Mr. Henley did not feel the applicant
would be that foolish and the Board should not penalize the applicant for that possibility.
He would not support that type of request but did not feel the Board should consider
that possibility by denying this request when same is not before the Board at this time.
Mr. Fisher said he is only alerting the Board that same is a probable step. He then
noted strong opposition to continuously expanding the water service area simply because
waterlines are adjacent to the boundaries of the existing areas. He felt if these
exceptions are advertised for public hearing and the request then denied, a judge would
decide that the Board is not being consistent. Mr. Fisher said a lot of work has been
done over the past ten years to guide growth out of the watershed area and this type of
approval is demolishing those efforts.
Mr. Bowie said he had voted for approval of the recent request in the Ivy area. He
does recognize the arguments from both sides, but as pointed out, this property is
adjacent to an existing waterline. Therefore, Mr. Bowie said he intends to support the
request.
Mr. Lindstrom said those persons choosing to live in a rural area must face the
fact that certain public services are not available. Since water is not a commodity
without limitation, he did feel adhering to County policies to preserve this resource is
essential. Mr. Lindstrom said this subdivision can still be built, even without using
public water, and he feels that is a concern separate and aside from concerns about
stimulation of growth. He also noted that there are thousands of lots in the rural
areas of the County that have been approved and platted, but are not developed and are
closer to public water than this subdivision. He visualized approval of this request as
increasing requests for public water service. Therefore, growth will be stimulated in
the area because more lots will be used than otherwise could take place without that
service. Mr. Henley said since he has been on the Board, more arguments have been made
to require persons to hook onto public water than denials, particularly since the Board
has been hesitant to approve wells for subdivisions. Mr. Lindstrom again emphasized
that the rate of growth in the County is about three percent a year and the major problem
the County has been facing is the limited resource of water.
Mrs. Cooke felt that this type of housing is needed as much as high density development,
and she noted that high density is putting a crunch on the urban ring of the County.
She, therefore, is more concerned about that problem than the development of this area
and the crunch this development would put on the usage of water. She agreed with Mr.
Lindstrom's statement about setting a precedent if the request involved running a waterline
to the area, or if the development were not adjacent to an already developed area.
However, this is not the situation because the subdivision is in close proximity to the
waterline, and is adjacPnt to c dcvclopcd area. Mrs. Cooke said she felt there is a
need for lower density housing in the area.
062
March 21 184 (Regular Night Meeting)
Mr. Lindstrom said this subdivision does not need public water to develop because
private wells can be used just like other subdivisions with lots of the same size.
However, water is a necessity in order for high density areas to develop in the future.
Mrs. Cooke said she felt this subdivision needs fire protection as well as those in the
urban area, and that is another consideration.
Before Mr. Henley offered motion, he asked if this is a public hearing to change
the service boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Agnor said this
is not a public hearing, but rather a discussion of the request from Mr. Gercke. The
Board has done these type of requests by public hearing in the past. However, he thought
' Mr. St. John had advised the Board that a public hearing is not required. Mr. St. John
said he would like to check the Code. The Board recessed at 8:48 P.M. in order that Mr.
((( St. John could research the procedure involved. The Board reconvened at 8:55 P.M.
Mr. St. John said according to Virginia Code Section 15.1-1247, a public hearing is
necessary but there are no advertising requirements specified. Therefore, he feels one
advertisement seven days before the hearing date would be satisfactory. Mr. Henley felt
the subject had been thoroughly discussed this evening and he offered motion to postpone
the request until April 11, 1984 and the change of the Service Authority project areas
be advertised as noted by Mr. St. John. He then asked if the Comprehensive Plan needed
to be amended at the same time. Mr. St. John said since this area is outside of the
growth area, the Comprehensive Plan should be amended to include this subdivision in the
water service area, with this request being sent to the Planning Commission for its
recommendation.
Mr. Henley then amended his motion to advertise for public hearing on April 11,
1984, an amendment to the Comprehensive Plan and the Albemarle County Service Authority
project areas to include Inglecress Subdivision for water service only and to adopt the
following resolution of intent:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
does hereby state its intent to amend the "Albemarle County Service Authority
Project Areas Map" in the Comprehensive Plan to include that property located on
the south side of Garth Road, Route 601, just north of Farmington, for water
service only.
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Planning Commission
is hereby requested to hold a public hearing on this resolution and to make
a recommendation to this Board as soon as possible.
