Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutLOD199400002 Letter of Determinationf COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Zoning 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 -4596 (804) 296 -5875 FAX (804) 972 -4060 TDD (804) 972.4012 December 8, 1994 Robert Knight Clamar Corporation T/A Southeastern Land and Timber Company 618 Kenmore Avenue Suite IA Fredericksburg, VA 22401 Phil Dean, Trustee Earl M. Martin, Trust and J. Harvie Martin, Unitrust 405 Air Park Road Ashland, VA 23005 Roger W. Ray 1717 Allied Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 RE: OFFICIAL DETERMINATION OF NUMBER OF PARCELS - Section 10.3.1 Tax Map 115, Parcel 16 (Property of Earl M. Martin, Trust and J. Hai-vie Martin, Unitrust) Dear Gentlemen: 1` l"I This letter is to confirm in writing for the record, the determination which I have shared with you verbally. The County Attorney and I have reviewed the title information and other records you have submitted for the above -noted property. It is the County Attorney's advisory opinion and my official determination, that at the date of adoption of the Zoning Ordinance this property consisted of three (3) separate parcels. The parcel contains three separate parcels comprised of approximately 178, 238 and 200 acres. This is a case where the County's real estate records (including the map), previously recognized three parcels (17, 18 and 16/16A) and were amended to recognize only one parcel, parcel 16. There was no intent on the owner's part, either in action or by deed, to combine these -- -- - - - - -- — -- - - -- - --- - - - - -- ---- - - - - -- ---------------------- properties. It was done under the somewhat routine practice when one .entity owned one or more than one adjoining parcel. (*Note: parcel 16/16A were shown within one parcel boundary with both numbers noted.) December 8, 1994 Parcel Determination TM 115 /P 16 Clamar Corp Page 2 Your submittal of information and our meeting were most comprehensive and greatly assisted this review. I will utilize some of the language from your explanatory memorandum within the findings of this letter, where appropriate. This will further provide the background history as well as substantiate the necessary findings for this determination. Each of these lawfully separate parcels is entitled to associated development rights. Each parcel has all five (5) development rights. Therefore, each may be divided into a maximum of five parcels of less than 21 acres, and additional parcels of not less than 21 acres each. This determination results in two (2) additional parcels than are shown with a parcel number on the current County tax maps. As separate parcels, any individual parcel may be conveyed separately. If you chose, I can sign a plat for recordation which establishes that parcel boundary and notes this determination. This determination considered among other findings, the descriptive clauses of the deed and the manner in which the properties were acquired. In that respect, this consideration is based on the findings of the Virginia Supreme Court in the case, Faison v. Union Camp 224 VA 54. Furthermore, the property was acquired in two separate deeds, with two parcels in one and the third parcel in the second deed. In each deed, the parcels are separately described and, are referred to as "that certain tract or parcel of land" for the one parcel and "those two certain tracts of land" in the other deed for the two parcels. Your submittal information details how these parcels were not intended to be combined by any action of the owners. This is further substantiated by the affidavit signed by J. H. Martin, Jr. who is the sole surviving owner of the properties. He affirmatively states "That it is, and at all times since 1952 has been, the intention of the owners of the said three tracts to maintain their identity as such and not to merge them into a single tract." He further states that boundary monuments have been maintained for the two parcels which were conveyed by one deed. All of these facts were considered by the case in the North Carolina Court of Appeals (1981), City of Winston Salem v. Tickle. The various tests include intent, use and physical boundaries. These three parcels are further described as follows: 1. (Previous parcel 18) This parcel currently consists of about 238 acres. It is located in the northeastern portion of the property and fronts on Rt 620. This and the parcel described under number 2 below, were acquired by conveyance from Virginia Woodlands, Inc., to Earl M. Martin and J. Harvie Martin, Jr. This deed is dated March. 2, 1964 and is found in DB 396, p. 490. December 8, 1994 Parcel Determination TM 115 /P 16 Clamar Corp Page 3. 2. (Previous parcel 16/16A) This parcel currently consists of about 178 acres. It is located directly adjacent to the south of previous parcel 18 and east of previous parcel 17 and it lies on the boundary with Fluvanna County. 3. (Previous parcel 17) This parcel currently consists of about 200 acres. It is located directly adjacent to the west of both parcels described in the preceding and it fronts on Rt 618. This parcel was acquired by conveyance to the Messrs Martin by deed of the Chesapeake Corporation of Virginia to Earl M. Martin and J.H. Martin, Jr., dated December 15, 1965, recorded in DB 414, p. 489. A certificate of plat was recorded to establish property boundaries to facilitate timbering activities and resolve disputes with neighbors. This did not explicitly or implicitly serve to merge the properties. The subsequent recordation of other documents related only to the ownership of Earl M. Martin's interest in the property. Anyone aggrieved by this decision may file a written appeal within thirty (30) days in accordance with Section 15.1- 496.1, or this decision will be final and unappealable. If you have any question, please feel free to contact me at your convenience. Sincerely, Amelia G. McCulley, A.I. C. P. Zoning Administrator cc: John Shepard, Planning Department Gay Carver, Real Estate Department Ella Carey Clerk, Board of Supervisors Reading Files NOTE: Two (2) additional parcels One (1) by Tax Map, three (3) by determination