Mr. Way seconded the motion. Mr. Lindstrom said he will not support the motion
because this proposed action is opening the door to similar requests and he did not see
any justification to extend the waterline to Inglecress Subdivision, but rather this
will create legal problems in the future, and tap a limited resource, water, that the
Board has struggled to preserve. Roll was called on the motion and same carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke and Messrs. Henley and Way.
NAYS: Messrs. Fisher and Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 9. Division of Woodbrook Precinct (Deferred from March 14, 1984).
This matter was deferred from March 14, 1984 since this is the precinct for the
Charlottesville Magisterial District and Mrs. Cooke was absent at that time.
Mr. John Burns, Chairman of the Electoral Board, was present and summarized the
following memorandum:
"TO: ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: ALBEMARLE COUNTY ELECTORAL BOARD
DATE: March 14, 1984
SUBJECT: Division of the Woodbrook Precinct, Charlottesville
Magisterial District
At the February 7 meeting of the Electoral Board, motion was made and
unanimously approved to establish a second polling place for the
Charlottesville District with the boundary lines being as shown in
Attachment 1 and on Attachment 2 (map). (The two attachments are on file
in the Clerk's Office.)
There are currently 4,879 registered voters now in the Woodbrook
precinct. Title 24.1-37 states as follows:
'In the event that any precinct contains a number of qualified
voters in excess of five thousand, the governing body of the
county shall within six months proceed to alter or rearrange
the precinct boundaries in order that such precinct shall no
longer contain in excess of five thousand qualified voters.
The mere failure to comply with the requirement of this
paragraph shall not invalidate any election. '
It is anticipated that the number will exceed 5000 prior to the
November 6th General Election.
March 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting)
un January 19, 1984, the committee met to consider several proposed changes
to the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, including your request.
It was the Committee's decision that while the reasons for this request
were fully appreciated, it could not agree to the acceptance of subdivision
streets constructed to standards less than adequate to accommodate the
traffic ultimately anticipated until such a time as an acceptable mechanism
is available to assure the timely financing and construction of the complete
roadway facility without cost to highway allocations. In light of the many
existing needs on the Secondary System and the limited funds available for
improvements, the acceptance of additional obligations to the system would
create an untenable situation.
The Committee regrets it must deny this request. In the event the Board has
any suggestion regarding a feasible method for providing this assurance, such
would be welcomed by the Committee for further consideration."
Mr. Fisher said this is basically the response he expected. Mr. Tucker said that the
Planning Commission was very concerned about the Highway Department's response. He continued
that there are requests coming in for approval (specifically in the Hollymead area) and the
county cannot require the developers to construct a road to the ultimate standard when the
development does not generate the need for such. Mr. Tucker said the only alternative is to
allow development of some roads outside of the parkway design which would not be within that
ultimate right-of-way. Mr. Fisher said this is the same problem the Virginia Association of
Counties has been pushing for about seven years. He contined that every year there are several
bills presented to the General Assembly in an attempt to alleviate the problem, however,
nothing much can be done until the Counties find a sympathetic ear in the General Assembly. No
action was taken by the Board.
Agenda Item No. 6(f). Highway Matters: Other Highway Matters. No other Highway Matters
were discussed.
Agenda Item No. 7. Request to connect Inglecress Subdivision to water service area.
The following letter, dated February 15, 1984, was received from James W. Gercke, Presiden.
of Inglecress, Ltd. :
"I would appreciate it if you could add to your agenda for the
March 14 meeting of the Board, a request to include the Inglecress
Subdivision in the water service area for the Albemarle County
Service Authority."
Mr. Tucker then read the following staff report:
"Proposal: Amendment of the Albemarle County Service Authority's
service area for water service only.
History, Zoning and Current Utility Service: Inglecress Subdivision
(formerly Berta Jones Estate) is located on the south side of Garth Road
(Route 601) and north of Farmington. The plat was approved by the Board
of Supervisors, after appeal, on September 10, 1980.
The subdivision consists of 43 lots averaging 4.2 acres per lot. The
property is currently zoned RA Rural Areas.
A public waterline is located along Ivy Creek contiguous to this property.
Public water was requested but not permitted at the time the subdivision
plat was approved in 1980.
Comprehensive Plan: This property is not located within a designated growth
area of the Comprehensive Plan, but is adjacent to the "water only" service
area of the Service Authority's jurisdictional area.
Staff Comment: It has been the Board of Supervisor's policy in the past to
limit water service to those areas designated for future growth and
development, existing water service areas and existing structures that are
contiguous to an existing waterline. Recently, the Board did approve an
amendment to the "water only" service area in Ivy, but limited the number of
water connections based upon the number of existing development rights.
Should the Board choose to approve this request, Staff would recommend that
approval be limited to 43 water connections."
Mr. Gercke said that the plat showing 43 lots has been signed, and several of the lots
have been conveyed to other owners. The only interest of Inglecress, Ltd. is to provide water
facilities for water protection to the existing 43 lots. Mr. Gercke said he is not interested
in obtaining any additional subdivision rights by virtue of having water available. The
Albemarle County Service Authority line is approximately 10 to 15 feet from the property and
can be readily accessed either by means of an easement across a private piece of property, or
along the State Highway right-of-way.
J.
March 14, 1984 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Mr. Henley left the meeting at 10:16 A.M.)
Mr. Gercke said the Planning Commission initially approved the subdivision plat on July 22,
1980 with several conditions, two of which were "Albemarle County Service Authority approval of
water plans; and Fire Official approval of hydrant locations and fire flow of 750 gpm." On
September 10, 1980, the Board of Supervisors approved the plat on appeal but deleted both these
conditions, i.e. , allowed no access to public water.
Mr. Fisher asked for futher public comments. There being none, he suggested this issue be
deferred until the March 21 meeting because Mr. Lindstrom is not present and has considerable
interest in this request. Motion was then offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mr. Bowie, to defer
the request by Mr. Gercke for expansion of the service areas of the Albemarle County Service
Authority to include Inglecress Subdivision, to March 21, 1984. (Mr. Henley returned at
10:22 A.M. ) Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Lindstrom.
Agenda Item No. 8. Requests to connect to Crozet Sewer Interceptor. Letter from W. J.
Kirtley, Jr., dated March 2, 1984, requesting service for 3.5 acres designated as Parcel 23B1
on Tax Map 59. Letter from Terence Y. Sieg, dated February 16, 1984, requesting service on
property owned by J. W. Sieg and Company on Route 250 West. Letter from Henry J. Javor, dated
March 8, 1984, requesting service to his property on Route 250 West; property lies between
properties of Kirtley and Sieg.
Mr. Tucker noted that all the properties are located in the same general area on Route 250
West. He then read the following staff report:
"Staff Comment: In lieu of a complete staff report on these requests, staff
offers the following comments with regard to general policy and precedence
set for a similar request in the past.
The general policy for access to utilities in the past has been to limit
utility service to those areas located outside of the County's designated
growth areas and/or those areas located within the watershed of a drinking
water impoundment. This policy is used as a tool to discourage intensive
development in those areas not designated for future growth and development,
as well as those areas of drinking water impoundments which are most
sensitive to development impact. This policy has basically been the guide-
line, along with the Comprehensive Plan, for establishing the Albemarle
County Service Authority's service areas. The most recent request for which
this policy was followed was in July, 1983, in which Christian Aid Mission
(located just west of these currently requested properties) was denied access
to the Crozet Interceptor."
Mr. Tucker said that the properties belonging to Mr. Kirtley and Mr. Sieg contain structures
at this time. Mr. Javor did have an approved site plan several years ago, but that site plan
subsequently expired; there are no structures presently on the Javor property.
Mr. Fisher said that when these requests were first received, he had suggested that the
staff review the entire length of Route 250 West in reference to the Crozet Interceptor line to
determine the growth areas which might be served by this line, and areas outside of the South
Fork Rivanna watershed and then draw a map which would comply with the Board's past procedures.
The Board could then determine whether the areas which could be served meets the needs of the
property owners. Mr. Fisher said the staff is really looking for some directions from the
Board.
Mr. Tucker referred to a map indicating the impoundment watershed boundary line which has
been used in the past as the growth area boundary as well. All properties lying outside of
that boundary technically drain to the South Fork Rivanna River watershed.
Mr. Fisher then asked for public comments relative to this application. Mr. W. J. Kirtley
passed out a fact sheet to the Board members, dated March 13, 1984 and read as follows:
"We have been in cur building since 1970 - 14 years. The property was
purchased, graded, road built and railroad siding constructed. This is
a Business Property and Zoned M-1. Location - Route 250 West, Parcel 23B1,
approximately one and one-half miles west of City limits on north side of
Route 250 West.
Easement for new sewer line is in road area which was constructed to
accommodate our purpose. This new line runs north to south in this road
to Route 250 at top of hill, present plans call for line to go under Route 250
at top of hill and then run from west to east to and through Ednam and Boar's
Head property. Proposed line is now planned to be on south side of Route 250.
Manholes to accommodate sewer lines are located at proposed points.
There is a manhole, number 29, located in roadway easement on north side of
Route 250 at Kirtley property and it has been determined that hook up is
possible here.
II